Tag: thor ragnarok meta

What do you think of Loki laughing about his fall when Thor meets GM for the first time? I think it was stupid and shallow of T.W to do. It was a bad experience for him and he just laugh?

foundlingmother:

satanssyn-n-things:

I actually don’t think it was stupid and shallow, let me tell you why. Note where Loki is – a place where the high class people are those who laugh at the misery of those below them. They laugh and enjoy the torment of others, he was not making fun of himself when he laughs after saying ‘Then, I let go’, he is Loki, he is blending in, making himself a new life, becoming one of ‘them’ – remember, he thinks Thor is dead at this point, he is doing what he can and playing with the sadists who laugh at the trauma and pain of others.

He is surviving, as he does with Thanos, as he does in the prison in Asgard, he survives. To be high class, he has to turn himself into a person who is a  hunger games loving sadist or he ends up like Thor – in an arena where he has no hopes of lasting.

Hope this was what you were looking for : ) Thanks for the ask

I really, really, really like this. It’s a great point, and it’s the first thing that’s made me feel a bit comfortable with Loki laughing about his fall.

#though i’m not sure i’d assume we were meant to get that from the scene#because of how other serious moments from the previous movies were handled

Fair point, @foundlingmother… this is one of the few circumstances where I take full advantage of the “death of the author” principle: in fanfiction, at least, I’m going to assume an explanation like the one @satanssyn-n-things offers, where Loki is laughing at his own pain because he needs to in order to survive. But I am certainly not ready to give the actual creators of the movie that much credit… except maybe Hiddleston himself, because he seems to be the only one who sees Loki’s pain as worth taking seriously.

foundlingmother:

illwynd:

raven-brings-light:

foundlingmother:

raven-brings-light:

foundlingmother:

icyxmischief:

hela:

What would you like me to say?

Isn’t it great how later in this movie Thor accuses Loki of never wanting to move forward and communicate but right here when he tries, earnestly, to do so, Thor shuts him down. Isn’t that great. 

Isn’t it great how people talk about this scene like Loki’s just goading Thor and not being genuine? Isn’t that just great? I mean, he’s actually:

Loki: It hurts, doesn’t it? Being lied
to. Being told you’re one thing and
then learning it’s all a fiction.

Attempting to begin a conversation about the numerous lies their father told them. One lie in particular. The big one. The lie Thor has yet to condemn Odin for.

Loki: Look, I couldn’t jeopardize my
position with Grandmaster, it took
me time to win his trust. He’s a
lunatic, but he can be amenable.

Providing Thor with a very reasonable explanation for why he couldn’t help him.

Loki: Does this mean you don’t want my
help?

Loki: What I’m telling you is, you could
join me at the Grandmaster’s side.

Offering to help Thor get on the Grandmaster’s good side. 

Loki: Perhaps, in time, an accident
befalls the Grandmaster, and
then… 

Loki gestures: “we take over.” 

Letting Thor in on his plan to take over Sakaar.

Loki: You’re not seriously thinking of
going back, are you? Our sister
destroyed your hammer like a piece
of glass. She’s stronger than both
of us. She’s stronger than you.
You don’t stand a chance. Do you
understand what I’m saying to you? 

Expressing concern for Thor’s life. Openly worrying about Thor returning to fight Hela.

And then, only once Thor’s ignored all of that and thrown pebbles at him the whole time, spouting bullshit about going in alone, trying to goad Thor into saying something. And when that doesn’t work, rather than continuing to goad, he demands Thor say something, uncharacteristically revealing just how much it’s bugging him that Thor has said nothing.

So… I guess that means Thor is 100% right, and he’s the only brother who really wants to repair their relationship. I mean, it’s not possible for the hero to be at all flawed, short-sighted, consumed by grief, and assigning blame to people who don’t deserve it in this circumstance. Characters with realistic reactions to grief? What’s that? Sounds made up. No, Thor’s the good guy, and that means every word out of his mouth is gospel. (Norse Jesus.)

I would love this scene if it heralded character development, but instead it’s just there, making Loki out to be wrong even when he’s being calm, reasonable, and vulnerable with Thor, and contradicting scenes that come later. Oh, and teasing us with an actual conversation about the family drama, which the movie never delivers.

I read this scene differently when I saw it. I didn’t see it as Loki being wrong and Thor being right, but about their flawed relationship. 

