Tumgik
#mcu meta
amarriageoftrueminds · 19 hours
Text
Current mad meta exercise I am indulging for no reason: trying to work out exactly where the Winter Soldier shot Steve in CATWS. 😭
31 notes · View notes
vivelarevolution13 · 8 days
Text
tbh I still think Brock Rumlow was an interesting character and upon further examination way more unsettling a villain than most to me because like. Let’s be real, the second you lay eyes on Robert Redford as Pierce monologuing in his pristine suit and glass office high up in the sky he just screams Evil Politician! at you. You can see it coming a mile away. Meanwhile Rumlow is….Just Some Guy. On the surface, he’s just some side dude. He’s not enhanced, he’s not in some major position of power, he’s just someone who’s really good at what he does and seems dedicated enough to the work and functions well with his team. He respects Steve, might admire him even, but not so much that he gets starry eyed like everybody else. He’s lighthearted but focused, he’s no nonsense, he’s the everyman Steve can relate to way more than spooks like Natasha or Fury.
And okay, maybe what Rumlow does for a living is beat intimidate and kill people, but it’s not like that’s the primary objective, right, because SHIELD are the good guys and this is what Steve does now, too, anyway; except that Steve doesn’t really use any weapons other than the shield, he holds back, he doesn’t carry a gun anymore which is usually fine since he’s dangerous enough without it. But when that leaves him vulnerable, he’s covered: Rumlow’s got his six, and he does it well, and he earns some of his trust. This is familiar to Steve.
And maybe Rumlow’s a little too good, fine, maybe he shoots a guy in the head within the first fifteen minutes of the movie when he doesn’t necessarily have to and then cracks jokes immediately after but that’s alright too, because that guy had Steve at gunpoint and that guy was Bad whereas Rumlow is One of the Good Guys just doing his job, right. Rumlow’s joking around because he’s used to the violence, they’re all used to it, and this is just how it works. They’re just soldiers doing the grunt work and following orders, and this is familiar, too.
Except that they’re not soldiers and this isn’t a war, except that the work is for an intelligence agency whose job it is to hoard and steal information and monitor civilians and orchestrate and sabotage and meddle in internal and external state affairs. Except that the Good Guys, in reality, are extremely grey at best. Except that many of the Good Guys turn out to be Nazis on top of everything else, and it’s not that far of a stretch.
But when it’s all starting to unravel, you’re still thinking well maybe some of these guys didn’t know. Maybe they didn’t do it out of individual belief, and if faced with the right choice, they can be redeemed.
That is until you realize that Rumlow maybe didn’t respect Steve and what he did so much as what Steve could do if only Steve weren’t “weak” in other ways, if Steve had chosen the right side. That it not being personal is less a cop out and more a taunt the same way just following orders has always been, for Rumlow and many many men that came before him and will continue to come after. Until the vault when, by the most charitable of interpretations, Rumlow looks at the Winter Soldier letting himself be smacked around and crying and getting shocked like he’s maybe a little unnerved (if not just downright fascinated) by the whole thing, but not enough that it really changes anything for him, because the end justifies the means and it’s not really his problem, anyway.
Until Sam shows up and Rumlow looks at him like a bird of prey and says This is gonna hurt with a fucking smile on his face, and then you think: shit, man, obviously. How was it not clear from the start.
To me, what makes someone like Rumlow a good villain, even a side one, is not that he’s straight up Insane & Evil™️ or suffering from Tragic Backstory Syndrome or all hopped up on magic superstrength juice or whatever, but precisely the fact that he’s Just Some Guy with a cockroach survival mentality who operates well within the established system and just so happens to be really good at his job - a job that he might’ve even joined thinking it was for a good cause, or because he had something to prove, or simply because it gave him one hell of an excuse to be a bully. Because he either wholeheartedly believes in HYDRA or he just doesn’t give much of a shit either way so long as he gets his due in the end, and both are just as bad.
Because when you strip away all the grand scale superhero theatrics, you’ve seen this before. You’ve seen Rumlows in your school and in your neighborhood and in the military and the cop car patrolling your street. They’re the ones who sometimes say or do somewhat offputting shit but you figure it’s fine because they’re otherwise real nice or charismatic or normal looking, or maybe they work a job that’s framed as helpful or protective or inherently good despite the power dynamics at play, or they share your background and interests and you chat about the weather being crap this time of year.
And every time one of them turns out to be a violent, hateful piece of shit, you’re still somehow surprised then, too, when you really shouldn’t be.
102 notes · View notes
the-bi-fangirl-biatch · 5 months
Text
"why do you keep shipping lokius, it's obviously queerbait and marvel would never do it, so stop wasting your time-"
see the best part of their dynamic is that it doesn't rely on it being romantic! they're character foils, their stories and backgrounds and traits mirror one another's, and they balance each other out. whether platonically or romantically, they need each other. ship them or not, you literally can't deny it. it's not even subtext, it's their canon dynamic.
and tbh who cares if it's canon or not? i get that it would be amazing if the mcu ever did it, and that queerbaiting is bad. but as a fanbase, we don't need to rely on them for material. so much talented artists and writers love it! fandom has never needed permission before, so we don't need to wait on it now.
tldr: let shippers be hopeful and enjoy something! let them read into interactions and throw away lines bc it's fun! don't be mean, thank you
172 notes · View notes
loveloki555 · 6 months
Text
Why Thor: Ragnarok is remake and doesn't fit to other movies of Thor
Tumblr media
I will talking only about chronology in this post. Hela shows ''true history'' of Asgard. Well, but we have one problem. We watched Thor and Thor: Dark World. This both movies are the denial of Hela's words.
Tumblr media
The frescoes show the winning couple. Odin and his daughter conquering the world. Look at Odin. A white, senile beard… interesting… because we saw what Odin looked like over a thousand years earlier at the time of Loki's birth.
Tumblr media
Here later with both sons.
Tumblr media
And here as King of Asgard when Thor and Loki are grown men.
Tumblr media
The war with Jotunheim was in 965 AD.
And Odin looked completely different at that time than he did in 2011-2013.
Next thing… is the case of Borr and the war with Malekith.
Tumblr media
5,000 thousand years ago, Borr was still the king of Asgard and fought against the Dark Elves. Interesting thing, his heir is not with him. Odin is not present during this key battle. He seems to truly believe that his father defeated Malekith.
Why isn't Odin present during this battle? We have two options… and they are related to age. Either Odin was too young to fight battles (Asgardians do not have children during battle, Mr. Taika Waititi! If Loki saw that scene with his mother, he would tear your head off!) or he was a very young man who was just old enough to be regent during his father's absence… which would make him roughly the age of Thor and Loki in Thor (2011).
However, both situations quite exclude the possibility of Odin being an old man with an unstoppable desire for power and an adult daughter.
Even assuming that Borr died quickly after this battle and Odin already had a teenage/adolescent daughter… that still doesn't fill the gaps. Because Odin was not the old man shown in the frescoes. And if he had access to the fountain of youth, he would use it again rather than allow Hela to be released?
