#one episode in and we have more therapy than in the entire mcu

[justarandomgirly]

Last night I was thinking about how Bucky never mentioned his parents or family, why he keeps living in Brooklyn or how he feels about everyone from his past being gone. And didnt he have a sister?

So we had whole 6 episodes long show and yet nothing explored while we saw Sam's family. Now I dont believe there are none of Bucky's relatives alive, (maybe grandkids of his sister?) so why not show us Bucky looking for them and trying to recconnect?

Dont tell me "there wasnt enough time". For example, they could have given us explanation why he still lives in Brooklyn and maybe how far away from where he used to live before, in few seconds. Few lines. Maybe during that scene where they fix a boat.

And how come trigger words no longer work on him? They still do in 2016. We see that woman from Wakanda reciting them but they dont work and he cries. Ok but how did he get to this moment? What and who and how helped him heal?

That whole thing seemed to like when you have a character at the beginning of a journey, they say how difficult this is gonna be, but they dont show you anything from this journey, only how they made it to the safety.

And where does he have money from? Pension? Does he have a job? I could fill a book with all of what is unexplored and unanswered. The only thing he was mentioning was Steve. Hallo! Bucky's pre war life wasnt just 1 person!

It would also take maybe 15 seconds to, idk, put in there a scene of Bucky looking at an old apartment he used to live in pre-war. His memories all coming back. Showing us he still think about it. Something like it. And again, it would be like 15 seconds and wouldnt make the episode any much longer. Dammit i would make great director.

As a part of this therapy, I would put in that the psychiatrist is encouraging him to seek for his living relatives. Find a hobby. Get a dog. Things that actually work.

So dont tell me there wasnt enough time. Because you know, you can put it all into the story, if you are a good writer. And if you focus on the characters you are supposed to write about, instaed of new ones noone asked for.

Its seems to me, looking at Bucky's entire journey in MCU, that Marvel just uses him as someone's sidekick,again and again. Sidekick who doesnt have any privat life of his own.

(Like Loki. Huh. Always someone's sidekick, whos privat life and past and trauma just noone wants to explore)

Bucky is more than a former Winter soldier!

#yes i mean id prefer less karly and john and more bucky's backstory #the falcon and the winter soldier negativity #bucky barnes #the falcon and the winter soldier #james buchanan barnes #seargent barnes

[cjrae]

The HMS Sylki? Or; Why I Like It, But I Don’t Ship It.

It’s hard to throw a rock at the MCU fandom without hitting someone who adores the character of Loki, as played by Tom Hiddleston. And with good reason - Loki is one of the best characters of the Infinity Saga due to the fact that he is morally grey. He is capable of villainy, but also heroism and he swings back and forth between those two poles as he works through the trauma of his childhood and stunted development. 

In the Infinity Saga, we know where this leads - he’s grown just enough to recognize that he wants more than validation through rulership before Thanos cuts all of that potential growth off with his brutal execution, further punctuating the tragedy that is Loki’s fate; his death, just like his life, is used to temper Thor into a hero that will rise to the challenge at hand. 

Spoilers are under the cut.

Loki

And then came his first chance to be in the spotlight. In an instant, Loki is ripped away from everything that has defined him - his narcissistic family unit and his role within it, his costume, even his name as he’s often simply referred to as “Variant”. He’s stripped down to his bare essentials and asked to answer the question, “What makes Loki tick?” 

This is a question the first season goes back to again and again as Loki is forced into a brutal version of therapy - first confronting his life and his “fate,” which makes him realize that he’s been stripped of agency his entire life. He’s desperately flailing for control when he has never had any, and it has made him cruel in a bid for attention and love. It is the classic setup for narcissistic behavior patterns and it leads to Loki’s greatest fear - being completely and utterly alone. 

Sylvie

Sylvie is a version of Loki that could have been - what if the God of Mischief had instead been a Goddess? Well, for one, it’s a bit depressing to realize how much better Odin treated an adopted daughter than a son; Sylvie knew she’d been adopted, she was securely attached to her parents and her people. The scene where she’s arrested by the TVA, she is playing make-believe with herself cast in the role of hero.

That role of Sylvie as hero and warrior is exactly what is projected to not just Loki, but also the audience as we get to know her, her mission and just what motivates her. It’s difficult to argue that Sylvie isn’t the hero of the piece through Episode 6. The TVA believes that the ends justify the means and that any actions they take are justified if it preserves the Sacred Timeline. If that leaves a little girl orphaned and homeless just before you’re preparing to sentence her to be reset in front of a judge who clearly has no care for the fact that this is a child who is not responsible for how she was born, then so be it. 

She also displays many of the traits that we’ve identified with the various superheroes of the MCU - she’s self-disciplined, she has a mission, she’s in the right and she knows it. She’s determined to give the entire universe their free will back! 

A Narcissistic Romance?

Here’s the crux of what we’re watching; Loki’s journey of learning to love himself in a healthy manner. One of the luxuries of narrative is that we’re able to externalize that story so that the audience can see Loki’s internal state. Because here’s the thing - most narcissists never change, because they have to understand that something is wrong first.

(Side note; I think this is a huge part of Loki’s appeal, and a dangerous piece of it. There are people who look at Loki’s story and fantasize about ‘fixing’ him by being the ones to show him unconditional love, when the crux of the story is about Loki recognizing the need and gaining the agency to start fixing himself).

Loki, however, has had his Infinity Saga growth put on fast-forward and then smacked over the head with it. He knows something is wrong and then he is shown a version of himself that embodies everything he thinks he needs to be in order to address his insecurities.

In the Void, when Kid Loki looks at him and says “You’re different,” Loki immediately demurs. No, he’s not different, but Sylvie is. Sylvie is Loki as Loki thinks he should be. Sylvie is a hero - in a sense, she is the Idealized Version of Loki.

Unfortunately, we all know what happens when you put someone on a pedestal. Sylvie is vulnerable to the same flaws as Loki - she feels cheated out of What Should Have Been. Only, instead of a crown (and the love of her father) she was cheated out of her right to grow up surrounded by her loving family - and her reaction to that injustice is the same as Loki’s; all consuming rage. She will achieve what she believes she deserves - revenge - regardless of the cost to anyone else around her.

This is what makes her betrayal of Loki so heartbreaking. He tells her the truth, with all the benefit of having his story on fast forward - Loki has grown enough to know that killing He Who Remains isn’t going to fix Sylvie’s pain any more than ruling would finally make him happy. Sylvie just shared her ability to enchant with Loki, reassuring him that he was capable of performing it as well because “we’re the same.” 

But when she pushes him away, she denies that connection. 

Season 2′s Core Story (Or My Theory, At Least)

So, if the central story of Season 1 was Loki learning a healthier self-love that wasn’t dependent on the approval of his father or besting Thor, then we segue nicely into the next phase of Loki’s healing, which should also address how he will self-regulate his emotions going forth:

How do you forgive yourself after you’ve f***ed up?

Whether or not Sylvie’s decision was actually the wrong one or not is a separate essay - but suffice it to say that on a personal level, she completely and utterly f***ed up and she may have on a cosmic level as well. 

But learning to forgive yourself in the wake of mistakes is vital to Loki’s continued growth as a character - so much of his story has been how he’s consumed by his self-hatred that he projects onto others because he is unable to process his emotions on his own. But at the end of Season 1 his worst fear has come true. He’s utterly and completely alone for the first time in his life - there will be no one to project them onto. He won’t even be able to attempt to rule the TVA, a go-to strategy when he’s stressed - because Kang has pretty throughly beaten him to the punch. 

If he doesn’t need to ally with Sylvie again to deal with the story of Season 2, I will be shocked because it will give the writers an opportunity to have Loki actively working through how to be angry, empathize and eventually forgive, without being destructive in the process. (Because he is not going to have time or emotional space to both deal with the ramifications of Season 1′s end and indulge in old patterns - one will have to give way to the other.

Not Boarding The HMS Sylki

I think I’ve made a pretty long-winded explanation of why I like the relationship between Loki and Sylvie and why I think it works on a character level. That doesn’t mean I ship it, however.

Some relationships come into our lives and are not meant to be permanent, long-term romantic relationships that end with commitment and families. Sylvie and Loki’s relationship is, as I’ve said before, an externalized view of what is happening within Loki himself. Eventually, however, he is going to need to internalize what this relationship is teaching him and when he does, it will be over. (And the same for Sylvie, honestly - Loki has as much to teach her as she does him).

But learning healthy self-love, as opposed to stunted, conditional love, is what will allow Loki to keep letting go of the narcissism that has shaped his life until now and stunted every other relationship in his life. And that foundation is what will give him the potential to actually step into a more heroic role within the MCU going forward, with the more complex and nuanced understanding that people are just that - people. No one is perfectly virtuous and no one is purely evil, hero or villain.

Especially not Loki.

#loki #loki tv show #mcu #meta #essay #character analysis #sylvie #sylki #sylki discourse #sylki kiss #long text post

[girlbob-boypants]

1-21-25 for uh Guild Wars? or whatever you want

You know what yeah let's be violent about my beloved game. Oh okay this was a lot more than I expected uh lets put that under the cut

1. The character everyone gets wrong

You think I'd say my precious baby boy BUT its Caithe. She's an incredibly interesting character who is denied the actual on screen depth and arcs she needs. It's an interesting case where the people who hate her are missing the points and the people who stan her talk like she's actually given an arc instead of simply plopped into the story with a "she's better now." The key example being the fact that she doesn't show up in s4 until THE END OF EPISODE FOUR??? That's hardly her fault cause for whatever reason THATS when she's allowed to actually give a fuck about the daughter she loves so much that the moment that daughter cared about the fact that WE WERE BEING MURDERED she ignored Aurene for fuck knows how long?? And then admitting that is enough for them to ignore the psychic connection Aurene canonically has with the Commander so they can just. Set Caithe to post therapy with no real story. The people who hate her act like she's personally the cause of every single problem in the game and that setting her on fire and replacing her with a man will fix everything. Meanwhile the people who stan her claim her story was sooooo good and 100% justified and didn't fuck with things or have problems. She's a brilliant concept that post HoT is executed in a parking lot. And while her parts in EoD are perfectly fine and logical it's just...ugh. She's barely there and exists purely to limit Aurene's screentime with the Commander. Which sucks cause I love both of them.

21. Part of canon you think is overhyped

All of EoD. I am going to pick at a certain part, actually. Rama as a character and especially the entire story with the cop father he has was TRASH. Not as in it's a bad idea but in that it's so terribly done. The lack of build up, the fact that it's the ONLY RATIONAL PERSON WITH A PROBLEM WITH JOON'S MONOPOLY OF TECH who turns out to be King Fascist, the way they just don't explore Li's whole being Kurzick like Rama (or at least I think that's what was being implied? It was literally just Rama saying his Secret Name in front of us and then not addressing it). It all goes nowhere and means very little beyond the strike mission. Like no we aren't going to explore this corruption of the cops, we aren't going to discuss why the society of Cantha would cultivate a minority joining a supremacist group, and we're ESPECIALLY not going to explore Rama's feelings about it for longer than a minute or two. Didn't you know his entire story is that he has a crush on a cop? Don't ask for depth, don't ask why the only people who have an issue with forest polluting tech monopolies are fascists and ecofascists, and don't ask us to give Rama lines that aren't mcu zingers. Take what you get and go make really fucking questionable jokes mocking his hat without expecting more of the expac that brutally murdered Icebrood Saga and gave us CHAMPIONS.

Not too fond, really.

Also the beast races but that's not really controversial to say it's just true. But I hate the Kodan, Grawl, and Centaurs especially. Whoever wrote their parts in s2 and s3 should be hit with a bat and robbed.

25. Common fandom complaint that you're sick of hearing

This one I'm actually having trouble with rn. The obvious answer is character hate and, no, I don't mean character criticism. I mean things like 'i hate Trahearne cause he sucks his voice is annoying and he's overhyped' and the many, many death wishes. This feels like a cop out but I barely scroll the tag anymore cause the game is in a weird space in my heart so I only really engage with it as I see fit for myself. Which is mostly nostalgia tinted thoughts about past seasons and expacs but hey. Better than being a rage filled ball of spite and bad faith readings like I've been in the past with things I've fallen out of love with.

I'd also say I got tired of the weird relationship gw2 has with strikes and raids both from newbies AND vets alike? This game kinda sucks at making the endgame accessible for everyone and I'm vividly aware of that but vets complain that it's stale while gatekeeping to the point of intimidation and newbies all sit and stare at the training LFG without doing anything like these groups are a match made in hell and if anet just learned how to make something like the ff14 duty finder it'd probably be a lot easier but that would require work and admitting that having some kind of role system would make class and party designs easier.

#girlbob.txt #anonymous #gw2 #hi i like this game i promise #it's really cool and fun and also [eldritch screaming]

[khaotunng]

Mood for tfatws, wandavision and hopefully the Loki series:

#wandavision #tfatws #fatws #fatws spoilers #wandavision spoilers #wanda maximoff #the vision #bucky barnes #sam wilson #the winter soldier #marvel #mcu #lyde.txt #one episode in and we have more therapy than in the entire mcu

[thehollowprince]

Queerbaiting vs. Fan Service

For whatever reason, I decided to take a stroll through The Falcon and The Winter Soldier tags after the second episode, and I was slightly distressed (and mostly annoyed) with how many people were labeling the interactions between Sam and Bucky as queerbaiting. You can imagine my confusion.

Now, as a gay man, nothing would please me more to see a relationship between two men in a big budget action franchise, even if it is just the MCU. Ignoring the reality that this is Disney and that they'll probably never have a gay or bisexual main character in anything, The Falcon and The Winter Soldier is not the place to draw that line in the sand.

