#two examples immediately come to mind one is thor ragnarok

[tennessoui]

absolutely hate when i can't think of where a quote or saying comes from but i know it absolutely comes from some piece of media i've consumed in the past and i agonize over trying to trace it back to the source and then give it up, and then i'm watching a piece of media and bam i found the root of the phrase and it's like. thor ragnarok. or something.

[lokiverserp]

Rules; Preferences, Verses & Characters

This Lokiverse blog is run by @blindtaleteller I've been roleplaying for over ten years between platforms: forum, game chats, discord, and tabletop. I don't interact with real life minors within my knowledge, as this blog can be NSFW at times; and there may be triggering subjects and definitely triggering backgrounds to the majority of the characters represented; including but not limited to: the mention of abuse of varying degrees and types, and torture.

US EST time zones, usually immediately available at night; but not afraid to take my time responding to and or RPing to those in differing time zones.

This blog is LGBTQ+ friendly. (Yes this means trans/Gender inclusive too.)

---Rules/Guidelines

Mature (18+) role-players only; underage characters are fine ONLY in platonic relationships.

This is a mature blog, it will have themes such as blackmail, brainwashing, torture, sexual themes and more. I prefer for this reason not to interact with minors, for these reasons and for my own comfort. If I discover you're under eighteen, I will block you.

Likewise, I am not comfortable or interested in role-playing my adult characters with minor-age characters; and will block if it's pushed.

However and that said:

1. If a mun wants to play a younger version of an adult character as a platonic backstory for their setting: I am willing, with some discussion ahead of time through DMs. As there are several Lokis at 1000+ years old, a few Bartons, and Tony Starks; this isn't a new concept to me. Just keep in mind that I will not roleplay sexual or romantic themes between them at that stage. Platonic only. 2. Gender fluidity and especially taking on appearances or illusions of other characters does sometimes happen with the Lokis in my verses in particular; depending on the story we're playing and era/verse we're playing in. If you aren't comfortable with that, this is your warning, and where I request you say as much in communicating with me ahead of time. Illusions are a big Loki skill, both for himself and in casting them on others. If the I feel character would feel the need to use them, or he is asked to do so for another character: he probably will. This includes but is not limited to changing genders and even who his appearance depicts him as, or in other circumstances; changing the appearance of his partnered character/s. As a side note to that: I do not play or play with Sylvie or Mobius characters, nor so I have any interest in playing Sylvie or Mobius characters. This has to do with the story, framing, including the pro-abuse and pro-torture messaging it portrays; especially along with the disregard for the title character in that series, more than anything else. That said, post-TVA Lokis can be discussed in DMs, but aren't very likely unless it's a Lokiverse-specific AU character (as brushed in OVERHAUL as one example). If you have questions about this or series era role-play, please DM me first: though it's not very likely I will accept without some large boundaries set in place with that in mind. I am not a fan of the series or it's dismissive and disrespectful treatment of the title character and every film before it in any way, shape or form; and prefer pre-Ragnarok characterizations for the Thor corner characters especially.

------Examples of the two exceptions listed above include, but aren't limited to:

a. Rather than fighting a pursuer etc, Loki opting to change himself, his roleplay partner or both to elude capture or the annoyance of a fight. This may include changing to another character's appearance, simply changing his own gender appearance, or removing either if not both from others' perceptions (I always will ask and discuss in DMs if this kind of thing comes up, where partners' appearances are concerned: if we don't discuss that during our first interactions.)

b. Using another appearance during a timeline/verse where his usual appearance where he doesn't want to deal with the hassle of, but might be immediately recognized in a setting where it applies. (This one can be pretty common.)

c. Role-plays where the other character is underage at the time of their first meeting (platonic only for underage characters) or a child character related comes across my characters. I am open to that and playing with MCU based OCs, but again; platonic only for underage characters.

I do try to tag any potential triggers as TW or spell it outright as trigger warning. The same applies to NSFW.

No Godmodding please; this includes capture. (Yes this has been tried before.) Don’t write for my characters. If you want the role-play to go a certain way just DM me and we will figure out a way to make it work. 

---This blog is new-ish and Semi-Selective:

Roleplaying is a fun time and I know how it can be to want to interact with everyone. I do have to work and sleep though, and am not always available for the timezone of every player: though I will often try to accommodate where possible.

I'm not afraid to take my time about it in working with those outside my TZ however; and have played with Australians, UK natives and more, prior. It may take us longer to finish a thread etc, but for me that isn't a reason to exclude or pressure anyone, and I appreciate being given that same respect.

If you want to play a character who is a child of one of mine, we can discuss it in DMs, but I'll warn you now I am very picky about that in particular; and it's on the very rare end of the spectrum that I will go for that, especially with a player new to me, and more so the characters as I play them. There are many reasons for this: so again, DM me about it.

I don’t participate in OOC drama. The MCU and existing stories are dramatic enough as is; and I do this for fun. Let's leave the drama in the role-play, okay?

---Preferences

I get wordy sometimes, so expect some posts to get long. This is especially true if we're aiming for a specific scene setting, or that scene changes; like moving from a home or street setting to a restaurant, car, plane, or mission setting and vice versa.

This also depends on the partner and roleplay. I'm good to do light stuff, but there will still be times where majority of characters will probably look around at their surroundings if you're controlling or start the scene too; whether that's for places to sit or simply out of curiosity about their role-play partner's environment.

Domestic or daily life role-plays are preferred early in for me. Testing them out in a first through third meeting (especially with new interactions) is a pretty common and comfortable thing for me. If you want to do a fight scene at some point, I'm okay with and used to that type as well from previous role-play experiences; but I do prefer to feel out the interaction through conversation etc.

That said; while sexual and or explicit scenes are more than okay with me, I don't prefer to jump right into them, either. If you're looking for pure smut right off the bat without proper build up, all I can say is you're probably best seeking role-play elsewhere.

I will probably ask you about your comfort with that kind of thing, if not just physical affection between the characters early in anyways; purely as a just in case. It's rare for my lot to engage even in that without a proper IC prompt in scene or desire to however. Otherwise, I am okay with 'fade to black' or summarizing if that's preferred. I may at times ask to move that sort of role-play to DMs or discord when applicable, myself.

---Disclaimers

This is an indie MCU AU blog, whose characters are based off of the their MCU counterparts. I don’t own anything MCU or otherwise.

These are my interpretation of, and versions of, the characters I write for.

I am not responsible for anyone else's content consumption: if you're here, read all this (or chose not to) and still interact expecting something else, that's on you.

Likewise and that said; your interaction with this blog is also your responsibility: harassment etc whether in asks or DMs, will be reported and blocked appropriately.

I do not tolerate bigots of any kind OOC. This includes but definitely is not limited to sexists of any flavor, and terfs. If a character is being played that way within reason and with some discussion prior, that's one thing. Otherwise, not so much.

(Verses/Characters below the cut.)

(THIS SECTION IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. PLEASE BEAR WITH ME, AND FEEL FREE TO ASK FOR ANY CLARIFICATIONS I MIGHT NOT HAVE DOWN.)

IF INTERESTED IN PARTICULAR LOKIVERSE UNI-SPECIFIC CHARACTERS, SUCH AS OZ, LOLO/LOKE, AARON, BANE, CLAYTON, CUYLER, CHARMER, POPPET ETC: DON'T BE AFRAID TO ASK.. OR BE AFRAID TO ASK WHO THOSE SPECIFICS ARE EITHER. I WON'T BITE YOU I SWEAR: THOUGH SOME OF MY CHARACTERS MIGHT..?

As there are several characters here spanning several of their own overlapping universes; I'm going to list the most prevalent below. Unless asked for a Lokiverse universe-specific muse, I will stick with he base line muse. Here's some of what to expect...

Loki (surname interchangeable depending on verse/era) -

Outgoing, complex sass machine with major trust issues that nope, don't just come from daddy: though Odin is second after 2011, to get most of his ire along those lines being he was King as well as his foster father with the most control of the situation and his treatment up until then.

Eloquent, adaptive and respectful; most of the time. Spiteful, dangerous and downright mean when he's pissed; he can also hold grudges: though he can be a bit of a sap, and sucker for good conversation, and earnest attempts at making up to set those grudges aside, often to his own detriment.

In response to his own personal history, consistently earnest or honest people tend to keep his attention. Tech savvy/curious, knowledgeable enough about he causeways between worlds that he often doesn't need either the Bifrost or a ship to move from one planet to the other among the nine realms, and possibly others outside of them: though he can pilot most airborne and waterborne craft having been raised and living in Asgard for 1000+ years.

While often coming across confident or casually laid back in demeanor, that isn't always the case: as it's generally part of his armor/defense against other forms of harm. Stand-offish with personal physical interactions that aren't a fight, past common courtesy; but very affectionate and playful once comfortable. Sometimes considered moody as a result. Often exasperated, or annoyed by people's tendency to judge and condescend without taking the time to know or bother to ask questions to understand him. Curiosity tends to rule his decision making outside of a serious or aggressive situation... well; sometimes, even in those.

(Lokiverse specific:) Has been learning shipbuilding since his early 20s as part of exploring the doorways between worlds he is later (2011) openly known to use. Lower tech transportation (and modifying it) and especially martial vehicles from other societies tends to catch his interest at weird times; motorcycles, older cars, boats and planes especially: the rarer or older, the better. Enjoys trying and learning new things, and occasionally meeting new people: though he tends to omit what he considers personal details, and will often avoid subjects or details he doesn't want to talk about: unless comfortable with the individual/s at hand. On the other end of that; Loki is rarely above simply dipping out of a conversation if he feels unwanted or offended in the wrong flavor: and definitely has no issue using magic or illusions to manage that. Pansexual, polyamorous.

(Most flexible of the bunch. I can pretty much adjust to any era with this one.)

(Keep in mind that while I can and will adjust to RP for Ragnarok-Endgame+ Eras/Verses, they will be played according to pre-Ragnarok characterizations. You will not get Waititi-conforming takes from this blog, or a take on any canon TVA inspired takes that followed in those footsteps either. Previous characterizations and resulting adjustments will be made for those eras: including post/IW era/verse. That said: 2011-2012 pre-Avengers, short mid-Avengers, mid-Dark World 2013 and any of the five years he spent under cover as king of Asgard separating the Infinity Stones is possible: though some will definitely need discussion to figure out the logistics. Remember; this dude is a 1000+ year old shape changer and illusionist of an interstellar prince of a warrior race, who was raised with both magic and what equates to super-spy skills on this level. If you wanna play with any version of him; we can figure that out pretty easy.)

(Hell and with this one.. boredom can be reason enough for him to be out and about to run across your character at almost any given time.)

Anthony 'Tony' Edward Stark aka Iron Man-

Sass master #2. Beware this punk's mouth. Sarcastic/Sardonic sense of humor, good taste in music; confident up front with a whole lot of commitment and self esteem issues under the surface. Angry about his daddy issues, and with good reason.

Workshop-aholic with trust, anxiety, and mostly-tucked-away self-worth issues: the majority of which he will brush at in joking if sardonic tones.

Bad heart history after 2008. These did not improve much until 2013, months before Greenwich's Convergence Incident; as a portion of his sternum was replaced in removing the arc reactor from it's embedded state in his chest along with the shrapnel there. While many have guessed that the scarring might have been removed --or rather regrown and replaced-- via geneticist Dr. Helen Cho's Cradle prior to the birth of Ultron, this remains unconfirmed.

Not above using big words out of the blue, though he really doesn't care to bother most of the time. If anything, he tends to skip entire chunks of dialogue to get to the point with much shorter, sentences; but good god will the man give you an earful if he's in a mood.. and more so if comfortable with his company. Has a tendency to give people weird nicknames; sometimes several in the same conversation.

Very reactive personality; he tends to test people socially in ways similar to how he tests his suits: by testing their limits. Though he rarely aims for it: this often pisses people off, and he is very aware of that. This habit becomes less as he gets to know an individual... mostly.

(This muse has a lot of availability options; and I am willing to do college years Tony both prior to and after Stark Sr.'s death, if interested.)

(Lokiverse specific:) Tends to be especially over self-aware and self-analytical in his relationships as they deepen; often to his own detriment. Very awkward with physical interactions; and will make excuses like 'I don't like being handed things' as one example, to avoid them at times. Among the examples of his habit giving ouit nicknames: Tony will often refer to Loki as 'Richard:' if not 'the Prince of Darkness,' 'Statuesque Giggle Monster,' or 'Mean and Green Two', for reasons you'll have to RP with him to find out. Partial/Seasonal Insomniac. Mostly shy about his late-life discovery of being bisexual.

(Very comfy with this dork.)

Clint Francis Barton aka Hawkeye/Ronin -

Passive aggressive with his own brand of sass in particular, Clint is sometimes considered grumpy as a result: and downright angry from 2018 to 2023 (between IW and Endgame.) The man who never misses is very defensive about his private life, and no wonder given he's spent his mostly as one of SHIELD's best assassins up until 2012-2014 (Avengers-SHIELD's fall in CA:tWS:) which led him into meeting Natasha Romanov as a former target who he decided to help escape the Red Room and defect, instead. Raised in his early years in Missouri; Barton later inherited the place and in his spare time tends to busy his hands with renovation projects.

Last to introduce himself without a reason or prompting; Hawkeye is the kind to either sit back and observe a situation and or person, and try to gauge both before becoming proactive. The only time this doesn't always apply is in an aggressive situation, as he is in possession of high perceptive skills, quick reflexes, and a very nasty temper that he is at least moderately self-aware of: and had grown mostly used to keeping at least moderate control of that most days has been a necessity, in staying alive in his previous profession alone. He tends to hold personal grudges, though within reason; most of the time. Probably the most normal demeanor among the abnormal individuals whom he's usually surrounded by; Barton's work and life experiences manage to affect a strange balance between pragmatism and morality most days of the week. Or at least, he aims himself that way (see quote in Specifics below.)

(Ronin.) After 2018 (Infinity War) Barton is ...a lot angrier, a lot more introverted on a personal level; and taking that and his grief out on the worst criminals left behind after the snap with very little of that control in place. Ronin-era/verse Clint is quiet and embittered individual at this stage while in the presence of others unless he feels the need to put in his two cents, the majority of which are usually lacking the optimism he had prior, and replacing it with a grim realism after the loss of his family. Loss and regret for retiring early has at this point and needless to say, has taken it's toll on him.

(Lokiverse Specifics:) Barton's internal pessimist often contradicts his need to toss the kind contrasting optimism that has him throwing out lines like 'The city is flying, we're fighting an army of robots. And I have a bow and arrow. ...Nothing, makes sense.' and still keep going at it. I tend to keep an adjusted version of his comic backstory with his father in his background; in large part because it does fit his character, drive and struggle as a person in the MCU in particular: "Sometimes a robber or super villain takes away the ones you love, setting you on a path to one day be a hero. Other times, it's a lot more simple. Like seeing what happens to someone you don't want to grow up to be like. " Bisexual, panamorous: prior to 2018 he is on an open marriage, quietly looking for another partner to join their family and maybe make it so he and Laura aren't looking at being quite so outnumbered as a secondary excuse. After 2018, he's harder to approach at all: alone for the most part, and pursued as an executioner-style vigilante by his remaining team mates including Rhodes until 2023.

[iamanartichoke]

I wrote a Thing. It’s extremely long. I’d prefer it not be reblogged; I wrote this for my own catharsis and would prefer it not be circulated, bc of Reasons. 

I changed my mind, okay to reblog. <3 

Under a cut for (extreme, did I mention?) length. 

So I got about 12 minutes of sleep last night, as you do, and around 3am or so I found myself - out of sheer curiosity - going down a meta hole of Ragnarok discourse, trying to figure out where this "satisfying redemption arc" for Loki happened. (I mean, there's a lot of things I would like to figure out, but I started there.) Because I could. 

Basically I was looking for meta that went into detail about how Loki was redeemed in a satisfactory way. The ‘satisfactory’  is an important word here bc there is a redemption arc in the film, in that Loki starts off the film as an antagonist (kinda) to Thor and he ends the film as an ally to Thor, standing at Thor's side. In that sense, yes, there's a redemption arc. I didn't find much (and I had no idea how much people just despise Ragnarok "antis" [I really dislike that word] but that's another topic [that I don't particularly want to get into, tbh]) but I did find some. I read what I could find, and I read it open-mindedly, and overall I came away feeling like, okay, there are some valid points being made here and I can kinda see where they're coming from.

But it was a bit (a lot) like -- flat. Idk. The best comparison I can think of is that it’s like if a literature class read, I don't know, The Yellow Wallpaper for an assignment, and some of the students came away from it feeling like it was a creepy story about a woman slowly driving herself insane, and the other students came away from it incensed at the oppression and infantilization of women in the late 19th century -

- and neither side is wrong, but the former is a very surface-level reading and the latter isn't (bc it stems from looking at why she drives herself insane, why she was prescribed 'rest' in the first place, the context of what women could and couldn't do back then, etc; basically, a bit more work has to go into it). 

[Note: I am not disparaging the quality of The Yellow Wallpaper. At all. It’s just the first relatively well-known story that popped into my head.]

In this sense, I can see the argument for Loki's redemption arc, but I don't think it's a very good argument. Not invalid, but not great.

I mean, for example, I think the most consistent argument I found variations of re: Loki's redemption is that Ragnarok shows Loki finally taking responsibility for his bad behaviour and misdeeds. This includes recognizing that his actions were fueled from a place of self-hatred and a desire to self-destruct in addition to bringing destruction on others. That he probably feels awkward and regretful of these things and doesn't know how to act around Thor, but he figures it out by the end, and decides that returning to Asgard is the best way to show that he's ready to make amends. His act of bringing the Statesman to Asgard is an apology. He allies himself with Thor and ends up in a better place, both narratively (united with Thor once again) and mentally (having taken responsibility and made amends for his past).

And setting aside that he had already made amends by sacrificing his life in TDW (and also setting aside that the argument is made that Loki redeems himself in IW by sacrificing himself to Thanos but if that's the case, wouldn't that imply that he hadn't achieved redemption in Ragnarok or else there would be no need to achieve it again in IW? Or, if you think he did achieve redemption in Ragnarok, then what the fuck did he give his life in IW for? What was his motivation there, and why did the narrative not make it clearer? I digress.) 

- setting aside those two factors, I think this is a very fair argument. Loki is fueled by self-hatred, and he does want to self-destruct, and he does want to inflict that pain on others as well (particularly Thor). No lies detected here. 

