The MCU did not succeed because of awesome plots. Their plots weren’t bad but it was nothing mind blowing.

The MCU succeeded because of the strength of their characters and actors with ungodly charisma. That trend continues.

Tom Hiddleston as Loki drove the show with a great supporting cast.

 

Spoiler: Just in case

I think I disagree here. Without the context of the comics, how do you foreshadow someone unfamiliar to the audience? Wouldn't introducing a brand new villain have exactly she same problems you called out?

Someone is behind this, they're smart, they made puppets, they live at the end of time, they're controlling the TVA -- all of those were clues and foreshadowed a villain behind it. (And could have foreshadowed another Loki, yes.)

I don't actually know any of Kang's history, being one of the casual viewers that Arth mentioned. But I didn't feel the reveal came out of nowhere. My reaction was basically "huh, black guy in elevator, I wonder if he's the villain or a random guy helping the villain, or another loki". His acting and writing made me think his character worked, not any references to comics.

> They did like the new guy. He played the part well, but there was no satisfaction at seeing him revealed.

Isn't that all you want from the introduction of a new villain? The local plot (Loki discovers what's behind the TVA) was wrapped up in a satisfying manner, and the overarching plot (Timelines, Kangs, Multiverse) teased enough to make people talk.

It's definitely a case of "how do you target two differently engaged audiences at once" and there's not necessarily a good answer.

 

I thought it was clearly better than probably half of Marvel's entries into the cinematic universe to-date. I'm significantly more interested in the next phase of the marvel universe than I've been in a very long time. Wandavision was... pretty alright, and I thought FWS was very below par, even with the pretty great performances from the actors.

The critique of Kang/the TVA trivializing the previous Marvel material... Well, that's pretty faithful to the comics. There is a multiverse in Marvel, and this is probably the best execution of that concept I could have possibly hoped for.

Power levels and the threats within the Marvel universe are all over the place. If anything it makes Loki more faithful to the source material than anything else Marvel I've watched recently. And it was inevitable, because de-escalation from a Thanos level threat isn't a selling point for future material for the next movies.

Solid 5/5.

 

I just enjoyed the show.

It was fun and pretty and I liked it.

 

Spoiler

The Show:

Ultimately, I enjoyed the show. I think it peaked in episode 5, and that the Lokies. Lokeys? Lokis were fun while still functioning as in-universe characters. It was a good balance of the story's themes acting in concert with its setting and its character world.

This was the first of the Marvel shows that I had watched, and I made it to episode 5 on the same day, enjoying the razz matazz of the Ragnarokesque Mothersbaugh-synth sound, the retro Legion like 1950s TV, Wilson's easy charisma and his rapport and his being a match for Loki in a casual disarming way that we've never seen Loki be handled before.

The story had a lot to do quickly, and though there were moments that felt rushed, ultimately I never felt that it struggled to maintain its pace. Loki spent less time with the TVA than expected, as its agent, but it was the right moment to step out. The sets and quality of the acting, filming, and the fidelity and frequency of the magic was wonderful to see. Because they had more time, Loki and crew had more time to just do things, to use powers and to interact and that was a big highlight for me (similarly I've not watched Wandavision and it was great seeing Vision and Wanda getting more than 2 minutes of power use across 180 minutes or whatever).

However, I think, compared to most of the feedback, I have to be one of the dissenting voices. The last episode left me with the conscious thought at the very end with the revelation (and quite sensible immediately, to be fair, understanding that the TVA isn't immune to this new multiversal effect, and he's now in a new universe) that the episode 'was a disappointing stumble for the show's Loki and its pay off' even though the broader effects to the setting are exciting and large.

Also, can I just say, I do feel the very opening of episode 6 was a bit of a stumble. The pullback from the Marvel title card into the sacred timeline's glow with a load of gag lines from various title-card characters, from their films. Completely fucked the tone for no reason as far as I can tell.

