# Loki - Season 1 (Spoilers)



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

This is going to be great. Sure, the Quantum Leap/Voyagers story has been done a million times. But it's fun.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

Will check back here tomorrow, after I get a chance to watch the episode tonight.

Big MCU fan and even bigger Loki fan.

The little fanboy inside of this 56 year old man is going "Squeeee!"


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

Very good intro episode...

Only problem I have is too much Earth-centric. Everything in the past happened on Earth, and everybody in the TVA was human.

Can we get a decent _Mos Eisley Cantina _scene?


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

dtle said:


> Very good intro episode...
> 
> Only problem I have is too much Earth-centric. Everything in the past happened on Earth, and everybody in the TVA was human.
> 
> Can we get a decent _Mos Eisley Cantina _scene?


Are we sure they are humans or did they take a form that is familiar to Loki?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

And why does everyone speak English? Usually, Sci-fi glosses over this. There is either a universal translator, or it's really not English, or sometimes they do have alien languages too. But Loki ended up in Mongolia, and the Mongolians spoke to him in Mongol and he didn't understand them and they didn't understand him. You'd think a god would know more languages.


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

The one hunter did say they spoke every language in the timeline.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

The first episode didn't blow me away. Maybe because I'm not a big Owen Wilson fan. I do wonder what time period the other variant Loki is from though and why that variant is more malignant than 2012 Loki.

Also, the Minutemen don't seem very tough. An oil trap can kill a whole squad? Yeesh!


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

Good episode, but I don’t know what bothers me more: Owen Wilson‘s voice, or his broken nose. No matter how you light him, there was that huge shadow going across his nose.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> And why does everyone speak English? Usually, Sci-fi glosses over this. There is either a universal translator, or it's really not English, or sometimes they do have alien languages too. But Loki ended up in Mongolia, and the Mongolians spoke to him in Mongol and he didn't understand them and they didn't understand him. You'd think a god would know more languages.


Like Groot?


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

I enjoyed it. 

I particularly liked the fact that I was thinking the whole time that if I understood the premise right, the Tesseract was probably thrown into a box full of infinity stones somewhere, but didn't expect to actually see it. Then bam, a box full of infinity stones.

Not entirely convinced the bag guy is another Loki Loki, instead it's just someone else that's latched onto the moniker of Loki, God of Mischief, but who knows.

(Although the DB Cooper bit felt forced and out of place)


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Enjoyable and a good episode of setting things up. What Easter eggs did you spot? I haven’t looked up anything yet but I’m sure there were some. That can of soda he was drinking had to be one.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Random User 7 said:


> Enjoyable and a good episode of setting things up. What Easter eggs did you spot? I haven't looked up anything yet but I'm sure there were some. That can of soda he was drinking had to be one.


I am looking forward to the detailed breakdown of the end credits sequence. Surely that is loaded with stuff.

While not an Easter egg because they came right out and told you, I still liked all the Infinity Stones.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

breakdown here

may possibly contain spoilers depending on your definition of "spoiler"


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I thought it was very entertaining. I haven't watched any of the Thor movies but things seemed to make sense to me. 

I'm excited to be watching as they are on, my first Marvel one I'm watching while it's on. I just binged Wandavision and Falcon & the Winter Soldier over the last few months. These shows thus far have all been excellent.


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

Yes, that was good. I like how each of these MCU streaming shows is unique. The Marvel folks are really getting a chance to stretch their creativity muscles in all directions.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Interesting that the DB cooper thing was a flashback and had nothing to do with the TVA at all, that was unexpected


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> Like Groot?


Thor, being the teacher's pet, took the elective course, while Loki played hooky.

--Carlos V.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

zordude said:


> Interesting that the DB cooper thing was a flashback and had nothing to do with the TVA at all, that was unexpected


The best part of that was it was all done because Loki lost a bet to Thor.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

kdmorse said:


> I enjoyed it.
> 
> Not entirely convinced the bag guy is another Loki Loki, instead it's just someone else that's latched onto the moniker of Loki, God of Mischief, but who knows.


Possible spoilers:



Spoiler



Some are predicting Lady Loki, as the hooded figure at the end of Ep1.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

Thumbs up for me but I was probably already going to love it regardless. 

Watching the intro cartoon with Ms. Minutes was too funny. I got the vibe of the 50s or 60s old Disney cartoons. And then thought of the intro cartoon in Jurassic Park, ('Dino DNA!') which was certainly another riff on the old cartoons.

Watching the cartoon, I thought "Now this is a good way to do exposition." Whenever there is a starting voice-over for a movie or show, I already know the writers don't have a good way to tell the story. (Rule one in movie making, 'show' don't 'tell')

And Loki watching "This is your life" is a good way to move him quickly from villain to anti-hero.

I did feel the DB Cooper just being a thing they did for fun was a bit of a trick. Still a fun little diversion. Of course I had to pause the show to explain to my wife and daughter who DB Cooper was...

A good balance of comedy and drama. I'm happy.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Enjoyed the first episode, but didn't expect otherwise. My immediate question was why was Loki nabbed for time hopping and not the Avengers, but then they actually answered that. Lol


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I liked it but I think Disney would have been smarter to release the first two episodes together. I feel like this was all setup, which is fine, but you want to set the hook and I suspect ep 02 will do that better, rather than making everyone wait a week.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

madscientist said:


> I liked it but I think Disney would have been smarter to release the first two episodes together. I feel like this was all setup, which is fine, but you want to set the hook and I suspect ep 02 will do that better, rather than making everyone wait a week.


That would work OK if there were more episodes in the series. But this is fairly limited.. So, they gotta drag it out.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Another variant and Loki's sex is known


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Dunno if Peggy would be a variant. She did not do any weird time travel.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

jsmeeker said:


> Dunno if Peggy would be a variant. She did not do any weird time travel.


From the way they described it, you don't have to time travel. You just have to do something that causes you to branch off of the sacred timeline, creating a new multiverse. Which of course is where this is headed. Can't have a multiverse of madness without a multiverse.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

hapster85 said:


> From the way they described it, you don't have to time travel. You just have to do something that causes you to branch off of the sacred timeline, creating a new multiverse. Which of course is where this is headed. Can't have a multiverse of madness without a multiverse.


But I don't think SHE did anything to cause a branch. If anyone did, it was Steve. So, Steve should be a variant. If he really is. But it seems to me everything that happened in End Game was part of the sacred time line, due in large part to Steve going back and replacing the stones as directed .

Now.. The rest of what you say, I believe is true. Miss Minutes told us of how things were before.. Multiverse. madness. And we know we have a movie coming out soon with "Multiverse of Madness" in the subtitle. So, yeah.. It seems we are going back to the way things were before TimeKeepers got involved. I'm still not quite convinced Peggy Carter is a variant.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

jsmeeker said:


> I'm still not quite convinced Peggy Carter is a variant.


Oh I'm not either. Didn't mean to suggest I was. Not convinced that's her in the posted image, either.

Also, if you do cause a branch that gets you arrested, do you still exist in the sacred timeline, from the point of the branch, or are you gone gone? I'm a bit confused on that point. Hopefully that question and more eventually get answered.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

hapster85 said:


> Oh I'm not either. Didn't mean to suggest I was. Not convinced that's her in the posted image, either.
> 
> Also, if you do cause a branch that gets you arrested, do you still exist in the sacred timeline, from the point of the branch, or are you gone gone? I'm a bit confused on that point. Hopefully that question and more eventually get answered.


yeah. We gonna find out with Loki.. I mean, he already gone in the sacred time line. he saw that for himself


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

hapster85 said:


> Oh I'm not either. Didn't mean to suggest I was. Not convinced that's her in the posted image, either.
> 
> Also, if you do cause a branch that gets you arrested, do you still exist in the sacred timeline, from the point of the branch, or are you gone gone? I'm a bit confused on that point. Hopefully that question and more eventually get answered.


When Loki said that the interrogation room looked like a place where he was going to be killed, Mobius did say that he rescued Loki from the place where they would have killed him. And we saw the guy in front of Loki get "disappeared" although it wasn't clear whether that was killing him or sending him back to his original timeline or something else.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

Well the fact that "evil variant Loki" is hooded means that there will be some surprise reveal. Probably the female version of Loki to play off the gender fluid clues.

Of course it could be Agent Carter for all we know. Since Rodgers went back to live out his life in a branched timeline, that could have somehow been the genesis of a variant Carter.

But I am going to say right now, that the variant villain is definitely a female.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Watching the episode again now, and from the little cartoon with Ms Minutes, it's the variant version that's carted off to the TVA. "Original you" carries on in the sacred timeline as of nothing happened.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

hapster85 said:


> Watching the episode again now, and from the little cartoon with Ms Minutes, it's the variant version that's carted off to the TVA. "Original you" carries on in the sacred timeline as of nothing happened.


That doesn't make sense. If there were an "original you" continuing on in the Sacred Timeline, then there wouldn't be anything to fix. The fact that the Variant left the Sacred Timeline and created a new fork means it borked the Sacred Timeline and there is no "original you" continuing on there. That's why the TVA needs to fix it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> Watching the episode again now, and from the little cartoon with Ms Minutes, it's the variant version that's carted off to the TVA. "Original you" carries on in the sacred timeline as of nothing happened.


Right, that's the one that was killed by Thanos.


DevdogAZ said:


> That doesn't make sense. If there were an "original you" continuing on in the Sacred Timeline, then there wouldn't be anything to fix. The fact that the Variant left the Sacred Timeline and created a new fork means it borked the Sacred Timeline and there is no "original you" continuing on there. That's why the TVA needs to fix it.


My impression is that the TVA is insistent that there only be one timeline. They go around destroying all the other ones.

It's not that the alternate timeline borked the Sacred Timeline. It's that it exists at all.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

"Time Travel!!!"
-- Smart Hulk


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Right, that's the one that was killed by Thanos.
> 
> My impression is that the TVA is insistent that there only be one timeline. They go around destroying all the other ones.
> 
> It's not that the alternate timeline borked the Sacred Timeline. It's that it exists at all.


I want to know what was going on at the TVA during the great time heist the Avengers were undertaking. Were they freaking out? did they get what was going on and just let it play out with out trying to stop it? It seems they can measure how bad things are getting with a branch.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> I want to know what was going on at the TVA during the great time heist the Avengers were undertaking. Were they freaking out? did they get what was going on and just let it play out with out trying to stop it? It seems they can measure how bad things are getting with a branch.


They said specifically in this episode that all of that was part of the Sacred Timeline. And since they know how it all plays out, they wouldn't have been freaking out at all.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> My impression is that the TVA is insistent that there only be one timeline. They go around destroying all the other ones.
> 
> It's not that the alternate timeline borked the Sacred Timeline. It's that it exists at all.


I agree they only want one timeline, because the multiple timelines in the past caused major problems. But how does a Variant create a fork and then exist in both timelines at the same time? Doesn't the act of creating the fork cause a disruption that removes the Variant from the ST?


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> They said specifically in this episode that all of that was part of the Sacred Timeline. And since they know how it all plays out, they wouldn't have been freaking out at all.


but how did they know that at the time? Unless the sacred time line is already written out all the way into the future?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> but how did they know that at the time? Unless the sacred time line is already written out all the way into the future?


Didn't Mobius specifically say in this episode that the TVA knows the whole timeline from beginning to end?


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Didn't Mobius specifically say in this episode that the TVA knows the whole timeline from beginning to end?


you tell me .


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> you tell me .


LOKI: This is nonsense. More tricks. This never even happened.

MOBIUS: Not to you. Not yet. Look, the TVA doesn't just know your whole past. We know your whole life, how it's all meant to be. Think of it as comforting.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I agree they only want one timeline, because the multiple timelines in the past caused major problems. But how does a Variant create a fork and then exist in both timelines at the same time? Doesn't the act of creating the fork cause a disruption that removes the Variant from the ST?


It shouldn't...otherwise, there wouldn't be a variant timeline; there would just be a "wrong" one.


DevdogAZ said:


> LOKI: This is nonsense. More tricks. This never even happened.
> 
> MOBIUS: Not to you. Not yet. Look, the TVA doesn't just know your whole past. We know your whole life, how it's all meant to be. Think of it as comforting.


Of course they're assuming that what they know is the "right" timeline really IS the right one! 

(I , but I suspect that will be a major part of the story...)


----------



## Jacopo (Jun 9, 2021)

So far this looks to be another winner for Marvel and D+. Looking forward to seeing where this mini series takes us.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Why does Loki go off to the Gobi desert? He can't control where he goes when he grabs the Tesseract?


----------



## Jacopo (Jun 9, 2021)

Reading some reviews the reason seems to be unknown for now.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

I'm guessing it doesn't matter. All that matters is he left New York and went off on a new branch and the TVA found him and captured him. But we'll see if the where he went first comes back into play.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> My impression is that the TVA is insistent that there only be one timeline. They go around destroying all the other ones.


I think this is what is happening too. There's a multiverse already happening, the TVA is just bending them all to be parallel or be the same to what they call "The Sacred Timeline" and maybe the little purple grenade thing destroys the whole timeline.

So that could be Peggy Carter, just from another timeline that we haven't seen so we wouldn't be aware of what decision made her a variant.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> They said specifically in this episode that all of that was part of the Sacred Timeline. And since they know how it all plays out, they wouldn't have been freaking out at all.


Of course this leads to the TVA going out and cleaning up all the variants that the Avengers caused by messing with time, but not the Avengers themselves since them messing with time is part of the Sacred Timeline.

At least this explains why there weren't a bunch of forked timelines after Endgame.

On a side note, I find that it amusing that the all powerful Mcguffin stones, which drove the plot for the last few phases of the MCU, are simply powerless trinkets in a drawer.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Infinity stones are just powerless within the TVA.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

I really like that 1970s retro-future aesthetic of the TVA office.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

kdmorse said:


> (Although the DB Cooper bit felt forced and out of place)


I would have liked to see a few other of these Loki-Thor bets.

