#thor theory | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gloriousburden · 4 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.

(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:

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:

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.

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!!

66 notes · View notes

peoplegettingreallymadatghosts · 3 months

Text

Alien diplomat Valiant Thor believing in Space Christianity is a very funny detail because the UFOlogist actually asks him if they have a Space Bible and his response is literally like “no, but then we didn’t try to kill Jesus. We can just ask him.”

#aliens #alien #valiant thor #christianity #conspiracy theory

48 notes · View notes

sad-trash-hobo · 1 month

Text

Do you ever think about that the heads of marvel had to have read our posts about bucky and Steve and Sam all working together and the avengers witnessing bucky with Steve and how even back in the 40s Steve must have just been doing shit and that he had even less self preservation when he was with bucky than present time? And all the stories of bucky and Sam getting into shit and making fun of each other? And all the stories of nat and bucky goofing off and being friends? And all the stories of Steve and thor being friends and chilling? And then they decided to not give us those moments, not even a little bit

#steve rogers #captain america #sam wilson #falcon #bucky barnes #winter soldier #natasha romanoff #black widow #thor #marvel #fan theories #fanfiction #i miss the good old days #when there was a chance that these characters could just be the character. not just the superheros

29 notes · View notes

mischief-lies-and-stories · 8 months

Text

I wanna talk about this today.

Mostly I want to talk about objective truth versus subjective truth. But let me start with what's happening in this scene. (Spoilers for Original Sin and Loki: Agent of Asgard)

So in this moment from Original Sin: Thor and Loki in the Tenth Realm, Loki is talking to the queen of the Angels about what happened in the previous issue of Agent of Asgard. Loki has been working for the All-Mothers in an attempt to erase his past crimes and start anew, but discovered that they were taking cues from Old Loki in order to ensure the future he said would come about, a future in which there was (mostly) peace in Asgard, Thor was king and All-Father, but Loki was still the villain. It was a price they were willing to pay for peace. So Loki's grappling with this in this issue, along with having to deal with Thor's reckless attempts at recovering their long-lost sister (not Hela).

So then the queen says, "[The Asgardians will] never understand you, god of what works. Go ahead, use your truth-sword. Tell me you don't know I'm right."

The sword she is referring to is Gram, the sword that Loki stole from Asgard's most famous hero, Sigurd, which was forged at Old Loki's bidding when he went further back in time to ensure it would exist for the current Loki to claim (the timeline gets confusing in AoA). The sword forces those it wounds to face the truth of themselves and their actions.

But truth comes in different forms, objective truth and subjective truth. Objective truth is indisputable fact, and if you say something otherwise it would simply not be true. "Earth orbits the sun" is an objective truth. We can and have proven it. Subjective truth is something that may be true for you but is not necessarily objectively true. This is why the testimony of innocent bystanders is sometimes not permitted in court. For whatever reason, you may be completely convinced that the person you saw stealing a tv from Best Buy at 2:16PM three weeks ago was wearing a blue shirt, so convinced you'd be willing to say so under oath. They could attach you to a lie detector, and the results would say you were telling the truth. However, when they get the CCTV footage, the person was wearing a red shirt. You weren't lying; your memory had you convinced it was a blue shirt. You believed it was the truth, so you believed you were telling the truth. This is how lie detectors work (theoretically; there's also the part that it only detects physical changes that only sometimes mean someone's lying anyway), and how truth serums (in various media or CIA conspiracy theories your subjective truth may or may not have you believe) are supposed to function.

Now, it could be argued that Gram functions as a detector of objective truth. Previously in AoA, it forced Thor to come to terms with the influence an infection of evil had on him (I don't remember exactly what happened, but essentially Old Loki more or less invaded Thor like a virus and forced him to act rather nastily). He didn't seem to realize what was happening until Loki stabbed him with Gram. This is a valid argument, and honestly I don't understand this scene enough (I think a lot of background for it came from other comics if I remember correctly) to make an authentic counterargument.

