Jump to content

Loki Trailer and Discussion Thread (Update: Series premiers on June 9th)


Recommended Posts

Just finished watching and I really enjoyed it and the look of the TVA (removed spoiler tag)

 

So now it’s time to throw out that name again MEPHISTO.

 

when we meet Mobius and talks to the Italian girl who did this. She points to the stain glass and it’s the red devil which Mephisto pretty much is. Now with the multiverse war hinted at. Do you think that maybe they are setting up the next big Avengers movie to be a big versus battle against The X-Men/The Mutants?

 

Plus can I just say I LOVE the whole retro vibe of the TVA. It was referred to in a review I read (and I kinda agree) to that it oozes oddness like that of the underworld that we see in Beetlejuice. How about the music? Isn’t it great, and love the Dr Who like vibe I get from the theme, knowing weird shit is going to be coming our way. Oh and the D.B. Cooper thing I will admit I kinda figured that out from the trailer, but I love the idea that he lost a bet :lol: 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think spoilers are necessary in a discussion thread for the show as it releases week to week is it? I'm not gonna hide my spoilers. 

 

I really liked the episode! Loki has been one of my favorite characters from any mythology since I was really young. I've named things, handles, usernames after him (usually the moniker Loki's flight as he's wont to run away after his mischief) and it's crazy to get to see him finally get such a great characterization. The number of emotions Loki goes through so quickly is very believable, as ultimately what Loki fears is feeling powerless. 

 

They cheated a little bit by having this Loki watch what happened to the original Loki but at least its also out of the way. You can tell when Owen Wilson said: "you were born to cause pain and suffering and death. That's how it is, that's how it was, and that's how it will be. All so that others can achieve the best versions of themselves" cut him deep. There's just layers of that kind of stuff to unpack in this. I also liked the hand wave-y explanation that what the Avengers did in Endgame was meant to happen (good guys are "meant" to win") whilst what Loki did was not "meant" to happen (antiheroes get all the interest shit :p ).

 

And we're clearly meant to question both Loki's conflicted idea of free will, where he wants to take it away from others to rule others to make their lives "easy" whilst at the same time yearning for true freedom for himself and the idea he makes his own choices. We're also meant to question the general idea of free will vs. predestination because if the TVA are all about predestination then what are variants and nexus events? Also part of the time keepers' plan? Or breakthroughs of free will? 

 

Also, I thought Owen Wilson was really good, and gave an actual performance that was subtle and well done. And lest we forget, his questions to Loki are entirely based on his investigation, and once you know that his questions become a lot more interesting to parse like "do you enjoy hurting people?". 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so another thing I’ve been thinking of is Natasha could easily be brought back to life now. I posted that pic the page back where they seem to be having a conversation. So with Infinity Stones being used as paper weights. Who says he wouldn’t grab a spare soul stone and give it too her to return. He might not be a bringer of death but he can’t help causing the chaos.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, silentbob said:

Ok so another thing I’ve been thinking of is Natasha could easily be brought back to life now. I posted that pic the page back where they seem to be having a conversation. So with Infinity Stones being used as paper weights. Who says he wouldn’t grab a spare soul stone and give it too her to return. He might not be a bringer of death but he can’t help causing the chaos.

I think if anything it won't happen because I'm pretty sure Scarlett Johansson's contract is up after Black Widow.:p

 

Overall, I'm super down for Loki so far. Tom Hiddleston is so great as that character, and I love the idea of hopping around different time periods, like one episode having a set piece in ancient Rome or something and the next episode having a set piece in 2050 or something. At least I hope they take it that far, that would be dope.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

I don't think spoilers are necessary in a discussion thread for the show as it releases week to week is it? I'm not gonna hide my spoilers. 

 

I really liked the episode! Loki has been one of my favorite characters from any mythology since I was really young. I've named things, handles, usernames after him (usually the moniker Loki's flight as he's wont to run away after his mischief) and it's crazy to get to see him finally get such a great characterization. The number of emotions Loki goes through so quickly is very believable, as ultimately what Loki fears is feeling powerless. 

 

It also works because, yeah, the MCU earned it through the 10 years of characterization since the original Thor, and the audience has no problem riding along. I mean this is just a condensed version of the emotions we've already seen him go through over a much longer span of time through the movies, only this time those emotions are processed much more suddenly and violently.

