#Gagnarok and Infinity War Loki

[blindtaleteller]

Just out of curiosity... Is it really in character of Loki to replace Odin with magic like he does at the end of TDW?.. A part of me feels like it is tainted with hasty writing (which fits the narrative regarding how this was a change mid-production). If Loki truly survived the attack by the Cursed, what seems most in character for him to do? Getting on the throne of Asgard doesn't seem that likely to me, to be honest..

This one is gonna be long I think, because asking that particular question, tells me you've missed a few things. Nothing wrong with that; it happens. (I do know a lot but even I forget to add or remind myself of certain bits too now and again: which is yet another reason why I do watch and re-watch the content over and again, and seek out creators and actors interviews from the era from varied angles.)

I wish the current creators paid a decent fraction as much attention mind you, but that' as whole other thing and annoyance.

Anyway! Here we go again~

It does make the most sense choice wise, actually; that Loki would take the throne in 2013: and it has nothing to do with wanting the throne itself as implied and said outright repeatedly by current creators and their "scripts."

While there are a LOT of reasons to do so with what's going on in the story both immediate in Thor the Dark World itself and otherwise? Most of them, and the reason why Loki absolutely would keep the throne for the next five years boils down to the same reason used to attempt to execute him on his return, and ultimately put him in the dungeon to end up as the major reason Asgard's people were spared a prolonged siege at a time when their defenses had been almost entirely decimated.

The ultimate answer boils down to the not-so-hidden Chekhov's Gun for the overall story of the first sequence/series of MCU films.

I say it that way in particular, because in this case.. they started setting up for it back in 2009-11 with Captain America the First Avenger and the first Thor movie as well. Iron Man 2 released in 2010, had some part setting up details for Avengers 2012 as well; though some of them are mostly less important in regards to this particular ask, for the era and subject we're talking about here.

They did this incredibly well though, when you look at the way the set up was constructed.

Basically, there are two layers of story being told in most Marvel Cinematic Universe Movies of the era; if you didn't notice.

1. Local Story, the story that wholly belongs to the title; era and or immediate characters.

2. Universal and or Overall Story belonging to the universe in which those local stories are taking place.

Remember this guy? I'm pretty sure you do but..

One of the things that people love to forget (or more often pass over as taken for granted) is that Thanos is the person who ultimately snatched Loki up, purely with the intent of getting another stone (Tesseract) into his hands. (Of course there was never any promise Loki would rule over 8 billion rather than 4 billion either, and well. That kind of action; taking half the population then rather than 2018: is established repeatedly as being very much in Thanos' character too.)

I say one of though, because the fact that the Mind Stone (Scepter) was in Thanos hands well before that was established in the very first scenes of Avengers 2012.. before they even put a single character on screen.

In a scene that, tells the viewer outright why Loki was the one chosen; and what they want. This scene is a lot more than just a foreword to catch up viewers who hadn't seen Captain America or Thor at the time. This is also the first not-so-subtle mention of their Universal Story Chekhov's Gun, Thanos.

To break it down for you real quick:

------pre-Universal story set up.

1 - (2010) Tony Stark creates a new-to-earth element (Badassium.. lol I didn't name it, they did) replacing the palladium in the reactor in his chest with this element. Black Widow (Natasha Romanov) is introduced.

----this sets up in minor ways for the Mind Stone: a more believable reason and mechanic for Stark being immune to the Scepter being used on him at the top of the tower at the beginning of the Battle for New York. (There are other mechanics like this set up in the previous IM movies as well: including his brief float in space otherwise ignoring physics of human body and suit versus a lack of atmosphere, gravity or air pressure. [IM1]) But it also introduces Nat and her position in SHIELD into the Universe, rather than just throwing her on screen in A1.

2 - (R May 2011)This film is the heavy lifter as far as Universal story goes. It doesn't just introduce one or two major characters in the Avengers; but THREE of next movie's three major, main characters and their place in the universe are introduced and built: As well as giving the first glimpses of the Universe at large.

There is a reason why Loki and especially Asgard where he is after Thor's banishment, has more screen time than Thor in the opening title film, and the Universal Story is that reason.

(This one is going to be among the largest, because it contains some of the intent behind the character as he is in the MCU.)

FEIGE: "The movie, very much, is an origin of Loki, almost as much as it is an origin of Thor. We had to ride that balance." BRANNAGH: " I think the connection, if there is one, is that the stakes are high. So, in something like Henry IV or Henry V, where you’re wondering if that young prince could be the king and whether he’s the right man for the job. That story arc of the flawed hero who must earn the right to be king is in our piece, but what’s key is the stakes. There, it’s Europe and England, and here, it’s the universe. When that family has problems, everybody else is affected. If Thor throws a fit and is yelling at his father and is banished, suddenly the worlds are unstable." I: Can you talk about casting Tom Hiddleston for Loki? BRANNAGH: "From the performance point of view, we needed somebody who was complex and could convey intelligence. There was a constant conversation between us all about whether it was a good thing to keep the question mark over the character of Loki throughout. Is he bad? Does he have a plan? Does he love his brother? Does he hate his brother? Does he hate his father? Is this happening before our very eyes? How does he truly react to the secrets and lies that emerge, in the course of the story? So, you needed someone who could be adept at putting on all those masks and making it seem seamless." [Link to the full Interview HERE.]

Granted Brannagh summarized Thor's part IN throwing that Universe into chaos more than a bit, but yeah. (his shit fit from a less personal view included breaking peace treaty with a no border crossing agreement between two entire worlds, threatening and then killing the residents in the process, and then throwing another fit in defense of that TO get banished: and furthering that later on as the source of that problem through the extra treason of ignoring his very and repeatedly stated light punishment for that first set of acts of treason: by attempting to return from that punishment against the order of not one but two kings [interim and prior] to have the Destroyer sent after him only then.)

As you can see through Brannagh's words in particular though; Thor as a movie (and Asgard in particular) was aimed as one of the major contributing factors and powers in the MCU Universe and Universal Story from concept one.

Asgard (and T1 as a result) as a power and society was set up and built as a major pivoting point and joint for the Universal Story, with all the power, knowledge, flaws, limitations societal and otherwise needed to forward that story.

Brannagh was not just and only aware of that and the scope to which a universal monarchy and having that monarchy including Thor and Loki as main characters would stretch: he and the creators of Thor and the Universe including Feige were VERY aware of it.

And it kept all the way through to IW and EndGame, and would have even if Loki had not kept the throne.. if at a much higher cost. (We'll get to that; though I'm betting with this taken into account you can figure out some of why.)

All that kept to one side, this film introduced Asgard's current ability as a technologically advanced Conquerer-type Imperialist society, rather than gods; but also and temporarily disabled the Bifrost as their most used and fastest known means to deliver larger numbers to Earth, at the time of the movie's release. It likewise released Loki for his role in the Avengers 2012 and in their Universe at large: and set up for Guardians of the Galaxy in subtler ways to start off the Other and Thanos as the ones conducting the Invasion and looking for the Infinity Stones.

Needless to say, juggling all that in one film before the Universal Story hit, made giving their other introduction and Universal story mechanic on the Earthen end a little hard to squeeze in; but they did manage to introduce both Hawkeye and Selvig in the same movie setting on top of that: and added the end credit scene to establish further connection during Thor's banishment: by further involving SHIELD in his and especially Mjolnir's arrival.

Like I said.. heavy lifter of a film. Brannagh did a beyond amazing job with everything he was made to juggle both in film and setting up for the next two: one of which was in production at the same time as the one he was chosen to direct.

3. (R July 2011 [1940s]) Coming out later that year, CA:tFA took the next (and the one at the time unknown previous) page that the end credit scene showed us in that set up, to establish how the cube and Stone got there, a feel for it's danger in the wrong hands and how it ended up on Earth still in 2012 at all: again tying to SHIELD as Earth's portion of that Universal Story, using Asgard's pivot point to advance the plot and add the final Avenger (which lol at the title 'The First Avenger' for that reason and others: someone had a giggle at the name I'm sure). The Tesseract first seen in the end credit scene of Thor; is properly introduced immediately, as A. having been in Asgard's hands before leaving it in the charge of humans, and B. Stolen by Schmidt who knows and tells us this as he's stealing it from it's guardians descendants (right out of their ancestor's grave and dead hands) for Nazi/Hydra gain. The Tesseract (along with Schmidt and Rogers) is lost somewhere over the Atlantic.