Tumblr media
Failure to solve the problem of Hela also puts the events in Thor 1 in a strange twist. Odin actually believes that it's time for Thor to be king. Why? He put off Odinsleep, Frigga really thought he might not wake up from this. He probably also realized that his strength was weakening. And… he didn't tell any of his sons… when I die, your bloodthirsty half-sister will suddenly appear and want to kill you? What kind of ruler does this?
My conclusion : Thor Ragnarok is remake.
We see the actual history of Asgard… up to 2015… where Age of Ultron still honors this timeline.
Overall timeline of Thor 1, Avengers, Thor Dark World, (in the meantime movies related to Avengers like Winter Soldier or Iron Man 3) and Avengers: Age of Ultron. After that, we never see any further events. I would also like to point out that Thanos in Guardians of Galaxy and Thanos from Infinity War are two different characters. The last time we see Thanos from Guardians of Galaxy is in the scene with the gauntlet at the end of Age of Ultron. Thanos in Infinity War is nothing like the previous Thanos.
Well, Thor is probably still looking for those stones, and Loki is preparing a surprise for Thanos in their universe.
The further timeline, starting with Ragnarok, has completely different events and one could even say a different universe.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
166 notes · View notes
gloriousburden · 2 months
Text
Debunking the “thanos brainwashed loki” theory (kind of)
DISCLAIMER: i don’t really have any problems with people taking this theory more lighthearted/just as an headcanon/au sort of thing, my issue is when it is accepted as fully canon, and words, meanings, and statements in interviews are completely twisted. people too often use it to mischaracterize loki, and disregard any of his motives, acts, and issues.
when i first got into the mcu and started interacting with the fandom, i too believed this theory when i first heard about it. until i thought about it a little more, and learned more about loki.
i’m aware that this is a little controversial to say since a lot of people truly take the theory as canon and have basically forever now… but in all honesty i REALLY don’t think it’s true. but let me just state that yes, loki definitely was persuaded/coerced into doing the things he did in avengers by thanos and his goons in order to retrieve the tesseract, that’s very canon as we can see in the scene of loki interacting with the other. loki fears thanos for a reason. thanos is a piece of shit and is shown to be a piece of shit to others including nebula and gamora, who were supposed to be his “daughters”. if he would torture his own “children”, why wouldn’t he torture and subject a stranger that he wanted to use to get the tesseract? so loki definitely was tortured.
i know there’s these two interviews, one with tom hiddleston (here) and the other with joss whedon that confirm loki went through a lot of horrible things between the ending of thor 1 and the beginning of avengers. they don’t necessarily give any specifics, just that it was really bad for him. please forgive me as i cannot find the joss whedon one right now, but i believe it was a video. the article with tom hiddleston which i’ve linked, is him saying “I think somewhere between the end of Thor and the beginning of The Avengers, Loki has been to the Marvel equivalent of the 7th circle of hell. At the end of Thor you see him let go. He lets go of the spear, he lets go of Asgard, and he lets go of the need of his brother and father’s affection and approval. He has bigger plans now.” and joss whedon pretty much said the same (in regards to loki going through horrible things between thor and avengers) from what i remember.
(but even with that being said, i’m going to focus more on canon rather than interviews.)
i’m not here to disprove that loki was tortured, i fully believe that he was and it makes sense considering thanos’ character, but i’m here to prove that he wasn’t FULLY brainwashed into doing what he did.
also trust me, i know that most of the movies loki has been in disregard a lot of the shit he’s been through, but i do feel that if he was truly forced into it, it would’ve been elaborated on. which i will elaborate on in this post.
…………………………………………………………………………….
if anyone was brainwashed into committing the acts loki committed in avengers, they would be very distraught and traumatized when they eventually gained full consciousness and realized that they did those things. examples of this in the mcu being clint (who is literally in the same movie), as well as bucky who really was brainwashed by hydra into being an assassin, and is shown as being deeply traumatized when the brainwashing is undone. even if he didn’t commit those acts intentionally, and in his own will.
we can see in the dark world that loki was not really shown to be regretful about what he did. and honestly, i don’t think that was just them choosing not to show loki as being vulnerable, or them disregarding loki’s issues (per usual) because we actually get to see some of his true feelings, as well as him having a breakdown in the movie. he is willingly vulnerable. “now you see me, brother.”
he is shown to be deeply troubled, and vengeful about the possibility of him unintentionally leading algrim/kurse to frigga, the fact he was locked up and unable to be of any sort of help, as well as obviously frigga’s death in general. it was something that was truly done unintentionally by loki.
if loki had really unintentionally, and unconsciously committed the acts he did, he would be shown to be very distraught about it in the dark world, and it would’ve been elaborated on.
the approach the writers, as well as tom hiddleston wanted to take for loki’s character in the dark world was one that showed us as the audience, and as fans of loki more about him, as well as to see him at his most vulnerable, so why would they leave out his supposed trauma from brainwashing? because that’s not really how it happened.
they would have shown him be vulnerable about being brainwashed, and doing something unintentionally if it were something that really happened. since loki’s writing in the dark world was meant to “humanize” him. we’ve seen him at his most villainous in the last movie, so now let’s see him at his lowest in the one after that.
a major point of mine that disproves the theory is that although loki is shown to fear thanos, he’s not necessarily doing this whole thing JUST for him. he is also focused on ruling over earth, rather than just retrieving the tesseract.
if he was brainwashed, however, he would’ve got the tesseract to thanos without anything in return. thanos wouldn’t have had to bargain with loki, or offer earth/an army to him. he would have just mind controlled him with the scepter, the same way loki did with clint, and called it a day.
another point that disproves the theory is that if loki truly was mind controlled by the scepter, he would act almost robotic, and would be quite still, only doing things when told/motioned to the same way clint was when the scepter was first used on him in the beginning of the movie. (i’ve linked this scene further down in this post when i talk about the misconceptions of loki’s eyes being the same blue as the character’s who were mind controlled.) loki clearly says, and does whatever he wants in the movie. this would not really be the case if he were being mind controlled.
(also another example of loki realizing he had partially caused something unintentionally was thor’s banishment. he is shown to be quite nervous about the fact that thor got banished, although it did end up working in his favor later on in the movie.)
loki has shown many times, even before avengers when he is undeniably a villain, that he has no issues with hurting people to get what he wants. people who use the theory and accept it as canon often (i kind of hate this word, so forgive me for the lack of better words) infantilize and mischaracterize loki as being this character who is completely innocent, and helpless. and that he only became “bad” in avengers. meanwhile loki has always (always meaning since after/during the events of thor 1) been shown as a manipulative character with dark thoughts and violent tendencies. in thor 1, he committed genocide against the frost giants BEFORE he was under the influence of thanos or the scepter.
