loki-agent-of-sassgard - Tumblr blog

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Tom Hiddleston:

Gif by @lokihiddleston

Some Fans:

The rest of us:

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Things I have seen Loki fandom wank about, regarding the series: Loki in brown costume, Loki being told he talks a lot, Loki being shown a large stack of papers full of his dialogue and it not being large enough, Loki being given less dialogue in tv spots, Loki sharing screen in tv spots, the existence of other actors, the existence of a plot.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Loki just invaded Earth and gave the middle finger to all of Thor's pleas to talk, to come home, to stop that insanity. And then Loki threw him out of a moving aircraft carrier, murdered Coulson, and eventually stabbed Thor, too, all while keeping Thor mostly in the dark about why he was doing any of it and who was behind the scenes.

Lots of humans died. Humans Thor had sword to protect. That is motivation enough for Thor to be pissed. And Loki still seemed utterly unrepentant for ANY of it, which to Thor is the most important thing right: admitting failures and trying to be better.

But Thor can't win, can he? Doesn't matter what he does or what Loki does. The narrative is always Poor Loki and Thor is a Poopy-Pants Meanie Weinie.

This is a Loki blog. But here we respect Thor for not being an idiot about things, such as the fact that Loki MIGHT be a horrible person. Thor isn't sure by this point in Dark World.

Thor is part of the reason for Loki's breakdown, sure, but...you're ignore every reason why Thor might not been feeling so hot about Loki by the time Dark World comes around.

its a vicious cycle

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

There's a dark underside to fighting against the antis, as pertains to Ragnarok, which is that sometimes you encounter people who have swung so far the other way that they seem equally blind to critical thought.

Case in point. Also, "blind" was a pun.

I don't usually link directly to posts, but this one needs to be read in order to understand why I'm pissed about it.

1. They've apparently forgotten about every disabled MCU character Pre-Ragnarok and want to make Thor the Patron Saint of the Disabled, or something. Meanwhile, Bucky, Rhodey, Nebula, Tony, and most of all, Strange, rightfully have a bone to pick with this. Also Clint, as I think we're finally going to see him with his hearing aids going forward.

2. Prosthetics are not bad things. I shouldn’t have to say that, but apparently I do. Thor being given a robot eye is not being ableist any more than Rhodey's mechanical legs, Clint's hearing aids, or Nebula's fucking entire body. The idea that Thor shouldn't use a prosthetic is fucking messed up, honestly. Is there a standard for how disabled you have to be, in order to be a Good Disabled Person™?

3. We're pro-Taika here. Obviously. But the depiction of Thor killing people on the Bifrost with one eye is not relatable for people who have one eye. I just want to make that clear. Taika didn't perform filmmaking magic. Thor losing an was a good choice narratively, but let's not kid ourselves by saying Taika gave us our first disabled superhero, let alone one who’s shown as being remotely disabled.  At heart, it’s just a change as to how Thor appears.  It’s a callback to mythology, his family, and the comic books waaaay before it’s about being disabled.

Not that you need to display disability a certain way, it's just that Thor's is the least realistic. And actually, the Russos’ choice to give Thor the robot eye was exactly what they should have done. A robot eye exists? Give that visually disabled person that robot eye! And if you think that was bad, then I’m going to ask you to stop taking all medications, stop wearing glasses, stop using knee braces, stop using your wheelchair, etc...

And while you’re at it, tell Luke Skywalker to take off his robot hand. But I digress.

Even if you feel like seeing Thor with one eye is good representation for the disabled community, that's a bad argument and it's part of the problem. Use of a prosthetic doesn't erase disability any more than use of medication removes you from the mental illness community. Advances in medicine and medical equipment are important and good. You don't have to use them, but it's messed up to FAULT OTHERS FOR USING THEM.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

There's a strong undercurrent of violence and polticial-esque radicalization with antis in the Loki fandom and someone needs to say it.

A lot of you don’t want Loki to be happy.  You want to see him straight up murder Thor and Odin and say fuck you while he spits on their graves.  And don’t pretend it’s not true.  We all see those posts.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

The next person who disparages Loki's butter knives is going to be forced to take him on in a knife fight.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

do you ever see a “hot take” and you’re like ohhhhhhhhhhhhh critical thinking is a learned skill and op has not put in the practice

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

I don't feel like getting into your whole manifesto on why Ragnarok sucks and no one with a brain should enjoy it, but I guess I'll link to it for the sake of reference.