----this movie sets up quite a few more things, and uses that gap in time to do so without need for a whole other movie. Cap's presence in 2012. What's really fun and interesting though, is just how afr ahead this one was running it's projected Universal Story aim: even if only in The Tesseract being reclaimed by SHIELD and Hydra sometime between 1945 and 1970 just before Tony's birth in that same year of 1970 (remember, Hydra were unidentified as being in SHIELD all the way up to 2014.)

Hydra's existence, threat, and eventual reveal in CA:TWS resulting in the Mind Stone they stole* while within SHIELD after 2012 to only be recovered three years after that in 2015. Bucky Barnes was introduced in this first film; and while his character on it's own doesn't do a whole lot for the Universal story.. where and what organization he's found in that he resurfaces as forced a part of, does: as the Universal Story in CAtWS connects from CAtFA and Avengers, to GoTG; and leads straight to Ultron where it's finally recovered, and more importantly to revealing the Infinity Stones for what they are.. as well as telling the viewer outright that of the six stones as of Age of Ultron?

We have already seen four of those six stones on screen.. and, three of them have been in Loki's presence if not directly in his hands as of 2013 the year after 2012. (Tesseract twice, Scepter, and Ather: and in that chronological order.)

(*Side note: Errrr, is it stealing when Hydra were running SHIELD more than Fury at that stage after Howard Stark's death: and they just kinda handed it to Rumlow and Pierce without question for two years? idk, that's more than a little iffy in a lot of ways lol!)

Anyway, again that pivoting point is straight-away Asgard, and Odin in particular. Though they make when it arrived on Earth ambiguous in CA:TFA, the Other's dialogue from that opening Avengers 2012 scene mentioned way up there at the top? Tells us outright that the Tesseract was left there AFTER the war with Jotunheim.

The line among the few I'm talking about in particular is:

" The Tesseract has awakened. [...] But our ally [Loki] knows it's workings as they never will. " - The Other, Avengers 2012, Opening Scene

(Another set of side notes: the inflection and especially emphasis being where it is in that dialogue was pretty interesting and a bit odd back then, prior to Thanos being properly unveiled as the Other's keeper two years later. Right away that opener tells you outright what they want from Earth at that moment[tesseract & the stones], the fact that the one speaking isn't in charge either [Thanos being behind the Other and Chitauri], that they are not the only army available to them [he says our Chitauri, not our army or armies: see Ronan the Accuser] and that they're willing to go war and kill on an interstellar level to get it [self explanatory].)

(There's also how Schmidt disappears as shown in this film. Reminder: while we generally know that Asgard put the Tesseract on Earth sometime during Loki & Thor's adult lifetime, we don't know when Asgard got it. BUT. The visuals alone at the end of CAtFA have some pretty big implications in that direction. More so as TDW shows us that there's a certain technology in play as far back as Bor's time. Here's a gif.. Look kinda familiar, Thor fans..?)

Here's one I've shared before, from TDW itself to visually remind us where we've seen that kind of things repeatedly:

(Yep. That's the Bifrost being used 5,000 years ago to bring in Bor's army and steal the Aether, y'all. It also shows us something else: that the Bifrost can be held in long spurts without destroying the planet it's pointed at becoming an immediate thing. Combine this with Loki's knowledge and hm... that raises some other interesting facts and extra questions about the Bifrost scene at the end of Thor 2011 too, doesn't it.)

Okay so! Some who see this might ask 'Why is all that important?'

Welp.. the answer is in the question at the very top of this ask.

Asking about Loki, and his taking Asgard's throne at the end of Thor the Dark World...

The answers are yes, especially because motivation, all that backstory (both directly on screen and what was established and cemented as canon even off it for years by the creators, for that story to work [yes click that link if you haven't seen the breakdown of the year between Thor 2011 and Avengers 2012],) and more pointedly the fact that Loki by that point after the end of The Dark World: not only knows someone is pursuing the Infinity Stones, and knows very well how the Tesseract in Asgard's vault at this stage would help Thanos collect the rest.. but!

Loki has also up close and personal just been introduced to a third, formerly lost/hidden Infinity Stone being revealed and claimed in a very loud, very public way, by a just as universally known power he himself has intimate knowledge of... Asgard [if through Jane/Earth: and gawds but Bor was just as bad about hiding vital and fatal info as Odin turned out to be, sheesh.]

And here's the extra addition to that motivation to stay and take that throne in a way that also knocks out all threat FROM Asgard and it's allies: the person who tortured him and is seeking those stones has already threatened his life more than once in pursuit of them, and promised to hunt him down if he didn't get what he wanted then in 2012.

(If you missed it by the way? The dialogue, inflection and expressions there both show and tell us right away that they don't trust him NOT to keep the Tesseract from them: even if Loki doesn't fail in 2012. There's no reason to use up the extra airtime, or hit him with pain immediately after, to triple down on it otherwise. The Other, and Thanos by extension; do not trust their hold on Loki: or that he will give them what they want in other words. They don't trust him to succeed [purposely or not] and they don't trust him not to gank both Stones completely out of their already distant reach. (Which and lol he absolutely does manage to do anyway, by putting up neon info signs, really gone-ham public and personal displays, riling the trashed initiative team up left and right, leaving Barton behind on purpose knowing he was coming, and definitely missing the slant of a sloped sky scraper AND the landing pad loop when he tosses Stark into account? It was brilliantly done as was and without that examination, but when you take all that into account too.. oof..! The higher probability that the plan was internally wrecked by the underlying knife of absolute spite for his torturers this character likely pulled off; was just plain beautiful, and clean AF. Just sayin'.)

But and no, Thanos didn't get what he wanted in gambling even the one stone he did have in 2012 in order to try and pick up that second stone.

Obviously.

So they (and we) had more than enough of the potential motivation put down both on screen and off it, over the course of four years (including IM2 production preparing for it in that foundation) but is that still enough to take the risk, and go for the throne?

( ⬆️ Loki's appearance on arrival in Avengers 2012 after his time with Thanos as originally intended; prior to toning it down in order to fit the PG-13 rating the studios were aiming for to increase audience.)

YES, it was.

Even if only temporarily at first, taking Odin off his throne insures Loki's freedom from pursuit on Asgard's end: as he is now king of those pursuers, and a great deal more overall autonomy even outside of Asgard.

This puts him in direct control of the King's Vault, in which the Tesseract [possible means of escape, while within the reach of that greater tech level etc] is being held: and which again.. Thanos [again threatened & tortured him] still wants, and he knows this.

(⬆️ On-screen Example 1 of what it was like even to be claimed as family, by Thanos. Loki was not, family.)

On top of that, in the long term; his position as King allows him to have a broader sight that running or hiding would not: thanks to Asgard's position as a Known-Universe-sized Imperial Protectorate encompassing multiple Worlds and or Galaxies .. including Earth where the Mind Stone (and Time) is, Xandar (Power shows up just a little under a single year later during his reign,) the Kree (same.) And a much greater ability to prepare (keeping those stones as separate as possible, as he does as the King on the throne who sends Reality to the Collector) and see Thanos coming when he does as a result.

Ultimately, even if temporarily: taking the throne at this stage and in this situation is absolutely within his character, even not wanting it. The massive tactical and personal advantages with Thanos alone, which that position with his knowledge; would provide him with a great deal of capability and reach for a very minimal amount of effort, and especially lives and time lost going the other route..? Were not only on display for two years worth of films to call on, but are pretty hard to excuse passing on in his situation at that time, for any reason.

