Loki Appreciation 2019

[Raye]

Yeah, you can retcon that guy as being Loki or Loki's father...

I guess my thing about the father thing is that whatever happens, Laufey has to be left thinking that he's the father. He wouldn't have left Loki alive if he wasn't. Of course, it could also mean his adoptive father, Odin, who might be his real father...

Look, I know we have gone over this before, but I think between Aaron's own words and what we've seen, I think finding out he isn't related to Laufey would mean a lot to Loki no matter who it is. And it would ultimately explain why he is so different. I don't know, I just think about this a lot at work. My work is boring...Well, mostly I was thinking about Game of Thrones today, but you know how that is.

I don't disagree that finding out he is not Laufey's would be a big deal, I just think that if you are going to do that, the reveal of his true father should also be impactful on his life, which is why I kept coming back to Odin, or someone else in the royal family, because of how much he desires to be accepted by them. Depending on how that goes, it could make him feel all the more rejected if Odin knows and never told him, or it could make Odin accept him more if Odin wasn't aware, either way it has an impact on his life. Someone random he's never heard of before lacks that. But, this wizard, that could work too, in a more tragic way, because of the connection they share due to him teaching Loki magic, and then Loki murdered him. It would provide much angst. Not that Loki really needs more angst, i guess. He's already a big ball of angst right now.

ps. team Jon all the way.

I'm feeling you on the time travel. It's been such a huge concept for this story and you know Loki could just wish himself there. That being said, we haven't actually seen how Loki's unique form of resurrection works, so the "new" Loki relearning from the old one's mistakes does make some bit of sense. But time travel isn't out of line. If it isn't Loki, who else could have cast the spell? Odin? Old Loki?

Dammit, Raye, I think you just spoiled the ending here with that theory.

I dunno, a lot of gaps in there that we just don't have the information to fill, so it could go way different, but right now, i think that makes sense... I just wish i could figure out what Thor's part in this is if he's not becoming worthy again. I always just kind of assumed this was the big 'make Thor worthy again' event, but apparently not! and for now he's just a frost giant blender in Jotunheim...

Loki not being a villain has certainly created something of a vacuum among Marvel's villains. Doesn't help that other villains like Magneto, Norman Osborn, and to a lesser extent, Thanos, are out of commission or not villains either. It's created this situation where they have to use ones like Malekith, Dracula and now Nightmare to get anywhere.

I think Loki alone doesn't leave a huge vacuum, Loki's particular brand of villainy can be covered by a number of other characters, revamped Malekith is basically an eviler version of old school Loki with no remorse, but there's also Enchantress or Cul (if he turns heel again in Thor 13) who can fill his shoes depending on which aspect you wanted to focus on, the sorcery/trickery or the Asgard royal family treachery. But Marvel did face turn or kill a whole lot of their biggest bads all at once, which did leave a vacuum. I think it led to showcasing some under utilized villains, like Malekith, as you mentioned, and creating interesting new ones, like Gorr, so i didn't have a problem with it, and I would have liked to see more of Doom etc. doing different things as well, because I don't like seeing the same thing over and over, it gets boring. I mean that's part of why the original Acts of Vengeance was fun, it didn't change the characterizations, but even just mixing up the usual pairings created new situations.

I can sort of see the logic of reverting some of them, because they had cleared the decks of villains quite a lot, and recurring villains can be interesting sometimes if they have enough of a connection. I guess it probably just came down to them deciding which version they (writer or editorial, or both, whichever) found more interesting, and villain won for most of them. Which speaks well of how Loki has been handled since his turn, if that's the case. And while I'm glad Marvel seems to have made Loki an exception to them turning everyone heel again, because I like him this way, I feel kinda bad for the fans who also wanted to follow a face turned Doom or Sabretooth etc. those face turns had fans too. And I think we missed an opportunity to create some new villains or push some under-used ones in interesting ways, because now it will just be FF fight Doom again, Wolverine fights Sabretooth again, instead of seeing something different.