However, I also need to know where that self-hatred and desire for destruction (toward himself and others) comes from and for that, we need to go back to Thor 1.

Thor 1. 

Loki starts Thor 1 out as "a clenched fist with hair," to borrow a quote from the Haunting of Hill House (that I tucked away in my mental box of Lovely Things bc it says so much so very simply). He's very used to bottling everything up, pushing it down; he slinks around behind the scenes, pulling the strings to this plot or that. He's "always been one for mischief," but the narrative implies that the coronation incident is the first time Loki's done anything truly terrible. And it all immediately pretty much goes to shit, so Loki spends the rest of the movie frantically juggling all these moving pieces while trying to seem as if he's got it all under control, every step of the way. That's how I view his actions. 

But I always come back to that quote where Kenneth Branaugh tells Tom, of the scene in the vault, "This is where the thin steel rod that's been holding your mind together snaps." In other words this is where Loki discovering he's Jotun is just one thing too many. He can't take it. But though the rod snaps, his descent isn't a nosedive. It's a tumble. As the story progresses, the clenched fist starts to loosen, the muscles are flexed in unfamiliar ways (that feel kinda good, after being stiff for so long), and it culminates with the hand opening completely and shaking itself out. All of that repression, that self-hatred, that rage and jealousy just explodes so that, by the time the bifrost scene happens, Loki's already hit bottom. It's not just about proving his worthiness to Odin. He wants to hurt Thor, too; he, essentially, throws a tantrum. (That's right, I said tantrum.) 

(Note: The word 'tantrum’ has negative connotations bc we normally equate it with a toddler stamping their feet and screaming in the aisle when their parent won't buy them the toy they want. But in itself, the word tantrum isn't infantalizing. It's an "emotional outburst, an uncontrolled explosion of anger and frustration" [paraphrasing from dictionary.com]. That's exactly what happens here [and why Tom called Loki's actions a massive tantrum, but people took that to mean Tom agreed it was childish whereas I doubt Tom meant it that way]).

He's been pushed past his limit, and he does bad things. He does really shitty things. He hurts Thor, he hurts his family. I'm pretty sure he knows this all along so this isn't, like, some revelation further down the line that "hey, those things I did were probably kinda bad." He got the memo already. 

Ragnarok 

Fast forward to Ragnarok, and we're introduced to a version of Loki who's had 4ish years to sit with everything that's happened. To sit with it and not do much else. The rawness of it has faded, and now it seems as though it's just become a thing, like when you move through life aware of your childhood traumas and have more or less just accepted them (and you probably share a lot of really funny depression memes on Facebook, which is kinda the equivalent of Loki's play, but that's probably just me). 

Loki has, more or less, chilled out. He seems more bored than anything else; he's been masquerading as Odin for longer than he ever planned or intended to, so he's more or less ended up hanging out, letting Asgard mind its own business, and entertaining himself with silly plays. This is the version that starts out the movie as an antagonist to Thor - a version that is, arguably, in a much different place [and is a much milder threat] than the version who originally did those Bad Things. 

And of course Thor is still mad at him, and of course they're going to butt heads, because that's what they do (and Thor's grievances are genuine, I’ll add, bc it's not really his fault he assumed Loki faked his death, nor can he be blamed for being pissed about Odin).

One argument framed this version of Loki as being a person who is facing the awkwardness of coming out of a dark place, which is fair. If we're going to frame his actions in Thor 1 as a tantrum, then Ragnarok would be the part where the toddler has been taken home, possibly has had some lunch and a juice box, and is now watching cartoons. They're over the tantrum, and would probably feel pretty silly about it if they weren't, yknow, toddlers. They probably can't remember why they even wanted that toy so badly. If they're a little older and self-aware, they might even be embarrassed for having melted down.

Like the word tantrum, this feeling isn't a thing limited to toddlers. I know I've had a few epic meltdowns as a grown ass adult, and I know I always feel deeply embarrassed afterwards - like, want to crawl into a hole and die. I've said things I can't take back. Adolescents and teenagers throw tantrums, mentally ill people throw tantrums, adults throw tantrums (I mean, my god, look at all the videos of Karens having screaming meltdowns - screaming! - over having to wear masks in order to shop at stores). Humans throw tantrums. And usually, after the feelings have been let out and the tantrum has passed, humans feel pretty regretful and awkward and embarrassed about whatever they did and said in the midst of their meltdown. 

I get all of that and agree it's valid and that Loki probably feels it. By the time Ragnarok happens, Loki's had some time to reflect and think hmm, yeah, probably could've handled that one a lot better. The argument further goes that in order to navigate this awkward period, Loki must come to terms with what he's done, acknowledge that some things can't be unsaid or undone, and begin to make amends. Supposedly, some people feel that Loki becomes a better person because he does "own" everything he did wrong and, even though he feels like a jackass (paraphrasing), he sets that aside to become a become a better person by choosing to help Thor and Asgard at the end. 

Thus, the overall arc goes like this. Loki, Thor's jealous little brother, 

throws a tantrum of epic proportions bc Reasons 

continues to act badly and make things even worse (Avengers) 

has to face consequences for his actions (prison sentence) 

ends up with a stretch of time in which he's free to contemplate and chill out 

feels embarrassed and awkward about how he's behaved

sees an opportunity to make up for it and decides to take it 

helps Thor, saves the day, and ends the film a better person. 

Redemption achieved.

None of this is wrong. The film supports it. It's a fair interpretation. But it leaves. out. so. much.

To circle all the way back around Loki being "a clenched fist with hair," and his actions stemming from his self-hatred, you have to ask - how did he get that way? He didn't end up with all this self-hatred on accident. Generally, one isn't born despising themselves, it's a learned behavior. (I realize chemical imbalances are a thing, obviously, as I have Mental Shit myself, but for argument's sake I'm assuming that's not the case with Loki [at this point in time]). 

Where did Loki learn it? From his family, from his surroundings, from his culture. We see examples of these microaggressions in the first, like, twenty minutes of the movie - a guard openly laughs at Loki's magic after Thor makes a joke about it (the tone of the conversation implies that Thor "jokes" like this often) and though Loki does the snake thing, the guard faces no real consequences. Thor doesn't acknowledge that anything went amiss. Not much later, on their way to Jotunheim, Loki's barely gotten two words out to Heimdall before Thor cuts him off, steps in front of him, and takes charge. Loki doesn't look annoyed at this; he looks resigned. 

Then, for absolutely no reason at all, Volstagg decides to make a jab at Loki ("silver tongue turned to lead?") just because he can. The ease with which he makes this comment and the way that no one else blinks an eye at it implies that this isn't out of the norm. And Loki doesn't react, not really. In the deleted version, he delivers a particularly nasty comeback but he delivers it under his breath, without intending Volstagg to hear it. In the final version, he simply says nothing, though his expression can be read as hurt or stung. Either way, the audience sees an example of Loki being walked all over by Thor and his friends and bottling up his reactions instead of standing up for himself. 

Microaggressions matter. They are mentally and emotionally damaging. They hurt. The implication that this is not unusual treatment for Loki means that Loki's probably gone through this for most of his life. It's like the equivalent of being, I don't know, twenty two and you're the friend who has to walk behind the others when the sidewalk isn't wide enough, and it's been that way since the first day of kindergarten. At this point, you're used to it, but that doesn't make it hurt any less when the jabs come seemingly out of nowhere, for no reason other than to make you feel bad.

(I personally identify a lot with this bc I experienced passive bullying in social settings for years. I was the 'doesn't fit on the sidewalk' friend; I hung around with people who'd pretend to be my friend and would be more or less nice to my face, but would laugh at me and make fun of me behind my back for whatever reasons. And often there'd be the random jabs at me, things that would come out of nowhere to smack me in the face, followed by the fake laugh and “just kidding!" so that I couldn't even get upset without being made to feel like I was overreacting and couldn't take a joke. I'd deal with this socially, particularly in middle school when girls are their most vicious, and then I'd go home and, because I was the only girl with a lot of brothers and because boys are mean and because I am who I am, the dynamic was that my brothers would just endlessly roast me to my face and sometimes it was a "just kidding!" thing, where I was the only one not laughing. But that’s beside the point; my point is that microaggressions, passive bullying, and consistent invalidation are harmful and that shit stays with you into adulthood.) 

So, yes, Loki needs to be held responsible for his misdeeds, and it's valid to say that he recognizes those misdeeds and wants to make amends. I have never disagreed with that. But the problem with this interpretation is that it lets every single other character who contributed to Loki's self-hatred and mental breakdown (let's just call a spade a spade here, that's what it was; he was broken psychologically) get off scot-free.

First of all,

Odin is not held accountable for instilling in the princes a mentality of Asgard first, everyone is beneath us but Jotuns are benath us the most, they are literal monsters. He is not held accountable for pitting his sons against one another (even if it was unintentional, he still did it) with "you were both born to be kings but only one of you can rule" being the general tone of their upbringing. He's not held accountable for his favoritism toward Thor.

Frigga is not held accountable for deferring to Odin both in supporting the above things and in keeping the truth of Loki's origins a secret while doing nothing to discourage the "monsters" narrative. 

Thor is not held accountable for his own tendency of taking Loki for granted (he assumes Loki will come to Jotunheim, he oversteps Loki constantly, “know your place,” etc.. He grants his implicit permission for Loki to be treated as the sidewalk friend in their “group,” a group which is loyal to and takes their cues from Thor as Thor continues to do nothing in his brother's defense).

[Note: Wanting Thor to be held accountable for things he's done wrong isn't vilifying him. Acknowledging that Thor benefited from Odin's favoritism and his own place as Crown Prince doesn't negate Thor also being raised in an abusive environment. I don't think anyone's saying that or, if they have, it's not something I agree with.]

Furthermore, 

Odin is not held accountable for his cruelty in disowning Loki (”your birthright was to die” is never going to be forgotten, speaking of people saying things that can't be unsaid or taken back) and in sentencing Loki to a severe prison sentence (life! only bc Frigga wouldn't let him execute Loki) for crimes that are no worse than what Odin himself has committed (around which the entire plot of Ragnarok revolves! Colonialism (and subjugation) is wrong is, like, a major theme [that people rush to praise, even] here). 

Thor is also never held accountable for not trying harder to understand what made Loki snap (fair enough, he didn't have a ton of time after returning from Earth, but certainly he had lots of time to sit around reflecting while Loki was being tortured by Thanos for a year). He knows Loki is "not himself" and "beyond reason" and accepts it at face value; he questions it once and then lets it go. He's fine with assuming Loki's just lost his mind, and isn't that a shame. (I realize I'm simplifying Thor's emotions but my point is that Thor could've tried harder to figure out that Loki was being influenced and/or not acting completely autonomously.) 

Thor is also never held accountable for - if not facing consequences for his own slaughter of Jotuns - then at least addressing why Loki can't kill an entire race even though Thor tried to do that, like, two days ago. (Granted, it’s difficult to understand how Thor got from Point A ("let's finish them together, Father!") to Point B (this is wrong!), but that failing belongs to Thor 1 (which is not, by the way, a perfect movie).

The interpretation that Loki is fully redeemed because he took responsibility for his actions, returned to Asgard, and allied himself with Thor to save their people is all well and good - but, why is Loki the only one here who has to take responsibility for their actions? 

What about all the loose threads in his story? 

For example, how did he get from: 

Point A (believing himself a literal monster, having a complete mental breakdown, getting tortured and further traumatized after that, etc) 

to 

Point B (Hey, yknow what would be fun? I'm going to write and direct a play about how I heroically died to save Thor and Jane, and I'll go ahead and have Odin say he accepts me and has always loved me. I'm going to do these things because Odin never said this in real life and instead of acknowledging my sacrifice, Thor left my body in the dirt, so someone has to validate what I've done right and that someone might as well be me. And hey, while I'm at it, I'm going to control the narrative on revealing myself as Jotun to Asgard, instead of living in fear of it being found out, and I'm going to do it in a way that they have to sympathize with me and revere me in death, bc they never bothered to do so when I was alive. And Matt Damon should play me, also.) 

to 

Point C (Yeah, I guess I feel kinda awkward about that whole tantrum thing, also I should help Thor and support him being king.)

? 

The answers to these questions are handwaved and the audience takes that to mean they don't matter. Furthermore, framing Loki's redemption around an act of service (more or less) to Thor makes Loki's redemption about Thor. Does Loki make this decision for the sake of Thor and of Asgard, or does he make it for himself? It's not super clear to me, and I think arguments can be made for both. Which, again, is fine, but - whatever.

If we're going to collectively agree, as a fandom, that Loki is complex, that he's morally gray, that he's worthy of redemption and therefore arguably a good person who's done bad things, then why is it asking too much to have it acknowledged that Thor (also a good person who's done bad things) played a part in Loki's downfall and has shit to apologize for, too? Bc one can only assume the reason is that you're taking a very gray concept and making it black and white by saying Loki has to apologize and make amends because he is the villain, and Thor doesn't because he is the hero (and it's his movie). And it's lazy.

This is where the crux of the issue lands. There's more than one valid interpretation, yes. And no two people (or groups of people, or whatever) are going to consume and therefore interpret or analyze the source material in the same way. I think I saw a post recently about how studies have been done on this, in fact. But, there is a lot going on under the surface that tends to get overlooked when exploring Loki's redemption arc in Ragnarok, as far as I can see, and that’s why I don’t consider it satisfactory. 

[I did read similar arguments regarding other issues that are often debated ('debated'), like Loki's magic and/or being underpowered, whether or not Loki's betrayal of Thor was the natural outcome of the situation on Sakaar or not, whether Thor actually gets closure with Odin [if he does, how does he reconcile the father he's idolized with the imperialistic conqueror he's discovered? Why doesn't he hold Odin responsible for covering up Hela's existence and the threat of her return, especially as he knew he was nearing the end of his life? Is Thor's "I'm not as strong as you" meant to imply that he acknowledges those shortcomings of Odin's and that he's okay with them, or that he's just overlooking them, or is he not okay with them but didn't have the chance to get into it bc he was in the middle of battle? T'Challa confronted his father on his wrongdoings in Black Panther; could Thor not have had at least one line that was confrontational enough to establish where he stands as opposed to this gray middle? Can someone explain to me how any of this equates to Thor gaining closure? Please?) but obviously I'm not going to go into all of them (well, I tried not to), bc this mammoth post has gone on long enough (I may not even post this tbh)]

- but my overall point to this entire thing is that when I say I'm critical of Ragnarok bc it's flawed, that Loki's arc was neither complete nor satisfactory, that many things went unaddressed and, due to all of these things, I do not think Ragnarok is a very good movie nor a very cohesive movie, this is where I'm coming from. I have not seen anything to change my mind to the contrary. 

But I am not saying that anyone satisfied with it is wrong, or shouldn't have the interpretation that they do. I'm not vilifying Thor in order to lift Loki up, just acknowledging that Thor is arguably just as flawed as Loki without the stigma of being Designated Villain. I think a lot of these arguments get overlooked or dismissed, and that's fine, but it doesn't make the people who do engage with them hateful, or bitter, or trying to excuse Loki's crimes, or feeling like redemption means that Loki's crimes should be erased rather than reconciled. 

And sure, yes, perhaps we are expecting too much and exploring all of these themes (or wanting them explored) means that somehow we think it should be Loki's movie (we don't). Loki is a supporting character, but he's still a character. And the movie itself doesn't have to delve into all these things - no one's saying that. (At least, I'm not.) We just want acknowledgement, from the narrative, that this stuff was an Issue. 

This could have been accomplished with - 

Some dialogue closer to the novelization (and original script), like Thor and Loki both acknowledging the harm they've done one another and their kingdom due to their Feels.

 A single line of Thor confronting Odin, or even asking "Why?" 

A narrative acknowledgement that Odin did both Thor and Loki dirty (”I love you, my sons” isn't an apology, because it doesn't acknowledge either that there's been wrong-doing or express regret for having done the wrong in the first place). 

A little bit more nuance in the way Loki treats his own past (ie, instead of flippantly telling the story of his suicide attempt, maybe - if it must be flippant - talk about getting blasted in the face with Hawkeye's arrow or sailing through to Svartalfheim [And in that moment, I sang ta-daaaa!]) or whatever. 

I recognize that wanting full, in-depth exploration on all of these issues regarding a supporting character is probably too much to ask or expect - but, I also feel like, if you're going to be professionally writing a narrative (or rewriting/improvising, as it were), it's not too much to ask that a little more care be taken in regards to all of the layers that have contributed to said supporting character's downfall and subsequent redemption arc. I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to want. 

And maybe if there had been more nuance and continuity in how these things were portrayed on screen (ie, if TW had actually done as good a job as his stans think he did), the fandom wouldn't have divided and conquered itself over which "version" of the same character is more valid and whether or not the film did its best to close out a trilogy (not start a new one), to the point where everyone in this fandom space makes navigating it feel like walking through a minefield. 

But, I mean 

(Again, please don’t reblog if possible.) 

Edit: Okay to reblog. <3 

[i-dreamed-i-had-a-son]

Alright so I've seen a lot of opinions floating around and now it's time to add my two cents: the show's Loki is both similar to and distinct from the Loki we remember, and that is, or at least can be, a good thing

We have this idea of the "Loki we know," and we're frustrated that he's not being adapted faithfully--and to a degree, this is correct. Marvel very intentionally chose 2012 Loki as the version to resurrect, because that is when Loki was at the height of his popularity. By doing this, they could get the fanbase that Loki has always had to watch the show, while also avoiding much of the character distortion that came after TDW. A great idea! But then, instead of bringing this character into the show and authentically representing him, they smashed him up with Ragnarok Loki's portrayal. This was mostly done to engage general viewers and to maintain a slightly lighter tone, but both of these are mistakes: first of all, the general viewership has never been Loki's core, active fanbase. But I get it--you want to make money. The second, more egregious mistake, is that you absolutely could have kept a lighter tone with 2012's Loki, and then easily adapted him from there. At the end of Avengers, he's making jokes, and we see even more of these in Endgame. That's humor that's authentic to the character, and doesn't feel disrespectful like Ragnarok was. When we see the Ragnarok style of humor popping up, we immediately get defensive because of how that movie treated him, and we say, "This isn't the Loki we know." But the Loki we know is, to a degree...wrong.

