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
Her plan to let Stark destroy himself did end up creating a vessel for the Mind Stone to work through.
Forever liveblogging the AvengersIt would make sense for them to kinda shift Loki towards a more protagonist position. Loki's an awkward case where he was the villain for his first two films because he's one of Thor's most iconic archnemeses and the villain responsible for the Avengers forming in the first damned place, but in the comics, he's been a superhero for a long time and that doesn't look like it's going to change any time soon.
Marvel loves teasing, "This is the arc where Loki GOES BACK TO BAD!" but it's always a fakeout for Loki to pull off some super-brilliant scheme that brings down the villain and/or helps Thor. And now we're seeing that in the movies too, with Loki's "betrayal" when he stabbed Thor in the back in The Dark World. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that Loki's ruling Asgard right now as some convoluted secret plan that he and Odin concocted rather than nefarious machinations.
I would not be surprised if Loki is 100% protagonist when Infinity War rolls around and he makes some kind of Heroic Sacrifice in the battle, setting up his reincarnation in Phase IV for a Journey Into Mystery or Loki: Agent of Asgard movie.
edited 23rd Aug '16 9:41:48 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I'd rather not have Loki be a straight up hero. I found it annoying enough that they glossed over the people who were likely killed when Wanda used her powers on the Hulk. I do not want the guy who ravaged New York to be on good terms with the Avengers.
Enemy Mine? Sure. Go for it. I always find that set up interesting.
@Swan, I mean that plan is shockingly straightforward, a definite recurring plot in a lots of stories where people get tricked by the villain: Stage tragedy, swoop in and stop it, look like a hero. It's pretty basic actually. Heck, It was Syndrome's final grand plan.
@Tobias, Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr He gets Ragnarok'd or however revival works, and in Stage 4 we introduce Ms. Marvel, Riri Williams, Kate Bishop, Patriot, and Kid Loki and begin the next generation and call it Young Avengers.
edited 23rd Aug '16 10:31:25 AM by MousaThe14
The Blog The ArtI'm going to assume that Ragnarok will probably not wipe out all the Asgardians, if only because it seems unlikely that either Thor or Loki would be absent for Infinity War.
I expect that Ragnarok will actually feature Ragnarok only in about the same amount as Age of Ultron can reasonably be called an Age. Cool name first, accurate description of the contents second.
edited 23rd Aug '16 10:57:30 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.The answer to that would depend partly on which camp you're in: the "he can lift it because, as a newborn innocent being, he is worthy" camp, or the "he can lift it because he's an inorganic construct, and thereby subject to a loophole" camp.
If it's the former, I would be surprised if he could still wield Mjolnir. (Also, does being able to wield Mjolnir also make him capable of harnessing its lightning powers, or can he just hit stuff with it?)
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."My theory is that, in determining "worthiness", Mjolnir includes noble parentage in the equation. That's why Thor can lift it despite still having many character flaws: being of royal blood helps cancel those out. And Cap, despite all his virtue, couldn't quite lift it because he is still common born.
Vision, being synthetic, sidesteps the issue of parentage, so the hammer judges him purely on his merits.
Yeah, I don't think it's a matter of bloodlines, but of character. That's why in Thor Loki couldn't lift it. If I recall, he was surprised by that, even thought he was present when Odin put that spell on the Hammer to begin with.
As for Vision, I believe that while his body is synthetic, he is a person, Just like I thought JARVIS was a person. As such, I don't think he'd be able to lift it anymore. I think he could in Ao U because he didn't have any life experience to be 'tainted', for lack of a better term. He does now, and since I saw someone in this very thread say something about Vision being subjected to Break the Haughty... I think he'd struggle like everyone else, if only because of his own sense of guilt ( for permanently injuring Rhodes, accident though it was)
I'm not saying the hammer only cares about people's bloodlines, or even cares mainly about that. Just that, coming from a monarchistic society, that's likely to be a factor it uses in assessing whether someone's worthy. Loki is of royal blood, but couldn't lift the hammer because he's a really, really bad person. However, I do think that Thor being of royal blood is what gives him the extra edge needed to be deemed worthy of the hammer, while people just as heroic and virtuous as he is (if not moreso) can still be deemed unworthy.

If there's one thing Loki wasn't doing in The Avengers, it was thinking clearly. So I don't think the "secretly genius plan" theory works. Besides which, even at the best of times, Loki isn't the greatest planner. He's really good at manipulating people and using trickery to win in situations where he'd lose if just brute force were involved. However, his plans tend to have issues because of his conflicting desires/poor self-analysis.
With the mind control theory, it's more Wanda and Pietro I question than the HYDRA people. Like her comics counterpart, Wanda is a .... controversial character who makes some... controversial choices, but there's never been an indication that this is because of the fact that the got her powers from the scepter.
edited 23rd Aug '16 8:51:52 AM by Hodor2