re: Loki Episode 6 Season Finale Thread

quote:

---

I just thought the performance was over the top and the whole presentation of the character didn't really work for me. I hold out hope that the presentation of Kang will be great, but the combination of writing, directing and acting for this particular character disappointed me. I'd be lying if I said it didn't.

---

This was probably my biggest takeaway from the episode. I thought it was cool but I didn’t find anything about the finale that blew me away like people are saying. Was it the confirmation of the multiverse? But we already had that for months with the Dr Strange movie. Was it the Kang reveal? I mean I guess I can see why fans of the comics could be hyped but it’s important for those fans to realize that his portrayal in this episode was…lacking. I found the performance over the top and a little silly. And like many others, I also found it difficult to understand him, even with our volume on 70 out of 100

It was cool to see Loki all stressed out about him at the end and the ending shot of Kang replacing the time keepers was cool but I didn’t really understand Loki’s stress. I never got the sense that Kang was some super powerful being. Again, I know he’s supposed to be from the comics but just based off the show and the backstory they gave and his portrayal, it didn’t instill any kind of fear or dread that I expected to feel when we are being introduced to someone who will be the big bag of the multiverse saga of the MCU. Again, I liked the episode but Kang’s portrayal and the praise it’s getting is the equivalent to when people praised Michael B Jordan as Killmonger, another overacted character. And it almost ruined the episode for me. In fact, the best part of Kang was at the end when he wasn’t on screen and Loki was trying to warn Mobius.

what is MoM?

quote:

---

WHY.

---

I don’t have an answer for the first part but it’s easy to answer why.

It provides them a ton of flexibility moving forward not only for Phase 4 but 5&6. It allows them to recast Cap, Iron Man, Hulk, Widow, any character really. Sure, they’re not going to do that anytime soon. They want the stakes set in Endgame to have meant something. But the option is there 10 years from now. It also opens the door for Scarlett Johansson, Chris Evans, RDJ or any of the others to come back if they want to, even if it’s just for an Avengers movie and they want to make a quick $50 mil. They can do that and the audience will go with it because it’s a different universe’s Tony or Steve or Natasha.

It allows them to bring in the X-Men and F4 without people wondering where they’ve been this whole time. Same with Deadpool. It probably also fixes the Chadwick Boseman (RIP) situation where they can have Shuri do it for a bit but have another T’Challa later on. I guess the only downside to introducing the multiverse is making the audience believe there are still stakes and consequences. That’s their biggest challenge moving forward. But I guess Feige thinks the benefits are worth the risk.

quote:

---

The Last Jedi at one point was getting 10 threads a day for 4 years of how it ruined Star Wars and their childhood.

---

To be fair, it did suck.

quote:

---

eople are going to downvote if you say ANYTHING negative about this apparently, but let me at least say 1st that I didn't hate it.

---

But in your original quote, you said this

quote:

---

Just finished it. Wow, that was awful. I heard the finale was a let down, but I wasn't expecting it to be that bad.

---

So, can you see how people took that you hated it? "Awful" is a pretty strong term

quote:

---

The show had a huge build up to finally meet this villain. I purposefully hadn't read anything or looked at imdb to see who it was going to be. Had I, I actually would have been hoping for even more actually.

It turns out to be a guy that is pretty cool with them and takes a long time to eat an apple. I didn't think he was a bad actor, but I found nothing about him interesting. I get that he has the potential to be bad arse, but I'm basing my opinion based off what I saw, not based on versions of him that I don't know who they will be.

I'm booting this quote up i know but he said something like "you think I'm bad? Wait till there's 1,000 of me." Why would that scare me? You're a pretty nice guy.

So that was one thing. Basically the villain was a let down. Not who the villain was, but how he was portrayed. It gave me nothing to be excited about and there was so much build up and so much protection all for someone who doesn't even care if he's killed.

---

Congratulations, you successfully resisted where I and so many others have failed. This should be even better for you in the upcoming movies...

without spoiling it MORE for you beyond what he said- the character is correct and truthful in what he says.
He IS a character with huge powers, and quite a few variants in the timeline (think of the various Loki's we saw, same idea). And 99% of them are BAD MO-FO's on the line of Thanos.

What he said, and what Loki eventually came to understand- this one version, who was maintaining the TVA as a "necessary evil" to maintain peace- this was the only version with any empathy for the rest of existence.

He's not the big bad, because he is the alternative to the big bad.

quote:

---

Also, the big plot reveal was nothing special. There's a multiverse. Ok. There's already been movies not in the same universe, we already know that. They were telling us something that we already knew. Sure, Marvel can go wherever it wants to, but it's not like it needed that, they already go where they want to

---

Only thing is, this is not the case in the MCU. Disney NOW owns the rights of the Marvel properties, and can include everything. But for decades, they didn't.

As of right now, the Avengers group (the MCU) do not exist in the same onscreen world as the X-Men, Blade (the vampire series), etc. You could not have Magneto fight the Avengers, or Loki muck around with the Fantastic Four.
In the comics, these superheroes all exist side by side.

Due to the events of this show, you CAN now mix and match, and have it make sense. It might seem a bit procedural, but it addresses the continuity question: if Charles Xavier and the X-Men have been around since the Cuban Missile crisis, why didn't they respond to Loki's invasion of New York? Because they had been in an alternate timeline/universe, where that event (and the existence of the Avengers to respond) didn't happen.