This might seem a bit harsh at first, but I think the fandom as a whole is unwilling to let go of a slightly distorted version of Loki, and that's coloring the fan response to the show. Because we've spent so long with a character that has had relatively few instances of development or even screen time, we've become attached to the version of the character we think we know, sometimes without realizing that collective memory has shifted our perception of him slightly. We're unwilling to let the character change at all, even if at points this growth could be done well--and even if the character was faithfully adapted, he would be met with criticism because he wouldn't be "what we know"; he couldn't be, because we as a fandom created that character, over time and without really recognizing it. To a degree, that kind of misplaced criticism is mixing with the legitimate critiques of the series. It makes us unwilling to look at the good things that are present, even among the flaws.

As an example, let's talk about Loki as a planner, and how his actions in the series compare to those in the earlier movies. A common sentiment I've heard is that throughout episode two (and to a degree, episode one) Loki is just kind of going along with everything. He doesn't seem to have a plan, and this makes people uncomfortable, since the "Loki we know" was a great planner. Wasn't he?

Most of the basis for the "Loki we know," comes from Thor and Thor: the Dark World, so I'll be using those as my "proof texts," so to speak. In those two movies, we see plenty of examples of Loki making spur-of-the-moment decisions to take advantage of a situation; he's a very flexible, adaptable character by nature (as I've discussed before), so this makes sense. The trouble is, I think the fandom memory of Loki has shifted enough that we forget exactly why and how he makes these decisions, and how they turn out. In contrast to what those films actually show us, we tend to think of Loki as a very strategic character, who is too clever to be caught off-guard. That's not the case.

Loki, in those films, has very little grasp or consideration of the consequences of his actions, because his emotions cloud his judgement; because of this, his plans (which are created responsively), and even actions he does not plan, fall apart disastrously. In Thor, when Thor is banished from Asgard, Loki sees an opportunity to step into the role his brother had filled. Then he discovers he is actually Laufey's son, and in response to this news and Odin's falling into Odinsleep, Loki plans to double-cross Laufey and kill him to prove his loyalty, taking the throne in the interim. He does have a plan, but it's one that he developed rather spontaneously based on the circumstances--he didn't plan for Odin to fall asleep so that he could assume the throne, that just...happened, and Loki forms a plan to adapt to it. But when he hears that Thor is trying to return to Asgard, all of his insecurities, compounded by having just discovered that he's actually a Jotun, come back full force; desperate to keep the small bit of identity he thinks he's managed to find, Loki sends an Automaton to kill Thor--whom he loves, and has even said so several times in the film--and then tries to destroy the Bifrost to keep Thor from coming back. These are decisions Loki hasn't truly evaluated; if he had, he wouldn't have made them, because they don't line up with his actual goal, as we see when Thor arrives. When Thor confronts him, Loki essentially has a breakdown, admitting in tears that his real motivation for all of this was just to be considered Thor's equal. He didn't hate Thor, he didn't hate Odin, he didn't even want to be king--he just wanted to be loved as much as his brother. But along the way, his real goal was clouded by his emotional state, and he stopped thinking clearly, instead just lashing out in a desperate bid to protect himself from more pain.

We see something similar occur in Thor: TDW. When Loki sends the guards "up the stairs to the left," he's not thinking about who they might find--he's just lashing out because he's been abandoned by his family, and he wants to exert whatever influence he can over the situation. He wants to do something, especially if it causes problems for Odin and Thor, and he thinks the opportunity has just landed in his lap. He hardly planned for it, but he's not going to pass it up. So he takes it unhesitatingly--and his mother dies. (Coincidentally, after both his father's rejection and his mother's death, Loki nearly dies himself, and at least one of those instances was deliberate. Hmmm...Loki doesn't want to live with the consequences of his actions? It's too painful for him to face what he's done?? Hmm??? But that's beside the point.) Once again, Loki's goals are unclear, and things go wrong because he's just acting on emotion.

All this to say, for Loki, plans are very flexible things that are basically defined as "whatever works best to get what I want," so to say that Loki is just going along with things in the series, and is thus out-of-character, is a bit of an unfair criticism; despite our misremembering, he is, as he's always done, very much acting as a reactive planner. As I've spelled out before, when Loki is thrown into the new environment of the TVA, he immediately starts gathering information, and shaping his responses based off of what he finds. He takes the chances he has to feel things out (at the Renaissance fair, for example), but mostly he bides his time and actively observes until an opportunity arises. This is standard for him, but viewers haven't really been receptive to it, because it isn't what we're expecting.

Now, Loki claims to have a larger plan (something that we think we remember being common), but that's not actually the case. When speaking to Lady Loki/(Enchantress??), he says his ultimate goal is to overthrow the TVA--but he also framed his supposed overall plan as "get an audience with the Time Keepers" when speaking to Mobius. Neither of these are true. In order to more effectively manipulate others, he pretends to have large-scale motivations: with Lady Loki/Enchantress, he knows she will likely only respect him if he claims to have an endgame, since she so clearly does herself, so he manufactures one she likely wouldn't oppose. Mobius, on the other hand, would likely be suspicious without the red-herring Loki throws him; since Mobius believes Loki's trying to get an audience with the Time Keepers, he doesn't become suspicious about how quickly Loki becomes eager to catch the other variant, which would otherwise have been an appropriately huge red flag. But these are just misdirections, further things that Loki is doing to keep himself in the best position possible. That's why his claims of a grand plan (particularly to Lady Loki/Enchantress) sound sudden or unrealistic: they are. But because we think we remember Loki being someone who would have a larger plan, we aren't able to see that he doesn't need to.

This time, unlike in Thor and TDW, Loki's immediate goals are clear: escape the TVA. Be free. Despite Mobius' attempts to get him into a hyper-emotional, and thus, less careful, state of mind, Loki keeps his wits about him. He's intentional with his decisions. He's not lashing out. For once, he's aware of and considers the consequences of his actions--we see him weighing the options as he stands in front of the portal--and he makes the right decisions because his goal is clear in his mind. And this makes all the difference. Loki plays the game expertly, and for the first time, he wins--he escapes.

And I think this is an excellent development, one that deserves more appreciation than we're giving it. It's a good thing that he's not behaving how we think we remember him, as some master planner--that would be being unfaithful to his character. Loki isn't the same as Lady Loki/Enchantress. He doesn't have a grand plan. He just, finally, knows what he really wants. That shows growth, and that is the kind of change we have to want to see, and be willing to accept; so in that regard, it's even good that this Loki is different than he actually was. The Loki we see in Thor and TDW is a highly emotional, and very broken, character, who reacts to his environment often without thinking of the potential consequences; the Loki we're being shown here is still emotional, still clearly affected by what he's gone through, but is now able--or is now being allowed!--to demonstrate his actual capabilities. He ACTUALLY GETS WHAT HE WANTS. That's the first time that's happened, the first time his attempts to protect himself or outsmart someone have actually ended in success instead of disaster. And that's exactly what you should do with a character.

Now, a valid quibble with Loki's characterization is that these things are not obvious, and that is a very legitimate criticism. It's hard to see that Loki is manipulating Mobius by pretending to be helpful, because the show seems to be framing it in a way that encourages us to take Loki at face value. Loki's behavior is an intentional obfuscation, but it can be hard to realize that if it seems like that's what the show is telling us Loki really is. Personally, I justify this by saying that the show is showing us Loki as he wants to be perceived--when Loki is bluffing in episode one, he seems cartoonish and over the top, but certainly nothing like he actually is, and this is what he intends. When he seems too jovial and trusting in episode two, that's because that's what he's presenting to Mobius. It's about whether we buy into the act as much as the other characters do--which is why Loki's most in-character scenes come when he's alone. When he has no one to perform for, he stops performing for us, too, and we see the genuine presentation. But, I could be wrong--maybe this isn't intentional at all. Maybe the writers really are just trying to revamp a character from 2012 and are doing it clumsily, and that's why he seems out of character in moments like those. It's too early to say, and honestly, we may never be sure.

But there are real, valid, and undeniable moments of positive development, the likes of which Loki has never had the space to experience before. They are present if you are willing to look--but they are much less obvious to people who don't want to see them. I agree, they are hard to see, and if I'm being honest, I haven't loved the show anywhere near as much as I would have liked to so far. But I think the fandom as a whole is so caught up in this idea of the "Loki we know" that they don't see the Loki we have for what he is--people are too attached to a misremembering of Loki's previous actions to realize that the change in his behavior isn't a regression or a flaw in his writing but a sign of growth. We're too attached to his brokenness and weakness to let him become strong.

We are defensive about Loki's character because of how it's been mishandled in the past, but if you actually look, you'll find that there is actually a lot of good in what we're being given. I'd agree that the show has to get better about making that obvious if it wants to succeed. But I think some of the harsh criticism the show has been receiving is unwarranted. It might not be perfect, and some of these decisions on the parts of the writers might not be intentional, but Loki has always been a character we've had to think about in order to understand him. Just like this show, there is much good about him beneath the surface. And for as much trouble as it causes sometimes--I'm glad that isn't changing.

[lokiondisneyplus]

Although Loki has been a fixture of the Marvel Cinematic Universe since 2011’s Thor, the character has never had his own musical identity. That all changed with Loki - the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s latest Disney+ series - and the music of Natalie Holt. The innovative, versatile score is a perfect match for the God of Mischief’s sensibilities and is easily among the best sonic works we’ve heard in the genre.

As such, we were excited to sit down with Holt to discuss the inspiration behind the score’s instrumentation, sticking up for her music in late-night dub sessions, and being part of the MCU.

I want to start right at the beginning. What was your reaction when you booked the Loki meeting?

I just knew that it was the biggest opportunity I'd ever had, and I really prepped hard. I went into the meeting with my ideas really fleshed out, and quite a lot of my responses to the script seemed to by some lucky coincidence fit with the directors. That was cool. I then got to do the pitch after the meeting, so I had to score the time theater scene in episode one, and I totally went to town on that as well. I really wanted this job so much because I felt that Loki was a great character and I was a big fan.

You and director Kate Herron were immediately on the same page in regards to using a Theremin for Loki. What was it about that instrument that appealed to you for this project?

A friend of mine had sent me ‘The Swan’ by Clara Rockmore ages ago, and I just loved the sound of it. I had also been listening to lots of BBC Radiophonic workshops, and I'd seen this documentary about Delia Derbyshire as well so I had all these 1950’s, analogue-y synth sounds buzzing around in my head. Tom Hiddleston has a Shakespeare-like quality to his performance, so I thought this needs to have some kind of classical, weighty grandness. So it was a fusion of those two things.

You weren’t on set for Loki, and I know that is something you like to do. In the absence of that, what sparked your creativity the most?

It was engaging with the character in a really deep way. The storyline really got under my skin and inspired me. I had the Loki theme in the pitch, so that’s been there from day one. And as for the riffs in the theme, I feel like Loki is the Salieri to Thor’s Mozart, so I was listening to lots of that. There's a bit of ‘Ride of the Valkyries’ by Wagner in Loki’s theme as well. That was all in the pitch. Then I had a month to write the suite. That was the Mobius theme, the Sylvie theme, and the Variant theme.

For all the hi-tech stuff we see in Loki, the TVA is also very analogue in some respects and you’ve clearly taken that into account with the score. How quickly did you catch onto that and are there any other ways that are reflected in your score?

I sampled lots of clock-ticking sounds. I worked with Daniel Sonnabend - he’s got lots of old analog tape machines - and we were messing around with that. The tape machine player almost became its own instrument. We had this big church bell for the timekeepers at the beginning of episode four. That was sampled and then downgraded, so it gets glitchy as it goes on to signify what’s happening in the story. I was just messing around with a lot of that in the background, and it's all over everything. There's always an urgency and a time-ticking feeling in the background of lots of tracks.

How long does one spend listening to samples of clocks before you find the right one?

I've got a lot! I'm sure they'll come in handy at some point.

I’ve read that you wanted a score that “reflected Loki’s personality.” What were some of the characteristics you were looking to emphasise and accentuate with your score?

Something that I touched on with Kate, from reading the scripts for the very first time was Anthony Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange. In that film, Alex commits these horrendous acts and he's extremely violent, and yet somehow you connect with him. I feel like Loki is the same. He's a likable villain. In the series, he comes to terms with his fallibility and it is quite painful for him. So I suppose my job is to help him reach those emotional depths. When he sees his mother in episode one, his past is calling to him and that's when we hear those haunting Norwegian instruments that suddenly seem to shine. Yearning for your mother is something we can all relate to.

We’ve spoken a bit about the use of the Theremin. What drove your selection of the other instruments?

I did this amazing lockdown project for an ad agency. They kind of got all of their artists to play Pass the Parcel with a theme, and we just did this lockdown piece. I'm not sure how successful it was, but the person that I got sent the material from was Charlie Draper who's a theremin player and a theremin enthusiast. So he was in the back of my mind, and I knew I really wanted to collaborate with him at some point. He played on my demo. And then the Norwegians... I saw them at a concert in Stoke Newington about three years ago. They're in this group called the Lodestar Trio. They're amazing, and they play with Max Bailey. I've known him for years, and I just went to this concert. He did all these interpretations of Bach, but with a kind of Norwegian folky twist. I just loved the instrument combination of the Nyckelharpa, the Hardanger fiddle, and the violin. It sounds mystical and magical and amazing. It felt like the perfect pairing with Loki’s past.

I read that you started with the finale and worked backward. Is that an unusual way of working for you or do you do that often?

This whole show has been a departure from anything I've ever done before, in terms of the scale of it, and, you know, the resources. It's all just been different. I think Kate and Kevin [Feige], the producer, saw it as a six-hour film. They didn't want it to be a TV show. The thing about scoring a film is that you do have that time to really craft themes and to have more of an overarching narrative than you sometimes get to do in TV because there's usually a quicker turnaround. And I guess because of the pandemic as well, I had more time.

I didn’t want to just work my way through the score in a linear order. I wanted to know where I was going and then seed it. I think writing a suite before starting on a picture, and having those themes in my mind before seeing the footage was super useful as well. I think I'm always going to do that from now on.

Are we ever gonna hear the full suites somewhere down the line?

I had never done one before. And I was like, “have you got any examples from anybody else?” So they sent me suites from a couple of other composers, like Ludwig Göransson’s one for Black Panther. I was totally geeking out on that. I heard Mark Mothersbaugh’s suite for Thor: Ragnarok as well, and that was kinda intimidating. But it was really good to hear that they've all gone through this process.

You get to see these epic moments in Loki before there’s any music to it. Was there any particular moment you watched that you were excited to work on?

I read the scripts, and I had Mobius in my head as something very different. I saw him being a bigger person who was quite slow, like a kind of cheeseburger-eating cop. The way Owen Wilson brought that character to life was so brilliant, as was the chemistry between him and Tom. I loved watching their bromance. It was really fun to score them as their relationship blossomed. When Mobius is pruned, that was so awesome. I loved episode four. I had seeded everything and built their friendship up. That moment where Tom walks down the corridor in slow motion with tears in his eyes… I loved scoring that.

Loki is a man of many multitudes, and the show goes down a lot of strange avenues. I love the tracks where you really get to do something different from the main body of the score, like ‘DB Cooper’ or ‘Miss Minutes’.

I had a bit more time for episodes one and two. Like, I had a month to score episode one. By the time I got to episode six, it was really frantic. So, with the tracks you mentioned, I just had the time to do it. Kate was like, “we've got a source track that sort of works, but wouldn't it be really fun if we could do a version of it with the Loki theme?” And I was like, “yep, cool, let's try it.” It was one of the upsides to the pandemic, that we had more time to work on it and do stuff like that. I did a film before with where I got Chris Lawrence - he's like a bass player in London, and he plays in orchestra’s but he also plays at Ronnie Scott’s - and he did the baseline on ‘D.B. Cooper’. He’s so good. And I sang on that track too!

‘Miss Minutes’ felt like a moment to tip your hat to those sci-fi shows and do a pastiche. So I got the theremin and the choir and had some fun with that piece. And again, that's got the TVA theme in it. I think that’s really nice, and it's something they did with WandaVision as well. There's cohesion in the score. Even when you're hearing this jazzy track, you're still getting the Loki theme and you're hearing a different side of his character.

You mentioned how you had more time to score the earlier episodes. Was there anything positive about having less time on the later episodes? How do you prefer to work?

I remember reading something about people who can see colours with music. I feel that I have the same thing with a scene. I can watch a scene and I can start hearing it in my head, and as I get more into a project... I remember watching episode six, and because I was so into the project and into the characters by that point, I was like, that's what needs to happen. I could hear it as I was watching it. I feel like sometimes if you’re spending ages working on something, that instinct can get a bit boiled down. Episode six felt like my most instinctive version of the music because I didn't have time to fiddle around with it. It just felt like that was my very undiluted response.

I like it. Natalie Holt uncut.

I just kind of sketched it all out on the piano as I heard it. It was very quick.

How long did you have to work on that particular episode?

I think it was a week. It was a very quick turnaround with the orchestral recording, and I thought we were going to need more time.

How involved were you with the track Tom Hiddleston sings in Asgardian?

They had found a Norwegian song, and he'd already recorded it. I was like, I think we need a musician in the background. There should be someone on that train who’s a little bit drunk and has an instrument, and it's a kind of space-age fiddle, and they're going to accompany Tom in the scene and I think that's going to really help. Kate and Kevin were like, yeah, that could really work. So I did a few versions where I just took what Tom had done, added some violins,  and then improvised a bit in the middle where Loki sings to Sylvie. And they're like, yes, we've got to do this. So they went back in and shot a pickup of an alien musician in that sequence because I insisted. I really wish it was me!

We know that season two of Loki is in the works now. They better have you on camera.

Oh my god, I'm so up for it!

How did you find it working remotely? Were you involved in the mixing stage at all?

It was kind of frustrating. Getting picture to work in the orchestral recording sessions was a problem. Marvel is very strict about how a picture goes out because they don't want any leaks, so that was quite challenging. I could never send people the picture to play with. It's kind of nice for the musicians to come in and see what they're playing against, but there was none of that. That was a bit of a downside. With that said, it was easier to get hold of people because everyone was at home and really happy to be working. I don't know if I'd have got the job had it not been for the fact that everyone was suddenly happy to accept more remote working than they would have done in the past. So I feel like it's opened some doors. The frustrations and the benefits seemed to be in balance.

Speaking of opening doors, you’re only the second woman to compose an MCU score (Pinar Toprak scored Captain Marvel in 2019). That feels significant.

We're in a time, certainly, where I think people are very consciously opening up opportunities to all sorts of people that wouldn't have had those opportunities before, which I'm really grateful for. A few years ago, I wouldn't have gotten this opportunity until a bit further on in my career. So it accelerated things. We are moving forward. But the thing that I really struggle with… I went to a state school and I got scholarships to study music. It wasn't prohibitively expensive to go to university. I did a master's and I didn't come out with 30 grand of debt. The opportunities are here for me now, but I think if I was young and I wanted to go to film school I wouldn't be able to afford it.