-smak-


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

trainman said:


> I really like that 1970s retro-future aesthetic of the TVA office.


Agreed. The production design, with futuristic tech controlled by devices that look like they were built 50 years ago, is very cool.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

smak said:


> I would have liked to see a few other of these Loki-Thor bets.
> 
> -smak-


Was Loki the second gunman on the grassy knoll?

Did Loki cause Ameila Earhart to crash?


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Agreed. The production design, with futuristic tech controlled by devices that look like they were built 50 years ago, is very cool.


they could have been created 500 years ago.


----------



## Jacopo (Jun 9, 2021)

It has a MiB sort of feel set wise.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

morac said:


> Of course this leads to the TVA going out and cleaning up all the variants that the Avengers caused by messing with time, but not the Avengers themselves since them messing with time is part of the Sacred Timeline.
> 
> At least this explains why there weren't a bunch of forked timelines after Endgame.


Cap returned the stones, so wouldn't there be no variants? And the TVA knows this, so they didn't interfere.

I feel like they only clean up major problems. Sure Tony Stark shouldn't be visiting his dad in the 70's, but it didn't cause any problems, so they leave it alone.

If somebody in the normal timeline was carrying the briefcase, and Hulk smashed him and the tessaract spilled out near Loki, that wouldn't be a variance.

Because the briefcase was snatched by future Tony, who shouldn't have been there, than it is a variance.

-smak-


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

DevdogAZ said:


> I agree they only want one timeline, because the multiple timelines in the past caused major problems. But how does a Variant create a fork and then exist in both timelines at the same time? Doesn't the act of creating the fork cause a disruption that removes the Variant from the ST?


I'm going solely by the cartoon that Loki watched. When the yellow dude created a fork, he left the sacred timeline and followed the fork. The TVA agents showed up and took him away. The yellow dude then reappeared in the sacred timeline, just past the point of the fork, and continued on his happy way. I think that's the "reset" part of what they do. No explanation is given about exactly what that means.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

morac said:


> On a side note, I find that it amusing that the all powerful Mcguffin stones, which drove the plot for the last few phases of the MCU, are simply powerless trinkets in a drawer.





jsmeeker said:


> Infinity stones are just powerless within the TVA.


I think the TVA is located outside of the universe, and the stones have no power there.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> Infinity stones are just powerless within the TVA.


Yes, but that means the TVA has the power to negate the power of all 6 stones.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

morac said:


> Yes, but that means the TVA has the power to negate the power of all 6 stones.


Yeah, that's one thing that bother me about the TVA...Infinity Stones don't work there, magic doesn't work there, apparently powers don't work there...awfully convenient.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, that's one thing that bother me about the TVA...Infinity Stones don't work there, magic doesn't work there, apparently powers don't work there...awfully convenient.


Or as Loki said, that's the real power.

The thing that bothers me is that this version Loki is the one who waged war on Earth before he started his journey toward reforming. This was Loki at peak bad, He seemed to relent much too quickly to turning "good", something which took years for him to do in the "sacred timeline". I don't think seeing his adopted parents and himself dying would be enough to do that.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

morac said:


> Or as Loki said, that's the real power.
> 
> The thing that bothers me is that this version Loki is the one who waged war on Earth before he started his journey toward reforming. This was Loki at peak bad, He seemed to relent much too quickly to turning "good", something which took years for him to do in the "sacred timeline". I don't think seeing his adopted parents and himself dying would be enough to do that.


Unless he's up to something...


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

It's Loki, so chances are good.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

morac said:


> The thing that bothers me is that this version Loki is the one who waged war on Earth before he started his journey toward reforming. This was Loki at peak bad, He seemed to relent much too quickly to turning "good", something which took years for him to do in the "sacred timeline". I don't think seeing his adopted parents and himself dying would be enough to do that.


I wouldn't say he's reformed. He's been really knocked off his game by the realization that collecting infinity stones won't solve all his problems. And then by the realization that all his efforts lead to being strangled to death by a titan.

So he's paused, while he's looking for a new angle. I'm sure given the right moment he'll still stab people in the back - he's just so unsure of his footing at the moment that he hasn't figured out who to stab when.


----------



## Jacopo (Jun 9, 2021)

can someone explain what the whole box of infinity stones means and how they came to be there? The goofy guy said they have bunches of them sitting around?


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Jacopo said:


> can someone explain what the whole box of infinity stones means and how they came to be there? The goofy guy said they have bunches of them sitting around?


My guess is many beings tried to use them over the years which would have altered the timeline. Five can be seen in the drawer: space, time, reality, power, and mind. The soul stone appears to be missing. The got nabbed by TVA for doing something they shouldn't.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Random User 7 said:


> My guess is many beings tried to use them over the years which would have altered the timeline. Five can be seen in the drawer: space, time, reality, power, and mind. The soul stone appears to be missing. The got nabbed by TVA for doing something they shouldn't.


yes

except the soul stone appears in the end credits as a paper weight, from what some breakdown videos say.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

I predict that their series will change Loki, and then put him right back where he started so the timeline doesn’t mess up.


----------



## zuko3984 (May 4, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, that's one thing that bother me about the TVA...Infinity Stones don't work there, magic doesn't work there, apparently powers don't work there...awfully convenient.


I think the TVA exists outside of time. Owen Wilsons character even said time works different in the TVA. A place existing outside of time and that making all sorts of powerful stuff not work has been used in many other shows including Doctor Who and DC's Legends Of Tomorrow. Time almost always seems to be portrayed as the most powerful power so if someone can build a place outside of time it seems to give that place a lot of power of it's own over everything else.


----------



## Jacopo (Jun 9, 2021)

Loki was fascinated by the city they were in. I wonder how much of it we will get to see as well as see who resides there.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> That would work OK if there were more episodes in the series. But this is fairly limited.. So, they gotta drag it out.


 Well, they don't _gotta_. I mean, it's happened before that even entire seasons of shows drop all at once and still turned out to be pretty popular... 

But, I get it. I just think it would have helped. But I suppose people tuning in for this won't be put off anyway.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

madscientist said:


> Well, they don't _gotta_. I mean, it's happened before that even entire seasons of shows drop all at once and still turned out to be pretty popular...
> 
> But, I get it. I just think it would have helped. But I suppose people tuning in for this won't be put off anyway.


That's me. I wasn't blown away by the first episode but I'm not gonna stop watching unless the next couple of episodes are really disappointing.


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

trainman said:


> I really like that 1970s retro-future aesthetic of the TVA office.


As someone who lives in Tennessee, I find it amusing that it is called the TVA.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I agree they only want one timeline, *because the multiple timelines in the past caused major problems*. But how does a Variant create a fork and then exist in both timelines at the same time? Doesn't the act of creating the fork cause a disruption that removes the Variant from the ST?


I am amused by this line. We are talking about a whole timeline from 'beginning' to 'end' and then referring to it as 'in the past'. Time travel is always confusing. The TVA, I assume, exists outside of time. So the concept of 'in the past' really makes no sense. They can traverse the entirety of the timeline at will. So how exactly does a variant occur at a given 'time' observed by the TVA. All of the variants everywhere/everytime would be happening already, just waiting to be observed by the TVA.

And of course, causality and the Grandfather Paradox rear their ugly head too.

I just tell myself to watch the show and ignore the realities of how time travel would work...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ehusen said:


> I am amused by this line. We are talking about a whole timeline from 'beginning' to 'end' and then referring to it as 'in the past'. Time travel is always confusing. The TVA, I assume, exists outside of time. So the concept of 'in the past' really makes no sense. They can traverse the entirety of the timeline at will. So how exactly does a variant occur at a given 'time' observed by the TVA. All of the variants everywhere/everytime would be happening already, just waiting to be observed by the TVA.


If you pay attention to the Miss Minutes video, they said that before the Time Keepers took over and unified the Sacred Timeline, there were many multiverses that led to wars. So clearly this was in the past, before the establishment of the TVA. Not sure why that's so amusing.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

morac said:


> Or as Loki said, that's the real power.
> 
> The thing that bothers me is that this version Loki is the one who waged war on Earth before he started his journey toward reforming. This was Loki at peak bad, He seemed to relent much too quickly to turning "good", something which took years for him to do in the "sacred timeline". I don't think seeing his adopted parents and himself dying would be enough to do that.


What's his other option? He's in a place where he's stuck. And if he's not cooperative, he's dead.

-smak-


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Unless he's up to something...


I seem to recall the trailer showing the TVA being attacked. At the time, I didn't know about the other variant Loki so I just assume that was the result of Loki being Loki. But now I wonder which Loki is the cause of the attack.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> If you pay attention to the Miss Minutes video, they said that before the Time Keepers took over and unified the Sacred Timeline, there were many multiverses that led to wars. So clearly this was in the past, before the establishment of the TVA. Not sure why that's so amusing.


I was speaking about the perception of time. You even say "in the past" above. But what does that mean in terms of when the TVA was established? Is there some point in the sacred timeline where the TVA was established? If it existed and could travel back in time, why was there even a time when there was a multiverse war? Wouldn't the TVA already have prevented it from happening? And if so, then how does the later created TVA even know about preventing the war?

How does an event on the timeline "show up" at the TVA's 'timeline' for lack of a better word. It's just the idea that an event happening in the past is still somehow occurring and discovered in the future at some point in time. Somehow the TVA detects an anomaly in the past timeline but wouldn't that anomaly have occurred already so why does the TVA somehow discover events as time goes by in TVA land? All those anomalies would have shown up instantly the moment the TVA looked for them.

Anyway, no offence meant, if I did so. I just have never round time travel to make any sort of sense.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ehusen said:


> I was speaking about the perception of time. You even say "in the past" above. But what does that mean in terms of when the TVA was established? Is there some point in the sacred timeline where the TVA was established? If it existed and could travel back in time, why was there even a time when there was a multiverse war? Wouldn't the TVA already have prevented it from happening? And if so, then how does the later created TVA even know about preventing the war?
> 
> How does an event on the timeline "show up" at the TVA's 'timeline' for lack of a better word. It's just the idea that an event happening in the past is still somehow occurring and discovered in the future at some point in time. Somehow the TVA detects an anomaly in the past timeline but wouldn't that anomaly have occurred already so why does the TVA somehow discover events as time goes by in TVA land? All those anomalies would have shown up instantly the moment the TVA looked for them.
> 
> Anyway, no offence meant, if I did so. I just have never round time travel to make any sort of sense.


No offense taken. But I thought it was clear in the Miss Minutes video that the multiverse war predated the creation of the Sacred Timeline and the TVA, so that has to be in the past relative to the events taking place in this show, right? We can't look at this as someone from outside of time, because we don't have any concept of how that works, so we have to assume that events which took place prior to the events in the show can be referred to as "in the past."


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

ehusen said:


> I was speaking about the perception of time. You even say "in the past" above. But what does that mean in terms of when the TVA was established? Is there some point in the sacred timeline where the TVA was established? If it existed and could travel back in time, why was there even a time when there was a multiverse war? Wouldn't the TVA already have prevented it from happening? And if so, then how does the later created TVA even know about preventing the war?
> 
> How does an event on the timeline "show up" at the TVA's 'timeline' for lack of a better word. It's just the idea that an event happening in the past is still somehow occurring and discovered in the future at some point in time. Somehow the TVA detects an anomaly in the past timeline but wouldn't that anomaly have occurred already so why does the TVA somehow discover events as time goes by in TVA land? All those anomalies would have shown up instantly the moment the TVA looked for them.
> 
> Anyway, no offence meant, if I did so. I just have never round time travel to make any sort of sense.


When Loki demanded to speak with the Time Keepers, the judge informed him they were much too busy dictating the timeline. From that, you can infer that only the Time Keepers, not the TVA workers, know the timeline in its entirety. So while the TVA exists outside of time as we know it, there's still a "time" of some sort in which they exist and operate. They are able to loop that time with their little devices and the collar, for example.

The variances we've seen the TVA investigate so far, have been the result of whatever the other Loki has been up to, not the normal flow of time. It's also reasonable to assume that there is not an infinite number of TVA workers, so even variances in the normal flow of time could not be known or investigated throughout the entirety of the timeline simultaneously. There's still a flow to the time in which they exist. The guy cataloging evidence, for example, remarks that he's spent his entire life sitting behind a desk.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Where was the "end credits" scene? I heard something at the end of the main credits (Miss Minutes, I think), but when I got to the foreign voice actors, I bailed.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> Where was the "end credits" scene? I heard something at the end of the main credits (Miss Minutes, I think), but when I got to the foreign voice actors, I bailed.


There wasn't one. There was a brief repeat of some of Miss Minutes audio, but that's it.

(Hint: when a show on Disney+ goes into "squeeze mode," when the credits shrink down to show a promo for something else on D+, that's it - there's no more content. If it stays full screen, that means there's still something else coming.)


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> (Hint: when a show on Disney+ goes into "squeeze mode," when the credits shrink down to show a promo for something else on D+, that's it - there's no more content. If it stays full screen, that means there's still something else coming.)


Thanks, didn't know that.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

zuko3984 said:


> I think the TVA exists outside of time. Owen Wilsons character even said time works different in the TVA. A place existing outside of time and that making all sorts of powerful stuff not work has been used in many other shows including Doctor Who and DC's Legends Of Tomorrow. Time almost always seems to be portrayed as the most powerful power so if someone can build a place outside of time it seems to give that place a lot of power of it's own over everything else.


Jeremy Bearimy


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

Maybe the Loki causing all the trouble is an LMD (life model decoy, robot)? Since we now know the TVA doesn't allow robots in, probably for good reason. Maybe somewhere along the line Loki's mind got copied to a robot, which is now causing chaos?


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

DancnDude said:


> Maybe the Loki causing all the trouble is an LMD (life model decoy, robot)? Since we now know the TVA doesn't allow robots in, probably for good reason. Maybe somewhere along the line Loki's mind got copied to a robot, which is now causing chaos?


Maybe. They certainly made it a point of letting us know that no robot shall pass.


