Discussion in 'Movies and Television' started by eagc7, Sep 18, 2018.
Yeah, all the digs at the multiverse were fun, including that that series IS a (unofficial) multiverse.
It's late as hell, but I finally had the chance to edit my Loki review. God was this show hard to talk about without spoilers.
I haven't even watched this yet. I don't know if I ever will based on some things I've heard. It's crazy, because back when this was announced it was like Christmas for me since Loki is my favorite MCU character.
But I haven't been excited about any of the MCU Disney + shows, nor am I feeling much of anything beyond "meh" for Phase 4 in general (minus maybe GOTG). I don't like the direction they're going in. I've pretty much been spoiled for all the shows because I wanted to know what I was going to get before I bothered to tune in, which is definitely a far cry from how I felt about the MCU pre-Endgame.
The only thing I care about is the writing and treatment of Loki himself, and I've heard he's depowered and takes a backseat to Sylvie in his own show and she's mostly better than him at everything. And that they take the piss out of him a lot. I have no desire whatsoever to sit through that shit, if that's the case. If there's one thing I want to keep my love for within the MCU, it's Hiddleston's Loki. I'd rather not watch if I'm going to see him belittled and written down so another new character can be propped up.
1. I wouldn't say Sylvie is more powerful, per se. Her abilities are that of The Sorceress in the comics, which means she can briefly take control of other people's minds. That's a little bit more handy than having to trick people. But Loki, overall, holds his own against her most of the time.
2. The devious, unfettered Loki still exists, since this version, dubbed "Professor Loki", is a Variant. The series sets up the chance that we'll see villain Loki again.
3. If you're a Loki fan, you'll kick yourself for not witnessing the bonkers episode 5 with all the variant Loki' dumped in the same place, including Classic Loki marvelously played by Richard Grant. You'll be asking for a new Loki series with just him as the main Loki. I just wish President Loki got a little more screen time. Maybe in Season 2?
4. This series is the true table-setter for everything else coming down the pike.
5. I feel like Howard The Duck should show up in this series...he'd be a good fit for the TVA.
Totally. That's a super good fit in my opinion too and not something I considered. Howard would be absurd, not serious and very emotional which would contrast really well with Loki's personality.
He'll show up in What If
This Loki gets stuck in a time loop where he's repeatedly kicked in the balls and makes no attempt to escape. Don't watch this show for Loki.
Man, once you see Richard Grant's Loki you won't even give a damn about Hiddleston's.
As for Sylvie, I don't see the big deal about it.
I recall he did try to escape by trying to talk his way out of it to Sif. Then he just stopped because its what he felt he deserved due to Sif's words getting to him and being right in a sense.
I agree. Yes, let's not have any moments of growth for the character.
I thought this scene was excellent. He can't escape and, once he learns he can't run away from his problems, learns to start confronting them properly. ST (Sacred Timeline) Loki looks for every opportunity to escape when he's presented with a major problem (usually being captured) rather than learning how to be contrite. Professor Loki learned how to be contrite and take on problems head-on - which made all the difference in episode 5.
This is also why he sees Mobius as a true friend and almost a better father figure than Odin. Mobius is teaching Professor Loki how to deal with problems head-on, how to get in touch with his empathy and learn how to be contrite...all the qualities Loki needed to be a hero but, when lacking those qualities, instead became a villain. He's still somewhat narcissistic, since that's his primary character flaw, but he's learning to curb some of those impulses for the greater good.
Like I said, though, ST Loki is still out there and Professor Loki doesn't really take away from ST Loki - he's just a variant Loki that learns how to be the hero of his story instead of the villain for once.
BTW, the simple reason the TVA didn't interfere with The Avengers screwing with the timeline was because the Tessaract had to be recovered by Loki to create a variant that would join up with Sylvie to find He Who Remains.
The reason Dr. Strange couldn't see any other possibilities on how to win against Thanos was probably because the TVA cut all the other possibilities off and reset the timeline, thereby ensuring Captain America would reset all the stones, of which the TVA probably also went in and reset behind him. Basically, the Sacred Timeline was allowed a single branch and the main continuity got pruned to follow the branch...all for the sake of Loki obtaining the Tessaract, creating a variant and leading to Loki finding He Who Remains. It's very interesting - and honestly, I would call this series the official end of Phase 3 with an exclamation point!
With some of the dialogue I wonder if we’ll see Loki reverse his own death by the end of the show. Or perhaps we’ll find out he did what was suggested all along.
I could see a showdown between ST Loki and Professor Loki in season 2.
1) Should've just used Enchantress. You make it sound slightly better than her leading him around in his own show, though.
2) I don't need 100% villain Loki. I've always been on board with Loki developing and becoming more of an antihero. The scene that made me love Loki wasn't a scene where he was a villain, after all - it was the scene where he confronted Odin after he found out he was a Frost Giant. But I do want competent, not made a mockery of Loki. That's very different than character development or evolution.