So what bothers me is social mobility. I still think we're opening up our industry, but we're not supporting people being able to study music and being able to get into film, and being able to spend those years doing low-paid jobs from the ground up. I still think we've got a long way to go with that. But I think at my age and my level, I'm just privileged that I did have those bursaries and those opportunities to study music, and I hope they're still there for my daughter's generation.

You have a lot of synths in this score. How tricky was it to find that balance between the classical and modern instruments?It's a blend. There’s some in-the-box stuff. Some of the synths are recorded, and then I ran them through the analog tape machine to dirty them up. I've got a Juno 60, so I've got some analog synths going on. It's such a weird process, isn't it? Creating something and being like, no, that's right! Jake Jackson - who mixed the score - must feel like I’m a complete control freak. I was like, “yeah I really like your mix but can you just go back and basically listen to my demo?” I was quite specific with him. He did an amazing job. The D.B. Cooper track... I cannot believe that he made it sound like that. I've never worked with him before, and handing your work over to an engineer does feel a bit like, oh, how's this gonna be? But it was a really, really great experience, and I think Jake is a genius. He really gets it, and he was really collaborative and respectful of my intentions with everything. I never felt like he was trying to put his mark on anything. It was a really smooth part of the process.

What conversations do you have about how prevalent your music is in the mix when it comes to the TV side of things?

I was so obsessed with Loki that I couldn’t let it go. I went to the dub even when it was two o'clock in the morning. I just wanted to check in and I was calling Kate and asking her, “please can you turn the music up here?” I was like a dog with a bone until it was ripped out of my mouth and they were like that’s it now, this episode is locked. I definitely fought for things to be turned up.

You had a 32-piece choir for the last 2 episodes. What was it like to get that recording in? Are you watching as they’re recording it from a remote location?

They were a Hungarian choir. The male singers could really go down. I was adding notes in at the bottom for those guys to sing. I didn’t know anyone could sing that low. That was cool. I had never recorded a choir before, so it was a new one for me. I was really lucky to have Andy Brown from the London Metropolitan orchestra. He assisted me with the Brass and singing sessions.

I imagine that one of the cooler things about scoring something like Loki is that you are now part of the wider MCU universe. I think I heard hints of Alan Silvestri’s Avengers cue a couple of times…

I put in a Loki version of the Avengers theme at the end of episode 4. Also, at the very start of the season before the title card, it goes from an Alan Silvestri cue and then segues and then I take it over. It was really cool to get to play around with the multitrack from that. I was always a big fan of the Thor: Ragnarok and Black Panther scores, so those were kind of my inspirations. I was just kind of honoured to be in the same league as those people and those scores because I thought they were great and quirky and had all these interesting flavours and textures.

I love that you’ve been given the freedom to be as bold as you’ve been with your score.

I wanted to do something a bit different, and Marvel's TV ventures... they're wanting to do something a bit different and challenging as well with this new direction that they're taking. It felt like there was a lot of creative freedom being dished out with this series, in every department. Kate was like, “let's try this DB Cooper scene with the theme, if it doesn't work then it's fine.” It was just trying things out and seeing what stuck.

I remember handing over my score for episode one, just before Christmas 2020. I'd scored the whole thing and was very nervous because I think it was the first time Kevin Feige and the execs were going to hear my stuff. I’d really worked hard on it, and it had a lot of live stuff. There was just one note back from Kevin Feige - push it further. I think that's so cool. As we went on the execs were really happy with it, I got calls from Victoria Alonso and Louis D’Esposito [Marvel producers]. They both rang me and just thanked me and they were like, 'we're just so happy that you've taken the ball and run with it'. I couldn't have asked for a nicer bunch of people to work with. I wasn't sure how it was going to be, I was a bit intimidated. I thought it might be a bit more terrifying. But actually, it turned out to be a really amazing, fulfilling experience.

Welcome to the world of Loki YouTube covers! How far down that rabbit hole have you fallen, and how much are you enjoying that side of the MCU experience?

It's really flattering. I’ve posted some of them on my Twitter. It’s just amazing how quickly people will post music from the show after episodes. They sound almost the same as my demo, and they’ve knocked it out in about two hours the minute after they’ve watched the episode.

Once your work on Loki was complete, how did you detox? Do you delete all your voice memos?

I've still got them. The TVA theme actually came to me as I was walking down the high street. I've got some in the bank for the future as well. I'm always noodling and sketching things down on manuscript paper. How do I detox? I just bought a new piano. It’s 100 years old. I haven't had a piano for a bit, so I've just been playing a lot of Bach.

[geekns]

Loki - a deeper look

Loki’s journey through the MCU only makes any sense to me if i overanalyze all of it. For examples, what I comprehend through subtext found in the Avengers is: Loki was tortured by Thanos. Loki blatantly presented himself as an enemy to the yet-unassembled superheroes, ensured the Avengers would team up, and was relying on Erik's resistance: all to ensure that he would be defeated. Then he allowed himself to be captured so he could be protected from Thanos on Asgard. 

For some of this, this is basic, right? We’ve eagerly watched Loki for years, we’ve analyzed his actions, we know who he really is. That’s why we’re Loki’s Army. So why does Loki seem so OOC in Loki?

The TVA is not completely all-seeing, but I still maintain that Loki was never alone during the Variant. Take his escape in “Glorious Purpose:” his movements through the Time Twister seem to completely remove him from view rather than blur him (unlike when he's slowed with the time/prune-stick thingy). So the TVA couldn't see him while he is in Time Twister transit, but it certainly did not take them long to find him. 

It took them less than a minute to realize he was missing. It took Loki a few seconds to find Casey, he had two minutes with him before B-15 found him, it took him just over four minutes to watch the end of Alpha Loki's life, B-15 had already found him again, and then he had a couple minutes, tops, to decide what he would do with all this new info before Morpheus found him. That's 5-10 minutes of freedom.

There are cameras everywhere in the TVA. And agents, Minute Men, administrative employees with various states of awareness of their surroundings, and even Miss Minutes herself. If i were Loki, i would assume that my every movement is being watched while I’m in the TVA and out of it.

In fact, Loki’s not even alone when he finds out about the destruction of Asgard!

So what would you do if you were being watched 24/7, would be caught inside ten minutes even if you were able to escape, and resisting and/or not cooperating is going to certainly end with death? Loki's solution seems to be acting as if he's cooperating for as long as it is expedient. Stalling for time, trying to seem harmless, etc.

Yes, it's not the Loki we want to see. Give me Avengers or TDW Loki any day of the week, i'm begging you, just let him use his full capabilities of magic and physical strength. But some of us are finding parallels to his actions that match all of the films he's been in (bless you guys). For instance, when have we known him to overact and be purposefully annoying in the past?

Loki's current behavior is typical of when he's grieving, trying to appear as if he's earning someone's trust, etc. I'm sorry, i know that the overacting is jarring, but surely this is a choice on Tom's part. No, it's not believable that possessed humans can throw him, but equally so, it's not believable that B-15 could, either. 

Loki's interactions with Mobius even echo his conversation with Thor in Ragnarok just before "Get Help." Annoy, appear to be cooperating, do not be assertive or threatening. Yes, even charm his way to the top, but no, it's not about overthrowing the Time-Keepers to rule. Yes, when Thor and Loki are talking in the elevator, Thor assumes that Loki wants to rule Sakaar (Loki merely assumes that Thor doesn't want him to come along back to Asgard). This misconception is one of those things that gets repeated over and over again: “Loki only wants to rule,” they're constantly shoving it into our faces, and I have never bought it. 

In Thor, he wasn't expecting to rule. In the Dark World, he tried to convince Thor to take the throne. In Ragnarok, he immediately ceded the throne to Thor when his brother finally decided to take it. In “the Variant,” the Variant tells Loki that she has no interest in ruling the TVA, once again assuming that Loki means to rule (which is one of the reasons I don't feel like she's Lady Loki, but i digress). 

The only reason Loki wanted to rule is because his mind was twisted by Thanos, that's the only time that ruling was his glorious purpose. And this version of Loki has already shaken that off, decided that purpose was hollow, not in the least bit glorious. Loki is perfectly capable of ruling well, that's not what his heart's desire is.

Loki wants to get to the top so he can save himself, plain and simple. He doesn't want to die. His strategy is consistent again (per Ragnarok, both with the GM and Thor), to prove himself useful to the people who are actually in power. And he doesn't stick his neck out unless he's forced to. If he is caught out being selfless, he plays it off as if it's for glory rather than because he's actually a decent person.

Now, ultimately, Loki probably does have it in mind to overthrow the TVA, but because he does not like their control over him and it would be fun to take vengeance. But, from what I am seeing set up here (and i may be 100% wrong), TPTB are setting us up to be distracted by the superficial Loki--that version of Loki that the people who don't overanalyze everything they watch are used to seeing (because they still do not properly understand what is obvious to us)--just so they can subvert that and give us the Loki that we know and love, as he truly is. 

Someone who wants you to think that he doesn't care, or only cares about himself, but deep down is quite noble and selfless. Who manipulates things behind the scenes for the good of his brother and the good of Asgard. Who is tragically misunderstood and would never wear his heart on his sleeve in public. Who has been literally tortured, and lied to, and told what his intentions were rather than listened to or believed in.

But IF they are just fucking this up then i'm done. I like my version of Loki better than the superficial one that we've been force fed in the past. This is already the MCU’s/Disney’s last chance with me.

[lokigodofaces]

thoughts on loki ep 2: the variant (spoilers)

under cut to not disturb your scrolling

Overall I enjoyed so that's good

Uh frick my mind blanked so sorry if things are completely out of order

I don't know, I expected the renaissance fair to be 2012 or 2021 or 2024 (Loki's time, our time, current time in the "sacred timeline"). So I was genuinely surprised when it was in 1985.

Ok, i really like the title card thing. And how the year scrolls around. It's a nice aesthetic touch there.

I wonder why the female Loki variant chooses her locations? Does she have a thing for renaissance fairs, French cathedrals, and Oklahoma?

1985 is when Back to the Future came out. And it's y'know, one of the most popular time travel movies ever. So I think they chose that year as a reference.

Again, not liking that the minutemen only have numbers, not names. It is giving me lots of Clone Wars vibes. If you don't know anything about Clone Wars, the clones are given number identifiers by the Kaminoans. Things like CT-7567. The clones would give themselves names (CT-7567, for example, names himself Rex). A really good sign throughout the series that someone is a sketchy person is if they call the clones by their numbers. The clones don't want to be known as numbers. They are people too, they deserve names, so they come up with all sorts of creative names (Rex, Fives, Cody, Tup, Hevy, Hardcase, Echo, Waxer, Boil, Wolffe, Jesse, Kix, Fox, Hunter, Wrecker, Crosshair, Omega, Tech, Matchstick, etc). The jedi respect this, and the only jedi that i can think of that called clones by their numbers is Krell, who fell to the dark side. the Kaminoans and other sketchy people all call them by their numbers and the clones don't like it. A big focus of the show is on the clone's agency (at the end, they all have brain chips that take away their agency and force them to kill jedi), and how the clones need to be respected. So for me to see in another series that people are only given numbers is bad. What's worse is that the minutemen are fine with this. They don't see it as dehumanizing or belittling. They are brainwashed into being okay with it. Which says a thing or two about the Time Keepers.

did. did the renaissance fair really have Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out for a Hero" for their renaissance themed fight? Is this normal? Was it normal in the '80's? We saw later that the female Loki can do electronic stuff. Did she rig it to play it? For the vibes?

Also the stuff before the song was about fighting for a princess, and in the end she kidnaps C-20.

Okay, btw, I'm just gonna say Lady Loki for a while because no one has explicitly said Sylvie yet, so I'm going to refer to di Martino as Loki until she or another calls her Sylvie. Cool? Cool.

I was thinking the "Holding Out for a Hero" fight would be the roomba fight or something. It is such a good song that has huge potential for this genre. Why did they use it in a lame fight as that one?

When Lady Loki did the spell on C-20, it looked similar to what Wanda and Agatha can do. As in, it had similar visuals.

Loki reading a random magazine he finds while sitting with his feet on the desk bored out of his mind because he has to learn sh*t is a MOOD.

What is Miss Minutes? She can jump around anywhere, and pop into computers. But she can't be just a projection. She took the effort to dodge Loki swatting at her, so that may mean she was corporeal. She also could be something similar to the Kree's Supreme Intelligence?

So, did Mobius give Loki the shirt, tie, and slacks, but really didn't give him the jacket until they had to call him in? What? That makes no sense? Did the TVA not have any jackets with the variant label? Did someone have to custom design a jacket for Loki?

What is up with this show giving me things I wanted to see only in holographic form? First we saw Coulson's death, and now Loki in his Jotun form in a holograph of another variant.

Okay, Loki being someone the TVA has to constantly deal with is very on brand. Loki is a creature of chaos, of course he's going to unknowingly rebel against the sacred timeline.

Also, headcanon that the Jotun Loki we see is king of Jotunheim because that would be epic.

Also, for personal reasons I choose to believe there is a Loki variant that defeated the Avengers and immediately went queer rights.

Loki's reaction to there being many Loki variants. He's seen what his life is supposed to be. I think he is even more upset that the TVA often deals with him, that there are so many things that could have been instead if it weren't for the TVA and the "sacred timeline."

Also, I totally think Mobius was waiting for another Loki to show up to help him defeat Lady Loki. They get them so often, it makes sense.

Loki explaining the difference between illusion projection and duplication was great. And very helpful to me personally understanding lore. Also, Mobius, get your crap together. If you're a Loki expert, figure this stuff out.

Loki calling the TVA out on propaganda, we love that.

The wolf quote is actually very nice, I quite like it.

Okay, the TVA doesn't even bury or cremate or do any sort of ritual for their fallen minutemen, they just reset the timeline. Which to me seems like another way to show how little the TVA actually care for their workers.

There are statues of the Time Keepers in Ravonna's office. The camera pays extra attention to it. Keep reading for more about Time Keepers and cinematography choices.

What. What sort of relationship does Ravonna and Mobius have? What is going on there? I am really confused.

Who is this "analyst on the side?" What is going on there?

Ravonna is MEGA SUS. Along with that, the Time Keepers are mega sus.

She signs R. Slayer. Yeah. Slayer. Not at all subtle, Marvel. Letting us know that she'll do the deed if needed.

Mobius you are sending me mixed signals. What do you want?

Okay, Mobius saying Loki was a "cold, scared boy" and an "ice runt" and stuff was totally a jab at Loki being Jotun.

Mobius saying Loki is insecure because of Lady Loki is...probably true.

With the elevator, the camera stops and focuses on the Time Keepers.

The Creation of the TVA, the beginning of time, the end of time, all classified. That is sus.

Loki almost crying over Ragnarok was good. Let him cry over the destruction of his home.

Loki being the one to discover something the TVA had no idea about after a day is on brand for Loki. And it shows how the TVA really are vulnerable.

Mobius: Really? In front of my salad?

No but the object lesson was well done and actually did help me understand what Loki was talking about.

Casey! Casey drinks grape juice! Imagine how confusing this is for Casey though. Loki is captured, threatens to gut you like a fish (whatever that means), and now he's dressed like an analysist, stealing your juice box. Does Loki get Casey more juice?

Honestly, Loki looking at everything logically and scientifically is fantastic. Adds to the science = magic thing Marvel's got going on, since Loki is a sorcerer.

Loki saying volcanoes are cool is fun. I agree. Volcanoes mean the planet is geologically active, which means we won't die. Also, there is a volcano named Loki on one of Jupiter's moons. I wonder if the creators knew that and put Loki in Pompeii because he is already linked with volcanoes.

Mobius telling Loki to start off small and Loki completely disregarding that felt very personal to me.

Loki being absolutely chaotic and telling everyone they were going to die while speaking perfect Latin was iconic. I want more of that content. Let the man be buckwild.

Again, Loki finding something out after a day that the TVA never knew about is on brand.

"Be free, my horned friends, be free!" I love that way too much.

Mobius being obsessed with jet skis wasn't something I expected, but I'm down for it. Heck, even Loki admitted they were cool.

The discussion on beliefs is going to lead to saying the Time Keepers are bullcrap. Hopefully.

Grapes and nuts are "candy" on Asgard. So, when Loki was eating grapes in Ragnarok, we can interpret that as him eating M&Ms. Second, this might add to something I've seen around here. I've seen things about a book somewhere with Loki saying chocolate fountains are mythical (which is really funny to me). So, I guess Asgard really doesn't have chocolate.

Oh my gosh, so many apocalypses between 2047 and 2051...hopefully none of those happen in real life.

Roxxcart is probably part of Roxxon, something that has been around in Iron Man movies.

Lady Loki got the shovel thing from Roxxcart that she left in Oklahoma! The minutemen said it was from the early third millenia, which is where we are now! 2050 also fits that category!

I saw something about the file saying Class 8 hurricane...there are only 5 classes...which means this is a crazy storm.

Does B-15 want Loki dead? This is a legitimate question, because I think she does. Dead or pruned.

Loki looking around at the storm, I love it. This could be him loving science, or him missing Thor, since Thor creates storms. Also, at this point Loki probably things Thor dies shortly after him in the sacred timeline, so Loki would be particularly sentimental about Thor.

I love Loki drying himself off and not anyone else. And B-15 yelling about his magic. And Loki's motions are so fluid, it's so aesthetically pleasing, I love it.

Dudes, I thought B-15 was going to try to prune Loki when they were alone.

Okay, was Lady Loki bsing about the azalea sale, or does Roxxcart actually do that? I want to know.

Wunmi Mosaku did a really good job as Lady Loki, I loved it.

Loki being annoyed at Lady Loki and saying he understood how Thor felt, does that insinuate Loki can do what Lady Loki was doing?

B-15 and C-20 were both very shaken after being possessed by Lady Loki. I wonder how that felt for them? We've had different explanations of mind control/brainwashing/similar from Clint, Bucky, Daisy, Mack, Fitz, and Monica in the MCU (including AoS). I wonder what is specific to Lady Loki's possession.

C-20 kept going on about something being real. What was that about?

C-20 revealed the location of the Time Keepers to Lady Loki!

Lady Loki not wanting to be called Loki could be a sign she is Sylvie.

There's something weird where Loki's voice echoed around while the camera focused on Lady Loki. Maybe she's telepathic?

