http://marvel.com/news/movies/26203/marvel_studios_confirms_stellar_new_cast_members_of_the_highly_anticipated_thor_ragnarok
Marvel has confirmed new cast members for Thor: Ragnarok.
Spoiler
Earlier this year it was said that Kate Blanchett and Tessa Thompson would be joining the cast along with Mark Ruffalo(Banner/Hulk), Tom Hiddleston(Loki), Idris Elba(Heimdall) and Anthony Hopkins(Odin) and of course Chris Hemsworth(Thor).
Now, Marvel has confirmed the roles Blanchett and Thompson will play along with Jeff Goldblum and Karl Urban as Hela(the main villain), Valkyrie(love interest), the Grandmaster and Skurge respectively.
Filming starts next month. Due to be released next November.
I'm 100% on board.
Of course, I can only imagine the level of nerdrage that comes about with Tessa Thompson... much like Kingpin and Heimdall and and Johnny Storm and Aquaman.
What's the point. It's not our movie.
The Thor sub-franchise has always been the MCU weak spot to me, but this sounds great.
Wait, I missed that. I didn't recognize that actress. Well, I can't say I'm crazy about that. Is Thompson a decent actress? I do hate when they switch out characters' races, especially in this case since she's playing a Norse goddess. Still, I suppose that the character in the comics inhabits different mortal hosts, right?
Jeff Goldblum? Neat. They're getting everyone into these Marvel movies. Should be interesting.
Quote from: BentonGrey on May 21, 2016, 02:55:21 AM
especially in this case since she's playing a Norse goddess.
Considering Heimdall and Hogun, we've well crossed that bridge.
Of course, but Hogun and Heimdall don't necessarily evoke a certain image (unless your a Thor fan). Valkyries, however....
Either way, as I've said many times before, Marvel has earned the benefit of my doubt. If they cast her, I am willing to believe that she'll be good in the part. I still think it's a shame, though.
Quote from: BentonGrey on May 21, 2016, 02:55:21 AM
Wait, I missed that. I didn't recognize that actress. Well, I can't say I'm crazy about that. Is Thompson a decent actress? I do hate when they switch out characters' races, especially in this case since she's playing a Norse goddess. Still, I suppose that the character in the comics inhabits different mortal hosts, right?
Though in the MCU, they aren't Norse gods, they're transdimensional aliens who came to earth in the past and were worshipped by the Norse as gods. A slight distinction, maybe, but it explains why the stories don't have to match the myths, and why they can be more diverse than the Norse maybe would have later represented them in art/etc.
I can't remember exactly what was said, but at one time I think it was acknowledged that Hogun was the Asgardian equivalent of a Mongol.
At this point,Im sure Marvel is just doing it to spark internet disscusion.
This is very cool! I have enjoyed this series and the potential for galactic-level villains entering the mix really ups my anticipation for this movie.
Regarding the casting: I can't see this being any sort of big deal. For one thing, as noted, this is already water under the bridge and I haven't heard much in the way of legitimate outcry that Elba wasn't good Heimdall. Second, it's just too easy to rationalize. E.g. the Asgardians (valkyrie included) are a diverse-looking group, even if the Norse humans who thought of them as gods weren't. Not many ancient Norse people encountered Asgardians in person and came back to talk about it. The humans just assumed (sometimes accurately and sometimes not) that the Asgardians looked like the people with whom they were most familiar.
Well,if a Romanian baron is black,we cant really comment on space gods,can we now? :)
Quote from: BentonGrey on May 21, 2016, 02:55:21 AM
Wait, I missed that. I didn't recognize that actress. Well, I can't say I'm crazy about that. Is Thompson a decent actress? I do hate when they switch out characters' races, especially in this case since she's playing a Norse goddess. Still, I suppose that the character in the comics inhabits different mortal hosts, right?
IMO, she's a good enough actress. Notable for her parts in Selma and Creed.
But BG, I'm with you. I mean I like Tessa Thompson, she's certainly will be easy to look at for a two hour movie. And I get that the Asgardians are aliens that are worshipped as gods by the Norse culture. I get it.
