#horrible fear of being forgotten mixing with the desperate desire for the people i love to not be damaged by the memory of me

[benilos]

I hope one day the things I create can bring people the same joy they've brought me and the people we hurt can forgive and forget us.

[portraitoftheoddity]

Ik this is out of the blue, but if you wanna talk about Loki I have a question. I'm having trouble writing him because he seems to always do things that are contrary to what he wants. He wants Thor to love him so he... Constantly betrays Thor and tries to kill him. It's difficult to get potential friends/love interests past the barbed wire fence he's put around himself. I was wondering what you think of that? Because I just really like hearing you talk about Loki. If you want.

*cracks knuckles* Awwwww, yesssss, here is my jam.

(I’ll be focusing on MCU!Loki here as comics!Loki hasn’t been stabbing Thor all that much lately so I’m guessing he’s not the subject of this ask.)

You’ve already touched on a really core component of Loki’s character, anon, which is that he is a great big mess of Contradictions with a capital C. He wants to be loved. He wants to be feared. He wants to destroy and he wants to be a savior. He wants the throne, and he just wants to be an equal. His methods and actions often seem at odds with his stated desires and goals. And for all that he’s depicted as the ‘god of chaos’ because of the results of his villainy, you could just as easily make an argument for the chaos being internal.

Frigga, who probably knows Loki best of anyone, makes a very poignant observation when she notes that Loki is “always so perceptive about everyone but [himself].” And I think this gets at the core of Loki’s character in a lot of ways – After having his world fall apart from under him in the first Thor movie, Loki has no idea who he is, what his role is, or what he wants. And in that state of conflict, he’s prone to undermining himself at every turn. He ‘wants’ to take over the Earth, but then forms a strategy for the invasion that’s easily thwarted. He ‘wants’ to be loved by his family, but constantly pushes them away. Possibly because he’s so angry and bitter that spite motivates him more than his own best interests. Possibly because he has a lot of self loathing (“I’m the monster parents tell their children about at night”) and subconsciously punishes himself. And possibly because he’s terrified of successfully getting what he thinks he wants and still being unhappy – which… given his plan in Thor did successfully get Thor out of the way and Loki on the throne and still wound up being one of the worst weeks in his life, is a rather understandable fear. He also seems to be acting out of fear anytime someone gets too close and is in a position to help him, as Loki subsequently turns on them almost defensively, like he’s trying to pre-empt any betrayal they might inflict on him by inflicting it on them first (See: “Sentiment.” / “You’re not.” / “Easier to let it burn.”)

A notable constant in Loki’s characterization is that he craves attention. So much of his bitterness comes from being constantly eclipsed by Thor his whole life, and feeling unseen (“I remember a shadow”). In Avengers, Tony recognizes that Loki is “a full-tilt diva.” At his trial in The Dark World, Loki is all about putting on a show of snark and bravado, because even negative attention is still attention – and while Odin gives him the satisfaction of yelling at him, his sentencing is a cruel outcome for Loki, since he’s imprisoned and left to be forgotten; something far worse, to him, than the drama of a public execution. We see this love of attention even more in Ragnarok, where he’s obviously indulging in making statues and plays commemorating himself, and then working his way into the Grandmaster’s inner circle. Whether he’s loved or hated, Loki is desperate not to be ignored.  

And I think that need for attention plays into a lot of his antagonism of Thor. He resents Thor for monopolizing what feels to Loki like a finite amount of love and attention in the universe. But he loves Thor all the same, as his brother and as a fixture in Loki’s life. And if he betrays Thor over and over and hurts him and gets Thor to hate him – well, it’s not as good as love, but love is almost too good to hope for and feels too fragile and ephemeral to someone with Loki’s insecurities. If he can’t count on Thor’s love, he’ll bet on his hate, because either is better than indifference. (Which is ultimately why Thor’s show of indifference toward Loki’s betrayals in Ragnarok is so damn effective – Thor not caring one way or the other is the worst outcome for Loki, and something that drives him to make a change after his plan obviously backfired.)

