Loki

[Thezmage]

Probably not. I love her, but spoilers:

the sex vixen temptress is not a character Disney has any interest in depicting. AoS did so with Lorieli, but that was before the Disney deal

end of spoilers

Disney bought Marvel in 2009. Agents of Shield debuted in 2013.

[kidfresh512]

I finally got to watch the first two episodes of LOKI. Curious how many answers we will get in the next 4 episodes. Loki asks a lot of questions(cause in some ways he is our stand-in) but hasn't gotten much in the way of answers.

-these Timekeepers decide time, no free will you say?
-where/when exactly are we...is it the future?
-I'm(loki) in trouble for violating time but I wouldn't even be here if not for the time traveling Avengers, why aren't they in trouble?(Mobius does say that was approved but Loki has a point)

Mobius shows that across the timelines their main Variant foe has been Loki doppelgangers. To even get on the TVA's radar you'd need to powerful. Lets circle back to that disintegrated person for not taking a ticket. Now, assuming he's making valid threats, his dad is "_________"(CEO, President, whatever) at Goldman Sachs. So, who is his dad? A powerful entity masquerading as his human dad and he stumbled across a powerful element that got him on TVA's radar? My thinking is.....how many possible threats to Time exist in any ONE timeline to really warrant a TVA in the first place??

With the Dr. Strange 2 film being about timelines and alternate realities I also have trouble thinking this TVA is that all powerful. Same for these Timekeepers. This show is going to trump the cinematic entries?

Loving the production value and acting and I'm along for the ride.


EDIT: Can the thread title be renamed? Remove 'trailer'. I'm guessing the OP intended to just discuss the trailer and it has been hijacked as the show discussion thread now.

Well I think they are making the TVA look kind of inept on purpose. Loki is our stand in asking the expected questions. He is also the one discovering their loopholes and hypocrisy every episode. I think its very purposeful the juxtaposition of Infinity gems in a drawer...vs what dozens or hundreds of "elite" TVA agents getting slaughtered and outsmarted by a "Variant" until they desperately need Loki's help.

They are purposefully showing them as both impressive in terms of being able to time jump anywhere and be quasi omniscient, but not really. They have glaring security holes, they clearly arent being told the full story by the "Timekeepers". Even Mobius is kept on a leash and fed what they think he should know.

I think we will get answers and probably see the man behind the curtain. Everything so far is pointing to some serious time fraud being perpetrated. And Female loki might have the right idea honestly just blow their ish up. Air the dirty laundry let the multiverse happen

[Robotech Master]

On the subject of the TVA not being as great as they think on paper, I'm wondering if this event Sylvie just caused is actually retroactively the existence of the multiverse, at least for the last several thousand years. Even though they have talked about clipping branches early on and keeping it to one "sacred" timeline for a long time, the TVA seems to exist outside of the normal flow of time and the universe, so the way they experience these things would be different from mortals. But people have compiled online the places and times that Sylvie bombed, and she detonated those devices on various planets in the MCU all at various points in time, thousands of years apart in some cases. That's why the branches that appeared at the end are coming from all over the place.

If these branches don't get clipped in this series, then hypothetically from the point of view of say, the Ancient One or Doctor Strange, the multiverse has always been around, even the cause of its existence wouldn't happen until the events of the Loki series. The Timekeepers may even be savvy about this, and may be the reason why the judge said they were unusually focused on stopping the Sylvie variant.

We'll see how it hashes out, but I definitely see disillusionment with the TVA and/or the Timekeepers not being what they claim being a part of this.

[DrNewGod]

Disney bought Marvel in 2009. Agents of Shield debuted in 2013.

I worded my meaning incompletely and poorly. I meant that AoS was still running around loose, doing its own thing before Feige got everything under one roof.

[BeastieRunner]

See, I think it would be weird for me if they do have some kind of special forces in reserve or something, because what were they waiting for? They've already been saying how many of their teams have been wiped out by the Variant, and their recruiting Loki has been portrayed as kind of an act of desperation, something they wouldn't usually do and most of them still think is crazy -- with all that established, how do you later come back and so, oh no, we weren't serious before, but now we're really mad?