Loki:

Loki had a good arc, if perhaps a bit quick objectively: if this had been the Loki of post Ragnarok pre/peri neck-snap (maybe making one last bad choice rather than the death he got, and becoming a variant) I think I could've bought it a smidge more. This is perhaps a bit ironic, as the Avenger's Loki after Thor's Loki and his incredibly sympathetic and conflicted portrayal felt like he'd gone a bit suddenly full unrepentant villain at the time.

Usually, I'm of the mindset that if you know the position and 'lesson' that your character is going to end up then trying to make your starting position as far from that as you reasonably can is a good thing. However, it ought to be a roll of precipitous speed, slow then building, and I think that in an effort to gel TH's performance of Loki now, he developed, in hindsight, too far too fast in the first episode. His arc was essentially completed by episode five, and the vast majority of the work was done by the time he was recaptured by Mobius, if not perhaps by the entrance to Lamentis' city to start using weird telekinetic abilities in the middle of trendy fake-continuous shots.

In the last episode, as a position (though it perhaps felt a bit too rapid, and a bit too wholehearted, a bit too ... unambiguous), Loki's being on the side of fate was a good reflection of his theme statement in episode one where he says something like 'people need tyranny' except him with him feeling at that time pretending he takes the burden of making their choices for them so that he can be happy. Sylvie is still there, thinking that, over the top of her narcissism of her quintessential Lokiness. In this Kang is a good mirror. 'And then what' and the obvious wear on him of getting what he wanted is a nice reflection, even though it's not actually Loki on the throne.

Still, while there are less directly discussed things such as the above, shortly after the Xth minute of monologue with the motionless backs of Sylvie's and Loki's heads framing Kang I did think 1) Fuck this is a lot of bizarre exposition about important shit that feels like it's probably going to be a lie cus it just raises so many 'then why not ... ' and 'surely x',

and 2)
except, theme and value opposition. Didn't they basically say at one point near verbatim 'I choose free will' and vice versa.

(this is where I got to, and then I fell asleep, so I'm just gonna wrap up quick.

Kang: I've watched the cartoons from the 90s to 00s, read 1 or 2 comics, even skimmed Kang and Immortus' pages last week after looking at this. I still didn't get any 'aha' from this random guy in the elevator. His performance which many of you really enjoyed didn't do it for me. It felt hackneyed? That 'magnanimous but sinsiter, scattered but omnsicient' thing. I think it reminded me of a lot of that sort of archetype, like BBC's Moriarity. Further, knowing he was a 31st century scientist, and seeing his little demonstration of the shitty pruning sticks fighting against himself... Obviously the TVA speaks for itself, but I just couldn't take him seriously. Compared to Thanos, compared to the developments from Iron man to Wandavision that we've seen, the sort of powers that exist in the main period of time that we see... and then all of time from then to the end of time wherever it is he's sat... I just couldn't buy it emotionally. The visceral reaction was 'yeah, ok' random, quite non-threatening guy with a pre-programmed time-pad.

The wider setting:
Loki's magic was powered up, but his Asgardian nature was massively downgraded. As has been said upthread: when Loki landed in an alternate TVA and we see the blooming of the timeline into the next phase's multiverse my first thought was 'this series is going to be non-optional?'. I guess I could see Spiderman and Dr. Strange just exploring the multiverse without caring about its existence, but both feel a disservice. Ostensibly this is the most important important thing that has ever importanted in the MCU, and it should be wide ranging and in everything. However, it's also one of the most distanced very-connected things that they've done too. Either approach, strictly, leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

I usually watch Endgame when I need to waste time lol, but I was thinking about what Hulk said. "I tried to bring her back". So my thought is maybe did he actually succeed and did the TVA remove her or was is it jus impossible to really bring back the dead.

 

Spoiler

As a casual fan I'm just interested in the inevitable multiverse shenanigans in the movies. Maybe Black Widow or OG Gamora showing up again in some form. I liked Into the Spider verse a lot, and a marginally more serious version of it in live action would be fun. Not sure yet if Loki has re-watchability but I did enjoy it a lot and looking forward to season 2.