Another notable aspect of Loki is the degree to which he adheres to narrative roles. In the first Thor, Loki tries to be the hero – the one who kills the monsters and saves Asgard by ending the war with the frost giants, once and for all. This backfires horribly and he’s told that no, he did wrong; he realizes he’s the villain of his story, and then embraces the villainy – because if he’s gonna be the bad guy, then he’s gonna go all out when it comes to filling that role. If he’s the monster, then he’ll be monstrous. So the Loki we see in Avengers has decided that fuck it, if everyone is going to expect the worst of him, then he will be The Worst™, and be it with style. This creates something of a reinforced feedback loop, where Loki acts like a villain, people expect villainy of him, and Loki plays to their expectations.

He gets to break out of that loop in some ways early in Ragnarok, when he’s ‘dead’ and able to change the narrative around himself. As “Odin,” he reshapes his [Loki’s] story into that of a hero, and not a villain. Everyone expects him to be Odin, not Loki, so with no expectations of villainy on him, he behaves…. Well, a bit selfishly, totally hedonistically, and a little negligently, but not particularly villainously or maliciously. He slides back into that villain role for a while on Sakaar (he gets almost performatively villainous when Bruce shows up – I think, again, playing to the expectations of his audience), but then Thor challenges him to do better, to be different, to break out of that role.

Interestingly enough, Loki still adheres to a narrative role at the end, but it’s the one he actually wanted from the start, which is that of ‘Asgard’s Savior’ – the role he wanted when he tricked Laufey, the role he gave himself in his plays, and the way he’s actually wanted to be seen all along. Loki may not want to be a hero for selfless, altruistic reasons – but he does love Asgard, however mixed his feelings are about it, and is willing to risk his life for it. And while he revels at times in playing the villain, performative villainy is more of a consolation prize he gives himself for not being able to enjoy the adulation of heroism. 

Getting back to the idea of Loki not knowing what the hell he wants – ultimately, I think Loki is at his best at the end of Ragnarok because Thor challenges him directly to actually figure out what he wants and who he wants to be. Plus, Loki’s had time to calm down and heal a bit from his earlier traumas, so the betrayal and villainy he exhibits at that point is less of him lashing out in pain and fear, and more just… habit. Breaking that habit becomes a choice he’s given.  

(Side Note: If you want to read some amazing meta-textual exploration of narrative roles vis-a-vis comics!Loki, Loki: Agent of Asgard is an incredible series and well worth checking out.)

So, when it comes to writing Loki – I think a lot of your characterization is going to be dependent on which point of Loki’s story you’re setting your fic in. Thor-era Loki who is having an identity crisis and lashing out near-mindlessly, frightened and angry and desperate to be the hero? Avengers-era Loki, who has decided he’s going to embrace being a monster and wear his monstrosity like armor before anyone can use it against him? Dark World-era Loki, who is bitter and desperate not to be forgotten forever in the bowels of Asgard’s dungeons? Or Ragnarok Loki, who has realized he doesn’t have to be universally reviled and has the ability to change his own story, if he can get the hell out of his own damn way for five minutes?  He goes through a lot of changes, and a lot of different traumas that affect him differently. So considering your setting is important.

Another thing to think about is what does your Loki want, and what does Loki think he wants? A great narrative arc can involve getting Loki to actually realize what his success means, and whether or not he’d find any joy in it (“satisfaction is not in my nature”) – and what, on the other hand, might actually make him happy.

Regarding Loki’s relationships with other characters – you’re right that it’s tricky, what with the walls Loki puts up, and how prickly he can be. Loki’s response to having his trust shattered in Thor was to pretty much quit trusting anybody, so you’ll have to think about how that other character earns his trust. I’ve personally enjoyed playing with the idea of another character rehabilitating Loki by expecting good of him, and leveraging Loki’s tendency to play to expectations in that way. Also, while Loki acts the way people expect him to, he also forms a lot of expectations of others, so keeping him on his toes by letting the characters around him act in ways he doesn’t predict can be a way to get under that armor. Extremes of situation such as dire peril and injury are, of course, other popular tropes for putting a walled-off character in a vulnerable position where their usual defenses are not in play. And when it comes to Loki’s satisfaction (or lack thereof) – Ragnarok Loki, when given the opportunity to play the hero instead of the villain, and the opportunity to be a part of a team instead of going it alone, ultimately seizes that opportunity. I think that speaks to the desire he has, deep down, to be loved and accepted and admired over hated and feared and lonely, which another character in your fic could tap into, with enough patience and persistence. 

