#referring to that tdw scene

[alwida10]

Hey! I just saw that you reblogged a post of mine on Loki's powers a while ago. And while I completely agree with your tags (Loki's powers in the tv series among other things), you also write that the show was originally written for a different character and only the names were changed and the magic added later on. I've never read that anywhere, could you explain? It would make so much sense given how different Loki is in the show and how his previous experience is largely disregarded.

Hi there!!

It took me a while to answer this because of real-life stuff, but now I’m there!

By saying the show was written for another character I referred to this analysis on Twitter which again links back to another analysis on Tumblr. (The original link in Twitter is broken, but I found the post manually). I read this analyses a while back, and admire people who were able and willing to read Waldron’s original script. For me, it reads like an insincere column on what a deeply conservative person assumes would be what a left-leaning, progressive audience would like to hear without understanding anything about the points he tries to mirror. I can't add much to the original posts.

However, Waldron’s comments about Loki, including the “he’s an ass and that makes him easy to write” as well as his jokes on never having watched Thor 1 before writing the series can certainly give you the idea he never knew much about our beloved blorbo before writing him. The fact that he thought making Loki say “he doesn’t enjoy killing people but does it anyway for his personal gain” (rephrased) would make TVA Loki in any way redeemable is telling imo.**

Now, technically this is all I can say to your ask, BUT I realize I never truly elaborated on the stuff I mentioned in said tags, so here is an explanation for everyone who would like more about it.

I read those a while back and took my basic analyzing skills to the test by taking a look at Loki and how writing for a character works in general. This has two aspects (I can think of from the top of my head).

If a work is written for one special character it should be impossible to achieve the same plot if he was replaced by another character without the special abilities.

One thing I read a while back (and sadly forgot where) is that both sex and fight scenes are both character exposition scenes. This is true for magic as well, just it gets rarely used since in all of literature there aren’t that many characters who possess magic.

In the Thor movies, Loki’s magic is masterfully used, showing that the works were actually written with Loki in mind. Both Thor 1 and the dark world would simply not work if you put -let’s say Fandral- in Loki’s position. Loki’s skill to find the pathways between worlds is essential. And his ability to make himself invisible is essential for Thor 1. I could go on, but you get the idea, and I don’t want to get this too long to read.

Regarding the character exposition, Loki’s magic in the first movies was a mirror for his characterization (as it should be). He could make himself invisible, for he has been invisible to his family. He could cast illusions since he learned that people preferred an illusion to his real self. He could make others manipulate into saying what he wanted them to say because that was how Loki survived on Asgard (post-credits scene of Thor 1).

In TDW, we see Loki’s anger and frustration manifest in a telekinetic blast that ruins everything around him, and if that isn’t a masterful analogy for his arc I don’t know what would be.

Now coming to the series. All magic Loki uses is cosmetically or for show. He dries himself, he makes sweet little fireworks. How is that connected to his characterization? The show tells us he is insecure and loves only himself. If you squint real hard you might argue the drying is a sign of him being used to comfort. But I thought he was pampered and spoiled? Wouldn’t that mean he had other people to dry him?

And then there is the hiding/teleportation* scene on Lamentis. What does it say about his character? If it IS teleportation what does it say about him? That he can go distances without walking, perhaps, which would fit his line “I never walked so much in my life”, but doesn’t fit that scene from Thor 1 where we see how long he had to walk. And if he can teleport why doesn’t he spare them the walk? And if it doesn’t work for long distances, why does he run for cover right when they realize they are on Lamentis and doesn’t teleport? Why doesn’t he teleport onboard the spaceship? IF they wanted to use the fight as a character exposition, they should have made him use illusions. That’s his trademark.

Next is the “lifting a building” stuff. What does that say? I guess if you limit the interpretation to the series, it could be considered foreshadowing for the “we are stronger than we think”. And like so many stuff of the show it lacks any connection to the former canon. Loki isn’t known for brute strength, either of the body or of the magic. That’s Thor. Loki is known for being the intelligent one. Interestingly, the scene spells rather “we are dumber than we think”, too, since making two steps to the side would have achieved the same effect without any flexing of inexplainable telekinesis muscles.

The same goes for the fireworks in the train (characterizing Loki as sentimental, ok fine, and later as a dumb drunk who can’t control what illusion he casts, 😒). The plot would work without that magic. Just like it works without the drying, the building lifting, and all the other magic Loki used.

So, yeah, magic is Loki’s specialty that sets him apart from many other characters. Someone who writes a story with him in mind will use that automatically. They didn’t. Because it wasn’t him the show was written for. But the worst guy of all time.

Since I only talked about the magic here, I would like to recommend this marvelous analysis on Loki’s speech pattern and body language in the shown in comparison to the former installments.

* The only thing the “I don’t enjoy it” achieves is taking possible sadism out of the equation. TVA Loki is still irredeemable because he decided his sense of superiority would be worth more than the lives of the people in New York. This is egoism and a total dismissal of other people’s lives, something that cannot be “unlearned” by learning to love himself. That only removes the former motivation for the slaughter. Should something else motivate him to kill people, he would act just the same.

On the other hand, OG Loki has been coerced, not only by torture as we see it in The Avengers but also under the influence of the mind stone. Whenever we see him having the choice he acts morally better by sparing lives where he can.

**I don’t consider it teleportation since there is a time delay between Loki vanishing and re-appearing, and imo teleportation is instantaneous. Also, he vanishes feet first but reappears head first which doesn’t sit right with teleportation, and rather with making himself invisible and lifting invisibility again, but that’s for another post.

#mcu loki #loki meta #anti loki series #loki series negativity #loki series criticism #asks

[bushs-world]

In Thor 1, loki choose to fall off a cliff rather than go back to live in Asgard. Do you think he choose death instead of life in Asgard because of how the warrior's 3 and sif treat him

Actually no. The reason Loki chose to commit suicide in Thor 1 was because of Odin and his 'no' at the end of the movie. Since Loki spent half of the movie trying to appease Odin and earn his approval, only for Odin to reject it (which wasn't wrong of Odin imo), Loki committed suicide coz in his mind, nothing he could do would earn him Odin's love.

Let me explain.

First of all, I don't think Warrior 3 or Sif were the only ones who mistreated Loki. Most of the people in Asgard didn't have a high opinion of him either. We know from 'Avengers' that Loki felt overlooked and overshadowed in favour of Thor (this sentiment is repeated by Frigga in a deleted scene in TDW).

Also while, there is nothing in 'Thor' that shows this but there is a deleted scene where Thor mocks Loki over his use of magic and a servant laughs at him (i don't consider deleted scenes canon but they do provide context). I like to use the myths as a reference and in the myths, Loki was looked down upon by the Aesir coz he's a seidr user (which shows their hypocrisy coz Odin himself is a seidr user yet he is considered the powerful in all nine realms), so I assume it might be the same for MCU Loki as well.

So yeah, Loki was overlooked and possibly looked down upon by Asgardians but I don't think it mattered so much to him that he would commit suicide. Yes, he did want to be loved and respected by the Asgardians and at the beginning of 'Thor' he does try to win the Warrior 3 and Sif's approval but as soon as he learns of his adoption and is handed the throne by Frigga, he stops trying to get their approval, and instead puts on a mask of indifference and nonchalance. So, it wasn't their behaviour that drove him to suicide.

Another point is that the warrior 3 and Sif weren't wrong when they suspected Loki coz he was doing exactly what they were suspecting him to. He did sneak frost giants into Asgard, he confessed to informing the guards about their trip to Jotunhiem, then got the throne all of a sudden with both odin and Frigga inaccessible. We as viewers know that Odin really went into odin sleep and Frigga passed him the throne, but they don't have that information. Their own paranoia of Loki, combined with his dubious actions, the situation and their blind loyalty to Thor made them totally mistrust Loki and go against his orders.

In fact, it's less about how they view Loki and more about their loyalty to Thor. Many people think that because they didn't obey Loki's commands, they didn't respect him but forget they even disobeyed Odin's commands twice for Thor.

