Sorry to be a bummer, but I really don’t think we can read into this. I think we’ve seen what the creators of this movie think about Loki, and it’s not much. I also just don’t think any of them are that smart. Infinity War‘s plot hole problem is worse than New Jersey’s pothole problem, and the latter destroyed the undercarriage of my car.
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.”
joe russo saying thor is to blame for the ending of infinity war (just as much as fucking thanos???) because he didnt aim for the head is SO Rich considering he Fucking Wrote It But ALSO bc thor, as ive learned just now by watching a compilation of all his fight scenes on youtube, has historically ALWAYS aimed for the head when dealing with a Threat. so Lads…
Welcome to my TEDx talk: Thor has NEVER done anything wrong Ever in his Life
thor 1 (0:04-0:25)thor is fighting some wack ass aliens. hits them in the chest and shoulders mostly. one of the aliens knocks thor down, proves himself to be an Actual Threat and Thor Immediately Aims For The HEAD
thor 1 (1:34-2:04)thor fighting a bunch of nerds again, mostly just flipping them over, hes lowkey panicking but still is going easy on them until this dude Drops Thor, declaring himself a threat and Thor Punches Him In The FACE
thor 1 (2:40-2:53) this one doesnt really count, he went for the dudes head bc thats where his power was but Regardless He Still Went For The HEAD
(also to note, loki Stay doing stupid shit in this movie (and also every other movie) but thor Never goes for his head in fights because he recognizes that as a Fatal Blow )
thor 2 (8:51-9:08) thor is seen fighting a bunch of losers, flipping them over, hitting them in the chest, etc, but as soon as he gets to the actual villain? Immediate Lightning Bolt To The FACE
thor 2 (10:14-10:25) once again hes fighting the actual villain: aims For The HEAD
age of ultron (13:44-13:52) when trying to kill ultron. thor aims where? ultrons HEAD
(and theres others in between too im just too tired to list them all.)
and to say he Purposely messed up because he wanted to rub it into thanos face???? since when is thor Petty like that?? in fact I Know he Isnt bc i Just watched the thor 2 scene where he fights the man he thinks killed his brother and isnt Dumb about it. And then with hela in thor 3 (who destroyed his Home, destroyed his hammer and fucked up his eye) , besides a few one liners he doesnt do dumb shit despite dying inside.
and Joe is over here trying to tell me thor takes the Full Force of A Star almost killing Himself in infinity war just to be Stupid at the end bc he wants to rub it in??? get out
TLDR: thor Would Have Killed Thanos at the end of infinity war if they Wanted him to BUT they Didnt want him to (because they wanted to make a part 2)
and Now theyre just pointing fingers bc it Doesnt make sense
In Conclusion, russos, Meet Me Outside .
Correction: Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely wrote it, not the Russos. (Forgetting about screenwriters is a pet peeve of mine.)
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.
14 million alternate universes and you are telling me that dumb bitch Strange didn’t think of opening a portal above Thanos’ head and closing it around his neck or teleporting the dried purple grape into the fucking sun in a single one of them like what kind of jackassery and complete lack of imagination honestly
Or just use the time stone to turn him into a shirveled old husk. Good look conquering the universe where you are too old to snap your fingers
Or just cut his goddamn arm off instead of trying to wiggle a metal gauntlet off while trying to keep him hypnotized.
This, honestly.
This is what we call an “idiot plot”: a plot that requires all the characters to be uncharacteristically stupid. Can also just be interpreted to mean an idiotic plot written by idiots.
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.
Unpopular/extremely weird opinion: Ultron was a more sympathetic villain than Thanos (and no one was even trying to make Ultron sympathetic).
Ultron’s motives are understandable and he is sympathetic. While Thanos is just a stupid disgusting abuser.
With you @philosopherking1887. The discussion between Ultron and Vision at the end of the film – they basically agreed on the same premise but Ultron was the pessimist/glass half empty & Vision was the optimist/glass half full. Ultimately, the difference between a screenwriter with a vision/purpose/coherent message & ones who didn’t.
@ms-cellanies, I’m not sure it’s a matter of pessimism vs. optimism, exactly… well, you can read my long post for my thoughts on the crucial difference between Ultron and Vision. But you are entirely correct on the difference between the screenwriters – and it’s also, I think, the difference between a screenwriter with a philosophical education and ones who maybe read the Wikipedia article on Ayn Rand once. It’s just as unfortunate that they ended up writing Vision in his subsequent screen appearances (Civil War and Infinity War) as that they tried to write a pseudo-philosophical rationale for Thanos. Joss Whedon knows how to write slightly inhuman, uncanny, but recognizable thought processes; Markus & McFeely just gave us “I am a robot meep-meep-moop.”
