Tumgik
#don’t necessarily think that means variant Loki will be gone if we get another one too
wrenhyperfixates · 3 years
Note
What do you mean by "another incarnation of Loki" ?
Well, what don’t I mean? Lady Loki, kid Loki, king Loki (could this even be the rouge Loki variant?), or really any other Loki from any other branch in the timeline
8 notes · View notes
juliabohemian · 3 years
Text
oh dear
I have noticed a number of posts circulating which imply that ANY character being mean to Loki EVER and for ANY reason = abuse.
I will admit that I initially felt mostly irritation at what appeared, on the surface, to constitute such a complete and utter lack of critical thinking. What I’ve realized, though, is that people who make such posts definitely believe what they are saying. And like everything people do and say, there’s a deeper reason for it. The fact is, traumatized characters attract traumatized fans. And not all of those fans are in a good place, emotionally. And those people are perfectly valid, even if the conclusions they draw are not.
When it comes to fiction, good characters are complex. That means they are conflicted and flawed. They make mistakes. They lash out when they are afraid or hurting. They sometimes hurt other characters. Loki fits that bill very well. It’s one of the reasons he is so popular. Not just with traumatized people, but with people in general. He’s relatable.
The problem comes when fans relate to fictional characters, but really aren’t conscious of why, because they aren’t all that conscious of themselves. They haven’t done a whole lot of self-reflection. Maybe because they aren’t ready, because their trauma is too fresh. Or maybe they are still living in crisis and don’t have the freedom to self-reflect. Those possibilities are all valid.
But very often, when a person goes through trauma and doesn’t have the luxury (and yes, it is a luxury) of working through it, their reasoning skills can become flawed as a result. Trauma, especially childhood trauma, tends to have a negative effect on our ability to socialize and form intimate relationships, because it damages our ability to interpret the intentions of others. We call this hostile attribution bias.
The problem with hostile attribution bias, is that it makes it difficult to tell when people genuinely mean you harm. If a person’s words, actions, or facial expressions are ambiguous in any way, they will be interpreted as being hostile in nature. This keeps one on the offensive, constantly, always anticipating the next blow. Very often, no such blow is coming. But it doesn’t matter. Fear is real, and the experience of it is real.
It stands to reason that someone who struggles to interpret the intentions of real-life people would also experience the same difficulty with fictional characters. For instance, fans who identify with Loki because they perceive him as being a victim will have a hard time seeing him as anything else. Thus, anyone who harms Loki in any way is just further proof that the universe is against him and always will be.
This is referred to as an external locus of control. It means that a person sees life as something that is happening TO them, and that they are powerless to affect the outcome. It’s also important to note that people with this mentality struggle deeply to heal from their trauma. They are stuck in a sort of Groundhog Day scenario, living the same thing out over and over again. Because of their flawed perception, everything that happens to them feels like an extension of that initial trauma.
So, it would make perfect sense that a person with a history of trauma, who suffers from attribution bias, and who has an external locus of control, would be extremely uncomfortable watching anything bad happen to Loki. In fact, it would probably be traumatic for them.
And while their feelings and their experience of those feelings are 100% real, their perception of reality is not entirely accurate. In other words, what they think is happening is not necessarily what is happening.
Loki’s initial trauma, believe it or not, was just being abandoned as an infant. Even though he can’t remember it, that experience alone can result in lifelong emotional struggles. In real life, we refer to this as an attachment disorder. A person with an attachment disorder usually develops major issues with abandonment. They also suffer from (wait for it) attribution bias. And that bias absolutely affects their perception.
Loki’s next trauma was being raised in a dysfunctional family. Not only were they dysfunctional, but they weren’t a very good fit for Loki. Loki was a quiet, contemplative person. He was a thinker, an intellectual. He would rather read or do magic. So, not a good fit for Asgardian society. The combination of Loki’s initial trauma, with his inherent temperament, and his dysfunctional family is what led to the inevitable breakdown that is regarded as Loki’s “villain” arc. I’d like to point out that, in reality, such a person would have probably suffered a breakdown much sooner than that. Typically, prior to reaching adulthood.