Now, onto the actual reason he tried to commit suicide. Like I said, Odin. Loki's entire world crumbled after he learnt that he was adopted and a frost giant. For him, this meant that his entire life had been a lie. He was nothing more than a monster and a stolen relic. And Loki hated this reality of his. He not only belonged to a race that was hated in Asgard, but he was also Odin's biggest enemy's son. But he didn't want to be a frost giant, he didn't want to be Laufey's son. He wanted to be an Asgardian and Odin's son.

I feel there was an internalised hatred in himself over who he truly was and Loki hated it. Then, Frigga gave him the power of the throne and Loki used this opportunity to prove himself to Odin. To show that he wasn't a monster like the frost giants, that his loyalty lay with both Asgard and Odin. He wanted to prove to Odin that he was worthy of being his son.

And that's when he started lashing out. In his hatred and anger, Loki started hurting innocent people. Not only that, he started putting his own loved ones in danger. And while, it's commonly believed Loki tried destroying Jotunhiem to please Odin, I personally feel he was punishing them because he was one of them. He wanted to get kill them all so that he never had to come to terms with his heritage. He even pushed and hurt Thor who tried to reach out to him.

And then, when Loki was dangling over the abyss, he tried to reach out for Odin's approval. To have his father say that he was proud of him. To acknowledge that whatever he did was because of his love for his father and the good of Asgard (i don't fully believe this because I always feel all loki did was more out of his own self hatred, even though a part of it was also out of winning Odin's love). He wanted his father to desperately see his (perceived) good intentions (which they weren't in reality) and possibly to acknowledge his efforts.

But Loki doesn't realise that there wasn't one good thing he did. All he had done was kill, hurt and burn. He had hurt unsuspecting innocent people who never wronged him all because of his self hatred and pain. Loki didn't realise that nothing he did was right.

So when Odin replied with a 'no', Loki took it as a rejection instead of understanding that it was his father's displeasure over his actions. The thought that he was wrong never even crossed his mind. He felt like nothing he could do would ever earn him Odin's love or approval (even though there was no way he could have gotten any approval after his actions).

Idk what was going in Loki's head and how he thought that his actions would be praised. Or why he didn't realise he was in the wrong and there was no way his father would be proud of him (which seems weird to me as a series fan coz in the series, he's very introspective n self aware. He understands his mistakes so well in the series that his total disregard in Thor makes no sense). But I think that's what he totally believed. I think he was so convinced of his own self righteousness, that the thought of his actions being horrific didn't even come to him (i think maybe coz he heard stories of Odin defeating the frost giants. But during the battle of tønsberg, according to Odin's account, he was just protecting humans. And thor was cast out of Asgard in front of his eyes because of his batte lust. Odin had time and again stressed about peace and denounced war two times in the movie and Loki used Thor's battle lust to show his father how Thor shouldn't be king so how Loki imagined he would be praised is beyond me. Which is why I feel most of what he did was for himself, so that he didn't have to face his ugly truth instead of Odin)

And I think at that moment Loki gave up hope to live coz he felt he would never get the one thing he always wanted- Odin's love and approval so he let's go. Before this moment, Loki never showed any tendency to die coz he was holding onto one end of gungnir for some time. But after that rejection, Loki tried to commit suicide.

#loki #loki meta #ask

[the-real-zhora-salome]

Looking at this whole Loki erasure thing, its so sad and wrong on many levels. Because it's not just Loki. It's like they're trying to erase the first half of the Thor MCU canon. That's disrespectful to Tom, of course for obvious and innumerable reasons. It's disrespectful to Kenneth Branagh who plucked CH from obscurity and launched his career. It's disrespectful to everyone who worked on the Dark World which is not half as bad as people remember. It's not everyone else's fault, Chris couldn't enhance the role with his performance. And don't get me started on the arrogance of CH and TW. Like there wouldn't have been Ragnarok if Tom hadn't carried Thor, TDW and the Avengers

Ugh, don't get me started.

100% agree.

With TW, it shouldn't be a surprise. Being a narcissist, showing no respect or regard for any kind of source material or efforts that came before his, is his thing. He thinks is gives him the edge, probably. And so far he's getting rewarded for it, so why would he change?

With CH, it's probably just toxic masculinity and over-inflated ego. He has two brothers, so he doesn't know any different.

The people I really blame here are the ones that cast CH as Thor (that includes Kenneth). They cast him for looks (definitely got that part right) and probably thought that any deficits in the acting department could be sorted out on set or that they could shoot around it. And CH, being a good bit younger and hungry for his break, probably thought the same.

But it was clear even in the first Thor film that while CH had the physicality and the more humerous moments down pat, he just couldn't cut it in the more dramatic/emotional moments.

KB leaned heavily on Shakespeare for the dynastic family drama (to borrow Tom's words), and with Tom and Anthony Hopkins, he was surrounded by classically trained actors that understood every reference, every quote, every prompt, every trope, every direction, while CH was probably walking around thinking to himself "what are they all on about, I like my beer cold, not shaken".

You almost cannot blame him for getting more and more disenchanted with the role, especially being put together with a scene (and hearts) stealer like Tom who, it must have felt like to CH, got all the praise for the films success there for a while.

[timetravellingshinigami]

Thor and Loki as YouTubers

Thor: Smash that like button!!!

Loki: Gently tap that like button.

#referring to that tdw scene #loki: dont hit it. press it gently #loki #loki mcu #tom hiddleston #chris hemsworth #thor odinson #loki incorrect quotes #thor incorrect quotes #avengers incorrect quotes #marvel #mcu #thor the dark world #source: #safiya nygaard

[sukugo]

Never forget selvig's "oh thank god" in Tfw after loki dies NEVER FORGET

(I know why, but that did rub me wrong)

oh definitely!! but then again, it's just a moment of him being insensitive, so our discomfort is very much the correct reaction lmao

#f.ask #during the scene it's framed as not a ver nice thing to say #but if we see tr to eg loki's death is just 'whatever lmao' #tr just has one line that references it with no further emotional weight to it #when u know #thor’s actual reaction to it during tdw was That #and then iw and eg? #eg thor literally passed next to loki and he just?? ignored him??? #when loki's death was what completely broke him down?' #ahdsahdkajdshas look we know the mcu be like that but sometimes it's still :/

[woodelf68]

I can't remember if it was a deleted scene or a snippet from a featurette where Thor storms into the cell. If you can find that, you can probably get as close-to-canon an answer as possible.

Ooh, thanks, I’d already looked at the movie clips and it went from Thor talking to Loki in the cell to Loki being out of the cell with no ‘Thor dropping the cell barrier’ in between. I’ll see if I can find that.

EDIT: I found it, it was a deleted scene with the audiobook from TDW Junior Novel playing over it. Couldn’t see anything useful (the view was from inside the cell looking out, and probably there was nothing to see, lbh), but the narrative said that “Thor shut down the energy barrier”, so the control panel is confirmed as being right outside each cell and Thor seemed to stride right in -- I don’t think there was any kind of a code to be entered, I’m going to go with the mechanism being set to recognise certain people in authority -- probably the royal family and the dungeon guards. 

Thanks, Nonny, you get the prize!

#Anonymous #reference #the dark world #thor enters loki's cell #tdw deleted scenes #it also mentions the eastern stairs lead to the barracks

[ramrage]

okay which one of you jackasses put these thorkiass lyrics for the song that played when thor was cradling a dying loki in his arms in tdw

scene for reference

#thor #thorki #loki #thunderfrost

[iamanartichoke]

This seems like kind of a dumb question, but you asked for questions and you're a Loki fan, so—what exactly did Loki do to that guy's eye in Stuttgart? I always thought he just held him down and scanned the eye so it could be duplicated for Clint to access the iridium, but then there are references to him just like cutting out his eye entirely.