You can dislike things.

But ^this^ reaction you posted about losing followers over it, that's disheartening. You insulted people who like the movie and then acted like a victim when you lost followers. People who hate Ragnarok clearly don't follow me and I don't feel the least bit slighted by it.

You earn followers of a like mind, you lose followers who don't want what you're tying to sell. If you want to post long commentary on controversial topics, then you need to expect people to react to that.

I think you know that, though. What you're really upset about is that fans of Ragnarok exist, and you want to write us off us as a group of dim-witted bros who get our jollies over things you don't think are funny. Unfortunately, that couldn't be further from the truth. I mean, we do think the movie is funny, but we're clearly, were a diverse, reasonably intelligent bunch. It comes down to taste. The only thing that's objective is that you just don't like the movie.

And that's fine.

But people who like it have a right to like it, and when you attack us, we're going to speak up.

Don't outright bash your followers and they won't stop following you. It's not complicated.

So being a « fan » for some people means saying yes to everything. Accept everything, never have another opinion. It means to love absolutely everything. Never being able to say that you didn't like this or that in a movie. Forced to be silent and especially never to be able to share if we don’t like this scene or that thing. Because if you do? « She dared to share this one her blog? Oh dear! What shame to you. I will be rude in anon and unfollow like if it was so serious. » Well no. Sorry.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Are people familiar with the idea that characters can be unreliable narrators?

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

It's not problematic to make gifsets of fav character but there is definietly some issue in the fandom that choose the line "there is no men like me" as some powerful line that defines Loki character.

No there isn’t.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Saw a post today by a possible Loki anti that was very good and whatnot, about how in Avengers the old man who stands up to Loki in Stuttgart is brave, he knows he’s going to die, etc etc Nazis, Hitler, but the OP’s thesis seemed to be that Loki fans are problematic and have been missing the point of this scene since 2012 because a lot of times we reblog gifsets that don’t include the old man. And presumably this transgression is because we’re blinded by how much we looooove Tom.

And it’s like. OP. Sometimes I reblog gifsets of my fave because he’s pretty and I love him, and I don’t need every gifset to be accompanied by an analysis of the scene and its heavy-handed allegory. I can be 99.9% distracted by how hot Loki is as he’s yelling at everyone to ‘kneel’ and still get hit over the head by the point of that scene.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Some people need to learn the difference between ‘bad writing’ and ‘I don’t like this because my favorite character died’.

Or ‘bad writing’ and just ‘writing’.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

I agree, well-mannered discussions are great!

I’ll be honest, I don’t actually disagree that Asgard probably has a more impressive library than Kamar-Taj or any of the Sancta. But at the end of the day, that’s still just an assumption I’m making, and the only concrete information we have about Asgard’s is, as I said, it’s got more than one librarian and an astronomy shelf (from Endgame, incidentally—I believe that’s the only time a library is mentioned). I mean, that describes the county library in my hometown of 3000 people. The point I was trying to make was not so much, ‘what you’re saying is unreasonable,’ but ‘this is not an evidence based argument.’

Re: when Loki uses daggers and when he uses a combo of daggers and magic, I mentioned the two instances in Thor 1 that you cite. I would definitely say that he uses the most magic in Avengers 1 (though I disagree on some of the moments you mention and would probably attribute them to the Mind Stone rather than Loki’s magic...there’s really no way to prove one way or the other). I want to address your point that he’s not using magic in Ragnarok and Infinity War. You specifically cite fights against, “Hela,strange, the Valkyrie and Thanos.”

Hela: During the battle on the Bifrost at the end, he crosses his daggers and shoots some kind of energy. Magic, presumably. We don’t see anyone else do this.

Strange: He uses magic to draw his daggers (this was to my earlier point that Loki often uses magic to get his hands on more daggers).

Valkyrie: I’m deeply puzzled by your inclusion of Valkyrie. Loki...kind of mind rapes her. This is also the first time we’ve seen him use this ability.

Thanos: Again, he uses magic to go for his dagger.

Your initial response was: “I can’t believe that he would go for a counter attack using daggers after being attacked with magic. All in all it reminds me heavily of how his resistance against Thanos was handled, which is more a ‘hurt durr- Loki’s signature move is dagger riiight 🤪’. And sorry - that’s nothing I can ever consider in character for him.” My intent was not to willfully twist anything; I was responding to what you yourself said. My apologies if I misread.

