Tumgik
#mcu salt
🤨🤦‍♂️
Tumblr media
🤨
Yep, it's utterly pathetic (x):
Elizabeth Olsen: "This time, they actually decided not to give us scripts," she continued with a laugh. "They gave me my pages, then they explained other things that are happening." When she actually sees the completed film, Olsen admitted, "I'll be so shocked and surprised." "I'll be like, 'Oh, I see!" she said. "That's what was happening to the world at that time."
It reminds me of what Brie Larson said about EG (x):
“I had no idea what I was shooting, what the movie was. I didn’t know if anybody else was in a scene with me. I didn’t know anything. And it’s not until you show up that you get your pages for the day. But you only get your part. So it was like a scene that was completely black redacted, and then just my one line.”
They did that to an Oscar-winning actress. Go figure.
They keep claiming it's about spoilers but there must be something else going on here. I have no idea what, but after the actors' strike maybe this behaviour will stop and Disney/Marvel will start treating them with respect? Or maybe I'm too idealistic...
241 notes · View notes
nikkoliferous · 8 months
Text
after reading the one hundred and one millionth inane quote about how Loki is such a pRiViLeGeD pRiNcE while Sylvie is just a poor baby who had no real childhood and had to learn to fend for herself from a young age, I feel the need to point out that even the ONE thing we know about Sylvie's past, the thing that's supposed to be her mAjOr tRaUmA and set her apart from him somehow, was literally stolen from Loki.
this is how Tom described Loki's experience post-suicide attempt back in the day while doing press for Avengers:
“I think he went, like with everything else, to a sort of… it was just like, the worst place imaginable. I think he went to all of the darkest recesses of the universe. I’m sure he had a brush with—several brushes with death. I think he ran into the shadiest characters you can find in the Nine Realms. I think he had to rely on his wits to protect himself. It was really, really, really unpleasant, I think. I don’t have any frame of reference for that, except for imagining what it might be like to be kidnapped by a terrorist or something and have to survive a very, very frightening and precarious existence. But whatever it was, it was important when Loki came back for The Avengers, that whatever compassion he had left was absolutely shriveled to a minimum because of the experience that he had. Harrowing, I think, and scarring for life—in a way that Thor and Odin and Frigga find very, very difficult to understand.” [source]
and now the show pretends that Loki teamed up with Thanos completely of his own will, even though Marvel had JUST confirmed that the sceptre was influencing him throughout Avengers, and they hand that traumatic backstory that was Loki's off to their precious OC.
229 notes · View notes
decayanddesign · 2 years
Text
So Marvel’s out here ripping off smaller artists now
https://twitter.com/midiankai/status/1580902267460366336
Tumblr media
They edited it just enough that it isn’t immediately obvious, especially to non-artists, so here’s some replies pointing out the proof:
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Honestly, I’m glad I stopped watching their shows and films months ago, becuase between this and how they treat their CGI artists, it’s pretty clear that they don’t value artists in any way, shape or form whatsoever. Incredibly disappointing.
2K notes · View notes
breckstonevailskier · 6 months
Text
Okay, not a fan
Tumblr media
Tumblr media
Tumblr media
As I see it, a lot of good story ideas. But they planned to fridge Foggy and basically act like Karen didn't exist. And that is not something I can forgive.
(That last bit is meant to be said in my best Wilson Fisk voice.)
163 notes · View notes
captainwidowspring · 3 months
Text
An excerpt from my Captain America music paper, for I just made a seriously disgusting discovery:
"The other appearance of the breaking-up-of-the-Avengers theme is during the Siberia fight, where it is played twice. The first time it plays is when Friday tells Tony, “You can’t beat [Steve] hand to hand,” and it continues as Tony tells Friday to analyze his fight pattern and she does it, up until Friday says, “Countermeasures ready,” and Tony grabs Steve’s shield. The second time it plays is shortly after Steve disables Tony’s suit, and shortly before Steve, exhausted and injured, slides off Tony’s suit and onto the ground; this plays until Steve helps Bucky off the ground and starts to walk away with him. Now, as the previous use of the Avengers-breakup theme helps show that Civil War was more of an Avengers movie than a Cap movie, this use actually happens to show how the film is more of an Iron Man movie than either of those other two. For considering that the theme was obviously meant to have the most impact after Steve broke the arc reactor, the fact that it first shows up a little before then is quite notable: and when exactly it shows up is very revealing. It first appears when Tony does not exactly have the upper hand (though Steve is doing no damage despite pummeling Tony’s suit), but then it stops when Friday allows Tony to get the upper hand over Steve and seriously hurt him, and then it resumes again when Steve is able to thwart Tony and disable his suit.
