Pinterest is a goldmine for seeing posts like this….
Sure. That’s why he spent 2 weeks secretly stealing acess codes to the ships to escape, andhad a plan to kill the psychotic leader, a plan that sounded like he had had for awhile, like 2 weeks. Sounds like he couldn’t wait to get the hell away from all that so called “love”, and was biding his time until the opportunity came.
The notion that Loki would feel at home on Sakaar because it is chaotic and lawless is based on Thor’s skewed perception of his brother. It is based on the premise that Loki is the god of mischief and thus, has had no deeper reasons for any of the things he’s done.
Which conflicts entirely with a huge chunk of the initial Thor film, that goes to a lot of trouble to set up Loki’s narrative, in which there is already an existing sibling rivalry and he is pushed over the edge by discovering that he was adopted.
Really he should be called the god of a lot of shitty things happened to me and I reacted badly…what can I say?
And then there was this interview, with this interesting little excerpt:
Thor: Ragnarok’s director Taika Waititi – New Zealander of the Year, blossoming fashion icon, and man of a thousand poses – is swift to launch into a description of Loki, the unbeloved son of Asgard, as, “someone who tries so hard to embody this idea of the tortured artist, this tortured, gothy orphan.”
“Swift to launch into” this description, huh? Kind of sounds like someone with an idée fixe, a preoccupation, a grudge… probably a secondhand grudge, on behalf of one Chris Hemsworth, but one he has made charmingly his own.
Loki of Thor1, Avengers and The Dark World. I identified with him in several ways, mostly because he was other. He was different, an outsider – as I was and am still.
Then along comes Ragnarok and a bunch of fans declare that they love this version. The version where his otherness is mocked and attacked. Where his pain is invalidated and his struggles deemed either unimportant or joke fodder. These people are saying they will not love Loki as he is, but they will ‘love’ him when he is flattened, confined, reduced to something unthreatening.
It feels very personal. I’m old enough and cynical enough to not let it hurt (much) but I have heard the message: to be loved, you cannot be other. It is a message I’ve heard all my life. And Ragnarok is a movie that embodies that nasty little message. Ragnarok-positive posts? Nails on a chalkboard most of the time. They’re certainly not a positive thing for me to see on my dash (Public blog, public space. Tumblr has tools to manage what we see. I use them, I’m ok.)
But to those people I follow who write wonderful thinky posts, you are treasured.
Loki fans from Ragnarok and people that are a fan of Loki character from another movies should be a two separated fandom.
I seriously think ao3 should provide tags to separate these two fandoms. It will save us lots of grief.
Oh my God, yes. And we should use different tags on Tumblr, too. I think my system of using Thor* and Loki* to designate their Ragnarok incarnations is very handy; it’s a lot easier for their side than typing ragnarok!thor. Or r-thor and r-loki, like using d- and l- to designate the different chiralities of enantiomers.
Thanks, @lostlokichaos. It’s always nice to know I’m not shouting into a void! And you’re right about invalidating Loki’s other-ness… which makes it ironic that the Ragnarok stans are constantly calling Loki* a “queer icon” and calling us (many of whom are queer) homophobic for not liking his stereotypical queer-coded villain/ effete limp-wristed sissy portrayal. It’s also utterly confusing that Taika keeps using “space orphan” as an insult. Why does being an orphan somehow reflect badly on Loki…? His story of being adopted (or kidnapped?) by a conquering society, raised in ignorance of his origin, and taught to fear and loathe the race he was born to should have played perfectly into the anti-imperialist theme that Ragnarok was (half-assedly) trying to get across; but apparently Taika despised Loki too much to be willing to put him on the oppressees’ side of the ledger, so he pooh-poohed the idea that it might be a source of genuine, justified distress or trauma.
The terrible interpretation of Loki’s character in Thor: Ragnarok
Things that Thor: Ragnarok director Taika Waititi said of Loki:
“Not to really wanna humiliate Loki all the way through the film, but because he was… most definitely overpowered Thor a lot in the other films in terms of presence and his story, and kind of overshadowed him a little bit… This one, it was just nice to kind of switch it around, after all the shitty things that Loki’s done in the last few films…” (Source: Empire Film Podcast)
“space orphan”
“someone who tries so hard to embody this idea of the tortured artist, this tortured, gothy orphan”
“…this little emo goth hanging out by himself. He was like the kid in Harry Potter [Malfoy].”
has been trying to kill Thor his entire life
A number of significant ways in which Loki’s character was retconned in Ragnarok:
1.
Tom: Loki’s death on Svartalfheim was written as a death, and Chris and I played that scene for real. That was meant to be sort of that he redeemed himself. He helped save his brother and helped save Jane Foster, but he, in the process, sacrificed himself.
Ragnarok!Thor: You FAKED your own death
2.
