In case you were wondering why I’ve been so bad about reading and/or writing fic lately, and instead have mostly been reblogging shitposts and liveblogging my rewatch of “Buffy” and “Angel,” with some occasional MCU-directed salt mixed in (and now Tumblr-directed salt; I started writing this post before the apocalypse), it’s because I am So Done with Marvel.
I no longer accept either Ragnarok or Infinity War as canon. I will not read fics that take them as canon – not even fix-it fics. (Or your super-dark rage fics, @illwynd. Do-overs are fair game, though, so @foundlingmother is in luck.) I regret that I wrote a few fics assuming Ragnarok as canon, before I realized what a horror show it is.
My imagination is firmly ensconced in my alternate universe in which Guillermo del Toro wrote and directed Ragnarok and Joss Whedon wrote and directed Infinity War (and its sequel/second part, as needed). Maybe Guillermo recast Charlie Hunnam as Thor once Hemsworth decided he was tired of pretending to be a dramatic actor, or maybe Hunnam was cast as Thor from the outset. (Part of the reason that Hemsworth was cast is that Whedon put in a good word for him, having worked with him on The Cabin in the Woods. Even the best creators make mistakes; Michelle Trachtenberg wasn’t great as Dawn, either.) I’m not sure who wrote Civil War, but it wasn’t those dimwitted hacks Markus and McFeely. Maybe it was Jed Whedon and Maurissa Tancharoen; they did a good job dealing with the moral quandaries of the Accords on “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.” Or hell, maybe it was Aaron Sorkin. This is my fantasy world. Go big or go home, amirite?
I’m not going to try to write any of these versions because I’m not Guillermo del Toro, Joss or Jed Whedon, or Aaron Sorkin. I have only very vague ideas of what these movies would be like. Maybe I’ve frozen time at the point where all of the writers/directors have been announced but the movies haven’t come out. Maybe we have some stills. Hela actually has half a face and it looks awesome. Loki and Thanos have some meaningful interactions. Josh Brolin is very excited about all of their scenes and the fraught history revealed between them.
I’m not sure what stage of grief this is. The obvious choice would be Denial, but I think Denial was actually before I figured out just how terrible TR was (and was still writing fics acknowledging it). I’ve definitely been in Anger for most of the time since then, so I guess this must be some weird form of Bargaining? Like, in my mind I’m trying to trade the canon we have for the canon we should have had.
I’ve reblogged some salty commentary, but I don’t think I’ve given a straightforward statement of my view. So here it is: I’m not getting my hopes up. After Ragnarok and Infinity War, I don’t trust any of the schmucks at Marvel as far as I can throw them, and I’m tiny with a terrible arm. I trust Tom to try not to let it get fucked up, but there’s only so much he can do. (I don’t think he was happy with what was done to his character in TR and IW, but obviously he had limited power to advocate for himself and for Loki.)
I am VERY cynical about Disney’s motivations for doing this. Starting a separate streaming service so people need to pay for something else on top of Netflix and Hulu and Amazon Prime and whatever else they’re already paying for is incredibly obnoxious, and they’re using Loki’s popularity to rope in a guaranteed audience. In the movies, they catered to the fanboy hatred of Loki (surely motivated by dismayed resentment over how many women find Loki more attractive than the standard male power fantasies); but they’re more than happy to keep taking our money in a new medium.
Will I buy the streaming service? I don’t know yet. I’ll see what else is on it. I’m also waiting to see what happens with Loki in Avengers 4. I’m not above pirating things. I still haven’t watched Ant-Man and the Wasp, and when I do, it will be either on a service I’m already paying for or illegally.
1. 90% of the movie was ruined by Loki’s death scene in the very beginning. I have talked multiple times about how stupid and full of plot holes that scene was, anyway, not to mention how pointless Loki’s death was in general. I’d link, but it’s 1am and I’m lazy, so you can take my word for it.
2. Speaking of Loki’s death, though, the Russos have gone back and forth on the reason for Loki’s death – first they say it’s sacrifice for Thor, then they say it’s his punishment for disobedience, then they say it’s the conclusion of his arc, to accept himself as Thor’s brother before he dies a hero, etc. They can’t seem to figure out why Loki really died, except that they didn’t know what to do with him and killing him is convenient.