Loki’s next trauma was encountering Thanos. Now, we have no idea exactly what happened between Loki and Thanos. We know only that it wasn’t good and that it resulted in Loki being absolutely terrified of him. Other than that, details are fuzzy. I think it’s fair to assume that whatever mistreatment Loki endured probably qualified as torture. Whether it was physical or psychological, we cannot know for sure.
While Loki’s Thanos-related trauma was NOT an extension of his family-related trauma, his decision to entangle himself with Thanos was a product of that trauma. By which I mean that his willingness to align himself with someone like Thanos came from a place of desperation, and a desire to prove himself to someone who he perceived as being qualified to validate him.
So, fast forward to the LOKI show. Our version of Loki never returned to Asgard in chains, was never told that it was his birthright to die, nor endured any gaslighting from Ragnarok-Thor. He never got his neck broken by Thanos. He never went through any of that. He arrived at the TVA, fresh off his failed attempt to take over planet Earth. He was all fired up and defensive, as anyone in his situation would probably be.
Now, here’s where we need to put our critical thinking caps on. Because, I hate to tell you this, folks...but unlike most of the Loki content we’ve gotten prior, this content is actually well written. It’s VERY well written. And while it might be tempting to respond to it with pure emotion, it is imperative that we don’t abandon all logic and reason. This show is not an extension of the gauntlet of trauma we’ve watched Loki endure since he first appeared on screen. The creative minds involved in this venture ALL care deeply about Loki’s character and want to see him succeed (whatever that means for him).
Enter Mobius. He’s a cog in a very big machine. He likes to think of himself as being more than that. He establishes a rapport with his boss in the hopes of distinguishing himself from his peers. His interest in his work is personal. He likes what he does.
From Mobius’ point of view, Loki is an asset. He has information that could help solve the bigger puzzle. But Mobius exists in a world that affords him access to multiple realities. He has probably met dozens of Lokis. And he has probably seen hundreds of people casually pruned or executed or reset. It’s just part of the world he happens to be in. And he doesn’t question it, because he has been brainwashed.
So, does Mobius attempt to manipulate Loki? Absolutely. Just another day at the office. And it works, because he knows Loki better than Loki knows himself, has studied him and other Lokis. And it’s hard not to be mad at Mobius for causing Loki pain. Especially when that is followed up by Loki eagerly taking Mobius up on his offer to help track down the other Loki variant.
I think some people might find Loki’s enthusiasm disconcerting. And there are certainly aspects of it that can be considered such. Loki, at his core, just wants to be told that he is doing a good job, that his contributions matter. That part of him is definitely a product of trauma. But is Loki motivated entirely by his trauma? Not really. Despite his manipulations, Mobius offers Loki the closest thing to warmth and compassion that he has seen for a while. Some of that is genuine and some of that is not. And faced with the reality that everything he knows is gone, Loki does what most people in his situation would do, he tries to be productive. He gets busy. He distracts himself. Because at the moment, little else is under his control.
Despite all of that, you simply cannot have compassion for Loki and none for Mobius. Because Mobius is a victim too. He was abducted from his own reality. He is living a lie. He is part of something that, upon deeper reflection, he realizes he doesn’t agree with. He is so very much like the Loki we first met in 2011. He is such a well-written and multi-faceted character, I thoroughly enjoy his on screen time with Loki.
But I understand that there are people who are not in a place, emotionally, where they can overlook such plot devices. And I sincerely hope that those eventually people find healing. In the meantime, let’s try to remember that this is a work of fiction. And unlike real-life trauma, when it becomes upsetting, we can turn it off and walk away.