Some examples of Loki having an issue with control (prior to Ragnarok):

The entirety of Thor 1, tbh. That’s Loki’s character arc, losing control and losing his grip. That scene in the Observatory where he’s flipping out at Thor and crying is really the best example of Loki making poor decisions when he’s lost control.

Avengers 1 is tricky because we don’t really know what’s Loki, what’s the Other, and what’s Thanos, so I hesitate to use examples from it. I think, to be honest, that the Chessmaster reading of his character comes primarily from this movie, and it’s valid in this movie, but...like I said, we don’t really know who’s driving.

TDW: Telling Frigga she isn’t his mother. “Why don’t you take the stairs to the left.” Also, getting himself impaled by Kurse. They’re more subtle examples, but all lead to horrible outcomes and could have been averted by thinking things through further.

I’m not saying Loki never makes good decisions under pressure—I think he does, and there are also examples of that. But I think we’re also shown enough instances of Loki making terrible decisions when he’s emotional that it’s not a stretch to imagine him drawing knives on Strange when he “should” have gone for a magical attack.

But tbh, the reason I made this post was because it irritates me to see Strange get shit on by Loki stans who obviously haven’t seen Doctor Strange.

Can we stop with the whole “Strange humiliated Loki and never should have been able to because he just learned magic like a year ago”.

Because 1. It’s stupid, Loki is not immune to being surprised, and 2. Anyone who says this clearly didn’t see Doctor Strange and the part where he was trapped in a time loop fighting Dormammu for centuries.

Guys, I’m serious. Every time I see someone say ‘Strange only became a sorcerer like a yeeeeaaaar ago,’ I immediately disregard everything else being said, because they obviously didn’t watch the movie that contains the backstory for the character they’re complaining about.

Sure. Be pissed he humiliated Loki because you don’t like to see Loki humiliated. I don’t care. Even though Loki visiting Earth is akin to violating a restraining order and he got off damn easy. 30 minutes in a free fall, which clearly didn’t injure him, vs immediate incarceration and/or violent retribution? Actually, I guess I do care.

Strange temporarily subdued Loki, who for all he knows is on Earth to cause extreme trouble like he did the last time he was there, and calmly contacted his brother. He basically put him in timeout until he could figure out what was going on, instead of calling in anyone else to hurt and/or incapacitate Loki. And once he makes an agreement with Thor that all relevant Asgardians will GTFO once he helps them? He allows Loki to journey to Norway to take care of family business and leaves the matter alone.

Frankly, Strange is a whole lot kinder than he could have been, considering what Loki did.

Also, “I have been falling for thirty minutes!” is a damn funny line.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

First, your “second point” is nonsense. The library of Kamar-Taj is presented as exceptional. You have no proof that it’s lacking, it just suits your argument to say so. We’ve never even seen Asgard’s library. Here’s what we know about it: there are multiple librarians working there, and there’s an astronomy shelf.

And seriously, the quality [of University] libraries can vary” is not an argument. That’s like saying “Burgers can vary from one McDonald’s to the next, therefore, I cannot trust the steak at any restaurant.”

Also, to say that Asgard’s must be better because it’s Asgard’s, while Midgard’s library, which is located in a depressed East Asian area is actually...kinda cringy for racial reasons. I won’t go there (BTW, Strange isn’t Sorcerer Supreme in the MCU. He’s the Guardian of the New York Sanctum. Just want to make sure you knew that. This isn’t the comics).

But back to your first point. Your problem with Strange is actually...a problem...with the way Loki is written? I mean, this is a Loki blog, so that’ll be fun to address.

Loki’s signature move is daggers. Loki has been using daggers since the beginning. Attack on Jotuns? Daggers. Attack on Dark Elves? Daggers. Stabbing Thor? Guess what? Daggers. His magic has always been secondary in combat and its purpose is often to get his hands on more daggers. I don’t understand why the fandom’s hate for Loki’s stabby inclinations gets leveled almost entirely at Taika Waititi and not, you know, the people who established that Loki prefers to fight without magic, Kenneth Branagh and Joss Whedon.  >.>

I, too, think it would have been super cool to see Loki be a serious magic user in the MCU, but he never was. That doesn’t mean daggers are out of character. Have you seen what he can do with them? Furthermore, Tom Hiddleston is on record, multiple times, about Loki’s affinity for stabbing things, slicing jugulars, etc. At what point will people stop saying, “I refuse to believe Loki would use daggers?”