TDW!Thor: Loki, for all his grave imbalance, understood rule as I know I never will.
Ragnarok!Thor: And what do I find, but the Nine Realms completely in chaos. Enemies of Asgard assembling, plotting our demise, all while you, Odin, the protector of those Nine Realms, are sitting here in your bathrobe, eating grapes.
3.
Tom: The best thing about Loki is that if he is afraid he won’t show it. He’s been highly trained through the experience of his slightly traumatic life to shield his fear.
Loki in all other films:
Gagnarok!Loki:
Bonus:
“You’re a screw up, so whatever.”
I could have sworn I’d reblogged this before, but I couldn’t find it when I searched my blog. Tumblr’s search function is weirdly… non-functional. Thanks, @lokiloveforever, for finding this for me!
Anyway, yeah. Evidence that Taika did not like or understand Loki, regardless of what he may have told Tom over a bowl of pasta. It’s quite possible that Taika thinks he didn’t change Loki, because he thought his version of Loki (whiny, hedonistic, venally self-interested, pointlessly malicious, with no real problems or grievances to speak of) is who Loki always was. That means he was wrong about the Loki of the previous films. If Ragnarok fans prefer the new Loki, they can have him, I guess… but stop trying to make the case that he’s identical to the Loki of previous films, or that everyone before Taika somehow got him “wrong,” whatever that would mean. It’s not like Ragnarok!Loki is the Platonic Form of MCU Loki that all prior Lokis were only imperfectly striving toward, and it’s definitely controversial whether Ragnarok succeeded in portraying the Loki of recent comics (which I assume is what some people mean by “canon”… never mind that the various writers haven’t characterized him consistently) or of myth (which was definitely not the target…?).
“Taika and I went out for a bowl of pasta before Ragnarok and he said ‘I’m gonna change quite a lot, but I’m not gonna change you.’ And I took that as a huge compliment. I’ve always felt a responsability to both honor the respect in which the character is held but also to try and progress it on.”
I love Tom’s quote so much because it proves all the Taika (“he ruined Loki!!11”) haters wrong.
Nope, it just proves that he’s a liar… or, perhaps more charitably (to his moral character if not his intellect), that he massively misunderstood Loki’s character throughout the previous movies.
“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.
Does anyone want to talk about how ridiculous it is that Valkyrie, of all people, shames Loki for not caring about doing the right thing?
Loki: I don’t mean to impose… (Valkyrie throws a bottle at him because violence is only bad if The Villain™ does it) Loki: The Grandmaster has a great many ships. I may even have stolen the access codes to his security system. Valkyrie: And suddenly you’re overcome with an urge to do the right thing?
You know… the same woman who spent half this movie also avoiding Thor’s attempts to gain her aid? The one who only decided to help out about five minutes prior to this scene? The one who arguably never would have wound up helping had Loki not invaded her memories, thus jolting her out of complacency? That Valkyrie?
Yeah, and considering her history in enslaving people for the Grandmaster runs about 1000 or so years? Maybe more, I can’t recall, she doesn’t really have the moral high ground.
In fact, Loki attempting to capture Thor and surrender him to the Grandmaster is more in line with something that Valkyrie would likely pursue (considering her time in Sakaar). Maybe they should have made her more difficult to convince.
Her comment/question is rather out of place also and would have to assume that she’s familiar with Loki to the level that Thor or Hulk (cause of NY) are.
I can only assume she said it in retaliation to what Loki did with her mind, but, in my opinion, she probably would have said something else.
Or they could have validated that she wasn’t necessarily trustworthy too.
It just felt like more of Taika’s lazy story-telling to me, as opposed to Valkyrie getting back at him for the whole ‘invading my mind’ thing. (But hey, don’t invade people’s brains, kids. It’s quite rude). I personally viewed it more as like, “hey, we haven’t reminded people that Loki’s a bad egg in the last 3 minutes or so; better let someone have a dig at his loose morals” sort of BS that is honestly just rampant in Thor: Ragnarok.
Like, I know Ragnarok critics get labelled conspiracy theorists for thinking (or at least speaking as though) Taika just had it out for Loki and wanted to degrade him as much as possible. And I get it, that sounds objectively insane. But just, looking at the narrative of the film itself, it’s… hard not to get that impression? And there’s really no other indicator in that movie–unless I’m forgetting something–that anyone on Sakaar (not including Thor and Bruce, obviously) has a clue who Loki really is. I guess it’s possible that they do, but there’s no evidence that that’s the case. More show & tell problems in this film.