Someone needs to keep a tracker on people telling Loki this isn't his story in a show literally about him.

But, that does add to themes for his life, and how everything was always about someone else in his life. He was always a supporting character for Thor, for Odin, for Thanos. Now, even in his own story, everyone insists he doesn't matter.

I was wondering what the reset charges would be used for. I wasn't expecting a massive bombing of the sacred timeline! Wow! That was unexpected and I loved it!

Okay, this isn't from me, this is from New Rockstars. But to list all the places mentioned on chronomonitors, either bombed or not: Knowhere, Barcelona, Niflheim, Dartford, Phong Nha, Lisbon, Vormir, Thorton, Cookeville, Asgard, Rome, Sakaar, Barichara, Porvoo, Ego, Titan, New York City, Tokyo, Hala, Kingsport, Xandar, Beijing, Madrid, Portland, Jotunheim. Bolded are other planets. Those are almost all the planets visited in the MCU. So fun easter eggs there!

I like Lady Loki's aesthetic. The fingerless gloves, the cloak, I love it. And YES SHE ISN'T SEXUALIZED. So many genderbent characters are excuses to sexualize women. But Lady Loki is just as covered as the male Lokis.

Lady Loki just...left the time door open for Loki to follow...for a really long time...I'm worried he's running into a trap.

What is Loki going to do now?

Theory time y'alls: Lady Loki bombed the sacred timeline to flush the minutemen out of the TVA, leaving it defenseless. And she's gonna go after the Time Keepers themselves. We know she gets into the TVA from trailer footage, and that's what I think we're gonna see next episode. I think she (like the Loki we are following) is upset over the lack of free will, and she plans to change that. That's why she wasn't interested in helping Loki "take over" the TVA, because she doesn't want to become the leader of a new TVA, she wants it destroyed.

Alright, back to the Time Keepers stuff. They keep focusing on the middle Time Keeper. Even in the end credits they have a weird cut to focus directly on his face. I'm not 100% on this, but I like this theory. That face is similar to Jonathan Major's, the actor confirmed to be Kang the Conqueror in Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. Kang is a well known time travelling villain in Marvel. Maybe he is Kang, and is using variant versions of himself (that's a Kang thing in the comics) to mess with the timeline, and no one expects that from him. Also, Renslayer was his S/O for a bit in the comics, and they keep framing her in front of that one Time Keeper's face. I feel like this would be a good way to set up Quantumania and to show how sus the Time Keepers are.

Also, Loki was absolutely adorable the entire episode. And he got to sleep! Yay for him!

Again, I enjoyed, and can't wait for next week!

[managedmischiefs]

my rant about villain characters

okay.

I have a beef w the way “villain” characters are portrayed in tv shows and movies.

 I’m convinced that writers just throw in as much malice and anger as they can without rereading or editing or actually watching what they produce. again, I’m not talking about fan fiction because that shit SLAPS.

for this rant, I’m going to talk only about criminal minds because those are the only examples I can remember and I know that everyone who follows will understand the examples I use. also, I’m exempting unsubs from this for obvious reasons.

the first villain I’ll be talking about is Linda Barnes. GARBAGE. HORRIBLE. THE WORST. every time she comes on screen, you groan and want her off. I get it, that’s the point of her character- to cause conflict. but her character took away from my enjoyment of the show because she made watching the show a chore. I didn’t want to watch when she was in the episode.

this is because she had no redeeming qualities and this is where my argument lays. Linda Barnes has literally no good moments. she kicked Spencer off the team, made Rossi retire early, moved Garcia to a different department and stripped her of all the color that the BAU allows, then didn’t allow the remaining members of the BAU to go on cases and DIDNT CARE THAT PEOPLE WERE DYING AND THEY SAID IT OUTRIGHT THAT SHE COULDNT GIVE A SHIT. when she was told certain cases that JJ wanted the team to work, she immediately wondered how those cases would make the bureau look, not how it would help the victims or their families. then eventually she puts a saved victim in harms way after the unit chief (Queen JJ) tells her not to and ends up getting that saved person SHOT (even if she was wearing a vest) and Barnes didn’t that just because she thought that takedown was taking too much times.

I understand that she was in the show for a short time, but she had no personality other than her job and being a bitch and trying to disband the BAU for no good reason other than she felt like it. she had not one single good moment in all the episodes that she was in and it took away from the enjoyment of watching the show.

this is the fault of the writing. it’s the writers job to write characters that viewers can connect to, even if they’re villains. ain’t nobody out there saying “I stan Linda Barnes” NO BECAUSE SHES A BITCH AND MADE THE BAU’S LIVES A LIVING HELL!!! the writing of this character was absolutely terrible and the reason is that she had no redeeming qualities.

NOW

a perfect example of a well written villain is Erin Strauss. it’s no secret that in the beginning of the show, she kinda had it out for the BAU, for whatever reason (and if there was a reason then I don’t remember it lol). she definitely makes their lives harder, especially when she follows them into the field, even when she doesn’t have field experience.

but as her character progresses and she grows, she becomes a better person. this growth is perfectly seen in the finale of season seven (the last two episodes, titled “hit” and “run”). Hotch asks her to defy the directors orders and while she’s hesitant to do so, she trusts the BAU and their processes and defies the director. we even see her ignoring a call from the director while they’re in the field.

Strauss was obviously meant to be the villain of the show and while she was definitely shown to be out for the BAU at the beginning, she had a very clear arch and backstory and she had a lot of growth. she overcame her alcohol problems and made amends with Derek Morgan and even in her last moments before dying, she refuted what Hotch said about her having a favorite child. even in the moments before her death, we can see the stark difference in her character and how much she grows.

writers need to see that villains (aside from the serial killers on the show) are not all bad. there needs to be some humanizing qualities to them or else the viewers will want to shut the show off as soon as they come onto the screen. you can’t have a writer just be bad bad bad bad bad and not having some sunshine moments to them. it’s frustrating and it makes me want to chuck my remote at the tv and think of the consequences later. please. from an avid tv/movie binger- think a lot about how to give your characters archs and make them better people by the time they leave the screen than when they entered.

hopefully that made sense and I didn’t just fully ramble too much lol

if you want more examples:

(I won’t go into depth with these!)

villain characters without redeeming qualities:

•Liza from 68 Kill

(yall i fucking hate this bitch she was so horrible)

•Alexis Carrington from Dynasty (season 1 and 2)

•Adam Carrington from Dynasty (season 1 I think and 2)

•Dolores Umbridge from Harry Potter

characters w redeeming qualities

•Sue Sylvester from Glee

•Zuko from Avatar the Last Airbender

•Jade West from Victorious

•Loki from the Avengers epic (specifically in Thor Ragnarok and Avengers Endgame)

•PL Travers from Saving Mr. Banks

(GO WATCH THIS MOVIE ITS ONE OF MY FAVORITE MOVIES OF ALL TIME ITS SO AMAZING AND ITS ON NETFLIX!!!!!!)

as always I’m open to opinions and debate so let me know what you think☺️

[adventures-in-a-world-of-fiction]

Skip-to-the-end character development

One thing that annoys me about Endgame is the way it handles character development. If you look back at the older MCU films (or the recent, good ones) then characters grow and change.

- Iron Man was all about Tony's personal journey. He started out cocky and irresponsible. He realised the consequences of his past actions and changes the direction of his company as well as creating a way for him to directly intervene to help the people he had put in danger. The Tony Stark standing up at the end and honestly admitting to being Iron Man is not the same Tony Stark who was shrugging off a stage appearance he'd promised his friend he would be at.

- Captain America: The First Avenger is about Steve striving to be allowed to fight, being forced into a caricature of being a hero, and then becoming more than the costume. The character growth isn't as pronounced as Iron Man, but it's there.

- Thor is basically a movie about Thor learning to be a better person and a better leader. He was kicked out for being unworthy and learned (over a ridiculously short span of time - seriously, this story would have felt more honest if he had spent a few weeks on Earth not a few days) to be worthy again.

- Winter Soldier has Steve start off purposeless, not sure what makes him happy, not sure what he wants to do with his life. At the end, he knows his purpose and he will fight anyone who stands in his way.

- Even Iron Man 3 has Tony learning that what makes him special and what makes him Iron Man has never been the suit.

In terms of the recent, good ones:

- Black Panther has T'Challa learning about his father's mistakes and deciding to correct them, growing out of his father's shadow.

- Captain Marvel is all about Carol's growth. She learns who she really is and stops defining herself in terms of limitations set by other people. She starts off desperate to prove herself and by the end knows that she has nothing to prove.

- Thor Ragnarok has Thor learning that his power isn't defined by his hammer and shows Loki moving from doing everything for personal gain to risking everything to save Thor and his people.

In all these films, people change and grow. That's character development. We see it unfold on the screen. Character development isn't essential for a film to be good, but it sure as hell helps.

So what about the character development in Endgame? Why did that annoy me so much? Because it all happens off-screen. Characters change dramatically - but it all happens during that five year time skip. The world has changed and people change too, but we don't get to see any of it. It's a skip-to-the-end approach to character development.

- Bruce in Infinity War is at war with himself, the two sides of his personality in conflict. In Endgame, he's merged them, getting the best of the strength and the brains. But how? How did he manage to get the two sides to communicate? How did that progress, because it presumably took time and effort. I would have liked to see that.

- Hawkeye's fall into darkness would have made a fascinating movie. He is a happy family man who watches his family disappear before his eyes. How did he cope immediately after? What made him decide to kill his first victim? How did he start on his vendetta against the evil criminals who were spared by Thanos' randomness? There is so much in there that could have been a really interesting story. Instead, we get one fight scene to show that he's dark now. This could have been an opportunity to learn about his past too, what he was doing before SHIELD recruited him. So many questions that the MCU never even asked could have been answered.

- Thor's slide into depression and despair could have been poignant and meaningful. We could have seen his emotional journey, instead of it being treated as a hugely offensive and unfunny fat joke.

- Tony finds peace. After all the trauma he's suffered, he manages to settle into a life of quiet domesticity. I can understand why this wouldn't make the cut of a big, action film, but some character moments of him adjusting would have been nice to see. The fact that he's willing to look past all his dad's lousy parenting rings false, but it could have been the result of interesting growth as he experiences parenthood himself. But it just feels grating because we don't see any of that. We could have seen him come to understand how difficult being a parent is and see why his dad left the raising of him to other people. We could see him trying to be a better father than Howard but in the process learning more about why his dad was so distant, or recalling moments when his dad did actually so kindness, so that when he says that all he remembers is the good stuff, it doesn't feel so out of nowhere.

- Even Steve and Nat show changes. It would have been interesting to see Steve try to take on Sam's role as a counselor, to see why he decided to do that. We could have seen Nat realising that Fury is gone and stepping up to try and fill his shoes, struggling with the responsibility but desperate to try.

- We could have see Okoye dealing with the fact that the king and Shuri are both dead, having to assume a mantel of leadership beyond that of a warrior.

Instead, we get nothing. The characters are one way at the start of the film and another way after the time jump. This particular movie is the most blatant example of character development that happens off-screen, but there have been other examples of characters having all their development between movies. Bucky is the perfect example of this. At the end of Winter Soldier, he pulls Steve out of the river and is seen in the post-credits clip looking at his memorial in the museum. Jump to Civil War and he's living on his own, in hiding, stable enough to go out and buy supplies for himself like a regular member of society, and he's regained enough of his memories to know who Steve is and what they mean to each other. At the end of Civil War, he goes into the ice because he doesn't doesn't trust his own mind, but by the Black Panther post-credits scene, he's awake and living peacefully and being teased by kids.

All his healing and recovery of his autonomy happens in those moments between films. If you follow me on AO3, you know I love Winter Soldier recovery fics, because there is so much interesting potential in how someone comes back from that trauma, how someone can learn to be a person again after being treated as an asset. It's a fascinating concept that is at the core of Bucky as a character - and the movies just skip over it. He's well enough now for Steve to abandon him and go back into the past. How did he get well enough? Who cares?

Me! I care!

Marvel seem to think that they can ignore all the interesting character development in favour of more quips and battle scenes.

I know Endgame was already a long movie, but think about what it could have been like to have a film in between IW and E. We could have had Avengers: Aftermath dealing with the immediate fallout. We could have had the first part of the movie with the death of Thanos, and then had the rest of the film be about them dealing, with some growing from it (Tony and Bruce), some barely holding themselves together (Steve and Nat), and some falling into despair (Clint and Thor). There would have been time to actually give Carol some semblance of personality too. The film could end with the Avengers scattered, and Steve going through Scott's things for some reason, activating the machine to bring Scott out of the quantum realm (because the rat is just a stupid deus ex machina if they weren't going to have it turn out to be an actual deus i.e. Loki). The very final part of the film could be Scott thinking that the quantum realm could be the answer, giving them hope for the next part.

I just think that by missing that middle chunk out, the whole thing feels hollow and empty and cheapens the payoff. Yes, we can fill the gap with fanfic, but you shouldn't end up with the situation where fanfic is having to do the entire legwork of the character building because the canon just couldn't be bothered with that.

Explosions and big battles are all well and good, but you've got to care about the characters for those big action scenes to matter, and people care about the characters because of character development. At least that's how I think it ought to work.

[luninosity]

Okay! Time for a slightly longer Avengers: Endgame thoughts post!

First, I do really, really like the film overall, so let’s get that out of the way right now: I had moments of wanting to cheer, tearing up, all that, and I want to see it again immediately.

Having said that...I do have Some Thoughts, which are not 100% positive.

Spoiler warnings, obviously! Only read if you’ve seen/don’t mind spoilers!

First, the AWESOME. OH MY GOD SO MUCH AWESOME.

--STEVE IS WORTHY OH HELL YES *screams in delight* And Thor’s genuine excitement about this! So perfect!

--STEVE ROGERS STANDING ON THAT BATTLEFIELD FACING DOWN THANOS’S WHOLE ARMY. This is a brilliant Steve Rogers character moment, it’s a brilliant narrative moment, it’s a gorgeous shot visually, it’s EVERYTHING -

--AND THEN EVERYONE ELSE SHOWING UP AT HIS BACK, YES YES YES, I WANTED TO CHEER AND CRY, LOOK AT THEM ALL TOGETHER AND FORMING UP BEHIND STEVE AND “AVENGERS ASSEMBLE” AND *screams more*

--Valkyrie getting to be king! She already has ideas for change! It’s a small moment but so satisfying, seeing where she is now versus her introduction in Ragnarok.

--”AMERICA’S ASS”

--actually everything about that Steve-on-Steve fight scene, Chris Evans’ delivery of every single line, the name-drop of Bucky being what worked

--I actually really love pretty much all the time hops, and Tony going with “Howard Potts” as his alias is both hilarious and heartwarming

--Morgan! Tony being a Good Dad! 3000!

--cheeseburgers, oh god my heart, this moment actually made me tear up

--Tony’s death felt well-earned, satisfying, and in-character, and that “I am Iron Man” - oh god yes, see above about in-character and also heartwarming and heartwrenching simultaneously

--Sebastian Stan continues to be very pretty

--Thor doesn’t magically get his old pirate-angel body back - I have a LOT of other less positive thoughts about this representation, which we’ll get into in a sec - the thing is, I do like this one aspect of it, because he doesn’t need to be magically “healed” of his fatness or anything like that; he’s chubby and damn heroic and still good at being a hero, and speaking as someone who always struggles with weight, that was actually really lovely

--Paul Rudd continues to be weirdly superhumanly likeable

--Gamora’s reaction to Star-Lord

--Nebula! Karen Gillan is fantastic throughout, and so central to the storyline

--Sam taking the shield! I love this - Bucky’s tired of the fight, which Steve knows; Sam has the heart and the will, and he deserves it, and Bucky’s clearly fine with that, and I’m so excited to see Sam Wilson as Cap

--just everything overall felt so fulfilling, like, yes, this is good, thank you, MCU, thank you

The Ambivalent (sure, yeah, okay)

--Clint and Nat: I actually really like Nat’s choice and sacrifice, doing it knowingly, and it also feels in-character for her as a dedicated protector; I don’t quite get why we’re pushing Clint to the forefront so much in this movie when he’s been so absent, and I dislike the implication that he somehow has more to live for because he’s got a biological family, versus Nat’s found family

--Thor’s killing of Thanos and the “I went for the head” and also the arm - yeah, look, you learned something! But also...it really just makes you *not* doing that in Infinity War seem...even dumber. But at least you learned, I guess?

--the Girl Power(tm) moment in the final battle. You know, the super-unsubtle obvious shot. Like, part of me went YES!! and another part of me cringed because WOW, that felt...not at all organic and incredibly staged

--Steve Rogers part one: I don’t actually mind that he took a side trip and saw Peggy and got some closure. It’s a nice nod to the end of First Avenger. And I love Steve getting to retire - not die - as Cap: he can still do so much as himself, maybe art or activism or support groups or all of the above, and he deserves a chance to find out who Steve Rogers is when not Captain America. Having said that, this is ambivalent because I really don’t like how it was done. More on that later.

--I love that Harley showed up at Tony’s funeral, but at first neither I nor Awesome Husband knew who the random person even was. We figured it out, but if you don’t know, it’s really unclear

--Carol. She’s wonderful and amazing in every scene she’s in, but also...weirdly...underused. Were they afraid she was too powerful?

--maybe I’m just kinda over Chris Pratt, I don’t know, but a lot of his dialogue didn’t land right for me? Clunky. Trying too hard to be funny? Maybe.

--I don’t really understand how time travel works in the MCU, but whatever, let’s just roll with it

--Loki! Fantastic to see again, also underused, but I’m very curious to see what’s next

The Not So Positive

--ALL the Thor fat jokes. This is a big one, and it pulled me out of the movie as I was watching it, as this kept happening. It’s obviously a serious manifestation of his trauma and PTSD, and yet pretty much every single character cracks a joke, and no one actually tries to support him. I’m...not a fan of that. (Side note: having just rewatched Infinity War, there’re fat jokes there too, about Quill. Do the writers/directors have an issue with fatness?)

--after Nat dies, there’s a whole lot of scenes of Rooms Full of Only Dudes, and Primarily White Dudes, at that, directing the narrative

--speaking of, how about a memorial service for Nat?