----------



## KungFuCow (May 6, 2004)

I don't understand how Steve staying in the past didn't create a variant. It changed the past. I know he returned the stone but he wasn't in the 70s before Endgame.

That's why time travel is so confusing. There aren't any hard and fast rules.


----------



## Flop (Dec 2, 2005)

KungFuCow said:


> I don't understand how Steve staying in the past didn't create a variant. It changed the past. I know he returned the stone but he wasn't in the 70s before Endgame.
> 
> That's why time travel is so confusing. There aren't any hard and fast rules.


The way I understood things is that some time travel actions are really part of the sacred timeline, thus they are not variants. If Steve had returned from the 70s, that would have created a variant since he was supposed to stay. Or something.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Flop said:


> The way I understood things is that some time travel actions are really part of the sacred timeline, thus they are not variants. If Steve had returned from the 70s, that would have created a variant since he was supposed to stay. Or something.


Right, and I suspect part of this story is that their "Sacred" Timeline will turn out to be completely arbitrary.


----------



## KungFuCow (May 6, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Right, and I suspect part of this story is that their "Sacred" Timeline will turn out to be completely arbitrary.


You would certainly think so, especially since they have a new old Gamora. What's to stop them from going back to 2017 and getting Tony Stark?


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

I have less of a problem with the main Avengers actions, because they largely form a closed event consistent with the rules as set forth in the universe. And you could make an argument that Steve cheated, but behaved. In both cases, the 'not causing any actual problems' is what the Timekeepers care about.

But new/old Gamora, and new/old Thanos, presented the same exact problems as new/old Loki. 

Which brings us back to "The Timekeepers have chosen, tough noogies!".


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

KungFuCow said:


> I don't understand how Steve staying in the past didn't create a variant. It changed the past. I know he returned the stone but *he wasn't in the 70s before Endgame.*
> 
> That's why time travel is so confusing. There aren't any hard and fast rules.


Just because we didn't know about it until the events in Endgame unfolded, doesn't mean he wasn't always there. The judge said what the Avengers did was "supposed to happen". So, at the time of events we saw in Endgame, there were 3 versions of Steve Rogers in the 70s on that day. Original version, buried in ice. Future version, living out his life in the past. Future version, visiting the past for a Stone.

It's only confusing when you try to reconcile the MCU version of time travel with the version from other places. The only rules that matter are the ones given in this universe.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Can someone refresh my memory on new/old Gamora and new/old Thanos? I don't know what those are referring to.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Can someone refresh my memory on new/old Gamora and new/old Thanos? I don't know what those are referring to.





Spoiler: In Avengers Endgame



Along the original timeline, Loki died - Thanos snapped his neck.
Along the original timeline, Thanos died - Thor cut his head off after he poofed the stones.
Along the original timeline, Gamora died - She was thrown into a pit to get an Infinity stone.

As a side effect of the Avengers going back in time - the Tesseract fell into Loki's hands, and he used it to escape in a way inconsistent with the original timeline. We now have an extra Loki out of nowhere. (And an extra Tesseract)
As a side effect of the Avengers going back in time - a version of Thanos from before he acquired the infinity stones traveled to the future, we now have an extra Thanos from nowhere, a timeline with two Thanos's in it. (one dead, until we had two dead)
As a side effect of the Avengers going back in time - a version of Gamora from before she was killed traveled to the future (with thanons), we now have an extra Gamora from nowhere, a timeline with two Gamora's in it. (one dead, one alive)

Awkward phrasing of course to sort out how in my mind that's different from the Avengers pilfering a stone from the past, then traveling it back and putting it right back where they took it from, so it ended up being destroyed on schedule. Its timeline has an unnatural wiggle in it, but no fork. As opposed to Thanos, Gamora, and Loki, which forked.



I have to assume talking about plot details of Endgame in the open is fair game here, only errd on the side of caution because the original question may have implied not having seen Endgame...


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I'm finding this interesting.
I particularly liked Hiddleston's performance when he sees how his life played out in the main timeline.

I'm not intimately familiar with the TVA but this should be interesting.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Did


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

kdmorse said:


> Spoiler: In Avengers Endgame
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks, I saw Endgame, but didn't remember those extra versions of Thanos and Gamora traveling to the future. I guess I'll need to watch it again.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

OMG, I just had a nasty thought... what if the Time-Keepers ARE robots??? Ow, now my head hurts.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

I watched it. I liked it. Reading this thread is giving me a headache, though. Too much to think about. I just like to sit back and enjoy the show.

Hey, do I get a bonus for the 100th post?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

mr.unnatural said:


> I watched it. I liked it. Reading this thread is giving me a headache, though. Too much to think about. I just like to sit back and enjoy the show.


This. Loved the first episode, but not all the time travel debates. But what would TCF be without a deep dive into... well, everything.

But no one is forcing me to read them!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

martinp13 said:


> OMG, I just had a nasty thought... what if the Time-Keepers ARE robots??? Ow, now my head hurts.


Does this mean that they're discriminating against the Vision with the "No Robots" edict or do they want Vision to join them?


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

kdmorse said:


> Spoiler: In Avengers Endgame
> 
> 
> 
> ...





DevdogAZ said:


> Thanks, I saw Endgame, but didn't remember those extra versions of Thanos and Gamora traveling to the future. I guess I'll need to watch it again.


Tony Stark used the stones to kill Thanos' army. Gamora disappeared during the final battle before Tony's snapp in End Game as Nebula and Star Lord confronted this version of Gamora to stand down. She's from the time just before the first Guardians movie and has never met Star Lord and has a no trust/hate relationship with Nebula. Her fate is unknown, but I'd wager she somehow evaded Tony Stark's snap. Maybe she got picked up by the TVA too?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

robojerk said:


> Tony Stark used the stones to kill Thanos' army. Gamora disappeared during the final battle before Tony's snapp in End Game as Nebula and Star Lord confronted this version of Gamora to stand down. She's from the time just before the first Guardians movie and has never met Star Lord and has a no trust/hate relationship with Nebula. Her fate is unknown, but I'd wager she somehow evaded Tony Stark's snap. Maybe she got picked up by the TVA too?


If you watch the deleted scenes from End Game she's still there after the snap, but she simply leaves while everyone is kneeling.

She's definitely a variant though in that by her being there she wouldn't die in her timeline.

The whole past Thanos and his army showing up in the present should have attracted the entire TVA (or at least a squad), but apparently they knew Stark would literally make the problem disappear, so they didn't bother showing up.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

She's only a variant if the time keepers decide she is a variant.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

DancnDude said:


> She's only a variant if the time keepers decide she is a variant.


Maybe she's just a variation of a variant.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

DancnDude said:


> She's only a variant if the time keepers decide she is a variant.


Since there are two different version of Gamora, one of them has to be a variant. I suppose the one that died could be, but that would mean the timeline where Thanos got all 6 stones (the main timeline) wouldn't be the sacred one. Since it was according to the TVA, that means the Gamora from the past has to be the variant.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

morac said:


> Since there are two different version of Gamora, one of them has to be a variant. I suppose the one that died could be, but that would mean the timeline where Thanos got all 6 stones (the main timeline) wouldn't be the sacred one. Since it was according to the TVA, that means the Gamora from the past has to be the variant.


She would only be a variant if she caused the sacred timeline to split off. What the Avengers did was supposed to happen, so as far as we know, not a variant.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Right. It's not the case that anyone doing any time traveling for any reason is automatically a variant.

A variant is someone who doesn't follow the sacred timeline. Mobius told Loki explicitly that the Avengers' time traveling wasn't against the sacred timeline so we know for sure that the sacred timeline is not 100% linear and that time travel is allowed.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

You're only a variant if the script says you're a variant.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Pretty fun article, just a partial quote below
Loki fans already found a huge plot hole in the TVA's sacred timeline



> Think about it: In _Endgame_, the Avengers don't just time travel once, they do it multiple times. Iron Man and Captain America visit 2012 before heading all the way back to 1970. Apparently, that's all part of the sacred timeline - but none of it would have happened if Loki didn't steal the Tesseract in the first place.
> 
> That's right, an entire part of the Avengers' time heist only happens _because_ of Loki. So how come Tony Stark and Steve Rogers are fine, but Loki gets tossed in time jail? Well, there are a few possible answers.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Loki also put the Time Twister in the bin with all of the Infinity Stones (he puts it down so he can pick up a Stone), then Casey shuts the bin. Then the Hunter shows up and Loki has the Time Twister in his hand again and escapes.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> Loki also put the Time Twister in the bin with all of the Infinity Stones (he puts it down so he can pick up a Stone), then Casey shuts the bin. Then the Hunter shows up and Loki has the Time Twister in his hand again and escapes.


I don't agree with that one.

When standing up and removing his hand from the bin, his hand is below the camera frame. It's perfectly reasonable to assume while removing his hand from the case, he had at that point picked the twister back up and it is in his left hand, then Casey shuts the bin. (After all, we're used to Loki swiping all sorts of things effortlessly, and while there's no deception involved, the notion of him having swooped the twister back up seems perfectly natural.) When we see his next see his hands seconds later as he walks away, it is clearly[*] visible in his left hand.

* For a definition of _clearly _that includes watching the scene over and over until I could get it paused on a frame that included a arm swing not obscured by his body's natural walking motion.
** No spell checker, I do not in fact mean "natural wanking motion". What sort of AI do you have in there, and where do you learn these things?


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Random User 7 said:


> Pretty fun article, just a partial quote below
> Loki fans already found a huge plot hole in the TVA's sacred timeline


Not a huge plot hole. Stark and Rogers are fine because time travel in and of itself is not verboten. Even with the multiple time hops, they are where they are supposed to be, doing what they are supposed to do. Loki, on the the other hand, puts himself where he isn't supposed to be by taking the tesseract. Yes, it was the actions of others that put him in a position to be able to take it, but it was still his decision to actually do it. And so, variant.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> Not a huge plot hole. Stark and Rogers are fine because time travel in and of itself is not verboten. Even with the multiple time hops, they are where they are supposed to be, doing what they are supposed to do. Loki, on the the other hand, puts himself where he isn't supposed to be by taking the tesseract. Yes, it was the actions of others that put him in a position to be able to take it, but it was still his decision to actually do it. And so, variant.


And I still think the TVA's "sacred" timeline will turn out to be arbitrary and capricious...


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

hapster85 said:


> Not a huge plot hole. Stark and Rogers are fine because time travel in and of itself is not verboten. Even with the multiple time hops, they are where they are supposed to be, doing what they are supposed to do. Loki, on the the other hand, puts himself where he isn't supposed to be by taking the tesseract. Yes, it was the actions of others that put him in a position to be able to take it, but it was still his decision to actually do it. And so, variant.


Considering how many infinity stones the TVA has and how it was stated that the stones regulate the flow of time, I wonder if the main reason Loki is a variant is that he took the stone out of it's proper flow.

Of course that wouldn't explain the other (hedge fund guy) prisoner at the TVA.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And I still think the TVA's "sacred" timeline will turn out to be arbitrary and capricious...





morac said:


> Considering how many infinity stones the TVA has and how it was stated that the stones regulate the flow of time, I wonder if the main reason Loki is a variant is that he took the stone out of it's proper flow.
> 
> Of course that wouldn't explain the other (hedge fund guy) prisoner at the TVA.


There's definitely a lot we don't know or understand yet. But I think by the end of this series, their system will have either completely collapsed, or will be well on its way.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> There's definitely a lot we don't know or understand yet. But I think by the end of this series, their system will have either completely collapsed, or will be well on its way.


Well, since next we have Doctor Strange going Into the Multiverse, I'd say that's a pretty safe bet!


----------



## blacknoi (Jan 23, 2006)

martinp13 said:


> You're only a variant if the script says you're a variant.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> And I still think the TVA's "sacred" timeline will turn out to be arbitrary and capricious...


At least what we know so far, you both are totally right.... and it will make "logic" potentially hard for us to accept as in theory, this gives writers ability to do anything and it won't have to make sense.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

hapster85 said:


> Not a huge plot hole. Stark and Rogers are fine because time travel in and of itself is not verboten. Even with the multiple time hops, they are where they are supposed to be, doing what they are supposed to do. Loki, on the the other hand, puts himself where he isn't supposed to be by taking the tesseract. Yes, it was the actions of others that put him in a position to be able to take it, but it was still his decision to actually do it. And so, variant.


I agree, I just found it entertaining. In this theoretical thread of what ifs: If Loki had not done that, Steve may still be an Avenger and Tony wouldn't have had the moment with his dad.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

Once again, too much Earth-centric. "Millions of apocalypse everyday", and yet, they only cared about the ones on Earth.

I understand it's about money and sets, but isn't Disney the richest, most financially-stabled studio?


----------



## KungFuCow (May 6, 2004)

kdmorse said:


> Spoiler: In Avengers Endgame
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But you have to argue now that if Loki HADNT taken the Tesseract, that Steve wouldnt have been able to go back to the 70s and live out his life. Whos the variant now?

I see someone mentioned this already. But if Loki's events hadnt happened, Steve and Tony wouldnt have been in the 70s.

Need to just stop thinking about it and hope they explain it later.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

To be fair, Loki didn't have to take the Tesseract. It was lying there right in the open. Thor could have picked it up, or anyone else, and it still would have meant the time travelers might not have been able to get at it. Granted, they could have followed whoever picked it up, but they might not have been able to get it from them. It's just that Loki used it to teleport somewhere else. 

In fact, since Loki picking it up made him a variant, I'm curious who was meant to pick it up?? Maybe Loki was meant to pick it up and not use it? Did they talk about this in episode 1?


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

The second episode didn't seem to resonate as well as the first to me.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

so, is that lady variant we saw at Roxxcart in Alabama Lady Loki? or is it someone else?

Anyway, Loki got away. Again.. Surprise surprise.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Of, I like the Spider-Man "appearance"

Neat.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

dtle said:


> Once again, too much Earth-centric. "Millions of apocalypse everyday", and yet, they only cared about the ones on Earth.
> 
> I understand it's about money and sets, but isn't Disney the richest, most financially-stabled studio?