From the beginning, we’ve seen Loki not defaulting to magic, but physical violence. He uses magic once in the fight on Jotunheim. Once when he fights with Thor on the Bifrost. His fighting style has always been more physical and less magical. The reasons for that probably aren’t very interesting--it’s most likely because when Thor 1 was greenlit, the MCU was still an insane idea, and Thor 1 was always going to be a hard sell. That’s why the movie leans so hard into the fact that it’s not MAGIC on Asgard, just really advanced sCiEnCe. Loki’s magic is a victim of the timing of his introduction into the MCU (so is Wanda’s). And that’s a valid complaint to make about these movies, but it’s also hard to prove that it was the wrong thing for Feige to do. We don’t know that audiences would have accepted a more magical Asgard in 2011, and we never will. So the Loki we got in the MCU uses magic, but he uses physical weapons a lot more. 

As to whether or not daggers are always the wisest choice, the answer is probably not. But when Loki is upset, he makes poor decisions. Loki wants to be a Chessmaster, but he isn’t. It was stupid to pull knives on Strange, but it wasn’t out of character.

Loki comes up with schemes that blow up in his face because he becomes so emotionally charged. He loses his grip. His solution is to go right for something physical: his daggers. I could also point out that he’s shown repeated disdain for humans. He calls Strange a second-rate amateur, obviously not taking him seriously--and honestly, I don’t think that’s out of character for him based on what we’ve seen from him when humans have previously come up. He underestimated Strange.

I guess the calm and collected thing would be for him to not attack Strange when he comes out of that portal. But uh, have you watched these movies? I know fandom likes to think Loki is calm and collected, but...Loki has a real lack of control issue, and we’ve seen it repeatedly.

Can we stop with the whole “Strange humiliated Loki and never should have been able to because he just learned magic like a year ago”.

Because 1. It’s stupid, Loki is not immune to being surprised, and 2. Anyone who says this clearly didn’t see Doctor Strange and the part where he was trapped in a time loop fighting Dormammu for centuries.

Guys, I’m serious. Every time I see someone say ‘Strange only became a sorcerer like a yeeeeaaaar ago,’ I immediately disregard everything else being said, because they obviously didn’t watch the movie that contains the backstory for the character they’re complaining about.

Sure. Be pissed he humiliated Loki because you don’t like to see Loki humiliated. I don’t care. Even though Loki visiting Earth is akin to violating a restraining order and he got off damn easy. 30 minutes in a free fall, which clearly didn’t injure him, vs immediate incarceration and/or violent retribution? Actually, I guess I do care.

Strange temporarily subdued Loki, who for all he knows is on Earth to cause extreme trouble like he did the last time he was there, and calmly contacted his brother. He basically put him in timeout until he could figure out what was going on, instead of calling in anyone else to hurt and/or incapacitate Loki. And once he makes an agreement with Thor that all relevant Asgardians will GTFO once he helps them? He allows Loki to journey to Norway to take care of family business and leaves the matter alone.

Frankly, Strange is a whole lot kinder than he could have been, considering what Loki did.

Also, “I have been falling for thirty minutes!” is a damn funny line.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Can we stop with the whole “Strange humiliated Loki and never should have been able to because he just learned magic like a year ago”.

Because 1. It’s stupid, Loki is not immune to being surprised, and 2. Anyone who says this clearly didn’t see Doctor Strange and the part where he was trapped in a time loop fighting Dormammu for centuries.

Guys, I’m serious. Every time I see someone say ‘Strange only became a sorcerer like a yeeeeaaaar ago,’ I immediately disregard everything else being said, because they obviously didn’t watch the movie that contains the backstory for the character they’re complaining about.

Sure. Be pissed he humiliated Loki because you don’t like to see Loki humiliated. I don’t care. Even though Loki visiting Earth is akin to violating a restraining order and he got off damn easy. 30 minutes in a free fall, which clearly didn’t injure him, vs immediate incarceration and/or violent retribution? Actually, I guess I do care.

