"You know this might be a big pile of crap, here." - John Huston
Well, John, I happen to think the THOR movie has potential to do great box office. My frame of reference is hazy, though. I read and liked the early issuses of the 1998 revamp, under the "Heroes Return" banner, by the team of Dan Jurgens and John Romita jr. I also liked Walt Simonson's "Frog Thor" story, which was really well done - not as audacious as some fans thought (the actual norse myth has an episode where Thor goes undercover in drag as a mail-order bride to retrieve his stolen hammer - pronounced 'mail-joor-neer', so that you'll know before anyone in the audience knows). Blake Edwards could've directed THAT film.
I stopped following the Jurgens/Romita jr. run closely because the main villains in that initial story arc - The Dark Gods - weren't too interesting once they were unveiled. They did solve one mystery on time, though - Marnot - Thor's mysterious benefactor/watchdog in the early issues turned out to be one of Odin's ravens and not Loki, as many believed. Oh, well. From there, the creative team spent their run reflecting on other creative team's in the book's past and it seemed like they ran out of gas. I would have preferred if they brought back the eskimo sea witch from issues 3-4 for a rematch. Yes, in the book, she's referred to as Inuit sea witch, but c'mon, one is more fun than the other.
I didn't catch the re-re-revamp by J. Michael Strazinski either, on account of how I'm convinced he only writes to new readers, people who've read nothing or seen nothing in pop culture before that would allow them to second guess. It was successful, though, and the film seems to be a mishmash of that, along with the "nowhere man, nowhere plan" wandering "dude" from Mark Miller's run on the Ultimates, setting up Thor's appearance in the upcoming Avengers film. Moviemaking synergy can be like forming a banquet out of meals brought in by guests from other places sometimes.