Loki’s a complicated mess of a character, whose identity and motivations can be difficult to grasp, largely because his own grasp of them is so tenuous and changeable. But it also makes him a really fascinating and compelling character, with a lot of layers to explore. There’s a lot of ways to interpret him – mine is just one of many interpretations, and certainly not gospel! – and I encourage you to have fun with exploring his psychology and characterization in all its messy glory, in whatever way makes most sense to you.

[theantisocialcritic]

The AntiSocial Critic Reviews… Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 2!

As someone who absolutely loves and defends the Marvel Cinematic Universe experiment the last three years have been a long and exhausting bunch for trying to stay on the side of the movies. 

The first two Phases of the MCU were spectacular. The origin movies that brought Iron Man, Thor and Captain America into the world were all well tuned little blockbusters with tight scripts followed by the big team up in The Avengers. Phase 2 was more sporadic as Marvel’s extremely controlling producers brought mixed results for the initial sequels. Captain America: The Winter Soldier was an unequivocal near masterpiece that set the bar for the entire franchise while Thor: The Dark World was rough and ended up largely forgotten. Iron Man 3 was a critical darling brought to life by one of the most talented directors of action comedy working and greatest screenwriters ever: Shane Black. Unfortunately a poorly conceived marketing gimmick left it’s audience largely cold and frustrated with the film. 

Then out of nowhere came Guardians of the Galaxy. Here was an intensely personal and unexpected blockbuster by indie legend James Gunn. Not only one of the best films in the MCU but one of the most unexpected pop culture hits in years. In many ways what was seemingly intended as a space fairing partner to The Avengers ended up being a more thematically complex and emotionally hard hitting movie about grappling with the pain of loss and tragedy and building a new life. 

Something then happened after Guardians hit theaters. Marvel got lazy and stubborn. While the post Guardians MCU hasn't exactly been a dumpster fire it has been in a confusing and frustrating place that it has largely struggling to work itself through a bizarre identity crisis. 

Age of Ultron was a bloated, thematically inappropriate sequel that retread the territory of the first film and sacrificed important character development on the alter of jokes and new character introductions. 

Civil War was a bloated Avengers film masquerading as a Captain America film that robs arguably the first or second best character in the MCU a proper sendoff in favor of pushing back the “payoff” for years of anticipation in the franchise to Infinity War, which may or may not actually end up being any good anyway.

Doctor Strange is a poorly executed origin film that grafts the theoretically limitless and lucid character much more suited to an edgy psychological thriller/horror film into a action packed blockbuster at the cost of the characters and world building. 

Really the only one that has fully worked is Ant-Man which was written by action comedy God Edgar Wright who left the production when Marvel demanded sticking the Falcon into the plot so that they could drag Scott Lang into Civil War. This in an of itself ultimately breaks the original film by overriding every ounce of Lang’s character development in his origin story by reverting him back to the wanted-thief status. 

At the core of all of these films and their problems is a severe case of studio interference that zaps every one of these films of dramatic stakes and focus that is desperately needed. Joss Whedon, The Russo Bros, Scott Derrickson and Edgar Wright are all insanely talented but when you pick at their creative soul it erodes the product and deprives it of narrative consequence. 

This was my immediate fear going into James Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 2. Despite how outside these characters are from the main storyline with the growing lineup of Avengers, Marvel still isn’t going to let Gunn TOO far off the leash in terms of creative risk taking. On the plus side, James Gunn is a spectacularly talented filmmaker. If the writer/director of the first movie can get away with crazy, occasionally dark film like that than making the film like what we got makes a lot of sense. GotG: Vol.2 may not be quite as well tuned as it’s earlier brethren and it’s occasional unwilling attitude to make long term consequences come to fruition is a problem however it still manages to succeed. 