I've never bought the argument most frequently brought up when it comes to keeping a character at a certain status quo basically forever, that maintaining the status quo ensures future generations can enjoy the classic characterizations, that every batch of new readers deserves to see the characters at their most iconic. I don't like the attitude that comes across with that line of thinking that old is always better. And especially nowadays, because collections are so easy to come by. If you want to read classic Loki, go get a collection of Simonson's run, it's not hard to get ahold of, especially with digital, it's not like we have to go searching thru back issue boxes any more. I think it would be nice if Marvel made like 'essential reading' checklists in the back of their comics for seeing how a character has been depicted over the years, especially ones that have had a lot of change over time.

so I did dust off the Sims like i said i would, and when I loaded up the game (it's been months, I've been playing AC: Odyssey, I don't remember what's going on) and it was on Roz when I loaded it up, probably I had just finished reviving her after her tragic cow plant demise, and moved her into her own place. so was finishing up a few things with her before going to make Blade and kill the Lokis (still gotta kill "Kid Loki" too), and she went over to Thor's boat and came upon the most bizarre scene. Loki was dressed in a shady disguise getup, Balder was dressed as a hot dog and Thor had some pie or something all over his face. like wtf. i guess they had just had a party or something. Oh and the case she was investigating (she's a PI) was Tyr taking bribes to throw sports games, which led to all 3 brothers talking smack about Tyr. Never stop being weird, Sims.


https://steamcommunity.com/id/RayeGu...94366431322364

Anyway, i did make Blade and gave him a lil basement room at the Avengers place, but I think that's it for tonight, will kill the Lokis tomorrow.

[Rosebunse]

God bless Sims for its weirdness! I still miss some of the creation options in Sims 3, but I feel like the "less is more" approach Sims 4 introduced makes sense. And it's less stressful on my computer LOL

Honestly, I think Loki just knowing that he has no connection to Laufey might be enough to let him "let go" of certain traumas. It's hardly a perfect fix and I'm not sure it will be presented as such, but it's something else to start on.

Part of Aaron's run has been about how Thor never stopped being "worthy." He just couldn't use that stupid hammer. So I think part of this event will be also be about him finally letting go of that hammer, even if it means letting Loki of all people hold it.

Here's the thing about the status quo: it changes whether people like it or not, just a lot of times, those changes are more subtle and you never know what will stick. Gwen Stacy's death, Sue and Reed's children, Magneto still isn't a fully villain, and Loki not being an outright villain, etc.

[Raye]

Sims 4 lacks certain things i'd want for this playthrough, like magic, house boats, and such... but yeah, sims 3 is horribly optimized, it takes SOOOOOO long to load the game now, and it can be pretty laggy. It started out as just Loki and Zelma in the Sanctum Sanctorum, because hey building the Sanctum Sanctorum would be fun, and Strange off doing his vet thing, and it's just ballooned over time to a crazy degree. It's been fun tho, to kinda try and keep up with the comics.

Yeah, Thor never became a worse person than he was before, he's still just as good as before (ok, a bit more prone to flying into a rage because he's upset, but other than that) he just lost confidence. He can still be an awesome hero without it. (and to be fair, so can Loki, when it comes to just abilities, but it will help him gain trust, something Thor doesn't need) There are tons of great heroes in the MU who can't lift that hammer.

Status Quo is the general rule, but it is unevenly applied, because the writers and editors all have different opinions on the matter, or certain stories may just be too impactful to ignore. That there are exceptions to the rule does mean it can shift to a new status quo if a new one manages to last long enough, in some instances, sure. They're rare, but there will always be exceptions that allow that to happen, and Loki seems to be one of them right now, so he's at least got a shot at replacing his old status quo with a new one. But you never know when that will end. I hope it can continue for a long time, and the longer it lasts, the better chance it has of becoming the new status quo. But all it takes is one nostalgia obsessed writer or editor and years of character development can be undone in a heartbeat. for example, Sandman went for years reformed, he was even a reserve member of the Avengers. then it was all over in one issue of Spider-Man, and he was just reset to villain ever since then. He's made some moves recently to undo the reversion back to villain, but nothing too much has come of it, that I am aware of. It would suck, but that could happen to Loki.

btw. on that note, now that Loki has a new solo, and he's apparently keeping costume as he's got right now, I want to say again that I would REALLY like a statue, a toy, *something* of him in this costume that i can buy. I will spend money to get this costume in my collection of comic knickknacks. (I mean i guess i could make a custom somethingorother, but I'd like something official) But they keep doing either his movie costumes (understandable, but still) or older 'classic' costumes. Just one statue of this costume, that's all I am asking for. (I would also like Kid Loki)

[dr4conianlaw]

By the way, away in the now even weirder corner of continuity where Loki's still not dead and on his buddy adventure with Wolverine: there's a preview for #3. http://www.adventuresinpoortaste.com...inity-watch-3/

The whole Doctor Strange arc is actually relevant here, since Loki ends up bringing them to the Sanctum Sanctorum... not to see Strange himself though. It's nice to see the story used again.

