#an explanation that makes sense within the MCU that was presented to us

[gothlokid]

My take on the ending of Endgame (major spoilers ahead)

If the title isn't warning enough about spoilers, let me just make sure you people understand it: 🚨 THIS POST IS FULL OF SPOILERS! DON'T READ IT IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED THE MOVIE 🚨

Long post, so everything is under the cut :)

So, there are some things that have been bugging me for a couple of days now. And it's not the ending of the movie per se, because let me tell you one thing: I think that was the best ending they could've done, even despite my own expectations and personal preferences and opinions, and some flawed moments in the movie. What's bothering me is people's reaction to it, specially related to Steve's arc.

I feel like people who are complaining about what happens to Steve, either didn't understand a thing they explained about time traveling in the context of what they were doing or/and didn't understand Steve's path throughout the MCU at all.

Let's get one thing out of the way first, which I’ve been seeing a lot:

Steve going back to the past and staying with Peggy would be OOC.

I ask you, why would that be? 

Let’s go down memory lane.

In CA:TFA, it's clear how much he loves Peggy. The compass when he's on the battlefield looking for Red Skull is proof enough that she was his reason to fight, she was his reason to take down HYDRA and come back alive. He sacrifices himself trying to do so and she's the person who's grounding him in that moment. He makes a promise to her that he will come back to her, to have their dance, but then he doesn't. When he comes out of the ice, one of the very first things he thinks about is: "I had a date", because that’s still fresh in his memory. It wasn't 70 years ago, it was hours ago for him, and the realization that he lost his chance with Peggy is one of the first things to hit him, even before he realizes that he woke up in the future and what that would mean to him.

In CA:TWS, he makes sure to visit her and I'm assuming that he does that frequently or as much as he can, even with her old age and condition. He cares so much about her, even if it pains him to see what he lost all those years ago.

In A:AOU, he tells Tony that "the guy who wanted all that [family, stability -- a farm, a simpler life] went in the ice 75 years ago", and for Steve at that time, all of that wasn't what he had in mind when he was mostly concerned about keeping the world safe, fighting for what was right, and also taking care of the Avengers, his newfound family, his home.

Tony: "You all right?" Steve: "I'm home." (A:AOU)

Sam: "Where to, Cap?" Steve: "Home." (A:IW)

So at that time, it was in character for him to forget of what he had left behind and focus on the present and what he had at the moment, even if he was still on the look for Bucky.

In CA:CW, things change for Steve. He finds Bucky, he and Tony have a fallout, he lets go of his shield, he's not Captain America anymore, he doesn't want to be associated with the Avengers. And not less important to mention, there was Peggy's passing, which is him, once again, losing the love of his life, the one thing/person that connected him to his past. He gets Bucky back, of course, but only for a short while, having a mutual agreement that it’s better for Bucky to stay hidden and in the cyrostatis.

In A:IW, we find out that Steve has been roaming around the world, he’s left Bucky in Wakanda, he doesn't respond to anything nor anyone anymore. That’s until he comes back to fight alongside his former teammates against a greater threat - Thanos. The aftermath is that they end up losing everything, and Steve loses people he cares about – Sam and Bucky, once again.

In A:Endgame, after the snap Steve's lost, he's desolated and wants only one thing: to go after Thanos, and when they finally succeed, after they kill Thanos and they think they will move on with their lives, that’s not what happens. ”Some people move on, but not us”,  which is clear from the scene at the support group and with Natasha that he isn't just talking about what they lost because of the Titan.

He has never moved on from Peggy. The trailers were a big hint that Peggy would be an important piece of Steve's arc, not only because of the compass again (which he's kept after all those years!!!!!), but also because of her voice over speech. They've established throughout most of Steve's story line that Peggy is a huge part of him, she is literally the love of his life (his own words in the beginning of the movie), and he lost her and that was one of the first things he couldn't move on from.

So when he goes back to the 70's and sees her again, sees that she keeps a photograph of him on her desk (THE! DIRECTOR! OF! SHIELD! KEEPS HIS! PHOTO! ON HER! DESK! AND HE LITERALLY SEES HER AGAIN, THE PEGGY HE KNEW AND LOVED IN THE 40′S AFTER ALMOST 80 YEARS), and maybe that's when it clicks for him that he was also the love of her life. (Bare in mind that at that time, we don't know if Peggy has already found her husband or whatnot. In her own TV series, she deals with her loss for Steve, there's a hint of something between her and Sousa but we never got a chance to find out what would come out of that, so, we literally don't know what was going on with her at that time, and neither did Steve). With that, it's possible he sees there’s a chance that he could have back one thing, aka the most important thing he had lost all those years ago and couldn't at the time.

The Steve from A:Endgame is not the Steve from A:AOU. He has gone through a lot, has lost a lot, has reconsidered a lot, and when given the window of opportunity to live the life he didn't have the chance to, he took it. He goes back in time and stays with Peggy, even when everything and everyone was restored... No. I take it back, not “even when”, but BECAUSE EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE WAS RESTORED. There’s no major threat anymore, the people he cared the most (least Tony, whom he mourned and was there beside his family as an equal) are well and alive, the world and the universe are at peace or at least will be for some time now, so... what else is left for him? He had accomplished his mission, but he still decides he has one last thing to do to fulfill his own sense of correcting their doings. He chooses to go back in time to return the Stones so they can restore the alternative timelines they created from taking them from their original places. He’s doing the greater good again, he’s again doing the right thing for humanity and this time for the universe as well. It’s almost another sacrifice from him, because things could go wrong once again, but he’s doing it nonetheless.

So, in my opinion, after thinking about Steve's backstory and what he has gone through throughout the entire MCU, it was not OOC that when presented with the choice to stay with Peggy, he took it. Knowing the Steve we got to know in the past eight years, my hot take is that he probably left returning the Tesseract to the 70's as his last task, putting everything else in place before and assuring that everything was alright again first and only then, saving his own happy ending for last, as Steve Rogers would do.

This video from ScreenCrush sums up a little of what I said here, specially regarding the part where things shifted for Steve. It also starts on another subject that it’s the one bugging me a lot, but in this video they only theorizes what happens. They better explained it in another video, which I’ll like after I breakdown my thoughts.

Now, to this other thing...

I’ve seen lots of posts referring to how the timeline for the time travel is fucked up and my only take on this is that people didn’t understand the timeline and how the time traveling in this movie works.

So let’s try to break it down here. There are two explanations of how the events of the entire MCU would be affected by them time traveling and taking the Stones from their original places. Banner is the one to explain it first when Rhodey suggests going back in time to kill baby Thanos (the easiest way out, but intangible)

There's a lengthy article that explains better the time traveling arrangements in the movie very well, but here are the pertinent parts of it.

Banner says: "If you travel to the past, that past becomes your future and your former present becomes the past, which can't now be changed by your new future." The basic implication is that you can't change the past because you've existed in the future; no matter what you do, the end result is the same.

Then, it's the Ancient One who tells another interesting piece of information about what would happen if they took the Infinity Stones from their places in a specific timeline.

She explains: "The Infinity Stones create what you experience as the flow of time. Remove one of the stones and that flow splits." This suggests that, while the post-Decimation future the Avengers have come from will be there when they return, their actions in the past can impact the timeline to the point that new timelines are created (which, due to the lack of Stones, are much more fraught). While it's possible any change could do this, it's only explicitly stated that it occurs when an Infinity Stone is removed from the timeline, which Bruce proposes can be fixed if they "return each one to its own timeline at the moment it was taken so chronologically, in that reality, it never left."

Which basically means that "[...] the Avengers can't change their own timeline as it already happened, so going into the past doesn't affect their own reality. However, removing the Infinity Stones from an earlier point does, creating darker timelines. To correct this, the Infinity Stones need to be returned to their original place in the timeline after use."

Having these information provided by the characters in the movie, what I think happens with Steve is that, as I said before, he probably returned all five Stones to their original timeline, (however he managed to do that) and when returning the Tesseract to the 70's, by staying there (although rewatching a second time I have a hunch he traveled further back because the car that appears in the final scene in front of the house he and Peggy are in look too vintage, maybe from the 50′s but I’m not sure and maybe we’ll never know), he didn't correct the timeline in that point of the past, therefore causing that exact point to become an alternative timeline from the one in the MCU as we know it, one in which he and Peggy stayed together, and not the one where she later on would get married, or Steve would continue in the ice until 2012, and all the other events we know of. This also would explain what happens with the timeline where Loki leaves with the Tesseract, because when he escapes, the Tesseract is gone, and so that’s not the turn of events we know after the Battle of NY (and that's why that also leaves it open for whatever is going to happen in his Disney+ series). Same thing with the Thanos and Nebula who travel from the events of 2014 to 2023. They left their own timeline/reality, creating another timeline for those events and so, that Nebula and that Thanos that were killed, don't exist anymore, and also that's why present-day Nebula doesn't disappear, because she is not the same Nebula (it's not a BTTF situation, you see).

So, whatever happened with Steve and Peggy when he stays in the past, he didn't change anything in the present we know of. Those canon MCU events, Steve staying iced for 70 years, Peggy becoming the head of SHIELD, getting married and all the peculiarities of her personal life, Bucky being the Winter Soldier, Steve getting out of the ice and everything that happened after that in ALL OF THE MOVIES, THEY STILL EXIST AS THEY ALWAYS DID.

The Steve that appeared at Tony's house in 2023, is our Steve. An older Steve, yes, but a Steve that after having lived and experienced everything up to 2023, also lived in an alternative universe with an alternative Peggy, living an alternative life as his own future, and not his past or any of the other character’s past either.

There's this youtuber who talks about the character’s ending and he explains it basically the same way as I understood what happened. Steve's part starts at 9:00.

There’s also this IGN video where they try to explain it, almost as if making fun of the complex timeline, but it pretty much sums up everything I’ve talked about the time travel timeline here.

Here’s the other video from ScreenCrush I mentioned before. They gather their thoughts and theories (and the Russos Brother’s statement) and explain it better.

They are worth a watch and I hope this was worth the reading. I'm not saying you have to understand things the same way as I did, but as I was trying to make sense and find a logical explanation for those events, that's the best I came up with (and so did other people), and for me it makes total sense. It bugs and saddens me to see people saying that The Russos fucked up Steve's arc, that Steve was OOC, that they did Steve and Peggy and Bucky and whoever else dirty... when for me, it's clear to understand what happened. I might’ve gotten (some or all of these) things wrong? Probably, but I'm in peace with my understanding of the events, and therefore, able to appreciate the movie despite things that make it a little bit harder to understand.

I loved this movie beyond my own expectation. It means so much to me, being a fan for 7 years of this universe, to have this epic journey with an ending that was satisfactory in many ways. That's the only thing that matters to me.

I wish it was the same for others too.

[giveamadeuschohisownmovie]

My understanding of the MCU multiverse (based on Loki, Endgame, and some details from the comics):

1) Per Kang’s explanation, the multiverse is comprised of an infinite number of parallel universes, each one different from each other. This is why we have an Alligator Loki and a Loki who decided their main form would be female (Sylvie). These universes were separate from each other until some of them reached the 31st century, when the various Kangs developed technology that allowed them to travel the multiverse. 

2) Each universe’s timeline can have branches within them which are created by people’s free will. It’s the classic multiverse theory where for every decision we make, there exists an alternate timeline where we made a different choice. So, think of the universes as threads in this gigantic multiverse rope. A branching timeline is a piece of fiber that broke free from one of the main threads. 

3) To simplify points 1 and 2, parallel universes form the main threads in the multiverse rope. The threads are represented by the timelines of each universe. Branching timelines are technically alternate universes that emerged from one of the main universes. Sylvie and 2012 Loki are both branching timeline versions of their main universe counterparts. Obviously, 2012 Loki’s main universe counterpart is MCU Loki. Sylvie’s main universe counterpart remains to be seen, but could be extremely different from the one we’ve been following (maybe she’s a brunette and evil in the Sacred Timeline). 

4) Per Professor Hulk, traveling back in time does not change your future. Instead, it creates a branching timeline that doesn’t affect the main thread. I’d like to think of this as the timestream always wanting to move forward. Going back to the past is technically the time traveler moving forward in time since the only reason why they’re in the past to begin with is because of what they did in the present/future. 

5) Not all trips to the past create nexus events (moments when the timeline branches) and not all nexus events consists of traveling through time. For example, Wanda Maximoff is a walking nexus event due to her ability to change reality. Also, some actions are so insignificant that they wouldn’t create a branch, such as doing anything in an apocalyptic event since everything will be destroyed anyways. 

6) That being said, if the event deviates significantly from what is approved by Kang and the TVA, then the apocalyptic loophole is defeated. We saw this when Loki and Sylvie formed a romance, which went against the concept that Lokis are supposed to be alone. Also, you know...they’re technically both the same person, which would definitely fuck the timeline up. I’d like to think of the lakeside moment between Loki and Sylvie as the timeline glitching out since it couldn’t comprehend how this was happening, thus why this was considered a unique branching timeline. 