3. Thanos’s motivation is stupid as fuck. For one thing, wiping out half of the population isn’t the logical solution to the problem. He could have used the Infinity Gauntlet to create more resources, or go back in time to before Titan died, or done any number of things that didn’t involve murdering half of the universe. He came to that particular solution because he likes murder and death and torment and torture (just look at what he did to Gamora and Nebula, whom he claimed as his children). The narrative ignores this and tries to paint Thanos as this sympathetic villain who “maybe has a point,” which is not only illogical but also kind of gross. Not to mention, the Russos said that the Snap got rid of half of the plants and animals, as well as people, anyway – meaning there is now exactly the same proportion of people to resources and Thanos accomplished absolutely nothing.
4. The movie is full of plot holes. Just to name a few: in Thor Ragnarok, Dr. Strange says he keeps a “watch list” of potential threats to Earth; in IW, he has no idea who Thanos is. Thanos tells Gamora that, by killing half of her planet, the remaining half of her people are now thriving, but the first GotG told us that Gamora was the last remaining member of her race. Where was the Hulk when Asgard was being slaughtered, and where did Loki disappear to for five whole minutes before he reappeared and died?
5. The narrative implies that Thanos truly loves Gamora, and that he was right to sacrifice her because it allowed him to get the Soul Stone and continue on his mission. Gamora says, “This isn’t love,” but the fact that Thanos does get the stone after killing her is the narrative saying that yes, this is love, the only way Thanos knows how but love, nonetheless. Which is … really not okay, but other people have gone into much better meta and analysis on this than I can at the moment.
6. The entire Wanda and Vision relationship was poorly developed and dragged out far too long. In a movie about all of the superheroes coming together and the culmination of all of the characters at their disposal, they chose to focus a good portion of the plot on a couple that was, I’m sorry, boring. I didn’t care if Vision died because their relationship wasn’t fleshed out or built up at all. We’re just supposed to accept it as true love and feel bad for them.
7. The ending would have had much more impact if they weren’t so obviously going to bring back all of those characters, anyway. Like, they are literally filming Spiderman 2 right now – of course Peter Parker will be back. Of course Dr. Strange, T’Challa, Bucky, etc, will be back. They made such a big deal about the “stakes being so high” in this movie, but all the stakes led us to was a gratuitously tragic ending that everyone knows will be undone, anyway, so the only deaths that will stick will be Loki’s, Gamora’s, and Vision’s – aka, the only characters not killed by the Snap, and two out of three of those characters were killed by their abusers and somehow that’s okay.
8. I will grant you, the cinematography was good and the music was nice. Also, there were some funny parts, mostly thanks to the Guardians still being in character because James Gunn was able to have a hand in portraying them.
But, yeah. Marvel fucked it up. The last ten years of movies could have culminated in the most epic of epic villains, if the Russos hadn’t gotten sidetracked by wanting to replicate Loki’s popularity (and Kilmonger’s, later) by making Thanos sympathetic, if they hadn’t ditched the “courting Death” motivation, if they hadn’t gotten rid of Joss Whedon, if they hadn’t tried to literally replicate Steve’s plotline with Thor (Steve lost everything and that worked out okay, so let’s have Thor lose everything, too!), or if they had hired some writers who knew what the fuck they were doing. Marvel fucked up Infinity War, and this is the hill I’ll die on, I’m not changing my mind.
You can always tell which viewers on Tumblr judge movies based on “Did it look cool? Was it witty?” and which viewers judge movies on “And did it make any fucking sense?” I really wish the average moviegoer had higher standards is what I’m saying, I guess.
And I want to address something because it’s a silly argument I’ve heard from some people in defense of bad fantasy/sci-fi in general: suspension of disbelief is for things like ‘this character is bulletproof’ or ‘this character can shoot lasers out of their eyes’. Shit like that. It’s not for justifying nonsensical character motivations or completely ignoring established canon. If that’s your argument–that superhero movies don’t have to make sense because they’re superhero movies–you’re just being lazy. At least find a better excuse for not caring.
ALL OF THIS!!!
Thanos was alot scarier when his motives were to court Death. Marvel spent all that time building him up as incredibly dark, ominous, and decidedly unsympathetic, and then all of a sudden try to turn him into this “psychopath with a heart of gold” crap? He may torture and murder, but he cares! So they can sell Thanos t-shirts and child-sized guantlets. And sending the message that yes, you can hurt, mutilate, and torture someone and still call that love. It’s sick.
