Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
Just to clarify: I am not saying Loki was bad in Avengers 1. In fact as far as I am concerned, he was good in all three movies; his Thor 1 self had believable motivations and a sympathetic side that set him apart from most MCU villains even now (seriously, Kilgrave is the only villain I can think of to date who was as well developpped... with Kingpin not far behind); his Avengers 1 self was more dickish, but still entertaining to watch. As for Dark World, well... let's face it, he stole that movie.
I think Pierce was a good villain - I don't know if I'd call him deep, but Robert Redford plays him well, and his motives and backstory help to make him more than a mustache-twirling villain, though.
He's still evil, though - on both a grand scale (Project Insight) and a personal scale (his treatment of Bucky).
Oh God! Natural light!
Pierce was good motivation-wise, but when it comes to charisma or entertaining, he was pretty standard. He was more of a political thriller villain than a supervillain. The "super"-villain role was more filled by Bucky, who I am hesitant to confirm as a villain or not (though I will admit that he was a pretty effective antagonist as well).
As for the characterization, they explained that away with Loki having been changed by his experiences traveling through space and meeting the Other/Thanos.
![]()
See, I kind of liked that. I certainly thought Redford gave a charismatic performance.
![]()
That's a fair point. I guess hypothetically (and I know this is my Fanon Discontinuity) I see the sceptre as having a sort of One Ring style effect on him. So like Loki mind controls other people with it, but it also has an effect on him of which he's unaware.
I thought he was good too. Gave some depth to the somewhat stock "political conspiracy villain".
edited 1st Dec '15 1:37:59 PM by Hodor2
![]()
Again, he wasn't bad, just...not the kind of villain I would like to see in a superhero movie. He worked as an antagonist, but as what a super-villain is supposed to be according to me (a Worthy Opponent who can match the superhero and has something memorable), not so much.
edited 1st Dec '15 1:38:46 PM by Theokal3
I think Loki was being influenced by the Mind Stone to some extent, at least. The philosophy he spouts off in Stuttgart and reverence toward the Tesseract sound a bit deluded, and IIRC his eyes are actually a different color in The Avengers than they were in either of the two Thor movies.
You cannot firmly grasp the true form of Squidward's technique!There's a deleted scene that hints at Loki possibly being influenced by the staff, but I assumed they cut it out precisely because they wanted Loki to be his own villain in the plot while Thanos was The Man Behind the Man, rather than making the plot outright about Thanos controlling things.
It's the same reason why they never out and say "Thanos was influencing Ultron to do all those inconsistent schemes." It's implied to an extent, but the plot is about Ultron's goals, not Thanos'.
edited 1st Dec '15 1:45:22 PM by KnownUnknown
Except for all the shit he does in Thor 1 or all the shit he does in Thor 2
and the fact he doesn't even show any remorse for what he does in Avengers.
Forever liveblogging the AvengersThat but also like there's as much evidence for him being a liberal politician as a conservative one and in regard to the latter, the movie avoids making him some kind of Dick Cheneyesque warmonger.
As for Hydra as a whole, it is something that the movie is able to maintain suspension of disbelief and make the reveal chilling rather than comical.
What is so great about Redford's performance is that my mind told me the moment his character turned up that he is most likely the bad guy. But he played the "worried leader" so convincing, I was actually starting to doubt my initial assessment and was wondering if he might be a red herring. The moment when the Winter Soldier turned up in his kitchen was truly suspenseful for me because I really wasn't sure in which direction they would go at this point. That's the main reason why I like this character so much more than Stane, who is so clearly evil that I never understood how Tony could fall for his façade.
The Sokovia Accords
, according to the Phase 2 Box Set.
I love how they list off the names of the individuals and then suddenly there's just "Vision." Not even "John Vision" or "Max Vision," just "Vision."
![]()
![]()
![]()
It's possible for someone to do horrible horrible things in the name of a "good" ideal without being a Straw Traitor. I mean, there are some people on the far left who genuinely care about the plight of the poor and downtrodden but will defend the morality of Stalin's purges, mainly considering them wrong because Stalin himself was a bad person who directed these purges towards the "wrong" sort of people for selfish reasons rather than to benefit society, but that the act of removing undesirables en masse for the sake of long-term peace is itself not immoral.
edited 1st Dec '15 4:49:36 PM by AlleyOop
The movie never explicitly says it was an act for power alone. His Motive Rant to Fury suggests he really thought he'd be bringing peace. And that's important because it's how Fury sees how little kept him from turning into Pierce. If it was just a fascist power grab then they could've replaced Pierce with the Red Skull and nothing would change.
edited 1st Dec '15 4:23:38 PM by Tuckerscreator

edited 1st Dec '15 12:24:54 PM by Swanpride