Such use of the music that symbolizes the Avengers team splintering seems to be the movie implying that if Tony had won the fight, whatever fracture the Avengers were experiencing would be less severe, but it is solidified now that Steve won the fight. Now, this is very much not true, as the entire Siberia fight was literally Tony trying to kill Bucky because he was upset, while Bucky tried to avoid this and Steve defended Bucky: and while Tony did some really despicable things throughout the movie, successfully killing Bucky and/or Steve while he was having a temper tantrum is something he would never be able to come back from. But considering the lengths the movie went to to try to make it seem like Tony was justified in doing this and not acting monstrously, it is not surprising that these fraudulent efforts extended to the music. And curiously, the Avengers-breakup theme does not play when Tony provokes Steve into dropping the shield, even though that is much more symbolic of the Avengers breaking up than Steve preventing Tony from killing him and Bucky. But that, too, might have painted Tony in a bad light, and the movie avoided such a thing at all costs. Civil War is seriously messed up."
Truly, the more one examines this mockery of a Captain America film, the more it becomes clear just how thoroughly rotten this movie is, and how it is most definitely not Cap 3.
75 notes · View notes
therese-lokidottir · 7 months
Text
What is wrong with you Marvel Studios!?
Tumblr media Tumblr media
So, the TVA is just full stop Nazis at this point. Not even being subtle about it? They are Nazi. We have passed the point where the TVA have done more actions that the nazi have done then the MCU's version of Hydra. Don't come at me saying the TVA is meant to bad and you're not meant to like them because if that's the case what is all this?
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
This isn't just making a figurine for kids to play with or collectors to put on their shelves. This is selling people the means to play dress up as the incredible Nazi-coded characters. Does No one see the problem with this?
I know Hasbro sells Cobra and Decepticon merchandise but along with it they still sell GI joe and Autobot Merch. What's being sold with all this TVA merchandise? Maybe a few scant pieces of Sylvie stuff but also Loki dress up in the TVA aesthetic. All they have to sell to the audience is the fascists.
Did we all forget about this?
The promotion for Secret Empire was controversial, deservedly so but now several years later Marvel does the exact same thing and the reaction people have is, Loki getting what deserves and Mobius is so charming.
It doesn't seem like the TVA are going away. If rumors are to believed they're going to be in Deadpool 3 and if it doesn't contain Wade slicing these monsters to sherds that franchise can go crash and burn as well.Marvel please just stop
128 notes · View notes
azural83 · 5 months
Text
It's such a shame that loki never made an appearance after the dark world:/
134 notes · View notes
gritsandbrits · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
702 notes · View notes
zylice · 4 months
Text
If Marvel drops the Multiverse and ‘He Who Remains’ storyline, then Loki would have been butchered in vain and his sacrifice and power up for nothing. The ‘Loki’ series completely wasted all Loki’s potential unless they can somehow utilise him later on. 😪
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
28 notes · View notes
lazlolullaby · 11 months
Text
It's been a month I can be salty.
Tumblr media
Explanation under cut
He dropped the ball on Gamora and the whole Group of Guardians. This is the first time that it feels less like an ensemble movie and more like "The Space Adventures of Rocket and Quill"
There could have been more elaboration on Peter and Mantis leaving, Nebula staying on Knowhere during the story instead of at the end. Drax's touches of being a Dad to the kids was actually really well done.
Groot didn't really have a character. Not even when his Dad Rocket was dying, he didn't feel like he was active in the story or given time to react at all.
Peter Quill's Arc was halfway decent so he wasn't mentioned. I have doubts that he'll return, but worse things have happened in this franchise. (i mean this as a joke.)
James has gone on record to say "you can just hop in" to Vol 3...but. That's putting new fans over the old ones. That's not fair or satisfying to the people that love these characters and have been following them for these 9 years.
List of Gamoras:
Guardian Gamora who was killed by her abuser in IW to "humanize" him. And then not followed up on. No funeral, no mentions aside from Quill having some very human grief but still unhealthy and Nebula taking a moment.
Gamora from the T'challa Star-Lord What if was just...not mentioned. At all. Only Nebula and Thanos were seen.
Gamora from the What if where she Kills Thanos and takes his armor. She has a Funko Pop...but she's in season 2 in limbo and we don't know anything about her. Also a Gamora that died against Upgraded!Ultron...
Ravager / Feral Gamora, who hitched a ride with the Ravagers in a deleted scene and got her bonding with them off screen. Pulled into a tough situation with her other self, constantly compared. It was a bad spot but Gunn handled it where she kept her choices and understood the Starmora relationship enough to keep in touch with Quill.