--Steve Rogers part two. (We’ll get to Steve and Bucky in the next point; this one’s about the time travel.) Like I said above, I don’t mind him wanting to take a side trip and get closure; he deserves that. And if I’m understanding MCU time travel right, he created an alternate branch, so “our” reality still all happened and everything. So. My first problem here is that we can assume he spent that alternate reality still Being A Hero - fighting evil, saving Bucky, getting into a happy triad of Steve/Peggy/Bucky if you want to imagine that - but we’re not shown any of that. We’re shown him...suddenly pining a lot for Peggy, which feels odd anyway: part of Steve’s arc has been him finding his place in this new century and his new found family. And then we’re just shown the dance. SHOW US STEVE AS A HERO IN ALL TIMELINES, PLEASE. But I digress. If this is a branching timeline, the way Steve shows back up on the bench shouldn’t work. He shouldn’t just live through all the years and wander over to the bench at the right time, because he’s not in the right timeline for that. (Maybe there’s something we’re not shown, like him tinkering with his time travel GPS? If that’s the case it needed to be much clearer.) There’s also no particular reason he needs to get or stay old (maybe he wants to experience aging, idk?) - we’ve established that we can de-age, for example, Scott. And Steve Rogers is a stubborn kid who will always want to be able to fight whatever might be coming - even if he’s still retiring as Cap, doesn’t he want another few decades with his current family - Bucky, Sam, Clint, Morgan Stark, everybody? Now he’s...much older than everyone, physically and mentally, and I guess that can still work but...it’s going to be a whole strange adjustment for him and for everyone...but anyway, the time travel as it’s shown seems to...break their own rules, and also I don’t like how suddenly emphasized his desire for Peggy is in this film, and I don’t like having to just sort of...guess about what Steve does in that timeline. (Also, side note: why is *only* Steve returning all the stones? Wouldn’t having a partner be helpful? In case things go wrong, as things so often do? AS WE’VE SEEN IN THIS VERY MOVIE.)

--STEVE AND BUCKY. This is the other big one. We all know I am a Steve/Bucky fan, but honestly I’m not even factoring that in here. It’s not about shipping. It’s about the fact that Steve’s narrative arc, Steve’s character arc, has been so entwined with Bucky up to now - and here they barely interact. The person Steve lost - the person Steve keeps losing - is Bucky. The person Steve shares memories of couch cushions and moving in together and Sarah Rogers’ name with - is Bucky. We’ve had to the end of the line, we’ve had even when I had nothing I had Bucky, we’ve had (paraphrasing here, I know it’s not an exact quote) he said Bucky’s name and suddenly I was a kid in Brooklyn again, we’ve had all of Winter Soldier and the relevant parts of Civil War, we’ve established over and over, canonically, that Steve and Bucky save each other. Bucky knows Steve even through brainwashing. Steve fights to save and protect Bucky. They love each other. (Friends love each other. It’s okay to show that.) They sacrifice for each other. And that relationship - in a film that’s meant to be a culmination, a wrapping-up, and closure for Steve Rogers - is almost entirely absent. And I’m not okay with that, emotionally and also as a narrative choice for Steve’s arc - like, as a writer (and English professor!) myself, this legitimately bothers me. I don’t feel fulfilled and I don’t feel happy about it. Especially not - as in the article I reblogged a bit ago - when we’re given other reunions, like Tony’s joy at getting “the kid!” back, with real pathos. I know the film’s already over three hours, choices have to be made, etc. But we could’ve had fewer fat jokes and a few more seconds of Steve and Bucky interacting, y’know? I just...I don’t like it. It doesn’t feel good or right.

Okay! Those are my thoughts.

Once again, I really really like the movie overall, and overall I am left happy and wanting to watch it again. That’s true. There’re just...some things.

I may or may not attempt to write my fix-it fic. There are so many already and I’m not sure what I could add that’s new, and I think I still don’t understand MCU time travel. But I also really want to deal with some of these emotions. We’ll see.

[machi-kun]

Thanks for answering my question! And I’d love an in depth explanation of the compatibilities if you’re offering!!

of course! it’s no problem at all, I actually have a lot of fun talking about stuff like this SJDFSKDJFHKDJFS Here’s a brief explanation of why I put them in that order:

1. Rhodey: I feel like this is pretty self-explanatory. Despite Rhodey’s attitude being a little more uptight at times, you can see, in canon, that he’s just as dynamic and wild and capable as Tony, they share a similar humor and they have genuine care and affection for each other. Even if they have bad moments, like in IM2, it’s never out of hatred or anything like that - it’s Tony acting contrary to their friendship on purpose, out of his own issues, not a demonstration that their friendship isn’t as strong as it seems. In fact, it’s only proof that their friendship is as strong as it seems that Rhodey is able to jump back to Tony’s side almost immediately as he realizes what is really happening, and no hard feelings are kept from either of them. Out of everyone else, these two are the ones who truly understand and support each other.

2. Pepper: Pepper goes second because even though she has learned to navigate through Tony’s personality and issues quite well, and they do seem to have a nice relationship, Pepper falls short in a place where Rhodey doesn’t, and that’s why she’s the second, not the first, on this list. Pepper really struggles to understand Tony’s motivations as Iron Man - which is to say, she tries really hard to help Tony with some of his issues, but she goes about it in a less than advisable way. It’s not the worse of problems, certainly not in this list, but it’s enough not to give her first place, because between someone who vehemently tries and fails to conciliate this part of their lives together, in comparison to Rhodey, who does it flawlessly, does indicate that something in their relationship doesn’t fit quite as neatly as the first one does.

3. Natasha: In the MCU, Natasha and Tony are so eerily similar it’s shocking. They both have the same kind of personality, they both are very good in keeping a tight hold on their feelings, but are hopelessly loyal, despite pretending they’re lone wolfs or whatever they want the world to believe they are. They also are adaptable, in a sense that if they need to change plans quickly, change sides, change perspectives, change everything to make a certain mission work, they’ll do it, even if it’s hard - they struggle to live on the line between being practical and being idealists, because they are both, and sometimes they make decisions that hurt each other, but they never harbor too many hard feelings because they understand each other far too much to not see the other’s logic when they try to analyze their decisions. What’s unfortunate about the MCU is that Natasha made one of those decisions at a very essential moment of the story, which makes her seem far more loyal to Steve than to Tony - and whether you believe that or not, it’s up to you, but she doesn’t do it out of dislike for Tony; she merely does it because that’s what they do, they adapt.

4. Bruce: Though Bruce and Tony have opposite reactions to things sometimes, with Bruce choosing to step back because of his insecurities and being far more hesitant for it, and Tony acting despite them even though it costs him, almost to the point of recklessness - they have a very deep understanding of why they do so, much like Natasha and Tony. Both Tony and Bruce share some very similar insecurities, guilt about hurting people when they’re not careful, and despite it all, they still feel strongly enough about it to fight and help, because that’s more important to them than their insecurities. There’s a lot of camaraderie in that. See that Bruce also goes along with Tony in AoU despite their small problems along the way, and also despite Bruce’s fears about Vision coming out like Ultron: because they both understand what they’re trying to do, they don’t doubt the other’s intentions, and even if Bruce is not willing to push himself as far as Tony does, that doesn’t mean he doesn’t understand why Tony does it.

5. Bucky: The thing about compatibility is just that we don’t always have the same amount of shared screentime for every duo, so it’s a little hard to figure out dynamics like this, since they interact so little and in such a specific situation. Based on what I know about these characters’ personalities, I also have to do some theorizing to figure out some more informative details from the dynamics. What I see from Bucky that would be a stepping stone for a great relationship between them is exactly their very careful approach to determine if someone is trustworthy or not. Bucky is in a bad mental state so he’s very cautious, but very open, to gather information - and when is Tony not that? Both are also staggeringly loyal, but Bucky is not loyal the way Steve is, despite their friendship - Steve is forceful, and Bucky is conceding. And guess what - Tony is also conceding. They share an unfortunate amount of trauma too, which, for better or for worse, really adds a layer of understanding between them, even if their history begins with a bad story, it allows a kind of companionship and feeling of protectiveness and community that only a few things in life do. If they had the opportunity to surpass this bad break and become friends - they would be really great friends. It’s a shame they never got the chance.

6/7. Strange and Steve: I put them in the same place not because they have the same problem, but because their problems are equally impeding - they both are too involved in their own plans to make concessions, and that’s something that causes problems with Tony. Tony concedes most of the time, but he’s incapable of doing it all the time, nor he should do it all the time. We haven’t seen enough of Strange for me to believe he has trust issues that run as deep as Steve’s do - he seems to suffer from the same brand of assholery and i-work-better-if-i-make-the-call attitude Tony did at first, but if Tony can grow out of it, there’s no reason for me to believe Strange can’t do it too - even though Strange is, by nature, more reserved than Tony. Steve’s problem runs a little deeper. He and Tony share similar ideals, and they’re both as pro-active, which would put Steve above Strange on this list, but at the same time, he has massive trust issues and we’ve already seen what kind of consequences those trust issues can have between them. I would almost say Steve gets over it thanks so some of his attitudes in Endgame, but alas, his ending contradicts a lot of stuff, so as it stands, it’s very ambiguous how exactly they would be capable of a prolonged, peaceful relationship. 

8. Thor: What makes me really upset about Thor sometimes is his lack of availability to be present and open with the rest of the team. Taika was the only one to get it right, I believe, but unfortunately, since Ragnarok only has Bruce around for us to test that theory, it makes it really hard to get a clear idea of what it would be like had Thor been emotionally available for the others too. I feel like they could get along, had the Thor we saw in Ragnarok continued - if that was the case, I would have put Thor all the way up next to Bruce, but seeing as canon cant make up their mind and changed Thor’s attitude and personality again for IW and Endgame, I have no choice but to assume Thor is simply not compatible for the kind of interactions with Tony that others can have, not the way he ended up being cemented as in canon.

9. Clint: Clint is, by far, the least compatible with Tony, from what I can gather from him. Though it seems at moments that they can be amicable (like the party in AoU) Clint is quick to change his opinion in a way that’s very intense, he can jump from complete mistrust to total attachment in a matter of minutes, and that’s not something Tony can handle, because if there’s something that fucks up Tony a lot is trust issues. Clint also seems to be very mistrusting of Tony in particular, and even if it wasn’t, and he would grant Tony the same “courtesy” he grants Wanda for example, to change his opinion and give the people he finds less than pleasant a chance - he doesn’t do it with an expression of genuine and vulnerable regret, as an apology should; either he doesn’t do it, or he doesn’t do it to the person who deserves to hear it, or he does it too late. Clint’s emotional availability is untrustworthy, and at times it almost seems like his loyalty is untrustworthy, so the way it stands in canon, I think there’s no way they could have had a better relationship than the trainwreck they had.

[baelatargaryen]

if you don’t mind, could you give us your opinion on thor in endgame if you haven’t done that already? i love your take on the film and i just wanted to see what you thought of him.

I think when it comes to Thor, there was a load of controversy around his character (particularly in the weight gain) that people seemed to either try to avoid discussing, because it made them uncomfortable, or they tried to be kinda glib about it. 

I’ll preface with this: I am an (extremely) skinny girl, and thus don’t really have a right to decide whether the Russos’ depiction of Thor was fatphobic or not. What I will say is that my immediate impression after watching the movie is that; yes, yes it was. (And before anyone says anything, I have nothing against Thor’s weight gain, I think if done right it would be a fantastic way to go against the type of body image most superhero movies promote, especially for men). 

Here’s the crux of the problem; the writers seem incapable of separating Thor’s weight gain (and his mental illness too, but more on that later) from making him completely undignified, in a way that seems pointedly as if to say, “look, Thor has made a mess of himself and it’s kinda funny”. Take for example, when Rocket and Bruce arrive to find Thor at his shack. The camera angle on purposely focuses on Thor’s belly and how it gets into Rocket’s face when he hugs him. Another thing is the amount of references to Thor’s weight meant to put him down (Rhodey jokes about food coursing through his veins at one point, for example). I will say that while it’s not up for me to decide whether this portrayal was fatphobic, my friend who is plus-sized, said that it was and I’m more inclined to agree and listen to her. 

Similarly, Thor’s depression and genuine PTSD is explored in a non-serious way. At one point, Rocket slaps Thor for crying. And even though Thor is crying, there is so much levity with how it’s done that even then it feels more like a comedy sketch of what depression looks like, than the truth. I’ll take the genuine grief in Thor’s speech in Infinity War (“What more do I have to lose?”), which for the record did nothing to take away from Thor’s general characterisation or his humour, any day over the tonal mess of the entirety of Thor’s arc in this movie. This isn’t even mentioning the entirety mess of the Fortnite play station joke, which was neither funny, nor interesting. I really am over movies trying to remain modern and in tune with everyday humour because the attempts at it in this movie were so out of touch and forced that they weren’t enjoyable at all (Hulk dabbing, for example, even though it’s 2023).

I’m seriously over movies having characters have depression, PTSD, or alcoholism if they don’t have the time to explore these serious issues within the movie’s time restriction, and with the right amount of gravity. Because ultimately, these things are usually never resolved or addressed. 

On the plus side, I adored Thor’s meeting with Frigga and their forehead touch when he travelled back in time — it’s a good way to recall how much Thor has lost, his relationship with his mother (which gets brushed aside way too often, in my opinion) and it was cathartic for Thor and the audience. I also loved that he called Mjolnir to him and was shocked and tearful when he realised he was still worthy. 

Conversely again though, the reappearance of Mjolnir is one thing when it’s there to narratively serve a purpose for Thor’s emotional journey, but having Thor seemingly use it on the battlefield with Stormbreaker despite him needing neither (hello, Thor: Ragnarok, how we’ve missed you) is frustrating. At every moment post-Ragnarok, it feels like something has to be retconned for no apparent reason — Thor dual wields (this time with two hammers), Thor has his eye back, Thor is again giving up the throne because apparently that’s not who he is after three movies of him proving that he would be a good leader for his people? And I’m all for his position being given up, especially given the anti monarchy themes in Thor: Ragnarok, and the burden it would place on Thor, but in culmination it feels like it’s just freeing Thor for another random storyline that really, I’m not that interested in. 

Thor is genuinely one of my favourite characters, has been since The Dark World, but I feel like the Russos mindset was “well, Thor is depressed and fat so clearly he can’t be strong as well”, which personally I think is a load of bullshit. Frankly as someone who’s mentally ill, the idea that Thor has to spend the entire movie minimised to the comedic caricature of “depression” is annoying and insulting as fuck. You can be ill and in pain and suffering, and still be one of the strongest people. You can be fat and still be dignified and respected. 

At the end of the day, the depiction of these issues is not nuanced enough for me to either care about it, or like it. Perhaps leave the joke-writing to someone who faces these particular issues.

[solcomfortssouls]

Avengers Endgame review

This movie suffered a bit from the sheer amount of content that made it all a bit hrr and chaotic, but everything I was looking forward to was there and some more, so I'm actually pretty satisfied.

Firstly, this movie was very Iron man centric and as a big Tony Stark fan I loved every part of it. Tony's conflict in this movie was about choosing between the happiness of his family and his own time with them and the greater good of the whole universe and for me it overshadowed everyone else.

Tony having a family and a daughter for 5 happy years. Oh god, that was so sweet and deserved. A nice house by the lake, and a cute little girl that Tony treats so lovingly while staying in character. Also his relationship with Pepper is amazing here - he told her immediately what he was thinking about doing, and she knew and loved him enough to understand he wouldn't be able to give it a rest. He wouldn't be able to let go of the chance, possible only because of his brilliant mind. She knew she married a genius with obsessive compulsion to fix the world. Tony wouldn't be able to live with himself, if he didn't. But it was hilarious and heartbreaking seeing him so mad when he realized he figured it out. 

Morgan. I wonder what role she will play. I would love it if she did have some in the future. Even more if she did come up in connection with Peter somehow though that's unlikely. But every scene with her and Tony was perfection personalized.

Tony and Cap reconciling. Really all their scenes were excellent. Cap helping Tony out of the jet, Tony saying he couldn't stop Thanos, Tony saying he lost the kid in that broken tone... Then Tony getting angry because he was right to be afraid so much ahead of time and then blaming Cap and passing out...That was powerful. Not that I think he was completly right to blame Cap, and it was cruel to say that to him. But it was so in character for Tony and I felt deeply for them and their suffering in that scene.

But then Tony and Cap making amends was very satisfying. Cap still came to Tony with the time travel idea and accepted when Tony rejected him out of the concern for his family. But I think Cap knew that Tony wouldn't give it a rest, that by giving him the thought he would definitely obsess over it until he figured it out. And despite Tony having the most to lose out of all of them, he hated he couldn't save Peter. That was a loss heavily hanging on him and tipping him over the edge in his decision.

Then all the scenes showing Tony and Cap trusting each other was just plain joy. It almost makes up for the fact that Cap wasn't there in Tony's last moments. But I guess there were only so many characters that could be by his side when he was dying and the people chosen - Rhody, Peter and Pepper - were definitely Tony's most treasured people that brought him peace.

Peter coming back and Tony immediatly hugging him. Oh Peter. Also Peter running with the gauntlet and being helped by all the other heroes. Really a parent team for him.

Peter crying by Tony's side. Like that heartbroken sobbing and how he tried talking to him, waking him. Oh kid. I'm interested to see how much this will impact Peter in future movies. 

Tony's death scene. I loved how Pepper didn't have a freak out but instead calmly reassured him that they would make it, that they would be okay in the world he saved for them. She was aware what was Tony staking and she truly understood who he was, accepted and loved him for it. What a beautiful love. Tony fought and struggled and obsessed and cared and suffered enough. He has done enough. He can rest now. It doesn't seem fair to me he died when he finally achieved genuine happiness - with a family and Peter back. But that's the thing with tragic and untimely death, with sacrifaces for something bigger, with battles of this scale and the loss it accompanies. And it really brings home what's at risk when someone precious is actually lost. 

From narrative standpoint it makes sense because Tony wouldn't be able just stay out of the way after giving up the mantle to other heroes. There is no way he would be able to live in peace when others were in trouble. To keep him true to himself and to keep him out, they had to kill him.

It's a bit different with Cap's ending. He already lived and fought in two wars, helped more then anyone could have hoped or expected him to. So Cap took Tony's advice and example by finally making a real life for himself. I think he deserved it after all he has done for earth. Plus I have seen people saying that it went against his development of moving on from his past, but if you look closer Cap's arc was never about moving on. It's something he encouraged in others but didn't know how to do for himself. Besides Avengers were special by not letting things go and attempting the impossible. Cap was stuck in the wrong century, forced to live a different life, far from his home. I don't blame him for using the chance to have it all back when he could. Besides the world doesn't need him anymore. There is enough of superheroes that the responsibility can fall off his shoulders. It was okay for him to let go and he was able to in contrast to Tony who wouldn't be able to do so, had he survived. 