The show is for earthlings. Showing stuff on Earth is relatable to the audience. I liked seeing the Walmart of the future.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Interesting that Lady Loki is the second name in the credits...I guess she's gonna be a pretty big part of the show!


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> Of, I like the Spider-Man "appearance"


Ok, what'd I miss?


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Interesting that Lady Loki is the second name in the credits...I guess she's gonna be a pretty big part of the show!


Once I'd watched it, I googled her name... she was called "Lady Loki" in the show since late 2020. Glad I didn't read any of that.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

hapster85 said:


> The second episode didn't seem to resonate as well as the first to me.


Seriously? A multitude of timelines running full-tilt towards the "doomsday" red line didn't excite you?  I have no idea how they avert disaster, but I can't wait to see how they do.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

martinp13 said:


> Once I'd watched it, I googled her name... she was called "Lady Loki" in the show since late 2020. Glad I didn't read any of that.


The credits simply list her as "The Variant". All we know is she hates to be called "Loki".

Most of the reaction videos to episode 1 assumed the other Loki would be Lady Loki, so fortunately that reveal came fairly early on.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I don't know comic book lore, but people are pointing out that the Catalan language credits had a different character name for associated with the person that so far seems to be Lady Loki:


Spoiler



Sylvie


I don't know what that means&#8230; I'll let the comic book nerds discuss.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

morac said:


> The credits simply list her as "The Variant". All we know is she hates to be called "Loki".
> 
> Most of the reaction videos to episode 1 assumed the other Loki would be Lady Loki, so fortunately that reveal came fairly early on.


It was a non-credits site (as far as I know), talking about the actress portraying "Lady Loki". When I searched, I'd never heard of her.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> I don't know comic book lore, but people are pointing out that the Catalan language credits had a different character name for associated with the person that so far seems to be Lady Loki:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...





Spoiler



There's some Enchantress by that name... but that's all I know


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Well, she's wearing a Loki headdress...


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, she's wearing a Loki headdress...


How better to pin the blame on someone else than to dress like them! 

To be honest, WandaVision and Falcon/Winter Soldier taught me to take what is given and go with that. If they end up with Thanos cross-dressing as Lady Loki... ok, ya got me.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

So why did Lady Loki keep C-20 alive after she extracted the information about the Time Keepers from C-20? And why does C-20 know how to get to the Time Keepers in the first place?


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

martinp13 said:


> Seriously? A multitude of timelines running full-tilt towards the "doomsday" red line didn't excite you?  I have no idea how they avert disaster, but I can't wait to see how they do.


Idk. May have been my mood. I watched the first one twice. I'll probably watch this one again, too.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Ok so, is "Lady Loki" a shape-shifted version of the Loki we know, or is she a completely different person? Up till now, I thought they'd been chasing another incarnation of the Loki we know, but now I'm not sure who she is.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> Ok so, is "Lady Loki" a shape-shifted version of the Loki we know, or is she a completely different person? Up till now, I thought they'd been chasing another incarnation of the Loki we know, but now I'm not sure who she is.


I suspect she's another Loki.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I suspect she's another Loki.


Which begs the question: If there's no multiverse (yet), where'd she come from?


----------



## PaulS (Sep 16, 2002)

hapster85 said:


> Which begs the question: If there's no multiverse (yet), where'd she come from?


She could have originated in another existing timeline during the "madness", before the unified timeline was established.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

jsmeeker said:


> dtle said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, too much Earth-centric. "Millions of apocalypse everyday", and yet, they only cared about the ones on Earth.
> ...


Plus the fact that this Loki is obsessed with becoming the ruler of Midgard (Earth), which he told Mobius in the first episode. So of course this story takes place on Earth.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> Which begs the question: If there's no multiverse (yet), where'd she come from?


She's a variant who has successfully hidden from the TVA using the apocalypse loophole that "our" Loki figured out.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

During the second episode they showed a whole series of Lokis that had been pruned and many of them were very different (there was a "Hulk Loki" IIRC). So a female Loki doesn't seem far-fetched, and she escaped pruning by hiding.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Still enjoying it. It's Voyagers+Quantum Leap+Good Place+Defending Your Life, but fun.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> During the second episode they showed a whole series of Lokis that had been pruned and many of them were very different (there was a "Hulk Loki" IIRC). So a female Loki doesn't seem far-fetched, and she escaped pruning by hiding.


Bear in mind that Loki is a shape-shifter, so he looks however he wants to look.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

At one point Loki asked where the Time Keepers were and Mobius said they were still untangling the future time lines to create order until they reach the end of time. So alternate timelines still exist but the time keepers are still sifting through them.

My bet the female Loki is mad her timeline was pruned, and just like our Loki sees the BS on some arbitrary beings picking and choosing what is "sacred". I think she either wants to reinstate her timeline if possible or just kill the time keepers for destroying her versions of Thor whom she also had a love/hate relationship with. Our Loki wants the Time Keepers power but she wants to take it away.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

I don't know why but the words "*Apocalypse Loophole*" just makes me laugh. 

That should be a band name or a physicist's theorem...


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

robojerk said:


> At one point Loki asked where the Time Keepers were and Mobius said they were still untangling the future time lines to create order until they reach the end of time. So alternate timelines still exist but the time keepers are still sifting through them.


Good point! Never crossed my mind that she might be from somewhere in the future. Doh.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

madscientist said:


> During the second episode they showed a whole series of Lokis that had been pruned and many of them were very different (there was a "Hulk Loki" IIRC). So a female Loki doesn't seem far-fetched, and she escaped pruning by hiding.


When did they show this? I must have missed it.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> When did they show this? I must have missed it.


They went through a bunch of them as they were gathering/briefing to go out for the first time as a group. Around the 7 minute mark on my stream.



Spoiler: Look - It's Soccer Player Loki?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Thanks. Guess I wasn't paying attention at that point. I'll need to go back and rewatch that scene.


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Thanks. Guess I wasn't paying attention at that point. I'll need to go back and rewatch that scene.


I want to rewatch that too and I missed what was written on the pen. But the skip ahead/back seems to be messed up or changed so it doesn't work the same. Is this just me? (Apple TV).


----------



## rowew (Feb 26, 2003)

kdmorse said:


> They went through a bunch of them as they were gathering/briefing to go out for the first time as a group. Around the 7 minute mark on my stream.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler: Not quite ..



I believe that is Tour de France winner Loki


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

rowew said:


> Spoiler: Not quite ..
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that is Tour de France winner Loki


Definitely... that is the ultimate object in the pic.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Is taking over a host upon touch a new Loki power or did he demonstrate that previously?


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Yah, I didn't put too much thought into it when I saw European short shorts and a cup. 

(Turns out, the World Cup is less cup shaped than I thought)


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

I'm still trying to decipher her motives (which I know is probly a futile task given a time-travel show with umpteen unknown characters/variables). She led him to Alabama with the Kablooie candy, and waited until he got there to send/set off the charges. Then took him with her? It's not about him she said, but it was all about him being there. My head hurts again.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

An article that breaks down all the times where the charges were sent and the impacts it may have on MCU history.

Breaking Down All of LOKI's Reset Timelines - Nerdist


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

Regarding Lady Loki...

They appear to be combining two characters from the books: there was a Sylvie Lushton, who Loki gave the powers of the Enchantress (long story), but in this show she's a variant of Loki (named Sylvie, so no wonder she hates to be called Loki).

In this week's episode she is named in the paperwork Loki was going through as "Laufeydottir, Sylvie", establishing that in an alternate timeline Laufey the Frost Giant had a daughter named Sylvie, instead of a Laufeyson named Loki.

That is mentioned briefly at about 11:35 in this video, which has other good stuff:


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

So do the Time Keepers really exist? They're real in the comics, but people in the TV show haven't seen them and are a bit cagey about where they really are. Is it like the Wizard of Oz with a man behind the curtain? But then again, the agent who was taken over said that she gave out the information of where to find them.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Ask anyone where the Wizard of Oz was and they'd say that big hall where anyone saw him. You might think you know the Time-Keepers' location... I'd guess it's that tower where the three statues are holding it up. But maybe it's all Ravonna. Or three bickering Loki variants. I think we will see soon given the impending redlines.


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> Ask anyone where the Wizard of Oz was and they'd say that big hall where anyone saw him. You might think you know the Time-Keepers' location... I'd guess it's that tower where the three statues are holding it up. But maybe it's all Ravonna. Or three bickering Loki variants. I think we will see soon given the impending redlines.


There are only six episodes, so I would think things will be moving along at a good pace.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> Which begs the question: If there's no multiverse (yet), where'd she come from?


Maybe something about Loki's powers...he spent more time than I would have counted on describing the details of the differences between Illusion Projection and Duplication Casting.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

hefe said:


> Maybe something about Loki's powers...he spent more time than I would have counted on describing the details of the differences between Illusion Projection and Duplication Casting.


Yeah, they definitely wanted us to understand the difference. Although I'm not sure I still do. I mean, it made perfect sense while Loki was describing it, but I couldn't tell you now what he said, or what the difference is.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Bear in mind that Loki is a shape-shifter, so he looks however he wants to look.


The Loki we all know well isn't even what he really looks like.

-smak-


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> Not a huge plot hole. Stark and Rogers are fine because time travel in and of itself is not verboten. Even with the multiple time hops, they are where they are supposed to be, doing what they are supposed to do. Loki, on the the other hand, puts himself where he isn't supposed to be by taking the tesseract. Yes, it was the actions of others that put him in a position to be able to take it, but it was still his decision to actually do it. And so, variant.


The reason Loki got the tesseract handed to him, is because Tony Stark 2023, a person out of time, was carrying the briefcase by the door that Hulk smashed. In the timeline we knew, the briefcase wasn't by the door Hulk smashed, so nothing happened to the tesseract.

Other than this happening, nothing consequential happened in any of the time heists to change the past to cause a branch off. Steve fixed all the ones involving infinity stones.

-smak-


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

So were all the red lines newly created variant timelines or old reset variant timelines that were un-reset?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Shakhari said:


> So were all the red lines newly created variant timelines or old reset variant timelines that were un-reset?


I would guess new timelines...


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Is it just me or does the time keeper on the left look a smidge like Thanos?


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

kdmorse said:


> *Yah, I didn't put too much thought into it when I saw European short shorts and a cup.
> 
> (Turns out, the World Cup is less cup shaped than I thought)*


They are aerodynamic shorts for cycling.

The jersey is yellow.

Tour de France.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> So do the Time Keepers really exist? They're real in the comics, but people in the TV show haven't seen them and are a bit cagey about where they really are. Is it like the Wizard of Oz with a man behind the curtain? But then again, the agent who was taken over said that she gave out the information of where to find them.


I get the feeling the Lokis will find the Time Keepers died a long time ago and that the TVA has been on auto-pilot ever since.


----------



## cbrrider (Feb 2, 2005)

The Time Keepers are the bad guys. The natural order of the multiverse is disorder.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

cbrrider said:


> *The Time Keepers are the bad guys. The natural order of the multiverse is disorder*.


Maybe one of the bad guys is Loki. Which would explain why Ravonna Renslayer said she had never seen them more involved in a case.

(maybe the place she meets them is the floor marked as restricted access on the elevator buttons)


----------



## Lady Honora (Oct 9, 2018)

pgogborn said:


> They are aerodynamic shorts for cycling.
> 
> The jersey is yellow.
> 
> Tour de France.


Good catch. It looks line the Tour de France cup's shape, not the World Cup shape.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

"Well, Stanley, this is ANOTHER nice mess you've gotten me into."

I think at this point the TVA has to show up and save the day. What happened to the Tesseract?


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

First of all, I'm glad we get to see something other than Earth.

Secondly, I'm glad the show isn't one of "chase Sylvie to another apocalypse in each episode".


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

martinp13 said:


> *I think at this point the TVA has to show up and save the day*


I could live to regret it but for now I take Sylvia at her word.

An organization that has been duped en masse by fascists isn't qualified to save the day.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I was wondering if the Bifrost would save them. I know Heimdall was killed, and Asgard was destroyed. 2077 is like almost 60 years later though. So, maybe they got a new Bifrost figured out in New Asgard in that time. Also, maybe someone that can see everything like Heimdall could.  Oh yeah, Thor's new axe hammer thing had a built in Bifrost. I don't see Thor making an appearance in this though.

I can just see the scene. Giant chunk of a planet is about to crush them, and suddenly the Bifrost sweeps them away.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I found ep 3 kind of meh. Didn't really move the story forward.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

Casey is more powerful than Thanos.

AN No other being has ever had the might, nay, the nobility, to to wield not one, but two Infinity Stones. MEANWHILE CASEY WITH 20+ INFINITY STONES: @SUPERHEROAXIS - iFunny :)


----------



## mattyro7878 (Nov 27, 2014)

robojerk said:


> At one point Loki asked where the Time Keepers were and Mobius said they were still untangling the future time lines to create order until they reach the end of time. So alternate timelines still exist but the time keepers are still sifting through them.
> 
> My bet the female Loki is mad her timeline was pruned, and just like our Loki sees the BS on some arbitrary beings picking and choosing what is "sacred". I think she either wants to reinstate her timeline if possible or just kill the time keepers for destroying her versions of Thor whom she also had a love/hate relationship with. Our Loki wants the Time Keepers power but she wants to take it away.


Thor had an incestuous relationship with his brosister?


----------



## mattyro7878 (Nov 27, 2014)

robojerk said:


> At one point Loki asked where the Time Keepers were and Mobius said they were still untangling the future time lines to create order until they reach the end of time. So alternate timelines still exist but the time keepers are still sifting through them.
> 
> My bet the female Loki is mad her timeline was pruned, and just like our Loki sees the BS on some arbitrary beings picking and choosing what is "sacred". I think she either wants to reinstate her timeline if possible or just kill the time keepers for destroying her versions of Thor whom she also had a love/hate relationship with. Our Loki wants the Time Keepers power but she wants to take it away.


