Loki Appreciation 2019

[Raye]

Yeah, maybe, though that is a while a way, they have not yet even begun filming, in the meantime i think we just have to hope Cates has some good stuff lined up for him, and maybe will be kind to fans and try and wrap up some of the dangling plotlines.

Tho speaking of the Disney+ show, some sites are reporting that Sophia di Martino has been cast as Lady Loki: https://www.pinkvilla.com/entertainm...ind-out-486717

But I went to her IMDB page and she is listed for all 6 episodes, so while she is definitely in the show, i have my doubts it is as Lady Loki, because after they spent so much time hyping Hiddleston in the role for the series, that they'd recast the part for all 6 episodes. Enchantress, or someone, maybe?

[Raye]

Okay, so they released a trailer for Cates run:


https://youtu.be/ScdxKLFmbfA

And it gives some context to previous pages and seems to imply Thor has retired from the Avengers, and as I suspected, looks like reading Silver Surfer Black may be beneficial, though they do say it's standalone. Now, a little treat. i have a ludicrous monitor, 2560x1440, so I could see the art full rez, better than, since it is a 1080p video. So i went full screen and took screen grabs of some of the pages, and put them, as well as the previously released pages, in order as near as I can figure on imgur:

https://imgur.com/a/F3QgXgq

I waffled a bit on if the bifrost scene happened before or after the throne scene, but decided it made more sense for him to put a shirt on and go to the throne than it did for him to take it off before going to talk with Sif. the monster page may also be the first one, but i felt that since the hammer was traveling left to right, it felt more like it was going to some place rather than returning from somewhere. the Volstagg at the World Tree page, i am unsure on, though.


here are the new Loki pages in particular:

[Karabaja]

Ooh, now that's how I like Loki's facial features lookin pretty naughty there, too. Is that a tooth missing?

[Prof. Aegis]

Issue 5 - Well, crap, this sure wasn't a final issue. So many aspects of the previous 4 issues are still unresolved and definitely open for more. Yet Marvel in its wisdom cancelled the series. This was a great issue and we got Verity back for all of one issue. I liked the interaction, though simple and direct between Loki and Logan. "Bub"...nice. Damn the next storyline could have been fantastic with Verity there along Loki's side in their next adventures. But no, the UnFather, the House of Ideas, Children of Eternity, Loki's true new powers/abilities, return of Verity, and more all left on the table with no idea in sight if or when any of them will be picked up.

I liked this series and where this series was going. It had great development and you could see the groundwork being laid for many other stories and storylines.

I have to wonder...being a total outsider on the business end, if the editors had plans to make this an ongoing...let's say 12 issues even, so Kibblesmith set up stories that would play out for a while. But, sales, doesn't look at that, nor communicate what they want for maintaining a book and after 2 or 3 issues, canceled the series. It sucks for Kibblesmith as well, because he went in with a long term goal, and laid the foundation, but Marvel, I wonder if they had more of a short term goal or even plan. So conflicting ideals.

Anyone one have any idea what the monthly sales figures were for Loki and Valkyrie for issues 1-5? I'm curious as to the differences since Valkyrie is going to 8 issues at least.

I'm going to miss this series.

[Drops Of Venus]

Tho speaking of the Disney+ show, some sites are reporting that Sophia di Martino has been cast as Lady Loki: https://www.pinkvilla.com/entertainm...ind-out-486717

But I went to her IMDB page and she is listed for all 6 episodes, so while she is definitely in the show, i have my doubts it is as Lady Loki, because after they spent so much time hyping Hiddleston in the role for the series, that they'd recast the part for all 6 episodes. Enchantress, or someone, maybe?

I mean, the Lady Loki report comes from Deadline, which is a pretty reliable source, so I'm inclined to believe it for now. It's not really a recast if they're adapting the genderfluid aspect of the comics. Loki could go back and forth between being male and female, and I could see that being a thing for 6 episodes, with both actors getting screentime in each. Tom Hiddleston would still probably get most of it, anyway. It's possible they're trying to get the audience used to the idea of someone else playing Loki in case they're going for a more permanent transition in the future (like Kid Loki/Ikol). I think it's a good idea. I'm sure the more hardcore parts of the fandom will object at first, but that's how it always goes when it comes to change.

Anyone one have any idea what the monthly sales figures were for Loki and Valkyrie for issues 1-5? I'm curious as to the differences since Valkyrie is going to 8 issues at least.