I've been on this app for about eight years now, and I can't tell you the number of times I've seen people make and reblog posts about the desire to see more men be friends with one another, to not fall victim to the toxic masculinity. How many times have you opened opened this app and seen posts about "let men cry" or "let men be intimate with each other without making it weird"? And yet, every time, almost as if on a timer, the moment two guys (either in a show or actual people) look at each other for longer than .05 seconds, a ship is born.

Now, there's nothing inherently wrong with shipping. Especially when you factor in the fact that same sex romances are severely lacking in modern media. I myself am attracted to the idea of SamBucky, because they have foundation there that if the producers decided, could be used to build a relationship off of. I did the same with Steve and Bucky in the MCU. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with shipping, but some people take it too far. In this instance, I've been seeing too many people claim "queerbaiting" because Sam rescued Bucky from falling to his death under a moving truck or because of the therapy scene where they had to face each other and get real close.

That is not queerbaiting.

For starters, it's been two episodes. The show isn't even halfway over. Not that I expect Disney to actually do something like that, but it's precisely this need to jump the gun and declare something that makes the problem worse within the fandom. And more to the point, I'm not entirely sure many of you know what the term queerbaiting actually means.

Queerbaiting is when a show or movie or whatever, sets up a relationship between two people of the same sex, has everything point in the direction of them becoming a romantic pairing, only to, at the last second, have one or both of them enter into a heterosexual relationship or be killed off.

A great example of this, and the first that pops into my mind, is The Magicians, specifically Queliot. Now, anyone who followed me, especially when the show as airing, knows I'm not the biggest fan of that ship, but in the fourth season of the show, they spent a great deal of time setting up Quentin and Eliot finding their way to each other, only for the production to kill off Quentin in the finale of the season. One could even argue that having Quentin chose Alice for a reconciliatory relationship after they did everything to set up Quentin and Eliot is another form of queerbaiting, eschewing the same-sex romance in favor of a heterosexual one.

Now, circling back to The Falcon and The Winter Soldier, what we have here is not a case of queerbaiting. Production of the show, and the MCU in general, more than likely scour Twitter and Instagram and whatever else and see the fandom reaction to certain ships/pairings, and specifically make scenes or scenarios where those two characters have to interact. That is called fan service, an entirely different animal.

A great example of fan service would be Teen Wolf. As anyone who has been following me knows, I've been talking about this topic a lot recently, thanks to one particularly persistent anon. If you've ever interacted with the Teen Wolf fandom, you know that the big ship that dominated it was Sterek, despite it being something that wasn't based at all in canon. Jeff Davis, after seeing how fans reacted to the few interactions of Derek and Stiles in season one, gave the fandom a more in season two, such as the pool scene, or when they were both paralyzed by Kanima venom in the sheriff's station, the dream sequence at the end of season three, or the ride to Mexico in season four. Hell, even the comedic sequence in the final season of Stiles "rescuing" Derek from the FBI to make it back to Beacon Hills for the final showdown was fan service. What it wasn't, was queerbaiting, because Sterek wasn't something that the show set up. It was something that the fandom set up, which more power to them, but with that being established, people still got mad because the show didn't go the way they (the fandom) decided it should have gone.

This same thing happened with Stucky. The idea of Bucky and Steve was appealing. If either one of them had been a woman in the MCU then their relationship would have very easily been interpreted in canon as romantic, but as it stands, that's not the case. They were just two very close friends.

Brining it back to my original point, we have Sambucky, and no matter how much fandom kicks and screams and demands, it won't happen in the show. It's alright to ship them, because I do see the appeal, but at the end of the day, too many people are getting upset about something that fandom made up and that canon doesn't deliver on, despite the two being unaffiliated. You want to ship Sam and Bucky, I fully support you in that endeavor. I myself like the idea of it, and often tag posts as such, but calling it queerbaiting in an attempt to shame people for not supporting it is misleading.

Bottom line: queerbaiting is a very specific thing and there are actual shows out there that are perpetrators of it. Please try and actually understand what queerbaiting is before you simply throw the term out at every inconvenience.

#queerbaiting #fan service #sambucky #tfatws #the falcon and the winter soldier

[iamnmbr3]

I saw the ask about having the person feeling like that the Loki show is objectively bad. I liked the show, here is why.

I love Loki, and I love the MCU, but I don’t go into any of it expecting consistency. Tony and Loki are my favourite.

Tony goes through character development in his own movies, IM3 especially that main canon just kinda ignores. So I didn’t go into work he Loki show expecting them to get him consistent or right. I just went in prepared to enjoy the show for what it is in isolation. I also know that no one looks at the stories they write for the MCU critically, so I try and turn off that for a first time watch.

I really like the show, that doesn’t mean I think they made it consistent or in character for Loki. I get why people don’t like it.

I really like the TVA and all the concepts it introduced. I really liked seeing Tom acting his heart out. And I really like Loki/Sylvie because I find something very compelling about a character who hates themselves, meeting another version of themselves and being able to love them. It is not a ship I’m going to write fic about but I like them within the show.

Basically what I am saying is that I go into MCU media with the expectation they will mess up at least one character or plot point badly every time. I like the media for what it is, and I appreciate whatever it brings to the table that I can then cannibalise into da works.

Yeah that's fair. Everyone has a right to their own opinion. Fandom is better when there are a diversity of opinions and we can all respect each other and engage in open and good faith discussion rather than attacking people for having the "wrong" views or trying to harass them out of fandom.

For me personally I feel like the show fails on 3 fronts.

1) To me it fails as a Loki show. I really enjoy Loki as a character and I wanted a show about him. And I didn't personally see him in the show at all. I saw a completely different character who does not behave, speak, act, respond, react, stand, emote, or make choices like Loki does. He doesn't even LOOK like Loki because they did his hair and makeup wrong. And that's really what I wanted. I didn't want Larry (as I call the show character). I wanted Loki. That was what was advertised and to me he was so ooc that he was unrecognizable. If I just saw a clip out of context and didn't know what it was from I would have assumed I was seeing Tom in a totally different role.

Thor Ragnarok felt like a different take on Loki that definitely retconned some of his personality and history, but still felt like an alternate interpretation of the same character in the sense that I could recognize the character as Loki (albeit a different version of him); some people liked that, other didn't. But here it wasn't that. It just felt like a completely new (and to me far less interesting and compelling) character. And beyond that it felt like the show went out of its way to make a mockery of the character played by Tom and by extension anyone who ever cared about Loki's character. Like it felt like a mean spirited caricatured parody. Loki is also extremely sidelined in what is supposed to be his own show. And it most certainly didn't feel like a show about Loki, which is what I wanted. So for me the show didn't provide what I was looking for.

2) To me it also fails on its own merits. If I view it in isolation without comparing it to previous canon and just view it as its own thing it also fails. The quality of the dialogue felt very poor. None of the humor made me laugh and it all felt very juvenile and forced. The plotting and characterization seemed nonsensical and all over the place. Like Sylvie sets off those charges and the episode ends on a cliffhanger with that but then it's never addressed later.

The reason that Loki and Syvie allegedly falling in love breaks the timeline didn't really make sense. Sylvie is going around murdering timekeepers and yet Mobius somehow immediately like and trusts her and says he prefers her to Loki. Loki and Sylvie are simultaneously presented as the same person and also totally different people. Loki allegedly learns self love but we never see that - we see him call himself degrading things like pathetic. And we see him think that Sylvie is better than him. That doesn't seem like self love. The romance feels extremely rushed and unrealistic and awkward and we aren't given a compelling reason for why they are in love or what they even have in common. Sylvie doesn't really have much of a character. Mobius and Loki don't interact much and Mobius consistently mistreats him but Loki somehow thinks of him as a friend. Mobius is portrayed as a good guy for cheerfully carrying out the TVA's ends but Kang is a villain for creating the TVA. The TVA seems to be all made up of humans even though it's in charge of all reality.

If Loki did bad things, then the TVA did worse things and thus are not moral authorities. If the TVA’s actions are acceptable then so are Loki’s. If Loki was wrong to violently impose his will on a planet (let’s forget about the context with Thanos for a minute) then the TVA is wrong to violently impose its will on all of reality in order to eliminate free will. If Loki was wrong to kill a few people, then the TVA was certainly wrong to kill trillions. And thus neither Mobius nor the TVA are moral authorities when it comes to Loki because they are infinitely worse. If the actions that Mobius and the TVA took are acceptable, then there is no reason to criticize Loki because he did far less than them. Etc etc etc.

The cinematography is also very poor and unprofessional and the costumes look extremely cheap and unprofessional. The whole story feels confused and disjointed. The directing is bad because the actors are all very capable but the performances often feel wooden and forced and fake. And the pacing is terrible. A lot of it drags and then plot twists come out of nowhere with no setup so it just makes them feel jarring rather than earned or entertaining. 

3) To me it also fails on a moral front. The show contains a lot of problematic depictions and messages and promotes messages that are offensive or even downright harmful.

Mobius gleefully subjects Loki to physical torture by leaving him to be repeatedly beaten in the genital area. This is a very clearcut and straight forward example of physical torture. And Mobius feels no compassion for Loki or remorse over what he has done to him. If anything he seems to find it amusing. And certainly the audience is supposed to find it amusing (which is gross and harmful messaging on Disney’s part). He also subjects Loki to psychological torture. This is a fact. There are multiple instances in the show where the TVA and Mobius subject Loki to treatment that would meet the legal definition of torture under both US law and international law. Furthermore, Mobius and the TVA are holding Loki against his will and forcing him to labor without compensation or any hope of release because they view him as belonging to a group of people (Variants) that they view as inferior and not really people. That’s a pretty textbook case of slavery. So objectively Mobius is Loki’s jailer, torturer, captor, and enslaver. And yet Mobius is presented as justified in what he does to Loki. The writer and director have even called it therapy. And a result many people have parroted this which is very harmful.

The queer “representation” feels straight out of bigoted propaganda. Loki’s personality traits have been retconned to map onto harmful stereotypes about queer men. He is overly expressive, makes grand gestures, is flamboyant, cowardly, dishonest, weak, bad at fighting, lazy, spineless, meek, unused to exercise etc. Now a person could be all these things and also happen to be queer. However, Loki was never like this before. His character was retconned to be this way only in this series where he is confirmed to be queer.

Furthermore, the entire premise of the series seems to be that it is funny and entertaining and justified when Loki is dehumanized, mocked, humiliated, hurt, tortured, beaten, assaulted, and/or robbed of his dignity. That’s the premise. That’s the whole show.

In addition to pro torture and pro authoritarianism and pro victim blaming messaging the show also has problematic depictions of black characters  (see here and here), Asian people (see here) and also has a lot of fludphobia and transphobia issues. And much more.

@nikkoliferous has put together a great compendium here of various posts explaining the various issues with the show if you're curious about why some people disliked it.

#asks #loki tv series #loki series #loki 2021 #loki show #loki tv show #Marvel #MCU

[fandomtrashfox]

A comment from Cinema therapy’s video on ‘Loki’.

Transcript and extra notes below:

I...disagree with the idea of Loki being a narcissist.   

   Acting out the way he does isn't just a trait of narcissists but also of people with low self-esteem, (I should know, being someone who has acted in such a way myself in the past.) Loki was clearly constantly put down by others, disrespected by who he thought were his people, and generally considered 'lesser' to Thor for most of, if not all of his life for seemingly no reason at all. (He 'feels' he's in Thor's shadow because he blatantly is. There's clear favouritism not just from Odin, but from all of Asgard.)

   He never wanted the throne, nor did he actually want power or popularity, he just wanted someone to tell him that he was worthy, he wanted someone to tell him he was worth something and that he wasn't a monster like the other Jotuns were. (This is far clearer in the deleted scenes, where Loki hesitates to take the throne in the first Thor movie, and even looks to his mother, the only person who really seemed to love him, before taking it. As well as his clearly more lovable interactions with Thor before it was revealed that he was Jotun.)

   I mean, hell, he tried to commit suicide at the end of the first Thor movie when his father, whom he tried to get recognition from, and who was certainly the biggest issue with his self-esteem, rejected him yet again.

   I feel like this is most prominent when you take into account that he IS a Jotun, a being that he was raised to hate and fear. He believes he's a monster, and that coupled with his already problematic self-esteem just makes it apparent that he has the exact opposite problem that a narcissist has.   He does deeply care for other people as well. Frigga being the biggest example, in Dark world, he was heartbroken and devastated by her loss. (And the fact that the last thing he said to her was that she 'wasn't his mother' certainly didn't make it better.) Or in Infinity War, where he recognizes Thanos' plan to kill 'half' of everything, so, seeing as he's one of two brothers, gets Thanos to kill him so Thor will get out safely. Literally sacrificing himself for his brother, who he, on all accounts, shouldn't have cared enough to help there if he was a narcassist.

   The mind stone and the sceptre weren't mind controlling Loki, but it was messing with his head, as is seen in-universe as well as mentioned in interviews. This is seen where he stabs Thor, as he's clearly shaken by what he's just done, even if you can only see this reaction for a few moments. He also doesn't believe in what he's saying in Avengers when he's telling the people around him to kneel, that's why Phil claims that he lacks conviction: Because he really does, he's doing all of this because he's hurting, and the mind stone is manipulating him, he doesn't actually believe anything he's saying there.

   Before anyone brings it up as well: Ragnarok and the Loki TV show are pieces of MCU lore that should be taken with a grain of salt. Many things said in Ragnarok are inconsistent with the other movies (See Sif apparently having to prove that women can be warriors, yet, the Valkyries existed. Or the fact that apparently the Valkyries died before Thor's time but Thor always wanted to join them? Or the 'we were eight at the time' line, when Thor and Loki, being Asgardian/Jotun, age differently than humans, so by that point, would've actually been infants. The Loki show as well, Sylvie and the entire situation revolving around that comes with many character and story inconsistencies, such as magic seen not working in the TVA but apparently Sylvie can still use it in another episode.)

