#Mobius is his number 1 fan in the Marvel Universe

[dummyminded]

Guys do you think the analysts at the TVA got together after watching someones life and just did their version of water cooler talk? Like they would get to Mobius and he'd start with "Okay so today Loki..." and they'd all go "Here he goes AGAIN with that variant..." in response.

[themovieblogonline]

Loki Season 2 Episode 1 DEEP DIVE and REACTION

Thank you, Makers of Mischief, we are back with our first recap of our favorite “I'm not a Liar” show Loki Season 2 Episode 1.  I will do my best to guide you in this Marvelous show as we’re actually picking up where Season 2 ended so let's dive in! This episode is titled “Ouroboros” which is a very which is a very fitting title as the episode takes time to introduce us to Ke Huy Quan's character Ouroboros, or OB for short, but it also hints at things to come when you understand the origin of the word. "Ouroboros" is a captivating concept often depicted as a symbol or image of a serpent or dragon eating its own tail. This ancient symbol has roots in various mythologies and cultures, including ancient Egyptian, Norse, and Greek traditions. It represents the cyclical nature of life, death, and rebirth, as well as the infinite and eternal cycle of existence. The Ouroboros is a powerful metaphor for self-renewal, transformation, and the idea that endings are inherently linked to new beginnings. It has been used in art, literature, and philosophy to explore themes of time, eternity, and the never-ending cycle of change. In the context of "Loki" Season 2, the title "Ouroboros" hints at intriguing possibilities. Given the time-traveling and multiverse aspects introduced in the first season, it's conceivable that the show will continue to explore the cyclical nature of time and the consequences of alternate realities. The Ouroboros symbolize the interconnectedness of past, present, and future, which aligns with the show's themes of time manipulation and branching timelines. It could signify the ever-repeating patterns and challenges that Loki, as a character, faces, and how he must navigate these cycles of change and self-discovery. "Ouroboros" may also imply that the show is diving deeper into the fundamental nature of the Marvel Cinematic Universe itself, examining the cyclical and infinite storytelling possibilities that come with a multiverse concept. Fans can anticipate a season filled with mind-bending twists, where the past and future are inexorably linked in the serpent's eternal embrace. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7OMcr9EfJ0 "Loki” Season 2 picks up in the aftermath of the shocking season finale when Loki finds himself in a battle for the soul of the Time Variance Authority. Along with Mobius, Hunter B-15 and a team of new and returning characters, Loki navigates an ever-expanding and increasingly dangerous multiverse in search of Sylvie, Judge Renslayer, Miss Minutes and the truth of what it means to possess free will and glorious purpose. In Marvel Studios’ “Loki,” the mercurial villain Loki (Tom Hiddleston) resumes his role as the God of Mischief in a series that takes place after the events of “Avengers: Endgame.” The starting point is the moment in “Avengers: Endgame” when the 2012 Loki takes the Tesseract. From there Loki lands in the hands of the Time Variance Authority (TVA), which is outside of the timeline, concurrent to the current day Marvel Cinematic Universe. In his cross-timeline journey, Loki finds himself a fish out of water as he tries to navigate—and manipulate—his way through the bureaucratic nightmare that is the Time Variance Authority and its by-the-numbers mentality. The Good: Continuity and Pacing: The episode seamlessly picks up where Season 1 left off, reminding viewers of the critical events with a concise recap. The pacing is brisk, keeping the audience engaged from the very beginning. Character Development: The interactions between Loki, Mobius, and B-15 provide insight into their characters. Loki's shock at being unrecognized and Mobius' dedication to his mission add depth to their personalities. Time Travel Mechanics: The episode introduces intriguing time travel mechanics within the TVA, adding complexity to the narrative. The concept of "time-slipping" and its impact on the timeline are well-executed and make for engaging storytelling. World-Building: We learn more about the TVA's inner workings and the consequences of Sylvie's actions, enhancing the world-building of the series. The inclusion of Broxton, Oklahoma, adds a fascinating nod to the comics. The Bad: Character Absences: While the episode delivers on many fronts, it leaves viewers eager for the appearance of Jonathan Majors' character, particularly after the tease in "Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania." Miss Minutes' Role: Miss Minutes' involvement with He Who Remains at the end of time raises questions, but her exact role and motivations remain unclear, leaving the audience wanting more clarity. Lack of Explanations: Some aspects, such as the specifics of He Who Remains' control over the TVA and the reason behind Mobius and OB's extended lifespans, could use further exploration and explanation. In summary, "Loki" Season 2, Episode 1, sets the stage for an exciting narrative with strong character dynamics and intriguing time travel mechanics. However, viewers are left with questions and eager for the development of certain plot points. The episode successfully builds anticipation for what lies ahead in the season. Read the full article

[musclesandhammering]

Every Single Issue I Have With S*lki (It’s Not Just The Selfcest)

Here goes. I threatened to post this a few days ago and never did, but I just saw a s*lki stan Twitter account claim that Loki caring about Sylvie more than the whole multiverse was a Good And Romantic thing and it pushed me over the fucking edge, so now you all have to read this. I’ve divided it into categories cause there’s just THAT much.

OOC Bullshit

• First and foremost, no amount of mental gymnastics you do will ever make me believe that this specific Loki- the one that just invaded New York, that just came off a year of Thanos Torture, that just got done being influenced by the sceptre, that was literally in the middle of a crisis already, and then on top of that went through all the trauma of Ep 1- would even be worried about a romantic relationship. That would be the furthest thing from his mind. Go back and watch how he acted in Avengers- you think that guy would abandon his previous mission to become a snivelling simp for a girl he’d just met 3 days prior? Yeah, there’s no universe in which that makes sense.

• “It’s very in character for Loki to fall in love with himself lololol-“ NO, it’s literally not. Out of all the characters in the mcu, I don’t think I can think of anyone that genuinely hates themselves more than Loki. He even referred to all his other male variants as “monsters” and said meeting them was “a nightmare” in this series. He’s got so much self-loathing, plus the fact that he genuinely thinks himself to be an evil backstabbing scourge- so there’s no evidence at all suggesting that he would ever develop a fondness for, or even be inclined to trust, another version of himself, after only knowing them for 3 days.

• Building on that, the whole concept of Loki falling in love with a version of himself just feeds into the annoying ass misconception that he’s a narcissist. No matter which way you stack it, he’s not. If you’re referring to NPD, he doesn’t fit the criteria, and if you’re saying “narcissist” just as a slang term meaning “selfish and arrogant”, that still doesn’t accurately describe him. But when creators like Waldron and Herron do things like having him fall in love with himself, it makes it so much easier for casual viewers to think that he is.

Shitty LGBT Rep

• It’s kinda sus that Loki’s are allegedly genderfluid and yet the only female-presenting variant we see (and apparently the only female-presenting variant there is, cause the male Loki’s all seemed unfamiliar with the concept) is treated as some kind of mind-bogglingly special paradox. Also very sus that, out of all the Loki variants, the one our Loki falls in love with just so happens to be the only female one. What a coincidence.

• The fact that the creators of the show went around bragging about Loki’s bisexuality and Marvel purposefully (lbr) allowed stories about Loki possibly having a male love interest to circulate, specifically enticing queer viewers to watch the show (you know, the definition of queerbaiting), and then instead of having a male love interest (Loki was the first queer main character, so it was the perfect opportunity) they gave us *gestures to this dumpster fire* this… it’s just a middle finger to LGBT fans. The fact that they would rather have this relationship with all its myriad of problems than have a gay relationship is just……. Very telling.

• While him being with a woman obviously doesn’t refute his bisexuality, the fact that they showed/talked about him being interested in 3 different women (flight attendant, Sylvie, Sif) and never even hinted at him being attracted to a man, definitely makes it seem like they were trying to cover up his bisexuality to smooth things over with the more homophobic viewers. You know? It’s like “I know you’re pissed that we sorta confirmed Loki as bi, so we promise we’ll never mention it again! Or even hint at it! As a matter of fact, we’ll give him lots of female lovies and make him seem as straight as possible! That’ll take your mind off of that horrible crumb of queer rep, right? Please please please keep giving us your money!!!”

• Aside from all the other issues, at its core, the biggest reason why I think I’m so irritated with s*lki is that it took one of the most interesting, complex, and diverse characters in cinema atm and squished him into a tired ass unnecessary heteronormative subplot…. Like literally every. single. other. protagonist. ever. Loki is such a unique character, and it’s so so so incredibly disappointing that they stuck him into that same boring cookie cutter romance that happens to every other character in every other movie I’ve ever seen. It’s a disservice, and it’s honestly just not compelling or entertaining at all.

Thematic Issues Galore

• His arc didn’t need a romance. With anyone. It was unnecessary and it didn’t make sense plot-wise. In fact, one of the reasons he was my fav prior to this was because he was the only big-name mcu character whose story wasn’t muddied-up by a romance that didn’t need to be there. So much for that.

• He wasn’t emotionally ready for a romantic relationship with anyone. Hell, just a genuine friendship would’ve been pushing it for him at this point. He was in such a bad state that any relationship he got into would’ve been toxic and unhealthy for both him and the other person, and it doesn’t make sense why the writers would want to put him in one when there were so many cons and essentially no pros (other than “Uwu aren’t they cute together”).

• Sylvie’s character in general was unnecessary and Loki’s character was robbed just by her being there. The whole show became about her post-Ep 2. They spent most of the time giving her backstory, building her up, telling us how awesome she is, trying to convince us to like her, etc when what they really needed to be doing was building Loki up- cause I gotta say, if I had to describe TVA!Loki in a few words, they would be Flat, Boring, and Weak.

• The romance overtakes the plot. They spend time portraying their supposed connection that could’ve been spent adding depth and complexity to literally any of the characters. They make the big Nexus Event them giving each other googly eyes on Lamentis when it could’ve been so many other way more profound things that speak to the fundamental nature of Loki’s. They have the climax of the finale be “oh no she betrayed him to kill He Who Remains” when it could’ve been something way more compelling (Loki having a moral crisis over whether or not to kill HWR, Loki contemplating the state of the multiverse and weighing the pros and cons of freedom vs order, Loki looking into some What If situations and getting emotional about what could’ve been regarding his family, Loki realising the gravity of HWR’s offer and finally coming to terms with how important he is to the universal cycle, etc etc). The entire plot suffered in favour of a romance that half of us didn’t even want.

• It essentially reduced all of Loki’s potential character growth down to “He did it for his crush.” He seemed to at least have some motivations of his own in Ep 1-2 (feeble as they were) but after Sylvie showed up in Ep 3, literally every action he took was just him being a simp for her. Why did he lie in the interrogation? To try to protect Sylvie. Why did he fight the minutemen and Timekeepers? To survive kinda, but mostly cause it was important to Sylvie. Why did he get pruned? Cause he got distracted trying to confess his crush to Sylvie. Why did he try to get out of The Void? Cause he thought Sylvie needed him. Why did he stay in The Void? Cause Sylvie was staying. Why did he try to enchant Alioth? Cause Sylvie told him to. Why did the multiverse get cracked open, leading to an infinite number of Kangs waging war on all of existence? Cause Loki didn’t wanna hurt Sylvie in their fight at the Citadel and then get distracted by her kissing him. It’s uninteresting and honestly pretty embarrassing.

• Throughout their “relationship arc” the writers do their absolute damndest to convince us that we should like Sylvie more than Loki. And you know what? It’s the most hypocritical shit I’ve ever seen. They preach and preach about how Sylvie’s life has been so difficult/we should feel bad for her/she had it so bad/poor poor sylvie/she had it SO much worse than pampered prince Loki…. But then they never even touch on any of Loki’s trauma of hardships (the ones that have been ignored for literally 3 movies now). They frame Sylvie as a good person and a Freedom Fighter after she spent literal decades/centuries mass-murdering brainwashed TVA agents and showing exactly zero remorse for it….. but then they make it their mission to constantly remind us that Loki is a terrible person and constantly put him in situations where he’s forced to acknowledge his wrongdoings/show remorse/admit to how “evil” he is for being a mass murderer for like 2 years. They show him on-screen having a wider range of powers than her, and perpetuate his whole shtick of being a “master manipulator” or whatever….. But then they make Sylvie “the brawn” more competent, intelligent, and physically capable than him. Tell me how it’s a good thing for a ship to be so narratively biased toward one character.

Missed Opportunities

• If they absolutely had to have a romance subplot, then they could’ve paired Loki with one of the characters that have already been established OR one of the characters that were a big part of the whole TVA storyline anyway. It would’ve been so interesting if they’d revealed that Loki had a history with some of the players from previous films (Sif and Fandral both come to mind). It also would’ve been really interesting if they’d given Loki a love interest that actually had some allegiance to the TVA as a whole (Mobius maybe, but not necessarily. It also could’ve been Renslayer or B-15). Hell, imo it would’ve been cool if they’d followed through with that “See you again someday” line that he said to the flight attendant in Ep 1. ALL of these characters have way more chemistry with him than Sylvie, and they were also already relevant to the plot without wasting half the show to give background info on them.

• If they absolutely had to have a hetero-presenting love story involving an enchantress-type figure, then there’s a whole Enchantress (Amora) that was actually Loki’s love interest in the comics. Plus, fans have been screaming for Amora to appear in the mcu for years. Plus, Tom literally pitched an Amora/Loki storyline way back in 2012-13. Also, Lorelei (another enchantress) is also one of Loki’s love interests in the comics, and she already exists in the mcu (she was on Agents of SHIELD). There were several different established characters for them to choose from. Creating a whole knew amalgamation of a character and going with the “she’s a Loki variant” storyline was just completely unnecessary and made no sense.

