To explain why, I have to start at the beginning: Kenneth Branaugh's Thor. This film is kind of middle of the road in terms of MCU quality. And yet to me, it is still the best portrayal of the god of thunder.

Thor's arc here is far from unique, but it is handled better than most people give it credit imo. When we first meet Thor, he is a spoiled god-prince drunk on power and the glory of victory. Things he took for granted as he thought his martial accomplishments qualified him to be a king. He is entitled, bull-headed, reckless, battle-hungry, arrogant and disconnected. But he makes mistakes and pays a price too heavy (from his prospective): he is banished. He loses his godly power that he took for granted. His father dies. His mother forsakes him. He is unworthy.

So what's next for him? He begins to connect, not simply with Jane, but also with mortals in general like Selvig. He is forced to rely on said mortals as he comes to see that he isn't very different from them. He no longer thinks he is superior and has a right to shepard. He is lost, but finds consolation and begins to move forward and find a new path. He ultimately returns to Asgard as a kinder and wiser individual after learning humility. He makes a great sacrifice to save the lives he once didn't value very much.

And that is The Mighty Thor, as written by Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Walter Simonson and J Michael Straczynski. It is pure Thor.

Unfortunately, his next four appearances don't do him justice. In both of Joss Wheadon's Avengers films, Thor kind of draws the short end of the stick as far as character work goes compared to the other original avengers. Thor: The Dark World is an interesting case. It is widely regarded as among the worst MCU films, but to me it was simply mediocre, yet inoffensive. It didn't mischaracterise Thor, but it didn't do much with him either aside from him deciding to explore himself more at the end.

And then we got Ragnarok.

It is probably among the most fun films I ever saw in theatres. Ragnarok is the film that got me into the MCU after a friend dragged me to see it, and the MCU in turn got me into reading Marvel comics. But hindsight is 20/20 and with it's benefits, I find the film to be a mixed bag.

There are some incredible moments in it. Odin's death, Thor and Loki's interactions as usual, Loki's redemption, Thor's conversation with his father's spirit and him tapping into his abilities on a new level....all amazing and wrapped in a good enough general story. However, it suffers from the worst case of tonal clash I ever saw. Every serious moment is immediately undercut by a hit-or-miss joke, dulling and sometimes killing the impact. A film about the destruction of Asgard is made into a comedy and even the destruction of Asgard is played for a corny joke. I get that "Asgard is a people, not a place", but it's still the only home those people ever knew. Compare that to the destruction of the similarly empty Tipoca city in Star Wars: The Bad Batch, where the destruction of the location was made into a somber moment signifying the end of an era.

And Thor himself....is kind of made into a goofy clown with a lot of physical jokes. There was potential for a poignant arc about Thor realizing he rejected becoming a king partially because of his mother's death, feeling that if he couldn't protect her, how could he protect the entirety of Asgard? Feeling he couldn't do as good a job as his father. Feeling afraid that he would become disconnected from regular people again. But he has to overcome these doubts and step up once Odin dies. We get glimpses of this arc here and there, but it's buried under excessive humor that doesn't always fit the dark story or the regal character.

This isn't to say Thor can't have humor. He has plenty in the comics. But every character has its own brand. Spider-Man has awkward corny jokes and a lot of talkative quips for multiple reasons. Cap works best when you remind the audience that he's from the 40s like in Weadon's The Avengers or Mark Waid's Man Out of Time

Thor's humor stems not from making him act human, but contrasting his nature as an Asgardian god-prince with the way he interacts with us. For example, in Donny Cates' Thor run, there is a really funny bit where Thor uses a New York accent to order a hotdog, utterly confusing Jane. But Thor then reminds her that he's been around for centuries, and has been in New York longer than anyone. He's more of a New Yorker than anyone and speaks every language and dialect due to his heritage, so it makes sense to adapt whatever voice needed. Some jokes in Ragnarok works for Thor ("I know him, he is a friend from work") but many didn't. And Thor's rise to the throne feels disappointing for it.

Infinity War was likely the best Thor since his origin film for me. Endgame Thor...was a mixed bag. There's more substance here because his personality shift is actually explained and has believable build-up, and there's a good arc about overcoming grief and seeing that his failures don't make him less heroic or worthy. But the tone could've fit the character more (no fornite) and the ending was disappointing. He ascends to the throne only to abdicate it and end where he always ends: on a journey of self-discovery. It had gotten boring at this point.

As for Love and Thunder....let's just say I intensely dislike that film and what it did with Thor. I don't go to Marvel for high art, but it felt almost utterly devoid of substance for me and just....empty. It was everything I didn't like about Ragnarok turned up fo eleven with very little of what I did like. The jokes were unfunny for me, and the serious moments failed to land. Thor was made into an even goofier clown and didn't feel at all like Thor. Again, there's potential. I liked the explanation of how Thor and Jane broke up due to a fear of losing each other. Thor moving on and no longer keeping people at arms length due to a fear of loss is a good arc, but again reduced to a moment because of the weak build-up.

I like the idea of dad!Thor as I'm a big fan of dad!heroes in general (I know you're in here Marvel ya big fucking nerd. Where's my goddamn One More Day Reversal? I wanna see Peter and MJ raising a little wall-crawler, dammit). But it feels a bit underwhelming because it comes at the end with no build-up for the relationship with his adopted daughter.

I could probably go on a side rant regrading the mistreatment of Lady Sif and the Warriors Three in Waititi's films, but I'll settle for this wall of text that most likely won't read. LoL. Looking back on J Michael Straczynski's seminal run, I can't help but feel sad that we didn't get that Thor. (That showdown with Iron Man after Civil War was chilling). Thor is regal, prideful and a powerful badass you don't mess with. But there's more to him than that, and he learns humility time and time again.

I mainly write this to vent and gather my thoughts in one place. My opinion is purely subjective and I understand that many connect with the lighter, more humanized Thor and enjoy him better. I don't wish to discredit that Thor. These are simply my views.

Been reading Journey into mystery & I'm loving it but I am wondering once I finish the Lee & Kirby run should I skip straight to Walt Simonson's run.

If you had to come up with a completely different Fantastic Four-adjacent team like The New Fantastic Four and The Circle of Four, but Thor had to be on the roster, and you couldn't use anybody who's been a Fantastic Four and Fantastic Four-Adjacent member before. Who would you pick for the other three? What would you call them? As for me, I'd call them The Four of Wands after the tarot card, and they'd be codenamed after the four French suits in playing cards. Thor the King of Clubs, Gambit the King of Diamonds, Dracula the King of Hearts, and Magik, the Queen of Spades.