I actually do want to address the ‘betraying Thor for money’ thing, though. Because I see a lot of people complaining that it’s completely out of character for Loki to do so for the money, and I actually have a different take on it. We all know Loki is rarely able to just be honest about what’s going on in his head. That’s essentially what the entire conflict between him and Thor has been fueled by for all this time, really. So I kind of headcanon that Loki might have told Thor that it was for the money, but I personally believe that in reality, it was actually Loki’s last-ditch effort to save his brother. Even as strong as he and Thor both are, individually and together, he did not believe Hela was an enemy that they could defeat (which is technically true)–especially now that she’s all cozy on Asgard, where she’ll be even stronger than when they first met her. Loki already failed once to talk Thor into staying on Sakaar of his own free will; I think betraying him was Loki’s way of trying to keep him safe from Hela by any means necessary.
I also think that deceptiveness can extend to his fight with Valkyrie too. A lot of Loki fans complain about her being able to take him captive so easily, but I choose to believe he lost to her intentionally. Easy ticket to finding his brother. He is the trickster god. Why are we suddenly taking him at face value all the time?
Admittedly, when it comes to Thor: Ragnarok, it’s super hard to decide when Loki is acting out of character because he’s running a scheme and when he’s doing it because of bad writing.
People actually call Loki stans (the true Loki stans) and people who don’t like Ragnarok as idiots just ‘cause we analyzed the movie from start to finish. Most of these people who insult us are new to the fandom and only saw Ragnarok. And even if they saw the other Thor movies they don’t remember it or for some reason they don’t like it. They just here for the jokes and, me, who is someone who’s here for depth of character, good storytelling and just pure emotion cannot deal with people like that.
Valkyrie is a good character but i wish people wouldn’t forget that she has done more wrong than Loki. She’s captured slaves for the Grandmaster for centuries. But of course she’s a hero like Thor and can do no wrong. Also people keep forgetting that the Grandmaster himself is a despot and a tyrant who has no mercy or respect for life. But you know he talks funny and so its all okay.
You know… the same woman who spent half this movie also avoiding Thor’s attempts to gain her aid? The one who only decided to help out about five minutes prior to this scene? The one who arguably never would have wound up helping had Loki not invaded her memories, thus jolting her out of complacency? That Valkyrie?
In fact, Valkyrie’s own words about “
suddenly you’re overcome with an urge to do the right thing?
“ itself applies accurately to what Valkyrie was doing exactly at that time.
And to be honest, Valkyrie is a hypocrite. Considering about her own deeds that sold many non-guilty people into slavery and causing those people’s deaths for thousands years, and the fact that she knows almost nothing about Loki himself, she has absolutely no right to judge Loki and then acts like she has never done anything wrong in her life, ever.
Valkyrie is a good character but i wish people wouldn’t forget that she has done more wrong than Loki. She’s captured slaves for the Grandmaster for centuries. But of course she’s a hero like Thor and can do no wrong. Also people keep forgetting that the Grandmaster himself is a despot and a tyrant who has no mercy or respect for life. But you know he talks funny and so its all 🆗.
People often forget about her actions because the narrative never call it. The narrative of Ragnarok want to condemn Loki only out of other characters and exaggerating his “evilness” into stereotype and caricature-like so people start to regard him as only “a mere background character who is just an useless twink who have no dignity and just nothing but a pest to Thor the Perfect ‘Hero’ with no absolute importance other than being fan-service”. That’s why they’re so many double standards in Ragnarok especially regarding Loki.
Waititi did have it in for Loki, he admitted it. He said Loki’s treatment and humiliation was “payback” for overshadowing the other movies. Everything, from that stupid play, to the deleted port o potty scene, to being chained up and having glass bottles thrown at his head, to Thor’s triumphant obedience disc scene was all a reflection of exactly how Waititi feels about Loki. “Blah, blah, blah, shut up, space orphan” “Loki tries so hard to be this tortured, artistic, space orphan”. Waititi’s not subtle about it. He thinks all the little Loki lovers are idiots. He meant out to “respectfully” disrespect the other movies, and extend a middle finger to those of us whose favorite character wasn’t Thor. It’s funny how, in that scene where Loki is sitting there chained up, nobody there, not Thor, not Bruce or Valkyrie, have any right to stand there and judge Loki. Valkyrie was just as much a “lackey” of the Grandmaster, if not moreso, because she worked for him and enslaved people for him for a long, long, time. She knew about the orgy ship too, and was obviously in high favor with the grandmaster. But yet in that scene, suddenly Thor, Bruce and Valkyrie are the spotless heroes with the right to look down their noses at Loki? No.
That’s part of what makes it so maddening too. Waititi fans love to label Ragnarok critics as “conspiracy theorists”. And it’s like… well, yeah… there was a conspiracy. About which Waititi has been completely transparent. So like… how is this even a controversial or debatable thing? If you want to defend Waititi’s bullshit, fine. But don’t resort to gaslighting to do it.