• They completely robbed us of a Chaos Twins dynamic. Had they handled Sylvie better and not forced her and Loki to smooch, the two of them could’ve had a really really complex and interesting sibling relationship. Loki could’ve stepped into Thor’s shoes and sort of used that new role to gain some self importance, and Sylvie could’ve finally had somebody to look out for her/teach her magic/be there for her. It would’ve been very aesthetically pleasing, the vibes would’ve been out of this world, it would’ve been way more profound than this bs, and frankly it would’ve been much more entertaining to watch.

• Loki’s relationship (read: obsession) with Sylvie completely overshadows all Loki’s other relationships in the show. Loki and Mobius were literally the focal point of the series in Ep 1-2, but after Sylvie showed up in Ep 3, they barely had any interactions with each other, and Mobius pretty much faded to the background entirely. Loki had the beginnings of a pretty interesting antagonistic relationship with Renslayer (with her wanting him pruned, then arguing with Mobius that he couldn’t be trusted), but after Sylvie showed up the dynamic shifted to focus on the history between her and Ravonna. Loki and B-15 started off very badly and openly disliked each other throughout Ep 1-2, and then in the end of Ep 2, Loki showed a little bit of concern for her when she was possessed, hinting that they might be inching toward a reconciliation- especially considering how obvious it was that Loki was gonna uncover the TVA’s sins eventually. There was so much potential for him to be the one to give her her memories back and convince her to change sides, but no, of course that honor went to Sylvie. In fact, after Sylvie showed up, Loki and B-15 never even spoke to each other again.

Various S*lki Fails

• If they were trying to convince us that this affection was mutual, they completely failed. There’s nothing I’ve seen that even hints at Sylvie feeling the same way about Loki that he does about her. At most, I’d say she has a slight endearment to him. She finds him likeable and she’s grudgingly fond of him, but she definitely isn’t in love with the guy. Maybe she thinks he’s cute and hopes that he gets out of this mess alright, but her mission obviously comes before him- whereas, it’s been confirmed multiple times that Loki cares about her above anything else. She doesn’t trust him, she looks at him like he’s an incompetent fool half the time, she shows little to no reaction during most of his confession moments, and she kissed him as a means to distract him so that she could get him out of her way. Look, all I’m saying is, when you get into a relationship where one of you is way more invested than the other, it never ends well.

• This goes without saying for a lot of us, but the selfcest is just straight up odd and cringey. If you’re cool with that sort of thing, fine! People can ship what they want! But don’t pretend it’s not at least a little bit uncomfortable. Yes, I know they’re not technically siblings so it’s not technically incest, and they’re also not technically the exact same person, but they’re similar enough that it makes things weird. And yes I know selfcest can’t happen in real life, so there’s no way to judge it morally, but neither can most of the other stuff that happens in these shows/movies (the Snap, Loki destroying jotunheim, superhero with powers being held accountable, mind control) and yet we still find ways to judge their morality, because they all mirror real-world events. (The snap= genocide; Loki destroying Jotunheim= bombing other countries; superhero accountability= weapons accountability; mind control= grooming and coercion). And lbr the closest real-world mirror to two versions of the same person (who may or may not share DNA, family, backgrounds, physical and emotion characteristics) being romantically involved with one another is incest. And you can be ok with that if you want- that’s your prerogative- but don’t get pissy just cause a lot of us are squicked out by it.

• The whole mirror metaphor (learning self love via each other) thing just fell completely flat. First of all, having Loki learn to love himself by looking at someone who mirrors him did not, in any way shape or form, require them to be romantically involved. But they were. Of course. Secondly, the creators have contradicted themselves so many times on whether Loki and Sylvie are the same or not, that it doesn’t even really register to the viewer that the mirroring thing was what they were going for. Finally, Loki and Sylvie are shown to have so little in common- and to have only the most bare minimum of similarities personality-wise- that it doesn’t even make sense that Loki would “learn to love himself through loving her”. Like? They’re nothing alike. So how would he make the connection that he himself is actually pretty cool, based on her alone? There’s virtually nothing in her that reflects him.

• I know the objective of the entire show was to convince us of how awesome and unique Sylvie is, but honestly her relationship with Loki just did the opposite. A hallmark of a Mary Sue is having her constantly upstage the male lead, and then having him instantly fall madly in love with her anyway. And that’s.. exactly what happened here. Everything they’re doing to try to force her character to be more stan-able is really just forcing her to look more like their self-insert OC. Which is exactly what she is. It would’ve been so much more satisfying if she didn’t have to try so hard to look cool, if they didn’t have to try so hard to make her backstory tear-inducing, if they didn’t have to turn our protagonist into a snivelling simp just to prove how incredible she supposedly is. Very much #GirlBoss energy and we all know how performative and cheap that is.

• The entire thing was too rushed, there was too little build-up, and it was nowhere near believable. As stated above, it’s ridiculously unlikely that Loki would canonically even be interested in Sylvie, and this show did nothing to explain why he was. He just suddenly was. There was nothing they showed us as viewers that would justify a guy as closed-off and preoccupied as Loki falling head-over-heels for a girl he just met. Their was no explanation, no big revelation, no reasoning, it just… kinda happened. And I’m also severely skeptical of any love story that has the characters go in this deep after only 3 45-minute episodes of exposition.

I’m sure there’s other stuff, so if anyone thinks of anything, let me know and I’ll be more than happy to add it. Tagging @janetsnakehole02 @raifenlf @natures-marvel and @brightredsunset800 for expressing interest. This is all your faults.

[twh-news]

Loki (TV): 5 Things the Disney+ serie got right (& 5 it ruined)

With its new Disney+ shows, the Marvel Cinematic Universe has managed to expand its reach and develop characters that didn't quite get enough attention in the movies. WandaVision grants Wanda Maximoff her rightful role as the Scarlet Witch while also developing her relationship with Vision. The Falcon and the Winter Soldier tackles some heavy themes as Sam Wilson struggles with the weight of Steve Rogers's legacy and Bucky tries to overcome his trauma.

In Loki, fans are reunited with a beloved character, one many deemed lost with his death in Avengers: Infinity War. The show centers on the adventures of a variant of Loki created after the Avengers' Time Heist. Loki's return to the MCU is more than welcome and gets many things right, but some elements could have been dealt with better.

10 Got Right: Loki's Enduring Affection For His Family Still Stands Out

Loki is easily one of the best villains in the MCU, and a big reason why he stands out is his affection for his family. He has a genuine bond with his mother Frigga, who is among the few people who support him. His rivalry with his brother Thor gradually disappears, and the two eventually mend their bond.

In the Disney+ series, Loki hasn't yet reached the right mental state to forgive and be forgiven. He is forced to confront the fate of his people--and his own--and it's one of the most touching moments in the series. Tom Hiddleston's portrayal is as always impeccable, adding another layer to the emotionally aloof god.

9 Ruined: His Character Doesn't Shine As Much As It Could Have

Despite the series being titled Loki, it doesn't really focus on him as much as it should. After Loki makes his escape using the Tesseract, he's taken captive by the Time Variance Authority and eventually joins them. He's then forced by circumstances into cooperating with a female variant of himself, Sylvie. Caught in a web of events he's unprepared for, he often seems just along for the ride. This wouldn't normally be an issue, but the limited number of episodes makes the pacing a problem. With a better balance, Loki's character could have shined through properly.

8 Got Right: Loki Is Confirmed To Be Bisexual And His Relationship With Sylvie Is Very Interesting

During a conversation with Sylvie, Loki comments that he's had relationships with both men and women in the past. The admittance of his bisexuality isn't a surprise, but it's still a welcome element. His subsequent relationship with Sylvie--who is, in the end, a version of himself--is interesting and chaotic, suiting the nature of the rule-breaking god.

7 Ruined: Sylvie Creates A Missed Opportunity As Viewers Would Have Liked A Truly Genderfluid Loki

Sylvie's character has its origins in the second Enchantress, Sylvie Lushton. Her look--mimicking Amora's in appearance--is combined with the concept of Lady Loki. Unfortunately, her presence comes at the expense of a highly-anticipated element of Loki's character.

Before the series came out, rumors were rampant that the show would finally give viewers a genderfluid Loki and tackle his sexuality in a more elaborate way. Loki's bisexuality may have been confirmed, but it doesn't feel like enough. Sylvie just isn't the Lady Loki viewers wanted.

6 Got Right: Loki's Relationships In The Series Make Him Grow As A Person

Throughout the series, Loki builds close relationships, not just with Sylvie, but also with TVA agent Mobius M. Mobius. Mobius places his faith in Loki and helps him realize many things about himself, even risking his own life for Loki. Meanwhile, Loki's romantic connection to Sylvie is so powerful it creates a nexus event. It gives Loki hope that he doesn't have to be alone, making him grow as a person.

5 Ruined: His Abilities Become Even More Confusing

Loki's abilities in the MCU have always been somewhat puzzling. He's a highly skilled sorcerer, but half the time, he doesn't use his powers. Thor mentions his brother shape-shifted into a snake as a child, but the ability is never used.

The Disney+ series makes things even more confusing. Loki is easily incapacitated by the TVA, even if their physical strength shouldn't be enough to overwhelm an Asgardian/Jotun. Later, after he makes his escape, Loki uses highly advanced telekinesis to hold falling buildings upright on Lamentis. The addition of Sylvie's strange form of mental projection muddies the waters further. It's not a new thing for characters in the MCU, but it could have been dealt with better.

4 Got Right: Classic Loki's Sacrifice Steals The Show

Sylvie isn't the only variant of himself Loki meets throughout his journey. After being pruned by the TVA, Loki ends up in The Void, where he meets Classic Loki, Boastful Loki, Kid Loki, and Alligator Loki.

Classic Loki easily steals the show, and his sacrifice to help Sylvie and Loki defeat Alioth is one of the best scenes in the series. Richard Grant's portrayal of the character is as powerful and emotional as Hiddleston's and leaves a true impression on the viewers.

3 Ruined: Most Variants Of Loki Barely Receive Any Attention

Despite the huge potential of the Loki variants, most of them don't get enough time in the spotlight. Kid Loki is said to rule The Void because he killed Thor, but the concept doesn't go anywhere. President Loki appears briefly as a villain, but his background is unknown. Alligator Loki--affectionately called Croki by the fandom--receives more attention than most other variants of the character. It's truly a shame, as each individual Loki had their own fascinating stories to tell.

2 Got Right: The Inclusion Of The TVA Tackles An Important Theme That Leads Into The Multiverse

Loki isn't the first MCU release that has mentioned the Multiverse, but it develops the theme much further, in a way that leaves a lot of room for further expansion. The concept of the "Sacred Timeline" sets into question the idea of free will, of the consequences of each choice. The TVA polices the path people have to take, enforcing a fatalistic design that would make many want to rebel.

Loki and Sylvie understandably want to topple it, but they soon learn that the TVA may very well be the lesser evil. With Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness just around the corner, the themes and issues that appear in Loki will doubtlessly be even more important than ever.

1 Ruined: The Overabundance Of Elements Makes The Final Villain Underwhelming

The addition of the Multiverse may have been a good idea, but the multitude of elements end up clashing against each other due to the format of the series. The introduction of a whole new figure as the villain ultimately makes him fall flat. He Who Remains may have great influence and power, but he doesn't do much except monologue. Presuming that he is indeed Kang the Conqueror, he isn't a bad choice as an antagonist. The series just doesn't do him justice, and the finale feels weak and underwhelming.

[bebx]

so I'm curious ....

1,3,6,8,9,10,12,15,18

if it's alot pick whatever u want :)

MCU asks meme

I answered number 6 and 9 here

1 - First Marvel movie I saw.

Captain America: the Winter Soldier

3. Top 3 favorite Marvel films

Thor: Ragnarok, Avengers (2012), Spider-Man: No Way Home

8. If you could make one thing canon in the MCU, anything, what would it be?

Lokius canon? But then Marvel has the tendency to mess up their canon couples so... I don't know? But I think... Lokius canon where they got their happily ever after together :")

10. Do you talk about Marvel to your in-real-life friends and/or family?

I do! I talk to them about Lokius and also Owen and Tom all the time they're probably sick of me, honestly. But, thanks to me, they've all become fans of Owen Wilson ;)

12.What are your favorite scenes from the MCU?

Lokius hug, the scene where Loki trusted Mobius enough he let his guards down and sleep while in Mobius's presence, and the Steve-lifted-Mjolnir scene!

15. Which scene was the most iconic to you? Can be from Marvel movie or show

the scene where Steve lifted Mjolnir. Gives me chills every time. Still remember how the entire audience in my cinema cheered when it happened. Also the one where he said, "Avengers assemble,"

18. If you could have one crossover where 2 characters from different universes met, who would it be?

I would really love Tom Hiddleston's Loki to meet Johnny Depp's Captain Jack Sparrow 🥺

[max-vandenburg-is-life]

Long Loki rant incoming

Ok first things first I've always liked Loki a lot as a character but I don't consider myself a really really big fan mainly because I haven't read the comics. So all this rant is gonna be only about mcu loki and loki in the mcu has been written differently depending on the movie so yeah. And on that note let's go!!!!