I would've liked to see a bit more magic from main Loki but I guess they used all that budget. His quick change was too quick yeah, but it felt plausible as seeing your future and all your mistakes and then minor unclimactic death is a lot and sure as hell can cause a life crisis/mindset change.

Re: Multiverse reveal

It does feel a bit odd that they put something so important in a show, but at least Loki has the most mass appeal of the shows so far imo. They even went super tame with the self cest lol, they don't look that much like each other or act like each other, and have different names. If they'd made her look like Hela it would've been hilarious how much more people probably would've been mad.

Loki is one of my favourite characters of the MCU so I'm glad they didn't botch him and his arc as bad as they did black widow apparently. Even if the end

Spoiler

sort of put him in the same spot as the beginning of the show, new TVA and all. I think his story will be really interesting. I can see him helping the avengers in a role like Dr. Strange, him randomly showing up and informing them of the threat and helping em combat it.

 

Black Widow was okay. But only just okay. Probably my least favorite MCU entry apart from Thor 2 and AntMan/Wasp.

Spoiler

basic action romp with a low stakes villain, supremely unsatisfying explanation of the Budapest job, and ScarJo was mostly phoning it in. Also, definitely suffered from the 'Nat is dead so why get further invested in her char' thing. Would have benefitted from being made pre-Endgame.

 

I think my big takeaway from Loki is just a much stronger version of my takeaway from F&WS; six episodes are just not enough to tell stories with this much weight. F&WS was pretty underwhelming anyway, as they just don't seem to know what to do with Bucky at all; poor guy was criminally underused in the show, serving mostly only to protect a Captain America having no actual powers.

Loki though? Even one more episode to ease the Kang reveal in would have gone a long way in the frame of the series itself, and maybe a second one with a bit more history/information about the TVA itself. Probably pure fanservice and all, but I like that kind of detail myself.

At the end of the day though, I'm going to assume Feige knows what he's doing, and that we're going to get info trickled in to us in much the same manner as we did Thanos, over a bunch of different small in-movie concepts and post-credit scenes and stuff. I have been pleased enough that I give him the benefit of the doubt here.

 

Lotta topics I have thoughts on for the MCU, but having recently seen Black Widow I'd say it's a good movie that could've been great if it had done two things differently.

Spoiler: BW

1) Come out four or five years earlier. Just everything about this movie would've worked better if I didn't have Natasha's death hanging over the whole thing. There's a way to make a Black Widow movie knowing that she died in Endgame, I'm sure of it. Probably even make a good story out of it. It's not like this movie butted heads with or expected you to forget that information... it just kinda ignored it when it's something I don't think you can ignore. You don't have to address it, but you have to write the movie knowing that the audience already knows what happens to Natasha. Feels like they didn't take it into consideration and just wrote it normally, as if it wasn't really a prequel. It was a baton pass, not a swan song. It was a good baton pass, but we kinda needed more swan song.

2) Red Room flashback. Like how did you not have young Nat in the Red Room at the beginning of this movie? Keep the Ohio undercover scene, that's damn integral too, but there's just so many reasons why a Red Room sequence needed to be here. Nat's backstory is a hook that audiences were looking for. It could've really added weight to the divide between Nat and Yelena and their relationship (though tbf it was a high point of the movie as is). Fuck, just one scene between Natasha and Dreykov before the damn climax could've helped a lot. Like yes spy movie villains do not need lots of screentime or development and Dreykov is no different, but his role in Natasha's lifestory mean he needs just a bit more than what he got. Hell, you could even extend it out to the Budapest mission and Nat's defection to have that be sequentially rather than just having Nat tell us about it later, and smash cut between Shield welcoming Nat to Ross hunting her.