7) The TVA, created by Kang, exists outside the multiverse. It’s essentially the time police since they manage the timelines of all the universes in the multiverse. Because they are outside the multiverse, “time works differently” there. 

8) While we’re not sure why the TVA changed after Sylvie killed He Who Remains, there’s plenty of explanations that don’t necessarily involve time travel. Kang the Conqueror could’ve just conquered the TVA and mind-wiped Mobius and B-15. But how could he have done that so quickly? Well...time works differently in the TVA. What was just a few minutes for Loki could’ve been decades or centuries for Mobius and B-15. 

9) Because of the Kang Multiversal War, Kang decided that the best way to restore peace was to regulate the timeline. So what he did was he used Alioth to wipe out the timelines of the enemy Kangs. The surviving universes were reorganized into the “Sacred Timeline”. 

10) To explain the Sacred Timeline, think back to how the multiverse works. The multiverse is a rope in which the threads are the alternate universes that form it. The main timeline threads form the Sacred Timeline and are allowed to exist. The branching timelines that form from each thread are pruned by the TVA. For example, let’s say Sacred Timeline Sylvie grows up to be a supervillain, like a typical Loki. The Sylvie we follow in the show is a variant who decided to be a hero. That goes against the main thread, thus why the TVA got involved. 

11) The TVA didn’t get involved in the Avengers’ time heist since Kang wrote that it should happen. If that wasn’t the case, then the Avengers would’ve been pruned, thus wiping out FATWS, WandaVision, and Far From Home. So because of this, SOME time traveling is allowed, which makes sense since humanity was bound to discover time travel at some point. However, the TVA has already mapped out all the possible trips through time that will ever be made. 

12) While the Avengers were supposed to collect the Infinity Stones, 2012 Loki was not supposed to take the Tesseract. What I think happened here was that Kang wrote that the Avengers were going to fuck up and lose the Tesseract. This doesn’t have to be Loki stealing the Tesseract, it could’ve been something like a SHIELD agent grabbing the Tesseract or Endgame Tony Stark getting noticed and stopped by 2012 Alexander Pierce. So the Avengers still followed the path approved for them in the Sacred Timeline, whereas Loki messed up. Just think about it; 2012 Loki with the Tesseract and roaming free, there’s so much he could’ve done to fuck things up. 

13) The only plot point I’m still on the fence about is Steve Rogers in the past. I truly don’t think Old Man Steve was in the main timeline this whole time since that goes against the rules of time travel established by Hulk. Now, if Steve Rogers really did live with Peggy Carter in an alternate timeline, why didn’t the TVA show up and prune him? Well, this could just be another case of Kang making that a part of the Sacred Timeline in the same way the Avengers’ time heist was part of the Sacred Timeline. Because if it weren’t for Steve marrying Peggy in the past, we wouldn’t have Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Steve going back to the past was a necessary point for the Sacred Timeline to continue.

I feel like I’m missing something but I’ll leave this post at that. 

[lushthemagicdragon]

On Deadpool, WandaVision and Breaking the Fourth Wall

Hey pals, let’s talk about breaking the fourth wall / extrapolation of meta information in multiverse universes--say, the Marvel cinematic vs the xmen films vs the comics. Actually, let’s talk specifically about the Marvel multiverse. 

I wrote you an essay, just go under the cut it’s shiny.

As a general rule, suspension of disbelief works better on paper than it does on video. Heroes was an excellent example of this problem. This was the first time TV show was made directly based on a comic book format, trying to emulate a comic book format. The ship sank when they tried to keep comic book pace, and to play by similar rules. Long story short, this is because the way our brains consume literature and comics is different from how we consume photographic media like movies or tv. Video, like photography, convinces the brain that it's depicting reality even when we logically know that it isn’t. Therefore, unless the rules of the video/TV world are well established as being different from our own, we apply to it our own real-world understandings of what is possible. We are able to follow the fantastic more willingly when we're imagining it (because we’re reading it) instead of seeing it with our senses. 

Breaking the fourth wall and/or being self-referential is extremely tricky on video media because you're forcing the audience's brain to acknowledge that this is fiction, which can cause some cognitive dissonance if the goal of your show/movie is to create second world immersion. Sitcoms are good at breaking the fourth wall because, with laugh tracks, live studio audiences, and a general lack of real-world consequences, our brains understand that it isn’t real. Generally, they’re not trying to fool us into believing that they’re real. Still, if Chandler Bing suddenly turned around and made eye contact with the camera, that would be weird. It’s not established in that particular sitcom world that they understand that they’re fictional. Fresh Prince on the other hand, did that all the time. 

But we’ll get back to Sitcoms, because WandaVision. As opposed to most sitcoms, most serious dramas and adventure-thrillers are trying to create a very different vibe. In order to function, you have to be fully engaged, and have to completely believe the second world you are currently in. Otherwise, the emotional experience falls short. Tonality must be consistent, whereas sitcoms can get away with having the odd emotional moment surrounded by a laugh track. 

Marvel is very weird when it comes to second worlds and believable experiences, because Marvel films, tv, and comics are all existing in the same multiverse but with wildly different tones. If you try to wrap your head around all of it as one body, it can give you a headache. Which is why I find it so interesting whenever they try to be meta. 

The MCU as we understand it is presented as a realistic second world. Yes, it's fun action adventure with magic and superheroes, but presented in a way that feels real, and rationalizes its reality. It explains with technobabble and sciencebabble everything that it's doing. It wants to feel real. There are a few examples of comedy in the MCU (AntMan, Guardians of the Galaxy, Thor Ragnorok), but their silliness can for the most part be explained away. With the latter two, they take place in space, with aliens, so our brains allow that as an explanation of wackiness outside our own reality. For Ant-Man, honestly I think it was a brilliant idea to make it a comedy because there was no way that film would have succeeded if they tried to make the audience take Ant-Man seriously on screen. I love Ant-Man, it’s a spectacularly made film. But I digress. Importantly, even though they’re funny and campy, they never lose their sense of realism, with emotional anchor points to keep them grounded.  When these characters are in an ensemble, they lose their high camp aesthetic and become part of the realism whole. 

Even when they say in the MCU, Oh look at this I am an action figure, I'm in comic books, it's presented as in-world realistic. These people are famous now, and they're real life superheroes, so obviously action figures and comic books are being produced about them. It all makes sense. Even the X-Men films, for as camp as they are, do this in their own realism bubble. I would argue the X-Men films actually do it better because you don't have to suspend as much disbelief to believe mutation as you do to believe in a super suit that shrinks people (I love you Small Rudd). 

Things get weird when the fourth wall is broken, and the multiverse is acknowledged, because the marvel cinematics have done an excellent job of creating stable second worlds. The Deadpool films, the prime example of fourth wall breaking in Marvel films/tv, are excellent because they go whole hog into breaking the fourth wall and acknowledging how ridiculous it all is. But it works for two reasons. 

1. Deadpool is the only person in the entire movie that acknowledges the fourth wall (I am pretty sure, it’s been a while since I’ve watched them but I am pretty sure). Because he alone is aware that he's a fictional character in a wider fictional universe, it's not weird when he references his actor being the green lantern or talks directly to the camera. It’s exactly what we expect from him. With Deadpool, we're in on the joke but no one else is. And that's funny. 

2. The tone of the Deadpool films is always funny and stupid. Even when it gets serious, that becomes the joke. There is no cognitive dissonance because it's consistent. See: Sitcom Logic. If the tone is light, breaking the fourth wall doesn’t jarr quite so much. 

3. Deadpool is never in the other films, and MOSTLY, the characters in Deadpool (beyond the odd brief cameo) aren't in the greater universe (I say mostly because of Colossus, but he was in one movie ages ago for like ten minutes it’s not the biggest deal). It's consistent, and it doesn't become confusing because it's contained in itself as a weird fourth wall bubble on the side of the greater universe. Anything that happens to characters in the Deadpool films will not carry over to the more serious timeline. 

There is one place in which I would say that the Deadpool films miss the mark, and make a mess of things. By making that one joke where young 90s xmen from the newest film are behind a door and shut it before he turns around, a wrench is thrown in. The weirdness of the Deadpool films suddenly is an issue because the question is asked: Where do the Deadpool films sit in the timeline? The answer is that the Deadpool films don't fit anywhere in the established XMen Cinematic Timeline, and the big mistake was having a group of characters from an xmen film on screen at the same time even as a gag. In this moment, the Deadpool films are very suddenly part of the greater universe, rather than a sidecar referencing what’s going on inside. By doing this, Deadpool is not the only character breaking the fourth wall. Now the physical world is breaking the fourth wall. And our brains will try to make sense where they cannot make sense.

But anyway for the most part, Deadpool does an excellent job of it by being a weird little fourth wall meta bubble on the fringe of existence. Wandavision though, that gets weird in a different but also very fun way.

The reason why the first 3/4ths of WandaVision work in terms of being meta-referential and also occasionally breaking the fourth wall is because 

1. genre and tone. It sets up from the beginning, this is a sitcom world, not gritty realism world. We get sitcom world, we know what to expect from sitcom world. We can laugh along with the laugh track when something odd or silly or referential happens, and accept it as truth, because a sitcom generally does not pretend to be reality. 

2. Whenever the fourth wall breaks in a way that doesn't make sense, it's intentional. Wanda reacts accordingly. Something goes weird, she fixes it. When something goes weird for someone other than Wanda (Say, the Vision), the integrity of this sitcom world is called into question in an intentional way that tracks with what is actually going on in the gritty-realism world (acknowledging that we’re in a bubble within a bubble). This camp sitcom world breaks the fourth wall within itself, not to us. Billy talking to the screen isn't talking to us, he's talking to the imagined viewer in-world. 

3. Most of the meta-references are either subtle enough to be Easter eggs (like the kick-ass reference) or exist solely as fun gaffs that have no consequences and are never acknowledged as being meta (the Halloween costumes). I say most, because there is one big meta-reference that I think was a mistake, and where it kind of starts to fall apart in my eyes. 

As much as I adore Evan Peters’ Pietro, as extremely happy as I was to see him on this show, this particular meta-reference was done in a way that breaks the second world illusion, because they pointed a big red sign at a meta reference and then tried to explain it without breaking into the multiverse. 

The thing about breaking the fourth wall and meta-referencing is that it has to be toungue in cheek to be sustainable. Our brains are accepting that this reference is for us, but to make it a serious part of the story requires an answer to the question: why? By explaining that actually, this fake Pietro was Ralph the whole time, a real person who exists in this gritty realism universe, the illusion of tongue in cheek is gone. Suddenly, there is a person who brings into question the entire structure of the second world. Because this second world does not have access to the multiverse (Into the Spiderverse is wholly its own thing), it doesn't make sense that this random guy who happened to be used to play Pietro looks exactly like Pietro from elsewhere in the multiverse. It stops being fun, and starts becoming confusing, and we start trying to find answers where there are none. 

IMO, two ways to solve that problem. 1. never explain it. If you never explain it, it's just a weird meta reference for us that also exists in Wanda's fake-world that is in itself accessing the multiverse (see: the costumes), without touching the realism world outside the bubble. 

2. What I'm now calling the Taika Waititi method. Give a nonsense explanation told with a straight face as a brush-off. Say, Wanda asks Agatha who this guy is, and she says something along the lines of, oh I don't know I just pulled some random Pietro out of the universe, I never met the guy I had to improvise. 

Anyway I still give WandaVision an 8/10 and an A for effort. Pulling off multiple tones and multiple second worlds simultaneously without even explaining it away with the multiverse is fucking hard, and they did a pretty good job all things considered. 

And if anyone is interested in wtf I'm talking about re: second worlds, I highly recommend Tolkien's essay On Fairy Stories which pretty much defines how fantastic fiction works.

[movie-magic]

Loki: Every MCU Easter Egg In Episode 1

Loki has officially begun on Disney+, and Tom Hiddleston comes bearing plenty of Marvel Easter eggs in the premiere episode. Here's what we found.

The premiere episode of Loki is burdened with glorious Marvel Easter eggs, from potential future villain teases to skulking Skrulls. Even before the considerable success enjoyed by WandaVision and Falcon & The Winter Soldier, MCU fans were eagerly anticipating Tom Hiddleston's return as the God of Mischief. Now blessed with his own Disney+ solo series, Loki has all of time and space to bother, and the premiere wastes little time throwing Hiddleston from the Avengers' frying pan into the TVA's fire.

After using the Tesseract to escape The Avengers in Avengers: Endgame, Loki is swiftly picked up by the Time Variance Authority - a seemingly omniscient organization overseeing the entirety of time and space. Evidently not ones to take prisoners, Loki's fate at the TVA looks grim, but Owen Wilson's Major Mobius intervenes, handing the silver-tongued variant a reprieve. In the opening episode, Mobius successfully digs to the root of Loki's dastardly ways, breaking him down to (presumably) build him back up, all with the aim of enlisting Loki's services as an ally to hunt down an especially vicious variant murdering the TVA's Minute Men.