Every time I hear them bitching about Thor not being the most popular character, though, I can’t help laughing. Like. This is literally the inverse of the premise of the movies. They mock Loki for being insecure about feeling second place to Thor in his own family… but that’s literally what Chris Hemsworth’s big problem with these movies is–coming in second to Loki in his own franchise. Except, you know, Hemsworth doesn’t have the underlying trauma of having been sold a lie his entire life and then tortured by a maniac, etc. So… ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Yes, LOL! So who’s the dramatic little bitch now? And who does Waititi see himself as, Thanos? Coming in and restoring order and balance to the Thor franchise? because people chose their own favorite character, and it wasn’t the title character? A character he doesn’t particularly care for or understand, so the only thing to do was tear him down, mock and ridicule him, and punish him for being loved and us for loving him.
Thank you one & all but especially @nikkoliferous for saying this:
“
They mock Loki for being insecure about feeling second place to Thor in his own family… but that’s literally what Chris Hemsworth’s big problem with these movies is–coming in second to Loki in his own franchise.”
That’s what I’ve been saying all along. In Thor & TDW those were THOR Movies. Hemsworth was the STAR, yet not just fans but CRITICS praised Tom as Loki. At least one critic who reviewed TDW said the BEST SCENES were those with Tom as Loki. Both films revolved around toxic sibling rivalry, primarily due to Daddy obviously loving and valuing one son more than the other. In REAL LIFE the roles were reversed and poor Chris Hemsworth poured out his poor abused, broken heart to his comrade in arms, Taika. Together they worked to destroy Loki and Tom’s fan base who are characterized as silly girls who fell for “the bad boy” instead of the “hero.” What irks me more than anything else is that in nearly every interview Tom gave for the Thor films he praised Chris, first and foremost. He NEVER put himself above or in front of Chris. Betrayal of the worst kind, imho.
When they’re outmatched, most creatures up their game.
The Lesser Talented Hemsworth, however, prefers to “win” by sabotaging its competition.
It’s an effective tactic in the short term but in the longer term, it soon becomes obvious who has the greater talent. As time goes on, the Lesser Talented Hemsworth finds that increasingly, its box office returns for dramatic roles cannot justify the budget, not indeed its paycheque, and eventually they find themselves relegated to B movies, where their toxic effect on box office numbers is mitigated by significantly small budgets.
Reblogging again because there’s a new branch of the discussion and it is also excellent.
Does anyone want to talk about how ridiculous it is that Valkyrie, of all people, shames Loki for not caring about doing the right thing?
Loki: I don’t mean to impose… (Valkyrie throws a bottle at him because violence is only bad if The Villain™ does it) Loki: The Grandmaster has a great many ships. I may even have stolen the access codes to his security system. Valkyrie: And suddenly you’re overcome with an urge to do the right thing?
You know… the same woman who spent half this movie also avoiding Thor’s attempts to gain her aid? The one who only decided to help out about five minutes prior to this scene? The one who arguably never would have wound up helping had Loki not invaded her memories, thus jolting her out of complacency? That Valkyrie?
Yeah, and considering her history in enslaving people for the Grandmaster runs about 1000 or so years? Maybe more, I can’t recall, she doesn’t really have the moral high ground.
In fact, Loki attempting to capture Thor and surrender him to the Grandmaster is more in line with something that Valkyrie would likely pursue (considering her time in Sakaar). Maybe they should have made her more difficult to convince.
Her comment/question is rather out of place also and would have to assume that she’s familiar with Loki to the level that Thor or Hulk (cause of NY) are.
I can only assume she said it in retaliation to what Loki did with her mind, but, in my opinion, she probably would have said something else.
Or they could have validated that she wasn’t necessarily trustworthy too.
It just felt like more of Taika’s lazy story-telling to me, as opposed to Valkyrie getting back at him for the whole ‘invading my mind’ thing. (But hey, don’t invade people’s brains, kids. It’s quite rude). I personally viewed it more as like, “hey, we haven’t reminded people that Loki’s a bad egg in the last 3 minutes or so; better let someone have a dig at his loose morals” sort of BS that is honestly just rampant in Thor: Ragnarok.
Like, I know Ragnarok critics get labelled conspiracy theorists for thinking (or at least speaking as though) Taika just had it out for Loki and wanted to degrade him as much as possible. And I get it, that sounds objectively insane. But just, looking at the narrative of the film itself, it’s… hard not to get that impression? And there’s really no other indicator in that movie–unless I’m forgetting something–that anyone on Sakaar (not including Thor and Bruce, obviously) has a clue who Loki really is. I guess it’s possible that they do, but there’s no evidence that that’s the case. More show & tell problems in this film.