(⬆️ On-screen Example 2)

There are and were other routes available yes: quite a few of them being he was and likely still is a hero everywhere BUT Earth*. But each and every one of them was that much more dangerous, and lacking in protection both for himself personally and for anything left of what he might have wanted to save of any of those also involved: including Asgard.

(*And yes some of those civilizations might maybe question him and that bad guy status a little: but let's be honest. Confronted with the facts of how all that and Thor's mess ups with Jotunheim actually went down, which Loki also knows about both first hand and in depth, and could easily call out just as publicly [and has in some of my fics]... it's not incredibly likely other societies and especially their leaders responsible for their lives, would choose to indulge Asgard's pride and arrogance at the risk of something like Thanos being allowed to continue to run loose after at least decades of halving populations like Gamora's, Drax's through Ronan, and possibly Nebula's [unconfirmed]. There would be a process to that too though; and time spent correcting all the messes that would cause for him to clean up in order to move forward with fewer obstacles as a result, possibly years if not centuries depending on location and how little they know.)

Taking Asgard's throne (even temporarily) while the majority of big players were either dead at that point[Frigga], weakened [Odin was putting Thor up for king in T1 to take his place & putting off Odinsleep at least 2 years prior to TDW] or occupied/distracted with the final death throes of the Dark Elves [Thor, pretty much everyone else] was the cleanest and safest way to ensure his life, his safety, and his freedom.

Even if, only short term.

Add on the other bonuses being in that seat "wearing the old goat's face" (yeah I borrowed that line from GROUNDED's Tony muse) and well.. there are too many more reasons to do it than not.

The other option has him either trying to escape Darkalfheim to a planet NOT Earth or Asgard to keep from being noted or picked up, before he's found first and knowing Asgard is and has been pursuing him (and Thor) since Thor broke him out of the dungeon: or trying to escape Asgard itself: with very little influence or power to do anything about both the person who tortured him coming after him as promised.. OR Asgard coming after him.

Because there is another thing that would have come out, with Odin still on the throne: is the fact that the body there [if he used a decoy, like one of the elves corpses left behind, or even the guard sent] was not his. Which would have led to immediate search and pursuit, and likely Thor being part of it after dealing with Malekith.

In these scenarios, Loki would have to pursue a counter to not only Asgard itself or Earth's established [and re-established through Jane's reaction] perceptions of him; but also Asgard's political reach as well in order to maintain his freedom, and actually start to counter Thanos before the slurpee stain could reach either, and potentially reclaim if not claim the stones: because they WOULD become an obstacle.. if not because of Odin and Thor [both of whose positions are made blatantly and glaringly clear where Loki is concerned in that same film, repeatedly and reflected on top of that in the entire scene with Thor's friends threatening him, as well as Frigga's own gaslighting scenes prior to her death as the Queen who should have taken her throne in T1 and in the dungeon in TDW.] then definitely because of the Other and Thanos, both of whom were very much alive and still running around the outer edges of the Galaxy until the Other was killed by Ronan in 2014.

Whether he's solely protecting himself, or looking to set up revenge, Loki, Thor, and Asgard's Local story in the MCU was designed to be part of if not heavily intertwined with the Universal Story before we saw any of them on our screens. And, if you're picking up a crafting story any time after 2011 in canon in that Universe.. that's gonna, and should be a thing.

Sad (and more than a little pitiful) that current creators ignore and mock all that and more, along with the efforts of over a decade of that work and hundreds of creators before them, especially in what they're passing for Thor since Gagnarok, or calling the "Loki" series (aka Bob: The Accountant/The Not-Enchantress Show) today*.. but I suppose that's what you get when you pay a bunch of clueless and Odin/Thor-level-arrogant cartoon creators for a twice rejected, unfinished script as the knock-off and fill in for crafting the next part of that story: and then hire their friends to do the next part even worse than the first?

(*Just sayin'. lol! Also yes those are both separate links to just a few examples of what's been going wrong since.)

So.. TLDR...

Yes, it's actually very in-character for Loki to have taken the throne; as a proven and intentionally crafted intelligent and tactically-minded character,* who was raised knowing Asgard's reach and power when a King who uses it properly is seated in that throne.

(*Regardless of what the series tries to tell you to mock viewers otherwise.. those scenes stating otherwise about Loki's character in S1 and now in S2 still makes me laugh my ass off at the stupidity and ignorance on display in this regard especially: as they tell you outright that absolutely no one who might have cared on the BTS team watched an ounce of the Avengers movie they want you believe the character came directly from, any of Thor 2011 before it, and definitely not TDW or Guardians to guess never mind know even remotely accurately as to the TITLE CHARACTER's characterization or motivations, of their own series; to get it THAT wrong on purpose... to the extent that, they have to put those kinds of words in his and other characters' mouths through the "scripts" they wrote and put on screen.)

I do however and as an addition: think Loki probably hated it from day to day.

After all, everything he did to stop if not pause Thanos and buy time; was done so with Odin's face.. and as a result was credited to Odin, who reminder.. by the time GotG and then Ragnarok ended, we knew was aware of Thanos at the very least (if not through Asgard then through other huge powers in the universe like Xandar and the Kree [Ronan was killing on Thanos behalf, Gamora's planet was halved decades prior]) and sat on his hands rather than face the largest army in the known universe, as it's proclaimed protector.

The leader for which being let run loose like that [Thanos].. was able to snatch Loki up, and the New York Invasion to happen as a result of Odin and Asgard's complacency.

Loki would have been stuck with the prospect of revealing himself and slowing down his potential progress and preparation (including restoring Asgard and it's defenses around the Tesseract in it's vault) over the course of those five years, being pursued for likely execution or maybe the rest of those 3,500 years of solitary confinement Frigga had to beg for as a sitting duck in a literal gilded cage again, running and attempting to keep his autonomy while doing all of that anyway, or ... just taking the throne and keeping his face hidden in order to avoid almost all of any of that and the many variations possible there that would have wasted months if not years of very precious time.

Ultimately, avoiding these things would have cost him in another way too, if he did manage and he knew that; because and again, Loki knew Thanos' game and purpose much earlier than we the viewers did. Sitting aside and hiding was not going to exclude him from the gamble of the snap even if Thanos did not find him, and took the stones without his interference.

Without his interference (and especially after Hydra stealing it in the 40's, and Thanos' first attempt to take the Tesseract from Earth as one very near example of why not to: especially from the outside looking in at that) it remains very probable that Odin would not have moved the Aether at all; as Loki did, wearing his face. Which means that, regardless of whether or not he returned for Ragnarok (which was established even in it's own plot-hole ridden mess of a story) as happening anyway: Thanos still would have collected Space and Reality after Power.. and he would have been able to do so far more quickly with them both in one place.. whether that place was floating space with Loki not there to collect either, or in their hands after the fact because he did think not to leave them in the open and undefended.

There are some ways around this (I've done some and planned out more,) but they're very tricky to do believably: and they still take time, allies, and correcting at least some things (especially perceptions and the break in trust worsened majorly by Odin and Thor) to manage. Sometimes a LOT of all of the above.

What's more, when taking him out into the open after the part he played in saving not only Jane, but also Asgard from Odin's rage filled dumb in TDW?

It's pretty likely that revealing himself on the throne and explaining this shit would have wasted even more time in various ways. But the very first and most obvious thing to become a problem in the realm of big-picture no-nos he definitely would have been aware of is this:

Asgard as a whole at that point and likely after having the story confirmed by Thor, would likely fall into a state of even more chaos in civil war if not a war of succession afterwards: further screwing over their ability to recover their defensive capabilities due to fighting themselves.

Other societies becoming aware could spark the same reaction, if a little later and cause Asgard's reputation, standing and overall influence to crumble as the facts came out. While some of these are avoidable or made less in certain situations: the fact remains that is what Odin set himself and Asgard up for by sitting to the side rather than doing everything in his power as King of an advanced space-faring society in contact with numerous others capable of moving them even without the Bifrost in effect.