[Rosebunse]

By the way, away in the now even weirder corner of continuity where Loki's still not dead and on his buddy adventure with Wolverine: there's a preview for #3. http://www.adventuresinpoortaste.com...inity-watch-3/

The whole Doctor Strange arc is actually relevant here, since Loki ends up bringing them to the Sanctum Sanctorum... not to see Strange himself though. It's nice to see the story used again.

Did we ever figure out when this series was taking place? I am really enjoying it, don't get me wrong. Loki and Logan sre great together! They're both so used to all this weird stuff and yet they each also come from very different parts of the MU.

I also really like that an artist takes the time to remember that Loki is probably just under a foot taller than Logan.


Raye, the best part of Sims 4 is that it doesn't take forever to load LOL

After I brought it, I found that I wasn't playing it nearly as much as Sims 3, but then I realized that I also wasn't spending half of my time waiting for things to load lol But the base game is pretty bare and the expansion packs are numerous and expansive.

Part of the fun of this Loki has always been the danger of him turning back into Old Loki. That has always been a risk. However, we're getting to a point where for a not unsubstantial part of the he fandom, this will be their Loki.

I mean, I got into comics in about 2009, right before we got this Loki. I'm sure many of you here had similar experiences. But there's still going to be that risk.

I think Loki getting that hammer, as a lot of you have pointed out already, would be a sign that Loki has finally changed. It's a sure sign that he isn't the evil person he was pretending to be. I just think it would be rather cheap if Thor got his hammer back so easily and that was that.

That being said, the King Thor timeline has me wondering just what the differences are between our Loki and that Loki. How has that timeline changed since the Incursions? Has it changed at all?

Also, I was wondering, when King Loki pulled off his face at the end of Agent of Asgard to reveal teen!Loki, and given the appearance of the Loki in King Thor's timeline, are we supposed to infer that a Loki doesn't actually age past the time it was created?

[Raye]

Nice to see Bats! though I still don't like Loki's voice in this, it's just off, it's gotten better over time but it's still not there. I think Loki is just not Duggan's character, they don't mesh.

As for timeframe, future stuff, i always just assumed it took place shortly before the Doom fight, i mean, that's the only time it CAN happen, there is a very small window of time this can occur, between King Thor and Wolverine meeting in the future, and Wolverine dying to Doom. Think it's pretty clear from this preview that this is the case with Wolverine's 'gotta go croak' line. It appears he used the Phoenix force or something to put time on pause during the Doom fight for this to happen. Present, just after Infinity Wars, just before WotR.

I got into comics in the late 90's with Sandman. (Vertigo version, since my previous post may cause some confusion there) got into Marvel with Morrison's X-Men. so I got into Marvel when Loki was still in 'classic' mode at that point, but i wasn't really into the Thor stuff then.

and I get that part of the fun of Loki is hoping for him to do better, and there always has to be the chance he fails. But if he falls, i want it to be because there is a story there, and it builds on what he's going through. If it's just some nostalgia wank where he's suddenly back to classic mode with little to no explanation, (see: Doom. Literally no explanation at all, just back to classic cus reasons) then it's not the same thing. The former is the character failing, and can be part of the overall story we've gotten so far, the latter is a writer failing and it would feel like his story was incomplete.

I don't think Secret Wars caused any changes to the King Thor timeline, the Secret Wars changes were largely unconnected to the Thor side of things, so... I really don't think it had any effect whatsoever. the Loki at the end of time is, just like King Thor, presumably just this Loki plus character changes over time. That change over time thing has been a theme in Aaron's run, so it doesn't surprise me that he ignored Ewing's sorta rebooting the character because that went against what he was saying with Thor, and I don't think he's going to be going with anything like that in the future for the same reason. Because the point is that though there may be a sort of core essence, they will change over time due to just, life. possibly more than most people would, because they are so long lived. (so yeah, i was never particularly worried about Aaron undoing the face turn, because of that, that he was different than he used to be fit very well with what he was saying so of course he used that. it's whoever follows him that i am worried about)

and the thing with King Loki is open for interpretation, I kinda took it as more of a metaphorical thing rather than literal.