(let me state that i’m not saying loki is a bad person or a psychopath who just goes off hurting people left and right merely for the fun of it. i’ve elaborated on this, as well as loki’s motives in this post. but basically i’m saying that loki does everything he does with reason, and purpose. he is conniving, and calculated with his decisions. he doesn’t get satisfaction in hurting people, he gets satisfaction in getting closer to his goals.)
loki is already a “tragic victim” type character. you don’t need to erase that he’s capable of and willing to do wrong, and imply that those things were very out of character for him to prove that. characters can simultaneously do bad things out of their own will, while having a shitty past. not all victimized characters are completely innocent, and without flaws.
loki is never shown to have any love for midgard, or midgardians in general. he genuinely wanted to rule over them. in thor 1, loki says “i never wanted the throne, i only ever wanted to be your equal.” in thor 1. but in avengers, he says “i’ve grown, odinson, in my exile.” showing that he, and his motives have changed since then. he’s not the same person he was in thor 1, begging for his father’s love and recognition. not wanting a throne isn’t the case for him anymore. if he wasn’t able to prove himself to his own father, then midgardians were the next option.
in the dark world, loki no longer cares for odin’s approval. “he’s not my father!” “i didn’t do it for him.” as well as banishing/exiling him, and taking his throne. his focus shifting from odin’s approval as his own son in thor 1, to the approval of midgard as their king in avengers, to the approval of asgard as their king in the dark world, shows how loki’s character and his motives developed and changed with each movie. he realized that odin will never approve of him as his own son, let alone as king of asgard. thor 1 was just the start.
the reason this is relevant to disproving the theory, as well as the points i’m trying to make are:
1. the motives were already there. the will to do bad things, was already there before thanos and even the scepter’s influence/interference.
2. loki has changed between thor 1 and avengers, and he didn’t need to be brainwashed for this change to happen. he didn’t change and become “evil” because of what thanos put him through.
3. some people who take the theory as canon, believe that loki is fully good and would have never willingly hurt others to get what he wants, or to prove a point. which could not be further from the truth.
i know most of this won’t really make sense to people who already know these things, but my words (and this post in general) are more directed to/are about those who use this theory to try and make loki seem like he’s a character who only started doing bad things, due to being brainwashed. that he’s a character who would never do anything wrong against his own will. meanwhile, he’s exhibited “bad” behaviors willingly since the first movie he was in.
he’s a character with manipulative tendencies, and deep rooted resentment and jealousy towards those put above him. he is insecure, and is willing to do anything to prove himself worthy.
also a lot of the things and points that the people who believe this theory as canon use as proof are things that have been debunked. a point that they often use is that marvel has confirmed that loki was influenced by the scepter. but the only thing they confirm is that it heightened his anger and negative feelings. a big issue is that people hear “influenced” and misunderstand, taking it as a confirmation that loki was mind controlled, and not that the scepter was just amplifying his negative emotions that were already there, and have been since thor 1.
Tumblr media
(link to the whole page.)
nowhere does it say that he was brainwashed, or mind controlled. influenced? yes, that’s what the scepter does.
another thing is people talking about his eyes supposedly being the same blue as clint’s, and erik selvig’s when they were under the influence of the scepter. when in reality… their proof of this is just lighting, edited photos, or them mistaking loki’s eyes as being green when they’re actually blue. tom hiddleston has blue eyes, and loki in avengers has the same blue eyes that he did in thor 1, before he even met thanos. his eyes aren’t green, and have never been. (also if loki was MIND CONTROLLED by the scepter, his eyes would be EXTREMELY blue, considering his natural eye color is blue.)
examples:
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
he has the same beautiful big blue eyes eye color. not the insanely bright blue that clint, or erik selvig had when they were mind controlled by the scepter.
more examples:
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
guys, if loki was being controlled by the scepter… his eyes would be the same color as theirs since the cgi was purposely used to make their eyes very unrealistically blue so that everyone would know they were being controlled. these two characters both have blue eyes. these pictures show them before being mind controlled/brainwashed, versus afterwards. also… his eyes would be that same blue throughout the movie. which they’re not… clint’s eyes remained that bright blue until the mind controlling was undone by natasha.
Tumblr media
it won’t let me add any more pictures so forgive me, but trust me… it’s not the same blue. loki’s eyes do look a little brighter here so maybe i understand the misconception a little bit, but that’s due many factors that can be explained. one being the makeup put on tom hiddleston in this scene to make his skin lighter as well to make him appear exhausted. another factor being the lighting!! as someone with blue eyes, i know that basically anything can make them appear a different shade. but that even goes for other eye colors. that’s just how it works. another thing to mention is that tom hiddleston is naturally blonde and has warmer skin than this. the contrast of the darker hair and the makeup (ESPECIALLY the makeup used to make his under-eye area look dark, which is only used like that in this scene btw) will make his eyes look really bright especially when he already has bright blue eyes. here’s the scene.
another example of his eye color being this post of mine right here. he literally has the same eyes
we can see that the avengers, specifically the hulk, were influenced by the scepter as well. but their eyes weren’t bright blue, because they weren’t being brainwashed by it and instead their negative emotions that were already there were being heightened. this caused cap and tony to argue even more, bruce banner to become angry and emotional about being the hulk, everyone else to become more hostile, etc… these were pre existing issues. loki’s resentment towards thor as well as his need for approval were pre existing.
……………………………………………………………………………
anyway i will probably update this in the future if there’s anything i left out/to correct mistakes.
moral of the story is, loki was canonically tortured, subjected, and manipulated by thanos. but even with that being said, he was not necessarily brainwashed and he was definitely not brainwashed by the scepter. there is no canon proof of that. the scepter only heightened his negative emotions that were already there.
if loki really was brainwashed, don’t you think he would’ve just retrieved the tesseract for thanos without wanting to rule over earth? it would’ve been that simple. but since that isn’t true and loki was consciously and intentionally doing these things, he wanted something in return. neither clint, nor erik selvig wanted anything in return. they did whatever loki needed them to, unconsciously.
people tend to take the proof of his torture, and mistake it as proof of him being brainwashed for some reason. loki is not an innocent character who only started exhibiting “bad” behaviors in avengers. just because he’s done bad things doesn’t mean that you cannot love him, sympathize with him, or see him as the true victim in the story. he is the god of mischief. he is manipulative, and has deep rooted issues that causes him to do bad things in order to prove himself. you don’t need to dumb down his character, and motives in order to like him.
sorry if none of this makes any sense. i’m really bad at explaining my own thoughts and putting them into words, and i’m sure this could’ve been worded better. i just made this to clear things up as well as give my own take on the theory. don’t take it too seriously but also feel more than welcome to correct me on anything, as well as add your own take or anything else onto this.
thank you for reading!!
56 notes · View notes
moon-andstardust · 6 months
Text
So I've come across a lot of posts that basically say that the only reason people didn't like Steve's ending was because they didn't want him to be happy/they didn't allow him to be selfish. And the last one riled me up enough to post this.