This is definitely not a dumb question, tbh I don't really know exactly what Loki did to the eye. I've always assumed that Loki cut it out, due to his body language when he's doing it. I've mentioned this before, but Loki has this very consistent tendency to look away at the pivotal violent moment of a kill (or just a gruesome eye removal):

Avengers:

^^ Loki is looking slightly over Coulson's shoulder, not at the blade or the wound;

TDW:

^^ Loki is moving so quickly that it was impossible to get good screencaps, so I'm sorry, Loki, for how unflattering these are - but, when he's moving very fast he does seem to keep an eye on the elves so he can see what he's doing, but once he's on the last elf and the immediate threat has passed, he looks away while doing the killing;

Ragnarok:

^^ Loki is looking at his opponent when he first swings his murder tiara at him, but when he actually goes in for the kill, he's looking away;

Loki:

^^ And most recently, he's driving the blade into this TVA officer for the kill but is looking away, over his (the officer's) shoulder, not at what his (Loki's) hand or blade is doing.

I always found this tendency of Loki's to be interesting bc he's never struck me as someone who is particularly squeamish but, rather, it reads more like he's someone who really dislikes violence but he does what he has to do when he has to do it. He doesn't take any pleasure in the actual violence part of his violent acts; he's compelled to look away at the very last moment or as soon as it's "safe" to do so. That he does this even in Avengers, when he's so mind-influenced, really speaks to this aversion. (I once again must commend Tom on what have to be deliberate acting choices, unspoken yet so consistent they add to Loki's characterization without him having to say a word.)

My point is, in the scene in question, Loki looks away right as he plunges the tool-thing (does anyone know what it's called?) into the guy's eye, making me assume it's particularly violent and that he doesn't actually want to look at what he's doing:

^^ You can see that he's got his eye (heh) on the target in the first still, but in the second one, when he actually plunges it down, he looks away as he does it. He's not getting pleasure out of this; rather, there's a detached, kind of clinical feel in how he does this that speaks to his (I feel) revulsion at the violence. Yes, he's smiling and looking very pleased a few moments later, but as you can see, he only smiles once he notices the people around him scattering and screaming; he takes pleasure in their fear and, by extension, his own sense of feeling powerful and threatening. The eye part is an afterthought, secondary to his delight in the reaction he's causing.

So, yeah. That's how I always interpreted the scene - that Loki cut his eye out bc of reasons. However, I did go and look it up for this ask, and this is what the MCU wikia has to say about it:

Loki traveled to Stuttgart to find Heinrich Schafer, a scientist with access to a warehouse containing Iridium, an element Erik Selvig needed to stabilize the inter-dimensional portals created by the Tesseract.

Loki infiltrated a gala where Schafer was a guest speaker, and personally attacked him to create a diversion ... Loki used a device to send an image of Schafer's eye to Barton's location, and open the warehouse using the projection of the eye to pass a retina scanner.

This description makes it seem like Loki just scanned his eye, but I noted that Schafer's status is Deceased on the wikia, and clicking on his entry gives us this description:

He then used a device to extract Schäfer's eye and send a holographic copy to Hawkeye in order to open the vault with the iridium.

- so this explicitly says that Loki did extract the eye, the implication being that the guy didn't survive the process (I suppose he could have died from shock?).

So in short, the answer is (probably) both - Loki cuts out the eye entirely so that he could scan it to Clint to access the iridium. But yeah, on-screen it's not really clear exactly what Loki's doing. (Also I did not know until now that the eye-guy was an actual named character Loki chose on purpose; I always thought he was just some random schmoe in the wrong place at the wrong time, lmao.)

Thank you for the ask!

reblog if you want your followers to ask you anything they’re curious about.

#asks #charlotte replies #a nonny mouse #avengers 1 #tw violence mention #image heavy post #this is a stupid post lmao 3/4s of it is irrelevant to the actual question so i'm sorry #i found my ask and this was not worth getting upset over smh #oh well here it is enjoy

[delyth88]

Something I’ve been thinking about since watching the first episode of Loki last week, is how it’s similar to Thor: Ragnarok in some ways, but is more respectful of the original films.

If you don’t want to read anything negative about Ragnarok, or positive about the series, this is your chance to step away.   Also, spoilers for episode 1.

In Thor Ragnarok one of the aims was to freshen up the character of Thor, and they chose to do this by stripping him of all the trappings surrounding him – his hammer, his hair, his red cape, his friends, Odin, Asgard.

In episode 1 of Loki they also take away his traditional choice of clothing, his magic, his family, Asgard. (I think they’re also taking away Thanos, through removing this variant of Loki from the flow of time and showing Loki that Thanos eventually catches up with him in the first episode, removing suspense about that. Although we’ll have to wait and see if that topic is brought up again in a later episode, but my money is on them not mentioning it.)

But there’s a difference in how they do this.

In Ragnarok they reference the previous films through a play that is shown as over-dramatic and a bit silly. All significance of the events it refers to is watered down, and the audience is effectively told “hey don’t worry about all of that, none of it’s relevant to this story”.  As a fan of the first two Thor films this by extension makes me feel rejected and ridiculed.  That any serious emotional attachment I had to those characters or events should be set aside because it won’t be relevant to the film you’re about to see.

In contrast, in the first episode of Loki they created distance from the event of the previous four films but they did it in a way that made me as a fan feel like they valued what had come before, and by extension value my emotional investment in these characters and their relationships.  They spent time on it – lots of time.  They spent just over half of the episode referencing the previous films and some of the most significant moments relating to Loki’s life.  And in a way that showed they were still deeply relevant to Loki in his current situation. Even while making it quite clear that there would be no revisiting these points in his life, and that the series would be striking out in a new direction.  And in doing this it felt like a goodbye of sorts, to these characters, and to Loki’s past, for Loki, and certainly for the audience. And I appreciated this.  Sure, I’d have preferred a series that did a better job at dealing with Loki’s family drama now that he is the main character and there is time in a six episode series to do it justice, but knowing they’re not going to do that, I felt at least like this acknowledged some of Loki’s history, some of his pain (cough *Thanos* cough *Jotun* cough – actually, to be fair, the writers had a massive pool of pain and regret to choose from for Loki, so perhaps I should cut them some slack for not including almost literally every moment of the last five films! XD ).

Another difference is how Ragnarok treated the minor characters of the Thor universe.  Odin was given a short and contrived death scene, the Warriors Three were quickly murdered and then never mentioned again, never mourned (maybe Thor had used up all his mourning allowance on Loki? /snark), Sif never mentioned, and Jane dismissed in a couple of sentences with no explanation. (seeing the deleted scene from TDW makes me assume the Ragnarok creators were aware of this, but instead of addressing it in any meaningful way to an audience who had no reason to assume the characters’ relationship had changed since the last film, it was just tossed in there as a quick reference to get that last bit of an annoying link to another person out of the way).

In the first episode of Loki everyone of importance to Loki is mentioned (and it cuts me a little to realise this is a much shorter list than Thor’s - hell, they even mention Coulson!). He’s shown the Avengers and it means something to him. That look of shame and anger at his capture. Then he’s shown Frigga and is terrified for her safety and we see he’s clearly ready to do what he can to save her, then he’s angry, then grief-stricken. He cries over the death of Odin, and smiles a bittersweet smile at seeing a future version of himself allied with Thor again.  And then indescribable terror, and… I just don’t have the words for his reaction to seeing Thanos (thank you Tom!!!).  These people mean something to him.  Having seen these reactions I don’t need to have them referenced in future episode.  I know Loki’s thinking of them.  Whereas at the end of Ragnarok I was still waiting for Thor to say something about his grief over his dead friends, or y’know his entire planet?!

All of this takes me, an audience member who is deeply invested in the character’s emotional wellbeing, and gently allows me to say goodbye to these beloved characters at the same time as Loki is.  It might not be what I want to see, but it takes me by the hand and guides me through it, reminding me how important these people are to Loki, how deeply he feels even about people with whom he is estranged, and lets me mourn with him.  It sets me up in his headspace, knowing he can’t go back, and knowing he now has an entirely unknown world of challenges to face, free of questions that start with “but what about Thor?”.