   Basically, from where I'm standing, this diagnosis doesn't seem to make any sense? It makes more sense to say that he's faking narcissism just so he can look strong and more in control, while on the inside continuing to feel unworthy and unlovable. Lashing out not because he's truly hateful, but because, as you've said in another video: 'Hurt people, hurt people.' (Again, something I have sadly been through.) I'd also like to point out, in this way, his mischief seems more like a cry for help. As many will point out, if someone is neglected enough in early life, they're likely to develop a mentality of 'any attention is good attention', which seems to be pretty in-line with a lot of 'mischief' he pulls.

   But hey, I'm not a therapist, and that's just my opinion.

Note: Narcissists aren’t inherently bad people. Don’t write them off as ‘evil’ or ‘monsters’. Not all of them are. Putting everyone in boxes like that for mental disabilities or neurodivergence is doing nothing but perpetuating harmful rhetoric and harming people.

...With that being said though, Loki ain’t it, chief.

Real talk though: Cinema therapy’s video on Loki is stupid as hell. ‘Loki genuinely believes he is superior’ is a direct quote, and as you can read from the above post, that statement is blatantly wrong on its own.

If I got anything wrong, feel free to mention so. I want to be sure I get as much correct as possible in this as not to miss anything or perpetuate any harmful stereotypes, I just went off of what was described in the video.

#character analysis #Loki Laufeyson #loki odinson #Loki Friggason #loki mcu #mcu rambles #mcu analysis #movie analysis #marvel analysis #youtube analysis #loki rant #loki ramble #mcu rant #mcu ramble #rambles #loki is not a narcissist #random fandom thoughts #MARVEL FANDOM #marvel fan #marvel rambling

[lokiondisneyplus]

[This story contains spoilers for Loki episode five.]

Forced to the edge of time and space known as The Void, and saved by his counterparts from alternate timelines, Classic Loki (Richard E. Grant), Kid Loki (Jack Veal), Boastful Loki (DeObia Oparei), and Alligator Loki, and hunted by the matter consuming entity, Alioth, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) finds a power greater than lies, stronger than time, and more glorious a purpose than any he’s fought for before: emotional honesty. Serving as both a cosmic mystery and therapy session for its titular character, Loki, displays a sincerity that places the character’s arc a step above his brother Thor’s (Chris Hemsworth) initial journey. The result is heroism that’s being earned the hard way. The penultimate episode of Loki, “Journey into Mystery,” directed by Kate Herron and written by Tom Kauffman, forces Loki and Sylvie (Sophia Di Martino) to come to terms with the fact that lives built upon cyclical patterns of betrayal and revenge will ultimately only lead to loneliness and unfulfilled purpose. The mystery then becomes a question of what will happen when they finally allow themselves to reach out and truly connect to another individual, outside of personal gain? What does a Loki become? Perhaps it’s the very thing that Loki has always sought in some shape or fashion. From seeking the throne of Asgard, waging war against his brother, Thor, and father, Odin (Anthony Hopkins), and seeking attention from his mother, Frigga (Rene Russo), Loki’s efforts, misguided as they were, have ultimately been an effort for one thing: to prove himself worthy.

But worthiness for Loki is more than hammer, and it’s more than possessing the power of Thor. It’s the ability to be valued as something more than what is seen, which can’t be easy for someone who is most often seen as a villain. Thor had it easy comparatively. His worthiness, as depicted in Kenneth Branagh’s 2011 film, Thor, sees the God of Thunder able to pick up the mighty Mjolnir after willingly sacrificing his life to the Destroyer to protect citizens in New Mexico, including his newfound love Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). There is a simplified nature to Thor’s heroes’ journey, in part because Thor was always meant to be worthy. Thor’s bravery and protection of innocents in front of him was never in doubt, thus his worthiness being defined by such an act does little to interrogate his character or showcase change. Thor is worthy because his role in the story is to be worthy. That was the path laid out for him. Loki on the other hand, was never meant to be worthy. From his place in myths, comics, and the MCU, Loki being worthy was never an expectation for the character. Because of that factor, the series can bend those expectations, bend the supposed definition of what makes a Loki, and allow the character to evolve beyond his formerly predictable nature.

Because there is no expectation or precedent for Loki being worthy, his journey to get to that point relies on a more intensive investigation of character than Thor ever faced on his path to worthiness. “We cannot change. We’re broken. Every version of us. Forever,” Classic Loki, an older version of Hiddelston’s God of Mischief, tells his younger counterpart. Except, as the series has shown, particularly with this most recent episode, Classic Loki’s self-deprecating statement isn’t entirely true. Lokis are, in part, the Gods of Lies after all, and no lies told have done more damage than the lies they’ve told to themselves and heard parroted back them, as the illusion of Lady Sif (Jaimie Alexander) did in the previous episode: “You deserve to be alone, and you always will be.”

For Loki, his worthiness is something that would ultimately be proved by not being alone. It’s what makes his connection to Sylvie so powerful. And it’s what makes Classic Loki’s efforts to save the day so meaningful — he has experienced the true depths of loneliness only to come away ultimately understanding the salvational quality of connection. And what emerges from Loki’s sincere connections? A legendary weapon of his own, an enhanced power set and true friendship. Thor’s journey has played a bit fast and loose with how much he values his connection to others, like members of his childhood friends the Warriors Three being killed off in Thor: Ragnarok (2017) and never given another thought, or the fact that much of his journey with the Avengers has consisted of him acting alone or going off on separate quests, ie. Age of Ultron (2015), Infinity War (2018), Endgame (2019). But for Loki, whose list of allies are few and far between, the connections he does share mean everything and the series gives them weight and “sentiment,” the very thing Loki scoffed at in The Avengers (2012).

At the end of time and space, and facing off against Alioth, Loki accepts his love of his Variant, and thus himself, and emerges better. As much as the mystery of who’s pulling the strings of the TVA remains to be seen in the final episode, the true impetus of Loki isn’t about laying the groundwork for a new villain but giving a former villain time to discover his own worth. And in that way, Loki has already proved worthy.

#Loki #episode 5 #review #spoilers

[agentxthirteen]

SAM WILSON aka The Falcon is a former U.S. Air Force pararescue jumper turned Avenger who was Steve Rogers’ right hand man. When Sam finds himself tangled in an international conflict that is more personal than he could have ever imagined, his only shot at overcoming this trial will be to team up with his least favorite 106-year-old: Bucky Barnes. Anthony Mackie, who returns as Sam/Falcon, welcomed the opportunity to dive deeper into the character. “I feel like with this series, we've been able to show you why Sam and Bucky are who they are and why they believe in what they believe,” he says. “You get to meet and get to know them as three-dimensional characters. You get to see them as people. It's funny because usually in a movie forum, you only have two hours to tell the beginning, middle and ending of a story. But we have six episodes to tell the entire scope of where these characters have been, how they feel about the world they're in, and where they're going once this series is over.”Upon returning from the Blip, Sam joins his sister Sarah in Louisiana in an effort to help save the family business. It’s complicated and he struggles. “Sam became a hero because of where he’s from—he saw that the world was not fair,” explains head writer Malcolm Spellman. “He ran off to save the world by joining the military. But he’s always worried if joining the military was really about running away from problems at home—they seemed so insurmountable, it'd be easier to save the world.”But it’s not the only thing on his mind. The future of the shield and the role Sam plays is not as clear as Steve Rogers anticipated. Says Spellman, “He truly believes that there’s an argument to be made that red, white and blue—stars and stripes—inherently represents oppression.”Adds Mackie, “Sam considers the shield a representation of the country that we live in. There's a lot of trepidation as far as how does a Black man represent a country that does not represent him?”

BUCKY BARNES was Steve Rogers’ best friend and a WWII veteran who was brainwashed by Hydra to become the Winter Soldier—a deadly and ruthless assassin who would stop at nothing to achieve his assigned mission. As revealed in the post-credit sequence of “Black Panther,” Bucky’s mind was healed by the Wakandans, and he later joins the Avengers to heroically battle and ultimately defeat Thanos. But now that Bucky has been thrust back into the real world, he must figure out how to become James Barnes again—all while facing the demons from his past. Sebastian Stan portrays the eternally troubled Bucky/Winter Soldier. “He is trying to embrace his new life—but he’s pretty lost and having an identity crisis again,” says Stan. “He's doing his best, finding his own path after Steve, after all those events. It feels like this is the first time he's finally free, so to speak, to look after himself. But it's not easy. “How does this character now function in the world?” continues Stan. “What's his life going back to Brooklyn? How is he meeting people? How is he interacting at coffee 5shops? Is he dating? Is he thinking about another career? Is he in therapy? There were all these questions about where we could take this character. There were a lot of fun and exciting things that came out of that exploration.”Co-executive producer Zoie Nagelhout adds that for the first time, Bucky is making a concerted effort to take charge of his life—and that includes making some difficult amends. “He is working to unburden himself from the trauma of being the Winter Soldier,” she says. “He believes that will get him closer to knowing what he wants.”Stan asserts, however, that Bucky’s past is there to stay. “Look, there's always going to be a darker side of this character, which I’ve always loved—it’s what makes him more interesting and complex,” he says. “I feel like that doesn’t go away. It's still there deep down. He's just learning how to deal with it a little bit better.”

JOHN WALKER is one of the highest-ranking soldiers in the U.S. military. He is patriotic, strong, good-intentioned, and every bit of him will be put to the test as he tries to team up with Sam and Bucky to protect the world from a new threat. Wyatt Russell was called on to portray the dedicated soldier. “We thought Wyatt was an interesting choice because a lot of his work before had him playing the slacker with long hair and a beard,” says executive producer Nate Moore. “But we found this unique energyin him that neither Sam Wilson nor Bucky Barnes has, and we felt that was important so that John Walker stood apart from these two characters.”But, says Russell, Walker’s journey is not without complication. “I gravitate towards characters who need to make difficult decisions,” he says. “His dichotomies are what attracted me to him, and I’ve been allowed the leeway to shape him a little because we’ve never met this character before.”

SHARON CARTER, a former S.H.I.E.L.D. agent who went on the run after breaking the Sokovia Accords, knows that if she stepped foot in the United States, she’d be arrested. But life underground has taken its toll on Sharon, who’s become somewhat jaded while fending for herself since the events of “Captain America: Civil War.” But heroism runs in her blood, and she finds herself tangled in Sam and Bucky’s global fight.Emily VanCamp, who returns to the MCU as Sharon Carter, says the character has changed since we last saw her. “Listen, when we find Sharon, she’s in a pretty dark place,” says VanCamp. “When we first see her, there’s a little bit of anger. She’s tougher, a little raw and rough around the edges—a totally different version of Sharon than what we’ve seen in the films. That’s really interesting to explore.”Adds Nagelhout, “We never really heard from Sharon after she put herself out there for Cap, Sam and Bucky, so we felt it was important to tell her story—to see what’s she’s been going through after throwing her career away to do what she felt was right. She’s that kind of person.”

ZEMO, the Sokovian special forces officer who targeted the Avengers after he lost his family in the battle of Sokovia, has been rotting in a German prison since we last saw him in “Captain America: Civil War.” But Zemo isabout to be reignited with a new ferocity. “I kind of fell in love with Zemo,” says director Kari Skogland. “He’s a man who’s struggling with this desire for revenge. But his story is a slippery slope of trying to make something right, but going about it all wrong. So, when we meet him, he’s paying for his crimes. He’s lost everything. He’s in a very sad place. I couldn’t help but feel a certain amount of sympathy for him.” DanielBrühl, whoreturns as Zemo, feels similarly about the character. “In ‘Civil War,’ I was fascinated by the fact that Zemo is a multi-layered villain,” he says. “He’s not just a sinister bad guy. But there was not that much time to explore different facets of him, so it was great to be given the opportunity to revisit this character.”

#sharon carter #sam wilson #bucky barnes #baron zemo #spoilers #john walker

[romanogers-lyrics]

TFAWS EP 2: Mind Blown!!!!

Not my captain America!!! The show tries to give him a compelling back story but he is literally what you get if you cheapen everything about Chris Evan’s cap. Blonde hair, military background, everything came easy for him. He was exactly the type that dr. erskine in The First Avenger didn’t want to pick.

Fake!cap has the nerve to say “hey I worked for this” to sambucky. like you didn’t bro. Sam and Bucky are real heroes who saved the world and risked their lives. You did a few military missions big fucking deal. I give Bucky permission to cut a bitch 🔪

They even give fake!cap a black best friend like smdh

Fake!cap calls Sam “captain America’s wingman” Aw hell nah 😡. Sam is his own ducking person.

Huge action set piece on the trains. I didn’t love it as much as I hoped because it felt too quick. They got their ass beat 😪

Shiiiiiiit Bucky can run fasttt 🏃‍♂️ ngl it’s hot

Redwing!!!! Noooo I will always remember you ✊🏽. Torres pls buy Sam a new one.

🚨 OKAY something I want to talk about!!!!!!!! Steve NEVER/RARELY fires a gun in the MCU. John Walker deadass shoots someone while holding the shield. Something about that image really grinds my gears and seems intentional on the part of the writers to make me dislike fake!cap even more. I don’t know how to explain it but it seems disrespectful. Pls reply if you noticed this to and can tell me why I hate it!!! 🤯

Bucky and Sam’s rift is a lot more personal than I thought it would be. They aren’t just different personalities but they have totally different views of captain America. Bucky obvi knows he could never wield it so it hurts that Sam won’t. Bucky sees his own redemption in the shield so to give it away means giving up hope. And Sam doesn’t say but we know the shield is a white symbol to him. The miscommunication 😩

Cap’s music is all throughout this episode and it’s painful especially when it comes in during the couple’s therapy. It’s literally like a ghost between them. I know this isn’t what he would want for his best friends 😭

Cap’s music from his show monkey days plays when fake!cap shows up at the beginning of the episode which again parallels how people want to use the shield for propaganda in the current time.

Isaiah from the Red White and Black comic appears. I had to look this up from hearing Malcom Spellman (writer) talk about it. Very interesting piece of history that really deepens Sam’s apprehension about the shield.