Yes, Loki is being relatively calm, reasonable, and vulnerable for the first part of the conversation. But From Thor’s point of view, he’s basically had no time to talk to Loki in years – first Loki lied to him for no ostensibly good reason and then and tried to kill him and then himself (thor 1), then Loki tried to take over Earth (avengers), then Loki managed to cheat death but instead of telling Thor about it he let him grieve AGAIN and he hid and banished Odin (and, in Thor’s mind, was instrumental in his death). Also, Loki has had weeks here in Sakaar coming to terms with the latest turn of events, but for Thor it’s been less than a day since he both got Loki back and lost his father. So, yes, Loki is momentarily pretending all that other stuff didn’t happen and is being nice RIGHT NOW but Thor is not in the mood to particularly give a shit or to be nice himself, and honestly if I were in his place I’d probably react the same way – no matter HOW earnest Loki was being in the first part of the conversation, which he was.

I did like this scene, because it showed how much Loki still cares about what Thor thinks of him, and because it showed that Thor *isn’t* perfect.

Basically, these two just need to be locked in a room together and not allowed out until they vent all their aggression and then actually TALK about everything that’s happened since Thor’s failed coronation. (and then hug it out)

Tl;Dr Thor isn’t perfect, he’s pissed.

I agree with everything you said @raven-brings-light. That’s why I would have liked this scene if they movie had readdressed it. Of course Thor’s not in the mood. This, to me, seems like a completely normal reaction for Thor to have given everything that’s happened. I guess it might have been lost somewhat in my snark, but that’s what I meant when I mentioned consumed by grief. This wasn’t a criticism of Thor.

My issue is with the movie, not Thor. I love a flawed Thor. Flawed heroes are my jam. It’s the movie that never says “Remember when Thor blamed Loki for Odin’s death and Hela’s return in that one scene? He was grieving then. Loki’s not really responsible for that.” It’s the movie that suggests Thor and Loki’s relationship problems are primarily perpetuated by Loki’s character flaws (which certainly play a role, don’t get me wrong), rather than something they’re both responsible for, both because of their actions and failures to communicate with one another.

The scene itself is great from the standpoint that it’s actually as close as we get to showing the nuance of their relationship. It’s letdown by the rest of the movie, which fails to reexamine Thor’s flaws, and thus tricks members of the audience into overlooking them. As I mentioned, I usually see this scene discussed as Thor doing the right thing by ignoring a Loki that’s just needling/goading him, when it seemed so obvious to me that wasn’t what happened. 

So I was thinking about this in the car just now, and actually the more I think about it, I don’t even know if Thor approached this the wrong way at all.

Loki’s initial *words* are truthful, yes, but I don’t believe he’s offering them in the spirit of reconciliation. I think he’s been hanging on by the skin of his teeth in this hellhole, and when Thor showed up he breathed a sigh of relief – THANK GOD, THOR CAN HELP GET ME OUT OF THIS MESS. So he’s being “nice” in order to get Thor to work with him to get them (and by extension, HIM) out of hot water.

And Thor IS pissed, and sees it for what it is, a cheap play to his emotions. And when he stays silent, Loki DOES start goading/needling, because being ignored is what he hates more than ANYTHING ELSE.

(btw all of this should all be read in a tone of friendly discussion! I just like to hash things out! no personal animosity here!)

Yeah idk, I don’t think I wholly agree with that take on it, but honestly this movie is such a mess for anything to do with Thor and Loki’s characterization and particularly their relationship with each other that all we can do is extrapolate and try to make sense of things that don’t make sense in the film. But given the fact that Loki’s first words to Thor when they meet on Sakaar are a legitimately surprised “you’re alive?!” yes, I can agree with the notion that Loki has been hanging on, hating this place but trapped there, and now he’s got his hopes pinned on Thor. But I don’t see his words as insincere in the way I think you mean it? Like, he knows Thor is pissed at him for ALL THE THINGS and… it would be humiliating, in the face of that, to express what he’s actually feeling–the desperation for Thor’s company and good opinion after so long, the relief that the person he cares about most in the universe is not actually dead, the ancient impulse to stick by Thor like glue–so he’s playing it cool, feeling out the situation so if Thor rebuffs him he can try something else without having completely shown his hand. 

And I don’t blame Thor for not letting Loki off the hook that easily. Thor is quite reasonably upset, and eagerly going along with Loki’s plan, showing a willingness to reconcile… would have sure made Loki feel better in the moment but it wouldn’t have done Thor much good, and it wouldn’t have really helped get to the root of their issues either. So yeah I’m not blaming Thor at all for his reactions here.

Personally, my issue with it is that the movie utterly drops the ball after this point and basically forgets this interaction, ignores what their issues are, and instead slots in whatever is needed to make the characters do what the plot requires, no matter how inconsistent or out of the blue it is. So we never actually get to know how this would play out between them because it, well, doesn’t. And consequently, it leaves this scene feeling incomplete and unsatisfying in retrospect.

^^^^^^^^^^

Thanks @illwynd. I think you communicated pretty much my thoughts much better than I did.