So today I'm gonna talk about what I liked and what I didn't like about the Loki show. This is obviously just my opinion, you can disagree with me! I'd love to hear your opinions!

First I wanna talk about is the writing of Loki's character. So previously it has been established in the mcu that Loki doesn't do bad things just because he's a bad guy or because he wants power above everything else, but because after all the manipulation and lying he went through as a child, the abuse, always been seen as less than those around him and being taught to hate himself for who he was (a Jotun). He wants validation and being treated the same as the others, he doesn't really care about ruling or being king. His actions are a result of his trauma. So the show painting him as "He's a bad guy!! He's evil he can't help it it's in his nature!! He just wants to be king!!!" felt off to me since it completely goes against all the previous canon. Apart from that, I feel the show also erased other aspects of him that had always been essential to his character, such as him being very smart and always having a plan, and his powers (he BARELY used his powers throughout the season and he's supposed to be the best sorcerer in the nine realms. Please). So yeah there's that. I didn't absolutely despise his character in the show or anything like that, he generally seemed more happy and chill and that was good, I just felt some aspects of the character seemed inconsistent.

Apart from Loki, something I loved about the show were all the new characters that we were introduced to. Sylvie was absolutely fantastic, she had a well written tragic backstory, she had a goal and she had layers. She was a really well written character. Also she was just really cool overall, she had a cool personality and seeing her use her powers was very fun. (Sylvie your hand in marriage) (I guess I can talk about the "betrayal" now. So yeah not gonna lie I don't think it was that bad. She had a goal she had been pursuing her whole life and she obviously prioritized that before a guy who she met a few days ago. She did hurt him of course but still it's easy to understand her decision.) Mobius was also really cool, in the first episode I didn't like him much but I started liking him a lot later on. He's just a good guy, he wants to help people. (HE ONLY WANTED A JETSKI MARVEL). And I liked his story a lot, he was forced into working for the tva because his memories were erased and he was told what he was doing the right thing when killing all those people, but once he finds out all of it was false he immediately starts going against it and trying to help as many people as he can. Ravonna was also a good character (I keep saying all of them are good characters lol they're well written ok). Like okay she was a little bit evil but I liked her. I really liked her ambition and her confidence. I would have loved to know more about her life at the tva, because it seemed like because of her position she knew some things that most didn't. Hunter B15 was also really good, loved her character development. Casey only appeared in the first two eps but for some reason I liked him a lot idk why. Casey my beloved. Kang was mind-blowing good, he absolutely carried the episode. He was so fun to watch and a very interesting character. This is how you do villains Marvel. And then all the Loki variants were amazing. Classic Loki was great, he was more mature and wiser than the Loki we're used to watching and I felt really sad about his whole situation (aka trying and failing to find his brother because he missed him, getting pruned and then dying). Kid loki was a BLAST, I really liked the little funky dude and I would love to know more about his life. Boastful Loki didn't appear for long but I liked him a lot, he looked like a really funny guy I wish he had had more screen time. And then there was the Lokigator which was also great. President Loki was also cool (meaning he had the coolest outfit), but we didn't see much of him. I think that's a big problem with the show, because they made it seem like it was gonna be more about the other Loki variants and their timelines (that's what it seemed to me from the trailers) but then we barely got that. Sad shit.

Now let's talk about the writing of the show in general. The writers definitely went off with the philosophical conversations, I enjoyed them greatly (Loki's and Mobius' talk in the second ep and Loki's and Sylvie's talk in the third ep were amazing). Something I didn't like at all about the show (this is probably my biggest complaint) is that the writing of the show throughout the episodes didn't seem consistent, like each episode seemed to be a different genre, and that made the whole story feel weird. What I'm trying to say is: the first episode was about Loki learning more about his life and reflecting on why he does the things he does. There was more to the episode but it was mainly that. It was a very emotional episode. The second episode looked like a cop show, they investigated a crime scene in the beginning, they did some detectiving, they had a great breakthrough and found out were the villain was hiding in the end. The third episode was an action episode. It gave me the vibes of mid season episode that isn't too relevant to the plot in which the characters go on some short mission. The fourth episode I can't exactly categorize it I think it was kinda like episode 1 but with some more action. The fifth episode was also a mix, they had a lot of reflecting on Loki's character like in the first episode and then also some action. And the last episode was mostly just exposition and a tiny bit of action at the end, very philosophical and stuff. It also felt like in the first two episodes they were indicating that the show was gonna be about free will and good and evil but that kind of disappeared for a big part of the show. I'm trying so hard to explain myself well, I hope what I say makes sense. Now my opinion on the episodes, my favourites were definitely ep 1, 3 and 5 (haha odd numbers go brrrr). The pilot was absolutely amazing, and I loved the direction the show seemed to be taking (YES MARVEL explore his trauma mmmm that's some good shit right there). It was really emotional but like in a good way. The third episode was great. I think it balanced really well the action and the dialogue, seeing Loki and Sylvie going on their shenanigans, using their powers and fighting was really fun, and then the train talk scene was absolutely amazing (bi loki yay! Gonna talk about this later). The fifth episode was great mostly because seeing all the other Loki variants and how they contrasted between each other was fantastic and I loved it. I really hope we see more of the variants in the next season. The other eps, the second and fourth were okay, the one I think was the worst one was the last one. Damn that episode. It was a very slow episode. Thank god the guy who plays Kang was really good because otherwise the episode would have been impossible to watch. There was so much exposure but it felt like we already knew most of it? They talked about how multiple timelines existing was bad because chaos and stuff, and they talked about the war in which the different timelines battled each other. Ok we already knew this. I feel like the only important thing to take from that whole talk was that Kang's variants are very powerful and dangerous and they were introducing the villain to the mcu. The whole episode felt like instead of giving closure to the characters or ending some storylines, the main thing it was doing was introducing the concept of the multiverse for the next marvel movies.

Something that surprised me a lot about the show is how important it is for the mcu storyline. Like in the first episode they talked about how the tva (and of course Kang) was much more powerful than the Infinity Stones, when basically all previous marvel movies were about them and about their power. And then Kang was revealed to have created a sacred timeline, he controls absolutely everything that happens. All of this is so important and for some reason I didn't think the show was gonna be like this. Not that I'm complaining, this is great. And I feel like a lot of people are not realising how big it is? Like I don't see much talking about how this is literally the greatest power in the universe.

Damn this is getting long sorry.

I suppose I'll have to talk about it because it has been this big thing. I'm talking about the loki x sylvie pairing. I didn't like it too much, it felt a lot like the writers went "he's a guy she's a girl so they have to fall in love", like I felt they had a very different dynamic and when they said that I was mostly surprised and confused. Because they were variants of each other their romance felt weird to me, and the fact that they made a character genderfluid and then made a woman and a man version fall in love also rubbed me the wrong way (I'll talk about the genderfluidity later). I did like the mobius x loki pairing more, but still I don't think they should have got any romance this season, I feel like there has to be a lot more progress in that relationship before any romance. I generally feel like Loki should first start getting some friends and then later on we can start with romance. But yeah this is just my opinion. And all the drama and discourse there has been over this???? Some of you guys look ridiculous not gonna lie.

Ok now let's talk about representation. I'm not poc myself so I don't feel like I'm in the position to say if something was good or bad, so I'm not gonna talk about poc rep. The show did a good job with female characters, many of the main characters were women and they were very well-written, not sexualized and cast appropriately for their age (I can't believe I'm praising this, this should be the bare minimum. Why is media in general so bad. Like please just.) About the bi rep now. I'm sure that the writers or directors of the show had to fight really hard with marvel so that they could make loki canon bi, so yeah cheers to that guys good job. Obviously it's not enough, and I really hope his bisexuality is explored more later. But yeah we finally have a queer character in the mcu this is big. Now about the genderfluid rep. OOF. I have a lot to say about this. It was bad. Really bad. I don't know if they just don't know what genderfluid means but that's what it looks like after watching the show. Not only were all of the variants cis, but they also went on to say that Loki as a woman was a weird and uncommon thing. Oh my god. And what angers me the most is the fact that Marvel used the so called genderfluid confirmation to their benefit. They exploited so much that little piece of paper that said his sex (not even gender) was fluid. I saw SO MANY articles praising marvel for making him canon genderfluid, and then it was absolutely shit. Absolutely shit. Out of everything in the show this is definitely what I hate the most.

Gotta calm down now. The soundtrack of the show was amazing, the actual songs they used were perfect and then the music they composed for the show was just *chef's kiss* (i have no idea how they're called but the song that plays during the title sequence WHAT A BANGER and the one that plays when loki and mobius are looking at the whole tva from the balcony in the first ep WHAT A BANGER). The aesthetic of the show was also great, the colours were really pretty (Lamentis bi colours my beloved) and I think it had some really cool shots. The acting was great, I'm gonna highlight Kang because I thought he was amazing. The costumes and that stuff were also really cool, I really liked seeing all the different versions of outfits they gave to the Loki variants (if anyone is interested I made another post reviewing all the variants' outfits) and Kang's funky costume was great too. The design of the places and that stuff (I have no idea how to call these lol I'm trying so hard but I don't know any of the technical words) was great: Lamentis was really beautiful, the void was also very cool and the tva was really well designed.

Ok y'all I think this is it. I'm so sorry this is much longer than I expected and if anyone actually reads all of it i love you and PLEASE tell me your thoughts (if anyone wanna chat about the show with me privately send me a message!!! I love talking with y'all). A little final note, English is not my first language, nor my second, so yeah sorry if I can't explain myself well. Bye!!!!

[littleabriel-blog]

My Problem with Loki

Loki is a character beloved by many people. He has been for a decade now, although some people who read comics before the Marvel Cinematic Universe was a thing were fans of him long before the first Thor came out. Over the years since his appearance in that movie the character has gone through a lot of changes, evolving from a villain to an anti-hero both in the MCU and in the comics, the latter even killing off his original incarnation to reincarnate him in a younger body resembling Tom Hiddleston in the hopes that the comics could capitalize on his popularity in order to sell more books. That move, unfortunately, did not bear fruit, with Loki’s solo series being canceled after only five issues. However, Loki remained popular in the movies, so much so that when he was killed off in Infinity War, people were pissed.

As a result of his enduring popularity, Kevin Feige and company decided to give Loki his own solo series on Disney+ when the decision was made to create a string of MCU tie-in shows to supplement the movies, and boost subscription numbers to Disney’s new streaming service. Fans of the character rejoiced. Finally, our favorite character was going to be in the spotlight, and not be merely a supporting character for Thor and hopefully not a butt monkey for the Avengers like he was in the third act of the movie of the same name. WandaVision and The Falcon and The Winter Soldier had previously had well-received and successful debuts on that same platform, and it was hoped that Loki would do the same. Loki turned out to be the most successful of the Disney+ MCU shows that have come out so far, scoring highest in the ratings. As of this writing, it holds a 93% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and an 8.5 on IMDb.

Those numbers, however, don’t reflect the entire audience and there were a lot of people who were not altogether happy with the product we received. Many people who had been hardcore fans of Loki since Tom Hiddleston first put on the horned helmet were not pleased, myself included.  

The show wasn’t all bad. It did set up the multiverse, introduced Kang, introduced Mobius. The special effects were outstanding, a lot of the gags were hilarious, and we did get some character development from Loki before the spotlight fell away from him and he became all about panting after the real main character...more on that in a few.  

So many things, however, were wrong.  

If you liked the show, thought it was perfect, and were a fan of the romance, that’s perfectly fine. There is no such thing as a wrong opinion on a work of fiction. Everyone has their interpretations, everyone has their likes and dislikes, and there is nothing wrong with liking the show. There is also nothing wrong with not liking the show. This is a concept that people on both sides of the debate fail to understand, and I have witnessed flame wars, harassment from individuals on both sides, harassment of creators on social media from both sides, and various bits of biphobia, homophobia, transphobia, and other assorted types of phobias on display. I have seen people accuse people who have different opinions on the show than them of “not being a true Loki fan” and stating that people who have certain interpretations of the character don’t “truly know Loki”.

I’m not here to do that, and I assure you, if you liked the show, that’s fine. You’re allowed to. I’m allowed to not like it, and I’m allowed to explained why I didn’t like it just as you’re allowed to explain why you did. As long as both of us are being respectful, expressing an opinion is good. There is expressing an opinion and offering constructive criticism, however, and then there is namecalling, trolling, and having a tantrum and accusing someone of being “aggressive” when they don’t share the same opinion you do.

There is a huge difference between saying “I find the character of Sylvie to be problematic, and here is why” and “I think fans of Sylvie are sick and need therapy”, and people need to learn the difference between the two. Unfortunately, you have people who have become very protective of their favorite characters and tend to take any criticism leveled at said characters personally. It’s basically “You don’t like them? Well then you don’t like me, and since you don’t like me, I don’t like you.” Which is, frankly, a dangerous mentality to have. We are talking about fictional characters, not real people, and there is no need to jump to the defense of someone who does not exist. It is those people who tend to demonstrate that they have unstable personalities and immaturity, and they are the ones I have started blocking on Twitter because, being an adult woman, I don’t have the patience to deal with immature nonsense like that.