It's very likely that, some of those external (and maybe some internal like Vanaheim) would use the very good examples of Odin and Thor's incompetence when dealing with things like Jotunheim (oh wow lets not get into that long list of treason and kid-glove handling of prince raised as genocidal traitor yet again), and Vanaheim (Asgardian colony with no Asgardian defense cannons or ships ..hm that reeks of some serious issues and bigotry too: especially seen in the very same film as those cannons, AND the fact they could transport whole armies via Bifrost 5,000 years prior?) alone, as a springboard to either GTFO Odin's alliance party, or support the idea of Loki being crowned instead of Thor.. if not both.

Anyway. This was really long and I have pulled this whole thing apart so many times in so many different ways that I could definitely keep going.. but I think that's a good enough view of the whys it's very much in character.. and some of what likely would have happened if he hadn't. And yes that emphasis in bold is very much needed.

There are other factors to take into account alongside of all this, including (aka not only) the fact his actual species (yep, don't forget: he's not Asgardian either) is both known at this point, and absolutely despised by Asgardians in particular on top of all that. And, at least some of the generation that hates his kind most --Odin and Frigga's-- are still around to keep carrying that on and attempt to pass it to their kids of the same generation. A thing we know they did already, through the dialogue, responses and and actions of every single member of the Royal family, including Loki's, starting with the very first film.

Remember.. this was the entire reason Thor thought it was completely okay to rack up multiple charges of treason, trespass on a completely different world he was forbidden by both sides from even setting foot on, and then insulting and killing them on the home planet he invaded, in the first place...

..and that fact it was still present, and was in action, was ultimately the root of the reasoning for that banishment.

Incidentally, and as final set of side notes?

This another example of why world building and sticking to the rules of that world/universe as established is necessary, and only serves to make the world and universe the characters are supposed be part of that much stronger and more interesting when done correctly.

Limitations (physical, social, psychological and more) exist in story and in those universes not just as near-laws-of-physics, but sometimes as an obstacle themselves to overcome, or more importantly and most often forgotten?

To work with, rather than around or over; in order to actually accomplish something, or at least give the sense of that accomplishment.

This is at the heart of what it means for a character to earn what they're given and show that, rather than simply getting it for free.

Ultimately I see that choice as Loki exchanging his name and identity, along with recognition for having put Thanos off of killing half the universe with him in it for five years; for the ability to better and more quickly protect himself and the things around him from those threats, not only from Thanos.. but also those threats posed and put into word by Odin, Thor, Sif, and the Yes-men Three.

And he was only able to to that without interruption, because he did make that sacrifice in hand for five solid years by taking Odin's throne and face.

It does fit that Loki absolutely did and as Tom Hiddleston and creators have said: at least try let go of Asgard, Thor, Odin and the rest when he let go at the end of Thor 2011...

..However. It's also very clear even if he hadn't; that Thanos' actions and Odin's and Asgard's inaction, ended up forcing him right back in front of them, whether his remaining anger re-igniited by the Scepter during that missing year had been bolstered as it was, played the part it did on screen or not.

All that said.. it was quite a long way away from hasty or lazy writing. If anything, that would have been true for going through with Loki's death at the end of TDW instead: as the next set in line would have been entirely excused from putting him or any of that story into focus on screen at all, even in what little they did pay attention to it during and after Gagnarok.

The TDW creators simply chose the most obvious path the previous creators had already crafted in their foundations, and laid down the path for them to take in crafting the next with TDW to set up for hte next even after it.

Sucks that it took getting that big an audience reaction in that direction to do so and not be that lazy about it.. but it is what it is.

-

Post-Script and For faster reference and in order from Captain America 2011 on, Loki did/was subject to, the following:

[Pre-1940s: unknown era] Had enough definitive exposure to the Tesseract as prince of Asgard, to be referred to as the equivalent of an expert on the Tesseract. (Given his discovery of the doorways between worlds as put on display in TDW, this makes even more sense than it already did in 2012.)

[2011]Was tortured and influenced both emotionally and mentally by the Other and gifted the Scepter with the intent of further riling and amplifying [that's what fueling means in this instance] his anger towards Thor and Earth's part in helping to release him from his banishment: in return, he's offered rule over Earth and more importantly his freedom from all of the above in that rule after.

[2012] The Mind Stone is used long distance in conjunction with the Tesseract to watch and torture him at a distance on screen as well. It's only functions used on screen otherwise is as a projectile weapon and device to spread that mind control to serve the deal made.

[2013]Helped save Jane & the Reality Stone.

[2013]Helped save an otherwise defenseless Asgard from another siege & Odin's stated intent to die to the last man, woman and child in that fight: at the same time.

[2013]Killed Algrim/Kurse in defense of Thor and Jane; an individual who was so powerful as enhanced by the Reality Stone: that he batted Mjolnir aside like it was a nerf toy.

[2013]Sent the Reality Stone to the Collector, separating what stones he had.

[2013]Kept the Space Stone in it's place in the vault ..and it stayed there for the 5 years of his rule.

[2014] Between Asgard proper as a political and protective power, and his connections to the Collector himself: clearly knew about and did not claim the Power stone, or put it in Asgard's vault either, after it's use there.

[2015] The Mind Stone being removed from Earth, was stated as being Thor's purpose, as directed by the King [Loki.] No intended ending destination was given.

[2017-2018]Rebuilt Asgard, it's homes and it's defenses: well enough that even in and by Gagnarok they were building theaters and statues, and enjoying plays.

( ⬆️ Yeah I wasn't kidding: that's the Kurse nerf-toy mjolnir sequence in TDW, if you missed it.)

[mentallydatingahotcelebrity]

Rreading posts today from various people I learned that Taika Waititi, director of Ragnarok, has no idea why Loki is a tragic character. Loki’s story alone and from his POV is, actually, a tragedy. But to someone who doesn’t really understand the definition of what makes a character, setting, novel, or film a “tragedy” the idea that Loki is a tragic character sounds utterly ridiculous and overdramatic.

So here’s a definition of the tragic character/a tragedy as written by E. B. Greenwood in 1994/95 for the introduction to Anna Karenina for anyone curious as to WHY I call Loki a “tragic character”. I’ve changed some words so that it fits my topic.

“What do I mean by saying that it is, in substance, a tragedy? [...] It has the substance of tragedy in that in it, as Aristotle required, a person neither of superlative goodness nor repellant wickedness (i.e. a character whom we can sympathise with, even love) makes a mistaken choice or set of choices. Aristotle called this hamartia. When this choice leads to a situation from which there is no way out but suffering, we have tragedy. Both Greek and Shakespearean tragedy involve poetic stylisation and elevation and actions out of the ordinary. Loki’s tragedy comes much closer to the type of tragedy described by Tolstoy’s favorite philosopher Schopenhauer in Section 51 of The World as Will and Representation:

Finally, the misfortune can be brought about also by the mere attitude of the persons to one another through their relations. Thus there is no need either of a colossal error, or of an unheard-of accident, or even of a character reaching the bounds of human possibility in wickedness, but characters as they usually are in a moral regard in circumstances that frequently occur, are so situated with regard to one another that their position forces them, knowingly and with their eyes open, to do one another the greatest injury, without any of them being entirely in the wrong. This last kind of tragedy seems to me to be far preferably to the other two; for it shows us the greatest misfortune not as an exception, not as something brought about by rare circumstances or by monstrous characters, but as something that arises easily and spontaneously out of the actions and characters of men as something almost essential to them, and in this way is brought terribly near to us. . . We see the greatest suffering brought about by entanglements whose essence could be assumed even by our own fate, and by actions that perhaps even we might be capable of committing, and so we cannot complain of injustice. Then, shuddering, we feel ourselves already in the midst of hell. In this last kind of tragedy the working out is of the greatest difficulty; for the greatest effect has to be produced in it with the least use of means and occasions for movement, merely by their position and distribution.

When I read all of the above upon purchasing Anna Karenina, I was quite surprised at how fitting it was of Loki’s role and an explanation of why he is a tragic character. Because, in a most ironic turn of events, the god who declares ‘there are no men like him’ is, in fact, utterly and completely like the men he seeks to dominate. He’s relatable, identifiable, lovable; because he’s flawed, and hurting, and desirous of the same emotions all human beings want:

Recognition, adoration, affection, support, protection, love, companionship. 