Disclaimer: I'm not trying to attack anyone's opinion, I'm stating my interpretation of Steve's ending and the reasons why I, personally, didn't like it
My reasons for hating disliking Steve's ending, in no particular order:
1. He wouldn’t fit in
Steve has been out of ice for at least ten years, give or take a few. He has had time to adjust and somewhat get used to his new reality. He has also changed as a person(even if his core character traits remained the same). To say that Steve went through a lot would be an understatement: Chitauri invasion, Ultron, Sokovia accords, the whole Thanos shitshow. Anyone who could've understood these things he left behind.
His loneliness isn't necessarily a new thing either, Steve didn't have all that many friends besides Bucky even in the 19s.
By the time endgame rolls around, I think his trouble with fitting in has less to do with what year he was born in and more with other people's reluctance to see beyond his captain america mask.
He'd be just as out of place in the Past as he was in the Future.
2. Peggy has already lived her life.
It's been made obvious that she lived quite a happy life without Steve even if she mourned his death. Peggy had a husband. She had children. All of her life choices were completely disregarded by Steve when he shoehorned his way back into Peggy's life.
Also, she has been dead for about seven years now. And Steve, whose entire character arc before this movie was about changing and adapting, never giving up despite the trauma he experienced, never came to terms with it? He hadn't even known her all that well before going under the ice.
3. Steve can't back down from a fight if his the only one who can help
It's been established many many times that Steve hardly ever backs down from a fight, he's always trying to help people: "If I see a situation going south I can't ignore it." This guy. This guy proceeded to ignore: His best friend being tortured, experimented on and brainwashed by nazi scientists for seventy years; His other best friend being tortured, experimented on and turned into a child assassin by kgb; A secret nazi organization keen on murdering twenty million people slowly corrupting an organization his girlfriend/wife is trying to build.
I can see Steve retiring because he trusted his friends to do the right thing and protect people when he couldn't, but I can't see Steve turning a blind eye on the aforementioned when he was the only one even aware of them
On top of it all, Bucky's family was still around when Steve came back. Did he look Bucky's grieving family straight in the eyes as he told them that their son, their brother, was dead and never coming back? Did he toast in honor of Bucky with the Howling Commandos all the while knowing where he really was? I'm sorry, but I really can't reconcile this version of Steve with the one depicted in the earlier films.
In conclusion, my dislike for Steve's ending wasn't because I didn't want him to be selfish or happy, it was because his decision was extremely out of character and badly written.
108 notes · View notes
Text
How I would’ve marketed “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness”:
1) Don’t even mention the Illuminati. Don’t hype up any of the cameos, especially since they’re not that important in the long run.
2) Release the movie in October and hype the HELL out of it as Marvel’s Halloween special. Basically, the “Hawkeye is a Christmas show” treatment.
3) Focus on the overall spookiness/horror vibes of the movie. And I don’t mean a horror trailer like “Insidious” or “The Nun” where the focus is on scaring people. I mean a horror-inspired trailer, something along the lines of “Nightmare Before Christmas”. Horror elements, but you let the audience know that this is still a superhero movie.
4) Still mention the use of the multiverse, but don’t go too deep into it. Focus more on the movie being Doctor Strange and Wanda’s journey THROUGH the multiverse, not so much being ABOUT the multiverse. Does that make sense? I’m trying to say that this is more of a character journey rather than world-building, which a lot of people thought this movie would be due to the Illuminati and the multiverse.
5) Hype the hell out of this being Sam Raimi’s return to horror and filmmaking. “Eternals” really caught everyone’s attention by pointing out that the director just won an Academy Award. Marvel should’ve done something similar for Raimi, especially since DSitMoM was basically Evil Dead 4. 
2K notes · View notes
racefortheironthrone · 3 months
Note
How was Iron Man thought of by comics readers, before the movie? I've heard different takes, from him being despised to being generally popular.
This is one of those that really changes depending on the era you're talking about. It is true that, overall, Iron Man was not a particularly well-loved or important character before the movie.
Indeed, I would argue he was kind of the bottom of the C-tier. Yes, he was a founding Avenger and he had some solo stories people liked, but he also fucked off out of the Avengers after #16 (because of a weird Stan Lee idea), and wound up leading the West Coast Avengers who were sort of an in-universe joke, very much the also-rans to the Avengers (who weren't particularly that big either). There was likewise a running gag about villains finding it embarassing to lose a fight to "Old Shellhead."
Tumblr media
But he wasn't despised, just kind of inessential and overshadowed by more prominent heroes. This would change in 2002 with the creation of the Ultimates and the Ultimate Universe.
Now, I fucking hate Mark Millar's work, but credit where credit is due: he made Tony Stark a main character when he had not been one before, and the movie would not have happened without his inspiration (although I'd argue there was a lot of sifting the pure from the dross on that one).
One of the ironies of the MCU, though, is that it got its liftoff from Iron Man just at the point where the comics had reached Peak Tony and fans really turned against him during Civil War. Mark Millar might have thought that the Pro-Registration side was self-evidently in the right, but no one agreed with him - especially once he started building interdimensional black site prisons for superheroes, recruiting supervillains to work for the government, and creating a murderous Thor clone. Not only did the fans hate him, but pretty much all of his old friends now considered him a traitor - and Marvel pretty much had to kill Tony and replace him with a pre-fash AI backup, then have Tony be the leader of the "good" side in Civil War II, to deal with the backlash.
(Incidentally, I would argue that Hickman's Avengers run did a way better job with Millar's concept than Millar ever could.)
This is why Captain America: Civil War ended up being a second take for the concept, where both sides were depicted as more reasonable in their motivations and actions than in the comics that inspired the movie, and then Infinity War and Endgame recontextualized Tony as a tragic character who ultimately managed to redeem himself with a heroic sacrifice. (Although since then, they really have gone too far with his canonization.)
54 notes · View notes
moonlayl · 1 year
Text
I love the fact they really put in effort to make Shuri different from T’Challa. The line about T’Challa being “too noble” was amazing, because that IS his story. “It’s hard for a good man to be a king”. That’s a huge part of his inner conflict in the comics. He struggles between putting Wakanda first over the rest of the world. He struggles to be king over being an avenger. Even in the mcu, there was absolutely no reason for him to offer Zemo or Killmonger any hint of sympathy or kindness or understanding, but he did. He kept Zemo alive (despite the man being responsible for his father’s death) and he was absolutely willing to save Killmonger. Because that IS the kind of person he is. 
He revealed vibranium to the rest of the world to help. “You are wrong to turn your back to the rest of the world.” He wanted to provide aid and to protect not just those in Wakanda. He offered to heal and protect Bucky. He offered to house Steve as well (I’m assuming). He opened his borders to the avengers and stood right alongside them as they all fought Thanos. But his decisions that were made with good intentions, and to SAVE people, also came with repercussions as we see in bpwf. 
With Shuri (at least this is my interpretation of what happened, supported by several scenes and her comic counterpart) I think she took everyone else’s words to heart in that moment with Namor. Unlike Zemo and Killmonger, Namor had an army. A powerful one. He wasn’t just one man. He and his entire underwater nation was a very real and powerful threat, and killing Namor, like M’baku had said, would’ve caused eternal conflict between their people, which would’ve hurt more Wakandans. And so she didn’t do it. Because Shuri, especially during this movie, and everything she and Wakanda had been through, will put her country first. She’s dutiful. That’s who she is in the comics as well. 