So, if you read this and then decide you want to hunt me down to give me a piece of your mind, tell me that I’m not a “true” fan of Loki, and accuse me of whatever, don’t bother. This piece isn’t here for that. It’s here because I wanted to compile my thoughts and feelings in a way that would better for me to articulate. It’s more or less a venting mechanism, purely for my benefit. If someone else gets something out of it, fine. If the creators of the show happen to see it, which is very unlikely because A) I’m not exactly going to push it onto them on their social media to get them to read it and B) they already get bombarded with tons of opinions on the show on a daily basis and aren’t going to care about one more voice added to the mix, even one who has basically compiled a novel, then alright.

And it is a novel, because I have a lot to say about Loki. I have been a huge fan of the character since long before Tom Hiddleston began playing him. My first encounter with Marvel’s Loki came in the form of the X-Men comics, specifically The Asgardian Wars run. It’s available in trade, and you should check it out. I read that run when I was around 10 years old, and I enjoyed Loki as the bad guy in the two stories that make up the collection. The first has him creating a special wish fountain that has a monkey’s paw effect in that it imbues mortals with special gifts and powers, and has the potential to make Earth a better place, but at the cost of killing every magical person and being on Earth. The X-Men and Alpha Flight find out about this after a plane piloted by the wife of one of the X-Men happens to crash in the general location the fountain is located. The two teams go to investigate, Shaman and Snowbird who are both magical beings begin dying, it’s discovered Loki created the fountain in order to score brownie points with The Ones Who Sit Above In Shadow (a pantheon of deities who are basically the Gods to the Asgardians), and after a lengthy battle Loki is defeated, he shuts down the fountain under pressure from The Ones, and slinks back to Asgard with tail between his legs.

In the second story, set after the heroes of Earth had helped Asgard defeat Surtur, Loki’s attention is caught by Storm, who at the time was depowered. He kidnaps her and brings her to Asgard intending to use her to replace Thor as the Goddess of the Storm, and use her as a pawn to, what else, conquer Asgard and seize the throne.  

I really enjoyed Loki then, and felt sorry that he never appeared in any other X-Men story, not even in an issue of the New Mutants, and that team boasted an actual Valkyrie (Danielle Moonstar) as one of its members. I was a kid at the time and read pretty much exclusively X-Men since those were the books my father purchased for me. I never felt right about asking him for other books since we were a family with money struggles and I didn’t want to be more of a burden by requesting Thor or Avengers comics--that, and I just didn’t find Thor or the Avengers all that interesting at the time, a sentiment shared by a lot of people until the first Iron Man made us actually care about Tony Stark. I wouldn’t have an opportunity to start reading more comics featuring Loki until I was an adult and able to visit comic book stores on my own. I read several runs that featured him as a character, including Ragnarok, the Broxton, OK run where Loki first appeared as a woman, Dark Reign, and finally Siege. I also went back and read Walt Simonson’s legendary run on The Mighty Thor, which I highly recommend.  

Suffice it to say, I’ve been a fan of the character for a long time, and in fact when Tom Hiddleston was cast in the role for Thor, I remember thinking that he was too young. But then I figured it was Hollywood, of course they’re going to deage Loki so that he appears closer in age to his adopted brother in contrast to the comics pre-Siege where Loki was often drawn to look like he was as old as Odin and therefore could be Thor’s uncle or even father as opposed to brother.  

Over the years I grew to enjoy the MCU’s version of the character, enjoy Tom Hiddleston in the role, and like most other people was greatly saddened by his death in Infinity War. Like other fans, I looked forward to his solo series and had high hopes for it. Hopes that were, unfortunately, dashed.

It Was Rushed

In the MCU, it took Loki years to go from troubled young god, to villain, to ambivalent ally, to anti-hero, to hero. Literally, years. Months had passed between the end of Thor and the beginning of Avengers during which Loki endured who-knows-what at the hands of Thanos. We don’t know exactly what still. The Loki series didn’t answer that, I guess because they didn’t want to devote precious screentime to an interesting backstory for what was supposed to be the main character when they could focus on something else instead. That something else will be elaborated on.

In Episode 1, Loki is still the villain from Avengers, something he would have remained as into The Dark World. It would take him being in Asgard’s prisons for a year and then him accidentally getting his adopted mother Frigga killed in order for him to begin to do a heel-face turn. From this, we can clearly see that a transition from ax-crazy bad guy to anti-hero is not going to happen overnight. For this person I shall call Ragnarok Loki, it was a process that took time. He suffered a complete mental breakdown while in Asgard’s prison, a fragile emotional state that was compounded by the anger and massive guilt he felt at Frigga’s death.  

Even after that, he still hadn’t completely abandoned his villainous ways. At the end of The Dark World we find out that after faking his supposed death earlier in the movie, Loki has assumed Odin’s form and taken his place on Asgard’s throne. In Ragnarok, Loki is still sitting on the throne in Odin’s form, and shows no indication at all that he feels any remorse for giving his adopted father amnesia, stripping away his magic, and abandoning him on Earth to whatever fate he might meet. Loki remains a selfish bastard throughout Ragnarok until the third act, after Thor had treated him to a taste of his own medicine by sticking a taser on him and then giving him a speech about becoming predictable and complacent.  

Loki’s arc was one that spanned four movies and six years, since in-universe there were a couple of years between The Dark World and Ragnarok. That meant that his character development took actual time and was realistic. It was one of the things that drew people to the character, the fact that he had a very relatable and believable redemption arc.

Compare that to Episode 1. In less than a day he goes from being the Loki that we saw in Avengers, batshit crazy, selfish, callous, and untrusting, to making personal confessions to a man he had just met only a couple hours previously and agreeing to help the organization that had arrested, stripped, imprisoned, tried, and almost executed him.

What?

I will give the show this: In Episode 2, he shows that he’s still up to his old tricks when he feeds Mobius and the agents all that horsecrap about how a Loki works in the Ren Faire tent, and then revealing that he plans to take over the TVA when he confronts his variant in the futuristic Wal-Mart. The weeping confession to Mobius, that I can’t really get over. How do you go from haughty, arrogant, and “trust is for children and dogs”, to “I don’t enjoy hurting people” in just a couple of hours? The show never indicated that it was a manipulation tactic on Loki’s part. Instead, we were basically told to believe that they became friends just that fast. That emotionally stunted and closed-off Loki made a connection with another person in a matter of hours. Makes sense. Don’t get me wrong, I like Mobius and feel he makes a good foil for Loki. I hope to see more of him in the future. I just have a tough time finding their friendship all that believable.

This would not be the only relationship in the show that happened too fast that we were forced to just buy, which leads me to Sylvie.

She’s the variant that the TVA had been hunting, that Mobius recruited Loki to help capture. And while I normally hate it when people ascribe a certain label onto a new female character because reasons (ones that are usually misogynistic), I think it fits rather well in Sylvie’s case.

Enter The Mary Sue

Mary Sue is a term that gets thrown around a lot. To sum up the meaning in very simple terms, it refers to a character who is too perfect to be believable. Mary Sues are often author-self inserts in fiction, they’re usually the love interest for at least one male hero and it’s usually the male hero the author will admit to having a crush on, their scenes usually are presented much more descriptively than those of the other characters, the story will revolve around them often at the expense of the development and plots for the other characters of the story, and they’re presented as beautiful, powerful, intelligent, beautiful, special, strong, beautiful, and desirable. Yes, beautiful is on the list more than once, and it’s deliberate.

The term comes from an old Star Trek parody fanfic, and while it is usually applied to original characters in fan fiction, the term has been used to describe characters in canon media as well. Some examples of characters who have been described as Mary Sues would include Bella from the Twilight books, Felicity from the show Arrow, Jaenelle Angelline from Anne Bishop’s The Black Jewel novels, Sookie Stackhouse from True Blood, Rey from the last Star Wars trilogy, and Jean Grey from the X-Men comics. Note I do not necessarily agree that those characters are Mary Sues, I have merely heard these characters referred to as Mary Sues, and when I look at them objectively I can kind of see where the accusations come from. Some other terms that can apply are Creator’s Pet and of course Author Self-Insert. Not all Mary Sues are Author Self-Inserts, but a lot of them are. Also, not all characters who can be labeled Mary Sues are female, though they often are. The male version of a Mary Sue is called a Marty Stu, and a couple of characters I’ve seen get ascribed that label include Harry Potter, Daemon Sadi from Anne Bishop’s The Black Jewel novels, Edward from Twilight, and Red Hulk from Marvel Comics. Even Batman and Wolverine haven’t been immune from the Marty Stu stamp, although you can argue that it does apply in their cases especially depending on who’s writing them. Sometimes it is painfully obvious they are author self-inserts...the aforementioned Bella is a good example. Others, you can only speculate on. And while there are theories going around that Sylvie is someone’s self-insert, we don’t have definitive proof of that.

There are good arguments, however, for her being labeled a Mary Sue and Creator’s Pet.

First are her powers. In the show we are told that Sylvie taught herself magic, especially her ability to “enchant”, the power to get into the minds of others and manipulate them. The fact that she taught herself would indicate that her education and skill in using magic should be lacking, right? She should not be as good as, say, someone who learned magic from his foster mother who herself was taught by Asgardian witches?

Yet in the show, Sylvie not only runs circles around Loki magically wise, she even teaches him a few tricks. This is startlingly in contrast to the comics. Loki’s Sylvie is partially based on the character Sylvie Lushton from the Young Avengers, a bad guy who was once a normal girl whom Loki imbued with powers before his death at the hands of the Sentry during the events of 2010’s Siege storyline. In the comics, Loki not only gave Sylvie her powers, but he was the one who taught her how to use them. Now, of course things in the MCU are not going to follow the way things are in the comics. MCU Loki is nowhere near as old as comics Loki and has so far not demonstrated the ability to give other beings powers. And MCU Sylvie is a composite of Sylvie Lushton and Lady Loki, which is also problematic, but we’ll get to that.

But the point is that Sylvie had no training. Her magic is some improvised slapped-together stuff that at best she picked up here and there and at worst she just pulled out of her ass. Now, knowing that, we’re supposed to buy that she can mop the floor magically wise with someone who was formally trained by a sorceress? And that furthermore, she can school him as well?

To make up for her lack of experience and knowledge, Loki is nerfed. Power wise and intellectually wise, he is nerfed. In Thor and Avengers Loki is smart, well-spoken, and a master manipulator. At one point he is able to turn all of the Avengers against one another, and while his magic has never been anywhere near the level it was at in the comics pre-Siege (after his resurrection, he was powered down and is currently nowhere near the powerhouse he had been prior to 2011) he was able to pull off some impressive displays of skill nonetheless. Shape shifting, illusion casting, it was a good repertoire.  

In Episode 3, however...well, he does use teleportation to some impressive affect during his fight with Sylvie, but he still doesn’t get the upperhand. And he should. Loki is a better trained fighter, better trained in sorcery, and realistically should have at the least managed to incapacitate his variant. He doesn’t however, because the moment he meets Sylvie his IQ drops about 20 points. He falls easily for her tricks, makes laughable plans, gets drunk and draws too much attention when he knows that is a bad idea, and manages to get them both stuck on a moon that will soon be dust courtesy of the rogue planet about to crash into it. Loki has made some blunders in the various MCU movies he’s been in, mostly due to his own arrogance and tendency to underestimate his foes, but he’s not that stupid. In fact, in The Dark World he screams at Thor and calls him an idiot for drawing attention to themselves by hijacking an elven ship and crashing into every column and statue within a fifty-foot radius.

Where exactly is that smart, calculating, more careful Loki we know from the films? He’s been transformed and dumbed down, in an attempt to prop Sylvie up. It’s a tired trope, making the male character a dumbass in order to make the female character look good. Well, I should say male-presenting and female-presenting characters in this case, but their supposed gender fluidity really is not represented well and it’s completely contradicted later on, but we’ll get to that.

Anyway, making the male character stupid in order to make the female character look better by comparison is not empowering. It’s insulting. It implies that women are not smart or capable enough to meet men on equal footing, that the only way we can shine is not by virtue of our own strengths, but merely by making us look better than the men.

She doesn’t just outshine Loki intellectually and power wise, she outshines him period. The show from Episode 3 on becomes about Sylvie. She is the show’s main focus, and Loki? He’s relegated to the role of supporting character in the series that’s named after him. Supporting character, and love interest. From Episode 3 on, the show might as well be called Sylvie.

Now, some people will say that since Sylvie is a Loki, the show was indeed focusing on Loki. The problem is, the show is very inconsistent as to whether or not Sylvie really is a Loki or a different person entirely. I will explain more later, but the writers seem to change Sylvie’s identity to suit whatever narrative they want to present to the audience, including the pre-Pixar Disney romance they foist upon us.

The Romance, and why some find it gross

One major characteristic of the Mary Sue is that she always draws the romantic and sexual interest of the main male character, who may or may not be a Marty Stu himself. Oftentimes he’s not, and Loki does not fit the criteria of a Marty Stu by any stretch of the imagination. These romances always happen fast with little to no buildup. There is no what writers of romance call “slow burn”, it’s just throw Mary at the male character, hook them up, and get the audience to buy it. Basically, it’s reminiscent of the romance stories in the Classical Era Disney animated films. Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella all fall madly in love with their princes within minutes of meeting them. There’s no getting to know each other, there is no preamble, there is no slow courtship, no real drama to speak of. It’s basically Love At First Sight or True Love. This trend continues even into the Disney Renaissance. In The Little Mermaid, Ariel is willing to make a deal with a witch to give up her fins for a prince she hasn’t even spoken to yet. He doesn’t even know she exists, and she leaves her home and family behind, gives up her voice, all for a mere shot at hooking up with him.