James just gave a really good swing at his fursona (i mean this affectionately) 's backstory and writing the end of a chapter of their lives. Adventures can still happen, the Guardian's aren't gone, but...they'll never be the same again.
We're never going to see them at their "peak" between Vol 2 and Infinity War and that's a shame. They were more family than the Avengers ever were. Despite being aliens, they were more human than many other characters in the MCU.
82 notes · View notes
martianbugsbunny · 7 months
Text
Not the gospel not the blanket statement but I don't like the way the Loki series, at least thus far, has treated either of Loki's queer identities. because guess what!! I happen to also be bisexual and genderfluid.
(also, this post has been in my drafts for enough days that I do not remember if I wrote before or after season 2 started, but I do know that 1: I wrote it before I watched that episode, and 2: I wouldn't made a damn lick of difference anyway.)
Okay so right off the bat, the bisexuality within the show is actually pretty decent. It's not a big deal, Loki isn't throwing himself at every character onscreen, that's pretty respectful. But I feel that (and this is simply my weary, jaded-at-the-MCU opinion) the writers decided to finally commit to him being canonically bisexual because it can be made more palatable for homophobic straight audiences. If you decide to say, okay, Character X is gay, they will then be shown in same-sex relationships or in a conspicuous absence of any relationship at all despite chemistry and history with same-sex characters, one of which pisses of the straights and one of which pisses of people like me. Now, I don't think Marvel minds hurting us, but it's still not a good look to say here's a canonically gay character but wait! we're not actually going to show a gay relationship onscreen. It feels like going for the cheapest of sucking-up options and ain't nobody buying. Therefore, the number of canonically gay characters in the MCU is low.
If you have a bisexual character, however, they can be in an opposite-sex relationship and the straights can pretend the character is also straight or going through a phase or some bullshit, and we can't say hey this feels like a cop-out because well we gave you what you wanted, the character is bisexual, and also because the biphobia card can be played against us immediately.
To avoid that, I'm saying right here and now I love opposite-sex bisexual relationships as a rule, whether it's bi4bi or one of the characters in the couple is straight. I'm bisexual and while the gender situation is complicated (we'll get to that in a minute) I'm AFAB and my only relationship ever has been with a cishet man, and I would throw hands with anybody who suggested that I'm not a real bisexual just because I haven't made that kind of a connection with a woman yet. (Trust me, I would love to date a woman.) Now, a wee bit of a caveat, the complicated gender also complicates that, because I am not female, so technically my relationship with that one man was not a straight relationship, but I also hadn't realized it at the time so it's difficult to parse what it was, and frankly I don't care.
The point is, it's the context, not the relationship, that really bothers me. The context is the MCU, which has proven itself pretty damn against having queer characters or queer relationships, particularly visibly same-sex ones, for the sake of the box office. Taking that into consideration Loki and Sylvie's relationship feels like a way to cop out of having to show a same-sex relationship with a queer character while also making queer people look bad if we say that it feels like a feeble attempt to score progressive brownie points. It also gives the straights in the room a reason to point and us and say why can't you be grateful, you've been thrown a bone, what more could you possibly want, you're so demanding. The MCU does the bare minimum, doesn't have to show a same-sex relationship, and we look like the badguys if we say what I'm saying right now.
But you know what I don't want? I don't want my identity weaponized against me, against other bisexual people who feel like we're being used as a not-really-queer statement for a character because not queer enough is something that I think is directed against bi people way too often. I don't want the MCU to use that logic in having a bi4bi couple, which I personally think is probably what at least part of their motivation was. I don't want to be accused of biphobia simply because I don't think an identity that I share with the character, and therefore have some experience with, is being used properly. Bisexuality is not a tool to say queer-not-queer about fictional characters, because using it that way I would go so far as to say can actually be detrimental to bisexual people in real life.