Strange temporarily subdued Loki, who for all he knows is on Earth to cause extreme trouble like he did the last time he was there, and calmly contacted his brother. He basically put him in timeout until he could figure out what was going on, instead of calling in anyone else to hurt and/or incapacitate Loki. And once he makes an agreement with Thor that all relevant Asgardians will GTFO once he helps them? He allows Loki to journey to Norway to take care of family business and leaves the matter alone.

Frankly, Strange is a whole lot kinder than he could have been, considering what Loki did.

Also, “I have been falling for thirty minutes!” is a damn funny line.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Ragnarok was about Thor growing up not to be fooled by Loki anymore but Loki doesn't have any growth. He just wanted to prove that he is not predictible and to play the hero. He didn't really care about Asgard or being better person.

Anon, have you seen Thor Ragnarok?

Seriously, I’m sure nothing I’m about to say will make a dent, but let’s talk specifically about why you’re wrong.

Ragnarok is a movie about families, about secrets and lies, about colonialism, and yes, about growing up. But Thor’s story is absolutely not about “growing up not to be fooled by Loki anymore.” That’s a puerile and uncritical reading of both of their individual arcs, as well as the arc they undergo together, as brothers.

What Thor learns is to not enable Loki anymore, and that’s a very different thing (and I’m sure I already have some people up-in-arms over suggesting that Loki shouldn’t be enabled). Loki and Thor are caught in a dysfunctional dynamic where Loki constantly wants Thor to prove his love but never believes it when Thor tries, while also outright rejecting Thor’s attempts. Yet, he seeks attention, positive or negative. More on Loki specifically in a bit.

Meanwhile, Thor has a savior complex with Loki; he wants to rescue him, to save him from himself. This arc extends throughout the entire Thor franchise. But the thing is, the only person who can save Loki is Loki. That is what the scene in the elevator, and then the hangar, is about.

It’s not about Thor rejecting Loki. It’s about Thor accepting that Loki is something he cannot control, which is integral to mending their relationship. And it’s not that Thor learns “not to be fooled by Loki anymore,” it’s that Thor learns he has to let Loki save himself. No one can fix Loki but Loki.  

Sidebar: let me stress, Loki absolutely needs some kind of saving. He’s at a low. He seems lazy and not himself; he’s probably bored and possibly depressed. Most importantly, he’s in denial. Thor spouts facts about what’s going on in the other realms and Loki doesn’t seem aware. And the idea that doing away with Odin and ruling Asgard is what Loki needs to be happy is a piss-poor read of Loki as a person. When Loki banishes Odin in Thor 2, he might have found temporary pleasure. But Tom Hiddleston is well on record about Loki’s love for his father. The revelation that Loki placed Odin in a comfortable nursing home shows that love, even if it’s complicated.

But let’s talk about how Loki fixes Loki, which is by taking his place beside Thor to save Asgard, as was his stated goal since Thor 1. He accomplishes this by initiating Ragnarok, so that Asgard can be reborn, which are again words directly out of Loki’s mouth. The reason why it’s so important that it’s Loki who starts Ragnarok is because it shows his acceptance of his odd role in the universe AND that his chaotic nature can be used to accomplish his goals and desires, both for himself and the people he cares about. His self-destructive behaviors are reborn into something that, while still as complicated as he is, are objectively good.

So when Loki cries out, “Your savior is here!” he means that in the most literal way possible.  How dare you even suggest it was performative! Do you remember what Thor sees when he arrives on Asgard at the beginning of Ragnarok? It’s a statue of Loki. This statue of Loki, to be exact:

During the play dramatizing Loki’s ‘death’ on Svartalfheim at the hands of the Dark Elves, Actor Thor (Luke Hemsworth) says, “You are Asgard’s savior.” So guess what? When Loki shows up on Asgard with The Statesman at the end of the movie, in the same exact pose, and says “Your savior is here!” -- this time, it’s real. That’s bookending, my friend.

But let’s address your idea that Loki “didn’t actually care about Asgard or being a better person,” because it is genuinely delusional. He brought The Statesman to Asgard, evacuated the planet, and then initiated Ragnarok at great personal risk. In what dimension do people do this and not mean it? His brother, the King of Asgard, had just given him leave to do whatever the hell he wanted. Loki had an army of disgruntled gladiators in the palm of his hand and Sakaar was in a state of unrest. It is blindingly obvious that Loki cared about Asgard. He always did. It’s absolute nonsense to say that he doesn’t when he has shown us over and over and over again that he does.