 

They've established he really does love his mother, and seeing her get killed is the first thing in the reel tape that gets to him.

 

Also I loved the moment of him seeing the Infinity Stones. All his effort to escape and steal the Tesseract and continue his quest for world conquest, and... The stones are all just there. All the power of the universe is worthless. Everything he's trying to do is instantly rendered meaningless.

 

How brilliant is their understanding of the character that they can cut him down to a tiny bite-sized cube in just 30 minutes, and it works?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Reputator said:

 

It also works because, yeah, the MCU earned it through the 10 years of characterization since the original Thor, and the audience has no problem riding along. I mean this is just a condensed version of the emotions we've already seen him go through over a much longer span of time through the movies, only this time those emotions are processed much more suddenly and violently.

 

They've established he really does love his mother, and seeing her get killed is the first thing in the reel tape that gets to him.

 

Also I loved the moment of him seeing the Infinity Stones. All his effort to escape and steal the Tesseract and continue his quest for world conquest, and... The stones are all just there. All the power of the universe is worthless. Everything he's trying to do is instantly rendered meaningless.

 

How brilliant is their understanding of the character that they can cut him down to a tiny bite-sized cube in just 30 minutes, and it works?

 

Everything you mentioned is on point. Loved all those scenes. It really is making complex the characterization of Loki we saw through the movies, which always happened mostly off screen. He falls off of the Rainbow Bridge in Thor 1, only to reappear working for Thanos and attacking Earth in The Avengers (what happened in between?). We see him defeated in Avengers only to escape his own death in Thor 2 (wherein he accidentally gets his mom killed). He then reappears in Thor 3 in control of all of Asgard, having kicked his dad Odin to the curb (which kills Odin) and Thor is so disappointed in him he doesn't bother trying to bring Loki to the good side anymore. Loki earns the Grandmaster's trust also off screen. He then redeems himself and gets killed in Infinity War. This show aims to make all these Loki's make sense, and the first episode did a great job of that.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So do we think there’s any possibility of a Loki swap? The “real” 2012 Loki is the one causing all the issues and the one plucked out of the desert is a from a different dimension/timeline/whatever? I have no real reason to think this :p Other than maybe it’s a little odd that Loki ended up in the desert? I’ve not nothing, really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

So do we think there’s any possibility of a Loki swap? The “real” 2012 Loki is the one causing all the issues and the one plucked out of the desert is a from a different dimension/timeline/whatever? I have no real reason to think this :p Other than maybe it’s a little odd that Loki ended up in the desert? I’ve not nothing, really.

 

That'd be interesting. I don't think that's the case since the connective tissue of the scene seemed pretty clear cut and this Loki references having just lost the battle of NY but you never know with multiple dimensions/timelines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One single time line as explained in Loki does seem to make the time travel and time line explanations in End Game make less sense than they already did. 
 

unless, for these time lords or whatever the past and present and future may as well all be the same. So the multi verse war they saved the universe from my have happened for them, but not happened for “us” yet. 

  • Shocked 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

One single time line as explained in Loki does seem to make the time travel and time line explanations in End Game make less sense than they already did.

 

Does it? All time travel, whether that's back and forth through time in one timeline, or traveling back and forth in time in other timelines/alternate dimensions/alternate worlds, all time travel is wonky. I think so long as it seems to make superficial sense and follows its own internal rules we're good.

 

This is more cause I find it interesting, where do you see Endgame time travel rules being broken in Loki (or elsewhere)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of understood it as the time travel they do in Endgame was supposed to happen. Like the time travel itself is part of the sacred timeline. The only part that doesn't make much sense is Cap staying back and marrying Peggy or whatever. That feels like it would have altered the timeline, since Peggy was one of the founders of SHIELD. So that feels like it would have created a big divergence.

 

It never does well to dig too deep into the logic of time travel, though. It doesn't make any sense if you take it far enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fizzzzle said:

I kind of understood it as the time travel they do in Endgame was supposed to happen. Like the time travel itself is part of the sacred timeline. The only part that doesn't make much sense is Cap staying back and marrying Peggy or whatever. That feels like it would have altered the timeline, since Peggy was one of the founders of SHIELD. So that feels like it would have created a big divergence.