The gender fluid claim I hate with every ounce of my own gender. It's canon because what, it's showed on a file in the end-credits sequence? Lazy. Bullshit. I don't want it. Sylvie is treated like some kind of exception for being a woman and ostensibly a Loki; if Loki was actually genderfluid nobody would give a rat's ass. Our Loki could qualify as a woman and a Loki every now and then. Sylvie wouldn't be anything special...oh, wait. That would defeat the purpose of having her on the nice little pedestal the writers built for her. So they shoved in some quarter-assed claim (I say quarter-assed because it wasn't even enough effort to be half-assed) that's blink and you miss it, in fact don't specifically look for it and you miss it, to gender fluidity because...I don't even know. Because they want to bring MCU Loki closer to the comics version of Loki, who has been slaying gender fluidity for a darn while? Well, if that's why, they failed. Because they were looking for some more of those no-effort brownie points? If that's why, they've once again failed, because I am giving them none. There are no feathers for the MCU to preen here. Our Loki is a man and Sylvie is a woman, that's all there is to it, and putting that Loki is genderfluid in that stupid end-credits sequence doesn't change that. What would change that it actually depicting both of them as alternately male, female, nonbinary, etc., because that once again avoids the exceptionalism complex for one of them that would make gender fluidity look like a deviation for Loki when really it should be the norm. They tried to claim my gender identity for Loki and I'm not even sorry, I'm not having it. They failed. Of course it's not to say I'm the Almighty Keeper of the Gender Fluid. I'm not. But am I allowed to take full offense when someone majorly screws up at what they're barely even attempting to depict and it's my identity? YES. I am.
So the thing is, I'm probably overreacting a little bit. And as a member of a mistreated and marginalized part of society, and as a member of a fandom for something that feels sort of actively hostile towards people like me pretty often, I think I have the right to be. And as a person who actually lives with the identities that Loki is trying to claim, I also think I have the right to hold my opinion about it.
Now I'm not saying all genderfluid people or all bisexual people who watch the show will have the same reaction I did. That would be ridiculous. In fact, if not for the context of the MCU existing around it, I would be ecstatic about Loki being bisexual myself. But I am saying that these are the reactions I did have to it, and if you disagree, that's fine, but please do it as civilly as I am doing with people with whom I disagree. Queer representation is a complicated, messy thing, as is queerness itself a lot of the time, and different people will see different things in it.
Slay on.
49 notes · View notes
Tumblr media
This is exactly what I was talking about.
1K notes · View notes
nikkoliferous · 1 year
Text
Sylvie, Queen of the Mary Sues; Worst of Her Name; Breaker of Canon*
The Shameless Erasure of Loki’s Trauma in Order to Prop Up the Show’s True Protagonist, Sylvie
Loki Deserves Better Than His Toxic, One-sided Romance With Sylvie
Sylki is Literally the Opposite of a Self-Love Story
The Hypocrisy of Framing Sylvie as a Hero and Loki as a Villain
Sylvie and the Problem With “Strong Female Characters”
Loki (2021)’s Cynical Use of Comic Book Easter Eggs to Shortcut Sylvie’s Character “Development”
Belittling vs. Bickering: Sylvie and Loki’s Problematic Dynamic
Every Single Issue With Sylki (It’s Not Just the Selfcest)
Why Loki (2021)’s Sylvie Is A Mary Sue
Even Ignoring the Selfcest, Sylki Is Still A Terrible Pairing
*shoutout to @iamnmbr3 for this catchy nickname lol
↩️ back to the compendium
157 notes · View notes
breckstonevailskier · 11 months
Text
Tumblr media
🤣🤣🤣😂
Source
183 notes · View notes
Text
*taps microphone* Tony Stark and Kamala Khan is what the MCU people think Tony Stark and Peter Parker is
35 notes · View notes
therese-lokidottir · 5 months
Text
God of Stories!?
Tumblr media
Um... No, Aaron. God of Stories is title from Marvel and nowhere else.
I've read some of the stories and flipped through some Norse Mythology books. I am by no means an expert, but apparently I still have done more research than anyone making this series.
It would take one google search to find that "God of Stories" is not a thing from Norse Mythology.
God of Stories is specifically derived from Loki's pervious title of God of Lies.
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
"What does God of Lies even mean?" "What's a lie?" "A lie is a story told. That's all."
Becoming the God of Stories in the comics was Loki taking his fate into own hands. Loki deciding for himself for he is. Taking a negative quality "a lie" and reinventing it to be a positive "a story".
So, the big problem with trying to use the God of Stories title in the MCU is the fact Loki was never the God of Lies in the MCU. He's never called that, not even as a joke or insult. That's why it doesn't work.
Tumblr media
That makes no sense, Loki's new title should be god of time or at most god of destiny/fate. Loki isn't writing stories or telling the stories he's preserving the timelines. He interacts with things as time travel and multiverse travel. He does not interact with this as a narrative.
Tumblr media
In the comics, Loki and Asgard, It's myth, legends and prophecy=Stories. Loki interacts with these things as narrative, as stories.
The series is more reaching, because it's more in the sense of "Everyone has their own story and Loki is now preserving time which is people's stories." But it could be changed to calling Loki the destiny or fate and nothing about the themes would change. The arc would be exactly the same they just wouldn't have said the word stories so much.
102 notes · View notes