*edit- waaaaaaiiiiiit.... random thought. What if Loki can't remember how he died or got there in the preview, because that ain't Loki, exactly, that's Ikol 2.0. He created another backup of himself before he died, so of course he can't remember his death. He prepared for death in this way before, why not do it again? and.. then this is either it living through old kinda suppressed memories, or Loki sent it back in time to learn something before it came time to re-occupy a body. though the problem with that is that this time, he knows what it will mean to overwrite his reincarnated self's consciousness. But that might be solved with Naglfar.

[Rosebunse]

That actually makes a ton of sense, especially since we've seen a Loki do that before and it would allow a continuation of Loki's plan. Of course, now he might know more about how to control the reincarnation or something...Damn you, moral quandaries!

My thing about the status quo is that often time there is a story there, it just often isn't what we want or it isn't very good. Doom was given a story to explain his shift back to what he usually does, though to be fair to Slott, I don't think even he sees Doom as evil, just...well, he's Doom. Of course he's going to do what he does. A few months of good behavior aren't going to change that.

[Raye]

Well, it may go back to what i speculated earlier about with fate being offline, the reincarnated body may not have a fate uploaded. If gods are creatures of story, and story previously was created by fate... stands to reason, the body would possibly end up a mindless husk. OR, he takes over a zombie body on Naglfar.

And you realize that you could have said the EXACT SAME THING about Loki, right? He has lasted a bit longer than Doom, but not by a whole lot when you think of things in terms of the sliding timescale. if you justify handwaving character development for Doom, you should be OK with it for Loki too. Doom's character development as Iron Doom was no less valid than Loki's, and it was tossed aside like nothing, there may be a backdoor to get him back, but it's unlikely to be used. I am not an expert on every detail of Doom, so I invited a friend to come and address that, we'll see if he does or not. But from what I do know, we got a handwave explanation, not a story. Explanations are not stories. Let's create a hypothetical with Loki. It's not a terribly likely one given recent events and what we know of the series, but like i said, hypothetical. Say the new solo starts and like the very first issue, Loki dies, and when he comes back, he's back to being classic Loki. He goes out and gets a more classic looking costume with a full helmet, he's older looking again, and most importantly, he's evil, and has a chip on his shoulder about Thor, and sets out to ruin his life through devious means. Because of his whole reincarnation deal, that does technically explain the change, it makes it fit with continuity, but it is not a story. It's a handwave to accomplish the goal of getting the character back the way the writer wanted in order to tell the story he actually wanted to tell. Would you really be ok with something like that happening? would it be 'well, he's Loki, of course he's going to do what he does'? Because you are saying something like that is fine for Doom etc.

I am happy Loki is the exception because he's my fave at Marvel right now, and has been for years now, precisely because of his character development. But that doesn't mean reverting characters that aren't necessarily my faves is ok, I disagree with it on principle, and the fans of those turns matter too. And that they are doing it to them means they could turn around and do it to Loki.

[Snoop Dogg]

Victor having a character shift again and that bringing with it the more traditional Doom elements isn't really the same as undoing the previous developments. The more accurate comparison is Doctor Octopus, where the version that completed his full character arc died, the one who didn't was revived, and it was looking like that they were going to use that compromise to reset him to classic, but then chose to go forward by continuing the road of development he was on with a new Superior run. And that story continuing is dependent on readers showing up and buying the book, a chance Doom never really had. It's still a tougher position to be in than Loki, where the modern character has just proven to be more popular and you can do those kinds of classic stories with a guy like Maximus. But still, status quo is not really god, and if we support the changes that we know are good and we can prove that they can stick, they'll stick.

So savor and buy your precious anti-hero books.

