My dad was dealing with some mixed feelings so I told him "In therapy when something is too complicated to do a simple 'pro and contra list' we sometimes do an excercise where you imagine all these mixed feelings around a table in some kind of conference, letting each tell their bit and you leading the debate."
and my dad didn't really respond and just stared ahead so I kept preparing lunch. Until a few minutes later when he suddenly piped up: "I am having a bad time at the conference"
Was anyone going to tell me that Jesse McCartney who voices Dick Grayson in Young Justice is the same fuckign Jesse McCartney whose song Beautiful Soul was the slow dance song in literally every single rom com circa early 2000s, or was I just supposed to connect the dots myself
I came out here to celebrate a teen heart-throb icon, and have left with knowledge about Quentin McCartino I never could have anticipated. I am Pandora, and typing the first Dickard Grayson post was opening the shoe box
So i happened on some Loki Series update, which I was purposely avoiding, but it helped me realize something. Especially after the brutalization in Gagnarok, I realized that I have no idea what/how is the correct portrayalization of Loki. Because in the first movie, he went from someone quiet, controlled, rarely speaking and doing the right thing to going mad. Because of this his actions in Avenger were too violent, and so against the control and sneakiness he showed in the beginning of the first movie when it comes to managing the circumstances. And then in the Dark World, he was angry and snappish towards everything, especially his family, which is soooo understandable. But then in Gagnarok he was depicted as some stupid person that makes weird jokes and smiles all the time, some drama queen…. So i have no idea what is the right Loki portrayal we should expect from the Loki series. Or what is the correct self-healing arc he should have, considering the little knowledge we have of how Loki acts and interacts with things/people when he’s not mad/angry/snapping at everything. So I would like to ask you guys opinions on this, @lucianalight@juliabohemian@imnotrevealingmyname@nikkoliferous@iamanartichoke@yume-no-fantasy@loki-god-of-menace@seiramili7@icyxmischief , because I’ve read the most beautifully constructed Loki metas on your blog and really value your opinions when it comes to Loki things. And anyone else that wants to contribute. And also, what is everyone’s thoughts on this Loki series, because like i’d stated i was avoiding the news about because i’ve given up on Marvel after how badly and weird Loki was characterized in Gagnarok and Infinity War.
Thank you for tagging me, @kinathewolf! You’ve given me something to do while I procrastinate at work, lmao. Long post coming up, sorry!
So i happened on some Loki Series update, which I was purposely avoiding, but it helped me realize something. Especially after the brutalization in Gagnarok, I realized that I have no idea what/how is the correct portrayalization of Loki. Because in the first movie, he went from someone quiet, controlled, rarely speaking and doing the right thing to going mad.
I think that this is a pretty accurate interpretation - Loki is very quiet and controlled in the first Thor, and because this is his first appearance in canon, there’s also this underlying implication that this is Loki’s basic personality - and has been for the previous thousand years.
There are several things established about Loki in the first movie that give us an idea about who he is:
- He loves Thor, but is envious of him, and everyone around them knows it. Loki himself admits it. (Interestingly, the Warriors 4 have no problem calling out his jealousy, but they don’t really acknowledge that Loki “loves Thor more deeply than any of you.”)
- His dynamic with the W4 indicates that he is only friends with them because of Thor, and vice versa; they don’t like or trust him, yet tolerate him because he is Thor’s brother and their prince. As soon as push comes to shove, they blatantly choose Thor, and this is probably a pattern that is well established by now (the treason is just a bonus).
- Loki doesn’t have any friends of his own, which further characterizes him as an introvert and a loner. He’s tricky, as his magic seems to be well-known with everyone, yet he isn’t respected for it, as shown when the servant openly laughs at him.
- This doesn’t stop Loki from using his magic to his advantage whenever he sees fit, though, even (and especially?) in battle, as shown on Jotunheim. The other warriors benefit from Loki’s skill and magic in battle, but they do not thank him for it or even acknowledge it in the aftermath.
These things paint a picture of a lonely man who is intelligent and has a sense of humor, but who is also resigned to not being taken seriously, who is used to being passed over for Thor, and who feels like he doesn’t belong in Asgard. He’s already got this level of self-loathing for all of his perceived shortcomings, so finding out that he’s not only adopted but also a Frost Giant - a race he’s been raised to think of as monsters - is absolutely devastating to him.
We watch him spiral down until he’s desperate and has nothing left to lose, and even then, when all is said and done, he tells Odin (and the audience) that he did it for him. To be accepted, to be seen as Thor’s equal. And when Odin rejects this, that’s it - that’s the last thread that is connecting Loki to his family, to Asgard, and to the man he was for the past thousand years. So he lets go, literally and figuratively.