Sebby Stan is giving me so much of Bucky I love it! Just with his eyes only he can tell the audience so much. Anthony is great too but I feel like we’re seeing so much more of Bucky than we ever have before.

The banter! “I have all of that on video”

The couples therapy had me cackling jajajahah

✨The casual racism and micro aggressions✨ Sam can’t get now FUCKING respect round here😡

No Sharon yet 🥺 but she is mentioned. I’m waiting patiently.

Zemo. The teaming up with your enemy trope and Magneto prison. Literally has the chess 😂. Guess marvel is ripping off themselves. But I love to see it!

Some more characterization of the big bad. Lots more to learn and I can’t wait. They are all like a family and really believe what they are fighting for which makes them dangerous.

My one criticism is the pacing kinda sucked in this episode because you jumped around locations a lot so I felt scenes got cut short. I wanted to dig into the tension but it always felt like it got interrupted! Like when sam and Bucky are talking after the big fight they get cut off by new characters entering.

Sam calling Bucky “Bucky”. Bucky introducing Sam to people. They are friends they just don’t know it yet 🥺

So much more details and references so I need to watch again and research some of the comic stuff 😬

My episode 1 reaction:

#mcu #romanogers #captain america #marvel #avengers #black widow #natasha romanoff #evansson #steve rogers #capwidow #falcon and winter soldier spoilers #tfaws #tfaws spoilers #bucky barnes #sam wilson #winterfalcon #sambucky

[littleabriel-blog]

My Problem with Loki

Loki is a character beloved by many people. He has been for a decade now, although some people who read comics before the Marvel Cinematic Universe was a thing were fans of him long before the first Thor came out. Over the years since his appearance in that movie the character has gone through a lot of changes, evolving from a villain to an anti-hero both in the MCU and in the comics, the latter even killing off his original incarnation to reincarnate him in a younger body resembling Tom Hiddleston in the hopes that the comics could capitalize on his popularity in order to sell more books. That move, unfortunately, did not bear fruit, with Loki’s solo series being canceled after only five issues. However, Loki remained popular in the movies, so much so that when he was killed off in Infinity War, people were pissed.

As a result of his enduring popularity, Kevin Feige and company decided to give Loki his own solo series on Disney+ when the decision was made to create a string of MCU tie-in shows to supplement the movies, and boost subscription numbers to Disney’s new streaming service. Fans of the character rejoiced. Finally, our favorite character was going to be in the spotlight, and not be merely a supporting character for Thor and hopefully not a butt monkey for the Avengers like he was in the third act of the movie of the same name. WandaVision and The Falcon and The Winter Soldier had previously had well-received and successful debuts on that same platform, and it was hoped that Loki would do the same. Loki turned out to be the most successful of the Disney+ MCU shows that have come out so far, scoring highest in the ratings. As of this writing, it holds a 93% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and an 8.5 on IMDb.

Those numbers, however, don’t reflect the entire audience and there were a lot of people who were not altogether happy with the product we received. Many people who had been hardcore fans of Loki since Tom Hiddleston first put on the horned helmet were not pleased, myself included.  

The show wasn’t all bad. It did set up the multiverse, introduced Kang, introduced Mobius. The special effects were outstanding, a lot of the gags were hilarious, and we did get some character development from Loki before the spotlight fell away from him and he became all about panting after the real main character...more on that in a few.  

So many things, however, were wrong.  

If you liked the show, thought it was perfect, and were a fan of the romance, that’s perfectly fine. There is no such thing as a wrong opinion on a work of fiction. Everyone has their interpretations, everyone has their likes and dislikes, and there is nothing wrong with liking the show. There is also nothing wrong with not liking the show. This is a concept that people on both sides of the debate fail to understand, and I have witnessed flame wars, harassment from individuals on both sides, harassment of creators on social media from both sides, and various bits of biphobia, homophobia, transphobia, and other assorted types of phobias on display. I have seen people accuse people who have different opinions on the show than them of “not being a true Loki fan” and stating that people who have certain interpretations of the character don’t “truly know Loki”.

I’m not here to do that, and I assure you, if you liked the show, that’s fine. You’re allowed to. I’m allowed to not like it, and I’m allowed to explained why I didn’t like it just as you’re allowed to explain why you did. As long as both of us are being respectful, expressing an opinion is good. There is expressing an opinion and offering constructive criticism, however, and then there is namecalling, trolling, and having a tantrum and accusing someone of being “aggressive” when they don’t share the same opinion you do.

There is a huge difference between saying “I find the character of Sylvie to be problematic, and here is why” and “I think fans of Sylvie are sick and need therapy”, and people need to learn the difference between the two. Unfortunately, you have people who have become very protective of their favorite characters and tend to take any criticism leveled at said characters personally. It’s basically “You don’t like them? Well then you don’t like me, and since you don’t like me, I don’t like you.” Which is, frankly, a dangerous mentality to have. We are talking about fictional characters, not real people, and there is no need to jump to the defense of someone who does not exist. It is those people who tend to demonstrate that they have unstable personalities and immaturity, and they are the ones I have started blocking on Twitter because, being an adult woman, I don’t have the patience to deal with immature nonsense like that.

So, if you read this and then decide you want to hunt me down to give me a piece of your mind, tell me that I’m not a “true” fan of Loki, and accuse me of whatever, don’t bother. This piece isn’t here for that. It’s here because I wanted to compile my thoughts and feelings in a way that would better for me to articulate. It’s more or less a venting mechanism, purely for my benefit. If someone else gets something out of it, fine. If the creators of the show happen to see it, which is very unlikely because A) I’m not exactly going to push it onto them on their social media to get them to read it and B) they already get bombarded with tons of opinions on the show on a daily basis and aren’t going to care about one more voice added to the mix, even one who has basically compiled a novel, then alright.

And it is a novel, because I have a lot to say about Loki. I have been a huge fan of the character since long before Tom Hiddleston began playing him. My first encounter with Marvel’s Loki came in the form of the X-Men comics, specifically The Asgardian Wars run. It’s available in trade, and you should check it out. I read that run when I was around 10 years old, and I enjoyed Loki as the bad guy in the two stories that make up the collection. The first has him creating a special wish fountain that has a monkey’s paw effect in that it imbues mortals with special gifts and powers, and has the potential to make Earth a better place, but at the cost of killing every magical person and being on Earth. The X-Men and Alpha Flight find out about this after a plane piloted by the wife of one of the X-Men happens to crash in the general location the fountain is located. The two teams go to investigate, Shaman and Snowbird who are both magical beings begin dying, it’s discovered Loki created the fountain in order to score brownie points with The Ones Who Sit Above In Shadow (a pantheon of deities who are basically the Gods to the Asgardians), and after a lengthy battle Loki is defeated, he shuts down the fountain under pressure from The Ones, and slinks back to Asgard with tail between his legs.

In the second story, set after the heroes of Earth had helped Asgard defeat Surtur, Loki’s attention is caught by Storm, who at the time was depowered. He kidnaps her and brings her to Asgard intending to use her to replace Thor as the Goddess of the Storm, and use her as a pawn to, what else, conquer Asgard and seize the throne.  

I really enjoyed Loki then, and felt sorry that he never appeared in any other X-Men story, not even in an issue of the New Mutants, and that team boasted an actual Valkyrie (Danielle Moonstar) as one of its members. I was a kid at the time and read pretty much exclusively X-Men since those were the books my father purchased for me. I never felt right about asking him for other books since we were a family with money struggles and I didn’t want to be more of a burden by requesting Thor or Avengers comics--that, and I just didn’t find Thor or the Avengers all that interesting at the time, a sentiment shared by a lot of people until the first Iron Man made us actually care about Tony Stark. I wouldn’t have an opportunity to start reading more comics featuring Loki until I was an adult and able to visit comic book stores on my own. I read several runs that featured him as a character, including Ragnarok, the Broxton, OK run where Loki first appeared as a woman, Dark Reign, and finally Siege. I also went back and read Walt Simonson’s legendary run on The Mighty Thor, which I highly recommend.  

Suffice it to say, I’ve been a fan of the character for a long time, and in fact when Tom Hiddleston was cast in the role for Thor, I remember thinking that he was too young. But then I figured it was Hollywood, of course they’re going to deage Loki so that he appears closer in age to his adopted brother in contrast to the comics pre-Siege where Loki was often drawn to look like he was as old as Odin and therefore could be Thor’s uncle or even father as opposed to brother.  

Over the years I grew to enjoy the MCU’s version of the character, enjoy Tom Hiddleston in the role, and like most other people was greatly saddened by his death in Infinity War. Like other fans, I looked forward to his solo series and had high hopes for it. Hopes that were, unfortunately, dashed.

It Was Rushed

In the MCU, it took Loki years to go from troubled young god, to villain, to ambivalent ally, to anti-hero, to hero. Literally, years. Months had passed between the end of Thor and the beginning of Avengers during which Loki endured who-knows-what at the hands of Thanos. We don’t know exactly what still. The Loki series didn’t answer that, I guess because they didn’t want to devote precious screentime to an interesting backstory for what was supposed to be the main character when they could focus on something else instead. That something else will be elaborated on.

In Episode 1, Loki is still the villain from Avengers, something he would have remained as into The Dark World. It would take him being in Asgard’s prisons for a year and then him accidentally getting his adopted mother Frigga killed in order for him to begin to do a heel-face turn. From this, we can clearly see that a transition from ax-crazy bad guy to anti-hero is not going to happen overnight. For this person I shall call Ragnarok Loki, it was a process that took time. He suffered a complete mental breakdown while in Asgard’s prison, a fragile emotional state that was compounded by the anger and massive guilt he felt at Frigga’s death.  

Even after that, he still hadn’t completely abandoned his villainous ways. At the end of The Dark World we find out that after faking his supposed death earlier in the movie, Loki has assumed Odin’s form and taken his place on Asgard’s throne. In Ragnarok, Loki is still sitting on the throne in Odin’s form, and shows no indication at all that he feels any remorse for giving his adopted father amnesia, stripping away his magic, and abandoning him on Earth to whatever fate he might meet. Loki remains a selfish bastard throughout Ragnarok until the third act, after Thor had treated him to a taste of his own medicine by sticking a taser on him and then giving him a speech about becoming predictable and complacent.  

Loki’s arc was one that spanned four movies and six years, since in-universe there were a couple of years between The Dark World and Ragnarok. That meant that his character development took actual time and was realistic. It was one of the things that drew people to the character, the fact that he had a very relatable and believable redemption arc.

Compare that to Episode 1. In less than a day he goes from being the Loki that we saw in Avengers, batshit crazy, selfish, callous, and untrusting, to making personal confessions to a man he had just met only a couple hours previously and agreeing to help the organization that had arrested, stripped, imprisoned, tried, and almost executed him.

What?

I will give the show this: In Episode 2, he shows that he’s still up to his old tricks when he feeds Mobius and the agents all that horsecrap about how a Loki works in the Ren Faire tent, and then revealing that he plans to take over the TVA when he confronts his variant in the futuristic Wal-Mart. The weeping confession to Mobius, that I can’t really get over. How do you go from haughty, arrogant, and “trust is for children and dogs”, to “I don’t enjoy hurting people” in just a couple of hours? The show never indicated that it was a manipulation tactic on Loki’s part. Instead, we were basically told to believe that they became friends just that fast. That emotionally stunted and closed-off Loki made a connection with another person in a matter of hours. Makes sense. Don’t get me wrong, I like Mobius and feel he makes a good foil for Loki. I hope to see more of him in the future. I just have a tough time finding their friendship all that believable.

This would not be the only relationship in the show that happened too fast that we were forced to just buy, which leads me to Sylvie.

She’s the variant that the TVA had been hunting, that Mobius recruited Loki to help capture. And while I normally hate it when people ascribe a certain label onto a new female character because reasons (ones that are usually misogynistic), I think it fits rather well in Sylvie’s case.

Enter The Mary Sue

Mary Sue is a term that gets thrown around a lot. To sum up the meaning in very simple terms, it refers to a character who is too perfect to be believable. Mary Sues are often author-self inserts in fiction, they’re usually the love interest for at least one male hero and it’s usually the male hero the author will admit to having a crush on, their scenes usually are presented much more descriptively than those of the other characters, the story will revolve around them often at the expense of the development and plots for the other characters of the story, and they’re presented as beautiful, powerful, intelligent, beautiful, special, strong, beautiful, and desirable. Yes, beautiful is on the list more than once, and it’s deliberate.

The term comes from an old Star Trek parody fanfic, and while it is usually applied to original characters in fan fiction, the term has been used to describe characters in canon media as well. Some examples of characters who have been described as Mary Sues would include Bella from the Twilight books, Felicity from the show Arrow, Jaenelle Angelline from Anne Bishop’s The Black Jewel novels, Sookie Stackhouse from True Blood, Rey from the last Star Wars trilogy, and Jean Grey from the X-Men comics. Note I do not necessarily agree that those characters are Mary Sues, I have merely heard these characters referred to as Mary Sues, and when I look at them objectively I can kind of see where the accusations come from. Some other terms that can apply are Creator’s Pet and of course Author Self-Insert. Not all Mary Sues are Author Self-Inserts, but a lot of them are. Also, not all characters who can be labeled Mary Sues are female, though they often are. The male version of a Mary Sue is called a Marty Stu, and a couple of characters I’ve seen get ascribed that label include Harry Potter, Daemon Sadi from Anne Bishop’s The Black Jewel novels, Edward from Twilight, and Red Hulk from Marvel Comics. Even Batman and Wolverine haven’t been immune from the Marty Stu stamp, although you can argue that it does apply in their cases especially depending on who’s writing them. Sometimes it is painfully obvious they are author self-inserts...the aforementioned Bella is a good example. Others, you can only speculate on. And while there are theories going around that Sylvie is someone’s self-insert, we don’t have definitive proof of that.