 Just reread your post. "love/hate is not incestuous...my bad.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

pgogborn said:


> I could live to regret it but for now I take Sylvia at her word.
> 
> An organization that has been duped en masse by fascists isn't qualified to save the day.


By "save the day" I meant "rescue our daring (anti-)heroes from certain doom".


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> I found ep 3 kind of meh. Didn't really move the story forward.


It truly was a character development episode. For all of the special effects and such, nothing much happened.  Curious if woman-in-hut is at all important or was just there for character development?


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

mattyro7878 said:


> Thor had an incestuous relationship with his brosister?


There was several times in this episode that I wonder if Disney would actually ship Loki and Sylvie.

(Though I guess it wouldn't count as incest but masturbation, perhaps? )


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> "Well, Stanley, this is ANOTHER nice mess you've gotten me into."
> 
> I think at this point the TVA has to show up and save the day. What happened to the Tesseract?


I've seen speculation that Lamentis is just an illusion so it's not really happening. After all, both Loki's have the ability to deceive via either enchantment or mind control.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Lokis sure seem to find Lokis annoying.

If Lokis were more self-reflective, they might realize something from that...


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> *I found ep 3 kind of meh. Didn't really move the story forward.*


Assuming that Sylvie is speaking the truth:

All TVA employees are variants but do not know they are variants.

Maybe that didn't really move the story forward but as resets of a story goes I think it deserves much greater praise than meh.

I am left scratching my head trying to work out when it will be a tactical advantage for Loki or Sylvie to tell them they are all variants.

But I did give the executive elevator having a gold door a Really?!


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

dtle said:


> First of all, I'm glad we get to see something other than Earth.


Yeah, but the people there still looked human.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Those gold elevators lead to an empty room where there are no trace of timekeepers, right?

-smak-


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

What's the story on Laemenits?


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

As they were running through the town towards the Arc, did anyone els get major flashbacks from every single 3D ride in Universals Studios? It seemed like such an on-the-rails, let's go this way, oops that way is blocked, let's cut through here, experience. For some reason it really reminded me of one of the Transformers rides I went on like 10 years ago. Maybe it was just me.

Beyond that, all I can say is that when they're not in the TVA, they need to let Loki be Loki more often. There's absolutely no reason for him not to be slinging the magic with confidence and an out of control ego, way more than he currently is.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

kdmorse said:


> Beyond that, all I can say is that when they're not in the TVA, they need to let Loki be Loki more often. There's absolutely no reason for him not to be slinging the magic with confidence and an out of control ego, way more than he currently is.


He's using more magic then I've seen him use in the movies. In films he pretty much just does illusions. Here he's shooting magic bolts and lifting buildings.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

A thought I had is that he brought out an illusion of the TimePad, broken and unusable, while still keeping the working but dead (or maybe not even dead) Pad for himself hidden. Not sure what that gains, but he does a lot of stupid stuff. So he can still get off Lamentis, but she doesn't know that.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

morac said:


> He's using more magic then I've seen him use in the movies. In films he pretty much just does illusions. Here he's shooting magic bolts and lifting buildings.


I don't think he used magic to lift the building. I think he used a time stone he stole from Casey. Time stone magic is green, too. And his possession of the stone would explain why he isn't worried. He can rewind time to repair the time device.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

kdmorse said:


> As they were running through the town towards the Arc, did anyone els get major flashbacks from every single 3D ride in Universals Studios? It seemed like such an on-the-rails, let's go this way, oops that way is blocked, let's cut through here, experience. For some reason it really reminded me of one of the Transformers rides I went on like 10 years ago. Maybe it was just me.


Standard video game design. Give the illusion of free choice, but put roadblocks in the directions you don't want the player to go, resulting in the player following the intended path.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Philosofy said:


> I don't think he used magic to lift the building. I think he used a time stone he stole from Casey. Time stone magic is green, too. And his possession of the stone would explain why he isn't worried. He can rewind time to repair the time device.


His normal magic green. I doubt he has the time stone. If he did, he would have immediately used it, so as not to get killed by a falling meteor.

The whole meteor thing was kind of silly, especially hiding from them in a small building.


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

hapster85 said:


> Yeah, but the people there still looked human.


I know, right? I think they're supposed to be Kree. Would it have killed the budget to paint at least a few of them blue?



jsmeeker said:


> What's the story on Laemenits?


I looked that up. Apparently Lamentis is a planet on the edge of Kree space. It previously showed up in a story involving the Kree and Peter Quill (Guardians of the Galaxy) fighting some other force. I don't know if the moon Lamentis-1 was also mentioned in that story.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

smak said:


> *Those gold elevators lead to an empty room where there are no trace of timekeepers, right?*


One of the pieces of information that Sylvie was seeking was how many people are guarding the Time Keepers, if they have guardians they do not assume they are safe, I doubt they are foolish enough to have a shiny gold arrow pointing to where they are located.

However, Ravonna Renslayer claims to be in contact with them so maybe not a completely empty room, maybe a room with a communications device with or without an operator.

(the director has given a long list of things that has influenced her design of the show, she did not mention Counterpart but at times I think Counterpart is one of the many influences of the look)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

pgogborn said:


> However, Ravonna Renslayer claims to be in contact with them so maybe not a completely empty room, maybe a room with a communications device with or without an operator.


Well, she could be in contact with them via telephone. Or email. That doesn't have to imply any kind of physical contact. They may well THINK the elevator leads to them, but they may well also be wrong.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> *Well, she could be in contact with them via telephone. Or email*


The TVA has rotary dial telephones, I am not going to bet hard cash they have email.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

You know if you name your planet "Lamentis", it's just going to suck as a place to live. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. Come on people, you need to a more positive outlook.

If you name a planet "Happy Fun Time", it's automatically going to be a great place, right?


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, she could be in contact with them via telephone. Or email. That doesn't have to imply any kind of physical contact. They may well THINK the elevator leads to them, but they may well also be wrong.


sounds like being in contact with Mr. Wiford


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jsmeeker said:


> sounds like being in contact with Mr. Wiford


...which might be exactly the case here!


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

pgogborn said:


> The TVA has rotary dial telephones, I am not going to bet hard cash they have email.


They carry sticks that can wipe you from existence. Time travel at will with another gadget. Loop you back in time a moment or two with yet another (or is it the same one?). Present you with a video presentation of your entire life, including parts you haven't lived yet, and a printout of every word you've ever said (what?). Just to name a few of their future retro tech toys. But yeah. Electronic communication would definitely be too much.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> ...which might be exactly the case here!


Yeah.. Though I think if the timekeepers don't exist (or don't exist anymore), they just don't exist at all. So, it's a *bit* different


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jsmeeker said:


> Yeah.. Though I think if the timekeepers don't exist (or don't exist anymore), they just don't exist at all. So, it's a *bit* different


...except Wilford actually DOES exist! They just THOUGHT they were making him up!


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

hapster85 said:


> *They carry sticks that can wipe you from existence. Time travel at will with another gadget. Loop you back in time a moment or two with yet another (or is it the same one?). Present you with a video presentation of your entire life, including parts you haven't lived yet, and a printout of every word you've ever said (what?).*


Although the printout of every word seemed to be on on a dot matrix printer.

Kate Herron, the show's director and partial creator explained the mix of technologies in Loki:
The TVA exists outside of time and space [don't expect the time line of technology to develop in the way you are familiar with].
The TVA is a bureaucracy, she has direct experience of working for a bureaucracy, in her case the NHS, that retained old technology too long, did not introduce new technology fast enough.

However, I also note that the shiny new technology is the sort that is useful for the fascists repressing people, the fascists may not be so keen on technology that could be useful to rebels.

I am also intrigued that the Minutemen have to be in contact with somebody to their use their sticks, it is not a remote weapon that can be used against Time Keepers in a bunker.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

martinp13 said:


> It truly was a character development episode. For all of the special effects and such, nothing much happened.  Curious if woman-in-hut is at all important or was just there for character development?


I wondered why they didn't try to use the power source that was powering the woman-in-hut's weapon. That would clearly take a large amount of power. 


morac said:


> His normal magic green. I doubt he has the time stone. If he did, he would have immediately used it, so as not to get killed by a falling meteor.
> 
> *The whole meteor thing was kind of silly, especially hiding from them in a small building.*


The meteor thing was not only silly, but also incredibly inconsistent. When they first arrived on the planet, they were running for their lives and barely missed being crushed by meteors several times. Yet later in the episode people are just standing in a line for hours, waiting for the train, with no sense of urgency to find shelter, and later still Loki and Sylvie are just slowly walking along, seemingly without a care in the world. So bizarre that they didn't at least try to make the danger uniform.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I wondered why they didn't try to use the power source that was powering the woman-in-hut's weapon. That would clearly take a large amount of power.


Well, they were talking about needing the amount of power that a space-ark would generate. I doubt a hand-held weapon would even be in the same league.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, they were talking about needing the amount of power that a space-ark would generate. I doubt a hand-held weapon would even be in the same league.


Understood, but you'd think they'd at least try, given the impending death and all. Maybe that gun would generate at least enough juice for one hop back to the TVA, and that's all they need.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I also thought this episode was pretty weak, even if it did have a few good moments of story progress (the TVA employees all being Variants). Probably the weakest of all the episodes in Loki, FatWS, and WV.

Honestly, I think I mostly missed Owen Wilson's Mobius. The tone of this episode lost at lot of the lightheartedness.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DancnDude said:


> I also thought this episode was pretty weak, even if it did have a few good moments of story progress (the TVA employees all being Variants). Probably the weakest of all the episodes in Loki, FatWS, and WV.
> 
> Honestly, I think I mostly missed Owen Wilson's Mobius. The tone of this episode lost at lot of the lightheartedness.


Really? I though the relationship between Loki and Lady Loki was every bit as good (and amusing) as Loki and Mobius...


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Really? I though the relationship between Loki and Lady Loki was every bit as good (and amusing) as Loki and Mobius...


Yeah, I guess I'm not really digging her character much. Maybe she'll grow on me, but so far not really into it.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

This will only mean something to Doctor Who fans:
The classic line from the Doctor to a Companion is "Run!". Loki said it to Sylvie when everything was collapsing around them. In a different universe I think Sylvie would be an excellent companion for Loki, much better than Mobius.

While thinking about Mobius and a mobius strip, maybe not only does Mobius not know he is a replicant, maybe he does not know he is on a loop repeatedly visting Ravonna Renslayer's office but not remembering he gave her a pen from a mission, left water stains on her desk etc (but Ravonna does know he is on a loop).


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

pgogborn said:


> replicant


I see what you did there.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

ehusen said:


> You know if you name your planet "Lamentis", it's just going to suck as a place to live. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. Come on people, you need to a more positive outlook.
> 
> If you name a planet "Happy Fun Time", it's automatically going to be a great place, right?


Do not taunt Happy Fun Time.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Huh. Young Sylvie?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1408062364604305408


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

That would explain why Slyvie barely remembers her mother. 

And if Analysts are getting Hunters to grab children off the street my opinion of Mobius goes down even more, he is in serious need of redemption.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

I think Loki has the time stone, and can escape any danger on Lament. If he didn’t, he’d be blaming Sylvie for screwing everything up. I’m not saying she’s screwing everything up, but Loki can’t take responsibility for his own mistakes. He’s not doing that, so it tells me he still feels like he’s in control.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

The God of Mischief can open his palm and create the illusion of firework rockets bursting into the sky, maybe he can create the illusion of a broken TemPad falling out of his hand to the ground.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

TVA propaganda posters:
ALWAYS WATCHING
HUNTERS & ANALYSTS WORKING IN TANDEM
ZERO TOLERANCE
_BEHAVE!_ OR GET YOUR CLOCK CLEANED

A real test of identity, time to choose a side.


----------



## mattyro7878 (Nov 27, 2014)

jsmeeker said:


> sounds like being in contact with Mr. Wiford


In the movie anyway.


----------



## mattyro7878 (Nov 27, 2014)

DancnDude said:


> I also thought this episode was pretty weak, even if it did have a few good moments of story progress (the TVA employees all being Variants). Probably the weakest of all the episodes in Loki, FatWS, and WV.
> 
> Honestly, I think I mostly missed Owen Wilson's Mobius. The tone of this episode lost at lot of the lightheartedness.


We are all taking Sylvie at her word that all the employees are variants. I have no opinion ...Im just sayin'.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

mattyro7878 said:


> *We are all taking Sylvie at her word that all the employees are variants. I have no opinion ...Im just sayin'.*


Count me out of your we 
What I posted was "Assuming that Sylvie is speaking the truth: All TVA employees are variants but do not know they are variants".

One of the reasons for my caution is the show is part influenced by Doctor Who - "Rule One: The Doctor lies,"


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

pgogborn said:


> but do not know they are variants


Sylvie said they're all variants. Loki said "they don't know that". And I don't know what I don't know that I don't know.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I'm just guessing that because it seems like it would be the most interesting idea to explore. Of course she could be lying.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

I'm going on the practical assumption that they are indeed all harvested variants, just as Sylvie said. While I enjoy the Marvel TV shows immensely, they generally don't have that sort of twisty depth to them. There just aren't enough episodes for there to be a twist behind a twist behind a twist. There's at most one major twist (the timekeepers are not what they seem), and everything else can kinda be taken at face value in support of that.

I could of course be wrong.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Mid season trailer released - has some scenes we have not seen before.



Spoiler: Mid-season Trailer


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Realized yesterday I'll be out of town for the final two episodes. Hopefully I can manage to avoid spoilers in the interim.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> Realized yesterday I'll be out of town for the final two episodes. Hopefully I can manage to avoid spoilers in the interim.


Wow, good luck with that! 

(I'd be tempted to watch it on my laptop...)


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

hapster85 said:


> Realized yesterday I'll be out of town for the final two episodes. Hopefully I can manage to avoid spoilers in the interim.