Boom. And when Loki flies The Commodore to Odin’s vault, he is fully prepared to do the craziest thing possible, at Thor’s request, because it’s the only way to save Asgard. There’s nothing forcing Loki to fly that little ship anywhere. And then he runs at full speed toward Surtur’s Crown, focused like we’ve never seen him focused before. He is only thinking about the good of Asgard and doing what is right.

Of course, he’s waylaid by the Tesseract, but that’s beside the point of what he’s accomplishing here.

At the end of the movie, during Thor’s coronation, we see Loki finally take his place at his brother’s side.

Oh wait! I know! It’s this scene!

Hey, guess what this scene echoes?

You know what’s cool about this, Anon? Loki is standing in the exact same place in both shots. But in Thor 1, he’s bitter and jealous; he’s already put his plan into action to ruin the coronation. He’s deeply unhappy and he makes no attempt to hide it.

Contrast that with Ragnarok. This is a Loki who is...well, probably not at peace with everything, because this is Loki we’re talking about, but more at peace than he’s ever been at any other time in his life. He willingly steps up to take his place at Thor’s side. That’s why we see everyone else gathered there already as Thor approaches the ‘throne’ -- because the default is that those people will stand by Thor. We expect them to. Loki? Well, Loki is an open question. But Loki walks in from off screen, actively taking his place. At the end of Ragnarok, both Thor and Loki step into roles that they’ve always been afraid of or unwilling to occupy.

TL;DR. In Ragnarok, Loki finally accomplishes the goals he set in Thor 1 and becomes a much healthier version of himself. And that, Anon, is what is known as a character arc.

Okay, but you know what? Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that Loki didn’t actually care about being a better person. Let’s say he really did just want to play the hero, and he didn’t care about Thor or Asgard.

Let me repeat what Loki did: he brought The Statesman back to Asgard, evacuated the planet, and then initiated Ragnarok at great personal risk. You can’t take that away from the character, even if you think his intentions weren’t pure. He did those things, and those things were good. Do you think the Asgardians cared whether Loki was just playing the hero or actually was a hero? Do you have an alternate take on what defines a hero? How would Loki have proved to you that, in his heart, he had changed? Must he be untainted and superhuman? That’s purity culture bullshit. Loki is conflicted and complicated and does the right thing anyway.

Because that’s what heroes do.

[loki-agent-of-sassgard]

Ragnarok was about Thor growing up not to be fooled by Loki anymore but Loki doesn't have any growth. He just wanted to prove that he is not predictible and to play the hero. He didn't really care about Asgard or being better person.

Anon, have you seen Thor Ragnarok?

Seriously, I’m sure nothing I’m about to say will make a dent, but let’s talk specifically about why you’re wrong.

Ragnarok is a movie about families, about secrets and lies, about colonialism, and yes, about growing up. But Thor’s story is absolutely not about “growing up not to be fooled by Loki anymore.” That’s a puerile and uncritical reading of both of their individual arcs, as well as the arc they undergo together, as brothers.

What Thor learns is to not enable Loki anymore, and that’s a very different thing (and I’m sure I already have some people up-in-arms over suggesting that Loki shouldn’t be enabled). Loki and Thor are caught in a dysfunctional dynamic where Loki constantly wants Thor to prove his love but never believes it when Thor tries, while also outright rejecting Thor’s attempts. Yet, he seeks attention, positive or negative. More on Loki specifically in a bit.

Meanwhile, Thor has a savior complex with Loki; he wants to rescue him, to save him from himself. This arc extends throughout the entire Thor franchise. But the thing is, the only person who can save Loki is Loki. That is what the scene in the elevator, and then the hangar, is about.

It’s not about Thor rejecting Loki. It’s about Thor accepting that Loki is something he cannot control, which is integral to mending their relationship. And it’s not that Thor learns “not to be fooled by Loki anymore,” it’s that Thor learns he has to let Loki save himself. No one can fix Loki but Loki.  

Sidebar: let me stress, Loki absolutely needs some kind of saving. He’s at a low. He seems lazy and not himself; he’s probably bored and possibly depressed. Most importantly, he’s in denial. Thor spouts facts about what’s going on in the other realms and Loki doesn’t seem aware. And the idea that doing away with Odin and ruling Asgard is what Loki needs to be happy is a piss-poor read of Loki as a person. When Loki banishes Odin in Thor 2, he might have found temporary pleasure. But Tom Hiddleston is well on record about Loki’s love for his father. The revelation that Loki placed Odin in a comfortable nursing home shows that love, even if it’s complicated.