However Gram acts with Thor, though, I do believe in the above panel, Gram functions like a lie detector or truth serum. The "truth" Loki speaks is subjective truth. He believes it's true, so Gram is essentially like, "Sure, yep, sounds about right."

But because Gram doesn't do whatever it does when someone lies (or maybe because it functions like Wonder Woman's lasso, and you simply can't lie when you're wounded by it), it just further convinces Loki that his beliefs about his inability to be loved are true. Or he's aware that this may merely be a subjective truth, but because he knows how the sword works and he's banking on the queen not understanding the difference between types of truth, he's using it to gain her trust. He still can't lie while holding Gram, so either what he says is 100% indisputably true in an absolute sense, or he wholeheartedly believes it to be true with such certainty that it doesn't matter that it isn't objective. He may be saying it to gain her trust, but he also still believes it.

And I'm in pain.

#loki #loki comics #loki theories #loki spoilers #loki agent of asgard #loki: agent of asgard spoilers #original sin: thor and loki in the tenth realm #original sin: thor and loki in the tenth realm spoilers

107 notes · View notes

guckies · 3 months

Text

I really wanna know who Sunny’s ‘imaginary’ friend is and if they’re anything like Leo’s ‘imaginary’ friend(Thor)…

Cause what if they’re the same person and they’re talking to Sunny when Leo isn’t around? Or Leo introduced the friend to Sunny? So many questions and not many answers..

#just a lil theory talking bc i want my leos friends lore back #thor is a fan made name bc the friend looks a lot like oscurucho or dark Cucurucho #qsmp #qsmp leonarda #qsmp sunny #ome thing is if it is completely different and we get more sunnys friends lore then i will riot we only get leos friends -#for such a small time and its like several months between each mention #like i need leo friends lore i need leo lore!!! we are literally starved for it!!!

27 notes · View notes

midnight-in-town · 8 months

Text

Leaving Vinland...? (spoilers for ch205!)

After reading the chapter, I actually think we had it coming, even if they went through all that trouble to reach Vinland and create a peaceful village of settlers there. :D

I mean, remember Ketil's Farm arc?

Like I said before, I think the last arc parallels it a lot (like the War on the Baltic Sea arc mirrored some parts of the Prologue).

Back then, when confronting Canute's violent ways, Thorfinn was asked whether or not he would kill Canute to stop him (illustrating that "righteous violence" Einar talked about in a previous chapter) and he answered...

...that in front of violence, he'll always choose to run (and he did so against first Sigurd and then Garm as well, when they first met, during the War on the Baltic Sea arc).

Now in the last arc, faced with a devastating epidemic in both Europe and Vinland, Canute chose his usual approach of "killing a few to save the many" (ch202)...

whereas Thorfinn once again chose to run in the latest chapter:

Don't get me wrong, it's understandable why some readers might side with Einar and Hild after reading ch205, because in the past, whenever Thorfinn would choose to run, it was always in order to make it to Vinland and to create there "a country of peace".

Now that they're driven out of Vinland though (or, more accurately, that Thorfinn intends to leave in order to avoid war), it makes sense that many would wonder "but to go where?!":

However, I think wondering about "where" is missing the point Yukimura-sensei is trying to make.

Obviously, we were always led to think that reaching Vinland was the end goal of Thorfinn's journey, because it was also Thors' dream to go live there in peace. That being said if, even after reaching Vinland, Thorfinn and the settlers trigger a never-ending conflict that many generations after them will inherit and recreate, then how are they doing any better than all the violence they fled from all the countries at war in Europe?

Peace is not just about "where", but also about "how" and "with who".

In my opinion, Hild forgiving Thorfinn was the conclusion of Thorfinn's journey to reach Vinland: this success is why he can forgive himself and start living free from guilt.

But Yukimura-sensei just chose to illustrate that Thorfinn's road pursuing pacifism and living his life without guilt doesn't just end by reaching Vinland: it is also about his family's survival and about what he passes onto his children.