That’s not love, that’s lust. That’s hormones overruling your brain, and it’s an insulting trope, one that feminists have railed against for years. Disney has made a little progress. The movie Frozen took the mickey out of the Love At First Sight/True Love trope with the song “Love Is An Open Door” and the prince Anna wanting to marry turning out to be a major sleazebag who just wants to use her, but we still only have three Disney princesses (Elsa, Moana, and Merida) who have never had love interests and two (Anna and Rapunzel) whose love stories come close to being slow burns, out of 12 official Princesses. There’s still a long way to go, and boy is there a major step backwards in Loki.  

In Episode 3, Loki fights Sylvie and they end up on Lamentis 1. Sylvie spends a good portion of the time insulting and trying to kill Loki, and Loki finds himself having to defend himself from her. That changes once they get on the train going to the Arc. After sneaking aboard the train using a disguise and a flimsy story, the two Lokis sit in a booth, where Loki proceeds to drink champagne. It is then that, out of nowhere, the conversation shifts from how Sylvie learned her powers to the topic of love.

Why? Why would you bring that up in conversation with someone who was doing her best to kill you a couple hours prior?

Then Loki makes things worse by asking Sylvie if she has a beau waiting for her. Why? It doesn’t make sense. The two of you are at each other’s throats, she’s done her best to kill you, neither of you trusts the other, and, completely out of left field, you decide to basically ask “So...are you single?”

Now, enemies to lovers is a trope that can work when done right. Typically, it’s a very subtle, slow progression that the audience witnesses over time in a novel, movie or television series. Weeks and even months will go by in the narrative during which the two people go from wanting each other dead to developing feelings for one another. There’s usually a “will they, won’t they period” that lasts for some time that’s full of teases and flirting before the couple does hook up and gives the audience the resolution. Done in this way, enemies to lovers can work.

This...this is not the right way to do enemies to lovers. Within a couple of hours Loki and Sylvie go from hatred and doing their damnedest to stabbing one another in the backs, to having a connection that causes a nexus event?

By the way, that nexus event makes no sense. In Episode 2, it is established that it is impossible to create a nexus event in an apocalypse. It is why Sylvie was able to avoid capture by the TVA for so long. In fact, just minutes prior to the two of them almost dying in Episode 4, Sylvie flat-out says that she figured out that she needed to hide in apocalypses because she discovered she didn’t create a nexus event when she hid in them.

Now the two of them are able to create a nexus event in the midst of an apocalypse? Why? Their “connection” isn’t going to lead to any consequences...they were about to die. No one else need never have known about the “moment” the two of them shared. It’s very confusing and the only purpose it really serves is to paint Loki and Sylvie as soulmates, which doesn’t make sense in the context of the show. The concept of soulmates is that for every person, there is someone out there they are predestined to be with. Loki is a show that, at the core of it, is about rejecting predestination and embracing free will. In that context, the idea of soulmates is ludicrous and contradictory to the message that we make our own destiny. This is why True Love is unrealistic, and I hate to break it to you romantics out there, but Love At First sight does not exist.

Infatuation At First Sight exists, but that is not Love, no matter what your hormones are telling you. Love takes time to evolve, and it takes work to maintain. It sure as hell doesn’t happen after less than 12 hours of knowing each other, during which a huge chunk of time was devoted to trying to manipulate, outsmart, and murder the person you’re supposedly in love with. No one falls in love in less than 12 hours, period, unless it’s a Classical Era Disney animated movie. They basically turned Loki into a big Disney Romance trope. I have a very hard time buying that Loki, who we have established is emotionally stunted and closed off, would form a love connection in just a few hours, especially with someone who was doing her best to murder him in that timespan.

That is not the only reason this relationship is problematic. The term “Selfcest” has been thrown around, and a lot of defenders of this particular ship claim that the term was very recently made up in social media for the sole purpose of badmouthing this particular romance. That is not the case. Selfcest is a term that has existed among fiction writers for years, it’s just that more people have recently become aware of it thanks to this show. The trope has been used and referred to in various works of fiction, especially in fantasy and science fiction where cloning, alternative universes, and magic occur. A lot of the insults I get from people who can’t stand that I don’t like the romance basically go along the lines of saying selfcest doesn’t exist. No, it doesn’t...in reality. But this isn’t reality, is it? It’s fiction. It’s a fictional world where such a thing could be possible, and even in works where it’s not possible it’s often alluded to.

In A Song Of Ice And Fire, we have the infamous twincest relationship going on between Cersei and Jamie Lannister, and it is heavily implied that sleeping with her brother is the closest that Cersei can get to banging herself and that is why she does it. Jamie is basically everything she feels she should have been and was denied due to being born a woman. In fact, in later books when he reunites with her after having been away from King’s Landing for over a year, during which time he’s grown a beard and shaved his head, Cersei no longer finds him as attractive since they no longer look as much alike.

And with advances in cloning, selfcest might be possible in the future. We already have sex robots, and people with money are capable of making those robots look like themselves. There is nothing stopping them from doing it.

Knowing all of this, the argument of “selfcest doesn’t exist!” falls flat. And it especially falls flat when you’re referring to a fictional universe where a large purple man once killed off half the population of said universe with a snap of his fingers, where scientists turn into giant green monsters, the Norse gods not only exist but regularly interact with people on Earth, and there’s such a thing as a Sorcerer Supreme.

As I have said, the show has been rather inconsistent in stating what exactly Sylvie’s identity is. One moment, we are told Sylvie is a Loki and that she and Loki are the same person. Mobius says it, Kang says it multiple times, Judge Renslayer says it, the director and the writers state it in interviews. But then in the next breath, they contradict it by saying that she’s not a Loki, she’s Sylvie and a different person.  

You can’t have it both ways. Which is it? Either she’s a Loki, or she’s not. The narrative is very confusing and it changes depending on how they want us to see Sylvie, especially in relation to her romance with Loki. It’s so much easier to avoid the selfcest/incest accusations when you can say they are different people. But then they say they’re the same person. Make up your minds!

Since the show first established that Sylvie is a Loki, I’m going with that. Especially since we saw a bit of her backstory. She grew up in Asgard as a member of the royal family, which means she had Odin as a father, Frigga as mother, and Thor as brother. She may or may not have the same DNA as Loki. We never got confirmation either way, and there are people who argue that they don’t to which I have to ask: How do you know? The show never tells us! “Oh, well, there’s Alligator Loki, are you going to say he has the same DNA as well?” Well, we are never told how exactly Alligator Loki came to be. Is he actually an alligator, or is he Loki who somehow got permanently stuck when he shapeshifted? People tend to forget that he can do that. Ragnarok established that he can turn into a snake, and a deleted scene actually had the childhood story go that Loki turned into a rug to cover a hole in the ground and then dumped Thor into it. There is the scene where Doctor Strange drops Loki through a portal, and Thor is left poking at a business card, and it is clear that for a moment he thinks that Loki turned into that. We know Loki can shapeshift, so Alligator Loki can very well have the same DNA. We just don’t know, because the show never explains it for the same reason the show cut out the scenes with Throg fighting Loki...to devote more screentime to Sylki.

Even if they don’t have the same DNA, it’s still established that they are the same person, they have the same family, they’re both the God/dess of Mischief, and even Sylvie herself acknowledges that she is a Loki despite the fact that she changed her name. So selfcest very much applies here, and a good argument can be made that selfcest is the ultimate in incest...after all, there isn’t anyone else you’re more related to than yourself. It is very understandable, therefore, that a lot of people would be very, very uncomfortable with such a relationship. Having the same DNA would merely be the icing on the very gross cake.

Furthermore, just because selfcest does not exist in reality does not mean someone can’t find the concept distasteful. “It’s not real!” “It’s just fiction!” Yes, and people are allowed to have their own feelings and opinions on fiction. If they find the idea of selfcest hard to stomach, that’s their prerogative and you really have no right to tell them they are wrong for feeling that way. They should not have to justify to anyone why they feel that way either. No one owes you an explanation for why they find real world incest or cannibalism distasteful, so they don’t owe you an explanation for this.

“Well, of course Loki would fall for himself...he’s a narcissist!” Is he though? Is he really? Having dealt with my fair share of narcissists in my life, I have to wonder if the fans who say that, along with the writers, know what a narcissist really is.

Is Loki a narcissist?

Bringing up Cersei Lannister again, the novels she appears in establishes that she is an extreme narcissist. She sleeps with her twin brother because it’s the closest she can come to sleeping with herself, and she desires to do that because she is a narcissist. A narcissist is someone whose personality is defined by an inflated sense of self-importance, troubled relationships, lack of empathy for others, and an excessive deep-seated need for attention and admiration. It’s a very simplistic definition, and there are plenty of YouTube videos devoted to delving into narcissists into more depth, as well as videos on how to cope with the aftermath of abuse at the hands of narcissists. Narcissists are so devoted to themselves that they ignore the needs and the feelings of those in their lives, which often results in abusive behavior. There are entire support groups that exist for victims of narcissists.

At first glance, one can see why some might consider Loki a narcissist. He does engage in some pretty selfish behavior, he goes to great lengths to get attention, his relationships to his family are indeed fraught with drama, and he seems to have a pretty overinflated ego. He even goes so far as to write a play featuring himself as the central character, and build a giant golden statue of himself after taking over Asgard in the guise of Odin. But really, is his ego truly that big? Or he is overcompensating for his self-hatred and self-disgust?

Loki suffered quite the emotional blow when he found out his true heritage, a revelation that shook him to his very core. Of course, his relationship with his father suffered as a result...the man lied to him for his entire life. Their relationship really was not that great even before that since Odin found it easier to relate to Thor, who was more like him in personality, than to Loki, who was more cerebral and quieter. Loki’s relationship to Frigga fared much better. He’s quick to forgive her involvement in covering up the truth about his parentage, and it is obvious that they are close. Even his relationship with Thor prior to the events of the movie is not all that bad, the two brothers are affectionate and playful, and when Loki interrupts Thor’s coronation, it’s not just for the sake of creating trouble, but to postpone Thor taking the crown for another little while because he is not fit to rule. At the time Thor had yet to go through his character development arc on Earth and he was still an overly arrogant, bloodthirsty, elitist douchebag, so Loki really had a good point.

A true narcissist would have done what Loki did just for the sake of making life difficult for Thor. Also, he would have done it because he wanted the throne. Loki states repeatedly that he never wanted to rule. A true narcissist would have been all smiles about taking the throne instead of being reluctant about it as Loki was when Frigga handed him Gungnir.

Throughout the films, and in the first episode of the series, we see that Loki does indeed love his family and is capable of feeling guilt over the things that he does to them, intentionally or not. Narcissists typically don’t feel remorse. As far as they are concerned, they are perfect and can do no wrong, so they have nothing to feel bad about. If they hurt you, it’s because you deserved it. You shouldn’t have provoked their ire.

Loki feels bad for getting Frigga killed, and then later on Odin. Then he is in tears when Odin dies, and later at the mere thought of never seeing Thor again when the two brothers talk in an elevator on Sakaar. Those are not the actions of someone who is incapable of loving anyone but himself, as I’ve seen so many people claim about him. And the fact that he sacrificed himself to save his brother also kind of kills the whole “narcissist” narrative.

In Episode 1, Loki breaks down and confesses to Mobius that he doesn’t like hurting people. He does it because it’s part of the façade, and admits that he sees himself as weak. A few episodes later, he admits to a memory illusion Sif that he craves attention “because I’m a narcissist” and admits to being afraid of being alone. That is far more self-reflection than a typical narcissist is capable of in my experience. As I said, narcissists tend to think they are perfect. A true narcissist would never admit to having any flaws, and sure as hell would never admit that they are a narcissist. As far as the true narcissist is concerned, if you find them flawed in any way, that’s on you. The narcissist has no need for self-reflection because they honestly see nothing wrong with themselves, and believe that they don’t need to change...it’s everyone else who does.

A good real-life example from my past is a former friend I’ll call D. D was a self-proclaimed brat who was quite proud of the fact that she could be difficult to be in a relationship with and tended to go through men like tissue paper. She was demanding, self-centered, extremely jealous, manipulative, and prone to wild mood swings. She could and did go from zero to insane at the drop of a hat. In the time I knew her, she left a string of burnt guys behind, and according to her it was because they just weren’t man enough to handle her. She also left behind a string of broken former friends, to the point where there really needed to be a support group for former friends of D who suddenly had her turn them into Public Enemy Number 1 when they either started taking attention away from D, or...well, that was it really. As I said, she was a very jealous person and had a chronic need to be the center of attention, especially if there were men around. Anyway, instead of working on herself to become less self-involved, self-absorbed, and more empathetic, she double downed on her abrasiveness and constant need for attention until she finally wore the poor man down and he either ghosted her or outright dumped her. She never broke up with them, preferring to keep them around for as long as they were willing in order to toy with them as a cat does with a mouse.  I tried to talk to her about her horrible behavior, but instead of taking my constructive criticism and maybe using it to make some needed changes, she completely turned on me and did her best to make my life hell until I finally cut her out of it. I learned two things: Narcissists don’t want help because they don’t feel they need it and they are never going to change as a result, and never, ever try to confront a narcissist. It’ll only end badly.  