I actually do want to address the ‘betraying Thor for money’ thing, though. Because I see a lot of people complaining that it’s completely out of character for Loki to do so for the money, and I actually have a different take on it. We all know Loki is rarely able to just be honest about what’s going on in his head. That’s essentially what the entire conflict between him and Thor has been fueled by for all this time, really. So I kind of headcanon that Loki might have told Thor that it was for the money, but I personally believe that in reality, it was actually Loki’s last-ditch effort to save his brother. Even as strong as he and Thor both are, individually and together, he did not believe Hela was an enemy that they could defeat (which is technically true)–especially now that she’s all cozy on Asgard, where she’ll be even stronger than when they first met her. Loki already failed once to talk Thor into staying on Sakaar of his own free will; I think betraying him was Loki’s way of trying to keep him safe from Hela by any means necessary.
I also think that deceptiveness can extend to his fight with Valkyrie too. A lot of Loki fans complain about her being able to take him captive so easily, but I choose to believe he lost to her intentionally. Easy ticket to finding his brother. He is the trickster god. Why are we suddenly taking him at face value all the time?
Admittedly, when it comes to Thor: Ragnarok, it’s super hard to decide when Loki is acting out of character because he’s running a scheme and when he’s doing it because of bad writing.
People actually call Loki stans (the true Loki stans) and people who don’t like Ragnarok as idiots just ‘cause we analyzed the movie from start to finish. Most of these people who insult us are new to the fandom and only saw Ragnarok. And even if they saw the other Thor movies they don’t remember it or for some reason they don’t like it. They just here for the jokes and, me, who is someone who’s here for depth of character, good storytelling and just pure emotion cannot deal with people like that.
Valkyrie is a good character but i wish people wouldn’t forget that she has done more wrong than Loki. She’s captured slaves for the Grandmaster for centuries. But of course she’s a hero like Thor and can do no wrong. Also people keep forgetting that the Grandmaster himself is a despot and a tyrant who has no mercy or respect for life. But you know he talks funny and so its all okay.
You know… the same woman who spent half this movie also avoiding Thor’s attempts to gain her aid? The one who only decided to help out about five minutes prior to this scene? The one who arguably never would have wound up helping had Loki not invaded her memories, thus jolting her out of complacency? That Valkyrie?
In fact, Valkyrie’s own words about “
suddenly you’re overcome with an urge to do the right thing?
“ itself applies accurately to what Valkyrie was doing exactly at that time.
And to be honest, Valkyrie is a hypocrite. Considering about her own deeds that sold many non-guilty people into slavery and causing those people’s deaths for thousands years, and the fact that she knows almost nothing about Loki himself, she has absolutely no right to judge Loki and then acts like she has never done anything wrong in her life, ever.
Valkyrie is a good character but i wish people wouldn’t forget that she has done more wrong than Loki. She’s captured slaves for the Grandmaster for centuries. But of course she’s a hero like Thor and can do no wrong. Also people keep forgetting that the Grandmaster himself is a despot and a tyrant who has no mercy or respect for life. But you know he talks funny and so its all 🆗.
People often forget about her actions because the narrative never call it. The narrative of Ragnarok want to condemn Loki only out of other characters and exaggerating his “evilness” into stereotype and caricature-like so people start to regard him as only “a mere background character who is just an useless twink who have no dignity and just nothing but a pest to Thor the Perfect ‘Hero’ with no absolute importance other than being fan-service”. That’s why they’re so many double standards in Ragnarok especially regarding Loki.
Waititi did have it in for Loki, he admitted it. He said Loki’s treatment and humiliation was “payback” for overshadowing the other movies. Everything, from that stupid play, to the deleted port o potty scene, to being chained up and having glass bottles thrown at his head, to Thor’s triumphant obedience disc scene was all a reflection of exactly how Waititi feels about Loki. “Blah, blah, blah, shut up, space orphan” “Loki tries so hard to be this tortured, artistic, space orphan”. Waititi’s not subtle about it. He thinks all the little Loki lovers are idiots. He meant out to “respectfully” disrespect the other movies, and extend a middle finger to those of us whose favorite character wasn’t Thor. It’s funny how, in that scene where Loki is sitting there chained up, nobody there, not Thor, not Bruce or Valkyrie, have any right to stand there and judge Loki. Valkyrie was just as much a “lackey” of the Grandmaster, if not moreso, because she worked for him and enslaved people for him for a long, long, time. She knew about the orgy ship too, and was obviously in high favor with the grandmaster. But yet in that scene, suddenly Thor, Bruce and Valkyrie are the spotless heroes with the right to look down their noses at Loki? No.
What I also find bothersome about Lokis treatment in Ragnarok is wondering how Tom took it. No one knows really and we may never, yet I can’t help but think it affected him negatively on some level, after devoting so much time, talent and heart into the character. I’d certainly be insulted and secretly pissed. And yes, Sakaar must’ve dwelled within the boonies of space, as I too found it odd no one there ever recognized Loki. A form of subliminal messaging, perhaps?