[Raye]

Doom did have that chance, he had what was basically a solo even if his name wasn't on the cover, with Infamous Iron Man. Of 12 issues, the final issue sold 26,000 in the direct market. It's not that much less than AoA's 17 issues, and that one that finished in the 16k ballpark. If this is all based on sales and Loki's turn was popular enough to keep it going, why not Doom's? Though it's hard to say which version of the character was more popular among fans, and it may be that more people did prefer a classic Doom. But my argument isn't really based on popularity, as much as it is on the principle of just erasing what came before with a handwave way because you find it inconvenient, or you just think the old status quo was better because nostalgia. I just want the character development to be treated with a bit of respect, and if you really want to undo something, (ok, 'undo' may be not quite the right word, because the events weren't erased from continuity or anything, but you get my my meaning) at the very least have some respect for what came before, and make a real story out of it, give it some real closure, not just sweep it under the rug like it never happened and didn't matter. Also i just dislike pandering to nostalgia because I find it boring, personally. some people find it comforting, i get that, but me, i like things to move forward rather than try to recreate the past.

But yes, supporting the books will probably help, like it did with Otto getting another chance to play anti-hero, and presumably helped with Loki lasting as long as he did. But it's not everything, if someone wants to revert something bad enough, they'll do it, regardless of fan support. I'm just saying, it's always going to be a possibility, and if it does happen, I'd prefer it done well, in a respectful way that gives this version of the character it a satisfying conclusion, and that goes for all characters.

*edited to add - i don't mean to come across as all pessimistic, I do think Loki has a very good chance at continuing down his current path, wherever that may lead, and i am very optimistic for him. I'm just trying to point out that just because he's made it this far, it doesn't mean he's safe. Characters making lasting change in comics is notoriously hard, that was the whole point of JIM. There are examples we can point to, sure, but they're the exceptions that prove the rule. It just takes one person to come along and decide they liked things better back in the 70's and they should be like that, and *poof* it all gets reverted. It could happen tomorrow, or it could happen 10 years from now, and if it does, there's a good way to handle it and a bad way, I'd prefer the good way.

[Snoop Dogg]

Doom didn't have a chance as in they already had all of that stuff planned out from the start, probably even including Brian ending with him getting scarred again to let the next writer spin that where they want to. So sales wouldn't have been a factor in changing plans unless people went Immortal Hulk-style ape-bananas over the book. In contrast to something like Superior where they can more easily try to branch it off into its own thing because Spider-Man's not hurting for villains. And while I don't like nostalgia pandering or going to straight old Doom is a good thing, I think you can get a lot of new stuff out of the Latveria-first compromise they've made. He can keep the classic Doom aesthetic, but maybe, and this depends on future Slott plans + other writers, they can make him a Magneto type character who's moral alignment depends on the story but is flexible because it's driven by what's best for his people. That's what I'd want, anyway.

If Loki joins the Avengers they should do the cover of the first issue of Aaron's run again but with Loki replacing Thor and looking very happy while everyone else, in the same poses as in the original cover, are wearing very concerned expressions. And then they go back and they add Loki to the founding Avengers statue where he belongs, damn it.

[Raye]

Okay, sure, but you could say the same about Loki at the end of JIM, too. It ended with Loki in a different body, sure, but his mind was re-uploaded from before Siege, and they still managed to go forward rather than backward. Difference there being that coincidentally Gillen ended up following up on his own story so his vague ending leaving Loki able to go in any direction, including reverting right back to his classic characterization, which was probably what most people expected, ended up being kind of moot. Though it does show that you can take a seeming reversion and go new places with it instead of old ones. Unfortunately, these 'put the toys back int he box' endings are usually used to revert rather than build on what came before.

And if he joins the Avengers, (I am going to be right about that sooner or later) i want all sorts of concerned reactions from the Avengers. the way i see it they think he's just there so they can keep an eye on him, keep your enemies close kinda thing. I absolutely do not expect the other heroes to take him seriously (with a few exceptions already established, like Squirrel Girl) nor would i want them to because it will be entertaining to have him not be trusted but they begrudgingly let him in the club anyway. But hopefully he'd prove them wrong and be a big damn hero.

[Fanto.mx]

That actually makes a ton of sense, especially since we've seen a Loki do that before and it would allow a continuation of Loki's plan. Of course, now he might know more about how to control the reincarnation or something...Damn you, moral quandaries!

My thing about the status quo is that often time there is a story there, it just often isn't what we want or it isn't very good. Doom was given a story to explain his shift back to what he usually does, though to be fair to Slott, I don't think even he sees Doom as evil, just...well, he's Doom. Of course he's going to do what he does. A few months of good behavior aren't going to change that.