A more famous example? Former US President Donald Trump. I won’t get into that, because really all you need to do is perform a quick Google search to see what all he’s done and witness his narcissism on full display. But really, place him side by side with Loki. Do you see any similarities at all? Maybe on the surface, but when you go deeper...no. Loki is not a narcissist. He’s capable of deep self-reflection, owns his faults, is capable of loving others, and feels remorse. I would argue that anyone who says he is a narcissist, either does not know the character, or hasn’t ever actually dealt with a narcissist in real life, to which I can only say: Lucky you.  

I honestly would argue that calling Loki a narcissist is actually doing a disservice to victims of abuse from actual narcissists.

What about Sylvie? Well, in contrast to Loki who does show remorse while Mobius is playing that “This Is Your Life” reel for him, Sylvie shows no remorse or regret. She knows that the TVA agents she kills are as much victims as she is. They are innocent variants who were kidnapped from Earth and forced to work for the TVA after having their memories wiped. She knows this, yet the first time we see her she burns a bunch of TVA agents alive, and she just stands there watching as they scream in agony. In the next episode she says right out that she’s “having some fun” while possessing the body of C-90 and murdering more agents. She is not at all sorry about doing what she did, and we’re supposed to be understanding since she was kidnapped as a child. Okay, but the entire TVA didn’t do that. The agents she kills didn’t personally kidnap her. The only one we see who was directly involved in that is Renslayer. Sylvie “did what she had to do”, fine. But she doesn’t feel bad about it, at all. The flashback to her as a child takes great pains to try to show us what a good person she is when she cries out “Help him!” as another prisoner is being beaten, but I guess she grew out of it.

We don’t know if Sylvie has any other narcissistic traits besides lack of remorse because, well, the show really doesn’t do much to show her personality. Other than killing people, trying to kill Loki, and then flirting with Loki, we just don’t really see much to her. It’s another trait of a Mary Sue. Mary Sues often have bland, one-dimensional personalities. After all, their only purpose is usually to serve as love interests for one or more male characters. Mary Sues break the “show, don’t tell” rule by having the other characters verbally inform us about their traits, usually while singing their praises, but we don’t actually see those traits in the Mary Sue herself.

Loki calls Sylvie “amazing”, but how amazing is she, really? She kills people she knows are victims, she endangers the timeline just to sneak into the TVA, and then she kills Kang despite knowing that there is a very good chance that doing so could unleash something far, far worse than him. Then again, it doesn’t have to make sense when you’re pushing an unwanted and unasked for romance on an audience who was expecting a scifi show, not a romance.

I have spoken in a few places about this. Romance is fine, but in a show that blatantly places itself in the scifi genre, it really should only be the background, not center stage. When I expressed this opinion, I got accused of being dismissive of an essential part of the human experience. Well, first of all, congratulations: You just invalidated the existence of people on the asexual and aromantic spectrums, not to mention people who are celibate by choice. Second, that is why we have the romance genre. To tell stories centered around romance. I like romance, I read romance novels, and I sometimes write romantic fiction. But there are some places where it just is not appropriate.

There are people who say that adding romance makes things more interesting. Nope, in those cases it’s just a smokescreen, something used to hide plot holes and distract us from just how empty the story really is. Writers like to say that if you need a romance to make things more interesting, then you really don’t have much of a story in the first place. And sadly, Loki does have some plot holes. The nexus event on Lamentis is a good example, and the romance is definitely used to distract us from that. People were so focused on “oh wow, they’re having a moment, they’re soulmates!” that they didn’t think “waitaminute...didn’t they say that nexus events can’t occur in apocalypses?”

We really did not need a romance in Loki. Period. It was unnecessary, it was distracting, a lot of people found it disturbing, and it actively hurt a marginalized group.

Loki Is A Queer Icon!...maybe

I am not going to say that the relationship between Loki and Sylvie is not a bisexual one. A bisexual relationship is a bisexual relationship regardless of whether or not the person the bisexual person is with is the opposite sex. Saying otherwise is biphobic. Biphobic people in both the straight and the queer communities have been excluding bisexual people who happen to be in opposite sex relationships for years because apparently one stops being bisexual once they get into a relationship with someone of the opposite sex. This is horseshit. I’ve been in relationships with CIS men, did I stop being attracted to other men, women, nonbinary, genderfluid, agender, and other genderqueer people? No. No, I didn’t, because while I was entangled, I was not dead. Heterosexual people don’t stop being attracted to other members of the opposite sex when they are in relationships, it’s no different with queer people.

So, stop saying that Loki and Sylvie are not a bisexual relationship. You’re not doing us any favors at all, and in fact you’re only helping the biphobes who want to kick us out of Pride and other queer spaces for daring to date members of the opposite sex.

I will address the “Bit of both” line however. In Episode 3, Loki has that response to Sylvie’s questioning about whether there had been any would-be princesses or princes in his life. Again, a conversation that comes out of nowhere. She stated outright that she didn’t trust him, clearly wanted him dead, and now she’s asking if he’s single. Whatever.

Anyway, people went nuts when Loki answered “A bit of both”. It was confirmation that Loki was bisexual, it was celebrated on social media...and it is really biphobic and Kate Herron, who is bisexual herself, really should have known better.

Biphobic people have long tried to sow division between the bi and trans communities (unsurprisingly, biphobia and transphobia tend to go hand-in-hand) by saying that the concept of being bisexual is transphobic. “Bi” means two, ergo bisexual people are only attracted to two genders, specifically CIS men and CIS women. It never occurs to anyone that the “two genders” a bisexual person could be attracted to could be, say, women (and yes, I include trans women in that, since they are in fact women, get over it) and non-binary people, or agender and gender-fluid people, it’s always CIS men and CIS women. This despite the fact that the definition of bisexual has been “attraction to more than one gender” since long before the Bisexual Manifesto was put out in 1990.

Some people have tried to remedy this by adopting the moniker of “pansexual” instead, which A) is basically reinforcing what biphobes are saying about bisexuals and creating even more division and B) doesn’t just mean “attraction to trans people as well, I’m not transphobic, I promise!” “Pansexual” is not interchangeable with “bisexual”. Pansexual is attraction to all genders. Bisexual means attraction to more than one gender, but not necessarily to all genders. You can have a bisexual person, for instance, who is attracted to all genders except for men. If you are attracted to more than one gender, but not to all genders, you are bisexual, and labeling yourself pansexual is lying and basically caving in to the biphobes.

I’m not trying to police what people call themselves...if you want to use the two terms interchangeably, if you want to call yourself bisexual, or pansexual, it’s fine. But just evaluate the reasons why. Are you calling yourself pansexual because you really think you can be, or are you just calling yourself that out of fear of being labeled transphobic? The latter, in my opinion, is not a really good reason, and it only helps deliver the biphobic message that bisexual people are transphobic.

So, by saying “a bit of both”, Loki is really helping to reinforce that biphobic assertion that bisexual people are attracted just to CIS men and CIS women. It’s disappointing, but it is Disney so I suppose that is the best we can expect for now. It just shows that Disney really has a long way to go.

What’s more problematic is the supposed genderfluid representation. Now, I am a CIS woman. As such, I feel unqualified to really say that the representation is shitty and fluidphobic. However, if I’m not qualified to say that it is, then Kate Herron and the writers are unqualified to say that it isn’t. Rule of thumb: If members of a marginalized group are telling you that you did a poor job of representing them and that you are being transphobic or fluidphobic, instead of ignoring and dismissing their concerns like a good portion of the population already does, it’s a really good idea to listen to what they are saying and learn how you can do better.

There have been some genderfluid and trans people who expressed that they liked the show, and good for them. But I have seen a lot of very valid criticisms and concerns from genderfluid and trans people about the representation on the show, and I think they really should be listened to. Kate, you and I are queer, but we are still CIS women. Ergo, we have no say in whether or not the way you attempted to present Loki’s gender fluidity is transphobic. If genderfluid people say it’s fluidphobic or trans people say it’s transphobic, then it is indeed fluidphobic/transphobic. To say otherwise is gaslighting a marginalized community who already faces gaslighting on a daily basis.

I will touch on a couple of things.

First, in Episode 5, Loki asks a bunch of his variants if they have ever encountered a female version of themselves, a question that is met with varying levels of incredulousness and even disgust. If Loki was truly genderfluid, this question wouldn’t have been asked. Genderfluid means the person shifts genders along the spectrum. Loki does this in the comics. Comicbook Loki switches between masculine and feminine presenting on the drop of a dime, especially in his current incarnation. Loki in the MCU we are told is also genderfluid, and should also be able to hop along the gender spectrum on a whim. There should not be a “female variant” therefore, since they are all the same gender. There could be a female presenting variant, but that is not the same thing. They would still be all genderfluid in that case. Also, Sylvie’s nexus event would not have been “being born the Goddess of Mischief”. Okay, the show never actually says that is the nexus event that led to her being arrested, but it heavily implies it. If Sylvie is a Loki, and as a Loki is genderfluid, her being the “Goddess” of Mischief should never have been an issue since they can change genders anyway.

Second, making Lady Loki a separate person is problematic. A lot of genderfluid people felt that this move invalidated their identity by basically showing that the same person cannot indeed be different genders along the spectrum. I don’t feel I’m totally qualified to really get into this. I will just say that if you’re going to write a genderfluid character, maybe at least get an actual genderfluid person to advise in the writing room.

Third, there is a transphobic movement called trans exclusionary radical feminism. You might have heard of it. Unfortunately, it is a very widespread movement that has done a lot of harm to the trans community, successfully blocking funding to organizations that help trans people, blocking laws that would benefit trans people, and the movement includes celebrities like Graham Linehan and JK Rowling.

One of the weapons they like to use against trans women is the concept of “autogynephilia”. It is basically the sexual fetish of becoming aroused from thinking of oneself as a woman.  Many, many of these transphobic “feminists” love to say that trans women are merely men who have this particular sexual fetish.

It’s bullshit of course. Maybe there is a small segment of the male population that has that fetish, but trans women are not included in that. For trans women, things like dressing as women, changing their names, having state and federal issued IDs that say they are female, and being able to use the restrooms and change rooms that match the gender they actually are as opposed to the one they were assigned at birth is not a matter of sexual arousal. It’s a matter of making their external realities match their internal ones. It’s a matter of validation of their identities as women. Sexual gratification has nothing to do with it.

Now, Loki is not trans, but genderfluid people do tend to fall under the trans umbrella. We have Loki, a supposedly genderfluid individual and masculine presenting, falling head over heels in love with a feminine presenting version of himself. Maybe it’s just me, but it just seems like a form of autogynephilia to me.

Way to go, Kate...you just gave the TERFs more ammo.

One more note: At one point, Kate tweeted a list of the different Loki emojis, and “jokingly” included #FiretruckLoki with an emoji of a firetruck. Kate, you do realize that a “joke” transphobes love to harp on is that they can identify as an attack helicopter, right?

It’s his way of learning self-love!

That is not how you learn self-love.

First, the people who are making this argument often contradict themselves by then saying that Sylvie is a different person. Again, make up your minds. Either Sylvie is the same person as Loki, or she’s not. You can’t have it both ways, and you can’t continue to change the narrative to fit whatever it is you want to shove down the audience’s throats.

Second, romantic love and self-love are two different things entirely. Loki isn’t feeling self-love with Sylvie, he’s feeling romantic love. That’s not learning self-love. That's narcissism, and it’s character regression in his case. He’s supposed to be evolving past being a self-centered, egotistical shitweasel, and falling in love with a variant of himself makes him, as Mobius put it, “a seismic narcissist”. It’s not character development.  

Third, this argument tends to come in the same breath as saying that Loki is a narcissist so of course he would fall for a variant of himself. If Loki is a narcissist though, why would he need to learn self-love? Narcissists already love themselves, that is the very definition of the word. If Loki needs to learn self-love, that would imply that he actually hates himself, which is the opposite of narcissism. Again, the writers and the fans who make these arguments when they feel the need to defend this relationship need to make up their minds. Either he’s a narcissist and therefore already loves himself too much, or he hates himself and needs to learn to love himself. It’s once again changing the narrative to fill a plothole.  

Fourth, the whole learning self-love and trust narrative is completely thrown out the window in Episode 6 when Sylvie decides to toy with Loki’s emotions, using his feelings for her against him by kissing him as a distraction so she could grab Kang’s temp pad and toss Loki back to the TVA. To Sylvie, her revenge was more important than the bond she had with him. The move basically set Loki’s progress back several steps. What little progress he made anyway.

TL:DR, is there hope for Season 2?

Whew, this went on for a while, didn’t it? Told you I had a lot to say.

As I have said, if you liked the first season of Loki and think I am completely full of shit, that’s fine and it’s your prerogative. More power to you.  

But, and this is a huge but, that does not give you the right to harass and bully people who did not like it.

I have witnessed horrible things from both sides of the now split Loki fandom on social media. Harassment and even death threats towards the creators. Telling people who don’t like the Loki and Sylvie relationship that they need to drink bleach. Homophobic attacks. Gatekeeping.  

There’s constructive criticism and sharing your opinions, and then there is...this.

Both sides need to chill.

Anyway.