But honestly, Brunnhilda's golden long pig-tails is what makes the character stand out of everything. If anyone knew anything about Valkyrie it would be that one girl with blonde pig-tails. I'm not saying it's essential to the character, but it's what made the character recognizable.
But... it's what it is.
Quote from: daglob on May 21, 2016, 04:36:15 AM
I can't remember exactly what was said, but at one time I think it was acknowledged that Hogun was the Asgardian equivalent of a Mongol.
In Thor 2, it was revealed that he's not an Asgardian at all, but comes from whatever realm the fighting at the beginning of the film takes place at, and stays there at the end of that scene.
(I feel like I'm going to phrase this poorly, no matter how I say it)
And yet.....if this were any other non-white culture, and white actors were being given roles, people who feel they are important would be making a stink about it (along with us fanboys, of course). Notice that only fanboys are upset when characters who have traditionally (i.e.: always, canon) been portrayed as white are cast to obviously non-white actors (Kingpin, Heimdall, Alicia, Johnny Storm), but when it happens the other way (the Ancient One, Mandarin) celebrities and/or public figures feel the need to "take a stand"/"make a statement". There's been a lot made of "appropriating culture" lately (which I think is a huge, steaming load of hooey), so wouldn't this be the same thing? It's hard to get much whiter than Scandinavian/Norse culture & mythology. Mavel made excuses about the Ancient One (which I don't exactly buy), and tiptoed around the whole Mandarin thing. I know it's an old argument, and I know we're all pretty tired of it, but it still irritates me when a change like this is made for no real good reason, other than to try to get some more diversity in the cast. I'm tired of political correctness and cultural sensitivity ruling the day instead of common sense. If there are complaints about there not being "enough parts for people of color", then make movies/tell stories that feature them more. Let's do movies about Black Panther, a Storm origin movie, Black Lightning (but I'm sure WB will get that wrong), Cyborg. (I know, that's a short list, and I'm sure it underscores the problem that the studios/writers have)
I don't have a tidy way to wrap this up, nor do I have a fix that everyone will like. I'm just kind of tired of having to "suck it up" and not say anything when yet another caucasian character is changed because too many of the characters are already white, because all of the classic comics that people remember were written by white males, because that was the industry back then, because, because, because.... (and I don't think there's a wizard who can fix this).
Hopefully I haven't hopelessly thread-jacked this to oblivion. <_<
Quote from: Panther_Gunn on May 21, 2016, 06:36:21 PM
(I feel like I'm going to phrase this poorly, no matter how I say it)
And yet.....if this were any other non-white culture, and white actors were being given roles, people who feel they are important would be making a stink about it (along with us fanboys, of course). Notice that only fanboys are upset when characters who have traditionally (i.e.: always, canon) been portrayed as white are cast to obviously non-white actors (Kingpin, Heimdall, Alicia, Johnny Storm), but when it happens the other way (the Ancient One, Mandarin) celebrities and/or public figures feel the need to "take a stand"/"make a statement". There's been a lot made of "appropriating culture" lately (which I think is a huge, steaming load of hooey), so wouldn't this be the same thing? It's hard to get much whiter than Scandinavian/Norse culture & mythology. Mavel made excuses about the Ancient One (which I don't exactly buy), and tiptoed around the whole Mandarin thing. I know it's an old argument, and I know we're all pretty tired of it, but it still irritates me when a change like this is made for no real good reason, other than to try to get some more diversity in the cast. I'm tired of political correctness and cultural sensitivity ruling the day instead of common sense. If there are complaints about there not being "enough parts for people of color", then make movies/tell stories that feature them more. Let's do movies about Black Panther, a Storm origin movie, Black Lightning (but I'm sure WB will get that wrong), Cyborg. (I know, that's a short list, and I'm sure it underscores the problem that the studios/writers have)
I don't have a tidy way to wrap this up, nor do I have a fix that everyone will like. I'm just kind of tired of having to "suck it up" and not say anything when yet another caucasian character is changed because too many of the characters are already white, because all of the classic comics that people remember were written by white males, because that was the industry back then, because, because, because.... (and I don't think there's a wizard who can fix this).