I think they got really careless as to how to end Loki’s “arc”, because the last we heard, Loki was threatened with a fate worse than pain itself, but the confrontation between Thanos and Loki made it seem like they barely had any kind of prior association. Like they just slapped something together to wrap up Loki’s story and get him out of the way before the movie even officially starts. They have him say all these things that’s supposed to make us believe that he’s come “full circle” to the point where he has no story of his own left, and all that’s left for him to do is sacrifice himself for Thor, like a good little plot device, motivating Thor and his Manpain.
And sorry, but the ending was nothing like the beginning. The Avengers dissolved to dust. It’s not like we got an extremely brutal, extremely violent, up-close shot of their excruciating dying process. And people can be pretty much assured of their return. It’s not like Marvel went out of their way to tell us otherwise, like saying “no resurrections this time” or anything.
I remember back when I was young and innocent (aka, before April 2018) and expected this movie to be so amazing. I mean, there was a small part of me every once in a while that would say, don’t get your hopes up too much, they could fuck it up. But then I thought, nah, it’s Marvel, they won’t mess this one up, it’s too important of a film!
And here we are.
Same here. I thought; this is what it all comes down to after ten years. It’s bound to be epic!
And… it wasn’t.
For me the movie was epic and entertaining, just the beginning was fucked up for reasons already stated and the ending was just….left me feeling nothing. We know they’ll return so maybe that doesn’t make it so shocking? Dunno.
I believe that the main problem with IW is plot because the Russos suck at plot. They are great at action, somewhat good at pacing, good at characterization when they like the character, very bad at it when they don’t care, and AWFUL at plot. CACW is the glaring example of this. Does anyone remember Zemo’s motivations and plan? The Russos just decide which cool scenes they want to happen and then force coincidences and make characters do OOC or just plainly stupid things to make that happen.
Because AoU is a generally disliked movie, nobody seems to notice how different AoU!Vision is from CACW!Vision. CACW is a plot device, because the Russos didn’t care about him in the least.
Something similar happened with Thor and the Asgardians. They couldn’t care less for them, so they just pushed them out of the way. They killed Loki because he was the one who knew Thanos’ plan the best and therefore he could be useful in dealing with him, which would have produced a different outcome. The whole Nidavellir plot was a waste of time designed to keep Thor out of the fight for the length of time needed, and to split the Guardians. Thor didn’t need an axe and didn’t need an eye. One-eyed Thor is one of the little serious symbols Taika put in Ragnarok, because in a way Thor is the new allfather. But I digress.
The whole “kill Vision”/”don’t kill Vision” thing is another distraction. It was known since Thor The Dark World that the Infinity Stones are indestructible (Wanda shouldn’t be able to destroy one of them, it is not possible, but it isn’t politically correct to point out that and risk being called a misogynist). Killing or not killing Vision shouldn’t be relevant because the gem itself couldn’t be destroyed but PLOT REASONS.
We cannot have Tony call Steve, so Ebony Maw must show up EXACTLY when Tony is about to press the button.
We need a battle in Wakanda, because it would be really epic, so we make up something about Strange seeing possible futures and giving up the time stone for mysterious reasons (and risking several wrong outcomes) because “it was the only way” (That’s CHEAP).
When you watch a movie and every emotional or bad thing that happens comes to be because of plot conveniences, you feel cheated. And that makes of a movie a bad movie.
Sorry to keep harping on this, but the Russos weren’t the ones who *wrote* CACW and IW; they just *directed* them. The writers who are responsible for all those egregious plot holes and mischaracterizations designed to lead to a pointlessly ~edgy~ but ultimately stakes-free foreordained conclusion are Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely. They also wrote most of Thor: The Dark World; they were responsible for the decision to fridge Frigga to bring her sons together, and they intended to kill Loki permanently before Feige decided to bring him back because a) test audiences thought it was a trick and b) Loki was really popular at the time.
Otherwise, @thatvermilionflycatcher is entirely correct. Thanks for making note of how CACW trashed Vision’s characterization. Whedon wrote him as an otherworldly, slightly uncanny inhuman intelligence; Markus & McFeely wrote “I am a robot meep meep moop.”