 

It never does well to dig too deep into the logic of time travel, though. It doesn't make any sense if you take it far enough.

 

The Russo's explained that Captain America created an alternate timeline by going back and being with Peggy. So any ramifications of that would be in the second timeline Captain America created, not the primary or "sacred" timeline of the MCU that we're familiar with. I imagine the Timekeepers intended for that to happen to, that it was "supposed" to happen as a reward to Captain America - they are allowing him to live in an alternate timeline of his making so he can be happy, etc. 

 

Obviously Captain America comes back to our timeline at the end of Endgame and his whereabouts are made very vague in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier since Marvel doesn't want us to know. But his creation of a second timeline fits so long as the Timekeepers obviously approved of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

The Russo's explained that Captain America created an alternate timeline by going back and being with Peggy. So any ramifications of that would be in the second timeline Captain America created, not the primary or "sacred" timeline of the MCU that we're familiar with. I imagine the Timekeepers intended for that to happen to, that it was "supposed" to happen as a reward to Captain America - they are allowing him to live in an alternate timeline of his making so he can be happy, etc. 

 

Obviously Captain America comes back to our timeline at the end of Endgame and his whereabouts are made very vague in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier since Marvel doesn't want us to know. But his creation of a second timeline fits so long as the Timekeepers obviously approved of it.

So "it fits the rules because we say it does!":p

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fizzzzle said:

So "it fits the rules because we say it does!":p

 

Well "God has a plan" or "the timekeepers have a plan" is as hand wave-y in real life as it is in fiction. If the time keepers intended for Captain America to be rewarded with his own timeline, then . . . it's the case I guess. :p 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

I kind of understood it as the time travel they do in Endgame was supposed to happen. Like the time travel itself is part of the sacred timeline. The only part that doesn't make much sense is Cap staying back and marrying Peggy or whatever. That feels like it would have altered the timeline, since Peggy was one of the founders of SHIELD. So that feels like it would have created a big divergence.

 

It never does well to dig too deep into the logic of time travel, though. It doesn't make any sense if you take it far enough.

 

AAKSVUD.img?h=768&w=1080&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=

 

BUSTED

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

The Russo's explained that Captain America created an alternate timeline by going back and being with Peggy. So any ramifications of that would be in the second timeline Captain America created, not the primary or "sacred" timeline of the MCU that we're familiar with. I imagine the Timekeepers intended for that to happen to, that it was "supposed" to happen as a reward to Captain America - they are allowing him to live in an alternate timeline of his making so he can be happy, etc. 

 

Obviously Captain America comes back to our timeline at the end of Endgame and his whereabouts are made very vague in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier since Marvel doesn't want us to know. But his creation of a second timeline fits so long as the Timekeepers obviously approved of it.

 

Plot twist, shortly after their dance they were both captured by the TVA.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2021 at 9:06 AM, Greatoneshere said:

 

Everything you mentioned is on point. Loved all those scenes. It really is making complex the characterization of Loki we saw through the movies, which always happened mostly off screen. He falls off of the Rainbow Bridge in Thor 1, only to reappear working for Thanos and attacking Earth in The Avengers (what happened in between?). We see him defeated in Avengers only to escape his own death in Thor 2 (wherein he accidentally gets his mom killed). He then reappears in Thor 3 in control of all of Asgard, having kicked his dad Odin to the curb (which kills Odin) and Thor is so disappointed in him he doesn't bother trying to bring Loki to the good side anymore. Loki earns the Grandmaster's trust also off screen. He then redeems himself and gets killed in Infinity War. This show aims to make all these Loki's make sense, and the first episode did a great job of that.

 

I am still yet to be convinced that the Loki from Thor->Avengers will make any sense, at least in the context of the first Avengers film.  His ramblings (motivations) in Avengers is the weakest part of the film, IMO, and the dialogue is hokey: "There is only... the WAR!"  At least this show is using it to add a layer of philosophical tug-and-war between predetermination and free will ("That was supposed to happen" vs. "Oh, who decides that?"), but the way it was presented in Avengers was superficially off-putting.  I'm so glad by end of the episode Loki was able to recognize the dumb things he said in the Avengers.  Although, he kind of did that by the time Thor 2 took place anyway.  The characterization of Loki in Avengers is most variant than Loki in any of the other Thor movies.  