In summary. Show respect for your audience by respecting your character’s relationship to your previous material.  It’s the reason they’re both here.

#this got away on me a bit. i forgot i had feelings about ragnarok still #loki #loki series #loki episode 1 #anti thor ragnarok #negative #loki series positivity #spoilers

[wrenhyperfixates]

Loki Series Thoughts—Glorious Purpose

Ok, I’m always nervous about posting my thoughts, but here we go. Spoilers ahead of course!!! (Disclaimer: Any gifs or images are not mine.)

Let’s start out with the episode’s name: Glorious Purpose. I know some people were a bit miffed about the emphasis put on the line, but I actually thought it worked well. It’s not so much that Loki actually believes in this “purpose,” but rather he is clinging to what he’s been told his purpose is. And by the end of the episode, he’s finally working through some of the things he’s been hurt by, abandoning what he’s been forced into and ready to be who he wants. Granted, it’s still going to take some time for him to come to grips with all that has happened, but I’m excited to see the journey.

The TVA. They undeniably suck. Whether or not it will be addressed directly, they are the (or one of the) antagonists in the show. What they are doing is, frankly, tyrannical. Three “time keepers” have taken it upon themselves to force countless versions of time and people into one single stream. And you know what? They can’t control that timeline. Not like they want to. As much as Loki’s line about “the weak” applies to himself, it applies to the TVA, too. It’s a facade of control that they cling to; if they truly had the right, the ability, to control time, everyone would follow their path. There would be no variants. Now, I could write a whole separate analysis on the MCU’s explanation of time travel. It’s convoluted and in a large way doesn’t make sense.

I’d like to talk about Loki’s characterization. I am, in a word, relieved. From the trailers, Tom seemed to be over-acting, something rather strange for someone so good at conveying deep emotions through nuanced actions. Now I believe any exaggerated lines from the trailers are just Loki trying to separate himself from who he’s been told he is, and trying to reinvent himself. I don’t think that’s a bad thing either; they’re not rewriting Loki, he’s just growing in a new way. And though this way is “new” I think it will be similar to what we’ve seen before. From what we’ve seen so far, there is good continuity, and they are addressing things about Loki that should be addressed in canon.

Loki projects. Most notably in the Avengers, but also a bit in Thor 1 and The Dark World, a lot of Loki’s lines can be applied to himself, though he is talking generally or towards another group. What comes to mind is actually something he touches upon again in the series. The illusion of freedom. And though it is not said that line in particular is him thinking of himself, it can be inferred based on his admission that the line in the gifs above apply to him. Also that little gesture when he says “weak” breaks me. He’s hurting so much.

Loki is not a villain. He may think he’s one because everyone else is telling him that, yet we’re already seeing it brought up that it’s not true. I can only hope that we’ll see Loki state this himself later in the series. He was largely forced to do what he did. It is not his fault, so how can he be a villain?

Loki cares. Tom’s acting is just *chef’s kiss* Seeing his mother’s death hurts so much. I love that his first response is denial. Loki is thrown into something he’s never known about before, being shown things that, to his knowledge, have never happened. But then when he’s had a few seconds to wander around the TVA on his own terms, he’s more come to grips with all that’s going on. So, when he’s by himself and see’s Frigga lying there, dead, it gets to him. Then seeing Odin still call him his son, he feels the slightest glimmer of hope, but also regret; he already knows in the back of his mind that he’s not actually going to get that. Loki’s living from second to second, trying to hold on. He probably thinks this ends with his death. (I do have issues with that Odin scene in context of Ragnarok but that’s more a tangential aside, so I’ll gloss over it for now.) Then seeing Thor and himself acting like brothers again is heartwarming. So just when he’s feeling uplifted, Thanos comes into the picture. He realizes how much control the titan still had over his life; he never really escaped. And in the end, Thanos made good on his promise. And that is terrifying! And he laughs at it. It’s a sad sort of laugh, one that’s slightly crazed. Loki feels that no matter what he does, it ends in pain. By the end of seeing all that, he is a man broken. Rather, more broken than he already was.

Loki is struggling. That’s nothing profound; it’s obvious. But where it really stands out to me is actually in a part I originally thought to be out of character. I am referring to “What if I was a robot and I didn’t know it.” Upon closer inspection, I realize it’s actually that his perception of himself has been so thrown that he really isn’t sure about his own chemical makeup anymore. Odin and Frigga keeping from him that he’s a frost giant made him so unsure of himself, he thought he might not even be a living being.

Nervous tics. Was I the only one noticing his leg bouncing when he talked to Mobius? And what about that scene when he’s sitting on the steps? He begins to pick at his hands. Note, that’s something he did in T1 after finding out he was a frost giant and while confessing to the Warriors Four about how he was the one who told the guard of their trip to Jotunheim. Just a little detail I really appreciated. (If anyone has gifs of any of these things, feel free to share :)

Mobius. I’ll be honest, I’m a bit undecided. I’m hesitant to say he’s evil. After all, we haven’t seen that much of him yet. However, I will say he is unscrupulous and manipulative. His questions weren’t to help Loki work through his trauma. Mobius was trying to goad him into helping, and likely was trying to gauge how much this Loki is like the variant he’s tracking. When Loki makes any admission of his feelings, it’s something he already knew, not a conclusion Mobius helped him reach. Mobius mocks him a bit and pushes his buttons because he sees Loki as a means to an end, and wants to know how easily he can get him to work with him. And what strikes me is how similar Mobius’s deal is to Thor’s deal in TDW. Thor doesn’t offer Loki freedom, he offers revenge. Mobius’s deal is just another variation of this. He can’t offer “salvation” but he can offer something “better”. Working for the TVA really isn’t better, though. So what does he mean? Well, I think he means a chance for Loki to prove he’s a hero. I hope as the show progresses it’s addressed that Loki doesn’t have to prove himself to anyone. That’s what he’s been doing his whole life, but I want Loki to see for himself that he doesn’t have to.

Miss Minutes. Propaganda. Plain and simple, it’s propaganda. Besides the way it praises the “time keepers” as amazing saviors, necessary to keep the world in order, it’s essentially saying “don’t think for yourself.” The whole point of the video is “the time keepers are great. The TVA is flawless. Trust us to decide everything. You have no autonomy in the world we want, so surrender your free will. Submit to the system we’ve decided is perfect and everything will be just fine.” Of course, by “just fine” they mean the variant will be pruned and the timeline will keep going as the time keepers see fit. The animation style was great though! It really fit.

The infinity stones. I think their inclusion makes sense. If you remember from Endgame, the stones being in the right place in the right time keeps the timeline from branching, and thus prevents the multiverse from being created. Likely, the time keepers used the stones to make their “sacred timeline.” Naturally, any variant time stones would cause a problem. That’s why they have so many extras. But think about how pointless so much of what happened seems. Nat, Gamora, Vision, Tony, everyone who was snapped, everyone who was left. So, literally the entire universe was flipped upside down for paperweights. It really puts Thanos’s pursuit of the stones into perspective, doesn’t it?

The cloaked figure. I think there’s some misdirection going on here in one way or another. Mobius says he’s chasing a Loki variant, then immediately it cuts to a scene with the cloaked figure. Our minds are likely to assume that is the variant then. But they don’t actually say it’s Loki, so I’m inclined to believe it’s not. Though, I don’t have enough information to say who I do think it is, I could make a couple of educated guesses and say Mephisto (he certainly interacted with Loki in the comics, plus there’s the stained glass window) or Sylvie. Well, whoever Sophia Di Martino’s character is. I know she was previously listed as Sylvie on sources such as IMDb, but that has since disappeared. But why would you have a “young Sylvie” (Cailey Fleming) without an older version? There is speculation Di Martino’s character will be Lady Loki, but I hope this won’t happen. If they make Lady Loki her own character, I doubt we’ll see Variant Loki get to be fluid. Even if it’s confirmed on the record, it’d be nice to see actually happen beyond a piece of paper. And with twist villains being such a prominent force in modern media, I’m interested to see who our cloaked friend really is.