I meant the literal Big Guns, not a team or spec ops because I think that is what Justice Peace, Mo, and Loki are.

I'm talking about weapons so bad, they couldn't erase them.

Given the penchant for trophy rooms, I would not be surprised if something big is hauled out sooner or later. For good or for ill.

The idea that cops should be sparying bullets everywhere like John Matrix seems like a peculiarly American affliction. I absolutely agree that the minutemen are going into known situations to carry out delicate correction work and their equipment is clearly a sufficient edge to achieve that objective. We also now know that they're often being ambushed by their own team mates during these incidents, and that would catch pretty much anyone out.

Well, I wasn't thinking a big ol' wild west shootout. The specific scenario that comes to mind is a Variant holding an important character (one that if removed from the timeline, a huge redline event occurs) hostage and they take the shot but get the hostage. Because Loki was using illusion projection ...

That's where I was coming from.

The MCU TVA doesn't strike me as a group that would function like that. Maybe when they get more desperate now with all those branches ... they get sloppy.

I wonder if he'll get to ride a jet ski.

I predict Mo dies, and we see a 90s clad Loki riding off into a Baywatch-esque sunset on a jet ski, smiling like no tomorrow.

[Scott Taylor]

So far, both MCU series have been about giving the main character a new status quo. Wanda got super powerful, Falcon became Captain America. So I fully expect that Loki will be alive at the end of this, probably as a hero, and back in the MCU after his untimely death. Can't wait to see the look on Thor's face.

[BeastieRunner]

So far, both MCU series have been about giving the main character a new status quo. Wanda got super powerful, Falcon became Captain America. So I fully expect that Loki will be alive at the end of this, probably as a hero, and back in the MCU after his untimely death. Can't wait to see the look on Thor's face.

Or as woman? That's what I want ... I've been waiting for them to recast Loki female for awhile.

[Scott Taylor]

Or as woman? That's what I want ... I've been waiting for them to recast Loki female for awhile.

That works for me. But I also selfishly really love Tom Hiddleston's acting and handling of the character, so wouldn't want him to go. How about a compromise? Just have two Loki's around, one of which is a woman.

[BeastieRunner]

That works for me. But I also selfishly really love Tom Hiddleston's acting and handling of the character, so wouldn't want him to go. How about a compromise? Just have two Loki's around, one of which is a woman.

Female Loki would fit so well into Thor Love and Thunder though ...

I'd be down with 2 if the Tom Loki is a mischievous variant that usually helps and the FemLoki always succeeds with her plans. Twist that knife ...

[Captain Craig]

Or as woman? That's what I want ... I've been waiting for them to recast Loki female for awhile.

Unlike Chris Evans who didn't want to renegotiate his contract(true for RDJ/Iron Man also) Tom is still keen to be Loki and is, as you know, adored in the role.

My hunch is that the role is Tom's until he does not want it and then, instead of having to cast a male you hope catches on like Tom, you take Loki female. Adds a whole lot more to the "can I re-interest" you dynamic to any one disillusioned by the Loki character.

[j9ac9k]

Unlike Chris Evans who didn't want to renegotiate his contract(true for RDJ/Iron Man also) Tom is still keen to be Loki and is, as you know, adored in the role.

My hunch is that the role is Tom's until he does not want it and then, instead of having to cast a male you hope catches on like Tom, you take Loki female. Adds a whole lot more to the "can I re-interest" you dynamic to any one disillusioned by the Loki character.

So, when you throw in the time travelling, the MCU's got its own Dr Who then. I'm down.

[Donald]

So far, both MCU series have been about giving the main character a new status quo. Wanda got super powerful, Falcon became Captain America.

Only half right. At the end of Endgame Steve gave Sam the Shield, so no one would bat an eye if he showed up as Captain America in the next movie. F&WS didn't really change any outcomes, just took a detour to get to the already established one.

Now Wanda showing up in the next movie looking for her kids followed by a recolored Vision is going to make the movie only crowd go huh?

[Frontier]

Only half right. At the end of Endgame Steve gave Sam the Shield, so no one would bat an eye if he showed up as Captain America in the next movie. F&WS didn't really change any outcomes, just took a detour to get to the already established one.