Loki's premiere is predictably heavy with exposition, and relatively limited in scope, mostly taking place within the walls of TVA HQ. Nevertheless, Michael Waldron (creator) and Kate Herron (director) pepper the 50-minute installment with an array of references to the Marvel comics, MCU history callbacks, and hints of the multiverse madness to come. Here's every Easter egg we discovered in Loki's "Glorious Purpose."

The Avengers Intro Sequence:

Loki's introductory scene is somewhat of an Easter egg itself, retelling the famous Tesseract heist from Avengers: Endgame. Much of the footage here derives straight from the 2019 box office behemoth, meaning no other MCU stars filmed additional footage or recorded new dialogue especially for Loki. With that said, a few extra Tom Hiddleston moments are spliced into the existing footage to show events entirely from Loki's point of view. The villain's Steve Rogers "search and rescue" gag is zoomed-in, and there's a closer shot of Loki waving goodbye to Hulk in the elevator, as well as fresh reaction shots during the Stark scuffle in the lobby.

An Iron Man Callback:

After commandeering the Tesseract in New York, Loki finds himself falling from the sky above Mongolia's Gobi Desert, landing unceremoniously in the sand below, and this scene might trigger a sense of déjà vu for longtime MCU fans. In 2008's Iron Man, Tony Stark escapes capture by creating a rudimentary suit of hi-tech armor. Flying to safety, the genius-billionaire-playboy-philanthropist also lands roughly in a remote desert. There's a symbolic correlation in how Iron Man marked the beginning of the MCU, while Loki is now ushering in a whole new chapter, and both begin with their protagonists in matching predicaments. Both characters also crash while evading incarceration, though only Loki immediately finds himself in chains once again.

"Burdened With Glorious Purpose":

As a man who rarely shuts up, Loki has plenty of wry MCU catchphrases, and one of his most famous would be "I am burdened with glorious purpose" from The Avengers. Disney +'s Loki premiere leans heavily into the line's popularity, with Tom Hiddleston repeating the quote on several occasions throughout the episode, the phrase becoming less sinister with every utterance.

The TVA:

The addition of the TVA to MCU canon was confirmed ahead of time via Loki's trailer and, sure enough, the paradoxical pen-pushers play a prominent part in the premiere. Although their motivations and methods are somewhat altered from the source material (as well as their aesthetic, which now sits closer to The Umbrella Academy's Commission), the TVA hails directly from the Marvel comic books. They were introduced by a 1986 issue of Thor that featured several time-hopping agents, one of which picked a random Earthling up for jaywalking.

A Skrull At The TVA:

Given their propensity to shape-shift and assimilate the forms of other races, it's not surprising that a Skrull might be lurking around the TVA's front desk. One of the MCU's green aliens can be spotted in the background as Loki gets marched in, and though it's not clear why the Skrull is present, the distinct lack of guards would suggest they aren't a variant. A timely reminder that Secret Invasion is right around the corner.

The Time Twisters:

As you'd predict, Loki tries running away. With minimum effort, Hunter B-15 (played by Wunmi Mosaku) clicks a device, and Loki is pulled back to where he stood moments earlier, effectively making escape impossible. These time twisters appear to be standard issue at the TVA, and have a vaguely similar counterpart in the Marvel comics called the Retroactive Cannon. Far more lethal than Loki's little clickers, these devices would rewind a person completely until they were unwritten from history. Like The Algorithm in Tenet, but less confusing.

Life Model Decoys:

For someone who spent many, many years unaware he was actually a Frost Giant, Loki probably shouldn't be shocked that some people don't realize they're secretly robots. Heading through the TVA's airport scanner, Loki passes the test with flying colors, though he remains perplexed by the idea someone could be unknowingly cybernetic, Loki's line is a nod to Life Model Decoys, which have appeared in both the Marvel comics, and Agents of SHIELD. These lifelike androids can mimic mankind so perfectly, the LMD itself isn't always certain of the truth.

Secret Wars?:

Whether you've accidentally arrived late for work, or just escaped a group of costumed vigilantes by seizing a glowing blue cube from the beginning of time, being labeled as a variant is confusing stuff. Luckily, the TVA has put together a short animation to fill quantum criminals in on the basics. The helpful Miss Minutes finally provides an explanation of the MCU multiverse, revealing how, long ago, separate timelines fought an inter-dimensional war for supremacy that almost resulted in total annihilation. Since then, the TVA has strictly maintained one single reality - the Sacred Timeline *echoes*. The history lesson bears some similarity to 2015's Secret Wars comic event, in which conflicting universes came together in Battleworld (the setting of the original Secret Wars), and attempts were made to streamline Marvel's sandbox.

The Time-Keepers:

The TVA's infomercial also confirms the organization are led by three Time-Keepers, who oversee the combined reality and dictate the proper flow of history. This big-faced trio were first introduced in the late 1970s, created from the sole remaining survivor of the previous universe's destruction. The mysterious overlords performed much the same function in the comics as they do in Loki, and possessed virtually complete mastery over time.

Kree And Nova's Attack On Titan:

As the animated exposition rumbles on, Miss Minutes (voiced by Tara Strong) uses "starting an uprising" as an example of something the TVA might potentially frown upon. The corresponding image shows two armies clashing, with the blue folk on the left appearing to be Kree, and the force on the right possibly the Nova Corps. Based on the spiky ruins in the background, the battle is taking place on Thanos' home planet of Titan. In Guardians of the Galaxy, Ronan confirmed the Kree and Nova Corps were at war for 1000 years - was the TVA involved somehow?

Nexus Events:

This week's lesson from Miss Minutes explains how stepping off one's designated path can create a "Nexus event," and spiral out of control to spawn countless alternate timelines that trigger another war. This word has cropped up several times in the MCU, first as an internet facility in Oslo (Avengers: Age of Ultron), and then as an antidepressant drug during one of WandaVision's fake commercials. The latter was most likely a reference to the Nexus of All Realities from the Marvel comics, which is essentially a gateway between every possible timeline. The TVA's Nexus events could take their name from the very same source.

The Timeline Diagram:

Throughout Loki's Disney+ debut, the TVA repeatedly use diagrams of a single flowing timeline with branches shooting off to represent unwanted deviations. MCU fans might recognize this from Avengers: Endgame, where the Ancient One drew something extremely similar while explaining the consequences of time travel to Bruce Banner. Perhaps Ms. One has visited the TVA herself once or twice?

Devil In The Church:

MEPHISTO. There, we said it. When Mobius asks a young girl who committed time crimes in 16th century France and the child points to a stained glass window depicting the Devil, Loki knew exactly what it was doing. WandaVision dropped several hints that Marvel's own Satan would appear, all of which proved fruitless, and Loki seems to be heading down the same hellish vein. Alas, there could be a simpler explanation. Mobius claims to be chasing an alternate version of Loki, and it's highly likely the child has mistaken the God of Mischief's famous horned helmet for the demonic horns of Lucifer.

Ravonna Renslayer:

Though her name isn't mentioned in Loki's premiere, Gugu MBatha-Raw's TVA judge is actually Ravonna Renslayer, who made her debut in a 1965 Avengers issue. In the comics, Renslayer is a human from the far future, most often a villainous figure associated with Kang the Conqueror. She certainly isn't a legal official sat behind a desk. One would imagine Marvel Studios has something more interesting in store for Renslayer further down the line.

Explaining Endgame:

During his TVA interrogation, Loki quite rightly points out that it was not he who meddled with the timeline. T'was those pesky Avengers who penetrated the Quantum Realm and disrupted the natural course of events in the aftermath of the Battle of New York; Loki merely picked up the Tesseract that fell at his feet. Unfortunately, this excuse falls on deaf ears, as Gugu MBatha-Raw confirms the Avengers' ambitious time heist was entirely sanctioned by the Time-Keepers. This exchange more or less clears up every single timeline wrinkle in the MCU, including Steve Rogers' reunion with Peggy, and Gamora from the past staying in the present. It's not altering time that irks the TVA; it's altering time in a manner the Time-Keepers haven't permitted.

Loki's "Wooing":

After Owen Wilson saves Loki from being "reset," the pair sit down for a more friendly conversation, but when Loki warns Mobius that cooperation isn't an option, the TVA officer retorts with, "even when you're wooing someone powerful you intend to betray?" Loki has betrayed a fair few people during his time, and Mobius' accusation could easily apply to Odin or Thor. Most likely, however, Mobius is alluding to Thanos here - a powerful figure Loki tried buttering up with intent to usurp him once the universe was brought to its knees.

Josta:

While not strictly a Marvel reference, it's worth noting that Mobius is a big fan of an ice cold Josta. Viewers of a certain age might not recognize this soda brand, but Josta is a genuine Pepsi product that was available in the late 1990s before being discontinued. An early variety of energy drink, there's evidently a few perks to hunting down timeline criminals. In Mobius' case, this includes sugary contraband.

Loki's Greatest Hits:

In a twisted version of It's A Wonderful Life, Mobius tries to change Loki by examining his choices in the past, present and future. Unlike the jaunty 1946 holiday classic, Mobius has access to a handy hi-tech screen which displays Loki's "greatest hits." The footage begins with the God of Mischief's defeat and arrest in 2012's The Avengers - perhaps not an entry Loki himself would've picked for the highlight reel. The screen next switches to Phil Coulson's death (which Loki definitely would pick), before moving on to images of civilian deaths from the Battle of New York, the gala eyeball removal scene, and the dictator speech, all from The Avengers.

D.B. Cooper:

More an Easter egg from real-world history than Marvel lore, Loki reveals the truth about D.B. Cooper - it was Agatha Loki all along! In 1971, an as-yet-identified man boarded a Boeing 727, held the aircraft ransom for $200,000, then parachuted out with the cash. Mobius' dive into Loki's past reveals that, thanks to a lost bet with Thor, the God of Mischief descended from Asgard to pull the plane heist himself as some kind of stunt. From Loki's hairstyle matching the real D.B. Cooper artist's impression to the smattering of bank notes left behind, there's an impressive attention to detail in this scene.

Infinity Stones In The Desk:

The Infinity Stones... Thanos would give his own daughter just for one. Entire worlds brought to their knees by their power. Humans turned into Gods at the merest touch. Gary from the TVA's HR department using one as a paperweight. Threatening Casey with a fishy demise, Loki finally gets his hands back on the Tesseract, only to discover even Infinity Stones are useless within the TVA's jurisdiction. To Loki's immense surprise, Casey's desk draw is chock-full of discarded Infinity Stones, most either of the Time or Reality variety (no surprises there). The scene essentially confirms that the power of these fabled jewels has led to more than a few timeline variant incidents over the years, but perhaps also undermines the once-unstoppable power of the Infinity Stones. Well, the Infinity Saga is over.

A 3rd Millennium Kang Hint?:

In its final scene, the Loki premiere might just be hinting at the future villain of Ant-Man & The Wasp: Quantumania. The MCU will soon introduce Kang the Conqueror, a major comic book baddie played by Jonathan Majors, and "Glorious Purpose" could represent the first step toward his arrival. Called out to 19th century Oklahoma, TVA agents find a piece of technology hailing from the 3rd millennium. Though it might be a coincidence, Kang hails from the 31st century, and is known for using advanced tech in his dominion of the timeline. The mysterious hooded figure is more likely a Loki variant than Kang himself, but since Ant-Man & The Wasp: Quantumania and Loki both deal in temporal themes, it wouldn't be strange for the Kang foundations to be laid on Disney+.

- Screen Rant

Loki releases new episodes every Wednesday on Disney+.

[redpillkieranosborn]

Avengers End Game

Avengers End Game fits Red Pill thanks to their attempt at a time travel story, and personally that is the part that really annoys me about that movie. For the most part it is a solid movie however the movie contradicts the two main rules of time travel and has many inconsitoncies and contradiction within the movie. Starting off with the idea of going back and stealing the stones from the past, this would need to use multiverse theory since if it was one single timeline it would cause many issues since the stones they aqquired in the past would no longer be there creating problems for the present. If done through multiverse theory though when they steal the stones that timeline would split and make a new parallel universe that won’t effect the present time we are watching them try to save, which is exactly what happens so it is following multiverse theory. Later Hulk talks to The Sorceress Supreme and she tells him to return the stones quickly otherwise their timeline will be ruined and cause a paradox. This means they are apparently on a single timeline which doesn’t make sense due to them already stealing some stones and would of made a paradox already but this one can be overseen if they erturn the stones at the precise second they retreaved them from which is close to impossible but could still work. However they completely screw up the logic when Steve Rogers goes back in time to return all the stones to their location which is fine and is consitent with their previous warning from The Sorceress Supreme but then Cap completely ruins this by staying in the past. So there should be a paradox, all events we have watched should be ruined, the timeline as we know it should implode or instantly change to have the world most likely in ruin due to Cap no longer being a part of any of the MCU since he went back into the past. This means that they majorly contadicted their previous warning and the only other explanation is multiverse thoery which is also contradicted due to the fact he appears as an old man when if it was multiverse thoery he wouldn’t appear at all due to him creating a parallel universe when he decides to stay in the past. The movie would be fixed if Cap came back to the present day since they would of followed the warnings they were given by The Sorceress Supreme but this scene and one other completely ruins the MCU’s big pay off and makes no sense. The other moment happens when Loki escapes with the teseract and leaves to make a new universe where he is alive. This is going to be the new Loki series and although I am excited for it it ruins the MCU again since Loki is needed to stay in that timeline otherwise the film Ragnarok wouldn’t work or Dark World since Loki plays a major part in those movies. 