There are good arguments, however, for her being labeled a Mary Sue and Creator’s Pet.

First are her powers. In the show we are told that Sylvie taught herself magic, especially her ability to “enchant”, the power to get into the minds of others and manipulate them. The fact that she taught herself would indicate that her education and skill in using magic should be lacking, right? She should not be as good as, say, someone who learned magic from his foster mother who herself was taught by Asgardian witches?

Yet in the show, Sylvie not only runs circles around Loki magically wise, she even teaches him a few tricks. This is startlingly in contrast to the comics. Loki’s Sylvie is partially based on the character Sylvie Lushton from the Young Avengers, a bad guy who was once a normal girl whom Loki imbued with powers before his death at the hands of the Sentry during the events of 2010’s Siege storyline. In the comics, Loki not only gave Sylvie her powers, but he was the one who taught her how to use them. Now, of course things in the MCU are not going to follow the way things are in the comics. MCU Loki is nowhere near as old as comics Loki and has so far not demonstrated the ability to give other beings powers. And MCU Sylvie is a composite of Sylvie Lushton and Lady Loki, which is also problematic, but we’ll get to that.

But the point is that Sylvie had no training. Her magic is some improvised slapped-together stuff that at best she picked up here and there and at worst she just pulled out of her ass. Now, knowing that, we’re supposed to buy that she can mop the floor magically wise with someone who was formally trained by a sorceress? And that furthermore, she can school him as well?

To make up for her lack of experience and knowledge, Loki is nerfed. Power wise and intellectually wise, he is nerfed. In Thor and Avengers Loki is smart, well-spoken, and a master manipulator. At one point he is able to turn all of the Avengers against one another, and while his magic has never been anywhere near the level it was at in the comics pre-Siege (after his resurrection, he was powered down and is currently nowhere near the powerhouse he had been prior to 2011) he was able to pull off some impressive displays of skill nonetheless. Shape shifting, illusion casting, it was a good repertoire.  

In Episode 3, however...well, he does use teleportation to some impressive affect during his fight with Sylvie, but he still doesn’t get the upperhand. And he should. Loki is a better trained fighter, better trained in sorcery, and realistically should have at the least managed to incapacitate his variant. He doesn’t however, because the moment he meets Sylvie his IQ drops about 20 points. He falls easily for her tricks, makes laughable plans, gets drunk and draws too much attention when he knows that is a bad idea, and manages to get them both stuck on a moon that will soon be dust courtesy of the rogue planet about to crash into it. Loki has made some blunders in the various MCU movies he’s been in, mostly due to his own arrogance and tendency to underestimate his foes, but he’s not that stupid. In fact, in The Dark World he screams at Thor and calls him an idiot for drawing attention to themselves by hijacking an elven ship and crashing into every column and statue within a fifty-foot radius.

Where exactly is that smart, calculating, more careful Loki we know from the films? He’s been transformed and dumbed down, in an attempt to prop Sylvie up. It’s a tired trope, making the male character a dumbass in order to make the female character look good. Well, I should say male-presenting and female-presenting characters in this case, but their supposed gender fluidity really is not represented well and it’s completely contradicted later on, but we’ll get to that.

Anyway, making the male character stupid in order to make the female character look better by comparison is not empowering. It’s insulting. It implies that women are not smart or capable enough to meet men on equal footing, that the only way we can shine is not by virtue of our own strengths, but merely by making us look better than the men.

She doesn’t just outshine Loki intellectually and power wise, she outshines him period. The show from Episode 3 on becomes about Sylvie. She is the show’s main focus, and Loki? He’s relegated to the role of supporting character in the series that’s named after him. Supporting character, and love interest. From Episode 3 on, the show might as well be called Sylvie.

Now, some people will say that since Sylvie is a Loki, the show was indeed focusing on Loki. The problem is, the show is very inconsistent as to whether or not Sylvie really is a Loki or a different person entirely. I will explain more later, but the writers seem to change Sylvie’s identity to suit whatever narrative they want to present to the audience, including the pre-Pixar Disney romance they foist upon us.

The Romance, and why some find it gross

One major characteristic of the Mary Sue is that she always draws the romantic and sexual interest of the main male character, who may or may not be a Marty Stu himself. Oftentimes he’s not, and Loki does not fit the criteria of a Marty Stu by any stretch of the imagination. These romances always happen fast with little to no buildup. There is no what writers of romance call “slow burn”, it’s just throw Mary at the male character, hook them up, and get the audience to buy it. Basically, it’s reminiscent of the romance stories in the Classical Era Disney animated films. Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella all fall madly in love with their princes within minutes of meeting them. There’s no getting to know each other, there is no preamble, there is no slow courtship, no real drama to speak of. It’s basically Love At First Sight or True Love. This trend continues even into the Disney Renaissance. In The Little Mermaid, Ariel is willing to make a deal with a witch to give up her fins for a prince she hasn’t even spoken to yet. He doesn’t even know she exists, and she leaves her home and family behind, gives up her voice, all for a mere shot at hooking up with him.

That’s not love, that’s lust. That’s hormones overruling your brain, and it’s an insulting trope, one that feminists have railed against for years. Disney has made a little progress. The movie Frozen took the mickey out of the Love At First Sight/True Love trope with the song “Love Is An Open Door” and the prince Anna wanting to marry turning out to be a major sleazebag who just wants to use her, but we still only have three Disney princesses (Elsa, Moana, and Merida) who have never had love interests and two (Anna and Rapunzel) whose love stories come close to being slow burns, out of 12 official Princesses. There’s still a long way to go, and boy is there a major step backwards in Loki.  

In Episode 3, Loki fights Sylvie and they end up on Lamentis 1. Sylvie spends a good portion of the time insulting and trying to kill Loki, and Loki finds himself having to defend himself from her. That changes once they get on the train going to the Arc. After sneaking aboard the train using a disguise and a flimsy story, the two Lokis sit in a booth, where Loki proceeds to drink champagne. It is then that, out of nowhere, the conversation shifts from how Sylvie learned her powers to the topic of love.

Why? Why would you bring that up in conversation with someone who was doing her best to kill you a couple hours prior?

Then Loki makes things worse by asking Sylvie if she has a beau waiting for her. Why? It doesn’t make sense. The two of you are at each other’s throats, she’s done her best to kill you, neither of you trusts the other, and, completely out of left field, you decide to basically ask “So...are you single?”

Now, enemies to lovers is a trope that can work when done right. Typically, it’s a very subtle, slow progression that the audience witnesses over time in a novel, movie or television series. Weeks and even months will go by in the narrative during which the two people go from wanting each other dead to developing feelings for one another. There’s usually a “will they, won’t they period” that lasts for some time that’s full of teases and flirting before the couple does hook up and gives the audience the resolution. Done in this way, enemies to lovers can work.

This...this is not the right way to do enemies to lovers. Within a couple of hours Loki and Sylvie go from hatred and doing their damnedest to stabbing one another in the backs, to having a connection that causes a nexus event?

By the way, that nexus event makes no sense. In Episode 2, it is established that it is impossible to create a nexus event in an apocalypse. It is why Sylvie was able to avoid capture by the TVA for so long. In fact, just minutes prior to the two of them almost dying in Episode 4, Sylvie flat-out says that she figured out that she needed to hide in apocalypses because she discovered she didn’t create a nexus event when she hid in them.

Now the two of them are able to create a nexus event in the midst of an apocalypse? Why? Their “connection” isn’t going to lead to any consequences...they were about to die. No one else need never have known about the “moment” the two of them shared. It’s very confusing and the only purpose it really serves is to paint Loki and Sylvie as soulmates, which doesn’t make sense in the context of the show. The concept of soulmates is that for every person, there is someone out there they are predestined to be with. Loki is a show that, at the core of it, is about rejecting predestination and embracing free will. In that context, the idea of soulmates is ludicrous and contradictory to the message that we make our own destiny. This is why True Love is unrealistic, and I hate to break it to you romantics out there, but Love At First sight does not exist.

Infatuation At First Sight exists, but that is not Love, no matter what your hormones are telling you. Love takes time to evolve, and it takes work to maintain. It sure as hell doesn’t happen after less than 12 hours of knowing each other, during which a huge chunk of time was devoted to trying to manipulate, outsmart, and murder the person you’re supposedly in love with. No one falls in love in less than 12 hours, period, unless it’s a Classical Era Disney animated movie. They basically turned Loki into a big Disney Romance trope. I have a very hard time buying that Loki, who we have established is emotionally stunted and closed off, would form a love connection in just a few hours, especially with someone who was doing her best to murder him in that timespan.

That is not the only reason this relationship is problematic. The term “Selfcest” has been thrown around, and a lot of defenders of this particular ship claim that the term was very recently made up in social media for the sole purpose of badmouthing this particular romance. That is not the case. Selfcest is a term that has existed among fiction writers for years, it’s just that more people have recently become aware of it thanks to this show. The trope has been used and referred to in various works of fiction, especially in fantasy and science fiction where cloning, alternative universes, and magic occur. A lot of the insults I get from people who can’t stand that I don’t like the romance basically go along the lines of saying selfcest doesn’t exist. No, it doesn’t...in reality. But this isn’t reality, is it? It’s fiction. It’s a fictional world where such a thing could be possible, and even in works where it’s not possible it’s often alluded to.

In A Song Of Ice And Fire, we have the infamous twincest relationship going on between Cersei and Jamie Lannister, and it is heavily implied that sleeping with her brother is the closest that Cersei can get to banging herself and that is why she does it. Jamie is basically everything she feels she should have been and was denied due to being born a woman. In fact, in later books when he reunites with her after having been away from King’s Landing for over a year, during which time he’s grown a beard and shaved his head, Cersei no longer finds him as attractive since they no longer look as much alike.

And with advances in cloning, selfcest might be possible in the future. We already have sex robots, and people with money are capable of making those robots look like themselves. There is nothing stopping them from doing it.

Knowing all of this, the argument of “selfcest doesn’t exist!” falls flat. And it especially falls flat when you’re referring to a fictional universe where a large purple man once killed off half the population of said universe with a snap of his fingers, where scientists turn into giant green monsters, the Norse gods not only exist but regularly interact with people on Earth, and there’s such a thing as a Sorcerer Supreme.

As I have said, the show has been rather inconsistent in stating what exactly Sylvie’s identity is. One moment, we are told Sylvie is a Loki and that she and Loki are the same person. Mobius says it, Kang says it multiple times, Judge Renslayer says it, the director and the writers state it in interviews. But then in the next breath, they contradict it by saying that she’s not a Loki, she’s Sylvie and a different person.  

You can’t have it both ways. Which is it? Either she’s a Loki, or she’s not. The narrative is very confusing and it changes depending on how they want us to see Sylvie, especially in relation to her romance with Loki. It’s so much easier to avoid the selfcest/incest accusations when you can say they are different people. But then they say they’re the same person. Make up your minds!

Since the show first established that Sylvie is a Loki, I’m going with that. Especially since we saw a bit of her backstory. She grew up in Asgard as a member of the royal family, which means she had Odin as a father, Frigga as mother, and Thor as brother. She may or may not have the same DNA as Loki. We never got confirmation either way, and there are people who argue that they don’t to which I have to ask: How do you know? The show never tells us! “Oh, well, there’s Alligator Loki, are you going to say he has the same DNA as well?” Well, we are never told how exactly Alligator Loki came to be. Is he actually an alligator, or is he Loki who somehow got permanently stuck when he shapeshifted? People tend to forget that he can do that. Ragnarok established that he can turn into a snake, and a deleted scene actually had the childhood story go that Loki turned into a rug to cover a hole in the ground and then dumped Thor into it. There is the scene where Doctor Strange drops Loki through a portal, and Thor is left poking at a business card, and it is clear that for a moment he thinks that Loki turned into that. We know Loki can shapeshift, so Alligator Loki can very well have the same DNA. We just don’t know, because the show never explains it for the same reason the show cut out the scenes with Throg fighting Loki...to devote more screentime to Sylki.

Even if they don’t have the same DNA, it’s still established that they are the same person, they have the same family, they’re both the God/dess of Mischief, and even Sylvie herself acknowledges that she is a Loki despite the fact that she changed her name. So selfcest very much applies here, and a good argument can be made that selfcest is the ultimate in incest...after all, there isn’t anyone else you’re more related to than yourself. It is very understandable, therefore, that a lot of people would be very, very uncomfortable with such a relationship. Having the same DNA would merely be the icing on the very gross cake.

Furthermore, just because selfcest does not exist in reality does not mean someone can’t find the concept distasteful. “It’s not real!” “It’s just fiction!” Yes, and people are allowed to have their own feelings and opinions on fiction. If they find the idea of selfcest hard to stomach, that’s their prerogative and you really have no right to tell them they are wrong for feeling that way. They should not have to justify to anyone why they feel that way either. No one owes you an explanation for why they find real world incest or cannibalism distasteful, so they don’t owe you an explanation for this.

“Well, of course Loki would fall for himself...he’s a narcissist!” Is he though? Is he really? Having dealt with my fair share of narcissists in my life, I have to wonder if the fans who say that, along with the writers, know what a narcissist really is.

Is Loki a narcissist?

Bringing up Cersei Lannister again, the novels she appears in establishes that she is an extreme narcissist. She sleeps with her twin brother because it’s the closest she can come to sleeping with herself, and she desires to do that because she is a narcissist. A narcissist is someone whose personality is defined by an inflated sense of self-importance, troubled relationships, lack of empathy for others, and an excessive deep-seated need for attention and admiration. It’s a very simplistic definition, and there are plenty of YouTube videos devoted to delving into narcissists into more depth, as well as videos on how to cope with the aftermath of abuse at the hands of narcissists. Narcissists are so devoted to themselves that they ignore the needs and the feelings of those in their lives, which often results in abusive behavior. There are entire support groups that exist for victims of narcissists.