When I say Thor has character flaws, it’s more in the sense that he isn’t Norse Jesus, forgiving and Good™ the way I sometimes see fandom talking about him. I think Thor doesn’t always have to be the one reaching out, willing to forgive, being nothing but nice to a cruel, impossible to talk to Loki in all their interactions, for him to be the good guy. Yet, I see their interactions reduced a lot to Thor doing the right/good thing and Loki doing the wrong/bad thing, including this one. My snark was directed at that, and the point of my post was to look at Loki’s lines in the first part of this scene, and point out that most of them are genuine attempts to reach out to Thor, not goading. It’s ok for Loki to reach out once in a while. He can still be a bad guy (or morally ambiguous, if you prefer, which I do).

I think what you said about Thor, how it wouldn’t have done him any good, is quite insightful. Reconciliation needs to happen on both their terms, not on Loki or Thor’s terms. The reconciliation attempt made by Thor in the beginning of Avengers is a great example of one offered on Thor’s terms. He asks Loki to come home, but he doesn’t acknowledge why Loki… left, and even calls Loki’s slights imagined. Here, all the power is reversed. It’s Loki saying “Go along with my plan, Thor. Let’s talk about the lie Odin told me, Thor.” Genuine, but only on Loki’s terms, and now Loki’s ready.

I am in complete agreement with @foundlingmother and @illwynd on this, including the fact that the movie failed to acknowledge that Loki was the one holding out an olive branch here—not very graciously, to be sure—and Thor swatted it down. If Thor gets credit for reaching out to Loki in the scene from The Avengers where he uses the phrase “imagined slights,” Loki should get credit for this. Which is not to say that I blame Thor for turning him down—any more than I blame Loki for turning Thor down in The Avengers.

@raven-brings-light, what did you see as a cheap play to Thor’s emotions? I don’t think that’s what the “It hurts, doesn’t it? Being lied to” line was. I think that was Loki trying—again, very ungraciously—to get Thor to acknowledge the wrongs that had been done to Loki.

led-lite:

philosopherking1887:

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

toomanylokifeels:

I wonder if Loki thought about when he was falling through the abyss when Strange left him falling for thirty minutes

HOLY SHIT ME TOO

I was definitely bothered that they were being so cavalier about something that’s plausibly a PTSD trigger for him. But I guess he’s over it now, right? Because he was telling that clearly *hilarious* story to his new friends on Sakaar that ended with “and then I let go.”

HOLY SHIT?!

I did not even catch what story he was telling on Sakaar? He was telling them about his suicide attempt? What the fuck?!

From the shooting script (available here, among other places): “There was a wormhole in space and time beneath me. At that moment, I let go.”

New headcanon: Loki is telling the people of Sakaar about something that isn’t his fucking suicide attempt. Let’s say he’s telling them about some adventure he, Thor, Sif, and the Warriors Three had where Loki had to save everyone (perhaps he’s exaggerating, perhaps not). Yeah, that sounds good to me.

The best I can make of it is what you and some others have done with the horrible play: call it a really weird coping strategy.

I thought prettying up his story of how he wandered onto literal trash dump planet was a maneuver to charm the locals tbh

Ah, so you thought he was telling it so that the suicide attempt was how he ended up on Sakaar, rather than getting pushed out of the Bifrost? Yeah, I can see how that might be more dramatic and compelling. Still not sure why everyone laughs. Maybe he told it as his escape from a horrible situation, expecting to survive rather than trying to die.

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

toomanylokifeels:

I wonder if Loki thought about when he was falling through the abyss when Strange left him falling for thirty minutes

HOLY SHIT ME TOO

I was definitely bothered that they were being so cavalier about something that’s plausibly a PTSD trigger for him. But I guess he’s over it now, right? Because he was telling that clearly *hilarious* story to his new friends on Sakaar that ended with “and then I let go.”

HOLY SHIT?!

I did not even catch what story he was telling on Sakaar? He was telling them about his suicide attempt? What the fuck?!

From the shooting script (available here, among other places): “There was a wormhole in space and time beneath me. At that moment, I let go.”

New headcanon: Loki is telling the people of Sakaar about something that isn’t his fucking suicide attempt. Let’s say he’s telling them about some adventure he, Thor, Sif, and the Warriors Three had where Loki had to save everyone (perhaps he’s exaggerating, perhaps not). Yeah, that sounds good to me.

The best I can make of it is what you and some others have done with the horrible play: call it a really weird coping strategy.

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

toomanylokifeels:

I wonder if Loki thought about when he was falling through the abyss when Strange left him falling for thirty minutes

HOLY SHIT ME TOO

I was definitely bothered that they were being so cavalier about something that’s plausibly a PTSD trigger for him. But I guess he’s over it now, right? Because he was telling that clearly *hilarious* story to his new friends on Sakaar that ended with “and then I let go.”

HOLY SHIT?!