Let us not forget please that Taika is not completely to blame. Hemsworth specifically asked for Taika because he was mad about how Tom overshadowed him in TDW because he did a shitty job and was tired of playing Thor like how it was written. Hemsy requested Taika. Which might be why Tom and Hemsworth aren’t tight anymore.
^ Yes, that is exactly right. I don’t think Taika himself gave a shit about any of the MCU films or characters until Hemsworth brought him on in order to showcase his (Hemsworth’s), er, comedic genius. He came in predisposed to despise Loki for stealing poor Chris’s limelight… and other than hating Loki on Chris’s behalf – and being incredibly pleased with himself over his witticisms as Korg, getting Jeff Goldblum to play himself, and getting away with spending all that money to produce a gold-plated “fuck you” sign aimed at Tom Hiddleston, Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon, and all of the fangirls who are too stupid to realize that they were supposed to fall for Thor, not Loki – I’m pretty sure he still doesn’t give a shit about the MCU or its characters. I blame Chris more than Taika, because I would have expected him to have some sense of artistic integrity with respect to the character he had been playing for 8 years, and perhaps even some loyalty to Tom and the work they had done together. Taika had no reason not to take Marvel’s money and run; his only loyalty was to his pal Chris who got him that sweet lucrative gig. Of course he would give full rein to Chris’s grievances.
Yes, it’s speculation; no, we can never know the secret inner lives of celebrities… but we have it spelled out in interviews that CH was bored of playing an actual dramatic character, that TW wanted to take Loki down a peg or several, that they wanted to “make sure Thor was the most interesting character in his own movie” (who might that have been before, hmm?), and that they were taking full license to retcon and “respectfully disrespect” previous canon (where we all understand that the “respectfully” part is horseshit). It *is* mere speculation, or rather interpretive guesswork, to conjecture that Tom’s dissatisfaction or even a feeling of betrayal over the handling of Loki’s character and previous canon in general is the reason he was absent from much of the Ragnarok promotion, and when he was there, looked downcast and alienated from the camaraderie of the rest of the cast. Maybe scheduling conflicts were the only reason that Tom and Chris did very few interviews together, though they had been teamed up constantly during promotion for TDW, and Tom was more likely to be paired with Jeff Goldblum or Tessa Thompson (both of whom seemed to have a lot more respect for him than either TW or CH did).
I’m not even clear what Chris and Taika’s endgame was with this. Like, was this just simple revenge on Tom and fans? Or did Chris somehow come to the wild conclusion that all they needed to do was take Tom/Loki down a few pegs and fans would just suck it up and be like, “Ugh, fiiiiine, I guess Thor is my favourite character now”?
I suspect it was just a “fuck you” to the fans who were already devoted to Loki; it was critics and potential new fans they were trying to win over. They seem to have succeeded with critics (sadly), who don’t particularly care about the consistency of the MCU, are probably pretty sick of it, and like seeing its self-seriousness mocked. Tom didn’t get the same chorus of praise for his nuanced acting that he had received for Thor 1, The Avengers, and TDW – of course, because they deliberately gave him nothing that would showcase his dramatic acting ability or capacity for conveying emotional depth; the intent was to make Loki appear shallow and ridiculous.
The usual dudebro casual fans are delighted with the new Thor who’s a dudebro like them; Loki always just confused them, but TR gave them permission to laugh at the… cigarette (or bassoon, if you know Italian or read orchestral scores). Oddly, Loki does seem to have acquired a contingent of new “fans” who accept TR’s flattening of his character and claim to “love” him anyway, while also affirming that he’s morally worthless and a dumb bitch. Not sure if that was the intent… in any case, it is succeeding in demoralizing the established Loki fans.
Does anyone want to talk about how ridiculous it is that Valkyrie, of all people, shames Loki for not caring about doing the right thing?
Loki: I don’t mean to impose… (Valkyrie throws a bottle at him because violence is only bad if The Villain™ does it) Loki: The Grandmaster has a great many ships. I may even have stolen the access codes to his security system. Valkyrie: And suddenly you’re overcome with an urge to do the right thing?
You know… the same woman who spent half this movie also avoiding Thor’s attempts to gain her aid? The one who only decided to help out about five minutes prior to this scene? The one who arguably never would have wound up helping had Loki not invaded her memories, thus jolting her out of complacency? That Valkyrie?
Yeah, and considering her history in enslaving people for the Grandmaster runs about 1000 or so years? Maybe more, I can’t recall, she doesn’t really have the moral high ground.
In fact, Loki attempting to capture Thor and surrender him to the Grandmaster is more in line with something that Valkyrie would likely pursue (considering her time in Sakaar). Maybe they should have made her more difficult to convince.