Even though Kate Herron has left the show, Michael Waldron is still the showrunner and as such I am not altogether optimistic for Season 2. I would like to see more emphasis on Loki himself for that season. Yes, it’s a novel thought, wanting a show that is called Loki to actually be about Loki, but here we are.

I would like to see actual character development in Loki rather than the old “true love transforms bad boy and conquers all” trope. There is a reason Disney has started to abandon that trope in their animated movies. They’ve been getting dragged about it for decades.

If Sylvie must return, there needs to be some actual consistency surrounding her character. The show needs to decide if she is a Loki or not and stick with whichever one they decide. And seriously, no more romance. Frankly, after what she pulled in Episode 6, I will be severely disappointed if the writers have Loki crawling back to her. That would make him pathetic, and Loki deserves better.

Really, Loki does not need a romance, period. He’s too emotionally immature, he has a lot of character growth to go through, and a romance would do nothing but be a distraction and an impediment to that growth. Anyone who got married too young can confirm that it is important to learn more about yourself and figure yourself out before you even think of getting involved with another person, who should not be your whole world. The Loki and Sylvie romance was reminding me of Classic Disney in another not-good way in that the two of them, especially on Loki’s side, were starting to revolve around one another and that does not make for a healthy relationship. Again, turning Loki into a Disney Prince (or, seeing as how he’s supposed to be genderfluid, Princess). Stop it.

Again, the romance was a smokescreen. It was a distraction from just how thin the plot was. Please, for the love of G-d, give more focus to the actual plot.

Do some research and talk to some psychologists for healthy ways Loki can “learn self-love" and develop as a character. If Ragnarok Loki can do it without relying on a romance with a variant with himself, then surely TVA Loki can pull it off.

Speaking of talking to people, listen to the concerns of the trans and genderfluid fans. Listen, talk to them, maybe get a couple in the writer’s room. CIS people should not write genderfluid people, and this season is a good example of why.

Please remember that Loki is not an idiot. Yes, he has pulled some fast ones and hasn’t been the greatest planner, but he is not downright stupid like he was in season 1.

And...really that’s all I have. As I have said, this thesis really wasn’t about making suggestions to the creators because I seriously doubt they will ever even see this. This was more less me screaming into the void, venting because I was that upset about what I saw as character assassination happening to one of my favorite characters. Keeping all of this in was proving to be bad for my blood pressure.  

I am attached to the character, have been for years. Loki is just one character in the MCU who I love, who I want to see done right. I had been looking forward to his solo series for a very long time, and the disappointment I felt was something that I just couldn’t keep in. I kept my mouth shut when they killed off Tony Stark for no reason other than that Ronnie Downey, Jr. didn't want to renew his contract. I didn’t say anything at the Russo Brothers’ “happy ending” for Steve Rogers, even though I feel it made no sense and is a massive plot hole.  

What they did to Loki, however...I couldn’t keep silent.

[otterskin]

Inverted Mobius, Mr. Tesseract and The Avatar of Truth

The mystery of the weird collar has deepened, thanks to @nebulousfishgills​ - by which I mean they totally solved it.

To those just joining me, I noticed this in my previous breakdown of the Loki trailer here.

Mr. Mobius, played by Owen Wilson, has an ‘inverted suit’. His collar is an indentation in his suit, rather than going on top of it.

So, first, a scene from Endgame that I seriously did think of when we learned there was a character called ‘Mobius M. Mobius’ in Loki (played by Owen Wilson). And yet I didn’t put this together. Thanks again to nebulousfish for making me realize that these things might not be coincidences.

When Mr. Stark is inventing time travel, he asks his AI to create a depiction of a Mobius Strip, inverted.

Which gets him this:

Anyway, what is a Mobius Strip, and who is Mobius M. Mobius? (Not to be confused with Morbius the Living Vampire, though wouldn’t it be funny if he was mistaken for Mobius M. if this show gets big first?)

I am not a quantum theorist or comic book aficionado by trade, so let’s do a Wikipedia-Fu on it.

In mathematics, a Möbius strip, band, or loop (US: /ˈmoʊbiəs, ˈmeɪ-/ MOH-bee-əs, MAY-, UK: /ˈmɜːbiəs/;[1]German: [ˈmøːbi̯ʊs]), also spelled Mobius or Moebius, is a surface with only one side (when embedded in three-dimensional Euclidean space) and only one boundary curve. The Möbius strip is the simplest non-orientable surface.

An example of a Möbius strip can be created by taking a strip of paper and giving one end a half-twist, then joining the ends to form a loop; its boundary is a simple closed curve which can be traced by a single unknotted string. Any topological space homeomorphic to this example is also called a Möbius strip, allowing for a very wide variety of geometric realizations as surfaces with a definite size and shape. For example, any rectangle can be glued left-edge to right-edge with a reversal of orientation. Some, but not all, of these can be smoothly modeled as surfaces in Euclidean space. A closely related, but not homeomorphic, surface is the complete open Möbius band, a boundaryless surface in which the width of the strip is extended infinitely to become a Euclidean line.A half-twist clockwise gives an embedding of the Möbius strip which cannot be moved or stretched to give the half-twist counterclockwise; thus, a Möbius strip embedded in Euclidean space is a chiral object with right- or left-handedness. The Möbius strip can also be embedded by twisting the strip any odd number of times, or by knotting and twisting the strip before joining its ends.

A Möbius strip does not self-intersect but its projection in 2 dimensions does.

Uh....right. Well, that clears everything up, doesn’t it?

Let’s crib off someone else’s work. Thanks to Thomas Wong on Medium, I was able to understand this a little better.

A Möbius strip is just a strip of paper, turned and taped together. It it only has one side, so an ant walking along the strip eventually returns to where he started. If we metaphorically interpret the ant, not as returning to a point in space, but a point in time, then it alludes to time travel.

...

As previously discussed, after a measurement, the quantum mixture (half born and half never born) becomes a definite state (born or never born). Finding the “spectral decomposition” is to find all the possible energies (eigenvalues) and states. Using these, one can determine how a quantum object evolves with time.

Combining this with the metaphoric interpretation of the Möbius strip, it could be that Stark found how to make quantum objects evolve such that they revisit a point in time, hence time travel.

Okay, that’s a little easier to understand. So how does this relate to the character Mobius M. Mobius, aside from him being named after the strip and the (apparently antiquated) ideas about time travel?

Well, he was based on Marvel Comics Legend Mark Gruenwald, a guy known for his passion for the lore of the comics, which he knew in innate detail. He even wrote the Official Handbooks and whatnot. Likewise, Mr. Mobius is a stickler for detail and one of the few members of the TVA even allowed a face - although it is off the rack, as he’s one an infinite number of clones (god I love the TVA so much already, it’s heaven for a Douglas Addams fan like me).

Despite being a clone, he rose through the ranks and is nearly the top guy, serving only underneath Mr. Alternity (and I am not familiar with these comics so feel free to correct me). Mr. Alternity has almost no comics history, but is based on editor Tom Brevoort.

There are several other misters, all of them near-identical to ‘Moby’. Mr. Orobourous, Mr. Paradox, Mr. Tesseract (!) and Mr. Oburos. They are also minor characters, but let’s look at all these names.

Clearly they are named after quantum theories of some-sort or another.

Mr. Mobius: Mobius Strip Theory - the idea that, essentially, is about the shape of time itself and the theory of traveling along that shape.

Mr. Alternity : Alternative universes

Mr. Ouroboros: A divine figure representing the beginning and the end of time in an endless cycle of death and rebirth.

Mr. Oburos - I’m not sure, but I think this is a variant of Ouroboros. 

Mr. Paradox - Temporal paradox, causal loops - ex. The Grandfather Paradox

Mr. Tesseract - An object that exists in 4 dimensions. Time is often called the fourth dimension.

Obviously that last one is interesting, considering how the Tesseract will be the start of our adventure. The Cosmic Cube was renamed for the MCU, and in the comics has no relation to this minor character.

But what if it now does?

What if Tony has caused a change in the very appearance of Mr. Mobius when he inverted the Mobius Strip - literally inverting his clothing because he changed the shape of the Mobius - does that mean that these seemingly human-looking misters are in fact some sort of avatars for aspects of time itself? And if Mr. Tesseract is representative of how space and time intersect in the fourth dimension, wouldn’t a rogue god twisting space and time with the device that shares his name cause him some affect? Perhaps why the TVA noticed something was amiss to begin with.

This would be a departure from the comics, but the characters have almost no history there. They are ripe for new ideas.

Or, then again, since Loki will be working for the TVA - perhaps he’s the one who becomes ‘Mr. Tesseract’?

But continuing with that ‘Avatar of Aspects’ idea, let’s get away from this sausagefest for a second and visit my next newest favourite character -

I’m guessing she’s one of the Justices of the TVA. What gives it away? The imperious look, the giant oaken table, or the fact that I’m suddenly self-conscious when she looks at me? It’s the last one, of course. She’s a natural judge.

Of the named TVA judges, there’s :

Justice Goodwill, Justice Hope, Justice Liberty, Justice Love, Justice Might, Justice Mills, Justice Peace and Justice Truth.

Could they also possibly be avatars of their respective aspects?

If I had to guess, I’d say this is Justice Truth, as pairing up Loki with an avatar of Truth seems like it’d be a smashing good time, similar to how he was paired with Verity Willis in the comics. She might even be a composite character with Verity.

Verity’s power is detecting and seeing through all lies and illusions. I think this powerset will be given to Justice Truth, except instead of deriving it from a magic ring that she swallowed, she’d simply be the actual ‘Embodiment of Truth’ - and let’s get real here, when I said ‘Avatars of Aspects’, I was using that clunky phrase because the more obvious one - God of - is already ‘taken’. So Justice Truth may well be the ‘God of Truth’, as it were.

I think she’ll end up in something of a buddy-comedy with Loki, giving him someone to bounce off against who literally cuts through his carefully crafted veneer.

I’m reminded of a great quote from Taika Waititi when he was talking about what he wanted to do with Loki in Ragnarok:

“(He’s) someone who tries so hard to embody this idea of the tortured artist, this tortured, gothy orphan...It’s too tiring trying to be like that,” he says. “And, most humans, we get over ourselves, we get to that point where we’re like, ‘man, being a tortured artist is actually, like, a lot of work. Maybe I should just be real and present, and just be me, and I don’t have to be a tortured artist to be interesting, I can just be a f*cking weird New Zealander and that’s enough.”

...I think Taika is a living Loki, tbh, ha ha. No wonder he gets it.

Waititi, Yost, Pearson and Kyle did great work to cut through Loki’s illusions, both with dialogue and the visual allegory of his projections being dispelled by handy thrown objects, culminating in the very sweet ‘I’m here,’ scene at the end of the film. Loki seems to be much more open and expressive at the end of that film, and it seems like a weight has lifted off his shoulders.

But while this new Loki (Loki 2.0? Loki’s Show’s Loki? Loki II? Lokii? Lokii.) is shown a clip show of Ragnarok (one I previously theorized will be deliberately incomplete), that’s quite different from actually experiencing it, and he’ll be as performative as he was in Avengers and Thor 2. Instead of processing that ‘lack of presence’ as he did in Ragnarok, which came about as a result of Thor finally seeing through Loki’s illusions (guess he doesn’t fall for it anymore) as a result of their long history together, I suspect the band-aid will be torn off much more harshly by a total stranger who nonetheless simply sees through him.

Loki in general has a bad relationship with the truth (see the famous Vault Confrontation scene), and literally putting him on trial before the Truth Herself would certainly be enough to get him to switch from this phony expression:

To this one:

That’s not much of a facade there.

It’s not the same character arc as Ragnarok, but it does get us to a similar place, albeit in a darker and less healing way for Loki. I mean Lokii.

Anyhow. That’s what I got out of this thing.

[rynnaaurelius]

Just Pirated Loki’s First Episode: The Reactions of a Comics Nerd and No-Fun MCU Hater

-Fair warning, I am a Loki fan, but not in the way, um. Pretty much everyone else on this website is

-Bless Tom Hiddleston for being such a fucking delight as Loki but the MCU straight- and cis-washes its Loki so much that I really am exhausted.

-That being said, the shout-out to the Kid Loki comics, also known as the best Loki comics, with the “your role is this” stuff was. . .well. Watch that space.

-Interesting characterization in the MCU! Can’t wait for them to fuck it all up when it threatens to get too interesting!

-God I checked the tags for the show/characters and I remembered why I stay out of the MCU fandom.

-”They killed people!”/”They enslaved a whole town!”/”They tried to take over the world!”/”He told my favorite to shut up!” This is comics, Susan, everyone’s a terrible person on some level. Pick your emotional support war criminal and go. Also, get a sense of humor.

-Lotta people bitching about the time travel logic and TVA logic need to read more comics. Fair warning: this shit’s par for the course. Like, a lot. Marvel’s getting very comics-y with its treatment of the TVA, MCU!Carol Danvers, and the Eternals (re: The whole “They were secretly there the whole time!” thing).

-I’ve seen a lot of yelling over Loki’s characterization/the morality of the TVA and Mobius and IMO it was. . .fine?

-Like, yes, the script wasn’t amazing, but it’s nothing we haven’t seen before. Honestly, it’s better than I was expecting, and the actors did their best.

-Loki seemed fairly in-line from what I remember from 2012.