Valkyrie: Jane Foster #1 - 42,948 (#39 in units, #56 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #2 - 43,640 (#35 in units, #72 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #3 - 39,564 (#42 in units, #73 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #4 - 23,686 (#106 in units, #118 in dollars)

Loki #1 - 51,725 (#25 in units, #64 in dollars)
Loki #2 - 22,944 (#92 in units, #98 in dollars)
Loki #3 - 17,493 (#129 in units, #129 in dollars)
Loki #4 - 19,517 (#135 in units, #145 in dollars)

Valkyrie was obviously doing better. Issue #4 took a fall, but it's possible the first 3 issues were enough to get it renewed for another arc. Also, keep in mind that Jane has the success of her Thor run to back her up. If that book continues to smash in trades (for instance, the Goddess Of Thunder volume is still on the first page of the Amazon bestsellers), Marvel might see this as an incentive to keep publishing more Jane Foster books.

[dr4conianlaw]

Loki #1 - 51,725 (#25 in units, #64 in dollars)
Loki #2 - 22,944 (#92 in units, #98 in dollars)
Loki #3 - 17,493 (#129 in units, #129 in dollars)
Loki #4 - 19,517 (#135 in units, #145 in dollars)

Aw dang, it's making me sad that #4 was going back up. This series might have been able to stabilize to a fine level if Marvel had let it... they make these cancelation decisions too early.

At least we got to see Verity though <3

[Rosebunse]

Seems to me like this was more about numbers. I mean, numbers played a part of it, a huge part of, but I think editorial has some plans here.

[Raye]

Issue 5 - Well, crap, this sure wasn't a final issue. So many aspects of the previous 4 issues are still unresolved and definitely open for more. Yet Marvel in its wisdom cancelled the series. This was a great issue and we got Verity back for all of one issue. I liked the interaction, though simple and direct between Loki and Logan. "Bub"...nice. Damn the next storyline could have been fantastic with Verity there along Loki's side in their next adventures. But no, the UnFather, the House of Ideas, Children of Eternity, Loki's true new powers/abilities, return of Verity, and more all left on the table with no idea in sight if or when any of them will be picked up.

I liked this series and where this series was going. It had great development and you could see the groundwork being laid for many other stories and storylines.

Yeah, it's very frustrating because there were clearly long term foundations being laid, and they're just left hanging there, and we now have to rely on Cates maybe picking some of them up, which is not a guarantee, since I am sure he has his own things he wants to do. I hope they

I have to wonder...being a total outsider on the business end, if the editors had plans to make this an ongoing...let's say 12 issues even, so Kibblesmith set up stories that would play out for a while. But, sales, doesn't look at that, nor communicate what they want for maintaining a book and after 2 or 3 issues, canceled the series. It sucks for Kibblesmith as well, because he went in with a long term goal, and laid the foundation, but Marvel, I wonder if they had more of a short term goal or even plan. So conflicting ideals.

It's possible, it ends so soon the decision had to come down very early into the run, but usually writers submit an outline, a roadmap of where they want to take a book, so the editors had to have known his plans, and approved of them.

I mean, the Lady Loki report comes from Deadline, which is a pretty reliable source, so I'm inclined to believe it for now. It's not really a recast if they're adapting the genderfluid aspect of the comics. Loki could go back and forth between being male and female, and I could see that being a thing for 6 episodes, with both actors getting screentime in each. Tom Hiddleston would still probably get most of it, anyway. It's possible they're trying to get the audience used to the idea of someone else playing Loki in case they're going for a more permanent transition in the future (like Kid Loki/Ikol). I think it's a good idea. I'm sure the more hardcore parts of the fandom will object at first, but that's how it always goes when it comes to change.