Time travel. Like I said earlier, this is a lot. But I can’t talk about the episode and not mention this aspect in at least a little more depth. I don’t like how the MCU deals with time travel. I think it’s an unnecessarily complicated mix of a number of different, already complicated theories. However, I think Loki will ultimately escape from the TVA and create a multiverse too difficult to prune (and maybe he’ll actually get to burn the place down too!) This will then tie directly into Doctor Strange 2. Do you guys know what that’s called? The Multiverse of Madness. Actually, in the Miss Minutes propaganda, they almost exactly say “will throw the multiverse into madness.” Will we get to (finally!) see a certain raven-haired god meeting Dr. Strange? And maybe even the Scarlet Witch herself? Well, I’m not sure, but right now I think it’s looking pretty good!

And some random things that didn’t really anywhere else:

Peggy is in the background?! My thought here is that Steve wasn’t supposed to stay with her. This made not only a Variant Steve, but also a Variant Peggy. We may not see Steve, but I bet he’s been taken care of too!! And who knows? Maybe there will be a cameo later. Otherwise, it might be something that was cut from the show, or just a fun easter egg of sorts.

The score was so good! It sets the mood perfectly.

Loki is a good fighter. Even if he’s overpowered, he finds a way.

Some of the humor didn’t land, but that might just be a personal thing.

So now my final thoughts. It’s their strongest pilot yet. So much emotion crammed into less than an hour. A lot of exposition, too, yet it didn’t feel tedious (Endgame I’m looking at you). And then we get to delve into Loki’s psyche, something that really appeals to me! Overall, 9/10. I hope the rest of the series is as good!

Did I miss anything? Was there something you were hoping I’d mention and didn’t? Or do you have something to add or (politely!) disagree with? I’d love to hear it all! Remember, fandom is a safe space to talk about, analyze, and debate about things you enjoy. My ask box is always open with anon on. Reblogs and comments are great too. Thanks!

Me after watching the episode:

#the loki show #the loki show spoilers #the loki series #loki series #loki analysis #loki odinson #loki laufeyson #loki friggason #the loki series spoilers #I know there’s nothing particularly profound here but here you go #*throws thoughts into the void*

[alwida10]

Thanks to @thehumming6ird who was so kind an provided scans from Tom’s interview with the Empire you can now read the whole thing here.

Some things caught my eye. The photos are cut from the @thehumming6ird ‘s Scans, but the highlighting is mine.

1. Tom talks about the ‘break’ he took after 2017. To me, it sounds like he’s playing it down, but perhaps he just wants to prevent misunderstandings or sounding like he would blame anyone. I deeply respect that, especially since there are less classy people who didn’t show such courtesy.

2. He knew of Loki’s death in infinity war before filming Ragnarok. (Also, just when I thought my respect for the Russos could not dip lower, I was proven wrong. How are these people professionals?! And if you go for the worf-maneuver, how can you do it so incredibly shitty? Whyyyyy?!)

3. He doesn’t deny how hard Loki’s death has been on him. (Also, he mentions the Russo’s initiated a round of applause after his death scene. Is it me or does that feel distasteful to anyone else, too? Am I developing an arch-nemesis? Who the fuck applauds after an execution? Even if it’s a fictional one?)

4. Until now I had been convinced that it has been Tom choice to revive the 2012 Avengers Loki instead, let’s say the 2013prison Loki or the post-Ragnarok version. Turns out, this wasn’t even intentional but the easiest fit. *sigh* ok. I’ll just assume we - the ones who like the avengers version best - got lucky.

5. At this point the interviewer says ‘malevolent streak’ which means he is -unlike in the introduction- not accusing Loki to be malevolent, but refers to his actions.

Tom agrees with those characterizations: bruised, broken, capricious, malevolent streak, and something to prove. These characterizations fit better the Loki from Thor 1 and TDW than Ragnarok Loki, I’d say. Also, he mentions The most ‘fun’ parts of Loki would be his defense mechanisms. (Not the potty humor.)

Regarding the snake story, he makes it very clear that this was Thor’s story, leaving it open if it truly happened like this or not.

6. He assures us he doesn’t want ‘to break’ Loki. Well, he also says he didn’t want to dilute what was already done, which also can be interpreted as ‘it won’t be worse than the former canon’ but the sentence about breaking Loki takes the ambivalence out. He seems pretty sure it is good, so the only question remains if his taste fits ours.

Regarding the team, he points out Kate’s knowledge. I think that’s a good sign. You don’t research things you’re not into this well. But I wasn’t me if I wouldn’t point out that ‘extraordinary’ doesn’t equal ‘good’.

#tom hiddleston #mcu loki #empire interview #loki meta #anti thor ragnarok

[shadowsofmoonracer]

Actual review for Spider-Man: NWH (Spoilers ahead)

Let myself just start by saying that I absolutely loved this movie. I’m not a big fan of Spider-Man, but this movie was really enjoyable and really fun to watch. It has the same vibes as Shang Chi, which was funny to watch but also dealt with some heavy themes. I think the director for NWH did a great job at balancing the humor with the angst without making it inappropriate (think Thor TDW)

I have to admit that I was abit concerned with post Endgame MCU movies because IW and Endgame felt badly directed with the forced injected humor vs the severity of the threat they were facing. (Possibly also because the cast was insanely huge, but this is just my opinion)

Anyway, I really enjoyed all the Easter eggs in the movie - daredevil’s appearance, miles’ Easter egg, allusions to the other Spider-Man series etc - and I dare say I enjoyed the interactions with the villains a lot (Yes, Doc Ock was amazing :D)

I think I especially loved the Green Goblin, just because I forgot how crazy that particular villain was, and Willem Defoe never ceases to amaze with his acting.

I didn’t particularly like the ending - felt a bit too plot armor for me, but then again most movies tend to be like that. I really loved the cinematography and the music though! They brought in Dr Strange’s brand of quirky cinematography and I loved it a lot.

One thing I have to say though… I’m a little curious how the reformed villains would affect their universe cause… the spideys are obviously from a later point in time of their universe’s timeline (Toby’s being much older, and Andrew’s having lived through Gwen’s death) but the villains are from an earlier point in time (Doc Ock clearly remembers Norman dying) so if they return to their universe…. How is that going to affect their timeline? Just some thoughts I was having after the movie ended.

Either way, I’m still not a huge Spider-man fan, but I’d rate this movie 8/10 just because it was really fun to watch and it balanced comedy and angst so well that it didn’t feel like one was spilling over into the scene of another. The references were really well placed and I enjoyed them a lot (the rest of my cinema didn’t :/) and I appreciated the villains’ reappearance :D

Next up: Multiverse of Madness! Really can’t wait for that, and I’m crossing my fingers and hoping Loki is in it… (and also hoping they stop doing my favorite character dirty)

#spider man: no way home #marvel #marvel mcu #mcu phase 4 #spoilers #movie review #shadowwatch

[bedlamsbard]

830 words written today, a scene which has so far meant I’ve checked Thor, TDW, and Ragnarok for reference.  And Wiki and the Loki: Agent of Asgard comics, not to mention several previous chapters of Morning and Yonder.

Snippet from Better in the Morning 9 (full chapter altverse flashback).

Trust his father, Loki thought, to link the coronation of Asgard’s heir to the Convergence.  It wasn’t even subtle, unless you counted the fact that Frigga had managed to talk Odin out of actually holding the coronation at the height of the Convergence.  Odin had wanted to remind everyone in the Nine Realms where Asgard held itself in their hierarchy – not that anyone particularly needed reminding.  Given that most of the Nine had their own celebrations for the Convergence Loki thought it was high-handed on Asgard’s part, but it wasn’t as though he had a choice in the matter.

“Your highness,” said one of the einherjar standing by the doors to the throne room. “It’s time.”