Don't get me wrong, I'm aware that flashback sequences can really fuck with the pacing, and that you would then need to take some screentime from elsewhere, but this is just such a whiff. The control and torture of the Red Room is just so damn central to this story that it's mind boggling that they didn't show it, and there's an audience expectation about showing the Red Room so you really can afford to spend some time on it. Really don't know how that ball got dropped.

There are other ways to tinker with the movie to improve it, because there always are, but those two are the big ones. Overall though, I did like it. ScarJo was good, Pugh was great, and David Harbour was having plenty of fun. I also really appreciate that there are aspects of this movie where Marvel is definitely reaching outside its comfort zone. Parts that were definitely in their wheelhouse, sure, but if the MCU is going to continue being entertaining it needs to broaden its toolkit and formula (which is why Eternals is so intriguing to me), and they did that here.

 

Earlier I noted that I wondered why they decided to make it the first movie of Phase 4, and that something about it needed to be needed in the future for it to be placed there. Well, I was wrong. Absolutely nothing was included that needs to be for the next phase. It should have been inserted in directly after Civil War.

The only thing that makes any note for the future was the post-credit scene which will again have little to nothing to do with Phase 4, but with one of the Disney+ shows. (Note: there isn't a (New) Avengers V movie included in Phase 4)

This annoys me. All the post credit scenes throughout the MCU movie-verse has to do with the movies, not with the shows. Sure, in the past, you might have missed some of the nuance or character development of some of the main heroes, but now if you don't follow the shows as well, then you will probably miss a lot of context. I'm including FatWS in this mess as well. I mean, what is Cap 4 supposed to be about. If you don't follow FatWS then you'll most likely have to settle for some lame summary of what happened when the movie comes out.

Wandavision could get away with it... barely with Multiverse of Madness coming up.

The Marvels? Nope. Two of the Marvels will be coming from D+ shows.

So, unless you want to be virtually clueless then sign up for Disney+, because Covid really cut into their bottom line or something and they couldn't make their Trillion dollar profit goal this year. I think this is why I quit comic books in the first place. Absolutely everything crossed-over with everything else. It became too much of a chore to keep up.

 

Ditto. This hit me all the way back in the mid-80s, when Crisis on Infinite Earths came out. Crossed over in some manner with nearly every DC title for an entire year. My paper route money just couldn't keep up, and after that it just got worse and worse. In 1985 the normal printing comic issues were only 75 cents too, I think - I can't even imagine what it costs a month to keep up on all these titles during the major crossovers today.

 

I followed about 10-15 titles on average. Then within a year it was up to 30, not counting the mini and maxi-series popping up left and right. Keep in mind the prices double or triple for Annual issues, then you had the special event crosses, and purchasing back issues to complete sets. When I hit the $50 dollar limit a month for current subscriptions alone I said fuck it, I quit. These days it's 3-5 dollars for a single issue.

If anything stops me from following the MCU it'll be this, and that sucks, because I looked forward to 2-3 movies a year. I'll keep watching, but when it starts to affect my enjoyment because of all the tie-ins, I'm gone.

 

The first episode of What If had a really bad pacing, but the second improved on that.

The meeting between Star Lords would really make Peter feel even worse than when meeting Thor. There is someone who become exactly what he wanted to be including the name. Even fight between them in What If universe probably won't happen. The episode sets it up, but even if that was a plan for the next season, it's not going to happen.

 

https://twitter.com/MarvelStudios/status/1429981786172399632

The leak forced them to post the trailer.

Overall, can I just say that I like them remixing the old spiderman music. I have no idea when that started, but it feels nice.

 

Strange is in the movie. Alfred Molina as Doc Oc is in the movie. Is this a crossover with the Raimi films? Because I am all in on that shit.

 

Spoiler

Yup. Other two spidermen are also in it.

 

Hnggggh! YES!

I'm beyond psyched for this.

This looks fucking amazing!

 

First Marvel movie since... GOTG 1 I've actually been interested in seeing in theatres. Second or third in that time to see in general.

 

This is what they needed to hype Phase four.

HHHHYYYYPPPPEEEEEE!!!