103 notes · View notes
iamanartichoke · 3 years
Text
I'm creating my own post in order to avoid adding negativity to someone else's, but I will link the post that inspired this one for context. This post talks about the theory that King Loki is the one pulling the strings, and it's mostly a theory that I can get behind as laid out by OP, but I have a serious problem with the role Sylvie may play in it, which is what this post is about.
So, okay, I was with [OP] right until this part -
Except, King Loki never met Sylvie. King Loki is everything Show Loki could’ve become if he hadn’t met her. Who he still could be, because it’s possible for him now to kill King Loki and take his place. But he won’t do that, because meeting Sylvie set him on a different path. Because she taught him how to love himself, he can let go of his need to grasp at power to feel special and important and in control of his life.
I'm not saying this is wrong (and my criticism is no reflection whatsoever on OP's theory in general, which is pretty sound overall), but I am saying that if the show chooses to go this way, I'll probably rage quit. It's a lazy trope to fall back on - that the only thing that could prevent Loki from becoming an evil mastermind and/or supervillain is meeting "the one" (in this case, Sylvie) and falling in love with her. It's so over simplified.
For one thing, I don't see how Sylvie taught him anything, let alone how to love himself. They may have a bond even after knowing one another such a short period of time; I'll give them that, since they're variants of one another and that strips away some of the layers and allows them to connect more easily. But Sylvie's existence isn't a lesson and while Loki may admire her for what she's accomplished, it doesn't automatically mean he can see himself capable of the same things. Whether he is capable or not isn't the point. He clearly doesn't hold himself in as high regard as he holds Sylvie (which is super in-character for him, to downplay his own strengths and potential even while recognizing the value in someone else's). Maybe he can learn to view himself as favorably as he views her, but to me, that's not what "teaching someone to love themselves" means.
(It's worth mentioning - but I won't digress too much - that at this point in the show, Sylvie shows no indication that she returns Loki's feelings, nor has she gone out of her way to build him up or show him that he's worthy of love, so it really is just Loki's feelings for her that we're relying on, that this point, to carry the love story.)
To be honest, I don't think he even necessarily views Sylvie as a variant of himself, as much as he views her as a separate person. She may know what it feels like to be a Loki, but her experiences are so different from Loki's and her path is so far diverged that it's more akin to meeting someone who knows what it's like to struggle with depression (or mental health in general): their perspectives are similar, and their emotional cores may align, and meeting may make each of them feel like they're not so alone - but she is Sylvie and Loki is Loki and neither one of them can step into the other's shoes and know exactly what it's like to be them. The way that he interacts with her implies that Loki is aware of this - that is, he's aware that they are two separate people, even as Mobius insists that they're the same.
So my point is, even if Loki admires Sylvie or falls in love with her bc of reasons, I would still fail to see how that put him any closer to loving himself. But say it did, for arguments' sake, since that's what the writers are going for. I still feel like it would be lazy to say that this is the one thing that stops Loki from becoming the most evil version of himself. It undermines Loki's legitimate trauma and layers of issues, like his fear of abandonment, his crippling lack of self-esteem, his belief that his worth has never been equal to that of Thor's, his identity crisis and struggle with the idea that he is "a monster," figuratively and literally. By virtue of all of these things being major contributing factors to Loki's fall and his villainy and his need for power to feel in control - which I believe that they are - it would naturally follow that, unaddressed, these would be the major contributing factors to Loki becoming more and more evil until we have a King Loki masterminding the TVA (and, by extension, the timeline, the multiverse, and free will itself - like, that's some pretty significant evil, or at least power).
(Again, it's worth acknowledging that it didn't go that way for Prime!Loki, who proved more than once that he was a good person at heart, and he never met Sylvie either - but, that's beside the point right now.)