Her comment/question is rather out of place also and would have to assume that she’s familiar with Loki to the level that Thor or Hulk (cause of NY) are.
I can only assume she said it in retaliation to what Loki did with her mind, but, in my opinion, she probably would have said something else.
Or they could have validated that she wasn’t necessarily trustworthy too.
It just felt like more of Taika’s lazy story-telling to me, as opposed to Valkyrie getting back at him for the whole ‘invading my mind’ thing. (But hey, don’t invade people’s brains, kids. It’s quite rude). I personally viewed it more as like, “hey, we haven’t reminded people that Loki’s a bad egg in the last 3 minutes or so; better let someone have a dig at his loose morals” sort of BS that is honestly just rampant in Thor: Ragnarok.
Like, I know Ragnarok critics get labelled conspiracy theorists for thinking (or at least speaking as though) Taika just had it out for Loki and wanted to degrade him as much as possible. And I get it, that sounds objectively insane. But just, looking at the narrative of the film itself, it’s… hard not to get that impression? And there’s really no other indicator in that movie–unless I’m forgetting something–that anyone on Sakaar (not including Thor and Bruce, obviously) has a clue who Loki really is. I guess it’s possible that they do, but there’s no evidence that that’s the case. More show & tell problems in this film.
I actually do want to address the ‘betraying Thor for money’ thing, though. Because I see a lot of people complaining that it’s completely out of character for Loki to do so for the money, and I actually have a different take on it. We all know Loki is rarely able to just be honest about what’s going on in his head. That’s essentially what the entire conflict between him and Thor has been fueled by for all this time, really. So I kind of headcanon that Loki might have told Thor that it was for the money, but I personally believe that in reality, it was actually Loki’s last-ditch effort to save his brother. Even as strong as he and Thor both are, individually and together, he did not believe Hela was an enemy that they could defeat (which is technically true)–especially now that she’s all cozy on Asgard, where she’ll be even stronger than when they first met her. Loki already failed once to talk Thor into staying on Sakaar of his own free will; I think betraying him was Loki’s way of trying to keep him safe from Hela by any means necessary.
I also think that deceptiveness can extend to his fight with Valkyrie too. A lot of Loki fans complain about her being able to take him captive so easily, but I choose to believe he lost to her intentionally. Easy ticket to finding his brother. He is the trickster god. Why are we suddenly taking him at face value all the time?
Admittedly, when it comes to Thor: Ragnarok, it’s super hard to decide when Loki is acting out of character because he’s running a scheme and when he’s doing it because of bad writing.
People actually call Loki stans (the true Loki stans) and people who don’t like Ragnarok as idiots just ‘cause we analyzed the movie from start to finish. Most of these people who insult us are new to the fandom and only saw Ragnarok. And even if they saw the other Thor movies they don’t remember it or for some reason they don’t like it. They just here for the jokes and, me, who is someone who’s here for depth of character, good storytelling and just pure emotion cannot deal with people like that.
Valkyrie is a good character but i wish people wouldn’t forget that she has done more wrong than Loki. She’s captured slaves for the Grandmaster for centuries. But of course she’s a hero like Thor and can do no wrong. Also people keep forgetting that the Grandmaster himself is a despot and a tyrant who has no mercy or respect for life. But you know he talks funny and so its all okay.
You know… the same woman who spent half this movie also avoiding Thor’s attempts to gain her aid? The one who only decided to help out about five minutes prior to this scene? The one who arguably never would have wound up helping had Loki not invaded her memories, thus jolting her out of complacency? That Valkyrie?
In fact, Valkyrie’s own words about “
suddenly you’re overcome with an urge to do the right thing?
“ itself applies accurately to what Valkyrie was doing exactly at that time.
And to be honest, Valkyrie is a hypocrite. Considering about her own deeds that sold many non-guilty people into slavery and causing those people’s deaths for thousands years, and the fact that she knows almost nothing about Loki himself, she has absolutely no right to judge Loki and then acts like she has never done anything wrong in her life, ever.
Valkyrie is a good character but i wish people wouldn’t forget that she has done more wrong than Loki. She’s captured slaves for the Grandmaster for centuries. But of course she’s a hero like Thor and can do no wrong. Also people keep forgetting that the Grandmaster himself is a despot and a tyrant who has no mercy or respect for life. But you know he talks funny and so its all 🆗.
People often forget about her actions because the narrative never call it. The narrative of Ragnarok want to condemn Loki only out of other characters and exaggerating his “evilness” into stereotype and caricature-like so people start to regard him as only “a mere background character who is just an useless twink who have no dignity and just nothing but a pest to Thor the Perfect ‘Hero’ with no absolute importance other than being fan-service”. That’s why they’re so many double standards in Ragnarok especially regarding Loki.