Like Thors did with him, despite Thors never reaching Vinland.

Well done, Yukimura-sensei, that's an excellent lesson for this series' final arc. Can't wait to see how it continues!

(PS: Gudrid is giving birth next month :D and I love that the birth of Thorfinn's second child happens precisely as he says he doesn't want his kids to inherit war in Vinland :D)

#vinland saga #thorfinn karlsefni #canute #hild #einar #thors snorresson #gudrid #karli #yukimura makoto #vs205 #vs theory #my analysis

54 notes · View notes

beheworthy · 4 months

Note

Which human outfit did Thor wear do you like more?

The one and only:

The bestest most perfect outfit ever!!!! (ah yes, alcohol in hand!)

I love these two as well:

(these precious minutes in Avengers4 where he is the King of Asgard AND confident and cool are everything to me)

#answers #anonymous #thor #thor odinson #outfits #avengers age of ultron #thor the dark world #avengers endgame #literally none of the outfits in the relationship montage in thor4 were good #only the pink tee when he makes breakfast is passable #cause it was the one time this genius director got color theory right #that his fans can't shut up abt thor4 being all abt and he got wrong on most occasions

28 notes · View notes

daisybell17 · 7 months

Text

Loki S2 Finale Prediction

With all the news and announcements coming out, i decided to make a prediction for what the finale will be. tbh This is based on what I have seen in the trailer and other stuff

——————————————————————————

The episode would pick up back where it all started in episode 1, where the TVA is in shambles and Loki would be time slipping (or not)

Now from episode 1, it's understood that Loki HAD the ability to go from the past, present and future of the TVA with a part of that future being seen towards the end of episode 1, with the phone ringing, Sylvie struggling to get the elevator door open and present Loki being pruned by someone (which many have believed to be future Loki) but I beg to differ.

I don’t think it was future Loki pruning past (or our current) Loki, and the only reason why I believe this is because, TO ME it doesn’t make sense how FUTURE LOKI would prune his past self, how could 2 versions of Loki be in the same timeline of the TVA? Especially since Loki has been time slipping back and forth that entire episode.

NOT TO MENTION that Sylvie calls him out “There you are!” As if she’s been searching for him for AGES or is relieved to find him, but before anything could happen, Loki is pruned and sent back to the present (to where EP1 left off)

Why would “FUTURE” Loki prune himself? Because he knew that “it's what needed to be done?”, to me it doesn’t make sense nor do I think it’s plausible that it was him….so who pruned Loki?

My 2 guesses are Ravonna Renslayer or Victor Timely, with my bet being Victor Timely, which leads me to believe that Loki had to sacrifice himself (as seen by 2 shots in the trailer of Sylvie and Mobius with mortified faces and Loki simply smiling back)

Now why would he prune Loki? Because by sending him back to the past, Victor Timely has full control and power to start the TVA all over again or at least re-claim control of it in the future, and basically reset everything once again (as explained by He Who Remains in the S1 Finale)

So by the time we the audience and present Loki reach the future (or S2 finale) it would have been too late.

I don’t think Marvel would kill Loki off, honestly, in the position Marvel is in right now, it is NOT a good business decision, ALTHOUGH from a story point position…ending the Loki arc with a banger Season 2 would not only seal Loki’s entire history in the franchise, giving him a good or bad ending, is up to debate, but PERSONALLY a bitter-sweet ending would fit well for a character like Loki

I think the finale would involve Loki sacrificing himself to save the TVA, Sylvie, Mobius, and essentially…everyone. The future we saw in S1 was a future too late, it was bound to happen and this sacrifice, where I am pretty sure he would be back in the temporal loom could possibly kill him…or maybe spit him into a different timeline…or maybe…he wakes up, and he’s in Valhalla

——————————————————————————

I love fan theories and predictions, literally speculation of what could happen is just so fun so if y’all have ur own theories or predictions, go ahead and comment/reblog it, i love love love reading them!!

41 notes · View notes