But Sylvie can't be the sole person who inspires Loki to address these things, nor would these things just go away or fail to hold the same weight once Loki meets and falls in love with her. Loving Sylvie doesn't change that Loki is a frost giant and has never come to terms with that. It doesn't mean he's suddenly not afraid of abandonment, or of being alone. It doesn't fix the complicated twist of emotions (understatement) Loki feels when it comes to Thor and the concept of worthiness and the truth of their parents' love for them.
At best, one could argue that Sylvie may act as a support system that Loki might not have otherwise had, which would allow him to then confront and untangle his way through these issues to ultimately suceed in becoming the best version of himself. This still renders her role in Loki's life a supporting one as opposed to the one thing that can stand between Loki as he is now and Loki as he has the potential to be (in this case, a full-fledged supervillain).
Loki's issues are issues that will not go away until Loki faces them head on and does the work. Which is a journey, admittedly, too long and complex to be accurately portrayed on-screen in a limited series, but the narrative can either imply that Loki's journey is one of self-love with his feelings for Sylvie acting as a catalyst to his working through the things standing in the way of that self-love - or, it can skip all of that and say that Loki's self-love journey begins and ends with his love for Sylvie, and not only does this "fix" him but it's also the one thing that prevents him from becoming a supervillain who presumably controls all of these things - the TVA, the timelines, etc - without remorse.
I, personally, would have no interest in the latter option, so if it does go that way, I think that'd be it for me. And I realize that a lot of my argument here is focusing on Loki ending up as King Loki, which is still speculation and it may not go that way at all. But I think that - since the show has confirmed it's going to explore self-love through a romance - my points about Sylvie's ultimate role in Loki's journey of self-acceptance are still worth mentioning, I think.
68 notes · View notes
beaft · 3 years
Text
to the anon who asked for my thoughts on the lokey show (tumblr ate your ask and my response, i’m sorry)
context note: i have not seen the last two episodes yet. but here are some thoughts under the cut.
my prevailing stance thus far is "it could have been worse." 
my slightly more complicated stance is that it's not a bad show, per se. the acting is great, the character work is great, the script is mostly great - but it does suffer from having too many moving parts. there are a lot of clashing themes and ideas and plot threads and the whole thing just ends up tripping over itself a little bit. 
theme number one: God of Stories. (i’m doing little titles like it’s a video essay, isn’t that fun?) okay so. we've got the whole question of fate and predestination to play with, and that connects nicely with loki's "performative villainy" thing (i.e. the notion that he's cosmically doomed to be The Bad Guy, so there's no point trying to be anything else). honestly, i kind of wish they'd gone with that as their central thesis - stories that acknowledge their own fictionality and provide a commentary on the nature of storytelling are my jam - but so far, there just hasn't been as much of that as i would like.
 two: Investigating The TVA. this is more a thriller plotline - what is the TVA? who created it? is it benevolent or not? who are the timekeepers? this plotline was really prominent in the trailers, so it was a little jarring to find that loki and mobius only actually worked together for one episode. the writers seemed to be going for a sci-fi mystery coupled with “loki learns the meaning of friendship”, but then they backtracked and shifted focus from loki/mobius to loki/sylvie before we even had the chance to get a handle on mobius and loki’s dynamic.
which brings me to three: sylvie! i love sylvie, i really do. but (of course there’s a but) i’m a little confused about what her role is supposed to be, narratively speaking. she almost feels like more of a protagonist than loki himself does, in the sense that she’s the only one with clear goals and motivations (as well as more to gain/lose). not a bad thing, necessarily, but it does muddy the waters further in terms of who we’re meant to be following and rooting for. she's not a straightforwardly "evil" version of loki, which could have been interesting and tied into the whole “performative villainy” thing. she's a love interest, but also she isn't. she's an antagonist, but then she's not. there’s this weird tension between the loki-and-mobius buddy-cop friendship and the loki-and-sylvie fuck-the-cops friendship. 