-The MCU retcons itself about everything every three years, but it looks like they’re going with the theory of Loki having major autonomy during the events of The Avengers. Probably.

-My unpopular opinion on this is that while Thanos certainly did a number on Loki to push him over the edge, supplied him with the army, and gave him this particular plan--none of which is exactly small beans--some version of this was always coming from MCU!Loki, barring major intervention.

-After the first Thor, he was always going to make a play for Earth the second Thor and Odin decided humans were all right. Thanos just happened to set the timetable.

-I mean, he’s been villain material for most of his MCU run, and it’s frankly hilarious how Marvel keeps being forced to bring him back because they can’t do villains for shit and how you can tell when they have to with each shift of his arc trajectory.

-Like everyone else in this godforsaken cinematic universe, his lines suffer from being post-Joss Whedon’s directorial and writing contributions as well as Marvel Main Character-itis, which is not unique to this series.

-Mobius is surprisingly interesting compared with his comics-self.

-*Ducks and hides from the Loki fans*

-He’s clearly working towards something with Loki maybe beyond the whole stopping someone who’s clearly not just your common garden Tom Hiddleston!Loki thing

-What with the interesting mix of de-radicalization techniques and interrogation techniques that probably aren’t completely copacetic under the Geneva Convention, anyway.

-He’s not a Loki fanboy in the comics, but after having to sit through MCU!Wanda, I’m just bracing myself here for the changes. It’s not like Mobius is much of a character in the comics, anyway.

-Like, his morality is of the TVA, but his priorities in keeping Loki alive and un-reset go a bit beyond what his comics self would, probably.

-Anyway, Owen Wilson remains as charismatic as ever and is doing a great job as him, so I like him right now, but jury’s definitely still out on his trajectory.

-So, the TVA.

-Despite the whole fan theory mess with WandaVision, I’m not unconvinced the Time Keepers aren’t secretly the Time-Twisters or something. The organization is more or less like this in the comics, but the emphasis on “Sacred Timeline” is. . .hmph.

-They monitor the multiverse in the comics. They’re not trying to avert its creation, and the Time-Twisters destroy realities as their schtick.

-Also, the multi-verse is coming, so I’m assuming that there’s going to be a twist that acts as an impetus for Loki plus Mobius and friends to blow the organization wide open and cause the multiverse (Probably re-forming the organization and giving Mobius the same surprise promotion as the comics, along with an excuse to bring Gugu Mbatha-Raw back).

-*chanting intensifies* mutants mutants mutants

-They’re gonna fuck up Magneto so bad lmao

Ending Conclusions

-. . .The Big Bad of this phase is absolutely either Mephisto or Kang, right?

-I don’t see how they do Secret Invasion at this point as a feasible Big Bad without a lot of changes, Deviants were Thanos, basically, Doctor Doom can’t happen without the Fantastic Four, and anything directly tied to the mutants is out until they’re brought in.

-Think a decent dark horse candidate for the Phase 4 is also Scarlet Witch/Chthon since she’s confirmed to be reading the Darkhold--which is pretty much No. 1 on the list of Stupid Shit To Never Ever Do In Marvel Comics--upholding the fine comics tradition of Wanda being manipulated by someone evil into doing world-breaking shit.

-I can’t wait for them to straightwash Wiccan and for me to die inside, unrelated news

-It’s episode 1, so there’s a lotta ballgame left, but this is now the second show to bait the MCU Devil, which I honestly want to see if only so I can watch the world burn over it.

-Then again, they might simplify things and just make the being behind the Darkhold Mephisto instead of Chthon, which would. . .track with some things mentioned by the WandaVision showrunners about removing important scenes because stop listening to fans theorize online, dammit. It’s the Hamlet written by monkeys hypothesis played out.

-Ahem.

-Anyway. The music was nice, the actors did a great job, production value looked good, and while this episode was 95% info-dump, they made it pretty digestible.

-Also, the ‘70s-style matte painting used for one scene instead of CGI was a nice surprise and the animation was delightful.

Recommendations:

-If you’re a Loki fan convinced the MCU hasn’t done right by him since Dark World and think Taika Waititi destroyed his character, this show is probably not going to make you especially happy.

-*Checks Tumblr tags again*

-*Winces* I’m so sorry, guys.

-If you’re someone like me, who’s not the biggest MCU fan but still loves the characters and wants to see what ditch this drives into, I think the show is promising.

-If you’re an MCU casual, ditto, but without the ditch part.

-Overall: 8/10 blue-teethed French kids

[aion-rsa]

Marvel’s Loki Episode 2: MCU Easter Eggs and Reference Guide

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

This article contains major spoilers for Marvel’s Loki episode 2, potentially future episodes, and the wider MCU.

Marvel’s Loki episode 2, “The Variant,” wastes absolutely no time. And like some of the best Marvel TV efforts, the Easter eggs and references are numerous, but not all of them are obvious. In fact, a lot of them don’t even necessarily pertain to the MCU! Loki is having fun with genre, TV formulas, and the very notions of time travel itself, so looking to the pages of Marvel Comics isn’t quite enough.

Here’s everything we’ve found so far, and if you spot anything we missed, be sure to let us know!

The Renaissance Fair

The Renaissance Fair takes place on April 12, 1985…in Oshkosh, WI. Why Oshkosh? It could very well be because that’s the place where legendary Marvel writer/editor Mark Gruenwald, the man who is the basis for Agent Mobius, was born! 

Now, anyone have any ideas why that date might be significant…other than it being the opening date of Return of the Living Dead?

The Renaissance Fair setting of the opening feels like a nod to early Thor and Loki comics, where Stan Lee’s overblown faux-Shakespearean dialogue felt like the kind of fun put-on you would find at a RenFaire.

The poor Ren Faire actress who is sad to see the TVA in their futuristic garb is played by Kate Berlant. Like fellow Loki actor Eugene Cordero, she comes from a comedy background and you may have seen (or heard) her in Search Party, The Good Place, and BoJack Horseman.

Holding Out for a Hero

Bonnie Tyler’s “Holding Out for a Hero” plays during the pre-credits Renaissance Fair sequence. This song is EVERYWHERE at the moment, but its connection to the MCU is at least twofold. There’s this incredible Thor: Ragnarok fan edit that went viral back in 2018, and then there’s the fact that the ’80s banger was originally recorded for the Footloose soundtrack …aka Star-Lord’s favorite film.

Meanwhile…at TVA HQ…

The TVA’s commitment to outmoded technology is on full display on Mobius’ desk next to that old computer terminal, with an actual hourglass instead of a clock.

The jacket that says VARIANT is like the PRISONER prominently displayed on the back of orange jumpsuits.

In the TVA Nexus Event Report we learn that TVA Agents are called Minutemen. Because of course they are.

There’s a hilariously dystopian poster in the TVA commissary that says “the timeline won’t wait for seconds,” exhorting people not to linger on their lunch breaks.

Since we found out last week that Casey doesn’t know what a fish is, we can reasonably conclude that Agent Mobius isn’t eating a Caesar salad, the dressing of which is made with anchovies. 

Running off the Josta gag that started in episode 1 (and continues here), where the TVA consumes discontinued food items as well, we have a Boku juice box. Boku was on shelves from about 1990-2003, and was like a juice box for grownups.

Miss Minutes

Even the computer terminals at the TVA display readouts in Miss Minutes’ accent. On Loki’s screen you can see “let’s see what ya know!”

Jet Skis, the Universe, and Everything

Loki appears to be reading something called Wake magazine, volume 26, #4. Like many things in the TVA, this appears to be a vintage magazine rather than one being published currently. Probably at the height of the jet ski craze of the early ’90s. We’re reasonably sure this is a fake magazine, but haven’t been able to verify it. Yet.

LOKI VARIANTS 

For the sake of keeping all of these straight, we’re just cataloging the Loki variant numbers for you. Here they are…

“Our” Loki  = L6792

“Athlete” Loki = L1247 (you know he cheats…and this image seems to be from a familiar photo)

“Horny” Loki (sorry) = L6795

“Party” Loki = L8914

“Warrior” Loki = L7803

The Lady Loki/Sylvie variant appears to be L1130. More on her down below!

If you’ve got any ideas about the significance of these numbers, please let us know!

Loki explaining the differences between particular magical abilities feels very much like anyone who has ever played D&D with someone who REALLY knows their stuff and/or is a bit of a “rules lawyer.”

Loki tells the TVA hunters that “where there are wolf’s ears, wolf’s teeth are near.” At first glance, this is just a charming Loki-ism in which he celebrates how cool and dangerous his Variant is. It also, however, is an homage to the “real” Loki of Norse mythology. That Loki has some latent lupine characteristics to the point that he fathered the giant wolf, Fenrir.

The FDR High School pen is…probably nothing. The school was established in Brooklyn in 1965, so there’s obviously no chance Steve Rogers went there. We’re trying to figure out if a Loki or Marvel-related creator went to high school there, but so far…no luck.

Also, is it us, or does the Timekeeper’s armor in Ravonna’s office look a LOT like a Dr. Doom mask?

The Destruction of Asgard

Just a few notes from the “destruction of Asgard” paperwork…

File IPB-ASG-001

Note the “Revengers” codename mentioned from Thor: Ragnarok

Asgard’s population was 9,719…not really an Easter egg, just kind of a cool and useless fact.

Destruction of Asgard was a “class  7 apocalypse” yet the hurricane later in the episode was a “class 10.” More on this in a minute…

Pompeii and Other Apocalypses

The destruction of Pompeii not only is a horrific historical moment, it’s also the basis for one of the greatest concert films of all time, the moody and bizarre Pink Floyd: Live at Pompeii.

Almost all of the apocalypses Loki and Mobius find between 2047-2051 are climate related. The climate disaster of 2048, extinction of the swallow in 2050, the tsunami of 2051…and of course the fact that the hurricane hitting Alabama in 2050 is a “Category 8.” At the moment, in our real/modern world, hurricane classifications only go up to “5” and 5s are becoming more common. Oh no.

Roxxcart

Originally created by Steve Engleheart and Sal Buscema in a 1974 issue of Captain America, Roxxon (loosely based on Exxon – weird how some folks knew they were evil in the ‘70s) eventually moved beyond its petrochemical roots and became a stand in for all evil corporations in general, which is why they map so neatly onto Amazon here. Roxxon has regularly come into conflict with Thor, most recently when they were headed by actual minotaur Daario Agger in the Thor: God of Thunder–War of the Realms run by Jason Aaron and several incredible artists.

Hunter B-15 notes that the events in Roxxcart represent a “Class 10 apocalypse.” It’s interesting that the TVA recognizes multiple severities of apocalypses as the apocalypse is supposed to be a singular event: the end of the world. If the Roxxcart hurricane is a “Class 10” then the TVA’s classification system must recognize Class 1 as the most severe, since this is relatively mild as apocalypses go. It’s also worth noting that similar classification systems for tornadoes and hurricanes both go up to only “Category 5”.

Haven Hills, AL appears to be fictional, but there is a Haven Hills Farms near Mobile, AL, and Mobile certainly would be vulnerable to the kind of storm surge damage that we seem to be seeing in this episode.

Lady Loki…or Sylvie?

A Lady Loki isn’t new or all that surprising, as there is precedent for Loki taking on a woman’s form for at least the last 15 years of comics. But it also…might not be Lady Loki after all.

Sylvie Lushton was a regular human living in Broxton, Oklahoma, until one day shortly after Asgard reappeared over her hometown (following Ragnarok). Long story short, Loki gave her powers just to mess with her.

It’s complicated, so we have much more on who our mysterious variant is here.

The Branching Timeline

These are the places mentioned as the timeline starts to branch. Something tells us we’re going to be visiting most of these places.

Vormir:  the location of the Soul Stone. We saw this teased in the early trailers, as well.

Asgard: This shouldn’t need any further explanation why this show might bring us there.

Jotunheim: the realm of the Frost Giants. Might we get an It’s A Wonderful Life style look at a life for Loki that might have been?

Hala: The Kree homeworld, a place that certainly won’t be getting any LESS significant to the MCU any time soon going forward!

Xandar: the homeworld/headquarters of the Nova Corps (of Guardians of the Galaxy fame). We’re probably due to eventually get more Nova stuff in the MCU down the line, so perhaps we’ll get a glimpse of that here.

Ego: Kurt Russell, cosmic deadbeat dad extraordinaire, from Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2.

Titan: The homeworld of the dreaded Thanos. uh-oh…

Miscellanous Time Fragments

Mobius refers to Loki as an “ice runt” during his “scared little boy, shivering in the cold” speech. It feels pretty rare that we get direct references to Loki’s frost giant roots in the MCU these days. Based on the Jotunheim reference above, there’s probably more coming, though…

The woman that Loki has to deal with in charge of the file room desk feels like a live-action Roz from Monsters Inc., which is a super fun touch.

The beginning of Loki and Sylvie’s face-off reminds us of the Kermit the Frog vs. Hooded Kermit the Frog meme, and that’s just a treat. 

Before they deploy to Alabama, Mobius hands Loki his trusty twin daggers…which are promptly confiscated again.

The locker room number where Mobius’ locker is #26. 2/6 as in Number 2 and Number 6 from The Prisoner?

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

Spot anything we missed? Let us know in the comments!

The post Marvel’s Loki Episode 2: MCU Easter Eggs and Reference Guide appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3gx4IUt