Because of this his actions in Avenger were too violent, and so against the control and sneakiness he showed in the beginning of the first movie when it comes to managing the circumstances
The problem with Loki’s Avengers characterization is that it can’t be indicative of who he is as a person because the Loki who invaded New York had been tortured and brainwashed by Thanos and the Black Order, and then was further being influenced by the mind stone in the scepter. (The latter is canon; the former is heavily implied in context clues.)
Loki fell into Thanos’s hands in an incredibly vulnerable posistion (see: the aforementioned mental breakdown due to the events in Thor 1). Thanos fed on that vulnerability; he manipulated Loki’s rage and self-loathing and gave him a mission. Loki’s degraded sense of self-worth made it easy for Thanos to say, you are important, you are the leader of a great army, you will get your revenge and you will be rightfully king.
And yet, at the same time, I think there is still some of that characterization from the first movie left. Loki isn’t a typical, cartoon-y villain. He’s never cruel or violent just for the sake of it; everything he does has a purpose. He didn’t seem to take pleasure in anything he was doing. When he’s using the weapon-thing on that guy’s eye, he can’t even look at what he’s doing. He only smiles when he realizes that people are afraid of him - for Loki, the reward is being recognized as someone powerful, someone to be feared. He has no interest in the violent thing he’s currently doing.
Similarly, when the battle starts, Loki is quiet, focused, and stone-faced. He’s not enjoying this and, furthermore, when Thor seems to break through the scepter’s hold for one moment, Loki looks panicked at what he’s done. He cries when he stabs Thor.
When Loki drops Thor from the hellicarrier, he’s trying to get Thor out of the way; he knows that it’s more than likely that Thor will survive. But, for argument’s sake, say Loki did intend to kill him - he doesn’t look happy about it. At best, he looks somewhat concerned; at worst, it barely registers before he continues on with his mission.
I think that the only truly violent thing Loki does, without particular reason (except to defend himself, but he probably could have done that regardless) was killing Coulson. Loki murdered Coulson in cold-blood, no matter how you look at it; but, it could also be argued that Loki wanted to hurt Thor and did it for that reason alone. Cool motive, still murder applies, but it does mean that Loki had a reason and wasn’t just doing it for the sake of being cruel.
And then in the Dark World, he was angry and snappish towards everything, especially his family, which is soooo understandable.
Loki is hardened by the time the Dark World comes around. He’s lost everything. He has a target on his back from Thanos. Thor, for all intents and purposes, hates him. His mother is forbidden from seeing him. His father has disowned him and imprisoned him for life. Loki has been through trauma after trauma after trauma at this point, and nobody around him cares enough to help him with any of it.
But, in addition to that, I think that we do see links to his Thor 1 characterization. If you look beyond his anger and snappishness, he still portrays similar traits. He’s shown to be reading in his downtime, which is probably something he has always enjoyed (as an introverted activity, not to mention being studious). He keeps to himself in his cell. I think that’s important to note. He doesn’t try to engage the other prisoners, nor antagonize them. He’s not inciting riots or causing trouble (even though that is Thor’s first suspicion when it’s clear that something is happening in the dungeons). He minds his own business and reads and stares into space a lot.
The Loki in this movie has been stripped of all of the madness and influence that dictated his actions in Avengers, but he still has all of the underlying trauma of the events of Thor 1, plus whatever he was subjected to in that time with Thanos.
What’s left is a man who is rightfully angry at the situation around him, namely with his family, but what also remains are personality traits such as introvertedness and a quick wit. There is loyalty, as he proved by helping Thor and saving Thor and Jane’s lives; there is the ability to feel things deeply, as he mourns his mother’s death; there is skill as a warrior and the love for his brother, and those are all things that are intrinsically Loki.
But then in Gagnarok he was depicted as some stupid person that makes weird jokes and smiles all the time, some drama queen….
If we are basing our characterization on what Thor 1, Avengers, and the Dark World did for Loki, then one really can’t argue that Ragnarok’s Loki was out of character. They did away with his introverted-ness, his tendency to keep to himself, his subtle trickery. What they did to Loki in that movie was, at best, taken some of the roots of his characterization - his humor, his anger at his family, his ability to be tricky - and overplayed them, while leaving out all of the rest of the nuances that made Loki relatable and complex.
And yet.
I think an argument can still be made for Loki’s character: first and foremost, there’s that love for Thor. He “visits” Thor in prison and joins in Thor’s prayer, rather than mocking him or ignoring him. He shows empathy, and he does his best to save Thor, even if saving Thor’s life means giving up on Asgard.
Similarly, at the end, Loki shows up on Asgard when he had no reason to whatsoever. Thor had left him and given up on him, and Loki came back anyway - with a ship big enough to evacuate his people.
Things like the cringey play, the statue, the “your savior is here” moment - those things are rooted in the fact that Loki wants recognition, he wants to feel validated and seen. He’s been chasing that validation since the first Thor movie, because underneath he feels worthlessness and self-loathing. I’d argue he’s just gotten better at hiding it.
