What did the TNIAAM comic book wing think of Marvel’s Loki?


Granted, “Marvel Week” lasted over a week, but we promise it’s officially over with this post. While LokiThe season finale appeared on Disney + last Wednesday, we wanted to give everyone enough time to watch the show and digest what happened (without spoilers, quite a bit has happened).

But now we dive into the show, conclusion, sequel, and other Marvel-related topics. As we do whenever something Marvel-related ends, the TNIAAM Comics Wing discusses everything you need to know about Loki.

FRONT SPOILERS, if you haven’t watched and still plan to do so, obviously.


Steve: I guess anyone who didn’t know who (Jonathan Majors) enjoyed an exhibit on the ins and outs of multidimensionality and the end of times, as well as an eloquent rampage of the multiverse by our favorite 31st century scholar, and thought of some eccentric mischievous guy getting killed as a weird ending, but damn all Nathaniel Richards (es?) are cowards.

Christian: I haven’t seen anything from Jonathan Majors before that. I love this man now. He’s gonna be awesome for the next phases

Steve: It was an emphatic “I’m stamping the MCU”

Andy: LOvevecraft country cleaned up at the Emmys for many reasons; Chief majors among these. He’s an established talent that is arguably the key element the MCU needed to move forward – another Hiddleston-level villainous talent.

Steve: To see where Hiddlestone from an unknown cast comes from Thor looks awesome. I thought he and Sophia DiMartino did a lot of physical action as well

Kevin: I don’t know exactly what I watched, but I really enjoyed him and Sylvie’s characters, and what the future might hold for us

Andy: I’m a DiMartino Stan now, please respect my decision.

I think the other fun part of this show is that it didn’t rewrite the MCU rules, but it basically said “oh, nice job finishing the game you thought you won, it turns out that this was only the first act “. And the multiverse is going to give a lot more flexibility in storytelling going forward. As an example, the rumor Spider-Man: No Path Home parcel

Christian: I’m curious if we’ll see Loki / Sylvie / Kang before their next scheduled appearances (In Loki season two and Ant-Man and the Wasp Quantumania respectively). It’s pretty well set up for them to appear in an MCU movie

Andy: Rumor has it that Loki will appear in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, but I’m not sure if that will be anything substantial given that the cast already have four co-makers (Strange, Wanda, Wong, and America Chavez). Do you think we see references to variants of Majors (maybe even a name) in anything before Quantumania.

Christian: The only disappointing thing about this is that for me, Majors’ excellent performance kind of took away some of the show’s finality that I think Disney was trying to avoid in Wandavision and in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. By not introducing major characters in the final episodes of these shows, we’re focusing more on the major ones completing their character arc, which were the overwhelming lessons of the first two Disney + shows. The fact that Loki has a season two makes this point a bit moot, but I would have liked to have felt more attached to a closing character arc rather than overwhelmed by the possible permutations of Kang that came from his reveal and subsequent dialogue.

Andy: I think that’s a valid concern and the balance that Marvel grapples with. WandaVision was not swept for any of these, and Loki definitely got BIG. I agree Sylvie-Loki’s resolution was a bit bland but season two could really dive into it since the fallout is clearly going to be severe, and Slyvie and Loki are now at the heart of the biggest MCU moment since the post-credit scene of the premieres. Avengers.

John: I credit Loki for using the finale to both close a story arc while embracing the most imaginable comic book idea. And yet it worked. Great swing with a handful of actors who absolutely go there.

Like the multiverse stuff and Kang / He Who Remains / Immortus shouldn’t work extremely well and yet it does because they once again expertly rolled out exposure and character development as a neat package. but interesting.

Andy: It’s far too early to tell, but is Kang on the same level / taller as Thanos? Or just different in terms of the “Big Bads MCU?”

John: For me, he’s already made Thanos and his goals a snap. Now this can have bad long term consequences. But we’ve seen Infinity Saga reduced to a gag before in this series.

Andy: Thanos was a rock collector. Kang is going to be something else, and I’m okay with that.

John: In episode one, Loki asks, “Is this the greatest power in the universe?” I think this show definitely answered yes.

Andy: It’s a very good reminder.

Christian: Now that the MCU is as big as it is, they definitely have a three-phase plan for Kang, where for Thanos it was a “oh it got big quickly, how do we keep it relevant?” for Avengers 3 “.

John: I think they didn’t know what to do with Thanos until they did. Here they know what they want to do with Kang and he will hide everywhere, even indirectly. The “I will do it myself” thing never made sense to Thanos. They just tried to make sense of it.

Here, Kang is directly responsible for what goes wrong. What will be interesting is how many characters other than Loki know about it before Quantumania.

Andy: And it also adds a whole new angle to the Fantastic Four movie

John: 100%

Andy: The Watts direct just after making a multiverse film (Spider-Man: Far From Home) is ripe for suspicion, but I’m glad it looks like the Fantastic Four movie will be nothing like what we saw Fox do.

John: So given all this, where do we rank Loki? I think there was a bit of infill, but beyond that I felt it was a cleverly crafted comic book story that proved to be relevant both small and large. It was odd but relatable, and provided a better formula for similar stories in the future.

I have it in the top 10 MCU projects, to be honest. But curious if I’m using too much recency bias.

Andy: I also have it in the top 10, but I’m the psychopath with my Marvel rating, so I understand if others disagree. I think the character development and the broader MCU implications were some of the strongest we’ve seen to date.

John: Having the time to build relationships was great here. And while it serves a larger purpose of expanding the reach of the MCU, it never seemed like that was the reason the show existed. It’s harder to pull off than some might think – but previous shows have highlighted what happens when that balance gets out of hand.

Andy: / watch the Avengers Age of Ultron

// Also watch Civil War much to John’s chagrin

John: Ha – I thought Civil war was a good movie on its own, but was also about 20 minutes too long and had to lift too much for the MCU plot. The Tony / Cap dynamic remains good there, but it’s not as well developed as like Loki and Sylvie or Loki and Mobius, who have had a lot less time to develop during this series.

Christian: Yeah the big thing that Loki The upside is that virtually all of the main characters have been well thought out, developed, and executed. They seemed rushed or underdeveloped in previous Disney + shows. I agree that this is one of the top 10 MCU projects.

Kevin: My only gripe with Loki is that it was difficult for the non-Marvel members of my family to keep up, so I wonder about the broader appeal of laid back? Personally I think it was meant to be very different from Wandavision or TFATWS and holds up really well.

John: I think Marvel really stopped caring about the casual a while ago, but especially after setting box office records with a three-hour film of callbacks and jokes in the universe. I think Wandavision attracted non-Marvel viewers because it was different, but TFATWS was no different, so I couldn’t do the same.

In Loki’s case, I’d say it’s the least MCU thing they’ve done to date. Rather, it was an in-depth character study imbued with the hallmarks of serious science fiction. Parts of it were an external homage to Doctor Who and to me, that’s probably what turned the casuals rather than the deep cuts from Marvel. I think Loki was pretty well contained in himself. The sci-fi chicane makes it hard to see if you’re not super invested. It’s not a hit on viewers or the show. It’ll be interesting to see if the approach changes in season two, especially if the awards buzz kicks in ahead of next year’s Emmys (and it could very well do).


Have your own opinion on Loki or related topics? Share whatever comes to mind here in the comments.

Source link


Comments are closed.