Now Wanda showing up in the next movie looking for her kids followed by a recolored Vision is going to make the movie only crowd go huh?

They also have to explain why Strange didn't interfere with Westview.

[Adam Allen]

They also have to explain why Strange didn't interfere with Westview.

Meh. I have given some thought to this idea, particularly as it relates to people saying how bringing the X-Men to the MCU will require explaining how they didn't get involved, with all the stuff that has happened already. Thing is, while this would be a consideration, as far as explaining some conspicuous absence in the real world, I feel like getting hung up on such details, specific to the genre of superheroes -- well, kind of ignores the reality of the genre.

You know, it's like how there might be conflicts for any popular character (like Wolverine, for instance) who appears in multiple team books and solo's, so a real-world take would have to ask when they were doing one thing or another -- in this one book, your character is in an arc in outer space, so how are they hanging out with Daredevil in Hell's Kitchen, in another book. Spider-Man's multiple solo titles present the same problem -- except for special crossover storylines, that intentionally tie each book together into linear episodes, it's always easy to have him lost in the Savage Land in one title, on a spy caper in Europe in another, while in yet another he's fighting home-grown threats in NYC.

Basically saying, I think it would be a mistake for the MCU to get hung up on thinking they need to explain why some characters weren't around, or where they were for a story, before it's time for them to feature in a particular story. Strange wasn't in Westview because it would have been a totally different story, if he had been. You'd probably in fact remove the majority of the conflict and struggle for Wanda. Likewise if any of the rest of the remaining Avengers showed up for that, and likewise how the Falcon and Winter Soldier storyline would have been different if you said, well, we have established that all of these other characters exist, so why shouldn't they show up? Like, now that Nu-Vision has all of his memories back -- realistically, he could have easily handled all of the Flag Smashers all by himself, without really needing Sam or Bucky, at all.

I'm saying, you don't need in-universe explanations for this stuff, because I think we as the audience can understand how trying to keep one great logical, linear path for every introduced character will significantly hobble you, story-wise. And we'd rather have the cool stories, than perfect logical consistency, as far as who should show up for every conflict.

[Frontier]

Meh. I have given some thought to this idea, particularly as it relates to people saying how bringing the X-Men to the MCU will require explaining how they didn't get involved, with all the stuff that has happened already. Thing is, while this would be a consideration, as far as explaining some conspicuous absence in the real world, I feel like getting hung up on such details, specific to the genre of superheroes -- well, kind of ignores the reality of the genre.

You know, it's like how there might be conflicts for any popular character (like Wolverine, for instance) who appears in multiple team books and solo's, so a real-world take would have to ask when they were doing one thing or another -- in this one book, your character is in an arc in outer space, so how are they hanging out with Daredevil in Hell's Kitchen, in another book. Spider-Man's multiple solo titles present the same problem -- except for special crossover storylines, that intentionally tie each book together into linear episodes, it's always easy to have him lost in the Savage Land in one title, on a spy caper in Europe in another, while in yet another he's fighting home-grown threats in NYC.

Basically saying, I think it would be a mistake for the MCU to get hung up on thinking they need to explain why some characters weren't around, or where they were for a story, before it's time for them to feature in a particular story. Strange wasn't in Westview because it would have been a totally different story, if he had been. You'd probably in fact remove the majority of the conflict and struggle for Wanda. Likewise if any of the rest of the remaining Avengers showed up for that, and likewise how the Falcon and Winter Soldier storyline would have been different if you said, well, we have established that all of these other characters exist, so why shouldn't they show up? Like, now that Nu-Vision has all of his memories back -- realistically, he could have easily handled all of the Flag Smashers all by himself, without really needing Sam or Bucky, at all.

I'm saying, you don't need in-universe explanations for this stuff, because I think we as the audience can understand how trying to keep one great logical, linear path for every introduced character will significantly hobble you, story-wise. And we'd rather have the cool stories, than perfect logical consistency, as far as who should show up for every conflict.

The thing is Strange was actually supposed to be in it and it's kind of his job to deal with that stuff and the showrunners just left it to the writers of his sequel film to come up with a reason as to why he wasn't involved.

With Wanda showing up in his movies they can't really not address it.