I did not even catch what story he was telling on Sakaar? He was telling them about his suicide attempt? What the fuck?!

From the shooting script (available here, among other places): “There was a wormhole in space and time beneath me. At that moment, I let go.”

saw ur letter to fandom post and was reading through the comments. someone mentioned talking about loki being responsible for odins death. didn’t mean much to the post itself, but i wondered about ur opinion. do u think loki killed odin?

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

Better tag @sarah1281 on this one because it was her comment. I do think Loki had some culpability – maybe not in Odin’s death as such, but in the manner of it, and of course the fact that he didn’t have the opportunity to warn them about Hela. But no, I don’t think Loki killed Odin. I think Odin was very old and tired, had been putting off Odinsleep too much, and was devastated by the death of Frigga, his companion, advisor, and love. I suspect that he was also hollowed out by his thorough failure with Loki, and the fact that Loki was so angry with him that he was willing to wipe his memory, banish him, and usurp the throne. To the extent that that’s the case, Loki is indirectly responsible, but I do think it’s also Odin’s recognition of his own failure, which isn’t exactly Loki’s fault.

I wouldn’t assign much blame to Loki for Odin being unable to tell them about Hela. He had many years to do so. Loki’s responsible for Odin not being able to warn them from 2013 to 2017 (and based on his previous silence, and how little he actually tells them, I’m not convinced he would have warned them much further in advance).

And since I was part of that initial conversation that @sarah1281 was referring to, I feel it’s important to clarify my point of view. It aligns with @philosopherking1887′s. Furthermore, I wouldn’t list Odin’s death as one of Loki’s crimes, and I take issue not with Thor blaming Loki (I think it’s a perfectly reasonable reaction to losing a loved one), but to the movie suggesting he’s correct when he says “You did this.” There’s a difference between a character searching for someone to blame for a loss (an irrational, but normal reaction to tragedy), and a film agreeing with that character, and presenting no room for a discussion. To tie it back into the post the anon was reading, I think it highlights one of the weaknesses in Ragnarok that they introduce, but never address, this particular reaction Thor has to his father’s passing. Ragnarok does a decent job of acknowledging the family conflicts, and even comes up with a few that make perfect sense, but it doesn’t pay them off well, if at all (see how Loki’s heritage is brought up and completely ignored in a handful of seconds). Some of that’s the tone of the movie, and some of it’s a disregard for the previous films.

is it just me or does taika waititi have a lot of contempt for thor and loki? he’s said that they’re rich space kids and no one should care about their problems, and it’s kind of bad when you’re making a movie and think no one should care about your two main characters.

foundlingmother:

@philosopherking1887 Another for our apparently racist group.

Don’t be concerned, dear anon. It’s not just you. It’s not a great idea to make anything when you don’t really care about your characters’ problems. 

Loki he doesn’t care a fig for. He literally mentions Loki’s biggest issue, being jotun, and dismisses it in a scene where Thor’s written to be in the right. He paints Loki solidly with the narcissist brush. Lucky me I’ve found meta that explains Loki’s behavior in Ragnarok within the context of his actual character and those identity struggles.

Not having so much luck with Thor. I think he likes the idea of Thor, but found his unhappiness and thoughtfulness boring. Oh gosh, a kind and thoughtful male protagonist who wants to negotiate before hitting something… impossible! It’s so damn boring to have a man who cares about the only family he’s got left, and who keeps hoping that family will be redeemed. 

(Actually, I’m cool with Thor pretending to not care about Loki’s behavior anymore. I think it’s a smart tactic given the information Thor possess, and there’s no reason he couldn’t have come up with it. However, there are points in the movie where he seems genuinely callous towards Loki, and I can’t picture Thor ever feeling that way. There’s no way that Thor doesn’t become terribly affectionate after what we get to see of the hug scene.)

Yes, welcome, Anon! And while we’re at it, here are links to the rest of my posts bitching about how Taika Waititi clearly doesn’t give a shit about the characters he was making a movie about.

wafflediaries

replied to your post

“wafflediaries replied to your post “wafflediaries replied to your…”

Yeah, sorry, I didn’t know you were a fic writer. If I had, I wouldn’t have said that. I didn’t mean to personally attack your writing or anything. However, I will address the points raised in this post. I literally have no idea where you are getting your Trump vibes from. Loki in Ragnarok is a perfectly reasonable development from Loki in Thor.