At first glance, one can see why some might consider Loki a narcissist. He does engage in some pretty selfish behavior, he goes to great lengths to get attention, his relationships to his family are indeed fraught with drama, and he seems to have a pretty overinflated ego. He even goes so far as to write a play featuring himself as the central character, and build a giant golden statue of himself after taking over Asgard in the guise of Odin. But really, is his ego truly that big? Or he is overcompensating for his self-hatred and self-disgust?

Loki suffered quite the emotional blow when he found out his true heritage, a revelation that shook him to his very core. Of course, his relationship with his father suffered as a result...the man lied to him for his entire life. Their relationship really was not that great even before that since Odin found it easier to relate to Thor, who was more like him in personality, than to Loki, who was more cerebral and quieter. Loki’s relationship to Frigga fared much better. He’s quick to forgive her involvement in covering up the truth about his parentage, and it is obvious that they are close. Even his relationship with Thor prior to the events of the movie is not all that bad, the two brothers are affectionate and playful, and when Loki interrupts Thor’s coronation, it’s not just for the sake of creating trouble, but to postpone Thor taking the crown for another little while because he is not fit to rule. At the time Thor had yet to go through his character development arc on Earth and he was still an overly arrogant, bloodthirsty, elitist douchebag, so Loki really had a good point.

A true narcissist would have done what Loki did just for the sake of making life difficult for Thor. Also, he would have done it because he wanted the throne. Loki states repeatedly that he never wanted to rule. A true narcissist would have been all smiles about taking the throne instead of being reluctant about it as Loki was when Frigga handed him Gungnir.

Throughout the films, and in the first episode of the series, we see that Loki does indeed love his family and is capable of feeling guilt over the things that he does to them, intentionally or not. Narcissists typically don’t feel remorse. As far as they are concerned, they are perfect and can do no wrong, so they have nothing to feel bad about. If they hurt you, it’s because you deserved it. You shouldn’t have provoked their ire.

Loki feels bad for getting Frigga killed, and then later on Odin. Then he is in tears when Odin dies, and later at the mere thought of never seeing Thor again when the two brothers talk in an elevator on Sakaar. Those are not the actions of someone who is incapable of loving anyone but himself, as I’ve seen so many people claim about him. And the fact that he sacrificed himself to save his brother also kind of kills the whole “narcissist” narrative.

In Episode 1, Loki breaks down and confesses to Mobius that he doesn’t like hurting people. He does it because it’s part of the façade, and admits that he sees himself as weak. A few episodes later, he admits to a memory illusion Sif that he craves attention “because I’m a narcissist” and admits to being afraid of being alone. That is far more self-reflection than a typical narcissist is capable of in my experience. As I said, narcissists tend to think they are perfect. A true narcissist would never admit to having any flaws, and sure as hell would never admit that they are a narcissist. As far as the true narcissist is concerned, if you find them flawed in any way, that’s on you. The narcissist has no need for self-reflection because they honestly see nothing wrong with themselves, and believe that they don’t need to change...it’s everyone else who does.

A good real-life example from my past is a former friend I’ll call D. D was a self-proclaimed brat who was quite proud of the fact that she could be difficult to be in a relationship with and tended to go through men like tissue paper. She was demanding, self-centered, extremely jealous, manipulative, and prone to wild mood swings. She could and did go from zero to insane at the drop of a hat. In the time I knew her, she left a string of burnt guys behind, and according to her it was because they just weren’t man enough to handle her. She also left behind a string of broken former friends, to the point where there really needed to be a support group for former friends of D who suddenly had her turn them into Public Enemy Number 1 when they either started taking attention away from D, or...well, that was it really. As I said, she was a very jealous person and had a chronic need to be the center of attention, especially if there were men around. Anyway, instead of working on herself to become less self-involved, self-absorbed, and more empathetic, she double downed on her abrasiveness and constant need for attention until she finally wore the poor man down and he either ghosted her or outright dumped her. She never broke up with them, preferring to keep them around for as long as they were willing in order to toy with them as a cat does with a mouse.  I tried to talk to her about her horrible behavior, but instead of taking my constructive criticism and maybe using it to make some needed changes, she completely turned on me and did her best to make my life hell until I finally cut her out of it. I learned two things: Narcissists don’t want help because they don’t feel they need it and they are never going to change as a result, and never, ever try to confront a narcissist. It’ll only end badly.  

A more famous example? Former US President Donald Trump. I won’t get into that, because really all you need to do is perform a quick Google search to see what all he’s done and witness his narcissism on full display. But really, place him side by side with Loki. Do you see any similarities at all? Maybe on the surface, but when you go deeper...no. Loki is not a narcissist. He’s capable of deep self-reflection, owns his faults, is capable of loving others, and feels remorse. I would argue that anyone who says he is a narcissist, either does not know the character, or hasn’t ever actually dealt with a narcissist in real life, to which I can only say: Lucky you.  

I honestly would argue that calling Loki a narcissist is actually doing a disservice to victims of abuse from actual narcissists.

What about Sylvie? Well, in contrast to Loki who does show remorse while Mobius is playing that “This Is Your Life” reel for him, Sylvie shows no remorse or regret. She knows that the TVA agents she kills are as much victims as she is. They are innocent variants who were kidnapped from Earth and forced to work for the TVA after having their memories wiped. She knows this, yet the first time we see her she burns a bunch of TVA agents alive, and she just stands there watching as they scream in agony. In the next episode she says right out that she’s “having some fun” while possessing the body of C-90 and murdering more agents. She is not at all sorry about doing what she did, and we’re supposed to be understanding since she was kidnapped as a child. Okay, but the entire TVA didn’t do that. The agents she kills didn’t personally kidnap her. The only one we see who was directly involved in that is Renslayer. Sylvie “did what she had to do”, fine. But she doesn’t feel bad about it, at all. The flashback to her as a child takes great pains to try to show us what a good person she is when she cries out “Help him!” as another prisoner is being beaten, but I guess she grew out of it.

We don’t know if Sylvie has any other narcissistic traits besides lack of remorse because, well, the show really doesn’t do much to show her personality. Other than killing people, trying to kill Loki, and then flirting with Loki, we just don’t really see much to her. It’s another trait of a Mary Sue. Mary Sues often have bland, one-dimensional personalities. After all, their only purpose is usually to serve as love interests for one or more male characters. Mary Sues break the “show, don’t tell” rule by having the other characters verbally inform us about their traits, usually while singing their praises, but we don’t actually see those traits in the Mary Sue herself.

Loki calls Sylvie “amazing”, but how amazing is she, really? She kills people she knows are victims, she endangers the timeline just to sneak into the TVA, and then she kills Kang despite knowing that there is a very good chance that doing so could unleash something far, far worse than him. Then again, it doesn’t have to make sense when you’re pushing an unwanted and unasked for romance on an audience who was expecting a scifi show, not a romance.

I have spoken in a few places about this. Romance is fine, but in a show that blatantly places itself in the scifi genre, it really should only be the background, not center stage. When I expressed this opinion, I got accused of being dismissive of an essential part of the human experience. Well, first of all, congratulations: You just invalidated the existence of people on the asexual and aromantic spectrums, not to mention people who are celibate by choice. Second, that is why we have the romance genre. To tell stories centered around romance. I like romance, I read romance novels, and I sometimes write romantic fiction. But there are some places where it just is not appropriate.

There are people who say that adding romance makes things more interesting. Nope, in those cases it’s just a smokescreen, something used to hide plot holes and distract us from just how empty the story really is. Writers like to say that if you need a romance to make things more interesting, then you really don’t have much of a story in the first place. And sadly, Loki does have some plot holes. The nexus event on Lamentis is a good example, and the romance is definitely used to distract us from that. People were so focused on “oh wow, they’re having a moment, they’re soulmates!” that they didn’t think “waitaminute...didn’t they say that nexus events can’t occur in apocalypses?”

We really did not need a romance in Loki. Period. It was unnecessary, it was distracting, a lot of people found it disturbing, and it actively hurt a marginalized group.

Loki Is A Queer Icon!...maybe

I am not going to say that the relationship between Loki and Sylvie is not a bisexual one. A bisexual relationship is a bisexual relationship regardless of whether or not the person the bisexual person is with is the opposite sex. Saying otherwise is biphobic. Biphobic people in both the straight and the queer communities have been excluding bisexual people who happen to be in opposite sex relationships for years because apparently one stops being bisexual once they get into a relationship with someone of the opposite sex. This is horseshit. I’ve been in relationships with CIS men, did I stop being attracted to other men, women, nonbinary, genderfluid, agender, and other genderqueer people? No. No, I didn’t, because while I was entangled, I was not dead. Heterosexual people don’t stop being attracted to other members of the opposite sex when they are in relationships, it’s no different with queer people.

So, stop saying that Loki and Sylvie are not a bisexual relationship. You’re not doing us any favors at all, and in fact you’re only helping the biphobes who want to kick us out of Pride and other queer spaces for daring to date members of the opposite sex.

I will address the “Bit of both” line however. In Episode 3, Loki has that response to Sylvie’s questioning about whether there had been any would-be princesses or princes in his life. Again, a conversation that comes out of nowhere. She stated outright that she didn’t trust him, clearly wanted him dead, and now she’s asking if he’s single. Whatever.

Anyway, people went nuts when Loki answered “A bit of both”. It was confirmation that Loki was bisexual, it was celebrated on social media...and it is really biphobic and Kate Herron, who is bisexual herself, really should have known better.

Biphobic people have long tried to sow division between the bi and trans communities (unsurprisingly, biphobia and transphobia tend to go hand-in-hand) by saying that the concept of being bisexual is transphobic. “Bi” means two, ergo bisexual people are only attracted to two genders, specifically CIS men and CIS women. It never occurs to anyone that the “two genders” a bisexual person could be attracted to could be, say, women (and yes, I include trans women in that, since they are in fact women, get over it) and non-binary people, or agender and gender-fluid people, it’s always CIS men and CIS women. This despite the fact that the definition of bisexual has been “attraction to more than one gender” since long before the Bisexual Manifesto was put out in 1990.

Some people have tried to remedy this by adopting the moniker of “pansexual” instead, which A) is basically reinforcing what biphobes are saying about bisexuals and creating even more division and B) doesn’t just mean “attraction to trans people as well, I’m not transphobic, I promise!” “Pansexual” is not interchangeable with “bisexual”. Pansexual is attraction to all genders. Bisexual means attraction to more than one gender, but not necessarily to all genders. You can have a bisexual person, for instance, who is attracted to all genders except for men. If you are attracted to more than one gender, but not to all genders, you are bisexual, and labeling yourself pansexual is lying and basically caving in to the biphobes.

I’m not trying to police what people call themselves...if you want to use the two terms interchangeably, if you want to call yourself bisexual, or pansexual, it’s fine. But just evaluate the reasons why. Are you calling yourself pansexual because you really think you can be, or are you just calling yourself that out of fear of being labeled transphobic? The latter, in my opinion, is not a really good reason, and it only helps deliver the biphobic message that bisexual people are transphobic.

So, by saying “a bit of both”, Loki is really helping to reinforce that biphobic assertion that bisexual people are attracted just to CIS men and CIS women. It’s disappointing, but it is Disney so I suppose that is the best we can expect for now. It just shows that Disney really has a long way to go.

What’s more problematic is the supposed genderfluid representation. Now, I am a CIS woman. As such, I feel unqualified to really say that the representation is shitty and fluidphobic. However, if I’m not qualified to say that it is, then Kate Herron and the writers are unqualified to say that it isn’t. Rule of thumb: If members of a marginalized group are telling you that you did a poor job of representing them and that you are being transphobic or fluidphobic, instead of ignoring and dismissing their concerns like a good portion of the population already does, it’s a really good idea to listen to what they are saying and learn how you can do better.

There have been some genderfluid and trans people who expressed that they liked the show, and good for them. But I have seen a lot of very valid criticisms and concerns from genderfluid and trans people about the representation on the show, and I think they really should be listened to. Kate, you and I are queer, but we are still CIS women. Ergo, we have no say in whether or not the way you attempted to present Loki’s gender fluidity is transphobic. If genderfluid people say it’s fluidphobic or trans people say it’s transphobic, then it is indeed fluidphobic/transphobic. To say otherwise is gaslighting a marginalized community who already faces gaslighting on a daily basis.

I will touch on a couple of things.

First, in Episode 5, Loki asks a bunch of his variants if they have ever encountered a female version of themselves, a question that is met with varying levels of incredulousness and even disgust. If Loki was truly genderfluid, this question wouldn’t have been asked. Genderfluid means the person shifts genders along the spectrum. Loki does this in the comics. Comicbook Loki switches between masculine and feminine presenting on the drop of a dime, especially in his current incarnation. Loki in the MCU we are told is also genderfluid, and should also be able to hop along the gender spectrum on a whim. There should not be a “female variant” therefore, since they are all the same gender. There could be a female presenting variant, but that is not the same thing. They would still be all genderfluid in that case. Also, Sylvie’s nexus event would not have been “being born the Goddess of Mischief”. Okay, the show never actually says that is the nexus event that led to her being arrested, but it heavily implies it. If Sylvie is a Loki, and as a Loki is genderfluid, her being the “Goddess” of Mischief should never have been an issue since they can change genders anyway.

Second, making Lady Loki a separate person is problematic. A lot of genderfluid people felt that this move invalidated their identity by basically showing that the same person cannot indeed be different genders along the spectrum. I don’t feel I’m totally qualified to really get into this. I will just say that if you’re going to write a genderfluid character, maybe at least get an actual genderfluid person to advise in the writing room.

Third, there is a transphobic movement called trans exclusionary radical feminism. You might have heard of it. Unfortunately, it is a very widespread movement that has done a lot of harm to the trans community, successfully blocking funding to organizations that help trans people, blocking laws that would benefit trans people, and the movement includes celebrities like Graham Linehan and JK Rowling.