Loki nodded and rose to his feet, settling his helmet on his head and checking the mirror on the wall to make certain it was straight.  For an instant his reflection seemed to be Jotun-blue, red eyes staring back at him, then he blinked and all that he saw were his own familiar features. He shut his eyes and let his breath out slowly, then went to the doors.

He could hear the crowd beyond it like a single living creature, the sound of their conversation waxing and waning like its breath.  Friends, some of those there; others, enemies; more still just waiting to see what the second prince would do given enough rope to hang himself with.

#daily fic snippet #family reunion concept

[howfarethestars]

thor’s gloves: a theory

I first posted this theory on twitter, but I plan on expanding on it a bit more here.

In Ragnarok, we see that Thor’s hands are a source of his powers when he’s upset. After Odin dies, Thor is overcome with grief and anger and his hands begin to spark.

This happens seemingly against Thor’s will and even maybe unbeknownst to the god of thunder. This is the first time we’ve seen Thor actually produce sparks in an outburst of emotion. (Thunder crackles at his anger in a TDW deleted scene, and it rains when he arrives on Earth in both Avengers 1 and TDW, but he never produces lighting except with Mjolnir in hand.)

Later, after meeting The Grandmaster, Thor produces sparks again. This time he looks at his hands in shock (ha, pun) when he realizes he’d created lightning without Mjolnir. This is only further proof that he wasn’t aware that he could do this or he couldn’t do this until Odin died, which passed on Odin’s power to Thor. (According to various canon, Thor’s lightning powers are referred to as the Odinforce, meaning those powers are somehow derived from Odin.)

later, of course, Thor unlocks this power full when fighting Hulk and again when fighting Hela. so it stands to reason that Thor has these powers fully under control. However, I like to believe otherwise. Every time Thor uses his powers, it’s in moments of extreme emotion or desperation. Only when he has no other way out.

jumping forward to post time jump endgame, Thor is seen wearing gloves in almost (if not every) scene he’s in.

Just from these pictures, I think these gloves are made of wool. why does that matter? Well, wool is a poor conductor of electricity.

I think Thor is having trouble controlling his powers. Because of his emotional state, I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to imagine that Thor can’t control his abilities. Wool, being a poor conductor of electricity, would stop the lightning from causing any harm.

#thor meta #thor odinson #marvel #mcu #fan theories

[mcfiddlestan]

I’m relatively new to marvel and I was wondering why you don’t like Hemsworth? I absolutely understand and agree with not liking Waititi (in terms of how he progressed the plot in Ragnarok and how he treated Loki and other characters)... but if there’s something either or both Hemsworth or Waititi did that made you/the fandom not like them, what is it?

Hi, Nonnie.

Ok, so strap in. Cuz this will probably get long.

First off, it’s not so much that I don’t like Hemsworth. It’s more I’m disappointed in his progression as an actor and celebrity in Hollywood. Frankly, when I first saw Thor no one in the cast really stuck with me except Kat Dennings bc I knew her already and loved her work. (Yeah I knew who Natalie Portman was but I’ve had issues with her since Star Wars — long story). It wasn’t until Avengers that I really caught on to the Hiddlesmania. In those days, 2012 and up through The Dark World, there was a very sweet, very genuine bromance going on between Hemzy and Hiddles. They really were “brothers from another mother.” They were adorable together. I remember in one press event with the entire cast Hemzy and Hiddles were making faces at each other across the table and when a reporter asked Hiddles who his fave Avenger was, before he could answer, Hemzy shouted, “Your brother!” There was a very beautiful connection between them. What happened to that? It’s anyone’s guess, but here’s what happened for me.

Leading up to the release of TDW, I might have found it weird that the, like, fourth-billed actor, and the previous film’s “villain,” was chosen to basically lead the global promotion. It was Hiddles, by his lonesome, in Mexico, Australia, China, etc. And he killed it. And it started pretty much with his appearance at Comic-Con that July. We ALL remember that. Why wasn’t Hemzy participating in any of this promo? Idk. I’m pretty sure he was filming Snow White & the Huntsman, or something. Still, it was interesting and telling that Marvel chose to utilize Hiddles’ very apparent popularity. Hell, they chose not to kill Loki because of his popularity.

So it would be about three years before Hemzy and Hiddles came back together again to film Ragnarok. And between that time, Hemzy filmed six movies and Hiddles filmed eight. During that time, also, Hiddles pulled a 180° on everybody and participated in what was the most ridiculous, career-destroying antic he could ever participate in. If you don’t know what I mean, just Google Tom and the Summer of 2016. It’s my opinion that that whole event had a damaging affect on not only Tom’s image in the industry, but I think it made his colleagues and friends question how well they really knew him. And I think it hindered his bankability for filmmakers. Basically it wasn’t a good move for him. The moment I first noticed a change in Hemzy’s behavior with Hiddles was at a Wizard World convention in the middle of the PR nightmare and the beginning of filming Ragnarok in 2016.

During their panel onstage, Hemzy seemed oddly quiet and tense even. He didn’t seem all that interested in being there or answering questions. And Hiddles was like an anxious puppy, overcompensating for Hemzy’s lackluster demeanor. I’m not the only one who’s noticed it, but no one can really pinpoint why. Was Hemzy upset that Tom was “dating” that chick? Was he upset at how obviously out of character it was? I’m guessing there was more to it because the filming of Ragnarok, and it’s result, speak volumes about what Hemzy was apparently feeling.

There are clips and interviews from the set of Raganarok and during promo with Waitidiot and Hemzy where they are very vocal about making sure Hemzy was the star of the movie “because it’s called Thor.” Waitidiot even referred to Loki as a goth orphan or something. Overall they were very critical of and condescending toward Tom and Loki. In the few interviews Hemzy and Hiddles did together, that old spark between them wasn’t there. There’s a lot about Ragnarok I don’t like. Hela was underused, Valkyrie was underused, Skurge deserved better. But, of course, what I hate most about it is the awful way they treat Loki through the whole thing. The way Thor became a bigger bully than he already was. The way he just wanted to wash his hands of Loki — which continued with the fucking Russo brothers who couldn’t put their stupid heads together long enough to realize Loki deserved to have his revenge on Thanos just like Nebula and even Wanda did. Loki deserved to be on that field fighting next to his brother, dammit.

Anyway….since Ragnarok promo i was kind of side-eyeing Hemzy. He literally behaved like a spoiled brat who found a friend who believed his bullshit (feeling overshadowed by Loki; which I think extended to feeling inferior in some way to Tom, a very gifted, educated actor compared to Hemzy who kind of fell into acting. There’s nothing wrong with where Hemzy started; but his choices in the last few years speak for themselves. 🤷🏽‍♀️) and they teamed up to bully the brainy guy. So then Infinity War promo came around and Hiddles was paired with Sebastian Stan and Letitia Wright and Paul Bettany, I think. I loved him with Sebastian (I ship WinterFrost), but it was weird that he wouldn’t be paired up at some point with Hemzy. But then Hemzy wasn’t doing any promo — wait what?? Yeah. Hemzy skipped out on Shanghai I believe. Then he said he couldn’t be at another place bc he got in an accident and injured his elbow ??? Then the next day he posted an IG live where he’s driving?? And his elbow is loosely wrapped in an ACE bandage??? That actually falls off during the video?? And then he was supposed to be somewhere for another promo, said he couldn’t make it, and was spotted camping off the coast of Australia with Matt Damon’s family??? It was all very suspish.

Speaking of Damon, don’t get me started on the bullshit scene in the last Jay & Silent Bob movie where he literally trashed Tom and his portrayal of Loki. Fuck off, Damon. Go suck Ben Affleck’s dick already.