Do like I do. Just record it and stay away from this thread until you've watched the episodes. I know it's hard to tear yourself away from all of the nice folks here, but it's a sacrifice we must make once in a while.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

mr.unnatural said:


> Do like I do. Just record it and stay away from this thread until you've watched the episodes. I know it's hard to tear yourself away from all of the nice folks here, but it's a sacrifice we must make once in a while.


Problem is, we're not the only place on the internet that talks about Loki...and spoilers sometimes even come in headlines.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

hapster85 said:


> Realized yesterday I'll be out of town for the final two episodes. Hopefully I can manage to avoid spoilers in the interim.


If you avoid this thread, you should be okay. Loki isn't a cultural phenom like Baby Yoda The Mandalorian was, where headlines popup all over the place. Unless you frequent TV sites, you're probably good to go.



mr.unnatural said:


> Just record it


???


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

I can manage to stay away from this thread well enough, it's other places I was worrying about. Conversations have come across my Twitter feed, as well as episode breakdowns on YouTube. I rarely ever watch those, but they pop up anyway. Guess I'll just need to avoid Twitter as well. Avoiding YouTube shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Problem is, we're not the only place on the internet that talks about Loki...and spoilers sometimes even come in headlines.


I realize that. I just avoid any such articles until I get around to watching the show. I never visit any ongoing threads about a show until I've watched the latest episode. I avoid all social media sites like the plague. It's not really all that hard to keep from seeing spoilers unless you like to watch certain shows on TV that reveal such things. It all depends on what other media habits you enjoy besides watching TV shows. Besides, just knowing what might happen in an episode doesn't really spoil it for me. It's no worse than reading a book that's been turned into a movie or TV series. I read books in The Expanse series before the seasons aired and I still thoroughly enjoyed watching the shows even though most of the details in the books were recreated for the show so I already knew what was coming ahead of time. If knowing details of an episode before you watch it spoils it for you then that sucks. I just learn to go with it and not let it ruin the show for me. I've read books more than once because I enjoyed them even though I already knew how it was going to end.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

Post credit scene in this week's episode.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Who are those three people? Other Loki variants?


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> Who are those three people? Other Loki variants?


Center and right definitely are. Left looks like a Thor-wannabe, so probably a Loki.  I'm just curious if the reptile is also a Loki.


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> Who are those three people? Other Loki variants?


It would appear so. They are credited as Classic Loki, Kid Loki, and Boastful Loki.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> OMG, I just had a nasty thought... what if the Time-Keepers ARE robots??? Ow, now my head hurts.


Well, I was right in post #99, but not completely. They were just mindless androids, not ruling-the-TVA robots.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

So who is really in charge, Ravonna?


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

I'm glad they explained the ineptitude of the TVA agents. I've always wondered why the "most powerful force of the universe" can employee such average people.

Is the TVA even that powerful? Or is that also a ruse?


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> So who is really in charge, Ravonna?


As far as I can tell, she's the only person in the TVA that knew everybody else was a Variant, and the timekeepers were fake.

She has to be in on it.

But I don't think she's in charge.

-smak-


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

getbak said:


> It would appear so. They are credited as Classic Loki, Kid Loki, and Boastful Loki.


Is that also Gator Loki in an uncredited appearance?

So where are all the other variants that got pruned? Is Owen Wilson back in his reality on a water ski?


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

dtle said:


> I'm glad they explained the ineptitude of the TVA agents. I've always wondered why the "most powerful force of the universe" can employee such average people.
> 
> Is the TVA even that powerful? Or is that also a ruse?


Well, they have time technology more powerful than anything we've ever seen. They are pretty powerful.

What I'd like to know is what is Sylvie's endgame? Is it just revenge? Or is she trying to free up the universe from the TVA's control of the timeline.

-smak-


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

What was the result of Sylvie's messing up of all the timelines? Did I miss something? They almost seem to be acting like it didn't happen.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Azlen said:


> What was the result of Sylvie's messing up of all the timelines? Did I miss something? They almost seem to be acting like it didn't happen.


I guess the all hands on deck scenes from last episode implied that they were able to prune all of the nexus events.

Why did Loki and Sylvie's impending death generate a nexus event? I thought hiding in apocalypses allowed you to hide from the TVA?


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

logic88 said:


> I guess the all hands on deck scenes from last episode implied that they were able to prune all of the nexus events.
> 
> Why did Loki and Sylvie's impending death generate a nexus event? I thought hiding in apocalypses allowed you to hide from the TVA?


Didn't Mobius tell Loki that falling for Sylvie (himself) is what caused it?


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

logic88 said:


> I guess the all hands on deck scenes from last episode implied that they were able to prune all of the nexus events.
> 
> Why did Loki and Sylvie's impending death generate a nexus event? I thought hiding in apocalypses allowed you to hide from the TVA?


i assumed Loki and Sylvie dying on Lament isn't on the Sacred Timeline.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Philosofy said:


> i assumed Loki and Sylvie dying on Lament isn't on the Sacred Timeline.


But since they're "not supposed to exist" at all, wouldn't their deaths be an improvement?

(I personally still believe there's nothing, well, sacred about the Sacred Timeline, so you may well be right...but only because the TVA is wrong.)


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I know it’s between PG and PG-13, but when Loki was falling for Sylvie, I wanted Mobius to tell him to go F himself.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Black Thor!!


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

logic88 said:


> Why did Loki and Sylvie's impending death generate a nexus event? I thought hiding in apocalypses allowed you to hide from the TVA?


As was stated by Mobius it was the budding love between 2 variants of the same person. As to why that would show up even on an apocalypse of planetary scale, I can only think that it might cause a universe splitting event.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Especially if they procreated.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Philosofy said:


> i assumed Loki and Sylvie dying on Lament isn't on the Sacred Timeline.


Yeah, I guess. But the "Sacred Timeline" seems to be even more of a shorthand for "this is happening because we want it to happen" without even trying to justify it.


----------



## secondclaw (Oct 3, 2004)

I wonder if the 'Nexus Event' is not as much an event that deviates from Sacred Timeline, but one that ends it. That's why TVA is pruning them. And Loki, a manifestation of chaos, is one they prune the most of. And that two Lokis getting together on Lamentis was a sign that they would survive somehow and will join forces to destroy the sacred timeline. 

This smacks a bit of Asimov's End of Eternity novel, which explores similar themes.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Something just clicked to Mobius’s offhanded comment that he’s had to deal with Kree, Titans and Vampires. I thought the last one was out of place, but I just realized it’s likely a reference to Blade (which will be in Phase 4).


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

It would be delightfully ironic if the branch in the Sacred Timeline on Lamentis was caused by the TVA rescuing the Lokis because of the branch they caused in the Sacred Timeline by not dying on Lamentis...because the TVA rescued them.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Philosofy said:


> i assumed Loki and Sylvie dying on Lament isn't on the Sacred Timeline.


The alarms went off as Loki reached out and put his hand on Sylvie's arm, it was clear the show wanted us to see that gesture and it was important.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

dianebrat said:


> The alarms went off as Loki reached out and put his hand on Sylvie's arm, it was clear the show wanted us to see that gesture and it was important.


so, according to the Sacred Timeline, Loki IS supposed to be alone!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

dianebrat said:


> The alarms went off as Loki reached out and put his hand on Sylvie's arm, it was clear the show wanted us to see that gesture and it was important.


Which of course makes no sense whatsoever. Why would it matter if they start to show feelings for each other...

...SECONDS BEFORE THEY DIE?


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which of course makes no sense whatsoever. Why would it matter if they start to show feelings for each other...
> 
> ...SECONDS BEFORE THEY DIE?


If Loki is destined to be alone (according to the sacred timeline), then these Lokis falling for each other has ramifications that extend beyond these two individual Lokis. It could happen to other Lokis elsewhere in time. As Mobius mentioned, the ramifications could destroy them all. The branch reality was moving towards redline faster than anything they'd previously seen. It spooked them enough to stop it, even though they were about to die.

Presumably we'll get answers as to why it was so cataclysmic in the remaining episodes.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> If Loki is destined to be alone (according to the sacred timeline), then these Lokis falling for each other has ramifications that extend beyond these two individual Lokis.


No, it doesn't. They will never encounter other Lokis (since they'll be DEAD).

If that's where they're really going (and not just some gibberish clueless Mobius was spouting), I will be profoundly disappointed.


----------



## secondclaw (Oct 3, 2004)

hapster85 said:


> If Loki is destined to be alone (according to the sacred timeline), then these Lokis falling for each other has ramifications that extend beyond these two individual Lokis. It could happen to other Lokis elsewhere in time. As Mobius mentioned, the ramifications could destroy them all. The branch reality was moving towards redline faster than anything they'd previously seen. It spooked them enough to stop it, even though they were about to die.
> 
> Presumably we'll get answers as to why it was so cataclysmic in the remaining episodes.


That particular Loki had been taken out of the timeline to be destroyed (I think???) not put back into 2012 NY, and he was supposed to only live long enough to help them find Sylvie. Which means it really wasn't relevant if he was no longer alone on Lamentis, since he was no longer part of sacred timeline. 
I have a feeling though that the writers didn't put much thought into this at all, and really just wanted Loki and Sylvie to have a thing.

If the plan was to put Loki back into sacred timeline in 2012, things would be different, but clearly that's not what the writers are going for. I suspect this has same level of cleverness as the Quicksilver debacle.


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

dianebrat said:


> The alarms went off as Loki reached out and put his hand on Sylvie's arm, it was clear the show wanted us to see that gesture and it was important.


Actually she reaches out and put a hand on his arm, moved by what he is saying. Then the action cuts away to the TVA people seeing a new branch spike off the timeline, then back to Lamentis-1 as he takes her hand.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

In Mobius' interrogation softening up time loop torture chamber Sif said about three times “You deserve to be alone — and you always will be.”

But if Mobius thinks the Loki Sylvie Nexus busting no longer alone connection is romantic I think he is wrong,


I mentioned while they were on Lamentis-1 the shout to "Run!" was a Doctor Who connection. Since then I have read Sophia Di Martino was asked if she would like to be the new Doctor, she replied "I wouldn’t turn my nose up at it. But I haven’t really given it much thought, to be honest".

She also said about episode 3 looking like Doctor Who "I see what they mean – the duo, as well, we're each other's companion!"

(there is an exception but the Doctor / Companion relationship usually isn't romantic)


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> No, it doesn't. They will never encounter other Lokis (since they'll be DEAD).
> 
> If that's where they're really going (and not just some gibberish clueless Mobius was spouting), I will be profoundly disappointed.


These two individual Lokis would have been dead yes, but not other Lokis from other times. If it happened once, it could happen again. That's assuming, of course, that their connection, and no longer being alone, is indeed the Nexus event they're seeing at the TVA.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapster85 said:


> These two individual Lokis would have been dead yes, but not other Lokis from other times. If it happened once, it could happen again. That's assuming, of course, that their connection, and no longer being alone, is indeed the Nexus event they're seeing at the TVA.


But that would or would not happen with other Lokis whether or not "our" Lokis live or die.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that would or would not happen with other Lokis whether or not "our" Lokis live or die.


Yes, which may be why it freaked them out. Idk. They hammered home the "always alone" thing for reason. Hopefully whatever it is, it actually makes sense.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Azlen said:


> What was the result of Sylvie's messing up of all the timelines? Did I miss something? They almost seem to be acting like it didn't happen.


i didn't think it was intended to have any lasting impact, it was all a distraction.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which of course makes no sense whatsoever. Why would it matter if they start to show feelings for each other...
> 
> ...SECONDS BEFORE THEY DIE?


right, it was literally the entire point of one episode that it you were hidden from the TVA in these events


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> No, it doesn't. They will never encounter other Lokis (since they'll be DEAD).
> 
> If that's where they're really going (and not just some gibberish clueless Mobius was spouting), I will be profoundly disappointed.


Maybe simply dying isn't the same as being reset.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Are we gonna see Mobius meeting other Mobius variants?


----------



## KungFuCow (May 6, 2004)

jsmeeker said:


> Are we gonna see Mobius meeting other Mobius variants?


And will there be jet skis?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

What if everything was a lie? There is no “sacred timeline.” The yet to be revealed Big Bad is really in control.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

TVA is the Big Bad in this series


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Until someone mentioned it elsewhere, I had completely missed Crocodile Loki.

The elsewhere was of course deeply embroiled in an argument as to whether it was Alligator Loki or Crocodile Loki.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

I saw someone call it Crocodoki.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

And who runs the TVA?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

If that kid at the end is Kid Loki, then every new MCU TV series has introduced a member of the Young Avengers.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Lots of chatter about Kang since he's supposed to be featured in an upcoming movie. I assume he'll make an appearance somewhere but I hope this entire series isn't just setup for that movie though.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Disney doesn’t seem to introduce movie big bads in their Disney+ shows.


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

jsmeeker said:


> Are we gonna see Mobius meeting other Mobius variants?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

getbak said:


>


A whole planet of people who say nothing but "Wow".


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

logic88 said:


> Lots of chatter about Kang since he's supposed to be featured in an upcoming movie. I assume he'll make an appearance somewhere but I hope this entire series isn't just setup for that movie though.


In the comics, Ravonna is


Spoiler



the woman Kang's obsession with whom drives him.


----------



## secondclaw (Oct 3, 2004)

kdmorse said:


> Until someone mentioned it elsewhere, I had completely missed Crocodile Loki.
> 
> The elsewhere was of course deeply embroiled in an argument as to whether it was Alligator Loki or Crocodile Loki.


Is there really a debate? It's obviously an alligator, due to a blunt nose profile. Crocodile is pointy ...
I'm from Florida, and gators are pretty ubiquitous here (and we have some crocs too), this looked like one, with Loki horned crown. Of course it's quiet possible it's supposed to be Crocoloki, but cgi people didn't know the difference and rendered a gator.


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

secondclaw said:


> Is there really a debate? It's obviously an alligator, due to a blunt nose profile. Crocodile is pointy ...
> I'm from Florida, and gators are pretty ubiquitous here (and we have some crocs too), this looked like one, with Loki horned crown. Of course it's quiet possible it's supposed to be Crocoloki, but cgi people didn't know the difference and rendered a gator.