Loki wants love and admiration, which is unrelated to him being a Jotunn. He found love when he became Odin, however it was unsatisfying because the people loved him for Odin, not for Loki. He is also motivated by the love for his family (opposite of love is indifference) and was taken aback by Thor’s apparent indifference. Both of these drove him to save Asgard in a grandiose fashion, to earn Asgard’s love and prove Thor wrong. I don’t see anything Trumpish about these

Also, people in Asgard don’t like him because he’s a dick. Like, Thor was a dick (in a thoughtless/oafish way) while Loki was an even bigger dick (in a ‘I’ll trick you into doing something and punish you for it’ way). Remember how he thought it was hilarious to let Jotunn into the treasury to ruin his brother’s coronation? And when has Loki ever been a good diplomat? Ragnarok was the height of his diplomatic skills, because his situation with the Grandmaster was way better than his situation with Laufy [sic] or Thanos

It has been explained many times that his portrayal of Thor is due his culture. In Maori (and Australian) culture, the worst thing someone can do is take themselves too seriously. Allowing a character to fall on their face and learn from their mistakes is a form of respect. So yeah, I consider it racist when people ignore Taika’s culture and straight up call him disrespectful or unprofessional. Seriously, even if he disliked Loki, why would he show that in his work?

The classism thing was a response to other comments in the post, which I already noted. Like Jesus, how can one ‘rich boy’ joke be offensive, especially considering MCU Loki and Thor are the epitome of rich boys who haven’t done anything to deserve their wealth. It was stolen from other realms by their father. Also, in response to your other points, Taika is a comedian and gives funny answers. His funny answers are the more well-known ones because people like sharing funny things. However, from his non-comedic interviews, it is clear that he is familiar with the source material (Thor films, MCU, comic books) and he was passionate in creating Thor Ragnarok.

Where am I getting the Trump vibes, @wafflediaries? How about from the giant fucking Jesus statue? (Seriously, it looks like the Cristo Redentor statue in Brazil.) Or that ridiculous self-glorifying play? Or just the fact that Loki is being portrayed as a textbook narcissist, as his detractors are happy to point out, and in the present political environment it’s hard not to think of the other textbook narcissist elephant in the room. The effect of this portrayal is to make into a punchline, mere fodder for ridicule, the very traits that literally drove Loki to suicide in the first movie. Hooray, mental illness is funny…! 

“Seriously, even if he disliked Loki, why would he show that in his work?” I don’t know, why don’t you ask him? Taika, why did you make Loki’s entire character into a punchline? And no, I’m NOT talking about the slapstick/physical humor; I’m talking about the fact that his character traits, his psychological and emotional problems, all the things that made him complicated and sympathetic and (in the first film) tragic (as detailed in this insightful post), are reduced to a punchline.

Um… where are you getting the “I’ll trick you into doing something and punish you for it” bit? Not the Jotnar who came to steal the Casket, surely; yes, Loki knew the Destroyer would kill them, showing a reprehensible indifference to their lives, but punishing them definitely wasn’t the point. You mean Thor? It didn’t take a lot of “tricking” to get Thor to charge into Jotunheim with guns blazing; all Loki said was “There’s nothing you can do without defying Father.” It’s really on Thor for being so predictably belligerent, which is exactly why Loki pulled the stunt in the first place: he was making a point to Odin about Thor’s unfitness for kingship; and if he was “punishing” Thor for anything, it was for the general pattern of arrogance and aggression, not for the specific action Loki prodded him into. Or do you mean Laufey? If you were paying attention, you would realize that what Loki is “punishing” him for is not the attempt on Odin’s life that he explicitly invited, but abandoning him to die as a baby. Yeah, Loki is a manipulative asshole, but at least get right the more sophisticated respect in which he is a manipulative asshole.

But I’m not the only one who got the impression from the first movie that Loki is more than just “a dick,” that we’re not supposed to think all his problems are self-made, and that when we meet him he isn’t already a villain. Thor tells the parallel stories – or should I say the perpendicular stories? – of Thor’s rise and Loki’s fall: not only his self-destruction, but his fall into villainy, precipitated (ironically) by his desperate desire to prove his worth. Yes, of course, he needed to already have some of the traits (the manipulative tendency, the willingness to sacrifice others to his ends) that would lead him into the drastically wrong actions he ended up taking. But I probably can’t say anything to convince you that we’re supposed to read other people’s mistrust and dismissiveness as not entirely earned. Maybe it’s just that I was reading so much commentary from fans familiar with Norse myth and culture about how seidr (witchcraft, effectively) was traditionally regarded as the province of women, and men who practiced it were considered effeminate, incurring a stigma called ergi, translated as “unmanliness” (associated with the assumption that they bottomed during sex with men). Or maybe it’s that I recognized the dynamic between Thor and his friends and Loki the tag-along little brother: they’re jocks, and he’s a nerd. Thor was a dick, too, but he was the right kind of dick: the brash, physical, always ready for a fistfight kind of dick. In a patriarchal warrior culture like Asgard, many of us can absolutely see how being a thoughtless, aggressive asshole is much more acceptable than being a scheming, too smart for your own good asshole.