 

And on paper I wouldn't be sold by the shortcut of emotional onslaught by a highlight reel of your entire life, BUT Hiddleston's performance was so damn good I bought it.  Any lesser physical acting would have had me saying, "Come on man, no one would buy this shit."

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, cusideabelincoln said:

 

I am still yet to be convinced that the Loki from Thor->Avengers will make any sense, at least in the context of the first Avengers film.  His ramblings (motivations) in Avengers is the weakest part of the film, IMO, and the dialogue is hokey: "There is only... the WAR!"  At least this show is using it to add a layer of philosophical tug-and-war between predetermination and free will ("That was supposed to happen" vs. "Oh, who decides that?"), but the way it was presented in Avengers was superficially off-putting.  I'm so glad by end of the episode Loki was able to recognize the dumb things he said in the Avengers.  Although, he kind of did that by the time Thor 2 took place anyway.  The characterization of Loki in Avengers is most variant than Loki in any of the other Thor movies.  

 

And on paper I wouldn't be sold by the shortcut of emotional onslaught by a highlight reel of your entire life, BUT Hiddleston's performance was so damn good I bought it.  Any lesser physical acting would have had me saying, "Come on man, no one would buy this shit."

 

Yeah agreed on all points. Hiddleston once said in response to a fan question he'd have loved to do a miniseries about his time between Thor 1 and The Avengers (this was years ago during Nerd HQ at ComicCon). He said he felt like Loki would run a 1970's rock club/lounge. This is not during Thor 1-Avengers gap, but dig this. Also for anyone who doesn't remember these two shared the screen years ago in Midnight in Paris and had wonderful chemistry (Owen Wilson and Tom Hiddleston). Great to see them back together.

 

loki-short-film.jpg
WWW.SLASHFILM.COM

Long before he had his own TV series, Loki almost appeared in a short movie set in the 1970s.

 

That'd have been so cool. Imagine a fan question almost making that a reality. It wouldn't have covered Thor 1 to Avengers but the idea is still there. Clearly Hiddleston pushed for it at one point. Who knows what happened to Loki during that time. And Hiddleston crushed the whole episode, but particularly the highlight reel. 

 

With someone who enjoys tricks and mischief but doesn't know the line, I ask: "do you enjoy hurting people?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watched when it first aired then when I finally got home from a long week of work early Friday morning, I implored my wife to watch. She was all "but I don't know ANY of this, I don't know what anything is going on at all!" to which I said "Hunny, just watch this episode objectively and if you enjoy it, say so." By the end, she was just as enthralled as I was rewatching it and that lit up my heart! 

 

Tom is perfectly cast as Loki, this show (of all that had been initially announced) was THE one for me to watch & as of yet, has lived up & surpassed my expectations. I'm just surfing the whole vibe of this show & am eager to be taken along for what looks to be one hell of a ride!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

Chris Evans is apparently going to be in another Marvel movie, I would assume it's either going to take place during WW2 or have some kind of multiverse shenanigans.

 

I'd be down for a Cold War, finding of SHIELD movie with a Chris Evans that's totally not Steve Rogers, but some other super soldier working under a different alias.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Remarkableriots said:

Do you have a link where Marvel announced this?

They haven't I don't think, it just got reported on a few times a few months ago

 

MEGA549838_094-e1610494005770.jpg?w=1024
DEADLINE.COM

In a move that is sure to rock the Marvel Cinematic Universe, sources tell Deadline that Chris Evans is cleaning the dust off his Captain America attire as he expected reprise the role in the MCU in some form.

 

chris-evans-captain-america-social.jpg
COLLIDER.COM

Chris Evans is negotiating a return to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, as the actor will reprise his role as Captain America in at least one new film.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

They haven't I don't think, it just got reported on a few times a few months ago

 

MEGA549838_094-e1610494005770.jpg?w=1024
DEADLINE.COM

In a move that is sure to rock the Marvel Cinematic Universe, sources tell Deadline that Chris Evans is cleaning the dust off his Captain America attire as he expected reprise the role in the MCU in some form.

 

chris-evans-captain-america-social.jpg
COLLIDER.COM

Chris Evans is negotiating a return to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, as the actor will reprise his role as Captain America in at least one new film.

 

That would be cool!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...