This time travel contradictions is my main problem End Game and honestly ruins the movie for me. I enjoyed watching it and it was funny but these contradictions left me with a sour taste in my mouth when I finished the movie. Spiderman and Antman and Doctor Strange are still the best movies by far and End Game is just okay as a movie and would be so much better if Marvel actually followed their rules they put down and payed a little more attention.

[sineala]

Chronology of Tony’s secret identity

One of the things that often comes up in discussions of 616 Tony Stark is his secret identity. Unlike the MCU, where Tony's secret identity lasts only until the end of the first Iron Man movie, or the Ultimate universe, where it's never secret at all, one of the key traits of 616 Tony for a number of years is the fact that he maintained a secret identity: Tony Stark the CEO and Avengers benefactor and his bodyguard the Avenger Iron Man, were presented to the world as two different people.

Now, if you're a fan of Tony in the comics, none of the above is new to you. But what isn't always obvious, especially if your primary point of familiarity with Tony is other universes, is that coming out as a superhero isn't a one-and-done thing. He doesn't start out by making a big public announcement: some people figure it out over the years, some people find out, some people are told. But until he tells the world, it's still a secret. There are Avengers teams even within the past 25 years where some people know who he is and some people don't.

So I thought that it would be useful to compile a list of who learns Tony is Iron Man, and when they learn it. The list isn't complete -- and I certainly welcome additions and corrections -- and is currently limited to Tony's friends, romantic interests, and selected teammates (rather than supervillains). Basically, I just wanted to limit it to characters we might care about for fannish purposes, because I often find myself wondering if Character X knows at Time Y that Tony is Iron Man. A lot of these aren't traditional reveals in the sense you're probably picturing, in which Tony takes off his helmet; several of them are just people saying that they've figured it out. But I think they still count.

This is the raw data, ordered by year of reveal; I will then go through it with explanations as appropriate:

RETCONS:

Joanna Nivena (Iron Man v1 #224 (1989); retconned into origin story)

ORIGINAL CONTINUITY:

1965

Happy Hogan (Tales of Suspense v1 #70)

1973

Thor (Avengers v1 #113) Pepper Potts (Iron Man v1 #65)

1977

Whitney Frost (Iron Man v1 #104)

1980

Bethany Cabe (Iron Man v1 #139)

1982

Steve Rogers (Avengers v1 #216) Tigra (Avengers v1 #216) Silver Surfer (Avengers v1 #216) Janet Van Dyne (Avengers v1 #224)

1983

James "Rhodey" Rhodes (Iron Man v1 #169)

1985

Clint Barton (Iron Man v1 #193) Bobbi Morse (Iron Man v1 #193)

1998

Carol Danvers (Iron Man v3 #7)

1999

Selected friends & Avengers, again (Captain America & Iron Man 1998 Annual)

2002

Rumiko Fujikawa, and also the entire world (Iron Man v3 #55)

2006

The entire world, again (Civil War: Front Line #1)

The first identity reveal by internal chronology is actually from 1989; IM v1 #224 introduces, in flashback, a woman named Joanna Nivena whom Tony was engaged to, and who actually encouraged him to be Iron Man, and then promptly left him when she figured out that was his true calling. She is a retcon, and as far as I know she's a retcon that canon hasn't done much of anything with -- I think this is her only appearance -- but technically she's the first.

Discounting the retcons, as you can probably guess, Happy Hogan is the first person to find out that Tony is Iron Man. It happens in a relatively early ToS issue, ToS #70 (1965), in the middle of the Titanium Man fight. And if you're looking for it, it is so completely subtle that you will probably miss it. I missed it twice. Happy thinks to himself, "I'm gettin' a hunch why Stark is never around when Iron Man's on the scene! It's nutty... but it must be the answer!" Seriously, that's as much as it gets spelled out, but Happy knows. Of course, then he gets amnesia for a bit, but the amnesia goes away in ToS #83 (1966) and he remembers again.

At this point you might think to yourself that probably this means Pepper will find out soon. Ha. Ha. No. Pepper does not find out soon. In fact, Thor technically finds out before Pepper does, though it happens in the same year, 1973. There's this whole Happy/Pepper/Tony dynamic where Pepper has a thing for Tony and Tony keeps trying to push Pepper toward Happy because Tony believes in his own imminent death. And to help this along, he behaves coldly to her as Iron Man, meaning that Pepper thinks Iron Man is terrible and Tony is so great. The identity reveal, in IM v1 #65, actually happens when Pepper and Happy are fighting and Pepper says something about how Iron Man is so awful and Happy tells her that Tony and Iron Man are the same person and then shows her the armor in its case.

And then there's Thor! The Thor thing seems like it should be easy, but it isn't. In Avengers v1 #113 (1973), Vision is injured, and they need an engineer (Tony) and a doctor (Don Blake) to help him, and so Tony and Thor kind of mutually tip their hand to each other about their identity; it's a really sweet reveal. It's also completely retconned, in the same year, in the same title, in a story by the exact same writer -- in Avengers #118, the Avengers/Defenders War ends with Doctor Strange explicitly mindwiping Tony and Thor's knowledge of each other's identities out of each others' minds. The really weird thing is that this retcon doesn't seem to have stuck; Tony refers to Thor already knowing his identity in IM #108 (1978), and Thor already knows in the Molecule Man incident. Comics, man, I don't even know.

A bunch of Tony's romantic interests find out in the remainder of the 1970s and early 1980s. I don't have an issue number, but I know Marianne Rodgers figures it out pretty early on in their relationship, on account of being a telepath. Whitney Frost finds out in 1977, Iron Man v1 #104, when she becomes seriously romantically involved with Tony. (They first kissed way back in Iron Man v1 #19 (1969)... but she didn't know he was Iron Man, then.) Bethany Cabe finds out -- or rather, reveals to Whitney Frost that she'd already figured it out -- in 1980, in Iron Man v1 #139. She doesn't tell Tony she knows until Iron Man v1 #152, in 1981 -- they're captured and she urges him to change into Iron Man. (So, yeah, this means that while Demon in a Bottle is happening and Bethany is helping Tony get sober, she most likely doesn't know he's Iron Man.)

And then there's Avengers v1 #216, which I am sure we all already know about. The Molecule Man strips Tony out of his armor, meaning that his identity is revealed to Thor (who already knew), the Silver Surfer (who doesn't really seem to care), Tigra (who is leaving the team, but this will be relevant in a bit anyway)... and of course, Steve Rogers. Hi, Steve.

This is where it becomes important that Tony's secret identity is still a secret. No one he's told tells anyone else. Even now that some of the Avengers know, he doesn't, say, rush out and tell the rest of the Avengers that he's really Iron Man. Instead, in Avengers v1 #224, he starts dating Jan, and he doesn't tell her he's Iron Man. Steve and Thor both encourage him to tell her, and he does, at which point she breaks up with him because she doesn't want to date another teammate so soon after leaving Hank.

Then the second drinking arc happens, which is when we get a couple more identity reveals -- Rhodey and Clint, specifically. Rhodey finds out when Tony has started drinking again. Tony reveals his identity to Rhodey in IM v1 #179 (1983), and then he passes out in the armor and Rhodey puts it on and becomes Iron Man and goes off to fight the villain of the issue. After Tony eventually sobers up, he and Rhodey and the Erwins make their way to the West Coast. When Rhodey joins the brand-new WCA, Tigra is confused because she knew Tony was Iron Man and this guy isn't Tony, but it's all sorted out eventually. (Similarly, some of Tony's villains are confused when they run into Rhodey as Iron Man -- the Mandarin says he'd suspected Iron Man was Tony but now obviously he must have been wrong.) Anyway, Tony outs himself to Clint and Bobbi in Iron Man v1 #193 (1985); he suits up in his old armor to go talk to Clint, and when Clint doesn't trust him, unmasks himself as Tony Stark. And when Tony becomes Iron Man again, he eventually joins the WCA and stays in California.

After this... well, okay, after this is where my reading gets patchy, honestly.  Armor Wars happens, and Tony comes up with a fake identity for Iron Man and then fakes Iron Man's death at the end of it -- I think this was to fool SHIELD, but I know that Steve et al. still know who Tony is. I don't think there are a whole lot of big reveals, but I get the sense that Tony's identity eventually becomes basically an open secret in the superhero community. There's a panel somewhere from the 80s or early 90s where Natasha is thinking that they all know already and Tony should just tell them. Note that the general public still doesn't know; this is only among Tony's fellow heroes.

The latest individual reveal I know of is after volume 3 starts, when Tony reveals his identity to Carol in Iron Man v3 #7 (1998). It's the middle of the Live Kree Or Die arc, in which Carol has been kicked off the Avengers for her drinking problem. Tony shows up at her door as Iron Man and then decides that he can relate to her better in this case as Tony Stark, alcoholic. It's clearly new information to her.

And then there's the Captain America & Iron Man 1998 Annual, which actually came out in 1999, apparently. Tony cybernetically fights a villain named Mentallo. In the course of the fight, Mentallo learns Tony's secret identity, but when Tony wins he gets the chance to erase it from his mind, which he does. He then realizes he can erase it from everyone's minds. He's thinking of all the villains who have found out over the years -- he names Spymaster, The Controller, Molecule Man, and Machinesmith, and even I can add a few more to that list. (There's Kraken, at least, and the Mandarin definitely suspected.) So Tony wipes everyone's minds, including his friends'. But via the magic of Comic Science, if he retells them right away it will be like they never forgot. So he calls a meeting of a bunch of Avengers (Vision, Thor, Jan, Steve, Hank, Wanda, Simon -- and later Happy and Pepper) and tells them his identity again, and everyone takes it really well, except for Steve, who gets mad about having his mind wiped, which is the plot of the book. He says he's going to tell a few more people who "deserve the same courtesy" and mentions wanting to find Clint. I assume he retells most of the superhero community (or at least his friends), but this isn't explicitly stated.

And in 2002, in Iron Man v3 #55, Tony unmasks to save a puppy, and the entire world finds out he's Iron Man. (This includes Rumiko, who he's dating at the time.) He continues to have a public identity for the remainder of v3, but during everything that happens during Disassembled, he manages to successfully hide his identity once again and get the world as a whole believing that Tony and Iron Man are two different people.

Even during Disassembled, it's clear that the superhero community still knows who he is -- in Avengers Finale (2005), he assembles a bunch of familiar Avengers in the ruins of the mansion (he's in armor but unmasked -- which, y'know, that's a dead giveaway there) and tells them, "I was able to put the genie back in the bottle as far as my secret identity is concerned. Most people believe that Tony Stark and Iron Man are now two completely different people. I would never ask any of you to outright lie for me, but if it comes up -- if you could at least not say anything to contradict me. I would appreciate it."

So New Avengers kicks off and the team moves into the tower and so on and so forth and Tony keeps his superhero identity secret from the public until... 2006. Nope, it doesn't take long at all. Civil War kicks off and Tony unmasks at a press conference in Civil War: Front Line #1 so that he can, essentially, show he's not a hypocrite for supporting Registration. He pulls his helmet off and says, "Hello, my name is Tony Stark, and I am an alcoholic. And now it's time to come clean."

And that's the one that stuck. So after 2006, everyone knows Tony Stark is Iron Man. (Fun fact: after the brain deletion, Tony's not going to remember that he did this, so he ought to wake up still thinking he has a secret identity. I don't think canon has ever explored this fact.)

So there you have it: my best attempt at putting together a chronology of Tony's identity issues.

[stanning-seb]

okay okay okay so in 202something thanos destroys the stones and from that point on they are null and void right so because they time traveled they were able to use them again to bring everyone back but then steve goes back in time to but them back but at that point in the time line thanos had been snapped away so there is no need for the stones to be brought together to bring everyone back & therefore put back or even destroyed so do the infinity stones exist at the time of far from home????

Ahh yayy we haven’t done this in a while! Also, how did you know that I literally just re-watched Endgame tonight so everything would be super fresh in my mind!? Alrighty, I’m going to try to talk myself through this to see if I even make sense…

So…when Thanos destroys the stones initially it’s still the year 2018 at that point; basically when the Avengers visit him in the Garden it’s only been a couple of days since “the snap”. This is when Thanos says that he used the stones to destroy the stones. Fast forward a little while and we get a crazy explanation from Bruce about the rules of time travel and basically everything we learned about time travel from Back to the Future is bullshit. From this explanation as well as his conversation with the Ancient One later on, we pretty much are told that going back in time isn’t going to change the past or future but will rather create a time rift of sorts and open an alternate timeline (at least that’s what I kind of make of it??).