…my biggest fear about Avengers 4 isn’t that Loki won’t come back: it’s the MCU, it’s Loki, he won’t stay dead for long. No, my biggest fear is that he’ll come back and that Thor, after all that happened in Infinity War – things that should finally have taught him humility and empathy and changed him for the better – STILL will treat his own brother like his inferior (because apparently the writers think saying Thor loves Loki is enough). And that this will be portrayed as a “happy ending” and something Loki should be content with, even thankful for, because who wants a brother who respects them anyway.
How the heck am I gonna be satisfied with that for either of them?!
I really hope – no, I beg – that anyone messaging Marvel about bringing Loki back would do him (and me) a favor and also drop them a line about Thor’s treatment of him, just to let them know we expect better. ‘Cause honestly, if it continues like so far, he’s probably no worse off dead.
My fear is Loki being resurrected by Thor’s noble and fearless actions, this making all about Thor… again. Loki’s death was about Thor, now Loki’s life could be about Thor as well, this confiding Loki’s status as a a useless twink / fridge wife
That’s exactly my fear too. That’s why I hope those theories about Thor going to Hel / Vallhalla to resurrect Loki don’t pan out, because then it will only be about Thor’s noble act and not about Loki himself. What I’d like to see is Loki to come back by his own incredible will and wits, somehow, like he’s always done. He died for Thor (again) now can’t his life be about himself?
“…now can’t his life be about himself?”
This!!
To your concerns, @shine-of-asgard: I haven’t read the Kid Loki or Agent of Asgard comics (yet…), but I get the sense that even though Thor was responsible for bringing Loki back, Loki has nonetheless been able to lead his own life – intertwined with Thor’s, of course, but not beholden to him. They might want to do something like that… but if Tom Hiddleston comes back in cameos as “Old Loki,” it wouldn’t have the same significance it does in the comics (I gather), because the MCU “Old Loki” was never actually evil. Even at his worst, in Thor and The Avengers, there were extenuating circumstances; he wasn’t in his right mind, and his intentions weren’t entirely malicious. I’m afraid that the way they’ll try to make it work is to frame Old Loki the way Ragnarok did, as not *evil* precisely – because even that would be giving him more credit for competence and motivational complexity/coherence than Ragnarok wanted to – but as *bad*, this cartoon trickster who betrays people for shits and giggles, or because it’s “in his nature” and he “just can’t help himself.”
Alternatively, though, Old Loki could just represent his envy and resentment against Thor and the pain and grievances he can’t move past, while Kid or Teen Loki is trying to live a new life free of all that baggage. That might be compelling, and would be worthy of Tom Hiddleston.
If they are going to reincarnate Loki with a new young actor… I wish Old Loki’s sacrifice had been more significant. I wish he had either had a real reconciliation of Thor, with an acknowledgment of fault on both sides and a resolve from both to do better, or that he had remained Thor’s enemy; the false reconciliation and “redemption” as submission to Thor’s will, and then the pointless shock-value death that didn’t even give much of a payoff to his connection with Thanos (what the hell happened, Marvel?!), are just such a disappointing end to his character arc. This is how your best, most complex and interesting character goes out, not with a bang but a whimper.
“So, I’ve known about that scene for two years.[…] My whole journey through making Thor: Ragnarok — I knew this was coming. By the end of Thor: Ragnarok, Loki has been accepted as Thor’s brother again. When I came to shoot the scene in Infinity War, I think it’s very powerful he calls himself an Odinson, and that closes the whole journey of Loki and what he can do. It [Loki’s death] set the stakes up emotionally. It takes the stakes up dramatically.”
— Tom Hiddleston
I already hate what Taika Waititi, Marvel, etc did to Loki with Thor: Ragnarok.
But this quote makes it sting so much worse. Knowing that Tom knew the entire time while they were treating this character he loves and has poured his heart and soul and intellect into like such trash… knowing he knew that was Loki’s curtain call.
And you know what? I bet Chris and Taika knew, too. And they didn’t give a shit. They had no qualms about making his last significant film appearance a complete hatchet job. Talk about adding insult to injury… or taking the knife that Marvel had stuck in and twisting it around viciously before Tom’s Loki actually died.