Hopefully I haven't hopelessly thread-jacked this to oblivion. <_<
Sorry, but I'm going to say, in as nice a way as possible, to keep sucking it up. The MCU is still a very white male place, and that's with Marvel making some efforts like these to cast different ethnicities as previously white characters. The reason people make a stink when it goes the other way (white-washing) is one of representation. When parts do exist for non-white characters and white actors get cast in them, representation--that is already so low--has been diminished. And sure, Black Panther is getting a movie, one that'll only be the 18th film in the MCU before we get one headlined by a black person. Luke Cage was a big part of Jessica Jones (the first female headliner), and is getting his own show in the fall. But try and name 2 Asian characters from Marvel movies, because I can't. Changes like these do a little to try and correct that imbalance, and trying to get more diversity in their casts
is an actual good reason. And when the counter-argument is, what? Preserving the sanctity of canon (it's definitely not the sanctity of the myths, because the comics stomp all over that)? Not a very compelling argument to me. I just don't see how any of that is a failure of common sense.
My own feelings on the matter are that the ethnic and gender background of a character should never be changed just to change the ethnic and gender background of a character. If there's another good reason for doing so, fine. Elba did such an excellent job as Heimdall, that I am confident that he was really the best actor for the job, which is as fine a reason as any. There was some outrage when news of a black Captain America in the comcis hit, but this was Falcon, Captain America's long time partner and the most logical person to take up the role, so I was fine with that too.
The new Ghostbusters movie, on the other hand, just seems to be gender flipping to gender flip. That's not okay. If the cast had been a mix of both genders, it would probably have been fine.
So if the acress can pull off the role and they chose her for that reason, then it will be fine. We should relax until then.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 21, 2016, 09:22:37 PM
The new Ghostbusters movie, on the other hand, just seems to be gender flipping to gender flip. That's not okay. If the cast had been a mix of both genders, it would probably have been fine.
Why isn't it okay? The first Ghostbusters were all male, and that movie exists in its near-perfection. If a studio wants to create a gender-flipped version, why is that wrong? Who or what is harmed by it?
Quote from: Talavar on May 21, 2016, 10:11:43 PM
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 21, 2016, 09:22:37 PM
The new Ghostbusters movie, on the other hand, just seems to be gender flipping to gender flip. That's not okay. If the cast had been a mix of both genders, it would probably have been fine.
Why isn't it okay? The first Ghostbusters were all male, and that movie exists in its near-perfection. If a studio wants to create a gender-flipped version, why is that wrong? Who or what is harmed by it?
Nothing is wrong with it--if they are doing it for a reason other than merely gender flipping. If your only reason to make a character change is because the change itself is the only goal, that isn't enough to make the change a good one and the overall product seems to always suffer for it. If the change is made for deeper reasons, then it often turns out well. If there is some deeper story reason for the change, or the actors are just best that way, then fine. I see no signs of that here though.
For me, as long as the spirit of the original character remains intact, I don't care. I do agree with Tavalar that there needs to be more diversity, and as long as that diversification does not affect the character, who honestly cares? Sure people will whine, but they typically get over it, on both ends.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 21, 2016, 11:48:37 PM
Quote from: Talavar on May 21, 2016, 10:11:43 PM
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 21, 2016, 09:22:37 PM
The new Ghostbusters movie, on the other hand, just seems to be gender flipping to gender flip. That's not okay. If the cast had been a mix of both genders, it would probably have been fine.
Why isn't it okay? The first Ghostbusters were all male, and that movie exists in its near-perfection. If a studio wants to create a gender-flipped version, why is that wrong? Who or what is harmed by it?
Nothing is wrong with it--if they are doing it for a reason other than merely gender flipping. If your only reason to make a character change is because the change itself is the only goal, that isn't enough to make the change a good one and the overall product seems to always suffer for it. If the change is made for deeper reasons, then it often turns out well. If there is some deeper story reason for the change, or the actors are just best that way, then fine. I see no signs of that here though.
Now, the Ghostbusters situation isn't quite the same--the characters aren't gender-flipped, just the team. They aren't doing a female Venkman, Spengler, Ray and Winston. These are new characters that create a similar group, like a parallel universe story.