It’s a beautiful contrast and I love them both for it. 
632 notes · View notes
zylice · 5 months
Text
Loki is the Catalyst of Marvel
‪*If he didn’t let the Frost Giants into Asgard to interrupt Thor’s coronation, Thor wouldn’t have come to Earth and met Selvig who then later helped Loki create the ‘space portal machine’ in the Avengers. ‬
*If he didn’t try to destroy Jotunheim then he would never have fallen into the black hole, gotten the Space and Mind stone and got the Avengers to assemble and ‘deliver’ these Infinity Stones to them. He let himself get caught by the Avengers because he WANTED to LOSE!
‪*If he hadn’t of killed Coulson, we wouldn’t have Agents of SHIELD.
‪*If he hadn’t got the sceptre, Wanda wouldn’t have gotten her amplified powers nor would Vision or Ultron ever have existed. Thor & Tony wouldn’t have had their prophesying visions about what would likely happen in IW ‬‬
‪*If he didn’t let Thanos kill him in Infinity War, Thor would have been snapped out of existence and Thanos would have succeeded in erasing half‬
‪of the universe‬
‪*In Thor The Dark World, he saved Jane in order to prevent the Aether (the Reality Stone) from disappearing into the void‬
*He accidentally got his mother killed & therefore banished Odin which caused to age faster which resulted in him dying and Hela to be released.
‪*He also called for Skurge to take them back to Asgard via the Bifrost but Hela caught the ride with them which resulted in he and Thor to be sent to Sakaar where Thor reunited with the Hulk and met Valkyrie and Ragnarok to be caused. ‬
‪*If he didn’t take the Tesseract from Odin’s vault in Thor Ragnarok, Thanos wouldn’t have been able to find it therefore the snap either wouldn’t have happened or been delayed.
‬ *If he didn’t use the Tesseract to escape in Endgame, we wouldn’t have the multiverse since he wouldn’t have become the ‘God of Stories’ or create the TVA.
‪*Sylvie Killing Kang at the end of ‘Loki S1’ made the next big villain for the Avengers to face in Kang Dynasty and Secret Wars. ‬
‪*In ‘Loki S2,’ he has to save the multiverse from being destroyed.
‪*Loki has to recruit heroes from across the multiverse in order to eliminate the ‘Kang Threat.’‬
‪*He can manipulate and re write time now that he is the ‘God of Stories.’‬
‪He is a catalyst. ‬
‪So there. Loki is indeed more important to the Marvel Universe than we all realised. 😌‬
Doctor Strange saw that the only way it would all work was if Tony sacrificed himself. He saw what Loki was doing behind the scenes. Loki recruited HIMSELF into the TVA after recruiting Mobius and other underdogs in order
to humble him. He even created Sylvie so that he could see from the outside what he had once been like and learn to ‘love himself.’ He has to tell her and his past self to not be selfish and power hungry (akin to Charles telling Logan to ‘guide his younger self’ in X-Men: Days of Future Past. He was ‘acting’ bad in the Avengers!! Loki admired Tony because of what he was doing. His purpose was to save the universe! 😭 He told Thor that the ‘Sun would shine on them again’ because he KNEW that they would reunite again eventually and told Thanos ‘You will never be a God.’ Because Loki was always that many steps ahead in the grand scheme of things. . He was guiding himself and everyone else the ENTIRE time!😌💚
Btw: Loki called Don ‘Mobius’ due to Tony discovering the ‘Mobius’ strip’ in Endgame. He always admired Tony’s ‘glorious purpose’ and that’s why he keeps referring to him in the ‘Loki’ series and Mobius knows ALL about Loki because HE, Loki as the ‘God of Stories’ MADE him that way!😉🧬
Loki’s Impact on the Marvel Universe So Far
He deliberately got caught by the Avengers so that the respective items got delivered and he WANTED to LOSE!
‪*If he didn’t let the Frost Giants into Asgard to interrupt Thor’s coronation, Thor wouldn’t have come to Earth and met Selvig who then later helped Loki create the ‘space portal machine’ in the Avengers. ‬
*If he didn’t try to destroy Jotunheim then he would never have fallen into the black hole, gotten the Space and Mind stone and got the Avengers to assemble and ‘deliver’ these Infinity Stones to them. He let himself get caught by the Avengers because he WANTED to LOSE!
‪*If he hadn’t of killed Coulson, we wouldn’t have Agents of SHIELD.
‪*If he hadn’t got the sceptre, Wanda wouldn’t have gotten her amplified powers nor would Vision or Ultron ever have existed. Thor & Tony wouldn’t have had their prophesying visions about what would likely happen in IW..‬‬
‪*If he didn’t let Thanos kill him in Infinity War, Thor would have been snapped out of existence and Thanos would have succeeded in erasing half‬ of the universe.‬.
‪*In Thor The Dark World, he saved Jane in order to prevent the Aether (the Reality Stone) from disappearing into the void‬..
*He accidentally got his mother killed & therefore banished Odin which caused to age faster which resulted in him dying and Hela to be released.
‪*He also called for Skurge to take them back to Asgard via the Bifrost but Hela caught the ride with them which resulted in he and Thor to be sent to Sakaar where Thor reunited with the Hulk and met Valkyrie and Ragnarok to be caused. ‬
‪*If he didn’t take the Tesseract from Odin’s vault in Thor Ragnarok, Thanos wouldn’t have been able to find it therefore the snap either wouldn’t have happened or been delayed.
‬ *If he didn’t use the Tesseract to escape in Endgame, we wouldn’t have the multiverse since he wouldn’t have become the ‘God of Stories’ or create the TVA.
‪*Sylvie Killing Kang at the end of ‘Loki S1’ made the next big villain for the Avengers to face in Kang Dynasty and Secret Wars. ‬
‪*In ‘Loki S2,’ he has to save the multiverse from being destroyed.
‪*Loki has to recruit heroes from across the multiverse in order to eliminate the ‘Kang Threat.’‬
‪*He can manipulate and re write time now that he is the ‘God of Stories.’‬
‪He is a catalyst. ‬
Doctor Strange saw that the only way it would all work was if Tony sacrificed himself. He saw what Loki was doing behind the scenes. Loki recruited HIMSELF into the TVA after recruiting Mobius and other underdogs in order
to humble him. He even created Sylvie so that he could see from the outside what he had once been like and learn to ‘love himself.’ He has to tell her and his past self to not be selfish and power hungry (akin to Charles telling Logan to ‘guide his younger self’ in X-Men: Days of Future Past. He was ‘acting’ bad in the Avengers!! Loki admired Tony because of what he was doing. His purpose was to save the universe! 😭 He told Thor that the ‘Sun would shine on them again’ because he KNEW that they would reunite again eventually and told Thanos ‘You will never be a God.’ Because Loki was always that many steps ahead in the grand scheme of things. He was guiding himself and everyone else the ENTIRE time!😌💚
Btw: Loki called Don ‘Mobius’ due to Tony discovering the ‘Mobius’ strip’ in Endgame. He always admired Tony’s ‘glorious purpose’ and that’s why he keeps referring to him in the ‘Loki’ series and Mobius knows ALL about Loki because HE, Loki MADE him that way!😉🧬
He actually planned to get killed by Thanos in order to save Thor from being snapped and he knew that he would come back one way or another. He said these things for a reason! “I assure you brother, the sun will shine on us again” and “You’ll never be a God!”