The reason why I included that excerpt from Schopenhauer is because I think that fits Loki too-- in his universe, the things that happened to him frequently occurred, but they built and built until he snapped beneath the weight of them; something everyone who came to adore Loki recognized and found utterly relatable, to the point of being distressed for Loki. 

He’s not a villain, he never was, he’s just a tragic character. 

And the problem with this is that tragic characters are not absolutely good nor utterly evil, they’re a bit of both and completely relatable from the audience’s point of view. That’s the reason why Marvel couldn’t figure out how to adapt him or develop him, because a tragic character is, always, fated to die.

Hamlet, Anna Karenina, Romeo, Juliet, Loki-- their roles are to bring to the foreground that the typical nature of humans is to destroy themselves for a motive they think in their own minds will help them while meanwhile the reality of it is that guides them toward their eventual end. We are all heroes in our own minds where we tell ourselves how much good we’re doing; but our actions make us deplorable to the people looking on. The Tragic Character role in all forms of writing is to wake up other characters to the realization that they need to change how they act if they want to prevent the same end. 

[Which is what happened in the end of Thor. Thor realized that anger can lead to self-destruction, and Odin learned that not mentioning his love for his sons can lead to their downfall]

The problem is that in order to continue to make Thor and Loki interesting, new and unique storylines would have to be created-- risk would have to be made. Loki would have to keep on being a tragic character and he’d have to die. Which he was going to do in The Dark World. But with Marvel, as with most things in this day and age, Loki’s name goes synonymously with money. He’d been making them money, he generated interest. Look how massive Ragnarok’s box office income [or whatever that’s called?] was on day one alone. 

Yeah, sure, there were people there because their interested had been piqued by the [bad] trailers for the film, and they also came because a large majority of people love Thor-- but who hadn’t been seen living, breathing and walking around for 4 years?

Loki.

People wanted to know what happened to Loki more than Thor-- sucks for Waititi and Hemsworth, but it’s the truth. We’ve been seeing Thor in basically every Avengers film except Captain America: Civil War. We know that he’s alive, how he’s doing, how things are going for him. But no one knew about Loki. Because Loki is the tragic character, the human one in a sea of unhuman, “good” characters (Thor, Odin, Frigga, Sif, Volstagg, Hogun, Fandral, Heimdall), if you will. He’s the one we look to and go “I wonder what he’s thinking” “I wonder how he’s feeling” because as soon as we see it:

“Trust my rage”

“Because I’m the monster parents tell their children about at night?”

“The humans slaughter each other in droves while you idly fret”

We can RELATE to what he’s saying, we GET what he’s saying. Yes, we all think with a grin at one another, Thor really is going on about nothing, wish he’d stop some of our wars. Yes, TRUST RAGE, because when we’re angry the truth comes out ungilt with fancy falsehoods and pretty pretendings. Yes, we all sometimes feel we’ve become what our parents warned us against when we were younger--no wonder it seems as if their love for us has diminished into nothing, they hate what we’ve become.

This is, 100%, a tragic character. People either love them or hate them because they remind us of who we are and what we’re capable of. Murder? Yes. Hatred? Yes. Rage? Yes. Self-doubt? Yes. Fear? Yes. Self-loathing? Yes. The capability to be good or bad or both in turns? Yes.

And the fact that the person who plays this role is someone who studied roles like this (among others) for his higher education? Well, it (quite literally) can’t get any better than that. Not only is Loki a tragic character, but he’s played by an actor who understands the method of performing tragedies, who understands how those characters have to be played out, and who can relate to them at the same time to make that performance dynamite. 

The reason why Ragnarok!Loki is so appalling is because he’s played in the same method as Thor, however not in the role of “Morally Good” character but rather in the role of Touchstone the Jester. He says some clever things amidst his largely joksy lines. But he’s really just there for giggles [also as a foil for the main characters to bounce sage-sounding lines or soliloquies off of], and not much else.

And we, as fans, hate that because that’s not Loki’s role. He isn’t the god of jokes. So I’ve taken to looking at this whole Gagnarok problem as an attempt at erasing the Tragic Character That Is Loki because he’s very difficult to write. It was difficult for Tolstoy to write Anna Karenina in the beginning because of how human the characters were, how easily their actions could very well become his own. There’s a reason it took him some three years to complete that novel: writing Tragic Characters is hard. In the process of creating them, writers have to admit things about themselves that all human beings would rather shove into little dark places in our hearts and ignore.

Or there’s another reason they have to crush his beautiful writing into the garbage chute: 

He’s

a) going to turn up alive and well but just for shits and giggles in A4

or

b) going to turn up alive and well and hatefully backstabbing in A4

I’m voting on the latter instead of the former. I’ll be really pleased, however, if he has a proper Tragic Character ending. As in, he comes back, helps the Avengers out, and then agrees to die anyway to save the “better” characters. Or dies in the process of actually saving one of the “better” characters. Because that crap at the beginning of Infinity War will never please me, I’m sorry. Tom’s acting: lovely. Loki’s role before kicking the bucket: garbage.

Annnnnd I think I’m done for the evening. I hope this made sense-- I’m sick so I’m doped up by the doc to the point of constantly feeling drowsy and half-lucid. If anyone wants to have further conversation on this, reblog the post or message me or ask me.

[darthxerik]

I’m tired of Loki getting punished for just existing. 🤷🏻‍♀️

[timetravellingshinigami]

"Oh shit"

Also, you can't deny his voice changed 😐

[juliabohemian]

I just thought of something else that irritates me about both Ragnarok and Infinity War. One of the themes of Ragnarok was that Asgard was not a place -it was a people. The point of the story was that Ragnarok was inevitable. Asgard could not be saved -but that was okay because its people COULD be. Which is not a terrible way to end the movie -the two princes leading their people to safety, so that they might begin anew somewhere else. It ends on a hopeful note -right up until the post credits scene.

Fast forward to Infinity War...every last Asgardian refugee is dead. And we didn’t even get to see how. It wasn’t even worth showing us. No one survives the mess but Thor and Hulk. From a writing standpoint, there’s no point in that. It’s just wasted tragedy that rendered the entire message of the third Thor film obsolete. Now, don’t get me wrong. There’s plenty about Ragnarok that I’d love to see rendered obsolete. But the whole aspect of saving Asgard was not one of them.

Was the point to build up the audience’s hope, just so it could be torn down? I feel like Thanos attacking the ship would have been shocking enough, even without him killing everyone on board. Loki could have given up the Tesseract as an attempt to appease Thanos, perhaps leading to some temporary conflict between he and Thor. Finding out that Loki had been tortured and that Thanos planned to wipe out half the universe should have been enough motivation for Thor. Especially since Thor has been deeply motivated by far less in the past.

If this were real life, I would be okay with it not making sense. Because real life is random and unplanned. But this was a work of fiction that someone supposedly plotted out in advance. And it doesn’t compute. And frankly, that irritates me.

