just tbh the fact thor: ragnarok was shunned by awarding bodies bc of the belief they hold that superhero movies aren’t as credible or hold as important a message as straight dramas is actually indicative of how outdated the Hollywood critics are.
Thor as a trilogy was a huge argument against hereditary monarchy as a political system, with Ragnarok being the spectacular climax of that. It was a call out to imperialism, showing how any great powers haven’t got there without blood on their hands, and you can’t cover that up if you want to grow, you have to face the truths of your past. It also demonstrates a major flaw in hereditary monarchy, which is that sometimes the best leader is not a part of the descendency - in this case Heimdall.
The film also ends, with the hero a man without a home. His home literally destroyed by tyranny and hellfire, he and his people looking for somewhere to seek refuge. Somewhere new they can call home - an interesting position to put your hero in, in a world where refugee is to many, a dirty word.
It also has an interesting commentary on the treatment of veterans when you look at Valkyrie. She gave everything for her land, lost everything for her land, and her land gave her very little in return. Which is tragically a reality many veterans face after returning from war.
But it wasn’t a heavy movie, all these socio-political commentaries were happening, but the film was a laugh a minute from the moment it started. The action sequences some of the best Marvel have ever produced. The visuals of this movie were extraordinary, again some of the best Marvel have ever produced. The soundtrack was finally memorable, something Marvel hadn’t really managed up to that point.
Everything about Ragnarok is awards worthy, and if it had been anything but a superhero movie it would have been nominated for them, and Taika would have without question been nominated for best director. So uhh, let me know when the awarding bodies are dragged into 2018 with the rest of us yeah?