Yes, I definitely agree with you, and I think I’ve ranted about it before. Actually, I think his treatment is misogynistic in two respects: his character is treated the way female characters usually are; and the way his death happened – in the first 10 minutes for shock value, with unusual gruesomeness and brutality, and with that fourth-wall-breaking “No resurrections this time” line – shows utter contempt for Loki’s fans, who are understood to be mostly female.
I searched “loki’s death in infinity war” on my blog and came up with this post where I answered a similar question from someone else and also linked to previous rants about it and reblogs of other people’s rants. Here’s another one that I don’t think I linked in that post.
I’m not sure how you feel about Ragnarok, but I’ve also reblogged and/or contributed to a couple of long analyses of how Loki’s discarding in Infinity War was connected to the deflation and ridicule of his character in Ragnarok, which was ultimately a misogynistic fuck-you to his fans: here’s one, here’s another, and here’s a third.
Shame and opprobrium where it’s due: the people who wrotethe screenplay for Infinity War are Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely. I blame them more than the Russo brothers for the bullshit that was IW … though of course the Russos executed Markus & McFeely’s shitty vision in predictably shitty fashion.
Tom has mentioned during the ACE comic con panel that he has
known about the scene for two years.
This was what Thanos said in this test footage: “I got the
information that I need, and now I have to break your neck. It’s just the way
it is.”
For reference, here’s some stuff from the Avengers: Infinity War director’s audio
commentary during the opening scene:
McFeely: We’re
starting the script in December, say January of 2016. There’s no Ragnarok
script. They’re in in various stages of development, and so the first scene of this movie changed a
bunch. And until we figured out that they were gonna end on a trip off of a
destroyed Asgard, we didn’t know where Thanos would find Loki.
Markus: We did
know we wanted Thanos to come to Loki. And we would find him in any… We have drafts of him in any number of
places.
McFeely: It establishes a vengeance story for Thor
by taking out his brother and arguably, his best friend.
Joe Russo: Part of
what we wanted to do out of the gate was to unsettle you as you’re watching the film. You’re sitting in the
theatre thinking, “Most characters in the Marvel Universe have been safe
for a decade.” And we wanted to
knock you off-kilter and make the audience understand that the stakes were
going to be significant and the cost was going to be very high in the
movie.
Markus: And in
that regard, this scene does away with a
lot of things from the ongoing MCU. That was… The first MacGuffin from
the first Captain America movie just got crushed and stuck into a glove.
Anthony: Bye bye,
Tesseract.
Markus: And
shortly, the villain from the first
Avengers movie…
McFeely: Right. Arguably the best villain in the MCU…
Markus: …will achieve a similar end.
Anthony: Aside
from establishing… introducing Thanos as our lead and POV in the movie, this
scene also heavily kicks off Thor’s arc
in the film.
Anthony: The one thing
that’s wonderful, one thing we all really responded to about Thor is where he’s
left at the end of Ragnarok with the destruction of Asgard… And there’s
something fascinating about exporing these people as you strip away who they
are and their built-out identities, and find out what’s left. I think we’re
going through a very similar process with Thor in this film, especially with this
scene, we’re sort of completing the
experience that Ragnarok brought to Thor in the sense that we’re taking away
the rest of everything away from him.
McFeely: And
remember, he (Thanos) had a relationship with Loki even if it was off-screen
where he entrusted him with a duty in
Avengers 1 and Loki failed, so...
Joe: He’s making him pay.
McFeely: Yeah.
Thanos has a long memory.
Anthony: Yep. Fair
enough.
Part of an interview with the IW screenwriters:
Stephen McFeely: Hemsworth came to set, and
went, “You guys really need to understand that we are doing something
different with Ragnarok.” And we knew they were changing it
some, but it was so early in the process, so we flew [Ragnarok screenwriter]
Eric Pearson and [director] Taika Waititi in and we had long conversations with
them. There are at least a couple of jokes in there Taika himself said in
passing that we thought were gold. They showed us a few scenes, so we knew that
Thor was being re-toned. And we needed to embrace that.
Christopher Markus: But it was also the realization
that even in the “funny” one [Ragnarok], his father and his
sister die, and that he’s almost
becoming comically unlucky at this point, and to follow that to its natural
conclusions.