[annes-andromeda]

When I go through the tags and see posts from like months ago about Loki fans being excited about his series and eagerly waiting for his trauma to be explored and for him to show off more magic and get a cool new costume and overall be treated with the respect and dignity that Gagnarok, Infinity War, and Endgame denied him…

[probably-need-sleep27]

Loki outfit

Thor movie, the avengers, thor: the dark world and thor: gagnarok Loki outfit

Vs

Comic Loki

Vs

Loki series Loki outfit

Loki didn't have their signature green, black and gold outfit that he is known for in the comics and movies, he had fucking ugly jumbsuit and ugly ass suit, even in gagnarok Loki had his signature green, let me tell you Loki was treated like trash in gagnarok and infinity war but Loki series take the cake with how badly Loki was treated

Taika Waititi hate Loki and he even openly admitted he hated Loki, @nikkoliferous did meta on it (X), I recommend reading it, even Taika Waititi didn't take away Loki signature green unlike Michael Waldron and Kate Herron who took away Loki personality, their signature green, their intelligent and magic, everything that made me fell in love with Loki is gone

So yes actual Loki Fans are angry and for good reason

[kina1551]

So i happened on some Loki Series update, which I was purposely avoiding, but it helped me realize something. Especially after the brutalization in Gagnarok, I realized that I have no idea what/how is the correct portrayalization of Loki. Because in the first movie, he went from someone quiet, controlled, rarely speaking and doing the right thing to going mad. Because of this his actions in Avenger were too violent, and so against the control and sneakiness he showed in the beginning of the first movie when it comes to managing the circumstances. And then in the Dark World, he was angry and snappish towards everything, especially his family, which is soooo understandable. But then in Gagnarok he was depicted as some stupid person that makes weird jokes and smiles all the time, some drama queen.... So i have no idea what is the right Loki portrayal we should expect from the Loki series. Or what is the correct self-healing arc he should have, considering the little knowledge we have of how Loki acts and interacts with things/people when he’s not mad/angry/snapping at everything. So I would like to ask you guys opinions on this, @lucianalight @juliabohemian @imnotrevealingmyname @nikkoliferous @iamanartichoke @yume-no-fantasy @loki-god-of-menace @seiramili7 @icyxmischief , because I’ve read the most beautifully constructed Loki metas on your blog and really value your opinions when it comes to Loki things. And anyone else that wants to contribute. And also, what is everyone’s thoughts on this Loki series, because like i’d stated i was avoiding the news about because i’ve given up on Marvel after how badly and weird Loki was characterized in Gagnarok and Infinity War.

[lonelyghosts-stuff]

Loki Tumblr Posts Masterlist

I have made so many Loki posts I figured I might as well make a masterlist because making organized things like this is fun for me.

This Masterlist includes some reblogs

There's no real point to this

Analyses/Rants/General Comments

(MCU) Loki Laufeyson/Odinson Character History and Analysis

Ugh Thanks a Lot "Gagnarok"

TVA Stripping Loki-Good? Bad? (Maybe a little of both?)

Loki Show Expectation Anxiety

Coping With Expectation Anxiety

Look at this shmuck calling me a fake Loki fan for not liking Ragnarok

Loki-Character Analysis (and Rant lol)

Why ppl say Loki smash dumb or toxic ppl???

Loki is so caring of Thor's love, Jane Foster

Loki | Behind the Scenes (2021)

Loki Show Promos

OfficialLoki Instagram Promo for Loki on Disney+

Loki Series TikTok Promo

OMG HE HAS A TURTLENECK

LOOK AT HIS TURTLENECK!!!

Good? Bad? Bit of both!

You Still Need to See Loki in a Turtleneck

"Loki - you're in a lot of trouble."

"COME AND GET ME!" Loki on Disney+ Hotspot clip

Marvel Infinite Disney+ Reel

Tom Hiddleston Breaks Down a Decade of Loki's Most Memorable Scenes in Preparation for 'Loki'

Tom Hiddleston: Loki in 30 Seconds

Miss Minutes 'Loki' TV Spot Clip-SHIRTLESS LOKI

Marvel Studios' Loki | Official Trailer | Disney+

Loki Art Posters

Behind the Scenes and Other Content

Thor (2011) Deleted Scenes

Loki VS Valkyries Fight Scene

Loki | Behind the Scenes (2021)

Memes and Fan Content

Loki Turned Into a Piece of Paper?

Tom Hiddleston is Given Executive Producer and the First thing he does is...

Loki Trailer Screenshot Memes

My Little Baby, Off to Destroy People

Considering Using My College Fund to Buy Loki Costume Pieces

You hurted Loki!? Oh. Oh! Jail for Mobius! Jail for Mobius for for One Thousand Years!!

Loki is played by a 40 year old man but he's baby

Distracted Boyfriend Meme but it's Tom Hiddleston/Loki With the Tesseract

Shirtless Loki is EVERYWHERE

It is Wednesdays my Loki Lovers-Wednesdays are the new Fridays

Loki's Just Vacuuming Stark Tower

What SHOULD Have Happened After Infinity War

Thor May be the God of Thunder, but Thunder Always Comes After Lightning--KACHOW!

Thor and Loki: Remember Me

Loki Has Kidnapped Tom Hiddleston Confirmed

Amazing Thor Ragnarok Reimagined Comic!

Loki Through the Movies

I'll Obey You Any Day, Loki

Loki Being Chill While Chaos Ensues Around Him

Introducing Thor and Loki to the Class in a Presentation About Norse Mythology

Loki Just Really Needs a Hug

Loki Gets Blamed for Everything When He's Just Getting Dragged Along

Loki in 'Avengers Assemble'

My Tumblr Officially Became a 'Loki Stan Account'

Desperate Attempt at Drawing Loki-Not so good

Loki has the same knife in the trailer as he used to try and stab purple grape man

Steve Roger is at fault for Loki going to space jail

Tom Hiddleston as Loki for 10 Years

Loki 1st Trailer Music

@sserpente fixed the MCU

Loki's "funeral"

Loki deserved comfort after learning of his true parentage

Loki and Wanda causing chaos while Stephen Strange knows he has to clean it up after

Thor and Loki are "smart"

Loki GIFs

Jotunn Loki is Tiny Giant

Look at his emotion; my poor baby

"COME AND GET ME!"

Loki is scared cuz a man just got melted in front of him for not showing his ticket

Mean Lady Takes Loki's Knives

Loki's Got a Point About Thor...

Tony Stark and Loki: "We have a Hulk."

"He's doing great!"-'Loki' Series

"Wednesdays are the new Fridays"

"HE'S NOT MY FATHER!"---"I, Loki, prince of Asgard... Odinson..."

Loki and Nebula Parallels

Thor and Loki Being a Duo in Thor Ragnarok

Loki Using Magic

Tom Hiddleston as Loki in the MCU

"We protect the proper flow of time. I want you to help us fix it." 'Loki' (2021)

Loki kicking all the booty in the 'Loki' trailers

Loki tryna help Thor in Ragnarok

"Come on... what'd you expect?"

Sylvie(?) and Loki

More 'Loki' Trailer GIFs

Loki Chillin' While Mount Vesuvius is Erupting

"I'm terribly sorry. Must be a very painful memory."

Thor: The Dark World | Loki's Coronation (Deleted Scene)

Thor and Loki transformation | Thor: Ragnarok

Thor: Ragnarok | Loki Flipping Knives

Thor: Ragnarok | Loki's Fabulous Hari Flip

Loki is a polite "evil" god

Loki Has Telekinesis!!!

Tom Hiddleston Very Animatedly Summarizes the Past Ten Years of Loki in 30 Seconds

Speculation/Headcanons/Interviews/Articles

Loki and Thor Headcanon

Wants for the Loki Series

Loki Showing Vulnerability in the Trailers

My Sweet Baby Boy Needs a Hug

Michael Waldron Interview and Comments

The Warriors 3 and Loki in Thor (2011)

Tom Hiddleston Gushing Over Owen Wilson and His Role in 'Loki'

Teletubbies Listed as Inspiration for 'Loki'???

Tom Hiddleston aka Loki Watches Marvel Movies as a Fan in Theaters

Fanfic

Specter Fanfic Synopsis/Idea

Specter Fanfic Masterlist

[bonesingerofyme-loc]

Endgame is a movie about payoffs

An incomplete list of all the great ‘payoffs’ in this movie.

Hulk’s character arc/story is resolved offscreen and Hulk as a character is killed off. Shh no tears, only Banner now.

Loki’s death was meaningless

Thor’s character arc/story wasn’t even regressed, it was reset

Tony and Nebula’s relationship went nowhere

Vision’s body was shoved in a closet for five years I guess

Doctor Strange’s 14 million futures and 1 solution relied on a fucking rat

The main six avengers never got to be on screen fighting together

Natasha was killed off and her death is barely mentioned

Red Skull’s presence was revealed to simply be the writers going wOuLdN’t iT Be CoOl rather than having any deeper meaning or reason for it. Boy would it have made sense for the Avengers to maybe talk to the Stonekeeper since they know next to fuck all about the infinity stones. Or maybe resolve the whole ‘Steve and Red Skull’ thing, because it’s not like that was formative conflict for Steve Rogers.