One of the weapons they like to use against trans women is the concept of “autogynephilia”. It is basically the sexual fetish of becoming aroused from thinking of oneself as a woman.  Many, many of these transphobic “feminists” love to say that trans women are merely men who have this particular sexual fetish.

It’s bullshit of course. Maybe there is a small segment of the male population that has that fetish, but trans women are not included in that. For trans women, things like dressing as women, changing their names, having state and federal issued IDs that say they are female, and being able to use the restrooms and change rooms that match the gender they actually are as opposed to the one they were assigned at birth is not a matter of sexual arousal. It’s a matter of making their external realities match their internal ones. It’s a matter of validation of their identities as women. Sexual gratification has nothing to do with it.

Now, Loki is not trans, but genderfluid people do tend to fall under the trans umbrella. We have Loki, a supposedly genderfluid individual and masculine presenting, falling head over heels in love with a feminine presenting version of himself. Maybe it’s just me, but it just seems like a form of autogynephilia to me.

Way to go, Kate...you just gave the TERFs more ammo.

One more note: At one point, Kate tweeted a list of the different Loki emojis, and “jokingly” included #FiretruckLoki with an emoji of a firetruck. Kate, you do realize that a “joke” transphobes love to harp on is that they can identify as an attack helicopter, right?

It’s his way of learning self-love!

That is not how you learn self-love.

First, the people who are making this argument often contradict themselves by then saying that Sylvie is a different person. Again, make up your minds. Either Sylvie is the same person as Loki, or she’s not. You can’t have it both ways, and you can’t continue to change the narrative to fit whatever it is you want to shove down the audience’s throats.

Second, romantic love and self-love are two different things entirely. Loki isn’t feeling self-love with Sylvie, he’s feeling romantic love. That’s not learning self-love. That's narcissism, and it’s character regression in his case. He’s supposed to be evolving past being a self-centered, egotistical shitweasel, and falling in love with a variant of himself makes him, as Mobius put it, “a seismic narcissist”. It’s not character development.  

Third, this argument tends to come in the same breath as saying that Loki is a narcissist so of course he would fall for a variant of himself. If Loki is a narcissist though, why would he need to learn self-love? Narcissists already love themselves, that is the very definition of the word. If Loki needs to learn self-love, that would imply that he actually hates himself, which is the opposite of narcissism. Again, the writers and the fans who make these arguments when they feel the need to defend this relationship need to make up their minds. Either he’s a narcissist and therefore already loves himself too much, or he hates himself and needs to learn to love himself. It’s once again changing the narrative to fill a plothole.  

Fourth, the whole learning self-love and trust narrative is completely thrown out the window in Episode 6 when Sylvie decides to toy with Loki’s emotions, using his feelings for her against him by kissing him as a distraction so she could grab Kang’s temp pad and toss Loki back to the TVA. To Sylvie, her revenge was more important than the bond she had with him. The move basically set Loki’s progress back several steps. What little progress he made anyway.

TL:DR, is there hope for Season 2?

Whew, this went on for a while, didn’t it? Told you I had a lot to say.

As I have said, if you liked the first season of Loki and think I am completely full of shit, that’s fine and it’s your prerogative. More power to you.  

But, and this is a huge but, that does not give you the right to harass and bully people who did not like it.

I have witnessed horrible things from both sides of the now split Loki fandom on social media. Harassment and even death threats towards the creators. Telling people who don’t like the Loki and Sylvie relationship that they need to drink bleach. Homophobic attacks. Gatekeeping.  

There’s constructive criticism and sharing your opinions, and then there is...this.

Both sides need to chill.

Anyway.

Even though Kate Herron has left the show, Michael Waldron is still the showrunner and as such I am not altogether optimistic for Season 2. I would like to see more emphasis on Loki himself for that season. Yes, it’s a novel thought, wanting a show that is called Loki to actually be about Loki, but here we are.

I would like to see actual character development in Loki rather than the old “true love transforms bad boy and conquers all” trope. There is a reason Disney has started to abandon that trope in their animated movies. They’ve been getting dragged about it for decades.

If Sylvie must return, there needs to be some actual consistency surrounding her character. The show needs to decide if she is a Loki or not and stick with whichever one they decide. And seriously, no more romance. Frankly, after what she pulled in Episode 6, I will be severely disappointed if the writers have Loki crawling back to her. That would make him pathetic, and Loki deserves better.

Really, Loki does not need a romance, period. He’s too emotionally immature, he has a lot of character growth to go through, and a romance would do nothing but be a distraction and an impediment to that growth. Anyone who got married too young can confirm that it is important to learn more about yourself and figure yourself out before you even think of getting involved with another person, who should not be your whole world. The Loki and Sylvie romance was reminding me of Classic Disney in another not-good way in that the two of them, especially on Loki’s side, were starting to revolve around one another and that does not make for a healthy relationship. Again, turning Loki into a Disney Prince (or, seeing as how he’s supposed to be genderfluid, Princess). Stop it.

Again, the romance was a smokescreen. It was a distraction from just how thin the plot was. Please, for the love of G-d, give more focus to the actual plot.

Do some research and talk to some psychologists for healthy ways Loki can “learn self-love" and develop as a character. If Ragnarok Loki can do it without relying on a romance with a variant with himself, then surely TVA Loki can pull it off.

Speaking of talking to people, listen to the concerns of the trans and genderfluid fans. Listen, talk to them, maybe get a couple in the writer’s room. CIS people should not write genderfluid people, and this season is a good example of why.

Please remember that Loki is not an idiot. Yes, he has pulled some fast ones and hasn’t been the greatest planner, but he is not downright stupid like he was in season 1.

And...really that’s all I have. As I have said, this thesis really wasn’t about making suggestions to the creators because I seriously doubt they will ever even see this. This was more less me screaming into the void, venting because I was that upset about what I saw as character assassination happening to one of my favorite characters. Keeping all of this in was proving to be bad for my blood pressure.  

I am attached to the character, have been for years. Loki is just one character in the MCU who I love, who I want to see done right. I had been looking forward to his solo series for a very long time, and the disappointment I felt was something that I just couldn’t keep in. I kept my mouth shut when they killed off Tony Stark for no reason other than that Ronnie Downey, Jr. didn't want to renew his contract. I didn’t say anything at the Russo Brothers’ “happy ending” for Steve Rogers, even though I feel it made no sense and is a massive plot hole.  

What they did to Loki, however...I couldn’t keep silent.

#loki series negativity #anti sylki

[katoodlez]

Alright here we go, Sam and Bucky show episode 2

This episode definitely had a different feel from all the other MCU content i’ve ever watched. To be honest I don’t think I can fully process or pick it apart until we’ve seen the entire show, but I’m excited to see how the story unfolds and how the character development happens as well. The show definitely feels more real than any other previous MCU content but it’s also incredibly nuanced. I’m not gonna go into an in-depth analysis though, so here’s just a list of the funny moments.

this goes without warning, but spoilers!!

1. Bucky’s stare lmao.... peak comedy device. He’s got a staring problem.

2. Sam and Bucky take turns picking on John Walker and that’s kinda hilarious. It very much gives off the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” vibes.

3. RIP Redwing. You were a real one. Bucky is very not sorry.

4. Bucky is cultured and read the Hobbit when it first came out (in 1937). This either makes him very cool, or just blatantly reveals that he is an old man.

5. the therapy scene LMAO. couples therapy for the best friendnemies

6. Bucky’s consistent insistence that wizards don’t exist is hilarious to me

7. Sam’s sarcasm in the entire episode -- quality writing

8. Sam telling Bucky not to hurt Redwing.... (rip redwing T _ T)

9. Bucky telling Sam to get out of his face and T’Challa telling Shuri “delete that footage” have incredibly similar energy

10. Torres: Are you sure you got this?

Bucky: y eAh (he means absolutely not)

11. Torres my beloved.... can we please have more Torres content thank you very much he is great : D

12. And lastly I know it’s not supposed to be funny, but Sam asking Bucky whether he’s just gonna go sit in a room with Zemo is hilarious for some reason. But aside from that, very excited to see Zemo

ok that is it for now... until next week 

#falcon and the winter soldier #bucky barnes #sam wilson #marvel #mcu #memes #funny moments #idk what these tags are anymore

[khaotunng]

One episode in tfatws and we already have more therapy than in the rest of the entire mcu how are we feeling

#finally #marvel #mcu #bucky barnes #sam wilson #tfatws #tony stark #steve rogers #fatws #tfatws spoilers #fatws spoilers

[metalgearkong]

The Falcon & The Winter Soldier - TV Review

5/1/21 ***spoilers***

Created by Malcomb Spellman, directed by Kari Skogland

Out of all the announced Disney+ MCU shows, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier seemed to be the most out of left field. Two sidekicks from the later 2 Captain America movies pair up and get their own show? What made their bormance so special? I mean, I like them well enough, but what is it that warrants a show? With all of it now said and done, this show is not what I expected, in a good way, but I can't say it lived up to its own potential. It brings up a lot of controversial subjects--stuff I really found interesting and progressive, but it doesn't fully commit. That being said, I'm glad it exists, and it takes many steps in the right direction.

6 months after Avengers Endgame, Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie) and Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) are returning to every day life, and the problems that come along with it. Bucky in particular is attending strict therapy to repair mental damage from decades of being Hydra's Winter Soldier. Sam is working with his sister and her boating shrimp business. As it turns out, the Avengers didn't technically receive a salary. Strange beings who they worked with, and i assumed Tony Stark or government funding supported the Avengers. Who built their base, made their suits, equipment, and how have the Avengers gotten by so far? The idea is brought up, but the show never comes around and fully explores this interesting point.

The Falcon the the Winter Soldier is only 6 episodes long, compared to WandaVision at 8. I feel like this show needed to be as longer for the numerous ideas it brings up and doesn't have time to flesh out. The main conflict of this series is the fight against the Flag Smashers. A revolutionary group, they want to return the world to what it was during the "blip." They want a worldwide policy of nations without borders. This is a really cool concept and something I could get behind, but yet again it's an interesting idea that is never sufficiently fleshed out. What (according to the Flash Smashers) was so great about the state of the world during the blip? What did nations do around the world that makes the Flag Smashers want to return to the way of life? Did people receive more finances and property? Did socialism thrive? None of this is ever expanded upon.

I also didn't care much for Karli Morgenthau, the leader of the Flag Smashers. Apparently their whole side story had to be changed last minute due to the covid-19 pandemic, and their inconsistent dialog and motivation shows this fact. I never bought actress Erin Kellyman as a revolutionary which thousands of people would follow and kill for, nor did I buy her as a juiced-up super soldier. The best character to come out of this show is John Walker as the government approved new Captain America. Wyatt Russell plays the character extremely well, and it's engaging to see a villain which so easily could have been one-dimensional develop into a more rounded person. He did however get a stupid small redemption in the final episode, but this "good guy" moment is wedged between him brutally killing an unarmed person in public, and joining what looks to be a "Dark Avengers" squad. For a show with progressive ideas, John Walker killing a civilian in a fit of rage should have been a point of no return.

My favorite aspect of The Falcon & the Winter Solider are the racial aspects it brings up. Finally we have a big mainstream company and mainstream show directly making light of the unfair bias and poorer treatment of minorities, especially black men. To see it happen even to an Avenger (Sam) was really cool, and fourth-wall breaking. Sam also discovers a man named Izayah who was a test subject, along with other black men, for the original super soldier serum in WWII. Izayah's mistreatment and his disenfranchised view of the United States is some of the best stuff in the entire show. Everything is all about living up to the legacy of Steve Rogers, but Izayah thinks no black man should even want to bear the stars and stripes. I hope this trend continues as it hangs a lampshade on something broad entertainment should address.

The action and cinematography also evoke my favorite corner of the MCU: everything directed by the Russo Brothers. The fight choreography is visceral without having to be flashy or larger than life (until the end). It was also great to see Sam Wilson reject the shield at the beginning of the show, thinking he would never live up to the mantle. His humility and growth throughout the show is also some of the best stuff to see. He truly is a man of the people, and the next best person besides Steve Rogers who truly can be and deserves to be the new Captain America. Zemo (Daniel Bruhl) also reemerges from Captain America: Civil War, but his character is totally retconned into being a Baron (comics accurate) with huge amounts of wealth and resources. I didn't like his character as much as I did in Civil War, as an everyday soldier tearing the Avengers apart is more compelling than a rich and powerful supervillain doing the same thing. He also had a dumb moment where he wore his purple ski mask for literally one action scene (less than a minute or two) and took it off never to be seen again.

Sharon Carter also makes an appearance, but I don't think the character, nor her twist being the Power Broker meant anything to me. It could be this show going a bit too far with its story threads. Carter has never been a charismatic character to me, and I'm wondering how they'll keep her interesting in the MCU going forward. She is the icing on the cake for too numerous and too weak of villains in this series. I also didn't think it was consistent of honorable of her character to go down a bad path especially knowing the lineage of Peggy Carter. I'm curious where this aspect of the story will go, but I'm not holding my breath. I wish this show cut out some of its threads in order to focus on some of its very good core ideas, especially only at 6 episodes.

The Falcon & The Winter Soldier has a lot of interesting ideas and brings up a lot of important ideas. I didn't expect this show to be critical of racial treatment, police brutality, and government overreach. To eventually see Sam evolve into the new Captain America and believing it down to the atom is the best thing to witness about this story. Bucky gets the short end of the stick, and while he does go through healing, I wish he had more great action or dialog scenes. The Falcon & the Winter soldier sets up future stuff, as the MCU does best. Sharon Carter might be some kind of bad guy going forward, the Dark Avengers seem to be forming, and Sam Wilson as Captain America may go on to lead a new generation of Avengers. The show is far from perfect, and sadly doesn't commit to some of its best ideas. I would watch another season, but hope it would have a slightly sharper script.