Ok but first of all, they’re not just criminals because ross said so, they’re criminals because they actively and wilfully committed crimes (illegally invading foreign countries, massive destruction of property, endangering civilians, seriously injuring/possibly killing law enforcement people just doing their damn job). Second, visions not there because he chose to go play happy couples with the crazy lady that put him through several floors of a building for no reason, not because of the accords. And third, Rhodey literally stated at the end of civil war that he doesn’t regret supporting the accords in spite of his injury, so why the sudden 180 here. Honestly the murder of James Rhodes was probably the most thorough and devastating in the entirety of infinity war, and this for set commemorates the exact moment I gave up all hope for the mcu
lmao so i dont really have a stake in this fight but i find these contradictions hilarious because guess who the directors were for civil war? :’)
The writers, Markus and McFeely, don’t seem to be aware of what they wrote. They think they made it clear that Cap was right and Tony was wrong, but for many of us (including Chris Evans) they did the exact opposite.
a theory nobody needs, not even me, and a rant i did and you do too
~~~~~
during the pr frenzy for A4 just prior to release, there was an acknowledgment/suggestion that Loki was on the boring villain’s side.
now, they will have him in A4, so we will see him in that film. however, all onset photos have only shown Loki in A1 gear, battlescars, hair, and all. none of any of his other costuming, grooming choices from any other timeline have surfaced that i am aware of. feel free to send me set pics to dispute as i would love to be disproved and dgaf about any spoilers, but i digress…
so why would they bother with that pr red herring of him allying with the purple thumb?
unless they were referring solely to his past conscripted alliance during A1.
again, i am not certain i want to ascribe too much clever maneuvering to come in A4 for him or frim them.
i think they were being disrespectful of the character in the press. like they were publicly sharing an inside joke at the expense of nearly 10 years of character development and the character’s fans. i do not think they were being subtle with foreshadowing. i believe them when they said they did not know what to do with the character.
in the three minutes Loki appeared in A3, he only wavered for a millisecond. it seemed to me an obvious feint to try to save himself as well as thor from the overpowered boring villain. does anybody disagree with that assessment of those three minutes? does anyone else remember wanting to cry joyfully when Loki said with conviction “We have a Hulk!” even though you just knew he was doomed cause this was the opening?
in conclusion, by the end of A4 Loki will be left dead, the creators will most likely be shown as the hamfisted, self-important fuckwits that they are, and that i will ache for something as coherent as age of ultron in comparison to A4.
~~~~~
rant:
i can’t convey how happy it would make me to get alternate timelines/universes. where it would then be possible to have an actual Loki film be a viable option and not only a kid Loki film, but all the Lokis, agent of asgard, occasional antagonist and ally to the avengers, Lady Loki showing up, just a Loki film with his Loki powers, doing Loki things.
i would love for massive realities to be opened to us and the filmmakers. instead we are getting everything shut down. think about it. we could have different Tony Starks in different timelines, iron heart showing up, a black widow or hawkeye spy film(we could find out wtf happened in Budapest!), lady thor, new asgard, professor hulk, we could have reboots without them being reboots or remakes. do you understand what i am trying to say???!? actors aging or timing out of contracts be damned. the characters would still go on, the actors could have cheeky cameos in alternate future works, no one would be chained to a single canon, and so many more stories could be told in a multiverse.
WHERE IS MY MULTIVERSE!
but all the russos know how to do is tear things down, apart. they do not build a story. they wreck things where they could create and believe their audience to be idiots.
still not with me on this? let me try an analogy. have you ever had any deconstructed food? it is where a “chef” breaks down a dish into it’s base components and then rearranges it and serves it to you like it is some sort of revelation. still having trouble?
imagine that a plate with a few cooked ripple edged flat noodles, a tiny bowl of marinara, two skewered sausage balls, an edible decorative sculpture of ricotta mouse with some mozzarella, parsley, and parmesan edging the plate is lasagna. NO.
and don’t let them tell you that you’re just not savvy enough to appreciate it, you just don’t get it. if you are promised lasagna and get 250 calories of edible decoration it’s okay to complain about it, cause that ain’t lasagna. it’s not even a good snack.
i am convinced this is what they will be offering us.
here’s your avengers, hope you like it.
/rant
Why did you bring this back? Are you trying to make me sad? I thought we were friends.
“Hamfisted, self-important fuckwits” is exactly right.
Loki is the Philosopher King 