This would explain the idea of how the Avengers are able to go back in time to retrieve the stones before Thanos does without actually affecting the result of “the snap”.  This also would be true for the events of Tony sacrificing himself  and Steve thereafter returning them back to where they came from to close the rift that they had changed. It’s not that the stones don’t exist anymore because the past version of Thanos (2014) was snapped away in their present (2023) or that “the snap” never happened because it was undone; it’s just that these events as well as the stones now exist in multiple timelines. So by Steve eventually returning all of the stones back to where they came from, it’s not changing the fact that they defeated Thanos but it is ensuring that he stays defeated in this said timeline. So all in all, in my own opinion at least, I do think that the stones still exist during the time of Far From Home but possibly not in the timeline that Peter is currently residing. I really hope that we are going to learn more about the Multiverse and it’s capabilities within the MCU as the Phase’s continue on that will give us a better explanation of this! We had a bit of a tease of it in FFH so hopefully we get a much more in depth look soon!

Honestly, I feel the longer that I explained this the more confusing I made it sound! I hope I gave an answer to what you were looking for!!

[thenightling]

MCU and theoretical physics

I would have left this be if not for the fact that Avengers: Endgame went out of its way to to belittle and degrade the version of time travel used in Back to the Future.  

The science in Back to the future is not perfect. At most it’s speculative but the same came be said of the MCU.

First, allow me to begin with my credentials here.  I have studied theoretical physics with the Stratford Career Institute.  And I have read a Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking.   I am a long time fan of science fiction and I am well versed with Multiverse / Parallel Time speculative fictions.

The MCU is a multiverse.   Now according to The “Free Lunch” and “Bootstrap Paradox” speculation if you alter the past then you create an alternate continuity of events.  In Back to the Future 2 this is how Marty ends up in the timeline where Biff has become a Trump-like overlord.    Avengers: Endgame attempts to debunk this version of Time Travel by claiming you will remain in the continuity in which the previous versions of the events still played out the way you originally had them.  This, however, is the big flaw in the MCU’s Time travel logic.  According to Hawking’s theorizing about time-space, if you were to change the past, you wild then find yourself in the timeline where that change took place.  There is, then, no real going home.  Once you create that new divergent timeline you have essentially entered an alternate universe created by that alternative version of the events.  The only way to go back to your own timeline or one like it would be to undo the change or undo it as much as possible but even then there is likely to be some difference.

As you would likely be the only you in that newly divergent timeline, it seems plausible that you would gradually forget the timeline in which things had been different because you will gradually be assimilated, with all matter and events, into that divergent timeline.

  Endgame is right that something like Loki escaping would create a divergent timeline- an alternate universe. The very idea of multiverse comes from the idea that every possible outcome of an event has an alternate universe to accommodate that possibility.  However it is not at all likely that you would remain in the original continuity.  Altering the events would thrust you into that divergent timeline that you have just created, possibly forever. It would be difficult to impossible to return to your original timeline unless you learn to traverse the multiverse.

In other words, Endgame is wrong in its judgement of Back to the Future because you are likely to find yourself in the “Biff timeline” rather than the unBiff version.

No show or film dealing with Time Travel should try to discredit another work of fiction in regard to time travel or multiverse as both are still speculative and in the realm of theoretical physics. However all we know about theoretical physics, and the minds of those like Stephen Hawking did not agree with the convenience of Endgame’s “Oh, our version of the timeline is still easily accessible to us even after we change things.” 

Other pre-Disney Marvel entities even contradict this with how Cable was handled in the X-men animated series of the 90s, which depicted characters from certain timelines actually vanishing once their version of the future was nullified.  In other words, in that version of Marvel, Nebula would have vanished once she killed her younger self instead of carrying on as she was from the continuity where she hadn’t died.  She would have been absorbed into the universe / continuity where she had died, and thus cease to be.

Disney’s Gargoyles had an interesting depiction of time travel (though magick based) in which all alterations to the past ultimately just lead to the present as we currently know it to be.  You’re just affirming the timeline you are already within.  Or, hypothetically, the way you remember it because you, yourself, have been absorbed into the divergent timeline.   Another problem is they want to have their cake and eat it too.  Loki escapes so that’s a new Alternate Universe (AU) / Alternate timeline yet Cap goes back and he’s still in his original timeline so that they can see him as an old man- contradicting their own earlier statements about time travel and the multiverse.

Another example of the wanting to have their cake and eating it too comes from Steve Rogers.  First the Russos said Peggy’s original husband and children “still exist but in another timeline” ignoring that we saw them in the main timeline so it makes no sense that elderly Cap (who stayed with her) would be able to meet up with the others in the main continuity (based on their own internal logic about alternate universes not effecting the main continuity’s present timeline).   Not to mention in the comics he wouldn’t have aged anyway as the Super Soldier serum slows down or even stops aging but that’s besides the point... Now the writers come along and claim Cap was the husband and father of the children all along, also implying that his interacting with the past somehow did not create a deviated timeline but maintained the original continuity (Much like the time travel in Disney’s Gargoyles) but both of these explanations contradict the established mythos on how MCU time travel works.  

What this ultimately amounts to is I sincerely hope people didn’t fall for the ploy that MCU tried to use in discrediting Back to the Future to make its own shaky use of theoretical physics seem more reasonable when in reality it’s actually weaker than the version used IN Back to the Future.

End of speculative science rant.    

[moogsthewriter]

Thoughts on Avengers: End Game

Put below a cut for spoilers, but the spoiler-free tl;dr is that I’m still not entirely sure how I feel about it because there’s things I liked, things I don’t like, and things I’m not sure if I should accept.

Let’s be blunt: Pulling off Endgame in a way that satisfies everyone, makes logical sense using reality-bending stones, and ties up 10+ years of movies was pretty much impossible. Obviously there’s a lot of debate, and I’m probably not adding anything new to the discourse, but I keep losing sleep and/or having weird dreams, so I clearly need to get it off my chest so to speak to try and ease my mind. So I’ll just touch on a few key topics:

The Timeline: This I know is getting a lot of hot debate, and it’s actually caused my husband and I to raise our voices at each other over it (which is honestly not surprising – the biggest conflict in our marriage thus far has been that he’s pro-Cap and I’m pro-Iron Man, lol). The most helpful explanation to me has been this reddit thread that essentially compares the timeline to an operating system and that essentially, by Cap returning the stones to their original times, it “rebooted” the main timeline from those points on (though the events still happened for the future characters because of the whole “the past becomes your future which can’t change your past” thing). This – in theory – helps explain why it doesn’t blow up the GOTG timeline to have past!Thanos + army come and be killed in 2023 or whatever year it was. I admit, I’m still a bit skeptical about this, primarily because of the Old Cap ending. The reset works for everyone except him in that case, and I know that Peggy Carter was a badass and could keep a lot of secrets, but I just don’t see it being possible for Steve to hide out and not impact the timeline… I also think it will be telling to see what happens in GOTG 3, because clearly Peter was searching for Gamora, and if this “system reboot” theory holds true, then she should not appear at all in that film, other than in recordings/flashbacks/etc. (unless they try and do something with the Soul Stone, which is a whole other kettle of fish). So I think the timeline can sort of work logically, but that leads into two other key points…

Steve’s Ending: Honestly, this was the worst note for me to end on and is the biggest source of contention between me and my husband on our perspectives of this film. We both agree that it’s totally in character for MCU!Steve to do something like this – husband thinks it’s good to let Steve have the happy ending he wants after everything, but I view it as yet another instance of Steve literally NEVER practicing what he preaches. To me, “getting a life” and having a happy ending that also shows ACTUAL character growth would be Steve finally accepting that he is in the future and it is time for him to move on AND THAT HE DOESN’T NEED ROMANCE TO BE HAPPY. But again… having such an ending would be antithetical to everything they’ve done with Cap since Winter Soldier, let’s be honest, so as much as I hated it (and think it throws the timeline thing into question, as mentioned above), I do think it fits the character.

Morgan Stark: As much as I loved seeing more of dad!Tony, there wasn’t much point to have Morgan as a character in the film unless it was setting it up for Tony to have to decide between the reality with his daughter and the reality with his spiderson everyone else, which is an excellent point that I know others have raised all over social media. HOWEVER, I also think that this isn’t so much a desire for a plot point for Tony as it is to be a... IDK, a consolation prize, I guess, for Pepper – yes, she loses Tony, but she gets their daughter, whereas if they reset the timeline like we all thought they would, she probably wouldn’t have gotten either (more on that in a sec). And THAT idea stems from the general problem of…

The female character story lines: It is very clear to me that the writers really had no idea what to do with the story arcs for the female characters in this film. For a character like Captain Marvel, it kind of makes sense, since apparently the script was finalized a few years ago (aka before the CM movie came out). But they’ve NEVER known what to do with Natasha’s arc, clearly, or with Pepper, either (at least not since the early Iron Man films, if even then), and so to me, the Morgan Stark thing ties more broadly into that. Basically, a bunch of dudes thinking through this problem with apparently little/no input from women (if the writing credits are accurate).

Natasha’s ending: Speaking of Natasha’s arc, this is the character death that is honestly bothering me the most out of the entire film. As much as I love Jeremy Renner and the Hawkeye of the comics, there has never been much compelling about his character (mostly because the writers have never done anything to make him to be compelling, let’s be real) – everything I (and I think a lot of the fandom) love about MCU!Clint is directly tied to his relationship to Natasha. I get that they were trying to not screw him over completely and do… something with him (very clearly not much, because he doesn’t really do much after Vormir????), but if he had been able to succeed in the sacrifice, that actually would’ve given both a point to his weird arc in this film AND would have set up even greater conflict/character development for Nat in a future film. Plus, it was hard to actually mourn Nat’s death because other than those REALLY SHORT scenes at the lake, it’s like it never happened or something. (I do wonder if there’s a bit more of that kind of content in the deleted scenes, but that would also speak to decisions of treatment of women in this film.)

Thor’s arc: There’s a LOT I could say about this, but I’ll keep it short-ish because this is already getting ridiculously long. Overall, I think it’s actually an interesting direction for Thor to go as a character (I can see where some think it’s backsliding from Ragnarok but I don’t necessarily think so… I can go more into that if people want), but it was really difficult to see his PTSD get treated so lightly. This is again where it makes sense for the characters involved – most of his screentime was with Rocket, who is probably the literal worst at dealing with past traumas in a positive way within the MCU, and other than Iron Man 3 and parts of Winter Soldier, no MCU film has really even touched the issue of PTSD well, especially in these later phases – so it makes sense on one level that it was the way it was, but… yeah, still. (Trauma is also why I really didn’t like Tony’s interaction with Howard, but I’m not even going to touch that because then we’ll be here forever.) But yeah, that’s another thing that will be interesting to see if they explore in GOTG 3.

Tony’s arc: This was obviously one of the hardest things for me to deal with, as a Tony fan, but I also was absolutely convinced he was going to die once Stephen traded the time stone to save Tony’s life in Infinity War, so to me it was a matter of figuring out how he was going to die. And honestly? I actually thought it was one of the better ways for Tony to go out. Why do I say that? Two things. One – the “I am Iron Man” line was perfect, even with – honestly, perhaps because of – its raspy croakiness. To me, that summed up Tony perfectly – he is the man in control of and behind the design the suit and thus the true hero (because the suit HE DESIGNED was able to work out getting the stones/gauntlet off Thanos’ hand), and even when he’s at the very end of his rope, he never gives up when it comes to trying to do the right thing (even if he goes about it in the wrong ways and is often his own worst enemy). So yeah, it felt like pure Tony Stark to me. Two – the fact that he went out with his real family by his side. One of my fave moments was him finally laying into Steve and the rest of the team at the start of the film, and I think his closing moments mirrored that well. Yes, he can be on cordial terms with the rest of the Avengers, but they were never his true family – his real family was the ones with him at the very end, and I was honestly so relieved that there was no bullshit last-words exchange between him and Cap that tried to cement some mythical bond that was never really present in MCU in the first place (comics, yes; cinematic universe, hell no) that that overruled everything else I feel about his death. (Though I could obviously go much more into that but again… this is hella long so I’ll stop now.)

Anyway, IDK if anyone made it to the end of this thing, but I feel like I’ve gotten a weight off my chest, so… mission accomplished, I guess? Lord knows I could write an entire novel about my feels as a result of this movie – I didn’t even touch treatment of the Wakandans, Captain Marvel’s non-appearance in the film, or other “implied but never confirmed/denied” elements of the plot. But I’m probably close to Tumblr’s bs limits anyway, so. Congrats to you if you made it this far lol.

[quadratic-shipping]

Anyway, an explanation below of why the time travel in Endgame was bad. Spoilers. Obviously.

So. Endgame right? Here’s why the time travel was inaccurate. 

Evidence throughout the film points to the idea that they’re using the multiverse model of time travel, the fact that you “can’t actually change the present” and the Monk Lady’s talk about “creating a doomed timeline” being chief among them, along with the fact that Thanos from fake Nebula’s timeline continued to exist even after she leaves, and that she specifically had to bring him through the portal because he was still dead in the current timeline, and any changes they made in their offshoot wouldn’t have held. 