But let’s talk about how Loki fixes Loki, which is by taking his place beside Thor to save Asgard, as was his stated goal since Thor 1. He accomplishes this by initiating Ragnarok, so that Asgard can be reborn, which are again words directly out of Loki’s mouth. The reason why it’s so important that it’s Loki who starts Ragnarok is because it shows his acceptance of his odd role in the universe AND that his chaotic nature can be used to accomplish his goals and desires, both for himself and the people he cares about. His self-destructive behaviors are reborn into something that, while still as complicated as he is, are objectively good.

So when Loki cries out, “Your savior is here!” he means that in the most literal way possible.  How dare you even suggest it was performative! Do you remember what Thor sees when he arrives on Asgard at the beginning of Ragnarok? It’s a statue of Loki. This statue of Loki, to be exact:

During the play dramatizing Loki’s ‘death’ on Svartalfheim at the hands of the Dark Elves, Actor Thor (Luke Hemsworth) says, “You are Asgard’s savior.” So guess what? When Loki shows up on Asgard with The Statesman at the end of the movie, in the same exact pose, and says “Your savior is here!” -- this time, it’s real. That’s bookending, my friend.

But let’s address your idea that Loki “didn’t actually care about Asgard or being a better person,” because it is genuinely delusional. He brought The Statesman to Asgard, evacuated the planet, and then initiated Ragnarok at great personal risk. In what dimension do people do this and not mean it? His brother, the King of Asgard, had just given him leave to do whatever the hell he wanted. Loki had an army of disgruntled gladiators in the palm of his hand and Sakaar was in a state of unrest. It is blindingly obvious that Loki cared about Asgard. He always did. It’s absolute nonsense to say that he doesn’t when he has shown us over and over and over again that he does.

Boom. And when Loki flies The Commodore to Odin’s vault, he is fully prepared to do the craziest thing possible, at Thor’s request, because it’s the only way to save Asgard. There’s nothing forcing Loki to fly that little ship anywhere. And then he runs at full speed toward Surtur’s Crown, focused like we’ve never seen him focused before. He is only thinking about the good of Asgard and doing what is right.

Of course, he’s waylaid by the Tesseract, but that’s beside the point of what he’s accomplishing here.

At the end of the movie, during Thor’s coronation, we see Loki finally take his place at his brother’s side.

Oh wait! I know! It’s this scene!

Hey, guess what this scene echoes?

You know what’s cool about this, Anon? Loki is standing in the exact same place in both shots. But in Thor 1, he’s bitter and jealous; he’s already put his plan into action to ruin the coronation. He’s deeply unhappy and he makes no attempt to hide it.

Contrast that with Ragnarok. This is a Loki who is...well, probably not at peace with everything, because this is Loki we’re talking about, but more at peace than he’s ever been at any other time in his life. He willingly steps up to take his place at Thor’s side. That’s why we see everyone else gathered there already as Thor approaches the ‘throne’ -- because the default is that those people will stand by Thor. We expect them to. Loki? Well, Loki is an open question. But Loki walks in from off screen, actively taking his place. At the end of Ragnarok, both Thor and Loki step into roles that they’ve always been afraid of or unwilling to occupy.

TL;DR. In Ragnarok, Loki finally accomplishes the goals he set in Thor 1 and becomes a much healthier version of himself. And that, Anon, is what is known as a character arc.

Okay, but you know what? Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that Loki didn’t actually care about being a better person. Let’s say he really did just want to play the hero, and he didn’t care about Thor or Asgard.

Let me repeat what Loki did: he brought The Statesman back to Asgard, evacuated the planet, and then initiated Ragnarok at great personal risk. You can’t take that away from the character, even if you think his intentions weren’t pure. He did those things, and those things were good. Do you think the Asgardians cared whether Loki was just playing the hero or actually was a hero? Do you have an alternate take on what defines a hero? How would Loki have proved to you that, in his heart, he had changed? Must he be untainted and superhuman? That’s purity culture bullshit. Loki is conflicted and complicated and does the right thing anyway.

Because that’s what heroes do.