And without the benevolent version of the TVA keeping it from happening (for various reasons down the road), they can now cross over.

What seems to be the case moving forward, the on-screen world will probably assimilate, causing these heroes to join within a single universe, to fight the multiversal threat.

In theory, this opens the MCU to allow every movie franchise to interact with each other.

Example- why doesn't James Bond, Jason Bourne and Batman team up with the Transformers, to deal with Godzilla wreaking havoc? Answer- they're all different franchises that don't interact with each other.
But if they were all owned by Marvel (or perhaps, Disney, as the parent company), they now COULD.

quote:

---

The plot point was that the guy was a raving lunatic from all his time keeping time in line as well as all the fighting he did with his variant selves. The acting (yes talking while chewing an apple as well) played into that. It is not me who does not understand.

---

The acting was poor. It took me completely out of the story. You are being deliberately obtuse because you don’t agree with me, but I thought the acting itself was terrible. It’s not like his was the only poor acting in this series, or like Loki is the only D+ series with poor acting that stands out.

quote:

---

So, can you see how people took that you hated it? "Awful" is a pretty strong term

---

I wasnt very clear, I was meaning I didnt hate the show in general. I really liked it up until the finale. The finale was awful imo, but it didnt make me hate the show, I just dont view it as highly as I did going in.

quote:

---

He IS a character with huge powers, and quite a few variants in the timeline (think of the various Loki's we saw, same idea). And 99% of them are BAD MO-FO's on the line of Thanos.

What he said, and what Loki eventually came to understand- this one version, who was maintaining the TVA as a "necessary evil" to maintain peace- this was the only version with any empathy for the rest of existence.

He's not the big bad, because he is the alternative to the big bad.

---

Right, and I get that. But I cant get excited about or I guess in this context cant give them credit for being a good finale based off of "this alternate version of Kang isnt a very good character but trust us all the others that we introduce are going to be awesome." They have earned the trust of the fans, but im just not going to say something is awesome just because I hope it is awesome.

quote:

---

In theory, this opens the MCU to allow every movie franchise to interact with each other.

Example- why doesn't James Bond, Jason Bourne and Batman team up with the Transformers, to deal with Godzilla wreaking havoc? Answer- they're all different franchises that don't interact with each other.
But if they were all owned by Marvel (or perhaps, Disney, as the parent company), they now COULD.

---

Is that a good thing? Its a free pass for them to just not have to worry about people having issues with the timeline but I personally dont care to have them potentially all mixed together. I dont want X-Men to be fighting alongside the Avengers. Good lord how many characters can you fit into this Some of the best movies put out were the X-Men and Deadpool, why is it even necessary to have them mixed in when they are already great on their own?

I mean I see where you're coming from, but I dont know, I guess the simple answer is it just didnt do it for me and didnt get me excited for anything in the future like it did for yall.

quote:

---

Again, I liked the episode but Kang’s portrayal and the praise it’s getting is the equivalent to when people praised Michael B Jordan as Killmonger, another overacted character

---

I didn't have a problem with Michael B. Jordan's acting in Black Panther. I wouldn't have minded him taking a shot at this role if he hadn't done that one. The one person I keep thinking could have really nailed this role was Cumberbatch if he wasn't already Dr. Strange. Heck, he even kind of looks like Nathaniel Richards from the comics.

So Kang is just a human, right?

Or I suppose he can be anything across all the timelines.

Similar to alligator Loki?

quote:

---

quote:

---

He's not the big bad, because he is the alternative to the big bad.

---

Right, and I get that. But I cant get excited about or I guess in this context cant give them credit for being a good finale based off of "this alternate version of Kang isnt a very good character but trust us all the others that we introduce are going to be awesome." They have earned the trust of the fans, but im just not going to say something is awesome just because I hope it is awesome.

---

I get that, but we never know until we see. Star Wars was awesome, we all hoped/thought the prequels and sequels would be. Objectively, they ... weren't.

The Mandalorian was met with a lot of love because it incorporated the Luke timeline, the one part of SW that was truly beloved by fans.

quote:

---

quote:

---

In theory, this opens the MCU to allow every movie franchise to interact with each other.

Example- why doesn't James Bond, Jason Bourne and Batman team up with the Transformers, to deal with Godzilla wreaking havoc? Answer- they're all different franchises that don't interact with each other.
But if they were all owned by Marvel (or perhaps, Disney, as the parent company), they now COULD.

---

Is that a good thing? Its a free pass for them to just not have to worry about people having issues with the timeline but I personally dont care to have them potentially all mixed together. I dont want X-Men to be fighting alongside the Avengers. Good lord how many characters can you fit into this

---

I mean, you have a good point. I sorta agree, to be totally honest.

I mentioned Star Wars. I'd absolutely love a similar scifi show, that is NOT Star Wars. Studios are terrified of trying this.

Pertaining to this show- it's Marvel. The basis of everything goes back to the comics, and in the comics, these characters coexist.
In the comics, Wanda and Quicksilver are siblings (which we saw in Avengers), and they are the children of Magneto (which we saw in Avengers).
Which means, Magneto is Wanda's dad... something we have not yet seen. And all the potential drama about that.
Beast has been a member of the Avengers as well as the X Men. Kang (just introduced) is an offspring of Reed Richards (Fantastic Four), etc.

ALL of this intertwines, it's a single universe (or had been) in the comics. It's their property, and rather than make stand-alone single movie adaptations, Marvel is in the process of converting their product to the film industry.