So in summary, Loki’s death scene was decided since two
years ago and he mainly died for the following purposes:
Set the tone for the movie by showing Thanos’
cruelty
For shock value
Give place to the new “best” MCU villain Thanos
Fuel Thor’s motivation for revenge, to further Thor’s storyline and character
development from where he left off in Ragnarok
Evidently, none of
the above reasons has anything to do with Loki’s arc and character development.
In terms of narrative, it was mentioned in the IW commentary
that here Thanos was actually punishing Loki for failing to fulfill his duty in the first
Avengers film, but IMO that’s just a load of crap. Thanos was already going to
leave the ship; it was Loki who suddenly popped up with his butter knife. Also,
what Loki was promised in Avengers was
this: “You will long for something as
sweet as pain.”
But how could death be worse than pain for Loki, when he had already let himself die twice before? (Just in case anyone wishes to protest
that he faked his own death in Ragnarok,
please read this first)
In TDW he even said this: “If I am for the axe, then for mercy’s sake, just swing it.”
Loki isn’t afraid and does not cower in the face of death, unlike what had been portrayed of
his character in Ragnarok, which was
just OOC af. Though I’m glad they rectified this part of his character in IW, the
way he died was just too needlessly brutal and meaningless, and also stupid. If the writers truly meant for Thanos to punish Loki in the worst possible way
like what was foreshadowed in A1, to be honest it would make more sense to kill
Thor instead (just saying). But as it is, the directors and writers were just making excuses and don’t actually care.
I assert that this is a direct result of Thor: Ragnarok. Those who don’t
follow the Ragnarok discussions may think
this is ridiculous, but really, it’s not. This was what I wrote on 20 Apr,
before IW was released:
“…when you consider the fact that Thanos arrived right after he said that, and just minutes after he had told Loki ‘Maybe you’re not so bad after all’. It only proved Thor*’s opinion about Loki right–because of course Thor* can never be wrong–that Loki was just never-ending trouble.
And what I’m worried about is that this will be taken into Infinity War
and Loki will be made the scapegoat again.I don’t want Thor* to blame him again
and make him feel like the only way he’ll be worthy of his brother’s love and
forgiveness is to sacrifice himself to make up for his mistake of taking the
Tesseract.”
I couldn’t believe this ended up being exactly what happened in
IW, and I hated it so much. While the rest of the audience was laughing, my
blood ran cold the moment Thor told Loki “you really are the worst brother”.
By now I think we can all agree that what Loki said—“I hereby
pledge to you my undying fidelity”—was meant for Thor. If anyone’s not
convinced, here:
‘Undying Fidelity’ was the title of the
soundtrack that was playing from the instant Loki started saying ‘I, Loki,
Prince of Asgard…’ to the moment Thor collapsed over his body.
Loki was crying when he said that. Assuming those were Loki’s
tears (in character), then it was almost as if Loki had been prepared to die, as though his futile attempt at killing Thanos was
deliberate. Why?!?!?! Just because Thor changed his mind about saying “maybe you’re
not so bad after all” and told him he was the “worst brother”, so he wanted to
prove his fidelity using his life??? It was foolish and OOC, is what I think.
But then again, if we consider his character and their relationship in Ragnarok, it might not be that out of
character after all… As a case in point, I’ve seen someone say this:
If Loki
couldn’t even trick Thor in Ragnarok,
what makes you think he can outsmart Thanos?
In Ragnarok, his
character was twisted and reduced to comic relief, his sacrifice and redemption
in TDW was made to seem like a sham and a joke. A previously complex,
multifaceted character was simplified into a misbehaving and terrible brother
who would betray his only remaining family for the sake of money(?!). When the God of
Mischief was asked whether he had a better idea than “get help”, he answered “no”
as though it was supposed to be obvious. The graceful, regal, composed and
witty prince of Asgard was played for a fool throughout most of the film. His
brother criticized him in a way that made it sound like he had always been incorrigible,
even though that’s definitely not
true if you watched the previous films. Only when he compromised and became “good” on Thor*’s
terms after listening to Thor*’s bullshit of a speech was he deemed redeemable.
In short, Ragnarok
“put him in his place”, downplayed his powers, stripped him of his purpose, wits, importance and independence as a
character, never gave him the equality and respect he wanted.
The IW writers said this:
“…the first scene of
this movie changed a bunch. And until we figured out that they were gonna end
on a trip off of a destroyed Asgard, we didn’t know where Thanos would find
Loki.”