The film follows the story of the first movie as the Guardians are now inter-galactically famous heroes working for hire for various alien races across the universe. When a race of gold genetically engineered beings called the Sovereign end up chasing the Guardians across space, Star Lord and the crew find themselves crash landed on an alien planet in the presence of Ego, who turns out to be the estranged father of Star Lord. 

GotG: Vol.2 is the best Marvel film since the first Guardians of the Galaxy. On initial inspection it doesn’t quite hold up to it’s predecessor on the margins but it crafts something that is exactly what I wanted it to craft. Instead of going to larger more bombastic route James Gunn has gone smaller, darker and more introspective into the motivations of the characters. While from a general plot/structure standpoint it leaves a fair bit of the screen time feeling a bit uninvolved and uneven it does give a ton of breathing room to the characters to talk, air grievances and motivations right up until the finale when it sticks the landing in one of the best endings to a Marvel film in years. 

The unevenness is admittedly a problem and one most critics have been rather adamant about expressing in detail. Honestly though it doesn’t bother me. I went into this film with tempered expectations after hearing about the unevenness and that helped. On the reverse side, the fact that the finale of the film left at least one person in my theater openly sobbing speaks to just how important that character build up is in the end. Unlike most films that try and make their sequel “Empire Strikes Back-esc”, this film truly understands in order to do that you have to dig deeply into the souls of the characters and bring out their darkest motivations and pains and tie it to the dramatic stakes of the film. You DON’T elevate the bombast and fill it with bigger set pieces (I.E. Age of Ultron). You also DON’T rob central characters of their screen screentime, story arcs and growth in the name of franchise management (I.E. Civil War). 

To be fair of course I don’t believe the movie does this entirely perfect. The unevenness does spread into the dialog as well where a large segment of the second act ends up devoted to long soliloquies by the characters dropping large amounts of exposition and revealing their horrible life stories in a weirdly consecutive series of scenes that left me scratching my head a bit wondering how this was going to pay off. Thankfully it all does! The film manages to dig at some insanely deep and complex themes about family, fatherhood and religious devotion and the desire for immortality and paradise. Thanks largely to the build up the story manages to express some fascinating and deeply humanistic ideas about what makes life ultimately meaningful and worth it. This is all deeply personal stuff made more powerful by a cursory understand of James Gunn’s difficult life and upbringing. Theres some intense pain behind all of these characters and it comes from a place of experience. Even though the film ultimately doesn’t push these characters very far in terms of willingness to take deeper risks it is an appropriate thematically sequel to it’s predecessor. If that film is about lost people finding company than this one is about affirming the validity of that connection against difficult challenges. 

On a more fan-servicy note there is a lot going on along the margins of the film that Marvel fans will enjoy. Comic readers with even a slight knowledge of Jim Starling’s Infinity series will probably guess ahead of time what the significance of the Sovereign is ultimately meant to mean in the context of the two Infinity War movies. Sylvester Stallone of all people ends up with a few scenes that ultimately go on to hint at some cool future installments for cosmic Marvel films if you’re away of his character’s history. Even Howard the Duck gets another brief cameo. The one most will probably be talking about though is Stan Lee’s cameo which fans of Marvel will recognize immediately for it’s longterm lore implications. 

As I stated, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is the best Marvel movie since Guardians of the Galaxy. It’s so utterly bizarre that this C-ranked team of heroes without any sort of major following in the comics has gone on to become one of the most beloved series that the MCU has cranked out in it’s last nine years. It’s not perfect. It’s not as focused and thoughtful as Logan. It’s not as cynical and irreverent as Deadpool. It isn’t even as focused and consistently funny as it’s predecessor. It is however a great movie in it’s own right that takes some surprising risks and drags down broken and beaten characters to new depths. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is great! 

Thank you all for reading! if you would like to see more reviews lemme know by tweeting me at @AntiSocialCriti or commenting below. Also be sure to check out my review show The Fox Valley Film Critics!

Live long and prosper!