That still feels weird to me, cus that is not how the gender fluid aspect is depicted with Loki, it's an occasional thing, not constantly shifting back and forth to the point where it would be happening every single episode, and the movie version has shown no indication of that at all to date, so going that route would feel very out of character to me. I know this probably isn't what you were saying, it's just reminded me of something I see a lot with Loki's fans. It's not that I am against that aspect being incorporated, but there is a spectrum there, 'genderfluid' can mean lots of different things. This has been something that's bugged me with Loki for a while, there seems to be this push from some fans to see Loki moved more towards the middle of the spectrum, and you get the sense it's coming from either them wanting him to more closely match their on personal experiences to they can better project onto him, or it's them kind of thinking that is the 'correct' way to show someone being genderfluid. As someone on the bi spectrum but mostly male attracted, but also aromantic, so i don't fit categories very neatly in that regard, I constantly see people putting forward this narrative, by the kinds of depictions in the media they find acceptable, that there is kind of one correct way to be on that spectrum. It's frustrating if you don't actually fit that completely, it feels like your experience is being invalidated, when only one way to be X is put forward. It's kind of like when women used to all be depicted in a very samey way. Sure, there were women characters, but if you were a tomboy or had short hair, or had some 'male coded' interests like cars or something, you missed out seeing someone truly like yourself depicted with a few rare exceptions. So while I get that it's a little different in that there are very few genderfluid characters, I still don't like seeing that done in situations like this with Loki, (where one of his defining traits is that he defies being put in categories by others, no less) where Loki's identifying as genderfluid now, so there's this push, where he has to be like smack in the middle, could go male or female at any given moment, like that's the 'real' way to be genderfluid, which kinda devalues the experiences of the people who are somewhere else on that spectrum. He's generally been on the 'mostly a guy, sometimes goes female, but it's occasional, and often situational' end of things, and that's ok, that is still genderfluid, it's not doing it wrong, it's just closer to the male end of the spectrum than the middle. A 'can go either way at any moment' depiction, or doesn't identify as either gender, just wouldn't feel in character to me, especially with the movie version.

On the bi side of things, I have said in the past that I'd like to see him with a guy at least once, to kinda make it more official. But if he is mostly attracted to women, with guys just being an occasional thing, that's ok, if he mostly is attracted/involved with women, and doesn't experience completely equal attraction to both, well, he is still bi.

It just feels like there is this attitude with some fans where if he's not smack in the middle of the scale, then he's not being shown as bi/genderfluid enough, which is... a problem.

Ok, that little tangent out of the way, if she is also Loki, I think a more likely option in this context, is a situation something like Spider-Verse, where there are alternate dimension Lokis all together. it could give us Kid Loki and stuff too, that way. It would fit with the fact that we already know Loki will be making the jump from that universe to the main MCU, and in Dr Strange: Multiverse of Madness, no less.

Valkyrie: Jane Foster #1 - 42,948 (#39 in units, #56 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #2 - 43,640 (#35 in units, #72 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #3 - 39,564 (#42 in units, #73 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #4 - 23,686 (#106 in units, #118 in dollars)

Loki #1 - 51,725 (#25 in units, #64 in dollars)
Loki #2 - 22,944 (#92 in units, #98 in dollars)
Loki #3 - 17,493 (#129 in units, #129 in dollars)
Loki #4 - 19,517 (#135 in units, #145 in dollars)

Valkyrie was obviously doing better. Issue #4 took a fall, but it's possible the first 3 issues were enough to get it renewed for another arc. Also, keep in mind that Jane has the success of her Thor run to back her up. If that book continue to smash in trades (for instance, the Goddess Of Thunder volume is still on the first page of the Amazon bestsellers), Marvel might see this as an incentive to keep publishing more Jane Foster books.

Doing better, but not dramatically so, (the dollar share is the main thing here since there has been a lot of over shipping going on with Valkyrie, hence the sharp drop with issue 4) you'd think they could have at least given a 6th issue, since trades are usually 6 issues anyway, to help tie things up. Usually books have already dipped below 15k before you hear of cancellation, this decision had to have been made before the third issue was even out. I think Valkyrie may have gotten a stay while Loki did not, even though if Loki had continued they would have been at close to the same numbers in a few more issues, probably, because, judging by the covers, it ties into Incoming. Also I still think there may be something going on in Thor which may have necessitated an early cancellation, but on the other hand the book set up a situation where he can literally be in two places at once, so...

[Prof. Aegis]

Valkyrie: Jane Foster #1 - 42,948 (#39 in units, #56 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #2 - 43,640 (#35 in units, #72 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #3 - 39,564 (#42 in units, #73 in dollars)
Valkyrie: Jane Foster #4 - 23,686 (#106 in units, #118 in dollars)

Loki #1 - 51,725 (#25 in units, #64 in dollars)
Loki #2 - 22,944 (#92 in units, #98 in dollars)
Loki #3 - 17,493 (#129 in units, #129 in dollars)
Loki #4 - 19,517 (#135 in units, #145 in dollars)

Valkyrie was obviously doing better. Issue #4 took a fall, but it's possible the first 3 issues were enough to get it renewed for another arc. Also, keep in mind that Jane has the success of her Thor run to back her up. If that book continue to smash in trades (for instance, the Goddess Of Thunder volume is still on the first page of the Amazon bestsellers), Marvel might see this as an incentive to keep publishing more Jane Foster books.