Waititi did have it in for Loki, he admitted it. He said Loki’s treatment and humiliation was “payback” for overshadowing the other movies. Everything, from that stupid play, to the deleted port o potty scene, to being chained up and having glass bottles thrown at his head, to Thor’s triumphant obedience disc scene was all a reflection of exactly how Waititi feels about Loki. “Blah, blah, blah, shut up, space orphan” “Loki tries so hard to be this tortured, artistic, space orphan”. Waititi’s not subtle about it. He thinks all the little Loki lovers are idiots. He meant out to “respectfully” disrespect the other movies, and extend a middle finger to those of us whose favorite character wasn’t Thor. It’s funny how, in that scene where Loki is sitting there chained up, nobody there, not Thor, not Bruce or Valkyrie, have any right to stand there and judge Loki. Valkyrie was just as much a “lackey” of the Grandmaster, if not moreso, because she worked for him and enslaved people for him for a long, long, time. She knew about the orgy ship too, and was obviously in high favor with the grandmaster. But yet in that scene, suddenly Thor, Bruce and Valkyrie are the spotless heroes with the right to look down their noses at Loki? No.
What I also find bothersome about Lokis treatment in Ragnarok is wondering how Tom took it. No one knows really and we may never, yet I can’t help but think it affected him negatively on some level, after devoting so much time, talent and heart into the character. I’d certainly be insulted and secretly pissed. And yes, Sakaar must’ve dwelled within the boonies of space, as I too found it odd no one there ever recognized Loki. A form of subliminal messaging, perhaps?
Let us not forget please that Taika is not completely to blame. Hemsworth specifically asked for Taika because he was mad about how Tom overshadowed him in TDW because he did a shitty job and was tired of playing Thor like how it was written. Hemsy requested Taika. Which might be why Tom and Hemsworth aren’t tight anymore.
^ Yes, that is exactly right. I don’t think Taika himself gave a shit about any of the MCU films or characters until Hemsworth brought him on in order to showcase his (Hemsworth’s), er, comedic genius. He came in predisposed to despise Loki for stealing poor Chris’s limelight… and other than hating Loki on Chris’s behalf – and being incredibly pleased with himself over his witticisms as Korg, getting Jeff Goldblum to play himself, and getting away with spending all that money to produce a gold-plated “fuck you” sign aimed at Tom Hiddleston, Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon, and all of the fangirls who are too stupid to realize that they were supposed to fall for Thor, not Loki – I’m pretty sure he still doesn’t give a shit about the MCU or its characters. I blame Chris more than Taika, because I would have expected him to have some sense of artistic integrity with respect to the character he had been playing for 8 years, and perhaps even some loyalty to Tom and the work they had done together. Taika had no reason not to take Marvel’s money and run; his only loyalty was to his pal Chris who got him that sweet lucrative gig. Of course he would give full rein to Chris’s grievances.
Yes, it’s speculation; no, we can never know the secret inner lives of celebrities… but we have it spelled out in interviews that CH was bored of playing an actual dramatic character, that TW wanted to take Loki down a peg or several, that they wanted to “make sure Thor was the most interesting character in his own movie” (who might that have been before, hmm?), and that they were taking full license to retcon and “respectfully disrespect” previous canon (where we all understand that the “respectfully” part is horseshit). It *is* mere speculation, or rather interpretive guesswork, to conjecture that Tom’s dissatisfaction or even a feeling of betrayal over the handling of Loki’s character and previous canon in general is the reason he was absent from much of the Ragnarok promotion, and when he was there, looked downcast and alienated from the camaraderie of the rest of the cast. Maybe scheduling conflicts were the only reason that Tom and Chris did very few interviews together, though they had been teamed up constantly during promotion for TDW, and Tom was more likely to be paired with Jeff Goldblum or Tessa Thompson (both of whom seemed to have a lot more respect for him than either TW or CH did).
I’m not really sure why I was hurriedly looking up whether Tom Hiddleston was going to be at TIFF, because even if he were – which he’s not, of course, because he doesn’t have anything to promote (where has he been? is he OK?) – there’s, like, 0 chance that I’d actually get a chance to catch a glimpse, much less hear him speak.
I did find out that Taika Waititi is going to be there. God, I can’t stand the sight of his smug face these days. Watch me not try to go to his special Q&A to ask him sharply worded questions about Ragnarok, however briefly tempting the idea might have been, because 1) I’m not completely insane, and 2) his unremittingly ironic persona allows him to get away with never giving serious answers to people who might want to hold him accountable for his creative choices. Can you imagine his response to someone who tried to call him out for his mental ableism with regard to Loki and his crypto-misogynistic contempt for Loki’s fans? He would just dismissively mock the speaker, probably in a way that would only serve to confirm the subtle misogyny, for those with ears to hear.
Loki is the Philosopher King 