As for Loki being a good diplomat: unfortunately, they don’t show a lot of that in Thor, but I think we’re supposed to assume it from the fact that he volunteers to sweet-talk Heimdall and Volstagg makes that “silver tongue” remark, invoking the “Silvertongue” epithet of the Loki of Norse myth. And actually, he does perfectly well with Laufey: he would have gotten them out of the situation at the beginning if Thor hadn’t had a violent reaction to being called “little princess,” and he successfully talked Laufey into doing what he wanted him to do later on. He also demonstrates the power of his words in The Avengers, not by winning people over to his side, but by sowing doubts among them, hitting them where it hurts.

Congratulations, all the people who have chimed in to say that they didn’t like the characterization of Thor, either: we’re all racists!! We’re just Too White to understand the genius of the Maori people that Taika Waititi channels, straight from the Volksgeist itself, with no admixture of his own peculiar sensibility; any objection to his work is therefore an objection to the entire Maori culture. Kenneth Branagh didn’t do the “high brought low” trope correctly in Thor, because he, too, was Too White. Screwing up and learning from your mistakes isn’t enough, making a fool of yourself in an unfamiliar environment isn’t enough if you maintain your basic poise, dignity, and decency; you have to be made into an actual, honest-to-God dumbass.

I don’t deny that TW was familiar with the Marvel comics, and he must have watched the other movies before he made Ragnarok (though maybe not before he took the job…). And yeah, I guess he was “passionate” about something (maybe creating the 80s aesthetic of Sakaar, which was pretty cool). But it wasn’t doing justice to the characters he inherited from the rest of the trilogy.

wafflediaries replied to your post “wafflediaries replied to your post “You know, it wasn’t until I was…”

Sorry, I was responding to an entire train of thoughts by various people that I was completely baffled by. It was late at night and my feathers were very ruffled because a lot of the posts were giving me uncomfortably racist and classist vibes (like seriously, people were offended that Taika joked about them as rich boys?).

@wafflediaries, I was using the “rich boys” comment as an especially flagrant representation of the low esteem in which Taika appears to hold the Thor franchise as a whole. There’s a lot of other evidence in his interviews (not to mention the film itself) that he doesn’t care about the characters or the world with which he was entrusted; that was particularly dismissive and easy to use as a symbol for the rest.

I don’t think it’s classist to be annoyed by that kind of attitude, considering that people of all classes have enjoyed literature about royalty, knights, gods, and other “rich kids” for millennia. I couldn’t find any context for the “we shouldn’t really give a shit about what their problems are” quote, but I did find a video where he claims that making Thor into “a buffoon” (his word) was the only way to make him relatable. That just seems inaccurate, considering that people have been interested in the problems of gods and heroes, and found their struggles relatable (albeit writ large), for so long; I take it that it’s the normative claim, that we shouldn’t care unless he’s brought down to ground level, that really motivates the characterization. Wonder Woman got along just fine without debasing or ridiculing its exceptional, quasi-immortal princess heroine; I don’t think it’s classist to prefer that approach.

I also hope you’re not suggesting that it’s racist to criticize any of Taika Waititi’s work. Saying that he wasn’t well-suited to contribute to the Thor series because he wasn’t invested in it, and that he ended up making a Taika Waititi movie rather than a Thor movie, doesn’t strike me as a racist attitude. (Even saying he’s a crap director – which I’m not, but some people very well might – isn’t inherently racist, though I wouldn’t be surprised if people on Tumblr claimed it was.) If you’re saying that my long discourse on the treatment of race in the Thor franchise, exploring the issue of Loki’s internalized racism in the first Thor movie and the critique of imperialism in Thor: Ragnarok, was racist… well, sorry; I tried to be as respectful to all parties as I could, but it’s a delicate issue and we can always offend people despite our best efforts.

oelfinessend:

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

foundlingmother:

philosopherking1887:

You know, it wasn’t until I was talking to someone in person about Thor: Ragnarok that I realized how pissed I am that Taika Waititi clearly does not like Loki. This is evident to me in all his interviews about the movie, as well as in his approach to Loki in the film. (He also seems not to appreciate Tom Hiddleston’s acting ability, but that’s another story. At least Jeff Goldblum knows where the real talent in the cast is.) I don’t know what it is – maybe he’s one of those people who’s just incapable of sympathizing with (sometime) villains. In any case, he seems to have misinterpreted Loki’s character and simplified him into a cartoon version of himself: self-absorbed and narcissistic, with nothing but “poor me, I’m misunderstood,” “rich kid” problems that he just needs to “grow up” and get over.