The basis of the multiverse theory is that every time you go back into the past, you aren’t changing the future, you creating an alternate universe where you have travelled back, now there are two universes, the one where you have travelled and changed, and your original universe which goes on as usual.

And then. Steve goes back and WAITS. And THAT. Bring him BACK? Wow. Fun fact; That’s not gonna gel. Because. That completely throws out the idea that we’re following the Multiverse theory. Ok. Alright. If Steve goes back, and just, waits and still sees the gang who did the timehopping then that means.

 He fundamentally stayed within the same universe. 

Which means that the changes inflicted on the past. Stick. 

Which shouldn’t be able to happen according to the whole movie. 

But QS, I hear you saying. Captain america didn’t change HIS past, he was already dead at this point! Well you’re right. But he did change the rest of the worlds past. In Peggy’s original past she didn’t marry Steve! I Steve’s neighbors pasts, he wasn’t their neighbor! Every grocery bought, every lawn trimmed, every second he existed was changing the GOD. DAMNED. PAST because you see, because of his existence in the timeline even if he wasn’t actually actually doing anything, his physical being there means that the literal physical arrangement of matter in the universe was different than in the original past. Notto even MENTION the butterfly effect, and even disregarding the butterfly effect let’s look at the likelihood Steve Rogers didn’t encounter at least one dangerous scenario with his military girlfriend that he didn’t change the outcome of. I’m putting it near zero.

So, because we know that you can’t change the past, then it doesn’t make sense for Steve to get there, his world would be fundamentally different than the world of the Avengers. And we even know that these versions of reality continue to exist after the Avengers leave them because the Stones are still missing from the physical reality of the worlds they took them from. That’s the whole reason that Good ol Cap went back in time! In the first place!!!!! And don’t tell me that because the stones were put back the timeline was now back to the same state as canon again because we were given no evidence whatsoever that putting the stones back returned everything to how it was, considering where some of the stones were taken from in the first place already had changes made to them!

Like for instance, the quest for the whichever stone’s Thanos found out, which means that timelines Thanos is gone because he was the Thanos at the final battle. Which means in that worlds future, there is no Thanos invasion in the first place because he’s already been defeated.

And honestly the only way you can REALLY justify it is by saying the relevant characters pasts weren’t changed so it should be fine but at that point you’re admitting that the time travel was just arbitrary as changed to fit whatever was most convenient at that point. Which it was, and that’s why I’m saying it wasn’t good.

In conclusion, the Time Travel in Endgame was a Joke(tm) and a sham. Feel free to point out any flaws in my argument, although I will warn you I don’t care about any inaccuracies about the MCU in general, just about the time travel parts.

Thanks for reading, having a nice day!

[wazafam]

Following an out-of-character stint in Falcon & The Winter Soldier, could Sharon Carter be an MCU Skrull in disguise? Skrulls have been bothering the Marvel comic universe for decades, but finally made their formal big screen debut in Captain Marvel, where a band of refugees led by Talos were saved from the Kree by Carol Danvers and Nick Fury. Possessing the unique ability to shape-shift, Skrulls are natural infiltrators, rather adept at blending into their surroundings, and Nick Fury uses this to his advantage, recruiting Talos and others into his SWORD organization.

Talos and Soren later pose as Fury and Maria Hill throughout Spider-Man: Far From Home, and another Skrull approaches Monica Rambeau in the final moments of WandaVision. If that wasn't evidence enough of the Skrulls' increasing importance to the MCU, Secret Invasion is lined up to stream on Disney+ soon, currently assembling an all-star cast. The Marvel comic arc of the same name saw Skrulls launch an invasion from within, infiltrating Earth by posing as key figures and superheroes. It's safe to assume that enemy aliens are already hiding in plain sight on MCU Earth.

Related: Falcon & Winter Soldier Season 2? Everything We Know

After featuring in the Captain America sequels, Emily VanCamp made her return as Sharon Carter in Falcon & The Winter Soldier, but felt drastically different compared to how fans remember her. With strange behavior and plot inconsistencies abound, could Sharon be an MCU Skrull in hiding?

As Falcon & The Winter Soldier explains, Sharon Carter was exiled from the U.S. following her crimes in Captain America: Civil War, causing the SHIELD agent to break bad and become the Power Broker, dealing weapons and abilities to the criminals of the MCU. Even after America humbly pardons Miss Carter, she plans to exploit her SHIELD privileges and source even more dangerous goodies for Madripoor's black market, but this murky scenario leaves much unanswered. Why was Sharon punished so harshly when other Civil War participants were forgiven? What are Sharon's motivations as the Power Broker? And if Sharon got snapped by Thanos (which we know she did), how is the Power Broker's empire still standing after 5 years unattended, especially since Falcon & The Winter Soldier takes place a scant 6 months or so after Avengers: Endgame?

All of this would make perfect sense if the Sharon Carter seen conspiring against Sam Wilson and Bucky Barnes in Falcon & The Winter Soldier was a Skrull. For this theory, let's assume the Sharon of the Captain America movies was an ordinary human. Thanks to the opening sequence of Avengers: Endgame, we know Sharon was snapped out of existence for 5 years by Thanos, so this means she either became the Power Broker before the snap, then slipped right back into her old position after the Blip (pretty unlikely), or she only became the Power Broker after the Blip and established herself within six months (even more unlikely).

Thanos' snap would've been the perfect opportunity for Skrulls to infiltrate - millions of lost identities to steal, and chaos everywhere. A Skrull could've taken Sharon's face during the Blip, settled in Madripoor and built the Power Broker's criminal empire. When Hulk's snap brought everyone back (a major inconvenience to the invasion effort, presumably), the Skrulls must've kidnapped the real Sharon, so their agent on Earth could continue the charade. This fits with several hints that suggest the Power Broker was active during the Blip. Firstly, Dr. Nagel was approached by the Broker after he came back to life, which hints Sharon was already up and running in Madripoor, and secondly, the Flag-Smashers (who weren't snapped, that's their whole deal) worked as the Power Broker's security. If the real Sharon was dusted, but the Power Broker was in operation, then the current Sharon must be an impostor. Furthermore, the inherent secrecy surrounding the Power Broker's identity would conveniently cover up why she looks exactly like a former SHIELD agent.

Related: How Did Marvel Get The Falcon & The Winter Soldier So Wrong?

As Bucky Barnes rightly points out, Falcon & The Winter Soldier's Sharon Carter is a whole new woman - bitter, angry and materialistic. This isn't just a turn to villainy, it's a wholesale personality transplant. Sharon has no qualms about killing folk, even via torturous methods such as the mercury cocktail gas, and not only is Power Broker Sharon cynical of superheroes, she also laments being apart from her family, saying, "my own father doesn't know where I am."

Again, these changes make far more sense if Sharon Carter was secretly a little green visitor from outer space. Assuming these evil, invading Skrulls are the antithesis of Nick Fury's peaceful pal, Talos, it follows that "Sharon" would hate do-good heroes. After all, Talos' people were rescued and relocated by Captain Marvel, the original Avenger, so any Skrull who stood against Talos would naturally take an anti-superhero stance. The lack of mercy Sharon demonstrates toward Flag-Smashers would come naturally to a Skrull insurgent, and the gas she deploys in the season finale could contain chemicals more other-worldly than Sharon lets on.

If Falcon & The Winter Soldier's Sharon Carter really was a Skrull, being separated from her family would suddenly track logically. Her appearance in the finale proves Sharon can slip into the U.S. without raising alarm, so why hasn't she sneaked a visit to her loved ones equipped with one of those nifty face masks? Perhaps when "Sharon" claimed to miss her family, it wasn't due to any American exile, but because they're on a different planet altogether.

As far as viewers know, Sharon Carter is 100% human in Falcon & The Winter Soldier, but a couple of wrinkles in her visual presentation don't sit quite right. In the final episode, Sharon uses a hi-tech mask to change her face and voice, surprising Bucky by joining the final mission in New York. Although it looks like the mask is responsible for altering Sharon's appearance, the apparatus could be a prop to hide the shape-shifting process, with the hidden Skrull transforming from random woman #7 back into Sharon Carter. It's good enough to fool Bucky, so the decoy could be how Skrulls use their special ability without raising suspicion.

Related: Falcon & Winter Soldier Proves Tony Stark Was Wrong In Civil War

In the standoff between Karli, Batroc and Sharon, the latter receives a bullet to the stomach courtesy of the Flag-Smashers' leader. Curiously, Falcon & Winter Soldier doesn't provide a close look at Sharon bleeding - possibly a deliberate move to mask her green Skrull blood. Sharon then recovers from the gunshot with remarkable speed (we know the Carters are double-tough, but come on), and this only adds to the suspicion.

Falcon & The Winter Soldier leaves Sharon's Power Broker motivations frustratingly vague. Why, even after being pardoned, is she so intent on shifting more weapons? Is it revenge? The love of danger? Money? Instead, Sharon's dealings could be part of the Skrulls' grand invasion plan. Infiltrating Earth in the wake of Thanos' snap was phase 1 of the plot; destabilizing Earth's defenses would be the logical next step. To this end, it makes perfect sense for Skrull Sharon to work as an arms dealer. Not only would she curate and keep the most destructive pieces for her own army, but creating other super-villains keeps Avengers and governments busy, clearing a path for the Skrulls to strike. Falcon & Winter Soldier proves this, with the Flag-Smashers managing to occupy Falcon, Bucky, and the U.S. military. Accessing SHIELD weaponry, Sharon can continue arming criminals across the world, distracting the Avengers from the true threat lying within.

The landscape of the MCU makes a Secret Invasion storyline tricky. Unlike the comics, it's impossible to suddenly declare major characters such as Captain America, Black Widow or Hawkeye secret Skrulls, waiting for their call to arms. Fans are already invested in those heroes, and a twist of such magnitude would play havoc with an already fraught MCU timeline. The likes of Sharon Carter, however, are perfect. Sharon is important enough for her Skrull reveal to be shocking, but not so pivotal as to disrupt the fabric of the MCU.

Falcon & The Winter Soldier's season 1 finale proved a relatively divisive affair, with some storylines hitting the mark, and others missing by a mile. Sharon Carter's Power Broker twist falls firmly into the latter category, as Falcon & The Winter Soldier offers no convincing idea of her purpose or motivations, nor any real explanation of why her character underwent such a drastic change of outlook, especially after the government's  red-faced apology. If Emily VanCamp really is playing Sharon Carter in Falcon & The Winter Soldier, then the Disney+ series has left the character desperately short-changed, retconning a much-loved figure for a relatively inconsequential shock twist. When the post-credits confirm Sharon has no intention of leaving her illicit activities in the past, her moral stance is so confusing, it's impossible to know whether she's a villain to worry about, or a wronged antihero we shouldn't give up on.

Related: Falcon & Winter Soldier Ending Explained & MCU Future Setup

Making Sharon a Skrull in Secret Invasion would retroactively nullify the criticism of her character from Falcon & The Winter Soldier. The MCU wouldn't have pointlessly muddled a popular MCU heroine, but cast VanCamp as an entirely new one. Rather than an inexplicably awful Sharon Carter, the audience is meeting a Skrull we'll come to know better in the future. While you can certainly question the wisdom of cramming Skrull setup into an already packed Falcon & The Winter Soldier, it's preferable to Sharon Carter becoming a baddie because she got punished for a crime committed in full knowledge of the potential consequences.

More: All 14 Marvel Movies Releasing After Falcon & Winter Soldier

Falcon & The Winter Soldier Theory: Sharon Carter Is A Skrull from https://ift.tt/3xqOXov

[skeren]

Just thinking but...

I cannot, for the life of me, understand when people get all pissed off and say that Storyline A negates or otherwise erases Character B’s presence/achievements/worth. 

Because that’s not how it works. The character, in their native habitat, is still there. Their achievements are still there. The character is not devalued because something about them has changed within a storyline. An Alternate Universe. The two have nothing to do with each other! Character B is still Character B. Storyline A is still Storyline A. Usually, even, Storyline A has to do with Character A and Character B is a bystander anyway. Regardless, it’s usually people complaining about either a canon medium that is not the one they love such as the instance of the MCU vs the Comics in Marvel, or a fandom approach such as Canon vs Fanfic/RP in general. It makes no sense.

Yes, I know not everyone agrees with every concept, but that doesn’t make it less true. There is no reason to try and make people stop RPing/Writing/drawing what makes them happy because it’s not to your preferences. If you have issues with how it’s presented, then find a way to do it in a way that pleases you. If you dislike it existing, then just don’t interact with it. Don’t read it, don’t reblog things about it, don’t look for pictures about it. Block it even. You don’t have to deal with anything you don’t want to.

I know that the internet these days is fueled by the toxic Us vs Them mentality that the political climate has inspired, but that perspective makes zero sense. Tolerance isn’t only a buzzword for hippies and activists to use for political rights. It’s also a word that can apply to fandom and I think a lot of people have forgotten that, or, in the case of many younger Fandom Folk, never learned it. 