It's a bit confusing with the time travel, but technically if changing something in the past leads to the same future anyway, then they used time travel without erasing everything that happens in the previous movies. Cap still returned from the ice and fought with the Avengers and met old Peggy but also had a life with her. The rules are not that clear, but I understand what they were trying to do here.

The costs of victory in this film were real and painful. Gamora forgetting her bonding with the Guardians and what person it made her into. Vision not coming back. Natasha. Cap choosing to have a life instead of saving the world over and over. And God, Tony. His whole arc came to an incredible conclusion. He had a family and a lovely relationship with his daughter. And I felt his internal conflict the most. It was a lot different for him then for the others because he didn't lose everything. He had to actually decide between having a happy life with his family or dying to save the universe. Between his own self-interest and his family or the chance of bringing everyone else's family back. (Nice little callback to what his father was worried about too. And I'm happy he got closure from the prove his father did love him).

His funeral hurt. It was so emotional to see all the characters, even the Guardians honouring his death.

The way he saved everyone - not just earth but the whole universe by what he did was epic and I pretty much coudn't breathe. When Strange held up that one finger and realization fleshed in Tony's eyes that this was the only way. Oh Tony. 

To me Clint's arc of going dark after the loss of his family came off as a bit cliche and his willingness to die for Nat when he had a family to live for as unrealistic - was it to show his guilt about his actions as Ronin or his closeness to Nat or his heroic character? But I'm not much of a fan of either Clint or Nat so no surprise this wasn't emotionally moving for me. Admittedly Clint's acting was believable in the heartbreaking scenes, and he really shined while protecting the gauntlet. I was kinda proud Earth had a pretty capable protector for the infinity stones themselves in the shape of one Clint Barton.

Scott turned out important but many of his dialogue and comments were just for fun and came off to me as a bit improper. I didn't really care about him at all. But I have never been much of a fan of his.

The whole combination of Hulk-Bruce, Scott's goofiness and chubby drunk Thor that couldn't focus felt a bit jarring. It was too ridiculous to be taken seriously. Rocket I could still take. Not all of them combined.

Hulk-Bruce just felt so...out of nowhere? I was intrigued by Bruce's conflict with Hulk in Infinity War and how they were going to solve it. But this? Bruce's arc was always about accepting Hulk as part of himself instead for as his enemy. This flash-forward resolving all this off screen felt cheap and I couldn't take Hulk-Bruce seriously as result.

Thor. Hmm. I didn't care much about him before Ragnarok, but he really charmed me there. So it was interesting seeing this broken side of him. It was realistic to his character since Thor is a fighter and a man of action and not killing Thanos when he had the chance really was kinda his fault. Where was he aiming? I understand he blamed himself for this the most and that even after killing Thanos nothing was solved and even worse for Thor there was no one to fight. Nothing to do but face the emptiness of his failure. Without a pressing goal or enemy Thor neglected himself and I found it believable. As much as I missed the handsome strong Thor. But he was mentally broken and him going with the Guardians means his story is not over. He didn't have all that much to offer in the last battle - the spotlight was on Cap and Tony since this was the ending to their arcs and journeys, the peak of all their development, them reaching their full potential (Steve wielding Mjolnir, Thor and Tony's tech combined, Pep in Iron suit).That's why Thor is allowed to make heavy mistakes here. 

Let's not forget all the interactions of the original Avenegers plus Nebula and Rocket as a whole. Tony, Steve and Nat putting the puzzle pieces together for the time travel heist, Nebula and her revelations and the others feeling for her, (plus how Rhodey sympathised with her), Steve and Nat scenes and Nat and Clint scenes. They really tried to do their bond justice with these and in the mourning of Nat in the later half. 

Nebula proved pretty interesting this movie. There was a lot of emotional results to what have been done to her and I actually quite enjoyed the focus on her and her reunion with Gamora. 

The last battle was grand, with so many characters coming to defend the Earth. It felt so well deserved after Tony, Steve and Thor fought tooth and nail with Thanos to bring everyone back, that all the saved came to back them up. I loved Cap's "Reassemble" - that was incredibly well played.

I would critise the shifts between the individual plot lines were sometimes too jarring. It was chaotic, coming from one impactful scene only to get hit with another, with little to no breathing room or time to savour the atmosphere in-between. I guess that was hard to avoid with the amount and concentration of plot and characters. Infinity War succeeded in balancing emotion, action and humour, but Endgame felt like a mess of heavy scenes mixed with a lot of out of place humour.

All in all it was a bit messier but rewarding, deeply thought-out with some characters and a bit rushed with others. I have definitely found new favourite scenes and can't wait to see Endgame again.

[northlandian]

Final Thoughts

So this is it. 

Endgame is 1000% complete. The premiere was last night, and in less than 48 hours, it will be released to the public. Well, at least for me, in about...

(Yes, I have a countdown on my phone that’s been set up since last year that goes until Thursday, April 25, 2019, at 6:00pm)

I wanted to make a post about my predictions. Something I could come back to, so I could see if I was right or wrong. I remember doing that last year with some of my favourite fan artists and laughing at their prospective situations that turned out to be true.

But you see, the truth is... I have absolutely no idea what to expect. And that's not just a cheap copout of me saying "It's a Marvel movie, therefore anything can happen". We know nothing. Literally nothing. The trailers are compilations of repetitive clips revealing nothing past the first 20 minutes of a 3-hour 2-minute movie. We don't even know the films true plot.

Is there a time jump? Do they time travel? Why are they splitting up into teams, seeing how well that proved to work last time? How is Scott saved? Tony and Nebula? And what is their plan?

I don't know. I really don't. All any of us can do is take shots in the dark. RDJ said it himself that it is near impossible to predict what's going to happen.

So that got me thinking about something I've considered pretty much since the debut of the first trailer...this movie is unpredictable...but there are some assumptions we've been making that we are assuming as a fact are going to happen.

But then there are also moments that I believe deserve to happen. Story arcs that need to be completed. Endings certain characters deserve.

So, drawn-out intros aside, here are my final thoughts on this movie.

Tony

Tony is an enigma. I've made a post in the past discussing why he might actually not die based on the chess motif and the necessity to save him as the "King", despite the fact that death is what we'd all expect. I'll be honest, when the first trailer came out, I thought to myself, "Wow. They're really trying to prep us for the heartbreak by shoving this foreshadowing down our throats.” 

Obviously, this is based on the first half of the first trailer, with him adrift in space. I thought that maybe Captain Marvel would be the one to save him, or maybe Pepper in her rescue armour that was seen a couple months ago from a set photo. But how would they know where he was?

But after the second trailer debuted, I think I'm going to make the assumption that it is, in fact, Nebula, with her spare bodily robotic parts, who saves the two of them and brings them back to earth. I'm also going to assume that the scene from the trailers of Steve and the rest looking up at the night sky outside the compound (if that scene is even real) is them seeing Tony and Nebula arriving back to earth. Though I have considered the possibility of the space ship recording scene actually taking place at the end of the move...which would suck. But I'm also going to assume, based on the third trailer and clips that followed of Steve and Tony together, that they actually do reunite, in the present time.

Of course, this does not excuse him from the possibility of dying at all. And he very well could. But then, another thought crossed my mind. In Infinity War, the first time we see Tony on screen is with Pepper, discussing their wedding and possible children. See...why would they foreshadow that if they were to never make reference of it again? Sure, there's a possibility of a time jump with perhaps a wedding and maybe kid squeezed in there. After all, the whole vibe we're given from the second trailer is the question of where the world is supposed to go from the tragedy endured, and how some move on (then Steve of course says "but not us" but anyways). But that's only with the off chance that there is a time jump, and it seems kind of off in the first place. So assuming the foreshadowing wasn't for no reason, I'd like to think that there's a chance he lives long enough to retire and have a kid. 

Tony and Pepper mentioning a kid isn't the only foreshadowing given for his survival, though. There was one line from Avengers that always stuck with me, and sort of got overshadowed by Tony's narcissistic but hilarious description of himself ("Genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist."). It comes when Steve is criticizing Tony's character and motivation. He says:

"You're not the guy to make the sacrifice play. To lay down on a wire and let the other guy crawl over you."

To which Tony immediately responds:

"I think I would just cut the wire."

Time and time again, Tony has proven Steve wrong, the first obviously being when he flew through the wormhole in the same movie. But what if this is his play in this one too? To be presented with a one-or-the-other choice for who can be saved, but manages to do both? Alternatively, this could also play out to the opposite of our favour; maybe Tony does finally just crawl over the wire for someone. For example, I've pictured a scenario where they do indeed go back in time to retrieve the stones before Thanos does. It's a plausible situation, considering we know nothing of their plan. But when it comes time to retrieve the soul stone, it's Tony who decides to make the sacrifice. Maybe he argues over it with Steve, who would want to finish what he started with Red Skull and complete the fate he was given 70 years ago, but ultimately Tony forces him to comply to what he wants, which is to finally make the ultimate sacrifice. 

(And for the record, if either of those situations plays out, I'm suing Marvel for emotional distress)

But there's one other option, and it's based on a line spoken by Tony in the trailer that really stuck out to me. It was when he was leaving his message to Pepper in the second trailer, and it's where he says:

"I know I said no more surprises, but I was really hoping to pull off one last one."

At first thought, I thought it may be like a "Surprise, honey! I'm not dead, and I've returned to earth to help defeat that giant grape!" sort of thing. And maybe it is. But I've also considered the possibility of Tony tricking someone or something. Perhaps tricking those into thinking he was dead. He did do it in Iron Man 3. But then again...who knows.

Sidenote: That's the end of my first thought and everything on Tony, and I have, like, *at least* twelve more to go. I was not expecting this to be this huge. Whoops.

Steve

It is so hard to get a read on what the hell is happening with this damn character. On one hand, Chris Evans has been talking for the longest time as if we all already know that his characters dead, with the way he speaks about his wrap-up with Marvel in general. But then there are people like the Russo's who say they have things in store that we don't know about yet. Like what?? Who do we believe? Are they just trying to cover up his obviousness? Or are we, again, making predictions that we shouldn't because this movie is actually so unpredictable??

Obviously, I don't know what's going to happen. What I will say is, I know what the fanbase expects, and that's for him to die. But again, just like in Tony's case, if that's one of the top expected outcomes, isn't it less likely going to happen?

Personally, I'm in favour of one specific theory many fans have contemplated and considered. The theory is that Steve, whether it be a result of the plot or by choice, goes back in time to the '40s, and that's where he lives out the rest of his life. He has his dance with Peggy, something foreshadowed so many times, including in the trailers, and they end up living together happily, and he endures the life he always wanted before going in the ice - that is how he phrased it at the end of Age of Ultron. So yes, he would most likely be "dead" in the present day from old age, as would Peggy (since she had already died in Civil War), but he would live out the life he always wanted.

OR - and I just thought of this now, literally as I'm writing - get this. He goes back to live in the '40s. But in present day, he's still alive, just very old. The Avengers (or whoever's left) go to see him by the end of the movie, maybe even during the after credits. And...it's Stan Lee. He is Steve Rogers. His final cameo.

(This seems highly unlikely, but the thought amused me. I also can't remember if the super soldier serum allows you to age properly in normal circumstances, but I don't wanna look it up at the risk of running into spoilers. Oh well, unresearched theory is unresearched.)

Thor

Don't get me wrong, I am still very much in the mindset of:

But if I'm being completely honest, yes, Thor, just like every other O6, the God of Thunder known by humans for his immortality, has a chance of not making it. With talks of a Thor 4 with dir. Taika Waititi, it seems unlikely, but the chance is still there. And it did get me thinking...

Loki telling him before his death, "The sun will shine on us again"...did he mean in Valhalla? I have had the thought of Thor possibly biting it, but then a scene where we see him there, reuniting with Loki, Heimdall, Frigga...even Odin. His loved ones. The ones he thought he could not go on without, finally being together again, him being happy in the afterlife.

It's a sucky thought, but a possible one.

Loki

Soooo...here we are. I'm not going over my whole freaking theory again, but I stand by what I wrote. Including the portion with the disclaimer where I established that I could be totally wrong.

But a possibility I also totally support is one where he is brought back with time travel. Why would he have a poster if he doesn't make a reappearance? What that reappearance is, I have no idea. Maybe, just like the comics, he does purposely bring the Avengers together in New York. Or maybe it's something heartfelt at the end, where time has rolled back, and it's immediately following Ragnarok. Thor is aware of the reverse, and everything that's happened, and Loki saunters into the dressing room again and makes the comment on Thor's eyepatch, but Thor is just so happy to see him, that he just hugs him, as it was foreshadowed in Ragnarok, and all is well, and they live happily ever after in Norway on Earth ruling Asgard together...

Idk. Just a thought.

A Cinematic Parallel

So this was just something I noticed when comparing the Infinity War and Endgame trailers.

So remember in the Infinity War trailer, where we see Tony just sitting with his hands folded over and we were like "huh wonder why they're covered in dirt", and then it turned out it was cause Peter just died, and it was his dust, and we all had a good laugh/cry when looking back on it.

Well...you know that moment in the Endgame trailer when Steve is covered in what looks to be sweat and dirt and he tightens his shield around his arm or something, and looks to be in extreme anguish over...something?

Well... I think that's our one glimpse at the end, just as Tony's was in the Infinity War trailer. I think someone just died in that moment.

That's literally it for that.

Death

We don't know who's going to die. We don't. And we don't know how. But that fact that the Russo's, Paul Rudd, and Chris Evans have been openly joking about character deaths is a definite indicator that whoever and however they go is not going to be mainstream. Like, I don't think it's going to be a Loki-type death, or the Tony-almost-death, where the character is just too overpowered by Thanos, or whoever else, and they die as a result. It's going to be complex. Or a decision the character makes that is self-sacrificing. Or something similar to the Steve time travel theory. But whatever it is, it is likely incredibly hard to guess.

Time Travel

The theories of time travel that have been circulating since the debut of Ant-Man and the Wasp are still just that - theories. I'll be honest, I'm still not 100% sure how the quantum realm can possibly assist them, other than getting them stuck in a time vortex. And even still, the operators of said quantum realm machine are dusted. That's all we have to go off of; that, obvious hair and suit changes throughout the trailers and set photos, and, of course, the fact that there are limited options as to how they can actually succeed at this point.

The Suits

Honestly, I just included this section to make fun of their new suits some more. They are so freaking ugly, it's hilarious. I remember when the photos of them were first leaked, everyone laughed and said it was too ugly to be real, yet HERE WE ARE.

So you can imagine how hard I laughed when I saw the second trailer for the first time, and how conflicted I was over how cool their "walk" was, but how gross the suits were.

Some actual memes I saved before the official release of the suits:

Bonus: Something I saved literally last November. And we're about to find out in less than two days...God, I'm not ready.

Prospective Scenes

There were a couple of scenes other than those I've already listed that would be incredibly satisfying to see.

Firstly, Tony and Pepper's wedding.

I always pictured it as the after credits scene. A final symbol of rest, retirement, and relaxation for Tony. And everyone's there, too. The rest of the O6, but also Peter and May, Happy, Rhodey, Sam, Wanda, the Guardians, T'Challa, Shuri, and their friends, Bucky, Dr. Strange (both reluctantly), Wong (of course), and the rest of their friends and (remaining) family. Everyone's watching as the shot is on them. And standing behind them, telling Tony he may kiss the bride, is the minister - Stan Lee. His final cameo.

(Or at least the one I originally had in mind).

The perfect ending for the perfect character arc. And oh, how unlikely it is to happen.

I'm also curious to know, now that it's confirmed, how the story will reintroduce Valkyrie, who happens to be one of my favourite characters, and also who may have escaped with her (hopefully with one of my other favourite characters...).

But there is a scene which we know for a fact is going to happen, and may have gotten a glimpse of during the final trailer, with the shot of Rocket and Nebula sitting somberly and holding hands. It's Rocket finding out that the other Guardian's didn't survive. Since separating from the other Guardians in Infinity War, Rocket did not know of their outcome, and there was no one to relay the message. That...is going to be heartbreaking to watch. Especially after seeing Rocket's character development in GOTG 2.

Prospective Dialogue

Just like certain scenes, there are lines that would be amazing to hear from specific characters.

The first, and probably most popular and obvious, is, of course:

"Avengers Assemble"

If Cap doesn't finally deliver this line with so much passion in this goddamned movie...

But then there was also a line of my personal preference that I really wanted to be heard in the movie, especially if it was said by either Tony, or Steve, or both of them to Thanos. And it's...:

"Because if we can't protect the Earth, you can be damn well sure we'll avenge it."

Which is why I was SO HYPED BUT ANNOYED when I heard it in the trailer because so much of that content isn't going to make it into the movie.

I guess we'll see.

The Stones

So a common...what would you call it...theme, I guess? I've noticed is the correlation between the Avengers and the infinity stones. There are, of course, the six original Avengers left, and six stones. Each Avenger happens to almost perfectly fit into the representation of each stone.

Thor is the Space Stone - Probably most obvious. The Tesseract came from his family, and he has done space travel all his life.

Steve is the Time Stone - As he is "the man out of time".

Banner is the Mind Stone - A scientific genius, yet can't control his own mind.

Barton is the Reality Stone - He conceals his reality - his family - from the rest of his life and his world.

Natasha is the Power Stone - Often viewed as the weak link, even by allies (ie. Scott in Civil War), yet probably one of the strongest and most powerful team members, both physically, and mentally.

And finally - Tony is the Soul Stone - The godfather and soul of the team.

I don't know what this means for Endgame, if it means anything at all. It was just something I noticed.

Fate

There is one last theme I've come to notice throughout the original six, and it's the fact that each of them had their fate severely altered, almost unnaturally, to end up where they are in Endgame.

Tony, of course, almost died in a cave after being kidnapped by terrorists. He only built the Mark 1 suit to escape, and nearly died in the process of that. If he did not go to Afghanistan for the weapons presentation, not only would he not be Iron Man, but he would not be with Pepper, and he would still be manufacturing weapons - or worse, Obidiah would've had him killed another way.

Steve, of course, was selected to be the test subject of the super soldier serum, but that's not what altered his fate. He was destined for that for his grit and determination alone. His fate was altered when he survived something he shouldn't have - When he came out of the ice alive. None - and I mean none - of the events within the Avengers, SHIELD, or anything could have happened if he had died as he was supposed to.