7/10

#the falcon and the winter soldier #winter soldier #bucky #sam wilson #captain america #MCU #mcu phase 4 #black falcon #anthony mackie #disney #=w=

[mattelektras]

*kneels before the altar, giving offerings to the Queen of Marvel Criticism* miss jessie...... i know youve seen endgame. please give us ur thoughts. ur wisdom

you really shouldn’t encourage me to be a bitch because i WILL do it and it WILL go to my head but here we go

first of all. if i may. sam wilson i would give my life for you…… the flying in front of the gold portal things looking like the angel that he is. giving sam the shield really was the only smart thing steve did this entire movie

speaking of. like i KNOW steve can weird mjolnir in the comics. but that steve is a very different person and shitting all over thor this entire movie and then giving steve his signature weapon is…. just…. insulting like….. it really diminishes who and what thor is to just have this dude pick up his weapon and just KNOW how to use it despite never having any training with anything even SLIGHTLY similar. I’m picky in comics about who can wield mjolnir and ever moreso in the mcu. just don’t like it ladies 

also steve conducting group therapy sessions??? this bitch is not qualified 

carol just wasn’t in the fucking movie lmao like…. they wrote out both of their main women and were like. oh thank god the men can SPEAK for once 

she just shows up when they need an easy out in the plot 

the vormir thing…. it was a very nat thing to do. like she would sacrifice herself like that and it did give me a glimpse of comic nat for the first time since cap 2. but she shouldn’t have HAD to, of all the people she shouldn’t have been the one because putting her against clint who’s more important because he has a family or whatever now, never mind the fact that he’s been beheading people here and there for years, when she has nothing and has tried so hard to be better is like… we’re really just gonna throw that all away. even the weak version of nat that mcc nat is didn’t deserve that. and her memorial was shit

i literally cannot even physically comprehend what they did to thor. all i have to say is he’s still a real one because he knows valkyrie’s made to be king of asgard

peter curling up on the ground when the missiles came down like…. god. honey sweetie baby im sorry i was ever mean about a third spiderman movie saga. i was right but still im sorry 

why was there sexy romance music playing when hulk met the ancient one like i straight up thought they were gonna fuck right there on the roof  and i cannot explain the emotion that gave me

hulk in general im fucking TERRIFIED…. THEY JUST MADE RUFFALO’S HEAD LIKE…… FUCKIN MASSIVE and why does he dress like an instagram influencer 

scott lang OUTSOLD. the only man with a brain int his movie

i dont like. CARE for mcu tony i think he’s over done but the mcu starting with ‘i am iron man’ and ending with it was a lot. i like comics tony a lot so it did give me a lil. emotion as it were. against my better judgement 

RESCUEEEEEEEE…. AND ONLY 10 YEARS TOO LATE 

tony’s kid was… adorable

it was the right time for tony to die, and the right death, i think. like i said i’ll be glad to not see rdj’s face anymore but it was a good death and rhodey and pepper being there and just kind of. KNOWING it was over for him was moving 

some of you dumbasses really thought the girl with the bow and arrow was gonna be kate… i love you but please use your brains this is the mcu

time travel just doesn’t work for me in movies that dont REVOLVE around time travel. it just feels like a special episode of a cartoon, and its a huge excuse to cop out . and u just end up with plotholes coming out of your eyeballs 

FUCK vision lives. he got the screen time he deserved 

valkyrie got her pegasus…….ethereal 

the women’s teamup at the end wasnt the moment it would have been if the mcu had given a fuck about their women from the start 

and again, wendy’s moment would’ve been a moment if she was actually wanda

STEVE YOU DUMBASS BITCH none of his ending meshes with ANYTHING else he’s done in the entire series. and as much as i dont give a fuck about peggy, it messes with her too like. she moved on she had a family, they both made peace with their ending. but everyone working on the movie obviously decided that the last 10 years isn’t really relevant and fuck sharon carter i suppose. let’s go w the most boring bitch alive 

“the lgbt character won’t be who you expect!!!!” do you think im a moron?????? as if i expected anything other than an unnamed character who just vaguely referenced dating a man. i will not be clowned this time nor ever again

was there….a little hint of carol/rhodey perhaps……. dont care for the ship in comics but i like mcu carol and god i want good things for rhodey

and speaking of. i would’ve preferred to have seen tony’s kid to have a moment with rhodey in the end instead of the other dude like. you’re telling me rhodey isn’t that kid’s godfather???? that pepper and rhodey aren’t gonna be the best platonic parenting duo since the dawn of time???

the thanos plot was dumb ass hell like. it relied ENTIRELY on him lucking out and finding nebula. that’s not a good big bad plot because he doesnt actually DO shit 

nebula is never gonna get the respect she deserves for what she did in this movie

tldr this all sounds very mean but it was definitely better than i thought it was gonna be. and better than the first half. were were some references back to the last 10 years that were really nice, and as much as i do criticise the mcu, its TEN years of my life so the callbacks were nice. they just… should’ve spent less time on them and more time on a plot and endings for their characters that make sense 

#endgame spoilers #anonymous #q & a

[amandajoyce118]

Agents of SHIELD S6E06 “Inescapable” Easter Eggs And References

In this week’s episode, Fitz and Simmons find themselves reunited, but sharing a mindspace while the Chronocoms want them to work out time travel. It leads to some unexpectedly therapeutic tracking through old memories.

As usual, there are spoilers. Again, SPOILERS if you haven’t yet watched the episode. You’ve been warned.

Spoilers.

Seriously.

Last warning.

The White Room

This is probably unintentional, and the white room they end up in is likely just meant to look like the blank slate it is, but… it made me think of another white room from Marvel Comics. Specifically, the White Hot Room. That’s the name of the Purgatory like space that the Phoenix Force inhabits pretty often. It’s also where Jean Grey recharges and accesses all of her memories when she and the Phoenix re-merge. It’s just a very striking similarity since Dark Phoenix was just in theaters (and the movie doesn’t use that comic book aspect at all).

Fitz’s Proposal

If Fitz’s proposal sounds familiar, that’s because we’ve heard it before. Last season, when he found Jemma, she couldn’t hear him, but he gave her nearly the exact same speech. (Edited to add: She also answered him the same way he answered her when she proposed last season. Nice. And she knew exactly how his speech would end, which means she must have asked him at some point last season how he proposed when she couldn’t hear him. Also, right before Fitz proposes, you’ll spot his bad hand twitching a bit, a nervous tick Iain has kept using since his season two injury. Love the character consistency.)

Alice In Wonderland

A hole appearing in the white room that Jemma escapes through and Fitz following her into her own childhood bedroom feels like a very intentional nod to going “down the rabbit holt” and Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

Jemma’s Room

I know I’m going to miss some things in Jemma’s room, but there is so much going on in here. Obviously, the book about her and Fitz, but there’s more. We see she’s a Jane Goodall fan because that photograph features prominently. There are stars on her ceiling, likely a nod to the times she spent studying the stars while recovering from surgery as a kid. She has so many samples on her shelves that I wish I could actually see what they all are. There’s a Winnie the Pooh which doubles as a nod to the Disney parent company and it being one of those very English animated properties (edited to add it is technically Canadian) for kids. Not to mention fellow MCU alum Hayley Atwell starred in Christopher Robin. Right next to Winnie is a Paddington Bear, which is a nice touch. Also, the butterfly painting on her wall that looks like it’s a little mixed media with butterfly pieces on the bottom? That was in Jemma’s Hydra apartment in season two. (I remember that odd detail because I used it in a fic.)

Edited to add that Jemma has a serious thing for butterflies that makes me curious. In addition to the butterfly print from season two, there are framed butterflies on shelves, and sample vials of other butterflies in her collection, and even butterflies on the tea set that she and Fitz have in the white room. I wonder if it’s because they were easy for her to study as a kid, or if she was fascinated by their transformation, or something else. Is that something else, perchance, something to do with Sarge’s Snowflake? She does like to go on about how people become beautiful butterflies after she stabs them. Is this just a weird bit of foreshadowing? Showing a connection between them? Is Snowflake another’s world’s version of Jemma? Oh, that would be weird. But food for thought.

Also edited to add: the book doesn’t just feature Fitz as the prince in the stars and Simmons as the princess looking for him. It also features Mack as a strong bear and Daisy as a quick rabbit, which are interesting choices. I’m assuming it’s them only because they’re the friends they call later in the episode. I mean, it could be that the animals are Daisy and Piper since they went to space together, but that would make Davis the monkey? lol

Cuttlefish

Okay, I’m editing this one in because it struck me, but I wasn’t sure I wanted to include it until I looked up the sea creature. So, I initially thought this was a nod to Jemma talking about fish in the pod at the bottom of the ocean in season one. And maybe it is. But, the cuttlefish is actually from the same taxonomic class as squids... like the symbol for Hydra. Nice nod either way.

Fitz’s Academy Dorm

Hey, Bonus mention of Anne Weaver! I enjoy her. The show should try to get her back for a cameo or two.

Okay, I’ll admit I was too focused on them processing the memory to focus on everything in Fitz’s room, but I did spot that massive Manchester banner. Just a reminder that’s Fitz’s team and Hunter is not a fan, as we learned last season. I might catch more on a rewatch, but feel free to tell me what I missed in both of their rooms.

Edited to add: Fitz is wearing the “same” dark blue hoodie that Jemma wears around the base in season three when she returns from Maveth. It’s not actually the same, but we’re clearly meant to think it’s the same one that fits her because it is far too small for Iain to be wearing it over two more layers of clothing. Also, even before Jemma mentions Fitz being manic, you can actually seen hand drawn monkeys on the wall like what Fitz did in the prison cell. Only a few before they start discussing his state of mind and then show Jemma looking at them on the wall. Also, the tie that Fitz wears when they meet Coulson is hanging on his coat rack.

Side note: I found it interesting, though I loathe the term, that Jemma says she friendzoned Fitz in that scene. That means that Jemma at the Academy must have had some inkling that Fitz had a crush on her. Or, this is just Jemma looking back on it with the benefit of over a decade of experience with Fitz and realizing it. Either way, it confirms that Fitz always thought she was the coolest, even while he was busy arguing with her.

Jemma Needs Therapy

I love that Jemma’s problems locked in a box are an amalgam of all her traumas. (Also, it’s funny to me that she has a little pink safe on her dresser that she could have locked her troubles away in, but instead, it’s the easy to open jewelry box.) This version of Jemma looks like a monster, but she’s wearing her shirt from Maveth and shreds of her Kree-slave attire, carrying the shiv from Maveth, has gold paint on her forehead from her time in the future. (Edited to add: she’s also covered in dirt with a hoarse voice, and I’ve noticed some people think that’s a nod to her emerging from a grave in the Framework, which is a good catch. I thought it was simply to make her look more like a monster, but it makes sense that it’s a nod to what she discovered in the Framework now that I’ve watched the episode again, and this “monster” only emerges after they’re faced with the Doctor.) She’s the embodiment of all the bad things Jemma has gone through, and Fitz is right that she’d be better off with therapy instead of keeping the English stiff upper lip.

Meeting Coulson

The scene where the two of them meet and get recruited by Coulson makes me wonder if it happened immediately before we meet them in the pilot episode. Why? Because they’re wearing their pilot episode clothes, though the hair, of course, is not exactly accurate. (Edited to add: Simmons telling Fitz, “yes, I’ve heard the stories, don’t be weird” is a nod to Coulson’s death being on record. They weren’t at a high enough clearance level to actual know he was alive.)

Edited to add: can we talk about how significant it is that Fitz “fights” the demon version of Jemma on the part of the quinjet where he first thought he was going to lose Jemma? It’s where he couldn’t get his parachute on in “FZZT” and Ward went to save her instead. I just found that location choice interesting. It’s not the bus from season one. It’s definitely an updated quinjet, probably because they don’t have the same exact set pieces anymore, but it looks strikingly similar. Demon-demon asking Fitz if his lungs or bones will go first? That’s a nod to the scene of she and Daisy torturing an alien this season when they were looking for Fitz. Clearly, though she saw the intimidation and torture as necessary, it left it’s mark on her.

Also, I didn’t mention in when I initially posted this, but I think them choosing Daisy and Mack to save them speaks more to how they view them than just what cast was available. We’ve seen Hunter literally pull Fitz out of prison, yet he chooses Mack to save him from Jemma. Why? I feel like he might trust Mack with Jemma’s trauma more than he trusts Hunter. Because Mack was there for most of it, and because Mack was there for his own recovery in season two before he became closer to Hunter. Likewise, Jemma calling Daisy and not May, or Elena? That’s because Daisy has had her back for a year in space. She’s seen Daisy literally take out an entire room of badguys while drugged up on puffies, so of course, Daisy is her first choice. Daisy has also already had the Doctor in her own head when Fitz had his psychotic break last season, so it’s a bit of symmetry there too.

Trapped In A Pod

Okay, so it’s sweet that they realize they don’t just have to rely on one another and call Daisy and Mack for backup against the dark parts of their minds. I enjoy that, as well as the symmetry of them both getting to see each other’s worst parts. What I really love here though is that this is the angrier version of the season one pod scene. The two of them run away from their troubles only to be trapped together in an enclosed space, yet again, to yell at one another about all the things they haven’t had the chance to argue about before. Watching the scene, I literally said that the only thing that would make it better would be if it was actually at the bottom of the ocean. Of course, they realized that and it filled with water. Of course. The arguing in the middle of the water, just as it did in season one, leads to their confessing their feelings. It’s a lovely, symmetrical, story of their relationship, this episode.

That Makeout

Leopold and Demon Jemma going at it while Fitz and Simmons argue? This just further proves that all that bantering in the early seasons was really foreplay, right?

That’s all I’ve got, for now. I’m sure I missed some things just because of the nature of the episode. It’s taking us on a walk through memories, some we’ve seen, so there are likely more that are harder to spot. Let me know what I missed!

#agents of shield #aos season 6 #aos spoilers #aos easter eggs #fitzsimmons