finally, four: the romance. i don’t know exactly what the writers are trying to go for with loki/sylvie, and honestly, i don’t think the writers know either. is it narcissism or self-love/forgiveness? is Cosmic Destiny or is it two lonely people confusing friendship with attraction? it doesn’t feel necessary, and in the end it only serves to complicate an already-byzantine plot. i think this is partly due to the show’s brevity. six episodes aren’t really enough to do as many things as Loki is trying to do, and as a consequence the pacing feels very off: things happen too fast, relationships develop off-screen to save time, the status quo is constantly shifting and being upended. as soon as we get used to one dynamic or one situation, it’s replaced with another and the rollercoaster continues. i personally think it could have benefited from being twice the length, if only to give the characters some breathing room.
i’m also - forgive me - a little bit salty that we were promised genderfluid loki and didn’t get it. the bisexuality was a genuinely unexpected and lovely reveal, but i do feel that if you give an interview where you talk explicitly about genderfluidity and the importance of trans representation, you have a responsibility to deliver on that. (and no, a female loki variant does not a genderfluid character make, especially if she’s the only one. there’s also a variant that’s just a crocodile. it means nothing.)
and those are (some of) my thoughts on the lokey show, aren’t you glad you asked :)))
9 notes · View notes
aion-rsa · 3 years
Text
Marvel’s Loki Episode 4 Ending and Post Credits Scene Explained
https://ift.tt/eA8V8J
This article contains Loki episode 4 spoilers.
Loki episode 4 is, well…we’re just gonna say it…the best episode of the series so far, by far. It rivals even the best chapters of WandaVision in its ambition, scope, and general batshittery. And a good chunk of that comes in the final moments, as well as what comes after.
That’s right, folks. Loki episode 4 engages in that proudest of MCU traditions: a post-credits scene.
Let’s try and make sense of all this, shall we?
Is Mobius Dead?
In what is perhaps the first truly heartbreaking moment on this show, Owen Wilson’s fan favorite Mobius M. Mobius gets himself deleted after confronting Judge Renslayer about the true nature of the TVA, its agents, and the Time-Keepers. Unlike the other Minutemen, notably C-20 and B-15, Mobius hasn’t had a Sylvie-assisted memory reactivation, but he’s savvy enough to realize that some of the interests that keep bubbling up from his subconscious (like his adorable fixation on jet skis) are almost certainly fragments of his former life.
Renslayer doesn’t even bother to give him any confirmation, or to dispute his newfound revelation, and instead deletes him from the timeline. It’s pretty sad, considering what a fun and gentle presence Wilson’s Mobius has been on the show. So is he actually gone?
Well, dramatically, this would be the time to kill a beloved character like this. But given what we learn in the post-credits scene where it turns out Loki awakens…somewhere…after being de-rezzed (go watch the Tron movies, kids…they’re on Disney+ and they rule!), maybe this means there’s hope for Mobius, too.
There’s another possibility, although an admittedly obscure one: in the comics, the TVA is staffed by MANY Mobiuses, essentially clones. This isn’t something we’ve even seen hinted at on the show, but is it possible that another Mobius will appear, one who could have his full memories reawakened by Sylvie? It doesn’t seem likely, but it would feel like malpractice if we didn’t point out this detail from the comics.
The Time-Keepers are Fake
In what we can’t really say is a terribly surprising reveal, the Time-Keepers are revealed as fakes. Wizard of Oz-esque androids/puppets, to be precise. This leads to a couple of possibilities…
The Time-Keepers never really existed at all, and the entire creation myth of the TVA is a fraud.
The Time-Keepers were once real, and were murdered/replaced by an entity with their own agenda. As for who that entity could be (a malevolent and all-powerful Miss Minutes, anyone? Just kidding! Or are we…) there are a few possibilities, but we should start with…
What’s Judge Renslayer’s Deal?
Judge Ravonna Renslayer has long raised the suspicions of fans. She’s too in love with “the system” and her job in general. As the song goes, “don’t ever trust the company man,” or woman as the case may be. There’s some serious “your job will never love you back” energy permeating this episode, most pronounced in Mobius, but also apparent in the otherwise shady Judge Renslayer, too.