Didn't the Florida Gators once put a crocodile on the cover of their football media guide? I remember people having fun with that.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The scene in which Loki gets pruned reminded me of other scenes of the same type in many tv shows that drive me nuts. There's no way that Sylvie couldn't see Ravonna stab Loki in the back. It was really dumb to not kill Ravonna in the first place. Then she had to walk directly behind Loki but at least partially within Sylvie's view to get to him. Unless maybe she used a pad to transport herself but even then Sylvie and Loki were dumb for not killing her in the first place.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> The scene in which Loki gets pruned reminded me of other scenes of the same type in many tv shows that drive me nuts. There's no way that Sylvie couldn't see Ravonna stab Loki in the back. It was really dumb to not kill Ravonna in the first place. Then she had to walk directly behind Loki but at least partially within Sylvie's view to get to him. Unless maybe she used a pad to transport herself but even then Sylvie and Loki were dumb for not killing her in the first place.


Maybe Ravonna's a Walking Dead zombie!


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

secondclaw said:


> Of course it's quiet possible it's supposed to be Crocoloki, but cgi people didn't know the difference and rendered a gator.


I just want to clarify that there is no "Crocoloki" character in the comics. Someone was just being clever with their naming.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

kdmorse said:


> Until someone mentioned it elsewhere, I had completely missed Crocodile Loki.
> 
> The elsewhere was of course deeply embroiled in an argument as to whether it was Alligator Loki or Crocodile Loki.


when I first saw it, I thought it was a lizard.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

morac said:


> Disney doesn't seem to introduce movie big bads in their Disney+ shows.


We don't really know that for sure. There have not been any MCU movies released since the Disney+ shows started to air


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> The scene in which Loki gets pruned reminded me of other scenes of the same type in many tv shows that drive me nuts. There's no way that Sylvie couldn't see Ravonna stab Loki in the back. It was really dumb to not kill Ravonna in the first place. Then she had to walk directly behind Loki but at least partially within Sylvie's view to get to him. Unless maybe she used a pad to transport herself but even then Sylvie and Loki were dumb for not killing her in the first place.


Rule 2: Always double tap

Yeah this always bothers me in so many movies/shows. You've got the mugger/serial killer/monster/etc down for the count. So what do you do? Immediately drop your weapon and slowly walk away? No no no! Dismember that bad dude into a pulp.

I expected better from you Loki's.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> We don't really know that for sure. There have not been any MCU movies released since the Disney+ shows started to air


This being the Loki thread, I don't want talk about WandaVision, but&#8230;


Spoiler



People were saying Mephisto was going to be revealed to be the big bad. He wasn't. He may show up in the next movie.



The above really isn't a spoiler, but I tagged it anyway just in case.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

well, what about (from Wanda Vision)



Spoiler



Agatha Harkness? She won't ever show up in a movie?



and from The Falcon and The Winter Soldier


Spoiler



The character played by Julia Louis-Dreyfus. She won't ever show up in a movie?


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> well, what about (from Wanda Vision)


1. Probably not. At least not beyond a minor role.
2.


Spoiler



I think she will, but a movie that was supposed to be released before the show aired, so she was supposed to be introduced in the Movie, and then swoop in at the end of the TV Series, which would have made a bit more sense than the way it played out.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)




----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

secondclaw said:


> That particular Loki had been taken out of the timeline to be destroyed (I think???) not put back into 2012 NY, and he was supposed to only live long enough to help them find Sylvie. Which means it really wasn't relevant if he was no longer alone on Lamentis, since he was no longer part of sacred timeline.
> I have a feeling though that the writers didn't put much thought into this at all, and really just wanted Loki and Sylvie to have a thing.
> 
> If the plan was to put Loki back into sacred timeline in 2012, things would be different, but clearly that's not what the writers are going for. I suspect this has same level of cleverness as the Quicksilver debacle.


We have new evidence that nobody is intended to be destroyed. I don't think those sticks do 2 separate things.

We also have no evidence that they are in 2012 NY

-smak-


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

morac said:


> Disney doesn't seem to introduce movie big bads in their Disney+ shows.


And probably not where his next movie seems to be in a year and a half. I guess he could be in Spider Man and Dr Strange, but I doubt it.

There's some conjecture out there that they are waiting until Loki is over to release the Spider-Man trailer for those kinds of reasons.

-smak-


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Which of course makes no sense whatsoever. Why would it matter if they start to show feelings for each other...
> 
> ...SECONDS BEFORE THEY DIE?


The TVA didn't rescue them to save them from imminent death, they rescued them because they found them.

They clearly just didn't capture them originally to just prune them right away, because they didn't.

Even if their sentence before the "timekeepers" was to be pruned, they would still save them from dying on Lamentis-1

-smak-


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

morac said:


> Disney doesn't seem to introduce movie big bads in their Disney+ shows.


This is true. But it's also the only time the #1 culprit for being the big bad is a character already cast.

-smak-


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Is _everyone _who was pruned really sent to a different timeline?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

smak said:


> We also have no evidence that they are in 2012 NY
> 
> -smak-


They may be in an alternate NY 2012 where the Avengers lost. Notice the destroyed Avengers tower in the background.


----------



## stark (Dec 31, 2003)

What is the point of capturing the variants if the next step is pruning their entire branch? Seems redundant.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Just watched 3 and 4 and they were okay. The action scenes remind me of a Broadway play in the way the actors move and react. Actions seem just a bit too much over emphasized. It was especially apparent when they were fighting to get to the transport in 3 and in the basement of the TVA in 4.

It’s not as good as WV or FWS but still interesting.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

stark said:


> *What is the point of capturing the variants if the next step is pruning their entire branch? Seems redundant.*


The TVA is a fascist bureaucracy, there was no real point in taking a ticket to be seen by the next available attendant when there was only two people in the line but the bureaucrat's penalty for not taking a ticket was severe.

However, who/what ever the the Time Keepers are they are were taking a particular interest in these particular variants. Loki was sent to a time-loop torture chamber to soften him up for interrogation by Mobius.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

Don't forget the mini Loki-Simpsons crossover, because...

"This is what happens when Disney buys Marvel and Fox"


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Episode 5 was interesting. Not too many 'WOW' moments, but it's a setup for the finale.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Frog Thor in a bottle cracked me up


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Turtleboy said:


> Episode 5 was interesting. Not too many 'WOW' moments, but it's a setup for the finale.


i liked "I think we are more powerful than we believe"


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Loved this episode!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1412753039082110981


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

I see suggestions about which Marvel castle they have arrived at - Chronopolis and Castle Doom have been claimed as lookalikes.

Although Chronopolis the home of Kang and Castle Doom the home of Doctor Doom are very tempting possibilities maybe a castle is just a castle. To me it also looks like the infamous Colditz Castle,


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I hope the finale is amazingly wonderful because the series so far has been mostly "meh" to me.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

One of the reasons why I am watching is I think the showrunners have a satisfying finale lined up.

I think the reason why the TVA attempted to prune the child Sylvie was she was a good decent emphatic person which is not what a Loki is meant to be.

In her determination to destroy the Time Keepers to save the Universe I hope a warning from history does not come to bite.

We have slain a large dragon, but we live now in a jungle filled with a bewildering variety of. poisonous snakes. And in many ways, the dragon was easier to keep track of.
--James Woolsey 1993, according to Wikipedia had a variety of government positions including United States Under Secretary of the Navy from 1977 to 1979, Director of Central Intelligence Agency from February 5, 1993, until January 10, 1995/


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Yeah, so far the series hasn't really grabbed me like WV or F&W did. But maybe it'll stick the landing.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

People keeping saying Kang will be the big bad, but that's too much set up for the final episode. Someone came up with a much more simple theory/prediction which makes a lot more sense in the scheme of the show. The big bad will be&#8230;



Spoiler



Loki.

After all the plural of Loki is Loki and the name of the series is Loki. The question is will he look like "our" Loki or completely different. I'm guessing it's a lookalike.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Is Kodos gonna be there with Kang?


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)

pgogborn said:


>


I thought it was Hogwarts. The tendrils flying around looked like death eaters....


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

morac said:


> People keeping saying Kang will be the big bad, but that's too much set up for the final episode. Someone came up with a much more simple theory/prediction which makes a lot more sense in the scheme of the show. The big bad will be&#8230;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've been thinking the same thing. It makes sense, since the moment our Loki discovered the existence of the TVA he made the decision to try to overthrow it. The baddie probably enchanted all the people (Loki power) and the real time keepers may have been real at one point as well. It also explains why Loki is the most common variant as somewhere on most Loki's paths they discovers the TVA's existence so to keep his power he created the bureaucratic, fascist force to keep them away.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I'm not sure. But they haven't introduced any real big bags in the tv series yet.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Stalling for time Miss Minutes pretends to look for a file

Ravonna Renslayer: How long? 
Miss Minutes: Any second now. 
Minutemen Guards storm through door: Go! Go! Go! Move it!

Sylvie anticipated the betrayal and escaped the Minutemen who did not move it quick enough, I do not know if Miss Minutes is AI or sentient - but I want Mobius to punch her in the clock four or five times and wipe the smile off her face.

(don't trust somebody who says trust me)


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

morac said:


> People keeping saying Kang will be the big bad, but that's too much set up for the final episode. Someone came up with a much more simple theory/prediction which makes a lot more sense in the scheme of the show. The big bad will be&#8230;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Huh. I was just chatting with my friend about the series and that was one of the possibilities that we came up with. Does seem likely, IMO.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

logic88 said:


> Huh. I was just chatting with my friend about the series and that was one of the possibilities that we came up with. Does seem likely, IMO.


Doesn't really work for me...with only one episode left and nobody else set up for Big Bad status, anybody other than the TVA (who have been the bad guys all along) would be kinda out of left field. There's been no real indication that there even IS a "bad guy" apart from them.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Doesn't really work for me...with only one episode left and nobody else set up for Big Bad status, anybody other than the TVA (who have been the bad guys all along) would be kinda out of left field. There's been no real indication that there even IS a "bad guy" apart from them.


Someone had to have enchanted or mind wiped all the TVA agents. Why not just add another Loki and make them the villain behind it all.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

robojerk said:


> Someone had to have enchanted or mind wiped all the TVA agents. Why not just add another Loki and make them the villain behind it all.


I suppose it's possibly they're (the writers) that much smarter than me, but I don't see them as having set that up as a possibility enough to be revealed at this late point without it seeming like a giant cheat. Remember that next week is the finalé...so whatever happens will have to have already been set up.

Whoever is behind the TVA is probably a matter for a future movie/show. I suspect all this is just set-up for Doctor Strange and Spider-Man (which clearly will follow up on Loki to some degree).


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Behind the scenes photo of Alligator Loki between takes... (really)


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

LA Times: We meet a new monster in 'Loki' Episode 5. Here's its backstory


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> *but I don't see them as having set that up as a possibility enough to be revealed at this late point without it seeming like a giant cheat. Remember that next week is the finalé...so whatever happens will have to have already been set up.*


In this thread June 20th I speculated that Loki was a Time-Keeper

Dialogues and themes could be setting it up:

Episode 1
Mobius: Should you return, what are you gonna do? 
Loki: Finish what I started. 
Mobius: Which is? 
Loki: Claim my throne. 
Mobius: You wanna be king? 
Loki: I don't want to be, I was born to be.

Episode 2
Ravonna Renslayer: The Time-Keepers are monitoring every aspect of this case. I've never seen them so involved. They want that Variant caught.

Episode 5
Sylvie: How do I know that, in the final moments, you won't betray me? 
Loki: Listen, Sylvie, I... ( Sighs deeply ) I betrayed everyone who ever loved me. I betrayed my father, my brother... my home. I know what I did. And I know why I did it. And that's not who I am anymore. Okay? I won't let you down. 
Sylvie: You sure? 'Cause if we make it, and the TVA is gone, there might be a timeline for you to rule. 
Loki: Ah. And then I'd finally be happy.

Apart from wibbly wobbly, timey wimey one of the big themes of the series is about identity including what kind of Loki is Loki.

No way was a gold elevator door going to be pointing to the location of the Time-Keepers. But I do not think it will be a cheat if in the castle beyond the void at the end of time Variant Time-Keeper Loki has created a gold throne room where he is king (but it could be a misdirection, not a cheat),


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

I recalled in episode 1 Miss Minutes graphical representation of one of the Time Lords Time-Keepers had what could be horns. Bearing in mind the wide variance of Loki horns we have seen in episode 5 I went back to look at it.

I have now additionally noticed that eyebrows are Loki's color, green. I think the horns and green are a showrunner's deliberate design. What I don't know is if it is a misdirection (and I can't completely rule out coincidence).


----------



## mlsnyc (Dec 3, 2009)

For those watching this who are also Simpsons fans:
https://disneyplus.com/movies/the-good-the-bart-and-the-loki/6xwLjCmfTVem


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

Interesting stats showing how well this show is doing. Which is quite well indeed.

LA Times: Disney+'s 'Loki' shows why Marvel's strategy could win the streaming wars


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

Lol'ed at Sylvie's backseat driving, and Mobius' quip: "You really are one of you!" 
And Loki was so smooth..instead of conjuring a separate blanket for Sylvie, he made the blanket big enough for both of them..if they got close together, of course


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Regina said:


> Lol'ed at Sylvie's backseat driving, and Mobius' quip: "You really are one of you!"
> And Loki was so smooth..instead of conjuring a separate blanket for Sylvie, he made the blanket big enough for both of them..if they got close together, of course


Except it wasn't smooth at all...it was awkwardly transparent.

Which is what made it work for him.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Except it wasn't smooth at all...it was awkwardly transparent.
> 
> Which is what made it work for him.


I should have put "smooth" in quotes...or said that Loki thought he was smooth..I thought the winky face was enough to convey my sarcasm.. but apparently not!
Those crazy kids are too cute together!