With Bruce, you'd think I would refer to his gamma experiment in general, but that's not it either. That was also destined, similar to Steve's experiment. His is mentioned more briefly in Avengers, and it's the fact that he tried to kill himself. His attempt backfired, as he says he immediately transformed into the Hulk and thus, survived. But his intent was there, and if not for the quick reflexes and will to live of the Hulk (something that was NOT demonstrated in Infinity War, mind you), he would be gone.

Clint's and Natasha's basically go hand-in-hand. In Avengers, we find out that Clint was sent to kill Natasha, as she was part of the KGB. Natasha, in return, would have to try and kill Clint, not that it would have been different from any other enemy of theirs at the time. But because Clint made the call to try and reason with her and get her to turn, they both came out alive rather than the false dichotomy of a situation that would have left at least one of them dead.

And finally, there's Thor. His is a bit trickier to pinpoint because although he's been in death-defying situations, it's unclear if he's ever come close to death like a mortal would. But it's Thor who actually describes this fate that got me thinking about this theme in the first place, as he tells Rocket in Infinity War:

"You know, I'm 1500 years old. I've killed twice as many enemies as that, and every one of them would have rather killed me, but none succeeded. I'm only alive because fate wants me alive."

Fate wants him alive. And apparently it wants the other five alive as well. Otherwise, three of them would be dust, based on probability of the snap. But all six of them remain.

Again, I have no idea what this means for Endgame. I'm just pointing out what I believe to be significant.

Wow, so those are a lot more thoughts than I thought I'd have...this took about 3 hours to write, lol. So I think I'm going to leave it at that, and find out what happens on Thursday. I am in no way ready for it to all be over. And I've never been so terrified to watch a movie. And I've never had to consider that this might be the final 48 hours of a characters life.

This is going to be big. And I can't wait. But goddamn I am so scared.

[lightningcrown]

My top 10 Marvel Cinematic Universe couples. Trust me, there’s a lot more, because I pretty much ship anything; but these are the main ones I ship. Yeah...I was tied between Valki and Hulkyrie, and realized I liked both for Valkyrie. So Valki is now an Honorable Mention while #4 is now replaced by Fitzsimmons.

Yeah, I don’t regret a fucking thing.

A couple warnings though. Firstly, there are spoilers to the character's respective shows/films in the meme’s description, so just a heads up. Infinity War spoilers, too. Second, I have either not seen or not finished the shows The Defenders, Jessica Jones, Daredevil, and Iron Fist, also Cloak and Daggar isn’t finished, so I can’t put Ty/Tandy on the list just yet (Honestly, Tandy is just a bitch at this point in the show).  As I finish the shows, I’ll move the couples around or add/remove them. And third, but most important without a doubt, this is my list, as in my personal opinion. I will not trash you for your ships if you do not trash mine. Ship and let ship.

Okay, let’s begin.

~Honorable Mention~ Valki -  Not canon...I think...seriously, Tessa Thompson has hinted that these two are in a...somewhat relationship? Like the other couples, I think these two would be good for each other. I mean, come on, Loki needs a partner to smack some sense into him every once in a while. I think they’d work in a unique way. A real power couple. I seriously might change this to a better couple, but I’m not sure. All I know is that I like this ship….but I like #3 more.

Alright, now onto the top 10.

#10 - Victor “Chase” Stein and Gertrude Yorkes -  When I found out that the Runaways were going to be adapted into the MCU, I got super excited! I love the comics, and I couldn’t wait to see how the show was going to turn out. I was satisfied with most things, including the romance between Chase and Gert. Their romance in the comics was/is beautiful and sad, so I couldn’t wait to see it. Gert and Chase are polar opposites in a charming way, with Chase originally being shown as a stuck up jock and Gert as a tumblr fueled activist, but they seem to bring their true selves out by being love struck and oblivious dorks. It’s so cute when they finally wake up, like ‘Oh shit, the one I was looking for was right in front of me the whole time’ kinda wake up. They’re the kind of characters you just can’t picture with anyone else, the just work that well together. They’re the only couple in the show I love at the moment. Yes, I hate Deanoru. Come get me.

#9 - Robbie Reyes and Daisy Johnson -  While they’re not official, I can’t help but imagine how they’d look as a couple. By the time they meet in season 4, Daisy has lost too many people, and she has too many regrets and too much grief. She desperately wants to make it right, and is afraid to let people get close because it always ends with either her or them getting hurt. Her parents, the agents that died to save her as a child, the breakout of the inhumans due to her sending the terrigen crystals into the ocean, and finally, her boyfriend’s death. Going by the codename Quake, she uses her powers to try and make up for what she believes is all her fault. Robbie is a man trying to make up for getting into gang trouble, which resulted in his brother being paralyzed from the waist down in a deliberate crash meant to kill Robbie. After he is possessed by the Spirit of Vengeance and becomes known as Ghost Rider, he takes to the streets at night, killing gang members and slowly cleaning up the city of people that the Spirit of Vengeance deems guilty and unworthy of life. Their paths cross, and while they don’t start off on a good note, the two eventually team up to connect the dots in front of them. They’re so alike, and I believe that they would be good for one another. It’s her meeting Robbie that kinda snaps her out of the daze she’s in, and it’s ultimately each other that heals the other and gets them out of their rut. It’s a shame, because I know they’ll never be official, but I love them, and I will continue to ship them despite of that.

#8 - Peter Quill and Gamora -  If you’ve seen the films, I think you know why I don’t even need to explain these two…but I will a bit anyways. He’s goofy and carefree, but knows when to be mature, and she’s been trained her whole life to be a weapon, and is just now being able to finally have the family she’s always wanted, with Quill being someone who’s helping her realize she’s more than a monster. Avengers Infinity War broke my heart. When the two kissed, their relationship being established between Guardian’s Vol. 2 and Infinity War, I was so happy...until Gamora told Quill to kill her if Thanos ever got his hands on her. Sadly, it happened, but Thanos used the reality stone to keep it from happening. When Quill later learns that Thanos murdered Gamora to gain the Soul Stone...his cry of despair and grief as Tony tried to hold him back broke my heart. I think he was perfectly justified in flipping out like he did. They’re just another one of those couples that are a perfect example of soulmates, and I hope they are reunited.

#7 - Phillip Coulson and Melinda May -  These two are like FitzSimmons, always together. They have each other’s back, and they support each other in almost everything they do. They’re like the mom and dad of the group. And while they do fight, it’s in a very...married couple sort of way. I don’t think there’s ever been a better team up in S.H.I.E.L.D. history since them, and I’m glad their relationship isn’t rushed. Once they officially got together, it was easy to see that it was slowly building the whole time, even if it wasn’t too noticeable at first.

#6 - Vision and Wanda Maximoff -  Their relationship is so much like teenagers flirting, just in an...adult way? Maybe that was a bit confusing, but my point is, these two are adorable. Another couple that managed to stomp on my heart in Infinity War. Turns out, after Captain America Civil War, Wanda and Vision became an official couple and began to travel the world. Their relationship is pure and innocent love. Nothing dirty, no sex jokes, just...they’re so in love; you can see it whenever they’re in the presence of the other. Seriously, it’s like they’re looking at the whole world when they’re looking at the other. Cheesy, but it fits. In Infinity War, Wanda is the one who has to destroy the mind stone in Vision’s forehead, despite it still being a part of him. She doesn’t want to, but he tells her that she must “It shouldn’t be you, but it is.” And she’s, understandably, upset, so Vision comforts her with some of the most romantic words I’ve ever heard in the MCU “It's alright. You could never hurt me. I just feel you.” He knows that he’s about to die...yet he’s doing his damndest to make sure she’s comforted. And sadly, she uses her powers to destroy the stone and kill him…until Thanos uses the Time Stone to rewind time, revive Vision, then rip the Mind Stone out of his head, killing him in front of Wanda for a second time! I...I just want these two to be happy.

#5 - Tony Stark and Pepper Potts -  Just...watch any movie with these characters, and you’ll know exactly why I put them on this list. I can’t really anything else other than that they’re perfect for each other; and in my opinion, I don’t believe either character could ever work in a relationship with a different person. These two are the best canon couple in the MCU, hands down.

#4 - Leopold Fitz and Jemma Simmons -  These two are literally two halves of a whole. Where one struggles, the other supports and the two succeed. Hell, people in the show don't even refer to them as individuals, they're called FitzSimmons. Seriously, these two had a canon ship name from the beginning, the other characters thought they were a perfect match. If soul mates are a thing, these two are definitely it. These two characters have been through so much in the first 4 seasons, and when they finally got together in season 3 after the massive cliffhanger in season 2; I cheered. Ever since, the two have continued to be a model of relationship goals. Fitz has put his life on the line several times in order to protect and rescue Simmons, literally jumping through an alien portal to find her on the other side of the universe. Simmons is no different. She suffered through a computer world that showed her death and made Fitz hate her, yet she managed to get through to him and save him. I haven't seen season 5 yet, but I do know that the two of them get married, and let me just say....it's about damn time!

#3 - Bruce Banner/Hulk and Valkyrie -  These two...need to be canon. I’m sorry (Pfft, no I’m not), but I...I really despise Bruce/Natasha. Their interactions feel so forced...it’s just awful! But these two? It’s so natural and amazing! Hulk and Valkyrie have known each other for couple years by the time Thor Ragnarok rolls around, and they’re so playful! Hulk doesn’t hate her, he smiles at her, and whenever she’s called to his room, she becomes happy and the two playfully spar and even have nicknames for each other. And once Bruce returns from being Hulk, he and Valkyrie immediately go “Do I know you? I feel like I know you!” And they get along perfectly from there. Seriously, when Bruce sees Valkyrie for the first time, he’s in complete awe! He notices the markings around her eyes and asks Thor about them, describing them and her as “beautiful and strong”. Seriously, in this one movie, Hulk/Valkyrie was shown to be more natural and smooth than Bruce/Natasha. These two would be in the category of being friends first and then a couple later on. The Hulk likes her, Bruce likes her, and neither have a problem with her, and she doesn’t have the problem with either of them. It works out. Also, in the first few movies where Bruce is shown…he’s always forced to become the Hulk by someone, but in Thor: Ragnarok, Bruce changes into the Hulk willingly. I can’t help but think that Valkyrie’s acceptance of both personalities might have had a small hand in it. Oh well, I’m stupid, moving on.

#2 - Peter Parker and Molly Hernandez -  A crack ship I made, but a cute one. Peter is Spiderman in the MCU, obviously, while Molly is a character in Marvel’s Runaways, being Gert’s adopted sister with Hulk-like strength. Both of these characters are young people swept up in horrible situations, and learning to cope with powers, abilities, and responsibilities they didn’t have before. I think it would be cute and emotional for the two of them to bond over their shared experiences. I’ve got so many story ideas for this cute pair. Also, I just...don’t like Michelle that much. I don’t know why, she just seems so...ugh, I’m gonna get hate for this, but I don’t like how they dealt with her in the movie. Also, now that I think about it, I’ve never really liked MJ in any Spiderman film, so...yeah. Anyways, I think Peter and Molly would be adorable together. Moving on.

#1 - James Buchanan “Bucky” Barnes and Princess Shuri - My OTP in the MCU...and I don’t regret a fucking thing for shipping it. Shuri is canonly the one who gets all of HYDRA’s programming out of his head, built him his new arm, and taught him about Wakanda in the MCU...and I can’t help but love that there’s finally another person for Bucky to be close with that isn’t Steve. I love their friendship, but I’m happy that Bucky is finally free from HYDRA and can finally depend on an befriend other people; expand a little. The little after credits scene at the end of Black Panther had me squealing and imagining all the scenarios for their relationship. I went back and saw it a second time to see that scene again (I also saw it a second time because that movie was fucking awesome, but seeing the scene again was good^^!). Shuri is officially my favorite female character in the MCU. Also, fun fact, me mentioning that I like this ship had given me so much shit on here. I’ve been called a pedophile, a pedophilic enabler, and a stucky fan once told me to kill myself...it’s fucking hilarious. I’ve never been in a fandom shipping war before, so it was an amazing anf funny experience XD I love these two so much, and no 12 year old on tumblr is going to change my mind. These two, I could see their relationship developing over time and it’s just...I would love to see these two develop together.

[ladyloveandjustice]

SO INFINITY WAR

I don’t have many feelings since I came in pretty detached from the MCU. Like, I care about Thor and his core supporting cast that’s left and I care about Black Panther and Wakanda peeps a lot...and I don’t  want bad things to happen to Spider-Man because he’s just a sweet kid but he’s Spider-Man so bad things are obviously going to happen to him and that’s the extent of my feelings on the MCU characters for real.

I came into this move super detached with the feeling it would be an overhyped Event Comic in cinematic form and boy it sure was. Very True to that.

Positives-

I did generally like some of the interactions- they were pure fanservice but the good time. Thor’s conversations with Rocket were actually genuinely sad and touching and probably the closest the movie got to making me feel an emotion, they were a good pair and the fact they WERE a pair and did bond quite a bit was novel. The fact Thor’s gone into an extremely chipper version of “literally all my loved ones are dead so nothing matters anymore might as well just charge right in for the vengeance !!! :D” does feel true to him, I mean what else can he do at this point. I’m not sure how much of enjoying whenever he’s on screen just comes from liking him best to begin with though. He sure was in this a lot.

 The two Peters immediately starting to argue about pop culture was a very “yep that’s gonna happen” moment that felt genuinely funny.  I think Tony and Peter’s relationship worked for me in this movie more than it did in like, any of the previous movies, probably because they’re wasn’t much focus on it and it was just Tony being Worried which is naturally going provoke an “aw”. Peter’s “death” worked because he seemed ACTUALLY SCARED (something no one else in this movie was at any point, making it impossible for the threat to feel real).

As stupid as literally everything else in those scenes were, Loki being like “haha kill Thor i don’t care” and then it actually starts happening and it’s like “wait nevermind I do care stop” was like. Yep. there he is. 

Negatives:

wow was this a movie just like an event comic! By which I mean the deaths were stupid shock stuff and nothing really mattered. As soon as they killed Heimdall and  Loki two minutes into the film I was like, “yep don’t care about anything that happens after this now”. First of all, Heimdall’s death was boring and expected, very black guy dies first, very just random and unearned, I was just like “Yeah...okay...”

As for Loki, I honestly don’t mind him dying, he was gonna at some point, but it didn’t have to be such a stupid death. like I know movie Loki isn’t incredibly competent or the schemes within schemes dude his comics counterpart sometimes is , but one would still think he could come up with a better plan than “i’ll pretend i’m gonna betray everyone but then in the same breath try to attack Thanos with a dagger”. Could they not have even shown him ATTEMPTING to play the long game here? All they had to do was do the same thing where Loki pretty obviously cued Thor with “I’m still on your side”. then join thanos for a little while, attempt to find out his weakness then try to weaken and kill Thanos and die. It would have been at least slightly more effective.

I mean, it may not stick, because comic book movie, but it pretty much screamed “Tom Hiddleston wanted to be in this as little as possible, he is out for good” so.

Gamora’s death was even more shitty and badly written (it seems more likely she’ll come back than Loki though). The definition of fridging too, since it was entirely to “develop” (HUGE air quotes) Thanos. They were trying to make me feel sorry for Thanos and feel he’s complex and conflicted or something but it’s not happening. The scale of his actions was too great for that. His abuse of Gamora is too great for me to buy that he cares about her, and even if he did, it’s in such a shitty way it shouldn’t count. Also his motivation is stupid. These planets, if they are like earth, did probably have enough resources for everyone, they’re just not distributed equally. Killing half the population does nothing for that. Going with “I’m in love with the personification of death” would have been way less stupid than this. Stop trying to make me feel sorry for him. I don’t.

This movie also definitely had the Tone problem people claimed Thor Ragnarok had but i really didn’t feel. I did feel it with this movie. The constant quipping here was even worse than Age of Ultron and just felt so out of place considering the huge losses these characters were taking that we were supposed to Take Seriously. And all of them went on too long. I mean I chuckled at a lot of them, but it made it impossible to be invested because apparently the characters don’t care about what’s happening either. They didn’t treat Thanos like an actual threat half the time, so why should I take him seriously? I think the worst example was for Thor to wake up, immediately after the death of a tremendous amount of people he cared about, and for it to instantly be a quip-off.

 To contrast Thor Ragnarok, they didn’t have him immediately quipping after the death of Odin, they had him start to freak out then just had the next threat immediately come so he didn’t really have time to dwell on it and after that funny stuff happened TO him, mostly. The death itself wasn’t ever made light of either. (The loss of the hammer was, but I mean. it’s a hammer.) There was just this sense that he couldn’t afford to dwell because whoops the next weird situation is already here. He had to bury his grief for the movie to work, but that seemed consistent to his character and the sitch he was in. He had to roll with it, and therefore so did  the audience. It was consistent with the fast pace and outrageous vibe of the movie.

 Here there wasn’t that vibe. It just felt disjointed. And Thor definitely did have time to react and rage in the immediate aftermath, so it’s weird he would wake up and the tragedy is immediately made light of with Peter trying to compete with him. The convo with Rocket later was better, but didn’t make up for the weirdness

And the whole Thor situation! Just immediately undoes what Thor sacrificed to accomplish in the last movie! So soon after it! He managed to save Asgard’s people except whoops not really, half of them are dead, where are the other half, who the fuck knows . also where the fuck is Valkyrie.

Everyone in this movie constantly made the stupidest decisions possible in order to let Thanos have the infinity stones. Which they acknowledged, and I get it’s how heroes operate, but it was still a Lot. Peter Q wins the prize since his stupid decision was inconsistent with what he did earller in the movie.. He went from being ready to honor Gamora’s request to kill her to keep Thanos from the stone (like it was shown he literally would have done it) to just letting Thanos escape because he was upset about Gamora’s death.

Also the fact Thanos is supposed to be so ridiculously powerful and yet somehow doesn’t kill people like Tony or Peter or even Steve in one hit...that’s a standard comic thing but it was a lot more distracting in a movie for some reason.

And of course there’s the ending which is very “this is obviously going to be undone”. Just like the comics I guess! But like, no need for somber black credits when we all know there’s no way Spider-Man’s gonna die for real.

Basically, it was watchable, mostly because I was detached and not super invested in the mcu. I mean, they sure did fuck over Thor and crew and wasted a ton of potential the ending of the last movie had, which annoyed me a bit, and the Wakandan characters felt like they were barely in it even thought they were...but yeah, that’s the extent I have on feelings.

As entertainment and spectacle and “oh cool these characters interacted” it was fine whatever. As a story, it was a mess, so. Yep. Sure does seem true to event comics.