Anyway. All the Ragnarok stuff and his behavior during IW promo and his seeming dismissal of Hiddles completely has just rubbed me the wrong way. Added to that, it just feels like Hemzy isn’t really in the business to hone his craft. It feels like he’s in it for the money. And yeah that’s a great benefit of acting in Hollywood. But he doesn’t seem to choose quality roles anymore. I liked him in Blackhat. I liked Rush. He was really good in Bad Times at the Royale, but it feels like all he wants to do now are formula action movies with no depth, no growth, where he just has to flex his muscles and give a charming smile. Which is fine but that gets tired after awhile (just ask Dolph Lundgren and Jean-Claude VanDamme). So right now, I want nothing to do with Love and Thunder — which is one of the stupidest movie names I’ve heard in awhile. And frankly I just don’t want to watch Hemzy not try to be his best. If I want mindless action with no real plot, I’ve got the Fast and Furious franchise. 🤷🏽‍♀️

Hope this answers your question, Nonnie. Thanks for asking. Let me know, if I can clarify anything for you.

xoxo, La

#la answers #asked and answered #anonymous #Hemzy #Hiddles #Waitidiot

[9worldstales]

In reply to this post @woodelf68 said:

The jr. novel having Thor say that Loki stole the throne twice is ridiculous. He was lawfully given the throne when Odin was Sleeping and Thor banished, as he was next in line of the succession. And he offered the throne to Thor in TDW and Thor refused it! What was he going to do, abandon Asgard? Loki was the one who stepped up and took on the burden of rule, and yet got none of the credit. And Thor was the ‘savage, chaotic, lawless’ one when he stormed Jotunheim, breaking the peace treaty and gleefully slaughtering Frost Giants. The only time that description fit Loki was after he’d been tortured and was under the influence of the Mind Stone.

My apologies if I reply to you in a separate post but this got too long for the comments...

I’ll try to keep this as impartial and objective as I can, please, everyone, forgive me if I fail.

For start, oh yes, you’re absolutely right, as I said the whole bit of the junior novel contains canon mistakes in regard to both Thor and Loki.

Going in order:

Thor never demanded the throne, the throne was ALWAYS meant to be given to him by Odin, nor he refused it when Asgard needed him the most. He refused it when Asgard just won the war against the Dark Elves and, after Thor refused it, Asgard went through 4 years of peace. Things got worse only because Hela came back after 4 years, something no one had an idea would happen except Odin.

As for Loki yeah, the first time in “Thor” he ABSOLUTELY didn’t steal the throne. He was also a heir to it and with Thor banished for something Thor did (I’ve a long meta digging into how it was Thor who caused his own banishment if someone is in doubt about it) he was the next in line and rightful heir to it. There was ABSOLUTELY no stealing of the throne in a cut scene we see Frigga herself telling so to a surprised Loki.

Loki: What hope is there for Thor? Frigga: There's always a purpose to everything your father does. Thor may yet find a way home. Loki looks troubled by the revelation. He rises, heads for the exit, when they hear the clatter of ARMORED FOOTSTEPS hurriedly approaching. THE EINHERJAR GUARD Enter the room, block his way out. Loki tenses, prepared for the worst, but the guards just stand before them. Loki is baffled. Frigga: (cont’d) Thor is banished. The line of succession falls to you. Until he awakens, Asgard is yours.

And it’s worth to mention Thor accepted Loki as the one inheriting the throne. When Loki tells him the burden of the throne has fallen on him, Thor doesn’t say ‘no, nope, the throne is mine’. He just asks if, since his brother is now in charge HE CAN COME HOME. He doesn’t ask for the throne he just wants to come home. And when Loki tells him nope, Thor doesn’t accuse him of stealing the throne either, he accepts it.

It’s also worth to remember Loki had no idea they would pass the throne to him when Odin fell into Odinsleep. As it apparently happened before, likely Frigga took regency in those moments and Loki had no idea Odin would fall into Odinsleep back then anyway. There was no plotting whatsoever for Loki to take the throne. The movie and the side-material make clear Loki never expected the throne to pass to him, when he let the Frost Giants in Asgard, he merely aimed to stall the coronation for a bit longer.

“Thor: The Dark World” is actually a bit more controversial. Loki has been sentenced by Odin to lifelong imprisonment. This implies he has lost the rights to the throne so he’s no more a legitimate heir to it (in the comic “Thor: The Dark World Prelude” n° 2 written by Yost (scriptwriter for “Thor: The Dark World Prelude” and Kyle) which was likely written prior to Joss Whedon writing the scene for the meeting between Loki and Odin in “Thor: The Dark World” whcih was later added into the movie, Odin even rejects him as a son, telling him the boy he knew is dead and what remains is a creature he doesn’t recognize and calls him ‘Loki Laufeyson’).

The moment Loki takes Odin’s place, he technically steals the throne.

Yes, he offers it to Thor, which implies he didn’t plan to keep it, but it wasn’t his to offer in the first place and although Odin always meant to make Thor the next king (and in the first ending of the movie it’s implied that’s what he would do as soon as Thor was back in good shape) he had no idea if he meant to make him the next king right then.

What’s more he doesn’t return it to Odin when Thor refuses it. So, since Loki wasn’t anymore a legitimate heir and the throne wasn’t his to take yes, in this case he stole it from Odin, not from Thor because Thor refused it.

Now yeah, I know Feige left open the possibility that Thor refused due to what Loki said to him in the guise of Odin…

Feige: That last scene needed to work for people watching the movie for the first time, who believed that it’s Odin talking to Thor, and then the surprise, but it also needs to work a second and third time. Why is Odin saying those things? Why is Loki saying those things to Thor? They’re very nice things, they’re very caring things, that he says to him. Is it partly because he loves his brother? I like to think so. Is it also because that’s what his brother needs… to leave? Perhaps. [“Kevin Feige: It was always the plan to have Loki have a redemptive death. It was always planned that he wouldn’t really be gone.”]

But this is the first exchange Thor and ‘Odin’ had in the movie after Thor returns:

Odin: You once said there would never be a wiser king than me. You were wrong. The Alignment has brought all the realms together. Every one of them saw you offer your life to save them. What can Asgard offer its new king in return? Thor: My life. Father, I cannot be king of Asgard. I will protect Asgard and all the realms with my last and every breath, but I cannot do so from that chair. Loki, for all his grave imbalance, understood rule as I know I never will. The brutality, the sacrifice... It changes you. I'd rather be a good man than a great king. Odin: Is this my son I hear, or the woman he loves? Thor: When you speak, do I never hear Mother's voice'? This is not for Jane, Father. She does not know what I came here to say. Now, forbid me to see her, or say she can rule at my side. It changes nothing.

Thor went there specifically to tell his father he didn’t want to be king and that he wouldn’t change his mind not even if Odin were to forbid him to see Jane or allow him to marry her.

So no, Loki’s words weren’t what Thor needed to leave, Thor didn’t need to be persuaded to leave. So maybe Feige should re-read the script before talking.

So yeah, Thor refused it on his own. Loki didn’t manipulate him into doing it.

(The script of this part is messed up though, because it starts with a reference to what Thor said to Odin at the end of “Thor”… and Loki back then wasn’t around to hear it so really, Feige isn’t the only one who should re-read their script but whatever, this was a bit they rushed to put together when they decided to toss away the original ending of the movie for this new one.)

But there’s more that’s wrong with that bit.

Thor says: “My point is that our self-centered conflict over Asgard has ruined our kingdom. We have been so focused on fighting for the top we’ve forgotten there’s a middle and a bottom.”

There was no self-centered conflict over Asgard that has ruined the kingdom. The kingdom wasn’t ruined, it was perfectly fine until Hela attacked and Hela’s attack is due to Odin and how he raised her and handled her when he couldn’t control her any longer, not due to Loki and Thor.

Also the real problem wasn’t a ‘self-centered conflict for the top’… more like Odin’s screwed up parenting.

So yeah, if the Junior novel is based on the old script there’s a lot of questionable material and not just in this scene. But let’s talk a bit about Eric Pearson, the guy who wrote the script.

As I said in another post about how people came to think Loki is a serial betrayal this guy never worked on a script with Thor and Loki previously and the most he did was to be involved in the “Marvel’s The Avengers Prelude: Fury’s Big Week” in which Thor and Loki have some cameo appearances.