I might be wrong, but I get the sense that people of many different socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds find Loki compelling and sympathetic. Maybe Taika is just too mentally healthy? Most of the Loki fans on here seem to have some mental illness or another. I’m reminded of when my former roommate started reading Lev Grossman’s The Magicians, on my recommendation, and said she couldn’t sympathize with the protagonist, Quentin, because he just couldn’t appreciate all the good things he had and was always whining about still being unhappy. And I’m like, yeah, that’s called depression. Everything in your life can be going great on the surface and you’re still miserable for no apparent reason. So yeah, Loki’s reactions to the (legitimately shitty) things that happen to him are irrational. Because he’s pretty clearly mentally unwell. I mean, he canonically – onscreen, FFS – attempts suicide. “Rich kid problems,” huh?

Or maybe the deflation of Loki’s character was deliberate. Taika kept saying in interviews that he wanted to make sure Thor was the best, most interesting character in his own movie. The implication, of course, is that in previous movies he wasn’t – which means that someone else was, and the obvious candidate is Loki (Jane Foster may have been a more interesting character than Thor in the first movie, but they gave her basically nothing to do for most of the second one). The difficult thing to do would be to make Thor at least as interesting as Loki. The easy thing to do is to portray Loki as less interesting than he is/was/could be so that Thor can outshine him.

If you need to talk about this in detail with someone, I’m your woman.

For me personally, one standout moment comes right at the beginning, when we see the statue and the play. I’ve seen the meta that connects Loki’s mental health with his contributions to Asgard’s art and culture, and I like the interpretation that these are methods for Loki to help himself heal. I don’t believe it was what we were intended to take from that scene, however. I think we’re just supposed to say, “Oh that Loki! Of course the silly rich boy would make a golden statue of himself and write a play glorifying his life and death. He’s such a narcissist.” Right… did you miss the part where he’s dealing with internalized racism against his own kind? That was a pretty big part of the first Thor movie’s plot and conflict. Oh right, we’re disregarding those.

It also annoys me that Thor treats fucking Hela’s grievances with Odin with more sympathy than Loki’s. Loki says something along the lines of “It hurts being lied to,” (for I a second I thought we might actually get to talk about one of the big issues) and Thor just does not give a shit. It’s all on Loki. Meanwhile, Thor relates to Hela during their conversation. Odin told them both they were worthy and then cast them out the instant they did something he found objectionable, despite the fact that he’d done the very same shit. Am I honestly supposed to feel more sympathy for Hela? 

Oh goodness, I’m ranting now…

I completely agree with you about the play and the statue. I felt called out, and honestly kind of offended, by the way they were making a mockery of what was actually a very moving scene in Thor: The Dark World. Yeah, OK, Loki didn’t die, but it’s not totally clear whether or not he thought he was going to die at the time; and there was a moment of genuine affection and honesty between him and Thor. They even made fun of the emotional background music by having that little angelic choir sing it. Yeah, thanks, I knew it was calculated to tug at my heart. Guess what? It worked. So fuck you very much.

Right… did you miss the part where he’s dealing with internalized racism against his own kind? That was a pretty big part of the first Thor movie’s plot and conflict. Oh right, we’re disregarding those.

^ This is the part of your comment that really stood out to me. We see, briefly, in the play that Loki-as-Odin has revealed his Jotun origin to all of Asgard. That’s a HUGE DEAL. I had imagined that Loki would keep trying to hide it forever – unless real-Odin had already made it public either after Loki’s fall (unlikely) or after his return and imprisonment (more likely; an excellent way to “explain” why he went bad and distance the rest of the royal family from the “bad apple”). But it’s slipped in there not only with no follow-up, but without seriousness. “A little blue baby icicle who melted this foolish old man’s heart”? Hahaha, WTF Loki just outed himself as a Jotun adoptee.

[This got really long so I’m putting the rest under a cut. Warning: it’s about race.]

Keep reading

Yes! All this!

Loki’s story could have been used to flesh out the narrative about colonialism. Recall Hela’s dismissive remark about bogus “peace treaties” commemorated on the redecorated walls of the throne room: that might have been an allusion to the one-sided “treaties” that Britain and the U.S. signed with American Indian nations and then trampled all over. Loki could have been one of those stolen indigenous children raised among the colonists and taught to scorn the people to whom he was born.

^ I especially like this summary of how his story could have fleshed out the narrative. Ragnarok is funny, and actions happen in a logical order, but even the most obvious message of the movie, the anti-imperialism, is muddied because it’s not fully addressed.

Or maybe the deflation of Loki’s character was deliberate. Taika kept saying in interviews that he wanted to make sure Thor was the best, most interesting character in his own movie.

This may seem a little tangential, but while I was looking out for this I got to thinking about this part of your post. Loki is the only victim of imperialism in the entire main cast. Disregarding Loki’s connection to the critique of imperialism doesn’t just do a disservice to his character and the story, it also does a disservice to Thor’s character.

(I’m aware of how long this post is getting, so here’s a cut.)

