>alcoholic slaver is alright because she's a woman of colour
>slave rebellion reduced to university organising humour
>Loki's daughter, goddess of death, is reduced to Asgardian MAGA, and his forgotten sister
What could be wrong with the tone?
But honestly, the movie was dealt a bad hand from the start. Remember how Thor managed to be entertaining through pure force of personality of some of its actors. They made Jane Foster into "I luv da science" generic girl. Which means the aspect of going into danger, and saving lives, is ripped from the character. Thor: The Dark World was boned because they had the poor earth characters inherited from the first film, when it needed to be pure space adventure. It also didn't help that Malekith was best using The Casket of Ancient Winters. And not some weird set up for Infinity War.
They couldn't lean into classic Thor, because there were aspects that just too cheesy for modern audiences. Walt Simonson Thor is out, because it reinvented the character from those aspects, and leaned into the good aspects of all the characters. They couldn't do the most famous recent run, because it effectively is building on decades of space adventures, and gods, as well as focusing on different periods in Thor's life.
And so, they hired a quirky comedy director that they told could do whatever he wanted. Provided it fits in the MCU. Ragnarok to me is wasted potential personified. Planet Hulk is out until the eventual reboot of the MCU. At least Thor was able to be heroic for the sake of being heroic. And the Hulk kicked some ass. And some of the villains were able to ham it up in a fun way. It could be a lot worse. It could have been on par with the Justice League movie.