3) While I don't mind seeing various iterations of Loki, I'm not really enticed by it. Anymore than I'm enticed by this multiverse stuff where we're going to see Garfield and Maguire's Spiderman. It's not something that appeals to me on its own.
4) See 3. Again, all I really care about when it comes to this show is Loki. The MCU original. I don't care what's coming down the pike if they crap on him.
That said, I may check out an episode or two and decide for myself at some point. But I'm out quick depending on how I feel about how they're writing Loki. (And if they have another scene like the one of him getting repeatedly kicked in the balls - NOPE).
Yeah, I heard about that (getting kicked repeatedly). And was automatically turned off by it. That's taking the piss out of the character, like I mentioned in my previous post. Not interested in seeing that.
I like Richard E. Grant and all.....but yeah, that's never gonna happen with me.
The big deal with Sylvie is if she usurps Loki on his own show, which I've gotten that impression with many reviews. That kind of thing automatically damns a new character in my eyes. It's a great way to make me hate your new character.
I don't think she usurps the show. She shares it with Loki but Loki always remained the protagonist. I personally feel some viewers are too hypersensitive about her role. I also think that one of the interesting things about Loki are the character arcs that several secondary characters go through. I think Marvel projects have a huge strength in that they often make us invested in secondary characters.
I mean, just recently with The Falcon and Winter Soldier we got a very charismatic Zemo-- that's not a bad thing. With Sylvie, you became invested in her story and became disappointed (but not surprised) when she gets her revenge. Becoming invested in Sylvie doesn't mean I'm less invested in Loki, it just means I now have two characters that I'm invested in. (Kudos to the acting, writing and directing for making Sylvie someone we want to see more of.)
In my personal opinion, you'd be doing yourself a disservice by not watching this show then.
You say that because you haven't watched it.
1. She doesn't usurp him and those that claim she does don't know what the term means. Hell, in that case, The One Who Remains usurps both Loki and Sylvie. Well that or some people are just triggered that their manliness has been shaken by a strong female character, which in that case, fuck those people!
2. The show is called "Loki," and she is as much of a Loki as Hiddleston.
3. You should be far more concerned at how weak he is compared to the TVA than Sylvie.
4. Hiddleston has wonderful chemistry with Wilson and his banter with him is what makes the show entertaining. He still steals every scene he is in.
Like if you don't want to watch the show, fine, but don't make up fake reasons to based on what others proclaim. And it's only 6 episodes, so if you already have Disney+, what's the big deal? I'm sure you have spent 5 hours watching other stuff you hated and wish you hadn't bothered with before. If you want a real reason to not watch the show, then go with my opinion that the first episode is beyond boring.
I don't have Disney +. I intended to subscribe for the Marvel shows, but never did. Don't really want to now since there are other platforms I get more use out of and I'm very selective when it comes to streaming services. I cut the cord for a reason - no way am I paying the same amount for tons of streaming platforms. My boyfriend has it for now, so I could use his.
She may be a Loki, but the show was sold on Hiddleston's Loki and that's why I was excited for it.
As long as she isn't smarter, better in every way then him, leads him around by the hand constantly, and the show is more about her than him, she might be cool to me.
I'm a woman, and "strong female character" doesn't mean much to me when I read or hear it these days. It tends to be a buzzword for bland ass overpowered female characters that aren't written worth a crap, whose only story arc is discovering their own awesomeness while everyone around them are written down.
I prefer well written characters. If she's that, and I don't feel like they're knocking down Loki to prop her and it's his show first and foremost, I could like her.
Okay, this makes more sense and I totally get you. We're using my wife's parents account, but honestly, Disney+ has really sold itself to us in the last few months so if they were to get rid of it, we would end up subscribing to it ourselves and drop Netflix, which we hardly ever watch anymore.
of course the show was sold on Hiddleston, they weren't going to spoil everything about the show. After all, you don't go into a show with the expectation that it is only going to be about one character and how perfect their perfect perfection is. The Falcon and the Winter Soldier still featured other characters beyond just Bucky and Falcon and even though Zemo stole every scene he was in, it didn't take away from Sam and Bucky. Loki is the same way. Just having other great characters in it does not take it away from Hiddleston.
Look at Better Call Saul. The show was solely advertised on Saul Goodman, but it's not just about Saul, it's also about Jimmy McGill's decent into becoming Saul along with Mike, Kim, Lalo, Gus, and Nacho. There's more to it than just Saul Goodman, which is a great thing because a show on just him would be pretty boring.
And why does it matter if she were to be? It's the writing that matters, not which character is better.
It depends, sometimes sure. However, when I think of strong female characters I think of Ellen Ripley, Sarah Connor, Samus Aran, She-Ra, Teela, Motoko Kusanagi, Hitomi Kanzaki, Haman Karn, etc.
That is exactly what Syvlie is. Hell, if you don't like to think of her as a Loki, think of her as Enchantress.
Separate names with a comma.