To continue that’s what he says about working on the script:

Fun sells, especially in the Marvel Comic Universe. Did you have a hard time balancing how hilarious the film had to be with the high stakes it has going on? Pearson: I did, yeah. It was tricky. First of all, it took a couple of interactions with Taika before we got on the same page. He’s such a different guy with a different sense of humor [he says fondly]. After I pitched the scene that happens first in the movie I got a sense of his sense of humor and going forward that was really helpful. The first draft was really about nailing the structure and the character arcs, and having our skeleton. That was when I started working more closely with Taika to get his little comedic flourishes in there. Plus, on the day during shooting, he’s bound to do anything. Suddenly there will be a weird prop in the scene and you have to be like “Ok, there it is! We’re gonna move right along!” He knew what he was doing from the beginning. He was going to rob the bank and get away with a ton of comedy, so I was just trying to keep the story together for the most part. And keep the characters honest and true to the world and their respective journeys. [“A Talk With THOR: RAGNAROK’s Eric Pearson”]

The Junior novel has basically no humour. I would say the script used is, if not the very first one, something like the second… which is also hinted by how there’s no mention of Hela being Odin’s daughter.

Let’s talk about Hela. There’s been a certain spoiler going around about her lineage, and we’d love to hear how that came about. Pearson: The decision to make Hela Odin's banished daughter came really late into writing my first draft. We had discussed her backstory as someone from Asgard's past, the Goddess of Death being a weapon of war that Odin used to conquer the Nine Realms and build his empire, but as I was writing and getting closer to the end, knowing that a Thor-Hela face-off was imminent, I felt like we needed more. More connection between the two, more depth to their ideological conflict. And it was one of those late nights, probably 11 pm working at Marvel, and I expressed this concern to Brad Winderbaum (producer). I basically told him that I'd been thinking about it, and I thought that making Hela Thor's sister made the most sense for the story and had the most impact to a shared history. He agreed and told me, "Don't pitch it to anyone because it'll be more likely to get shot down. Just write it into the script and let everyone discover the connection the same way that Thor will." Ultimately it was the right move because, after I wrote the ending and retconned the earlier scenes to reflect the family relation, everybody who read it was surprised, and pleasantly so. [“A Talk With THOR: RAGNAROK’s Eric Pearson”]

And this guy clearly has no idea what the relationship between Thor and Loki was previously and not only because he needed Chris Hemsworth to point out he wasn’t handing them correctly (how Hemsworth’s input helped or worsened the matter is up to debate)…

Pearson: For introductions, working on Thor’s voice was really great just because Hemsworth is great with the script. He actually pulled me aside one morning to talk to me about the Thor and Loki scenes. He pointed out, correctly so, that what I had was retreading a bit of what had already happened in Thor, Thor: The Dark World and The Avengers. We needed to have their relationship exhibit the amount of awareness that it should have after the audience spent so much time with them on screen. So, the Thor and Loki stuff is also some of my favorite. [“A Talk With THOR: RAGNAROK’s Eric Pearson”]

But that’s how, after Hemsworth’s tips, he describes Loki and Thor’s situation:

As the villains in the cinematic universe go, Loki is far and away considered the best by fans. Now you’ve got to bring forward his humor a little more with Hela acting as the main antagonist. What was it like reconciling all the history that Thor and Loki have while there’s another big bad threatening their world? Pearson: We find Loki in a different headspace at the beginning of the movie. Since Thor: The Dark World he’s been ruling Asgard as Odin as he’s always wanted. He’s on sort of a villainous vacation while in a role that plays to his narcissism. So, he’s mostly off his world conquering villain agenda already at the beginning of the film. Plus, Thor and Loki have had so many interactions, and alliances, and betrayals. They’ve been each others’ nemeses for so long that even they’re a little exhausted by themselves. It’s almost like the fatigue of dealing with each other allows this terminator like force of Hela to just walk in. They’re divided so she conquers. [“A Talk With THOR: RAGNAROK’s Eric Pearson”]

Thor and Loki has been each others’ nemeses for so long?

They started having an argument in “Thor” that’s placed in 2011 and that lasted basically 1 day before Loki fell into the void. They saw each other again the following year in “The Avengers” and argued for what? 2 days? Then Loki gets jailed for a year and in “Thor: The Dark World” they’re on the same page, allied against Malekith! Thor believes Loki dead and discover he’s not in 2017, when “Thor: Ragnarok” takes place!

(Now, whoever is about to say they actually have a story of Loki trying to kill Thor and tries to mention this scene to me:

Valkyrie: He did try to kill me. Thor: Yes, me too. On many, many occasions. There was one time when we were children, he transformed himself into a snake, and he knows that I love snakes. So, I went to pick up the snake to admire it and he transformed back into himself and he was like, "Yeah, it's me!" And he stabbed me. We were eight at the time.

...can either accept the short explanation that this scene is a retcon of Thor and Loki's relation or read the long explanation with all the official sources that explains how this is a retcon as prior to “Thor: Ragnarok” the canon was that Thor and Loki were loving brothers until “Thor” happened. That movie is meant to be the start of their fighting, for crying out loud.)

They have a total of 3 days of actively being on each others’ throats. This exhausted them? Even if we consider the full year in which Thor was aware Loki was alive and jailed, we’re talking of people that lives for centuries and a jailed Loki can’t really be considered at Thor’s throat.

So no, if “Thor: Ragnarok” had followed the original script, it wouldn’t have been canon compliant all the same… but Marvel wasn’t interested in protecting canon from the get-go and let Waititi free to create ‘his own thing’…

Waititi: I was lucky enough they didn’t force me to acknowledge things- there were certain things in the film, like the play, which makes fun of the scene in The Dark World where Loki dies, but there’s a point to that play, sort of to recap what happened, but also to tell the audience, “This is not what you think it’s going to be, this film is not going to be a continuation of that. It’s its own thing, and what you think you expect from this film ends at this play. [“Empire Podcast Spoiler Special: Thor: Ragnarok with Taika Waititi”]

…so really, I doubt the pressured Pearson into keeping the old scripts into consideration when writing his own.

As for Thor… the guy in the first part of “Thor” was presented as someone who absolutely loved fighting for the sake of fighting, which, I think, would have made him thrilled to fight in Sakaar, hadn’t it been for the fact they wouldn’t have paid him proper respect.

However, credits when it’s due, the second part of “Thor” is all about him abandoning this mindset. There were cut scenes in Thor which even showed how Thor refused to start a fight over being called ‘princess’ by an earthling just to show he had grown up and wasn’t anymore someone who would jump at the first chance to have a fight. “Thor: The Dark World” is also about him trying to avoid involving Asgard in a fight. So in theory Thor has stopped being someone chaotic and savage by… 6 years.

(I’m trying to preted “Thor: Ragnarok - A New Story” which is a tale included in the Junior Novel at the hands of Steve Behling and that, among other things, depicted Thor as a warmongrel again, is not part of the canon.)

On the opposite side Loki has never been savage or chaotic, he’s elegant, well organized, plans forward and, unless he’s in a deep emotional storm, remains calm and controlled.

I would argue also he’s not lawless either as, although he has broken some laws, he doesn’t wish for a world with no rules. Even when in charge of Asgard he didn’t let it turn into nobody’s land but still organized and ruled it. So really, that improvisation was mostly out of nowhere.

“Thor: Ragnarok” merely decided to retcon Loki and Marvel allowed it because they wanted to kill him in “Avengers: Infinity war” without fans to make the same fuss they did in “Thor: The Dark World” that forced them to change the ending.

Not that they succeeded as fans rejected the “Avengers: Infinity war” death too, but whatever, that’s Marvel for you.

#loki #thor #thor odinson #loki odinson #ask #9 worlds study #taika waititi #mcu thor ragnarok #mcu thor #mcu thor the dark world #christopher yost #eric pearson #mcu avengers infinity war