However, I don't agree with your larger point. Looking at some of these specific instances: Heimdall was cast with Idris Elba, and though there was some complaining at the time, it's largely dried up. Why? Because he was good. But was he the best actor available? Probably not--because there is no best actor, only good actors. Why was he cast? So Thor wasn't the lily-whitest of the MCU films. In contrast stand Michael Clark Duncan as the Kingpin, and Michael B. Jordan as Johnny Storm in Daredevil and Fantastic Four respectively. They were cast for very much the same reason--to squeeze in some diversity. Now, not to speak ill of the dead, but I don't think Michael Clarke Duncan was the greatest actor, but Michael B. Jordan received a lot of acclaim for his role in Creed. Were either of them the problem with their respective movies? I would say no.
Going further, I'd look to the DCAU. Timm & Co. have been very upfront that they chose John Stewart over Hal Jordan so the team wouldn't be all white people, and Hawkgirl over Hawkman or Aquaman so there would be another woman on the team. Both of those choices were made purely with representation in mind, but can you really argue that they were bad choices made to the detriment of the show?
And when the movie stared Hal Jordan,there was a shitstorm and accusations of racism,because people were more familiar with DCAU.But the two are different characters anyway,so this doesnt really fit with different casting theme.
Anyway...Thor.Jeff Goldblum as Grandmaster,who would have guessed?
Quote from: Talavar on May 22, 2016, 03:50:16 AM
However, I don't agree with your larger point. Looking at some of these specific instances: Heimdall was cast with Idris Elba, and though there was some complaining at the time, it's largely dried up. Why? Because he was good. But was he the best actor available? Probably not--because there is no best actor, only good actors. Why was he cast? So Thor wasn't the lily-whitest of the MCU films. In contrast stand Michael Clark Duncan as the Kingpin, and Michael B. Jordan as Johnny Storm in Daredevil and Fantastic Four respectively. They were cast for very much the same reason--to squeeze in some diversity. Now, not to speak ill of the dead, but I don't think Michael Clarke Duncan was the greatest actor, but Michael B. Jordan received a lot of acclaim for his role in Creed. Were either of them the problem with their respective movies? I would say no.
Going further, I'd look to the DCAU. Timm & Co. have been very upfront that they chose John Stewart over Hal Jordan so the team wouldn't be all white people, and Hawkgirl over Hawkman or Aquaman so there would be another woman on the team. Both of those choices were made purely with representation in mind, but can you really argue that they were bad choices made to the detriment of the show?
I consider all of those except for the one from the new Fantastic Four (since I have not seen that film and cannot comment on it) as examples of changes done for the right reasons. I think you are reading a more stringent standard than the one I actually use. Idris Elba did an outstanding job in the role, thus making that an excellent reason to cast him. I actually liked Duncan as the Kingpin, so the same thing applies. John Stewart was already an established character, as was Hawkwoman, so they changed nothing there. Both have been members of the Justice League in the comics before anyway, so I honestly dont' see your point there. They may have selected members of their team for more diversity, but they did so without changing a single thing.
Not to derail anything, but Im super pumped to see Karl Urban as Skurge.
Judge Dredd Vs Thor anyone?
To put my earlier point another way, it's okay if film makers want to make things more diverse, but not so okay if that becomes that goal becomes more important than telling a good story.
Quote from: detourne_me on May 22, 2016, 05:28:44 AM
Not to derail anything, but Im super pumped to see Karl Urban as Skurge.
Actually, DM, I think you're putting the thread
back on the rails. I, also share your opinion about Karl Urban.
We've rehashed our views about the changes in ethnicity and gender for the films in multiple threads ad nauseam. Let's discuss our opinions of the actors themselves and the roles they will be playing.
I hear what you're saying hoss, but as long as this keeps happening, the discussion will keep going and frankly, in some cases, I find it completely necessary and topical. To me, in a lot of cases it's more about characterization than just simply trying to be politically correct. Are Asgardians alien or are they terrestrial? It's material to the substance of the actual movie. It isn't just about Idris Elba or Tessa Thompson. It's about how they're shaping the universe and the movies. Before we could assume what we know of what Valkyrie is supposed to be, but again, before, we though Idris Elba's casting was weird because we didn't know they were looking at Asgardians as extra-dimensional beings.