Just look at the look she gives the camera during Hunter C-20’s confession/debriefing. That isn’t just fear that the “official story” could be challenged or blown up, it’s fear for her own well being. And then the look she gives Sylvie as she gets defeated is one of, well, at least resignation if not outright relief (Gugu Mbatha-Raw is so great in this role). Is Judge Renslayer being manipulated/coerced by whoever created the Time-Keeper ruse?
It’s worth noting that in the pages of Marvel Comics, Ravonna is romantically involved with Kang the Conqueror, a time-traveling villain whose entire modus operandi is messing with the timeline. Yes, yes…we got burned thinking Mephisto was really behind everything on WandaVision, but in this case, the evidence of Kang being behind some of the shady doings at the TVA is increasing…especially since the character has already been cast and confirmed for Ant-Man & The Wasp: Quantumania.
Loki Isn’t Dead…So Where is He?
Loki has awoken…somewhere. Whatever was supposed to delete him from the timeline has instead sent him to another timeline itself, or a pocket universe of some kind. That certainly appears to be a ruined New York City, and you can see a crumbling Avengers tower there. Perhaps he has ended up in a timeline where he won the Battle of New York?
But the fact that he’s there makes us wonder if all deleted variants are instead sent off somewhere. Do they all end up in the same place? Or is this one Loki-specific? It would seem so, because…
Who are the Variant Lokis?
Loki is greeted by three (or four, depending on how you look at it) variants of himself, in a shot that echoes the moment in Avengers when Loki found himself defeated, with the team looming over him. Here, of course, while defeated, he has found potential allies, looking to help him.
They are…
Boastful Loki (DeObia Oparei)
A Loki variant wearing more traditional battle armor and holding a Mjolnir-esque hammer, all we have to go on is the name this character goes by in the credits, “Boastful Loki.” We’re looking forward to learning more about him in the coming episodes.
Kid Loki (Jack Veal)
Kid Loki, however, is a very big deal from the comics. For a period of time in the comics, after Loki had been “killed” during the Siege of Asgard, he returned as a child version of himself…essentially when he was still mischievous but not yet “evil.” His whole purpose was to prove to everyone that he wasn’t necessarily evil and could change.
Kid Loki ended up joining the Young Avengers, a team which we’ve begin to see take shape in the MCU with Wanda’s kids (Wiccan and Speed) on WandaVision, Elijah Bradley on The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, and soon, Kate Bishop on the upcoming Hawkeye series. With Kid Loki here played by The End of the Fucking World’s Jack Veal, it seems that Marvel Studios is getting more and more serious about bringing the Young Avengers to the MCU.
Alligator Loki
OK, honestly, we don’t have any info on “alligator Loki” or even any indication of where he might fit in from the comics or Norse mythology. But for real, just look at how cute he is with those little gold horns!
Classic Loki (Richard E. Grant)
In a serious power move, Marvel Studios has gone ahead and cast Jack Kirby Loki lookalike Richard E. Grant as a “classic Loki” wearing his signature green-and-yellow spandex from the comics. In his early comics appearances (and really, for MOST of his history), Loki was always depicted as older, more sinister in appearance, and generally more shifty than Tom Hiddleston’s roguishly charming and handsome. Richard E. Grant looks like a Kirby Loki drawing come to life, and his appearance here is a tremendously cool reveal. It’s easy to imagine an alternate MCU where they went with a more traditionally villainous route for ol’ Loki and Grant was the villain powering everything.
cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });
So what will this “League of Lokis” get up to in future episodes? We have absolutely no idea, but we can’t wait to find out!
The post Marvel’s Loki Episode 4 Ending and Post Credits Scene Explained appeared first on Den of Geek.
from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3x8rBU9
0 notes