Despite Frigga saying: ‘You’re so perceptive about everyone but yourself,’ the older, wiser Loki knows himself well enough in order to change the other, younger version of himself. He knows EVERYTHING about the Avengers members in the first Avengers movie for a REASON! 😉
So there. Loki is indeed more important to the Marvel Universe than we all realised. 😌‬💚
Thor, Hulk and Loki about the ‘Sun.’ God of Stories Loki made it so that the phrase the ‘sun is going down’ to calm the Hulk down and subdue him and the ‘sun shining on him and Thor again’ was to inspire hope and energy.
The Time Stone is green because of Loki. ‪Did he create it? Did he some how get it to Sanctum Sanctorum?‬
‪Did Loki make Heimdall send Bruce to the Sanctum in Infinity War since Loki had been there before (in Ragnarok?) Is that why Bruce mentions ‘Loki’ to Tony, Stephen and Wong informing and warning them about Thanos?‬
He created the World Tree Yggdrasil and quite literally erased, reset and rebooted the MCU! 🤯
Loki is the ‘World Serpent’ Jörmungandr
It really was ‘Loki All Along.’ 😉
*UPDATED*
103 notes · View notes
galaxythreads · 1 year
Note
i literally don't understand the mcu script writes who've bragged about never having seen the previous movies, like bro??? how do you expect that script to be consistent with the rest of the canon?????????
normally I'd laugh and be like Yeah, anon, these guys are insane, but you have bypassed Mental Breakdown part of my brain and now I am deeply, deeply curious.
---
Why is it that mcu script writers are so proud to be arrogant?
---
Warning for minor language.
So anyway, the person I thought of specifically as being Generally Terrible to the Franchise Lately was Michael Waldron, who wrote Loki, Dr. Strange 2, AND is currently working on Avengers: Secret Wars. (Yay)
So I did a lot of research about where this guy CAME from and how he's impacted everything because I swear to God I'd never heard of him before Loki. And now I see him everywhere, but usually only in loathing.
---
Michael Waldron, according to Wikipedia, is currently 35 as of 2022 and graduated from some Film School i haven't heard of and can't be bothered to remember. He is unmarried(?) and has been active in the film industry since 2014. (8 years, for those of you counting.) He started work on Loki in 2020(? unconfirmed).
The thing that struck me the most was how incredibly short his project list is.
Tumblr media
My man has six (6) completed projects. He had three before he started on Loki. And while this doesn't necessarily mean that he's bad, it does show a level of inexperience that baffles me personally.
For comparison, Kenneth Brangah, one of four screenwriters for Thor 1's list is this:
Tumblr media
And again, it's not like Brangah's list is enormous, but I do see a lot more experience under their belt before they were approached by MCU rather than Waldron, who had done three projects. Brangah had 20 years in sceenwriting when he went to work for Thor. Waldron had six.
And the amazing thing to me is that even the shows Waldron's executive producer on, he wrote like, two episodes for it? Then he handed it off to other writers. So he doesn't, as far as I can tell and I found, seem to have a lot of experience actually working the writing process, just supervising it.
(I could be wrong)
But here is his latest series Heels, for reference.
the section says "Written by" above the names, I cropped it weirdly.
Tumblr media
---
So we have a man who has, at this point, worked six years in the industry. He has worked on three shows. He was the assistant for one show, he did not write in the other one, and he has written for ONE show, total. Produced one show, was the executive producer for ONE show.
Tumblr media
What I am seeing here, is, from what I can see, a lack of experience. And it shows. Badly.
So why did Marvel hire him?
----
According to an interview Waldron did, where I'm drawing a great deal of this information, he has always wanted to work for the Big Leagues. He wanted to work on Star Wars mostly, from what I could see, but he didn't think that Marvel would be bad either. When he approached his agent about how to get working for Marvel his agent told him he needed to have written a movie.
Now you're probably wondering. I DID look at that list of projects he's been involved in, and there wasn't a movie.
You are correct!
Waldron wrote a movie called The Worst Guy of All Time and the Girl Who Came to Kill Him. It's on The Black List and was never filmed, to my understanding. But he sure did write that script. And that script, I believe, is where a lot of issues in Loki start to come to light, but we'll get to that in a minute.
"At some point the script made its way to Marvel as they were meeting people for Loki and that got him in the door to pitch and that pitch got him the job."
When Kevin Feige was hiring directors, Waldron walked in and "I thought I was going to get it, but that's my attitude, I guess, hopefully as unarrogantly as that can sound, but I think you got to be confident" (Waldron). Feige was apparently impressed and hired him on.
Which again, a bold choice that COULD have been great, to give a small name the chance to work on a project like this?? Incredible. Just not in this context.
I feel immensely confused that MCU, which is a multi-billion dollar industry, did NOT actually hire someone with years and years of experience like they did for Thor 1. Instead, they went with someone who, personally to me, didn't have enough experience to seem like he knew what he was doing.
So now Waldron is working in MCU. Things are going great for him. He has TWENTY WEEKS to come up with the plot, the scripts, and the story for the entire Loki series.
TWENTY. I cannot emphasize this enough. That is no time at all. They went from blank slate NO IDEAS to a full script in TWENTY. WEEKS.
So HOW then, did Waldron get approached to do Dr. Strange 2?
Apparently, Waldron and Owen Wilson were talking one day and Waldron got asked to do Dr. Strange 2 because it was just as chaotic as Loki was.
WALDRON: Yeah. By that time, I had been able to build the trust. We'd written Loki. Loki was in good shape at that point. It was headed into production. I was getting ready to go to Atlanta. Fortunately, the scripts were in good shape. One of our writers, a close friend of mine, Eric Martin, took my place and went and was the writer on set, which you've got to have, and he did amazing work carrying the show across the finish line, from a writing standpoint. And yeah, it was just, "All right. You did Loki. That was crazy. Come do Dr. Strange. This is going to be crazy, too." That was really fun.
And guess what! This is the instructions he was given FOR Dr. Strange 2.
WALDRON: It is purely, 100%, "Make the most kick ass Dr. Strange movie you can possibly make." There was no, "You got to get here. It's got to fit here."
Which, by the way, Feige stated that he had no plans for the Loki series beyond time travel, and Waldron was instructed to do whatever he felt like. A 100% most kick-ass time travel series, you might say.