That said, I've also talked about how in my opinion, the MCU and Marvel in general has been pretty forward about the use of minorities in their films. Their first hit franchise that pretty much sparked Marvel's rise was with Blade, a black character. Storm has been an intergral part of pretty much all of the X-Men films. Nick Fury has been the glue through the entire Phase I films. Falcon's addition into the Captain America franchise has not only been a seemless addition, but completely story-appropriate. Just as Black Panther. It is not like they had to shoe-horn blackness into roles and characters just for inclusionary purposes.
But beyond all that to DM's point. Karl Urban is playing Skurge and while I might have expected someone bigger, I'm curious about the character himself. What would it look like for them to cast Skurge and not Amora? Why would they not have the Enchantress in this film? Or are they?
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 21, 2016, 09:22:37 PM
My own feelings on the matter are that the ethnic and gender background of a character should never be changed just to change the ethnic and gender background of a character. If there's another good reason for doing so, fine. Elba did such an excellent job as Heimdall, that I am confident that he was really the best actor for the job, which is as fine a reason as any. There was some outrage when news of a black Captain America in the comcis hit, but this was Falcon, Captain America's long time partner and the most logical person to take up the role, so I was fine with that too.
The new Ghostbusters movie, on the other hand, just seems to be gender flipping to gender flip. That's not okay. If the cast had been a mix of both genders, it would probably have been fine.
So if the acress can pull off the role and they chose her for that reason, then it will be fine. We should relax until then.
I agree wholeheartedly, except about the Ghostbusters movie. The difference is that those are new characters, not changes to existing characters (as I understand it). That's the central issue.
Quote from: Talavar on May 22, 2016, 03:50:16 AM
Going further, I'd look to the DCAU. Timm & Co. have been very upfront that they chose John Stewart over Hal Jordan so the team wouldn't be all white people, and Hawkgirl over Hawkman or Aquaman so there would be another woman on the team. Both of those choices were made purely with representation in mind, but can you really argue that they were bad choices made to the detriment of the show?
That's just the point, Tal. Choosing John Stewart over Hal is completely different than making Hal black or what have you. There is a big difference between promoting a character who is ACTUALLY diverse and race swapping a character who is not. I think the former is the right way to go about these things. If you want diversity, then use characters who are ACTUALLY diverse. I'd way rather they make a movie with the Ryan Choi Atom than change Ray. I'd much prefer using Black Panther rather than, say, Black Knight, for the same reason. It's fine to want diverse casts. That's a good thing, in the end, but I think making any big changes to a character without significant justification is always a loss, even if it's for a good cause. I'm 100% on board with taking the actually diverse characters and putting them on the screen. Would I rather see my favorite versions? Of course, but as long as they take good characters and treat them well, I'll be happy.
On the topic of Skurge, I'm just excited he's going to be in the movie. The fact that Urban is playing him just makes it better. His turn as Dredd shows he's perfect for the role.
Quote from: BentonGrey on May 23, 2016, 01:31:55 AM
I agree wholeheartedly, except about the Ghostbusters movie. The difference is that those are new characters, not changes to existing characters (as I understand it). That's the central issue.
They aren't really new characters. They may have different names, but each seems to be an obvious match for one of the originals. If they were completely different, then I'd have less of an issue with it.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 23, 2016, 02:57:58 AM
Quote from: BentonGrey on May 23, 2016, 01:31:55 AM
I agree wholeheartedly, except about the Ghostbusters movie. The difference is that those are new characters, not changes to existing characters (as I understand it). That's the central issue.
They aren't really new characters. They may have different names, but each seems to be an obvious match for one of the originals. If they were completely different, then I'd have less of an issue with it.
They do? I don't see anyone that calls to mind Peter Venkmann, and Kristen Wiig's character doesn't remind me of anyone from the original movie. Kate McKinnon's look reminds me of the cartoon version of Egon, but the cartoon version of Egon looked nothing like actual Egon, and she hasn't said enough in the trailers to remind me of anyone either. Leslie Jones, as both the only black ghostbuster and the only non-scientist ghostbuster is pretty much forced to call Winston to mind (which I think is a mistake). Who do you think pair up so neatly?