Okay, I can see how Valkyrie could have been given more issues based on her first 3 issue stability, compared to Loki. But yeah, seeing how Loki #4 went up, I do agree that Marvel reacted to quickly. I know it's a numbers game and money. but not everything is a hit right out and somethings take a bit of time and grow. It seems as if patience is not a virtue anymore and it really is quick money. Yes, Jane having a strong history with best sellers is an incentive to keep publishing a bit longer. Well, we'll see what occurs with Cates story and with the Loki Disney+ series see if a new Loki series will be started in another 12 months or so.

Speaking of Disney+ Loki series, and regarding Lady Loki, I know people are making statements that she'll take over for Hiddleston, but keep in mind (and perhaps this has already been stated), Loki possesses the tesseract and can move through dimensions as well as time, and perhaps we'll see two Loki at the same time. Or two storylines paralleling to converge at the end both with Loki and Lady Loki. Hiddleston is the draw, and I can't see them using him to introduce the series and then throwing him off. Especially if this has ties to Dr. Strange and Thor 4. But I am very interested in seeing what occurs with Lady Loki, if that is the plan for the series.

[SanityOrMadness]

The funny thing is that this abortive series... reset Loki to almost exactly where Ewing left him, standing at a portal to parts unknown with Verity, untangling what Aaron did. I can't think that is a complete coincidence (and see also Cates immediately giving Thor his eye & arm back. I really thought that was going to stick for a few years, at least).

Otherwise, mistakes were made. Kibblesmith doubling down on what he was doing to the point of spending so much of the issue on a random tangent with Wolverine is bizarre, and I can only think he's desperately angling for a sequel/resumption. There were opportunites to pull the abort switch when it was cancelled and tie up the most immediate plots, but instead it's been consciously left unresolved.

[Raye]

I don't think Cates is undoing the arm and eye. I think that's a bit of a red herring, I really do, I think that's some form of astral projection or similar form of body-separation, and though most of the story may focus on that, in the real world, he will stay the same, and will probably return to that in the end. Kinda like how Thor had both arms when he went to Valhalla briefly during Aaron's run. The change is just way too drastic to make much sense otherwise, and he insists there is an explanation for the new look that makes sense, and that Aarons' run is not being disregarded. Cates is a fan of Aaron, I don't think he's aiming to undo anything there. Go in a new direction, sure, but I don't think undoing the previous run is part of the goal, those events still happened. Just saying, I think people who are anticipating a giant reset button smash are gonna be disappointed.

I do think the portal thing was sort of intentional, but I don't think it was to undo Aaron either, more of a statement of how Loki stories always tend to end, with a new beginning, and mimicking the end of Agent of Asgard helped get that cross. Aaron wasn't really any different in that regard, the 'portal' was just a lot gorier. He's still king of Jotunheim, he's decided the God of Stories thing wasn't really him, and even Verity is in a different job, so not really reset beyond a very surface cosmetic way.

But yeah, it felt like more could have been resolved, it was fun, and did contribute to the whole situation in terms of how the Children of Eternity stuff works, it also never really went anywhere (it just kinda was like, there was a bar fight and that was it, it trailed off) so maybe a bit to show what was up with Frosti and Drrf or something at the very least could have been done

[Karabaja]

I hope that Cates will pick up at least at Frosti, Drrf and Verity, as well as the implied Jotunheim rebellion. The unfather thing and the Children of Eternity seem to be too complex to be resolved in an auxiliary plot.

[charliehustle415]

I hope that Cates will pick up at least at Frosti, Drrf and Verity, as well as the implied Jotunheim rebellion. The unfather thing and the Children of Eternity seem to be too complex to be resolved in an auxiliary plot.

I totally forgot about Frosti!

Damn, so currently Jotunheim is run by a megalomaniacal snowman.

With only King Thor being the only Asgardian focused book it's weird how everything else is in such limbo; luckily we don't have to wait too long.

Now I know how X-Men fans feel like

[rpmaluki]

This book is gone too soon, which is a crying shame. I want to read Loki's story, as good as it is to have him feature in Thor's book, it's simply not the same or enough.

[SanityOrMadness]

I don't think Cates is undoing the arm and eye. I think that's a bit of a red herring, I really do, I think that's some form of astral projection or similar form of body-separation, and though most of the story may focus on that, in the real world, he will stay the same, and will probably return to that in the end.

Well, the new solicits are out, and he's guest starring in Jane Foster's book with his new look on the cover.

He's still king of Jotunheim,...

Is he? Maybe in title, but he seems to have de facto abdicated, if not de jure.