Where did the story explaining the shift happen? I'm a big Doom fan, and as far as I've seen Doom, still in full Infamous Iron Man mode, was stranded in another dimension, and his very next appearance was completely reverted, re-scarred Doom taking Latveria back over, then baiting Galactus, and telling the whole world to let him take care of it on his own.

Victor having a character shift again and that bringing with it the more traditional Doom elements isn't really the same as undoing the previous developments. ... And that story continuing is dependent on readers showing up and buying the book, a chance Doom never really had.

Maybe sales was king here, but it really doesn't seem like it. Reading Slott's FF, it's pretty clear that there was a particular flavor of FF and Doom that he wanted and he just did it. A whole bunch of stuff, including from the very well-regarded and well-selling Future Foundation run and Secret Wars were undone by the end of the first issue.

Doom didn't have a chance as in they already had all of that stuff planned out from the start, probably even including Brian ending with him getting scarred again to let the next writer spin that where they want to.

He wasn't scarred at the end of Infamous. He didn't revert there. And given the set-up, which made excellent sense and is very, very hard to undo in any logical way, there's no evidence that his reversion was always meant to be happened and good evidence that it was meant to stick. I mean, the set-up was that Doom literally became god-emperor, with ultimate power and complete control over the world. He had always been convinced that if he were just in charge, everything would be better. He failed, and Reed and Franklin succeeded, practically on a whim. He had to deal with that, and he became Infamous Iron Man because he decided to use his power and genius to help in smaller, less selfish ways. He wasn't especially good at it, but he was dedicated.

He also literally had the exact same opportunity to retake Latveria and go back to being "classic" Doom in the middle of the Infamous run -- and didn't take it.

And then he was stranded in another universe for an indeterminate amount of time and somehow lost his face all over again but decided to go full conquering caveman and mustache twirler for no apparent reason.


EDIT: Found Invincible Iron Man #600. Reading now.

EDIT EDIT: HE SCAR FACE HE BAD NOW. Yup. That totally checks out, especially up against "Discovered he couldn't hack it as a god and had to completely reexamine his conception of his self."

[Raye]

https://twitter.com/jasonaaron/statu...90586782687233
"In WAR OF THE REALMS Act 2, I was originally going to have Loki become the new Prince of Canada. But well, as you saw, King Laufey had other ideas."

hehehehe! I'd actually kinda have liked to see that, even though it would have meant Loki was on the side of the bad guys.

(yeah i don't check twitter very frequently)

[Raye]

Upon reflection on how Doom got turned heel again i think my main takeaway is how lucky Loki was to have Gillen follow up JIM himself.

There is a habit with comic runs to put things away the way they found them, or back to classic, more or less, so that the next writer doesn't have to deal with anything they don't want from the previous run all that much, which is what Bendis did with Doom. He set up a vague situation where Doom could go in any direction, including right back to being a villain. But there was nothing about that scene that dictated he HAD to come out a villain, he could have come back out and defined himself separately from Iron Man, but still on the same path of trying to redefine himself, or something else, it was pretty open. Same thing happened with Loki at the end of JIM, after Ikol took over Kid Loki's mind. That was a horrible thing he did, so it would have been very easy to just go with it and say he was back to his old self again... but then again, maybe not. In both cases, they could have continued moving forward, or they could be reset and go from there. And the option most followup writers choose in a similar situation is to reset, presumably because they just want to tell their story that maybe they've had in their head for years now, they don't want to have to deal with baggage from the previous run, they just want to get on with the story they want to tell. Convenient for the writers, but it results in a bunch of fairly self contained runs that have little meaningful connection with one another, so if as a reader you got invested in a particular take, well, too bad. But with JIM being followed up by Gillen himself (and from what he says, this wasn't his original intention, he didn't know he would be following it up himself when he decided how JIM would end), I mean, why would Gillen reset a story he had started himself? So the characterization continued in Young Avengers, and that got the momentum going, and I think that momentum plus critical acclaim of JIM once other writers got a hold of him again is the main thing that helped Loki stay on this path, while Doom and some others got reset. But, momentum or not, there is still a risk of someone coming along and resetting him because they want to recreate a 'classic' feel, and the momentum won't stop that, though it will likely make readers a lot more upset.