---
Okay. So now that we have some background, I'm going to get onto my soapbox and explain why this man was a horrible, horrible directing choice and shows 0 understanding of the characters. This is going to go over Loki and Dr. Strange 2, for reference.
---
LOKI:
The biggest disaster I see with Loki is that the FIRST -- and I emphasize this, the FIRST -- thing that Waldron says about Loki in the interview is this:
Waldron: And I'd written a time travel movie about a character who was kind of a villain, and kind of a sh*thead, like Loki.
I think that the problem that Waldron suffered from the most in Loki is that Waldron didn't want to make a TV series about Loki. He doesn't like the character very much from what I can tell. Obviously, he calls him a sh*thead, but he never has anything nice to say about Loki as a whole either. He doesn't want to talk about Loki as a person, or Loki's story, Waldron wants to talk about the TVA. I seriously cannot emphasize this enough. Not once in the interview did Loki as a person come up. Loki didn't even seem to be a character to him.
The TVA is where Waldron seems like most of his time was spent, because that was, after all, what MCU wanted to do. I honestly, genuinely do not believe this man would have taken the job for Loki if it wasn't about time travel. Because Waldron could focus on the TVA and not Loki. Loki was an irritant he had to occasionally do something with.
And now we get to his script that was pitched to MCU.
Waldron: I sat down and I wrote a script that was a time travel action rom-com, is how I would describe it...because they [Marvel] wanted to make a time travel show. And I'd written a time travel movie about a character who was kind of a villain, and kind of a shithead, like Loki.
And the thing is, to me, sounds a lot like the TV series. A romcom, with time travel, and a sh*thead kind-of villain. That's the series we got. I do wonder how much of this pitch made it into the final series, because this is what Waldron had as a reference. (The director wanted to make a romance from what I understand, that was her vision of the series was this long-winding romance, and it doesn't look like anyone sat down in the writer's room and explained to them that the last thing that would fuel Loki's story forward was romance.)
And the thing is, Waldron doesn't seem to understand Loki as a character at all, if Loki is "kind of a villain and a sh*thead" because yeah, sure, Loki can be considered that, but that's not WHO Loki is. That's what people SEE him as.
Waldron at no point references having read the scripts for the Avengers, Thor 1 or the Dark World inside this interview. This doesn't mean he hasn't seen the movies or read the screenplay, as I often hear said about him, but it is strange to me that he makes so little mention of Loki.
This man is so focused on the TVA. Despite how much of a disaster the TVA ended up being. Here's some notable quotes:
WALDRON: What did I learn? Don't write one about time travel, because it's a pain in the ass.
WALDRON: ...A foundation of what constitutes a broken time law and what doesn't, so that we could then just, which is about Loki breaking a time law, and then you have to move all that stuff as far to the background as humanly possible, because you don't want the audience focusing on the rules of time travel during your show.
I love how "Loki breaking a time law" is supposed to be the center of it all and comes off as an afterthought.
And.
"don't want the audience focusing on the rules of time travel in your show" YEAH. CAUSE IT'S GARBAGE. Maybe if he and the others had had more than a weekend (exaggeration, untrue statement) to work on how time travel works, we'd have something that didn't make me want to scream into a pillow for ten years.
WALDRON:  All over our writer's room, our white boards were just covered in timelines. And it's just, "No, time travel works this way," "No, time travel works that way." That was the great challenge of our show, it was because the Time Variance Authority is an organization that literally manages and polices all of time, we had to define what time is to them and what time is in the MCU. 
I think we can blame this disaster on the Russo brothers. ^
WALDRON: Those are all questions we had to ask and define for ourselves. I think that what's fun about the TVA is it takes something remarkable, like time travel, and really packages it in a very soulless, sort of bureaucratic way. That's what was exciting to me, as a writer, was to take something so magical and just make it utterly soulless. -- So what we have is a writer's room so focused on the TVA that Loki becomes a secondary concern and the lens from which we VIEW the TVA, and then it stops becoming Loki's series and starts to become the TVA's.
But no one seemed to realize this.
And also "That's what was exciting to me...was to take something so magical and make it utterly soulless" is a GREAT way to go about time travel. I also think he applies this to everything and it shows.
So again. Writer focused on the TVA. Appears to me to not care about Loki. Spends a majority of the interview discussing ANYTHING but the main lead of his show. Does not want to talk about growth or character or WHERE LOKI CAME FROM? WHY ARE YOU NOT TALKING ABOUT YOUR LEAD?
But that's okay. Because we all know that the TVA was the main character of Loki, don't we?
---
Another interesting point, I thought, was how Waldron writes relationships. I watched a review of his TV series Heels, where the reviewer came to this conclusion about the main characters:
"...And that's just what made this show so fascinating, is that…all these characters, that in some way, treat each other horribly, but in other sense do care about each other, and they're all so entwined with trying to make this thing work."
and that sounded extremely familiar. Because this is the cast of Loki. Waldron seems to have discovered his Character Formula.
Thanks. I hate it.
I just...this man can't have been a bad writer in just Loki right, and this has to be a consistent theme across all his work? And honestly, he's worked on so little that I don't know. I can't have an honest opinion of him. From what he has worked on, terrible character chemistry seems to be the general vibe. Waldron does not seem to know how to write characters that you understand why they like each other.
Hence, Loki being abused by every figure of authority in Loki, and Slyive treating him horribly, but somehow they all like each other in the end.
Because that's Loki. The TVA series, Loki on the side, getting beat up. Because he's bad.
---
DR. STRANGE 2:
Dr. Strange 2 has a similar set of problems. It was written in a rushed time frame, there was no overarching idea for a plot and where the story needed to go, Waldron was just told to do what he wanted, and Waldron didn't seem to be too focused on character arcs.
Wanda, obviously, takes a devastating hit as far as arcs go, but I wouldn't say that Dr. Strange was spared, either. The two of them go through rapid flipflopping in terms of the growth they've incurred throughout the entire MCU, and it shows. Badly.
One thing that Waldron did say that absolutely baffled me was this:
WALDRON: I became good friends with Jac Schaeffer, head writer of WandaVision, while I was writing Loki. Her and I became good pals, because we were kind of in it together and everything...So, I had the benefit of just being able to call Jac and talk to her about Wanda's character and everything, because it was really important to me that I do right by her with what she did with Wanda as a character. And also, with Lizzie, who's a friend of mine. I really worked with her and made sure, "Okay, you guys just did this incredibly intimate show about this character that grew her so much. Let's make sure that we're doing that justice and telling a fulfilling next chapter of that story."
I am so confused. Waldron honestly appears to want to do right by Wanda, but Wanda's growth from WandaVision was destroyed in Dr Strange 2 (and I want to emphasize here that Waldron made no such comment about talking to Tom Hid. or previous directors of Thor movies) so then how did Wanda end up going through such a downward spiral? Waldron wanted to do right by her, and yet???