I don't disagree with you at all Shogunn. I do think that what's being discussed here is very relevant. My problem is that the name of the thread is "Thor: Ragnarok" and the initial post mentions four new additions to the movie. If the title of the thread was, "Marvel does it again. Look who they cast as Valkyrie," then everything being mentioned here would be completely on topic.
I agree that the discussion of gender-swapping or change of ethnicity for characters that have been around longer than most fans have been alive only for the sake of inclusion or change for the sake of change is topical. I just think the topic needs to have its own thread rather than derailing every thread that mentions a choice in casting.
A) Do we have to do this for every movie?Yes,there are better ways,like the DCAU example.No,we cant change anything either way.
B) Maybe start a thread for Ghostbusters?
Here's a novel idea. How about we just recast every character we've all grown up with and known for years, with whoever, not say anything to anyone, and let the audience try and figure out who is who and who is supposed to be who or what? We can classify it as an Audience Participation Feature. <_<
But seriously, the studios are going to do whatever they want to do, regardless of what the fans think, trying to lure in a wider range of people to whatever feature they create. yes, most of these characters were created back in a time when white males were the predominate readers, and I totally understand trying to diversify things to both appeal and appease the current fan base, but IMO, why not leave these characters the way they always have been, and *gasp* create new characters for a new generation?
Quote from: hoss20 on May 23, 2016, 04:48:00 AM
I don't disagree with you at all Shogunn. I do think that what's being discussed here is very relevant. My problem is that the name of the thread is "Thor: Ragnarok" and the initial post mentions four new additions to the movie. If the title of the thread was, "Marvel does it again. Look who they cast as Valkyrie," then everything being mentioned here would be completely on topic.
I agree that the discussion of gender-swapping or change of ethnicity for characters that have been around longer than most fans have been alive only for the sake of inclusion or change for the sake of change is topical. I just think the topic needs to have its own thread rather than derailing every thread that mentions a choice in casting.
Lol yeah well... I honestly thought it was inevitable.
At least this facet of it. Then everyone else came with the Ghostbusters and whatnot.
But I seriously would like to know would they really cast the Executioner and not the Enchantress? I mean, Skurge and Amora goes together like... well like Valkyrie and blonde pigtails.
I admit I am not a huge ghostbusters fan, don't even know the characters names and only vaguely recall seeing the first movie once, so my impressions are hardly clear ones.
I think that Ghostbusters film has problems enough on its own merits, but that's neither here nor there.
Shogunn, good point. It does seem like we really should see the Enchantress if we're going to get the Executioner.
Tal, you didn't respond to my point.
Quote from: BentonGrey on May 26, 2016, 02:07:55 AM
I think that Ghostbusters film has problems enough on its own merits, but that's neither here nor there.
Shogunn, good point. It does seem like we really should see the Enchantress if we're going to get the Executioner.
Tal, you didn't respond to my point.
Sorry Benton, it kind of got lost in the fray, and then I didn't want to further derail the thread. I agree, a different, more diverse character is preferable to just swapping a character's ethnicity around, but that is difficult at times, such as the cast of characters associated with Thor. Not a lot of diversity there. I know there are reasons for that being the case, but I also don't feel much is lost, and something is gained in a case like this.
Figured that might be the case. Well, sometimes it works out well, like with Idris Elba, but I'd cast that guy in anything.
http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/135465-heres-your-thor-ragnarok-guardians-of-the-galaxy-vol-2-rumors-for-today.html (http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/news/135465-heres-your-thor-ragnarok-guardians-of-the-galaxy-vol-2-rumors-for-today.html)
Newest batch of rumors for Thor and Guardians 2.Some elements of Planet Hulk will be present.
So here are the first shots of Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie. Honestly I've been thinking that it was just gonna be Tessa Thompson in a Valkyrie costume. Which would be a weird look. But apparently they're going a different way with the character completely.
And there's also a reveal of another character that tells more of the plot.
http://uproxx.com/movies/thor-ragnarok-valkyrie-miek/
MIEK!
This is the most interested I've been in Thor Ragnarok since its Inception.
Looks good or at least like it has a lot to deliver. And if Civil War was any kind of indicator. As long as it doesn't focus on a bunch of hipster college kids and a middle aged man running around in his underpants (yeesh!) I'll dig it.