Keep reading

Please, please, can I join? I’m stranded to my mobile but I’m so furious half of the time, so it doesn’t matter. I don’t really like Ragnarok as much as a lot of people I asked do. The problem is quite obvious, I think. Even a brief Wikipedia glance reveals that all three films have different story writers, screenwriters and directors, a bit telling, isn’t it? I’m not really familiar with Alan Taylor’s style but can say that Branagh and Waititi are really different in their vision. I mean, I LOVE What We Do In The Shadows and Hunt for the Wilderpeople but in in these cases Waititi didn’t have two previous films to base on and in the former case he was the screenwriter along with his friend. It just shows, Waititi has a very strong vision and I sure got the impression that he didn’t really care for Thor 1 and 2, instead following his own ideas, which I can get as a writer but let’s be honest, at this point, TtDW and Ragnarok look more like au-ish fanfiction than serious follow ups. So Taika created his own movie in his own style. I’m glad for him? I only wish it wasn’t at the expense of a dramatic and thought out premise of the first movie. Although to be fair Joss did a great job at destroying Asgardian credibility.

Sorry for rambling, pain to edit w/o laptop.

As for his rich kids line… Idk, that’s just shallow and really crossing the line. I get that Taika likes to flirt with the audience in interviews and call himself fabulous, but sometimes one just needs to, idk, be more self aware? Yea, they’re rich kids so their problems don’t count, because money. They don’t have problems, maybe, because MONEY. Suicide and self loathing are fine and dandy as soon as you have money!

Also, it’s extremely disrespectful to the audience to treat one of the most beloved and relatable characters like shit. Doesn’t Marvel do research? They sometimes pander so hard my teeth ache, but what the hell, Loki fans are just wet for Hiddleston, so screw them!

Nothing new here, why I even bother :/

I’m not sure what you mean by saying “Joss did a great job at destroying Asgardian credibility.” Do you mean that he started establishing the hollowness of the Asgardian empire, or that he somehow messed up with the writing of the Asgardian characters? If the latter, I would certainly dispute that assessment. Thor and Loki’s interactions in The Avengers are some of the most emotionally fraught and powerful between them. Joss Whedon also wrote both Loki’s shapeshifting scene in The Dark World and what I have seen fondly referred to as “the bro-boat scene,” i.e., the scene on the skiff flying through Svartalfheim with the “Satisfaction’s not in my nature”/ “Surrender’s not in mine” exchange. I would say that Whedon kept up the Shakespearean tone that had been established by Branagh and the writers of the first Thor. The failings of TDW were pretty much entirely due to the primary script writers, Markus and McFeely, who made melodramatic hash of Captain America: Civil War and are now responsible for Avengers: Infinity War, God help us.

You are entirely correct that Thor: Ragnarok is a Taika Waititi movie, not a Thor movie. It’s full of little references to previous movies, but many of them are distancing rather than unifying – the play essentially making fun of Loki’s “death” scene in TDW being a prime example. The musical evocation at the end of Thor’s coronation scene from the first movie was actually a nice unifying touch, but there wasn’t enough of that. Tonally, the “trilogy” is just a hot mess.

The remark about rich kids seems to imply that we shouldn’t read most classic works of literature, because they’re about royalty and nobility and other obnoxious rich kids. We should just throw out everything written before the late 19th century, apparently. If it’s not about the heroic proletarian, it’s counter-revolutionary. Barf. Cut it out with the cheap populism, Taika; it’s not cute.

Loki fans are just wet for Hiddleston, so screw them!

Honestly, I do wonder if that’s Taika’s attitude toward Loki’s fans. It seems not to be Marvel’s attitude more generally, considering that basically all the Dark World reshoots were to give Loki more screen time (including the scenes that Joss added/rewrote). For whatever reason (whether mental health or wrong oppressed perspective, as speculated above), Taika doesn’t understand what makes Loki interesting and sympathetic, and he wasn’t motivated to try to figure it out.

To be clear about the perspective I’m coming from (for the benefit of certain sectors of the fandom): yes, I am primarily a Loki fan, and I do find Tom Hiddleston attractive, especially in his role as Loki. But I do not ship either of them with myself (that would be weird). Nor do I “stan” for Loki (or anyone), inasmuch as that involves refusing to recognize any faults. I do not attempt to defend or excuse all of his actions; I think he bears guilt for a great many of them. I do not hate Thor; I do not claim that he “abuses” Loki after the bullying portrayed early in the first movie – anyway, not any more than Loki abuses him in return. I do find Thor a somewhat boring character (possibly because I don’t think Chris Hemsworth is a very good actor), but I try to remedy that in my own fic. My complaint about Loki’s treatment in Thor: Ragnarok has much more to do with the way that his character depth is thinned out than the way he personally is treated.