I think the biggest problem is that Waldron doesn't have to think long term. He's almost not supposed to. He said this:
WALDRON: Well, I think one of the joys of being a writer in the Marvel world is getting to make terrible messes and leave them for your predecessors
WALDRON: For instance, you write the Loki show and then you end up writing Dr. Strange 2, having to clean up your own mess and that can be a lot of fun.
WALDRON: And it will naturally connect to the MCU and it will naturally get the MCU to where it's supposed to go, in some ways that we expect and ways that sometimes you don't expect, and I think that's part of the fun.
Waldron was given the explicit instruction to write a good Dr. Strange movie, but not a good MCU movie. Part of the reason that Phase 4 feels like a bunch of puzzle pieces from different puzzles is that it was designed to be that way. Feige is just going with the flow to see what will happen rather than having any sort of idea of where to take the series.
"It will naturally get MCU to where it's supposed to go" is one of the most hilarious statements I've ever heard, by the way. As someone who has done original writing, and planned out a series, my 200+ page document of planning, background, and worldbuilding laughs at you. (And I still don't have it all finished, because I've had MONTHS to work on this). Maybe. Maybe they want to try and not publish the first draft of phase 4?
Waldron wasn't told to make a movie about Wanda, or how to progress Wanda's character in a way that made sense post her growth. And any problems that were there they blamed on the Darkhold, because it's someone else's problem to clean up. Very neat. Very good planning.
---
So overall, I don't think that MCU writers are proud of their ignorance, I just don't think that they see a problem with it. Writers are told to do what they want to, without there being any plans for character growth or plot advancement, so they do. They put whatever they want out on the sandbox and wait for someone else to clean it up.
Feige seems fully onboard with this plan. So the real problem, I think, is the fact that MCU is expecting writers to come up with complex, interconnected plots in twenty weeks, and the writer's don't have the time to write consistent character arcs, they just tell a flashy story because at least you get something out there.
I honestly don't imagine Secret Wars will be any different. Waldron has shown that he really really enjoys writing stories, but not characters. This is not to say that we should blame all of this on Waldron, because I don't think it's really his fault. I think it's more the fact that he's the byproduct of a system set to fail.
The writer's ignorance is someone else's problem in MCU, apparently. But don't worry. This will naturally get MCU where it's supposed to go. Just tilt your head and squint a little. Then close one eye. And then the other. Now you can see what brilliance Phase 4 is clearly.
Tumblr media
566 notes · View notes
Text
Considering Bucky's recovery in a post-WS scenario, and the fact that IRL the American Psychological Association (APA) collaborated with the CIA* on mind-control and 'black psychiatry' programmes...
And it really is difficult to see how Bucky is supposed to go to doctors and psychiatrists for therapy etc., and trust them, when it was (among others) doctors and psychiatrists who inflicted his trauma?
How does he get help when the very people capable of helping him are just like the people who abused him? It's a real catch-22. 🤔
(*source) (source) (source) (source)
20 notes · View notes
staying-elive · 6 months
Text
Really weird to think about how Marvel keeps whining about mourning the loss of their original line-up, when blatantly neglecting their next most senior member in terms of actual Avengers team cred and actor longevity... yes, I'm talking about Sam. (of course I am lol)
Look here...
Tumblr media Tumblr media
Tony, Steve, Nat, Maria = all dead
Clint, Bruce (not pictured), Thor = retired maybe? but no word on future appearances. Certainly no solo work on the slate. Passing the mantle?
Vision = dead. Wanda = evil and dead (lol), but complicated.
Rhodey stupidly got turned into a Skrull and while yes, he does have a movie coming, he's not heading it as a title hero. (Armor Wars)
Which leaves Sam. Captain America, thank you.
I just can't fathom (at least in-universe wise) why Marvel hasn't invested in building Sam up as part of a new Big Three.
The OG Big Three had a Science Guy, a Moral Compass Guy, and a Cosmic Guy.
Sam clearly fulfills the Moral Compass quota.
Science could've been Shuri and/or Scott
Cosmic could've been Carol
or could switch Cosmic for Mystic and have Doctor Strange handle that corner.
And that would've been the trifecta anchoring the new Phases. Add new characters like Shang Chi and Ms Marvel and Monica in around these core characters as needed and build from there, but anchor the new Saga with repeated (and timely!) check-ins with the core.
And Sam's the last (almost OG) active Avenger.
It's just crazy that he won't have been seen since 2021 to 2024. With nary a canonical film reference, by name, as Captain America.
65 notes · View notes
atthestarlite · 2 years
Text
ok i have A LOT of mixed feelings about the mcu, like A LOT. but watching thor: love and thunder and seeing the movie, directed by taika waititi, a maori and jewish filmmaker, in which the central premise is that the children of a displaced people, who have lost large portions of their population already to war, are stolen in the middle of the night. not only that but a man who wishes to kill all others like them and has already begun a genocidal killing spree. the fact that taika heavily implies that new asgard’s entire economy centers on the commodification and selling of asgard’s culture. where, when thor pleads with zeus to help them save their children (not even themselves, THEIR KIDS) zeus says it is their problem and that the entire children of a people are not worth saving. even the exchange thor has with astrid/axl, who insists on changing his traditional name, to one of the new land that they are in. thor’s grief over all of that death. the role of (ORAL) storytelling as a means of lesson parting and also inspiring hope.
people call it a silly movie, which it is, but taika’s strengths have always been comedy. and again, mixed feelings about the mcu, but still: whether purposeful or not, the movie engaged with ongoing genocide in a way that,,, i did not expect and hit very hard.
659 notes · View notes
loveloki555 · 3 months
Text
Thor's chambers
The movie Thor Dark World shows us Thor's chambers, but this sequence only lasts a few seconds, so it is easy to miss. I will analyze the Prince of Asgard's chambers a bit here.
Tumblr media
Thor wash himself in stone bowl.
Tumblr media
Here you can see a piece of the bowl, as well as a window with characteristic protrusions that can be seen in Frigga's chambers, in the corridors of the palace, and in the library where Odin talks to Thor and Jane.
Tumblr media
There is a candlestick in the window, a similar one is in Frigga's chambers.
The bowl is placed on a bench/chest with decorations, and we also see two dishes, one of which is mug from which you can drink beer.
Tumblr media
At the end we have a view of the open terrace and columns.
And that's it.
But I hope this helps fanfiction writers at least a little.
35 notes · View notes
sarahowritesostucky · 2 months
Text
Steve is Still 90 lbs in His Head
Modern Steve Rogers Headcanon:
When he's going about his daily life, Steve regularly bumps into things/people and misjudges where he can fit/squeeze through in crowds, because in his mind he's still got this mental map of himself as a 90 lb twig of a shrimpo human being. It leads to him bumping into a lot of people in crowds and tight spaces and a lot of "oops! sorry excuse me's!"
*When he's on a mission as Cap, however, his mindset changes so much that he's able to be very swift and agile.
**He's getting better the longer he spends defrosted, but it's still only been a handful of years post-serum, vs. the 25+ years spent as his pre-serum self.
Tumblr media
38 notes · View notes