Peter's Reviews > Thor: Ages of Thunder

Thor by Matt Fraction
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Sep 23, 2010

it was ok
bookshelves: comic-graphic-novel, fantasy, library
Recommended for: dim-witted teens from the 1950s

Want my one-word review? Here it is:


This really doesn't deserve two stars. But it's just not quite dreadful enough to rate only one. It almost was, but there was a slightly interesting section towards the end where they did some mildly amusing playing around with different art styles.

But in a fractional system, this one would get 1.51 stars at best. Ponderous, annoying, stupid characters and really felt like a throwback to the old days, when most comic books were being written for an audience of slightly dim-witted young teens. With a bit of extra confusion thrown in for pseudo "depth".

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Thor.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-1 of 1) (1 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Steve (last edited Sep 24, 2010 08:11AM) (new)

Steve It's a Thor book. Were you honestly expecting Something other than Snorri Sturluson dumbed-down for the mass market? Thor, since Day One, is a series that's pretty much about nothing but the slugfest, mythological or otherwise (often some type of sci-fi fusion that has a quirky charm), Thor's familial dysfunction (his dad is his worst enemy by far) and the soap opera of Asgardian court intrigue, so it ain't deep, nor is it supposed to be.

That said, Thor has only been a truly great series a small handful of times since the character debuted back in 1962, so one has to carefully pick and choose to find the good stuff. The Lee/Kirby run stands highest in my estimation, especially once they really figured out what they were doing — somewhere around JOURNEY INTO MYSTERY #114, where they introduced the Absorbing Man and quickly followed that with the Trial of the Gods — and after that some of the John Buscema stuff from the 1970's was both clever and beautifully illustrated. Following Lee/Kirby, the most acclaimed run is Walt Simonson's in the early 1980's; there's some good stuff there, storywise, but I personally find it to be quite overrated and too visually "cartoony" for my tastes. From that period there was a very long wait until Thor was really worth reading again, and the recent J. Michael Straczinski run that bgan around four years ago is pretty good, although it is best read in collected editions because it's very slow-moving if absorbed in monthly chapters. But while that run is largely good, it does kind of fizzle out near its end. The book's still going and they're changing creative teams, so we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

back to top