“We did know we wanted
Thanos to come to Loki. And we would find him in any… We have drafts of him
in any number of places.”
But with how Ragnarok ended
up, it became entirely too convenient. It made him too easy to kill off—they could simply make him sacrifice himself
for his brother again, since his sacrifice in TDW was retconned into a faked
death anyway.
There wasn’t a need to think of an intricate plot for a
character who no longer seemed important—they only needed to put the final nail
in the coffin. Since it would serve all their purposes anyway, why not?
This made my blood boil again. Yeah, we saw what you did, we saw how you used Loki as a plot device for shock value. “Arguably the best villain”? There is no argue. He is the best villain and no matter how much you try, your stupid disgusting abuser of a villain can’t replace him.
“there’s
something fascinating about exploring these people as you strip away who they
are and their built-out identities, and find out what’s left. I think we’re
going through a very similar process with Thor in this film”
Aren’t you creative? Using the same plot that you used for Steve, for Thor. How did you manage to come up with that? You didn’t care about Thor’s development, you only wanted an excuse so your beloved villain win. No matter how much it makes Thor ooc. No matter the fact that Thor doesn’t need sth to avenge to fight someone like Thanos. And TR just made things easy for you. So you even didn’t try to write a good death or even a good scene. It was just lazy writing.
“there’s something fascinating about exploring these people as you strip away who they are and their built-out identities, and find out what’s left.”
THAT IS LITERALLY THE PLOT OF THE FIRST THOR MOVIE. He was banished to Earth, powerless, weaponless, without his home and family, with no way of return in the nearest future. And he FOUND who he was, a protector, a self-sacrificing hero who doesn’t need revenge as a motivator, to do the right thing.
The whole Infinity War just makes me want to step off this planet, because the very idea that the only motivator for Thor would be to ‘lose everything’ is so pathetically cruel, stupid and shallow. That they needed to kill off the whole of Asgard (or whatever remains of it) and Loki — a brilliant, powerful sorcerer — to ‘establish’ Thanos’ power, that so much was done for nothing but shock value, that the whole movie intentionally leaves such a disgusting aftertaste of pointlessness and loss… It honestly says more about the writers than it does about the characters of that story.
Why the hell is this kind of budget spent on movies like this?? Why the hell these are the stories we as mankind choose to tell??
This is lazy writing, pure and simple. Of the millions of ways a writer could choose to motivate a character toward any kind of life change, the single most overused plot device is killing off a loved one. And, in fact it has been used in nearly every Marvel movie, as well–Pietro, Frigga, Bucky (though he came back), Coulson, Peter Quill’s mother (though there was a bit of a tape delay there)–seriously, they could have done so much better.
Remember, Markus and McFeely are the geniuses who decided to fridge Frigga to motivate Thor and Loki in TDW. They have one playbook and it ain’t long.
Anyone I see reblog that bullshit post about how Taika Waititi characterized Thor and Loki so much better than Joss Whedon because Taika has a Deep Pagan Understanding of Norse mythology while Joss is beholden to Bad Western Christianity and therefore thinks God is a fascist… you will be unfollowed. You are all hereby on notice.
(I just went looking through the notes to see if I could find my own comment, which I might reblog just to try to stem the idiocy, and saw another hot take, this one about how Taika’s compassionate understanding of gods reflects his Jewish heritage, and I am just… no. I’m about as proud to claim Adam Sandler as a landsman. At least he wrote the Chanukah song. Several of them.)
@philosopherking1887 taika’s jewish? I haven’t heard anything about that. There’s a plethora of jewish representation in the MCU, but I thought taika was part Australian Aboriginal. I have no great love for taika’s version of the odinson saga, but there were a few redeeming moments. I was really disappointed by the Russo brothers, because I held them in a much higher esteem. We watched IW again last night, and after my 3rd viewing I still find the firsr 10 minutes excruciating to watch.
He’s half Maori (New Zealand’s indigenous people), half Jewish.
I can’t decide whether I’m more pissed at him or at Markus & McFeely (who wrote IW) and the Russos. Well, Waititi shares my ire with Hemsworth, who brought him on and instigated the radical recharacterization, and Feige, who gave it the go-ahead.
Loki is the Philosopher King 