Some people like running with family fics, making AUs where their faves are related when canon never said they were. It’s a long, enduring trope, and I remember the heated debates about it back in the FFVII fandom. Especially before Crisis Core ever hit the shelves. However, the difference between then and now was that back then, people who didn’t like it avoided it, and people who did usually enjoyed themselves without being harrassed about it. Mind, writing prowess was fair game, but that’s another issue entirely.

Back then, it was expected that if you didn’t like something, you took responsibility for yourself about it. You said it was a squick, and people would respect that, because nobody can explain why something squicks them, makes them uncomfortable in other words, and nobody expected you to. The fandom wars of old weren’t as much about hating on concepts as they were about ships themselves. People would be horrified and appalled by concepts, sure, but the typical approach was to avoid the hell out of it, not to try to tell people what they were allowed to enjoy.

These days, people seem to think that they’re owed the explanation, that they have to have it justified to them why something is enjoyable instead of just accepting that someone finds a thing so. Nobody can say ‘I don’t like that’ without being accused of a half dozen things, many of which have nothing to do with why, and somehow that’s become acceptable.

It’s not. 

People need to learn to take care of themselves, and learn that people being different than them, and appreciating different things, isn’t an inherent problem. It doesn’t devalue characters for other characters to step a little into territory that isn’t normal for them, that another character possesses. It isn’t a problem for fandom to enjoy this over that. That’s normal, that’s how people work. Not everyone enjoys everything.

I think, perhaps, people should reconsider their advocacy. Instead of spewing hate and vitriol at the things they dislike, maybe they should contribute more about what they do. People should write Meta about their faves and how awesome they are. People should write/draw/RP what they love. People should compliment the people who do those things in a way that they enjoy instead of sitting silently by while putting all their energy into negativity.

Fandom can do better.

Fandom can be better. 

[aion-rsa]

Marvel’s Loki: Making Sense of the MCU’s Time Travel Rules

https://ift.tt/3gqwWz4

This article contains spoilers for Loki episode 1, Avengers: Endgame, and perhaps the very fabric of reality itself.

Nobody said time travel was easy. When Marvel Studios officially introduced temporal shenanigans into its cinematic canon in Avengers: Endgame, it did so with noble intentions. Our Avengers had to save the universe and recapture the 50% of the population that Thanos dusted away. The easiest way to do so was with a dash of Pym particles and an entanglement within the Quantum Realm. 

Unfortunately, however, engaging with time travel means engaging with its rules. Now that the studio’s third Disney+ series Loki has brought the God of Mischief into contact with the Time Variance Authority and the Time Keepers’ Sacred Timeline, the Marvel Cinematic Universe faces the unenviable task of making sense of the impossible.

Through one episode, Loki has done a solid job of explaining the rules and stakes of time travel as it applies to Loki, itself. Still, some questions remain about how the rules of time established in Loki apply to Avengers: Endgame’s time heist and the rest of the MCU at large. For a proper example, take a look at these very astute questions raised by Brit in the comment section of our Loki Episode 1 Easter eggs article. 

“Please can we have a Q&A article on this. Aren’t there already two timelines? One with Steve Rogers in the Avengers and one where he stayed in Peggy? (Editor’s Note: Phrasing) And a third where Thanos left? Either way, aren’t there already multiple? And shouldn’t Steve Rogers be classed as a variant as he went rogue?”

The simple answer to all of these questions is that, despite its interconnected nature, the Marvel Cinematic Universe is made up of individual films (and now TV shows) written by individual writers. So the events of Avengers: Endgame may not make perfect canonical sense in Loki. We know for a fact that Loki’s TVA adventure was not conceived of until Avengers: Endgame had already been written by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely. In an interview with EW, Marvel head Kevin Feige revealed that Loki stealing the Tesseract was never designed to lead into another time travel story.

“[That scene] was really more of a wrinkle so that one of the missions that the Avengers went on in Endgame could get screwed up and not go well, which is what required Cap and Tony to go further back in time to the ’70s,” Feige said.

If the time travel rules of Loki are to be consistent with the time travel rules of Avengers: Endgame it will be only because the later show retrofitted itself to work within them. For what it’s worth, Loki head writer Michael Waldron (who previously wrote for the timey wimey Rick and Morty) claims that the show’s approach to time travel rules are bulletproof.

“I was always very acutely aware of the fact that there’s a week between each of our episodes and these fans are going to do exactly what I would do, which is pick this apart. We wanted to create a time-travel logic that was so airtight it could sustain over six hours. There’s some time-travel sci-fi concepts here that I’m eager for my Rick and Morty colleagues to see,” Waldron told Vanity Fair.

In that same interview, Waldron notes that Avengers: Endgame presents the rules of time travel as The Avengers understand them. Perhaps this means that Loki will correct the Avengers in some areas and clarify the rules in future episodes. If that’s the case, Loki will have a lot of work to do. As we understand all the rules now, the time travel of Endgame does appear to be at odds with the time travel of Loki in several respects.

Hopefully, the show will explain away those inconsistencies. In case it doesn’t, however, let’s try to do it ourselves. 

Why Were the Events of Endgame Sanctioned?

Thanks to Loki episode 1 “Glorious Purpose” we have one bit of useful canonical information when it comes to the time travel in Avengers: Endgame. When Loki stands trial for his timecrimes, he tries to pass blame onto the Avengers. But the judge presiding over his case, Ravonna Renslayer (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), tells Loki that everything the Avengers did was supposed to happen. 

How can that be the case though? Just about everything that The Avengers did appears to fly in the face of the Time Keepers’ mission of maintaining the Sacred Timeline. Tony and Steve’s team sent no fewer than 11 individuals back in time to three distinct time periods. They then removed sacred objects from those time streams, brought them back to the present, used them, then returned them to their appropriate locations in time. How on Earth did that not create dozens if not hundreds of new timelines that threaten the singular supremacy of the Sacred Timeline?

I’ve got two potential explanations for that, both of which are imperfect and flawed. But absent further information from Loki, they might be the best we can do for now. 

The first option is that perhaps the TVA is oversimplifying how neat and tidy the Sacred Timeline looks. Within the TVA offices, the visual representation of the Sacred Timeline is a single straight line on their computer monitors, with potentially dangerous new timelines being represented by jagged fresh lines branching off from the main line. While this is a helpful visual for the TVA office drones to keep an eye on things, it might not represent the full reality of the Sacred Timeline.

The Sacred Timeline may be a gnarled, ugly beast with one long branch spreading out into infinity and smaller twigs doubling back on themselves along the big branch. This would mean that it’s possible for time travel within the Sacred Timeline as long as it’s occurring on the Sacred’s Timeline main branch and with the Time Keepers’ blessing. Why would the Time Keepers sanction some time travels and deem others as unacceptable Nexus events? That’s anyone’s guess. 

The other possibility comes from a theory within Endgame itself. The closest that Marvel’s Infinity Saga conclusion gets to addressing the “rules” of time travel is via a conversation among Scott Lang, James “Rhodey” Rhodes, and Bruce Banner. All three men have their opinions on time travel, but the film gives Bruce the final word, subtly suggesting that it’s his interpretation that’s correct. Here is what he has to say:

“Time doesn’t work that way. Changing the past doesn’t change the future. Think about it, if you travel to the past, that past becomes your future and your former present becomes the past, which can’t now be changed by your new future.”

Let’s call this the Subjective Theory of MCU Time Travel. A certain kind of time travel is allowed and effective as long as the time traveller understands that the nature of time comes down to their subjective experience of it. Bruce Banner can’t create a new timeline when traveling to the past because he’s aware that the past is now a part of his own subjective future. As long as his story ends up where it’s supposed to be, which is to say activating the Infinity Gauntlet in 2023, then everything will be ok.

And that brings us to a certain time traveling lothario…

Why Didn’t Steve Rogers Create A New Timeline?

The idea that Steve Rogers didn’t create a new, unsanctioned timeline by living out an entirely new life with his lost love Peggy Carter is truly baffling. If Loki can create a Nexus event by picking up the Tesseract, how can Steve Rogers abandoning Captaining America in favor of smooching Peggy for 50+ years not?

Well, maybe we can make sense of this by combining our two theories above. For starters, the Sacred Timeline has to accommodate for other smaller, sanctioned timelines within itself – it just has to! Any decision you do or do not make creates new possibilities and new universes. When you choose to wear a blue shirt in the morning as opposed to a red shirt, you are creating an entirely new unseen universe in which you wore that red shirt (and probably won the lottery or something, I don’t know).

Going back to that gnarled branch analogy from before: perhaps the Sacred Timeline isn’t so much of a single line but a series of lines contained within a larger line – fiber optic cable-style. Steve Rogers going back in time and living out a new life is just part of one of the smaller, sanctioned lines clinging onto the main one.

There’s also the reality that Steve did what he was required to do at the end of the day. Having delivered all of the Stones back to their respective places he returned to the present an aged man (and looking like Joe Biden). He then presumably passed away peacefully of natural causes in the timeline that he was supposed to die in at the precisely correct point. 

Read more

TV

Loki: Is the TVA The Most Powerful Entity in the MCU?

By Alec Bojalad

TV

Loki’s Success Hinges on Marvel TV’s New Storytelling Strategy

By Kayti Burt

That new past was Steve’s future like Bruce said it would be. Therefore it affected only him. What of all the people Steve interacted with in his new life though? It’s possible that they just dissipated away once Steve returned to the present or their lives carried on normally inside a pocket universe contained within the Sacred Timeline. There’s also a darker possibility that the TVA had to go in and liquidate that whole timeline once Steve had exited it. Sharp-eyed viewers have spotted what looks to be Peggy Carter in Variant prison garb in the background of Loki’s first episode.

That would be a pretty upsetting conclusion to Steve and Peggy’s character arcs, but it would resolve the temporal headaches created by his time travels in the ruthlessly unsentimental way that only the TVA can pull off.

Why Are Variants Allowed on the Sacred Timeline? 

At the conclusion of Avengers: Endgame, there is at least one Variant from a separate timeline existing within the Sacred Timeline. That is, of course, the Guardians of the Galaxy’s Gamora. Thanks to the Avengers’ meddling, she arrived in the Sacred Timeline alongside Variant versions of her “father” Thanos and her “sister” Nebula. Variant Thanos and Variant Nebula are eventually dispatched by the Avengers but Gamora remains behind as a curious sideways world version of herself in a new reality. How is this allowed?

The answer to this is a very well-reasoned “because the Time Keepers said so.” As far as we understand it, the Time Keepers only goal is to maintain the sanctity of the Sacred Timeline. If that means bringing in reinforcements from other timelines, then so be it.

But wait a minute, Alec, you just said “other timelines.” How could Variant versions of Thanos and Gamora even exist on a separate timeline to join the Sacred Timeline if the TVA is so adamant on stamping out other timelines? I don’t know, man. My head hurts. It likely goes back once again to that “big branch” or “fiber optic” cable analogy though. It’s quite simply not possible for there to not be alternate timelines once time travel comes into play. So those timelines have to exist as appropriate branches attached to the main branch. Those Variant Gamoras, Nebulas, and Thanos were therefore never Variants to begin with. They were merely different aspects of the same character from different parts of the same timeline.

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

Is this all complicated? Yep. Does it  make perfect sense to me? Absolutely not. That doesn’t change the fact, however, that there is one unshakable tenet of the Marvel Cinematic Universe canon when it comes to time travel now thanks to Loki. And that’s that the events of Avengers: Endgame happened exactly as the time stream needed them to. Steve Rogers, Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, Natasha Romanov, and company are not Variants. No one went “rogue.” That reality makes it harder to fully understand and explain away why dozens of Nexus events weren’t created by their actions. But explain it away we must, because the Time Keepers say so.

Loki airs new episodes Wednesdays on Disney+. 

The post Marvel’s Loki: Making Sense of the MCU’s Time Travel Rules appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2Tku0fl

[charlierejouis]

Captain Marvel Q&A Review

I want to try something a bit different. Rather than straight review this movie, I want to talk through some questions people may have about the movie. Having seen it once, I’ll try to get to some questions and keep this as spoiler-free as possible. Here’s an example.

What was it like seeing Marvel’s first female-led movie?

Well, frankly I haven’t seen Elektra yet. I haven’t heard a lot of good things about it. It was made in an era when superhero movies aren’t at the same quality we know them to be now. After ranking the MCU films, I’m starting to get more interested in the films outside of the MCU, especially some of Marvel’s films outside of the MCU that doesn’t have Deadpool in them.

Jokes aside, let’s go!

Were you concerned about Captain Marvel going into the movie?

Yes. I tried to read one of the newer Captain Marvel comics and couldn’t get past the issue #0 of the series. Then seeing the trailers and semi-controversy surrounding the movie, gave me successively less hype over this movie that I genuinely wanted to like. The thing that gave me the most concern was meeting with Chris Claremont at NYCC and hearing him say that he was concerned about this movie. Though some of his complaints were about not getting his touch on Carol’s character in the movie, a good number of the issues brought up about Captain Marvel were the same issues other people have been voicing.