Loki’s death was seriously fucking meaningless

Rocket sort of just existed. What did he do? Nothing. Who did he interact with? Barely anyone.

Gamora’s character arc/story is reset to a blank slate because she is a new person.

Drax’s whole reason for living was revenge and to strike back at Thanos. Never see Drax in Endgame except as part of the exhaustively long checklist of ‘HEY LOOK X PERSON IS HERE’

Clint going on a murderspree doesn’t matter at all except to give a reason why he isn’t in the first part of the movie. It has no bearing on the events and no one ever speaks to Clint about it. He doesn’t even act any differently from the mostly serious and broody Clint of the previous films. There isn’t even any tension about him coming back, Nat just says ‘Hi Clint come back’ and he’s like ‘k’.

Peter Quill, who I don’t even like, has only a single scene in the movie where his entire growth as a character and relationship with Gamora is reduced to stupid physical humor and a joke.

Carol Danvers was pointless. She exists to save Tony and Nebula, which Thor could’ve done with bifrost and to blow up Sanctuary, which could’ve been done far more interestingly. And yet the movie tried to weave her in pretty well by making her part of Natasha’s galactic avengers and then...did nothing with that idea. Was it too hard to consider maybe she shows up with whats left of NovaCorps or some Kree battleships?

Thanos proves that he was jobbing hard in Infinity War. What’s that, Thanos without any infinity stones could easily beat Tony in Mk85, Thor with both his weapons and Steve Rogers? I guess the entire fight on Titan was him just pissing around. It steals all the weight and strength that Infinity War gave the Avengers by showing that Thanos could’ve squashed any of them at any time and was never actually in danger.

‘Stark. You’re not the only one cursed with knowledge.’ What does that mean? Why does Thanos seem to respect him? Fucking who knows, since we see that in the past Thanos only vaguely knew about the Avengers and thought they were dumb nerds. I guess he read about Tony underneath a Snapple lid. 

Back to Natasha’s death - she dies and the movie decides it needs to focus on fucking Bruce of all people, when she and Steve had become very close friends over the past seven years, and from the implications Steve was the only one that actually kept in contact with her post-Snap when the Avengers all retired or fucked off. Fucking Bruce. 

Hey while we’re here, let’s keep up with Steve and his relationships. How about the fact he and Bucky never reunite on screen? How about the fact that all we have gotten between Steve and Bucky since Steve got his best friend back was what, three lines total between Infinity War and Endgame? 

Or how about Steve and Sam! You know, Sam the therapist that helped break Steve out of his shell. Sam the loyal friend who stood by Steve through thick and thin. Sam, who kind of was Steve’s first ‘real’ friend in the modern day. Sam, who only shows up at the end so old Steve who abandoned his friends can chuck him a shield. No reunion. No real meaningful moment. Just hey I’m old take my shield.

Or Steve and Wanda! Did you guys forget that the secret Avengers adopted her? How they were kind of like a family for that time after Civil War, with Steve the Dad and Natasha the Mom and Wanda their adopted weird magical girl? You know, how they took Wanda under their wing and started teaching her and treating her like a real person? Guess they did forget!

What about Valkyrie too, by the way. Valkyrie who spent a thousand years as a cynical drunk and then Thor helped her out of her self-loathing funk in Ragnarok. And then she I guess just said ‘sucks to be you’ and didn’t even try to help him? Or how about that Thor just kind of chucks her the throne like a party favor. Not even like he recognized she earned it or anything, Thor just said ‘hey, fuck my responsibilities I want to go be a failure in space, so take my job lmao’. Nice. I hate Ragnarok with a passion, but for fuck’s sake. 

Nidavellir. Establishes that Eitri is the last of the dwarven forgemasters left, and still has all his knowledge and skill. And that he forged the Gauntlet. And the plans for the Gauntlet are still there. Clearly, that means Tony should just whip together a nanite gauntlet in his basement overnight.

Carol Danvers and Nick Fury. You know, how Captain Marvel set them up as good friends, and then she allegedly shows up wanting to know where he is. Oops. That didn’t make the cut. Or her seeing Fury again after so many years. Double oops. Shit, this is even from the stinger of the last movie these yucks wrote, and they couldn’t even do it. Again - like Gagnarok and others, Cpt. Marvel is not even a movie I liked but COME ON NOW.

The intelligence/wisdom of the infinity stones. The space stone ‘judged’ Red Skull and cast him out. The soul stone has a ‘certain wisdom’. Ultron was made from the intelligence that lurked in the mind stone. Vision was linked to all the other stones and could sense almost a distress from each other stone as Thanos claimed them. NVM, stones destroyed lmao.

Infinity War went out of it’s way to make visually striking and different battle sequences and pulled out all the stops to really showcase powers. We got to see smart and interesting uses of all the stones during the battle on titan. Thanos actually had a wizard duel with Strange, showing that he is so much more than just a brute brawler. He blended caster and bruiser seemlessly. The color palatte was bright and arid, full of reds and oranges and blues and greens, well lit and extremely well choreographed. Tony showcases the amazing functionality of his Mk50 experimental armor. The battle at Avengers compound is dark, a color palette of grey, dark grey, light grey, and brown-grey. The choreography of the fight consisted of ‘surround Thanos and hit him with sticks’. We saw none of the MK85 suit. You know. The LAST suit Tony Stark would ever make. We saw none of Stormbreaker or Mjolnir’s power in Thor’s hands, only the most basic ‘fwoosh lightning’ from when Steve holds it. Where was Thor and his flying, his glowing eyes, Mjolnir-as-a-character that was present in all his fights in the past? Where was Steve’s mixed martial arts and his really acrobatic and distinct fighting style? Where was Tony constantly pulling new weapons and tricks out of his suit? The final fight of the Infinity Saga with the big three, and it’s as inspiring as a mid-aughties superhero duel. Just kind of slamming together and grunting. (I guess all the good fight choreographers were stolen by Alita)

‘I can do this all day’. The iconic line of Steve Rogers in the MCU, a touchstone for his character that is emblematic of his entire life and his drive, that says in six syllables the sum total meaning of what it is to be Captain America. Is played As A Joke.

Pepper Potts, whose character and relationship with Tony Stark to date can be summed up succinctly as ‘Tony no’ while he shouts ‘TONY YES’ now totally agrees with Tony and is all gung-ho about him deciding to risk his life, his daughter’s life, their lives, and the fucking universe to go a-time-travelling. What.

Steven Strange, whose movie was about him struggling to become a sorcerer and let go of his past and his preconceptions as well as the Ancient One seeing potential in him despite his roughness is shown to all be a charade. She actually knew all along he was going to be an OG badass and is so enamored with him that she’s willing to hand away the infinity stone she and her order have protected for millennia at the simple mention of his name.

Acausal time travel. Instead of enriching the previous movies by seamlessly blending into them for the time heist, Endgame goes out of it’s way to say ‘HAHA YEAH NO, THIS IS A BRANCHING TIMELINE’ so when you watch Dark World, Avengers, etc, there’s no intrigue of like ‘oh man, such and such is going on just around the corner’ because they so thoroughly bungled time travel and everything we saw in Endgame breaks the timelines. I can’t believe JK Rowling did a better job creating consistent and coherent time travel that carried narrative weight and tension in a children’s book.

Undoing the snap. All the speculation and theory about how, why, when, what, and it turns out all you have to do is just snap to bring everyone back and then act like the intervening five years of social decay and collapse never happened. 

Theodore Ross is very specifically shown in Infinity War to be the Secretary of State. Hm. A character who’s always been an antagonist, always against the avengers...in a high ranking government position...right before 50% of the population is dusted...right, yeah, nothing. Not the President after the snap. 