In Ragnarok, he’s out-of-character and oversimplified, but the argument can be made that there are still some general personality traits that are consistent with what we’ve seen before, enough to kind of give us an idea of who Loki is.
So i have no idea what is the right Loki portrayal we should expect from the Loki series. Or what is the correct self-healing arc he should have, considering the little knowledge we have of how Loki acts and interacts with things/people when he’s not mad/angry/snapping at everything.
Taking all of this into consideration, my interpretation of Loki is someone who is thoroughly damaged yet amazingly reslient. He feels things deeply, and he loathes himself, but he is also skilled, intelligent, and quick-witted. He has a sardonic sense of humor and is less hesitant to show it. Personal jabs don’t really hurt his feelings anymore, but he harbors the grudge of all the previous slights against him by people like the W4.
He has a lot of trauma to work through, both from within his family and upbringing, and from external factors, such as Thanos. The Loki in the TV show has the advantage, additionally, of being “reset” to his post-Avengers self. The Dark World and Ragnarok haven’t happened in this universe, which means that Loki hasn’t had time to really come to terms with it all.
And also, what is everyone’s thoughts on this Loki series, because like i’d stated i was avoiding the news about because i’ve given up on Marvel after how badly and weird Loki was characterized in Gagnarok and Infinity War.
I am “cautiously optimistic” about the series. There’s the aforementioned “reset” factor, which means that there’s more freedom for the show to move in its own direction and not be restricted by previous canon.
I think of the show as existing in an alternate timeline, because that doesn’t undo the character growth and redemption that Loki Prime accomplished.
I am also encouraged by the fact that Tom has agreed to sign on in the first place - if I were him, I wouldn’t, just because of how Marvel had treated my character. Tom signing on means that he believes that the project will be worth his time and his energy. He believes in it, and I am assuming he has some element of creative control. Tom is the one person outside of “fandom” who understands and cares about Loki as much as we do, so I think that if the project has his approval - even after everything, like the poor characterizations and the completely unnecessary, horrible death - then it has potential to be rewarding.
I think the series is going to give us an opportunity to see a Loki who is at his best while also being at his worst. We’ll see more things from Loki’s point of view, which is inevitable because he is the protagonist. We’ll probably see some of those inherent character traits, like introversion, a sense of humor, and subtle trickery.
I also expect that Loki’s portrayal will bank on the idea of Loki as a villain, who will then surprise everybody when it turns out he really isn’t. No one will know what to expect from Loki, which is also inherent to his character.
And hopefully, along the way, we’ll get to see him make some connections - maybe even a friend of his own - and establish himself as valid, which is what he’s wanted all along.
kinathewolf
thank you so much for the reply @iamanartichoke ! I felt like I have to take out my notebook and take notes. xD And i realize that you’re right that Ragnarok does keep some of Loki’s characterization. But I do not have the faith to believe that it was even remotely intentional. That’s why I think that trying to tie Ragnarok to the previous arcs is a very loose stretch. For me Loki feels like someone that wants attention/admiration and validation. But i remember as if (correct me if I’m wrong, it’s been at least 2 years since I watched anything Marvel related) Loki also struggles with voicing his needs clearly. I find it really ironic in a way: he’s a master manipulator when he wants to but when it comes to talking about himself or what he wants he struggles. Because he could have at least hinted something about what he went through to Frigga, who showed at least some kind of validation in the first movie by giving him the staff (but this might also be because Frigga might be unable to take control herself… but that’s anothe topic). So Loki doing too… extrovert actions to meet his lack of love/attention still seems out of character.
Thank you for tagging me @kinathewolf and sorry for answering late. I was on a long hiatus.
I think @iamanartichoke did a fantastic job at explaining Loki’s characterization. I have nothing to add really. Although I disagree with some minor things about TR. For example I can’t rationalize that golden statue and the stupid play at all. Imo Loki would do things like this to honor the role of his mother in the events of TDW. I agree that Loki at least was recognizable in this movie(unlike Thor), but he is generally ooc.
What I can add to this great meta, is two posts of mine about Loki’s personality that are written to criticize Loki’s characterization in TR.
About Loki tv show, I generally worry for Loki’s characterization in it. I have explained my thoughts about it in this post. But don’t read it if you haven’t watched the trailer and still want to avoid the news about it.
What I hope to see in the series, is that Loki’s identity issues, his trauma and pain are addressed, validated and healed. I also want to see Loki having a real friend for once. He really needs one.
If I had to sum it up, I would say that (no matter which film) Loki is the person we see when no one else is watching him. Loki is in those moments where he is alone. Because there, he is untainted by interaction with characters who may be biased against him (or taking orders from a director who is biased against him).