What are some of the issues people have with a Captain Marvel coming out?

Frankly, Carol’s not been doing so well in the comics department. Recently, Marvel Comics has been pushing her as sort of the face of a new era of comics. Since becoming Captain Marvel, though, she hasn’t had a series sell well or last long. Factor that in with another Civil War event that doesn’t put her in a good light, but still makes her out to be the supposed good guy, and it’s not surprising that Captain Marvel isn’t a hilariously popular character with a good number of Marvel fans.

What is your take on the politics surrounding the movie, up to its release?

Full disclosure, I don’t personally align terribly well with modern-day third/fourth wave feminism. I have a number of issues with both sides of the intersectionality arguments. However, I personally side more with the arguments against so-called “SJW issues”, especially considering many people making arguments against them are on both sides of the political aisle. Before seeing the movie, I feel like the idea that the making of this movie into a feminist battleground was a mistake. Not because I don’t think politics in movies is a bad thing, but because I was worried that this controversy was a way of distracting people from how good or bad the actual movie would end up being. I think that Brie Larson going after fans and critics was stupid before the film came out. People were not expecting this movie to do well the instant it was announced and her actions didn’t help to ease people’s concerns about the film.

And, after seeing the movie, how has this view changed?

I was not expecting this to actually be a feminist movie. Like, I know Brie Larson actually said that this was a feminist movie, but I figured that meant this was a good movie for women and girls to see come out on the day we celebrate them. No, this movie is, without exaggeration, a feminist allegory for women who live under the patriarchy. This results in at least some changes I know will piss fans of the comics off. However, I don’t have too much of a problem with the movie with that recognition in mind. I still think that marketing for this movie goofed up, but only in not giving us the best of Carol in the movie. Though, as an overtly feminist movie, I don’t think this will have as wide an appeal as it would if it wasn’t. Like, I wouldn’t be shocked if the upcoming Black Widow movie goes in a different direction and is considered better than this movie in any and all respects.

 Are there any things fans of the MCU/comics ought to look out for?

One big thing I can say is that Monica Rambeau is in this movie. In the comics, she was the first female Captain Marvel so it will be interesting to see how her future pans out across the MCU, especially with Miss Marvel in play. Ronan the Accusor and Coulson are in this movie, but they don’t play a seriously large role in this film. In regards to continuity, they do refer to the Strategic Homeland Intelligence, Enforcement, and Logistics Division as SHIELD in this movie, which kind of messes with Iron Man stuff. This movie also messes up some things with the first two Captain America movies and the first Avengers film. Also, the Marvel Studios logo is a tribute to Stan Lee and I’m glad that we got that.

What did you think of Brie Larson as Captain Marvel?

I don’t love Brie Larson as Captain Marvel in this movie. A lot of people say that she gets worse the more the movie goes on. To be honest, I think that she has some of her best moments as the movie goes on. However, I can’t say that this was a good performance for Larson as Captain Marvel. Interestingly enough, her best moments were playing off of other characters whom I considered to be more interesting than her. I don’t want to jump on it being her fault as she’s apparently won an Oscar a few years ago and I don’t love the directing or writing of this movie overall. Not to mention that this is her first time as the character. Maybe, under the Russos direction, she’ll improve in my eyes. Carol does smile when she sees Stan in his cameo and that made me like her a bit more.

Do you have any serious issues with this movie?

I have a lot of small issues with this movie. There’s one twist that everyone who’s seen this movie knows was supposed to be a joke. I’m not mad it happened so much as slightly annoyed by it. I don’t love some changes I hinted at earlier as one ruins a lot of potential for the MCU’s future, another feels like we were lied to by marketing for this movie, and others leave a bad taste in my mouth. Usually, my inclination is for movies to not spend more time than they need to do their thing, but this could have benefitted from having another half hour to tie up some loose ends or explore some issues presented within the movie.

Are there good things about this movie?

I love Samuel L. Jackon as Fury in this movie. We get to see him while he’s still a bit more optimistic about the world and it’s amazing seeing him play off of Carol. After the feminist angle of the movie is fully revealed, the movie becomes more fun to watch. A few expectations are subverted in ways that make sense for the movie’s bend and aren’t terribly unwelcome changes of pace. Apparently, they got the composer for Fortnite to write the music and she did a good job, though I doubt she’s getting an Oscar over this. And, I’ll say it again. I really, genuinely, and unironically hope we get a movie with Monica in the future. I don’t care that she didn’t do a lot in the comics. I want to see her do something in the MCU.

Do you need to watch this movie to understand Avengers: Endgame?

No. There is a bit of an explanation as to why Carol wasn’t a part of the MCU so far. We do see her give Nick Fury the pager he used in the end-credits scene of Infinity War. There’s a scene from Endgame that involves her, similar to how the end-credits scene of Ant-Man showed a scene involving him in Civil War. However, other than the assurance that she will be in Endgame, there’s not much of a connection to this movie and Endgame, at least so far as I can tell. To be fair, Marvel is trying to be as quiet as they can regarding this movie, considering how much it’s supposed to change about the MCU. Not getting a serious connection to it isn’t terribly shocking, disappointing though it may be.

Overall, how does this movie rank among the MCU?

Before watching the movie, everything I had seen and heard regarding the movie led me to believe this was going to be, at the very best, a movie just shy of my top 5 or, at the very worse, the next worse film in the MCU. I’m happy to report that, after my first viewing of this movie, it’s in neither extreme. I can’t say it’s outright the worst movie in the MCU, but it’s pretty close to it. For all the talk Captain Marvel being the strongest hero in the MCU, I can’t say I’m terribly impressed by her powers, considering I don’t understand how her powers work in the MCU. And, regarding Carol Danvers, she might actually be one of the worst people behind an MCU hero. For now, I’d say that it’s an okay film that’s close to being my least favorite film in what’s shaping up to be the best phase of the MCU. I may even consider it to be the outright worst film in the MCU.

Is it worth watching?

Ultimately, I had fun watching this movie. To invoke Digibro, it could have been much better, but it could have been so much worse. However, that’s because I already enjoy the MCU. I left the theatre and could barely explain why it was a good film for my Uber driver. No one whose I trust, of varying political views and allegiances to the MCU, said this movie was better than okay and many said it was below average. If you’re fine with your movies having more of a feminist angle, definitely give it a shot while its in theaters. Otherwise, you’ll likely have some fun with this movie when it comes out on DVD. I can’t really advocate watching this while in theaters.

If you have more questions for me, I’m planning to do a follow up where I get into more spoiler-related stuff. See you!

[shattered-rp-blog]

Congratulations, Mack!

You’ve been accepted as Jean Grey, welcome to the family! So sorry that we took this long to accept, but we’re diving right into it now. We’re impressed with your take on Jean and Cas is so happy that Charles has one of his favorite students around! We’d love to help you get used to RPing on tumblr, it has some tricks and you’ll fit in quickly, I’m sure. And yes, the Phoenix force should make an appearance along the way, maybe with a big event? We’ll see! Please send in your account in the next 48 hours and make sure you go through our checklist!

App Form - Canon

OOC

Name:  Mack

Preferred Pronouns:  She/Her

Age: 33

Timezone: Central  

Availability (with a short explanation): Most evenings after 6:30pm CST on M-F, Sa/Sun varies. I work a full time job and go out with my SO on dates on weekends. But I always make time for RP.

Do you have any triggers?: Emotional abuse

IC

Full Name: Jean Elaine Grey

Second character choice (if there’s any): N/A

Alias:  Marvel Girl, Phoenix

Affiliation:  Secret Mutants

Age (16+): 28

Faceclaim:  Bridget Regan

Gender: Female

Sexuality: Straight

Character quote: “You’re a firecracker Creed. I’m an atom bomb.”

Why do you want to play this character?:

I have always been drawn to Jean because of her complexity and the struggle she has within her to control both her powers and herself. My obsession with the character has led me to collecting action figures, jewelry, and even a real animation plate from the ‘90s X-Men Cartoon.

I’ve already  played Jean for over 7 years in one game, and for three years in another, but most of them were predominantly X-Men-centric so I’d love the chance to have her interact with both X-Men and other MCU characters. I also see that you guys have an Xavier, and I’d love to explore Jean and Xavier’s father/daughter type relationship (provided the player is okay with that).

Biography (3+ paragraphs, you can use the skeleton to help you):

Jean Grey was born to Elaine Grey, a lawyer, and Dr. John Grey, a professor of history at Bard College in Annandale on Hudson, New York. She was the youngest after her sister Sara, who was born two years earlier. Jean was a bright, imaginative girl who often divided her time between reading, watching action/adventure movies, and playing with her sister and the neighborhood kids.

When she was 12, Jean was forced to grow up impossibly early when she saw her best friend, Annie Richardson, get hit by a car. As the girl lay dying, Jean’s mutant ability to read minds manifested, and she felt her friend’s thoughts and emotions as she passed. This event left Jean depressed and withdrawn, and she suddenly discovered that she was hearing voices that she couldn’t turn off.

A month after Annie’s death, Jean’s depression and abilities came to a head and she was plagued by a nightmare that put Jean, her parents, sister, and most of the block in a telepathic slumber that they could not be roused from. The comas alerted the attention of the local media and Professor Charles Xavier, who was able to awaken Jean and the others from a distance. The authorities wrote it off as a “carbon monoxide gas leak.”

Xavier managed to convince Jean’s parents to allow her to come to his school for gifted mutants, where he met Scott Summers, Bobby Drake, Hank McCoy, and Warren Worthington. Jean formed a close relationship to Xavier, seeing him as a mentor and a father figure. She was drawn to his dream of humans and mutants eventually existing in peace and was eager to join his “X-Men” (even if she didn’t like the name), to help protect both human and mutant kind.

He was able to help her learn how to control her telepathy and telekinesis, which manifested soon after her arrival at the school due to raging teenage hormones and living in a house with all boys causing her untold amounts of frustration. All except for one. She fell hard for Scott Summers, the “leader” of the group. After a short love triangle between her, Scott, and Warren in their teenage years, Jean and Scott became a couple.

Jean realized that she wanted to do more than just be an X-Man and decided to become a medical doctor to help treat the X-Men and other mutants who came in. She enrolled at Empire State University after she graduated from high school and helped the X-Men as much as she could during that time. Unfortunately, she forced to drop out of the program a few months shy of completing her residency when the Sokovia Accords were signed and and the X-Men went underground.

Luckily (or unluckily), being an X-Man means she gets practice treating injuries. In her spare time, however, she has taken a liking to teaching the younger students biology, tag-teaming with Hank to give the full science experience.

Jean didn’t hesitate to go with Xavier and the other X-Men when they went underground. She is completely against registration, finding it to be immoral. She is willing to do whatever it takes to try to help people understand that mutants are nothing to fear.

Physical Description

Height: 5’ 9”

Weight: 145

Eye Color: Green

Hair: Copper Red

Distinguishing Features: None

Personality:

Jean Grey is an intelligent woman who finds her passion in medicine and being proactive in mutant issues and rights in politics. She has an unquenchable desire to learn, be it the physicality of the knowledge that comes from a library, or in the intricacies of those around her. She is a quick study and has a great memory, for better or worse.

Jean sees her abilities both as a blessing and a bane at times. She often sees people as others may not see, whether she, and they, like it or not . The minds of others are like doors to her,  sometimes closed, sometimes opened, but nonetheless solid and present, echoing with the secrets of what may lie behind them.  She has worked to gain the trust of those she works with and cares about, because she has the potential to learn those secrets with a mere turn of the door handle. It gives her a power she takes seriously, though sometimes the “louder” minds tend to blare at her like a foghorn.  She tries to keep those secrets, though sometimes she can play dirty. 

Jean loves with all of her heart and soul, and reacts with other emotions the same way if she doesn’t catch herself. She is warm, compassionate, and loving, but is also firm and not afraid to speak her mind if need be. Her temper can be something to behold if someone she loves has been hurt or threatened. Despite her past experiences, Jean is still a fairly optimistic person.   She has a great sense of humor and is not afraid to show it. She can also be rash and impulsive if she lets her emotions get to her, and while she forgives, she doesn’t forget.

Ships: Jean Grey/Scott Summers

Para sample (in character): (Removed for privacy)

Additional (optional):  Horoscope: Cancer, Myers-Briggs: INFJ

Favourites? Headcanons?  Favorite Tea: Chai with a splash of almond milk, Favorite Dessert: Everything, Favorite food: ramen. Favorite color: Green, Favorite Movie: Raiders of the Lost Ark, Meditates a lot. Does a lot of online shopping to avoid crowds. Even though she’s got a lot of control over her powers, sometimes huge crowds give her a headache from trying to keep all the voices out.

Wanted connections: Jean/Xavier, Jean/Scott, Jean/Hank, Jean/Bobby, Jean/Warren.

Questions or requests? Mostly used to chat rooms or Play by Email so I’d love some guidance on how to RP on Tumblr. I would also like to actually have the Phoenix manifest later (but not too much later) down the road as a future story arc to provide more plot fuel.