The snap itself. Smash cut to 5 years later, show some quick flybys and pay a bit of lip service to ‘oh yeah things are bad’ but that’s it. Don’t investigate it. Don’t show us how bad things are. Don’t explore it. In fact, everything seems pretty ok. People are still playing Fortnite five years later and cheerfully dabbing and taking selfies, so it’s all good right? Not like half of all life vanished instantly over night and the world is supposed to be falling apart. Nah.

Tony Stark’s death. Did he die to bring back the universe? Did he die to save his friends? Did he die to save his daughter or his family? Nope, he killed himself to kill the already beaten Thanos and his final words were all about himself. bUt ThE cAlLbAcK

Thanos. Killed off. Replaced by a cartoon villain version of himself. The Thanos that is the main antagonist that the Avengers beat? Not the Thanos who we got to know and who starred as the center of Infinity War.

Nebula. Best character in the film. Has no conclusion. No catharsis or reaction to Thanos’ death.

Groot. Split second shot of him and Rocket. No reunion.

Groot, again, and the rest of the Guardians. No chance to see Rocket’s reaction to the realization his entire family is gone or the effect it has on him. What was that scene in Infinity War? “Me? I got a lot to lose. I got a lot.” No relevance.

Stormbreaker. Major plotpoint of Infinity War. OP axe forged by Thor nearly sacrificing his life to a star. Yeets through a blast from a full-stone gauntlet. Is just a beatstick in Endgame, does nothing.

Infinity stones, again. Infinity War made them front and center, showing their many uses and delving deeper into the lore of them. Endgame makes them paperweights that can only snap.

I could go on and on and on. This is just off the top of my head, right now. Payoffs? I guess if you count the writers violently elbowing you in the ribs and shouting HEY ITS THAT SCENE FROM THAT OTHER MOVIE like you’re a drooling idiot as a ‘payoff’ it’s ripe with them, but actual meaningful payoff for a decade of characters and storytelling? Hah. No.

Edit: I will continue to update this as I think of/recall more examples

[love-is-an-sea]

Loki series

The fist time that I heard that Marvel will produce a series about Loki, I was so happy. I thought that the series will repair what gagnarok and Infinity War have done to this beautiful character. Finally, our King would be back and (this Time) he would have all that he deserved. Even the plot where he goes back in time, in different areas would have been interesting!

But now, if the series is really about Captain America who tries to stop him and, in the end, Loki dies, I don't want to watch it. I don't want to suffer again just because Marvel wanted to make profits on his back (I don't know if this expression exists in English)

I'm someone very optimistic so for the moment, I still want to trust Marvel. But if Chris Evans confirms that he is in it, it would be the end for me

I don't want to say goodbye to my favorite character for ever and ever...💚

[tonyrights-archive]

a lot of you have come into my ask

"if jotuns are a metaphor for being gay doesn't that make Loki gay "

NO IT DOESNT

just like being gay is a choice, for Loki, being a jotun is a choice.

If you don't count gagnarok and infinity war (also just as stupid and DESTROYS his character ugh) Loki HATES his jotun blood. those two movies were written to please the gays and its so obvious.

you can choose to not be gay it's really that simple. Loki chooses to not be gay. he chooses to be straight and it's the right choice.

[timetravellingshinigami]

Thor Ragnarok Loki stans are literally supporting everything Chris Hemsworth said about how he was disillusioned by the previous Thor movies before Ragnarok.

They are literally ignoring the fact that their darling Hemsworth said in a recent interview that he wants Loki gone from the MCU. How do they ignore this? I'm all for Chris changing Thor's characteristics in order to make him more interesting. What i do have a problem is Chris pushing people down in order to get his wishes fulfilled. And the person who got humiliated is Loki. There are literally interviews, and plain proof that Chris Hemsworth and Taika Waititi were out to humiliate and drag Loki through the dirt in Ragnarok. Your Loki from Ragnarok was a direct result of Chris wanting to humiliate Loki and put him in place and Waititi's ignorance of the franchise.

The saddest thing is Tom can't retaliate against anything Chris or Waititi says about Loki?why? Because he's not the lead actor. He's not the main character. So, if the character he plays and loves gets treated like shit he'll have to deal with it.

This is a quote about Loki by Tom:

"I've lived through him, you know. Other people can have their opinion objectively about where Loki should go, but I've lived through every moment. And sometimes, I might be - I'm the only person who knows how it feels and I always have ideas. I know every inch of Loki and I'm the only person who's played him. So other people have written him, other people have shot him, other people have framed him, but I know his inside"

The previous movies were important to Tom hiddleston. His fame came from those movies and his understanding of Loki was because of those movies. Tom has time and again spoken about how those movies mean so much to him and how much Loki after everything hes gone through after his betrayal by his family, Ragnarok and IW, has to now work to heal his mind and rediscover himself. Tom understands Loki's vulnerability and his need to protect himself. Tom loves Loki.

But Ragnarok stans can only see Loki as a "sugar baby slut who fucks his way to the top of a garbage heap".

I have friends who like Thor: Ragnarok but even they agree there's something wrong with Loki in Ragnarok

If you're going to be dense and call me and other anti Ragnarok folks stupid without reading our Loki meta and criticism about Ragnarok which has legit interviews from Director/actors and what they think about Loki and comparison between Ragnarok and the previous Thor movies, then I'm sorry don't comment on this post.

[juliabohemian]

This is a little gift for my friends who were less than satisfied with certain MCU films. 

This is a joke. It’s meant to be amusing.

[annes-andromeda]

It’s funny when fans claim that Thor: Ragnarök is one of, if not the best MCU film, as if Black Panther and Captain America: The Winter Soldier don’t exist (not everyone says this but still)

It’s also funny when they say that Gagnarok had such emotion and great comedy, as if Guardians of the Galaxy Volumes 1 and 2 don’t exist.

And it’s even funnier when they say that Gagnarok gave Loki the redemption he deserved, as if Thor: The Dark World doesn’t exist.

And it hilarious when they say that Gagnarok showed that Thor is more than just his hammer and it portrayed him being not stereotypically masculine, as if the first Thor film doesn’t exist.

And don’t even get me started on how they say that Infinity War and Endgame destroyed Thor’s character, as if Gagnarok didn’t already do that.

Bonus point for when they say that Thor: The Dark World is the worst MCU movie, as if Endgame doesn’t exist and has far more problems that TDW ever did.

[starscreamloki]

What would you like to see from Loki in the movies? (I have seen Infinity War, so feel free to mention spoilers.)

Thanks for the question. I got a list, so I hope you have time.

First of all, I want to see what most fans cry out for: Frost Giant Loki and him using his magic. And for that last thing, not some meager tricks, but his full blown Seidr powers.

I would love to see him as the anti-hero, balancing on the thin line between good and evil, just as he was in avengers but than less brainwashed. Mostly because I like his villain-y way of acting, but also because I think this arc was robbed from him in gagnarok.

I’d also love to see him rise above himself. Finally able to accept who he is, whatever that may be for him, and just go with it! I’d love to see him succeed in anything, because in every movie when he almost succeeded at something, he just fell down. There were some minor victories, but I think he deserves a victory that is bigger.

I’d love to see him go in full rage mode, because let’s be honest, even though he has been very angry in the movies, that is not nearly the rage that must be burning his veins.

I really would like (and sleep better probably), if he just threw Thor out of his life. Their relationship is toxic.

I want to see Loki happy for a moment, just a genuine laugh and not his laugh where he always just laughs his pain away. Just, real, happy, for once! It looked like he almost got that on Sakaar, but yet again it got snatched away from him.

I want him to be back in his Avengers or Dark World costume, because those were the ones I loved most!

But what i’d mostly would love to see, for A4, is that Loki’s horrible decision in A3 was just a scam. I want to see that time has been warped and that we start at the end of the first avengers again, that he just ditches Thor, and goes where-ever he wants to be. OR I’d want to see him get a worthy dead. Not just some stabby-stab with his knife and done, but a full blown fight, everything, and a worthy and logical death! I think in the end I just want a reset and get a story where we can pretend gagnarok and IW never ever happened!