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Regina said:


> *I should have put "smooth" in quotes...or said that Loki thought he was smooth..I thought the winky face was enough to convey my sarcasm.. but apparently not!
> Those crazy kids are too cute together!*


Yep (for me your "if they got close together, of course" remark told the whole story enough even without a winky)

We have already seen Loki conjure clothes, he had a major awkward fail when Sylvie said "You could conjure me a new outfit. You have no idea how uncomfortable something like this is."


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Regina said:


> I should have put "smooth" in quotes...or said that Loki thought he was smooth..I thought the winky face was enough to convey my sarcasm.. but apparently not!
> Those crazy kids are too cute together!


It just proves what we've all known all along. Loki is only in love with himself.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Pokemon_Dad said:


> Interesting stats showing how well this show is doing. Which is quite well indeed.
> 
> LA Times: Disney+'s 'Loki' shows why Marvel's strategy could win the streaming wars


Three podcasts that I've listened to long before Disney+, do recaps on all the Star Wars and Marvel shows. One of them I think about skipping, because it's too long, but I keep listening.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

I would think a re-cap on YouTube would be a lot better than a podcast. You get to SEE what they are talking about when they point out all the easter eggs "hidden" in the shot. When I do this sort of thing, thats where I go. YouTube.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

I don't have any emotional stock in who the big bad might be. I think if it's Kang, it's sortof out of nowhere within the confines of the show. It could be a Loki. It could be someone we've already met at the TVA.

But I'm hoping it's not Kang, because once again, everyone on the internet whose sure it's Kang is going to lose it's mind. 

(Actually, now that I type that, somehow I'm actively rooting for another boner joke.)


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

There’s already a confirmed season 2. At this point Miss Minutes could show up and say I’m sorry but the big bad is in another castle and people would still watch.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

morac said:


> There's already a confirmed season 2. At this point Miss Minutes could show up and say I'm sorry but the big bad is in another castle and people would still watch.


I don't believe that's ever been confirmed? As far as I can tell, it's just been the subject of persistent rumors and tea-leaf-reading (and I think the readers are reaching; interpreting the evidence in light of the desired outcome, and not simply following where the evidence actually leads)...

Which isn't to say it isn't going to happen. Just that nothing is official as of yet.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Scene from season 2


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

jsmeeker said:


> Scene from season 2
> 
> View attachment 61066


Señor vespa?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

robojerk said:


> Señor vespa?


Jet ski.

And notice that Sylvie is missing a horn. Huge spoiler for the finale next week.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

kdmorse said:


> *I don't have any emotional stock in who the big bad might be. I think if it's Kang, it's sortof out of nowhere within the confines of the show. It could be a Loki. It could be someone we've already met at the TVA.
> ...But I'm hoping it's not Kang, because once again, everyone on the internet whose sure it's Kang is going to lose it's mind. *


Many of the people who are saying it is Kang are using stuff which have appeared in the comics but nowhere in the show.

It is possible that the Time-Keeper is Kang and this is the wibbly wobbly point in time and space that Ravonna Renslayer first meets him and begins a relationship with him - but if that happens I think it will undermine the qualities of the show so far.

I too would like to see the people who are sure it is Kang lose their minds  but I think a more likely outcome is they will say it is the showrunners, not themselves that got it wrong.

*Edit:* 2 out of 3 I typed Kane not Kang


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I'm sure Kang is coming to the MCU, and soon, but if he's coming in Loki I'm sure it will be in a post-credits kind of way, not as part of the actual story.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1413974139694723075


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Just like we were SURE it was Mephisto in WandaVision, people are SURE it's Kang in Loki. I was a Mephisto believer too. But fool me once, that always happens, but fool me twice, I'm getting better at avoiding it.  Pretty sure it's a Loki. Though I don't think Ravonna has said one truthful thing yet... wondering if she might be a Loki too (always wearing that look-at-me sash).


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

I enjoyed E5, it got me back into it and understanding what they were setting up. I think a Loki being behind it makes sense.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Maybe it’s Mephisto in Loki, just to mess with us?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

LoadStar said:


> Maybe it's Mephisto in Loki, just to mess with us?


And in Hawkeye, they'll reveal that in WandaVision...

...it was Kang all along!


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And in Hawkeye, they'll reveal that in WandaVision...
> 
> ...it was Kang all along!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I don't even know who Kang is. Is this something I should know from watching this show, or is this purely comic book knowledge being imposed on those of us who have only watched the show?


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't even know who Kang is. Is this something I should know from watching this show, or is this purely comic book knowledge being imposed on those of us who have only watched the show?


Comic book knowledge.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Kang has not been mentioned at all in the MCU.


----------



## Allanon (Nov 2, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm sure Kang is coming to the MCU, and soon, but if he's coming in Loki I'm sure it will be in a post-credits kind of way, not as part of the actual story.





robojerk said:


> Kang has not been mentioned at all in the MCU.





Spoiler



Kang the Conqueror Wikipedia entry says Kang is set to make his feature film debut in the Marvel Cinematic Universe film Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania (2023).


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

I really doubt it's Kang except for a "I'll do it myself" kind of thing in the end credits.

Again, it's not Marvel's thing to just introduce a new character in the 300th minute, and have them be the villain.

Except for it being another Loki.

-smak-


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Going slightly off-topic for a bit here so bear with me. I thought it was interesting that the title of the episode was Journey Into Mystery. That's the title of the comic that introduced Thor and was the comic where he resided for years until he got his own book. With but a few exceptions, most of the Marvel characters had only a portion of a particular book dedicated to them with the rest of the comic containing other stories. Iron Man was in Tales of Suspense, Ant-Man/Giant-Man and the Hulk were in Tales to Astonish, and Doctor Strange was in Strange Tales. The Hulk actually had his own book initially but it only ran for six issues before it got canned and then he reappeared in Tales to Astonish. Back in the early sixties when Marvel introduced the Silver Age characters, they only had about a dozen superhero titles. They had a couple of cowboy comics and several romance comics. Spider-Man and the Fantastic Four along with Sgt. Fury and the Howling Commandos each had their own books as well as The Avengers and X-Men. DC did something similar for introducing new characters in comics like The Brave and the Bold and Showcase. I remember having the first issues that introduced the Justice League of America, Green Lantern, Hawkman, and the Atom, among others. Most of their other comics revolved around Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman and various spin-offs as well as Challengers of the Unknown and Blackhawk plus several war comics.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

There was also a Journey Into Mystery series a few years ago by Kieron Gillen, which starred Loki and introduced a lot of the concepts the show has used.

(It was a great, great series. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be terribly available these days...I have the big fat hardcover Omnibus, but that's long out-of-print.)


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Various representations of the Time-Keepers are not consistent, for some people the most explicit of the whole bunch is Kang, for me it is Loki.

What is consistent is that always three Time-Keepers are depicted - so that could be the misdirection.

Maybe there is only one Time-Keeper. I will enjoy it if an insane Time-Keeper Loki has eliminated the other Time-Keepers (but there are many other episode 6 outcomes that I would enjoy).

(maybe also consistent is something in the forehead)


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

It's gonna be Pietro. The real one. Not the fake Fox one.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Loki keeps saying the TVA is run by space lizards so the main villains will obviously be sleestaks.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Or Gorn?


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)

I'm pretty sure it's Palpatine in the castle.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't even know who Kang is.


You never watched the Simpsons?

Will Kodos be there, too?


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

Couldn't Ms. Minutes be the villain? I mean how can you trust an friendly always helpful cartoon character AI? She's got to be bad...

Maybe she is trying to create the one timeline where she can reunite with her one true love ... Cogsworth.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

ehusen said:


> Couldn't Ms. Minutes be the villain? I mean how can you trust an friendly always helpful cartoon character AI? She's got to be bad...
> 
> Maybe she is trying to create the one timeline where she can reunite with her one true love ... Cogsworth.


I'd expect nothing less from Clippy's mother.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Huh. Kang was never named but will now be the Big Bad in S2 of Loki as well as the new Ant-man (corrected) movie? Must say that while there were parts of Loki that I really liked, overall this series has been a miss for me so far. Not enough plot and the pacing was too slow. I guess Loki showed some development but we'll just have to see what S2 brings.

And what did Sylvie mean she was "pruned before you even existed" (when speaking to Loki at the beginning)?


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

So far, Kang is only confirmed to be appearing in the next Ant-Man movie, which isn't scheduled for release until February 2023.

There are 7 MCU films scheduled to be released before then.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

getbak said:


> So far, Kang is only confirmed to be appearing in the next Ant-Man movie, which isn't scheduled for release until February 2023.
> 
> There are 7 MCU films scheduled to be released before then.


Whoops. Thanks for the correction. I guess I was thinking "multi-verse" and Dr. Strange popped into my head for some reason.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

getbak said:


> So far, Kang is only confirmed to be appearing in the next Ant-Man movie, which isn't scheduled for release until February 2023.
> 
> There are 7 MCU films scheduled to be released before then.


Marvel sometimes announces casting news a day or two after a TV show airs.

I don't know what the plot of a Loki 2 would be unless it involved Kang.

-smak-


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

What an unfulfilling season finale. Seems more like a mid-season finale.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I was really excited for this last episode. Thought it was going to be epic. Really let down that it was just a bunch of dialogue, and laying the ground work for a second season. Last week's episode was pretty epic. So, I guess I was looking for more of that, but even more.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

We're not going to have to wait until the next Ant Man movie, or Loki S2. 

This is Kang and he'll be the next Big Bad of the MCU. I expect to see him in Dr. Strange, Thor, Spider Man, and possibly others too.


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

Feel like I just wasted 6 weeks after watching that finale.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

Cliffhanger?!?!? Who does Marvel think they are? A network broadcasting a TV series?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

That was the season finale? WTF.

Whoever was in charge of lighting on this show's last couple of episodes needs to be fired.

This series didn't do much for me. Of the three series so far I'd rate them this way:
1) The Falcon and the Winter Soldier
2) WandaVision
3) Loki

I may have ranked WandaVision #1 but the first two episodes were terrible as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

I can't believe that people didn't think that was an incredible season finale. Majors was awesome in a role that could have been totally hammy. He played it to perfection and can't wait to see what else he does given the possibilities of his character. Hiddleston was amazing as always and this just set the groundwork for all of Phase 4. They managed to make a concept as crazy as the multiverse fit into existing stories and into short movies/tv shows. I was amazed the whole time during this episode.

Loki was far and away the best Marvel TV show IMO and it's not even close. Ya'll crazy if you think that was underwhelming. Unlike Lost, it is clear there IS a plan here and it will unfold slowly, just like Phase 1 did. I can't wait.

Black Widow was an utter failure and bore compared to that episode. It was still an entertaining action flick but as a former comics geek, Loki S1 was pure gold.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Hated it as a supposed "series finale", but it makes perfect sense as a "season finale". Many questions answered, but more created. And putting a Kang Variant there? Loved it.

Sylvie, Sylvie, Sylvie... for the "older" Loki you sure are an idiot.  But the plot can't unfold unless she does that.

So did she kick Loki to an alternate universe, where an Evil Kang is in control? Or did her killing He Who Remains muck up "history"? Since Mobius didn't recognize him, I'd guess it's the former. (And how did she know how to use the iTemPad???)

One final thing: what caused the disturbance (heralded by the thunder) that made him admit the "know it all" fib? I rewatched the scene, and the camera slowly zoomed in on him over time, then the thunder, then it zoomed out slowly. I didn't notice any actions that could have "disrupted" anything. Any ideas?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Someone upthread mentioned the Earth-centricity of this series. The opening quotes reminded me of that. I don't disagree with her stances but still, I was like "Greta Thunberg? What's she doing on this show?"


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

I loved it. Left me feeling very satisfied with the season, and I have renewed excitement for the future of the MCU.


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

What a letdown.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

ugh. Stuoid


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

GDG76 said:


> I can't believe that people didn't think that was an incredible season finale. Majors was awesome in a role that could have been totally hammy. He played it to perfection and can't wait to see what else he does given the possibilities of his character. Hiddleston was amazing as always and this just set the groundwork for all of Phase 4. They managed to make a concept as crazy as the multiverse fit into existing stories and into short movies/tv shows. I was amazed the whole time during this episode.


I thought the guy playing Kang was incredibly hammy and not good at all. So many times it was like you could see him trying to decide what acting choice to make and he almost always made an awkward one. Nothing he did was up to par for a Marvel big bad. 


martinp13 said:


> One final thing: what caused the disturbance (heralded by the thunder) that made him admit the "know it all" fib? I rewatched the scene, and the camera slowly zoomed in on him over time, then the thunder, then it zoomed out slowly. I didn't notice any actions that could have "disrupted" anything. Any ideas?


It seemed to me like this was something he was expecting and something that was inevitable. Nothing specific caused the disturbance. It was just the appointed time for this to happen. It was the point beyond which Kang could not see and beyond which he had no control.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I thought the guy playing Kang was incredibly hammy and not good at all. So many times it was like you could see him trying to decide what acting choice to make and he almost always made an awkward one. Nothing he did was up to par for a Marvel big bad.


He wasn't playing Kang. He was playing a dude who waited millions of years for this moment.

I didn't get cheesy or hammy at all (except what you'd expect from someone who won the battle royale he won over multiverses and set up the TVA for this long  ) ...but to each their own. I'll be rewatching it later this week and may see it differently but thought it was great on the first watch. Compared to the Russian dude in Black Widow, he was light years better of an actor and character.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I thought the guy playing Kang was incredibly hammy and not good at all. So many times it was like you could see him trying to decide what acting choice to make and he almost always made an awkward one. Nothing he did was up to par for a Marvel big bad.


That wasn't Kang. That was the guy whose death made it possible for Kang to exist.

The statue at the end is Kang. I have a feeling when we finally see him, it will be a very different performance.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

GDG76 said:


> He wasn't playing Kang. He was playing a dude who waited millions of years for this moment.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> That wasn't Kang. That was the guy whose death made it possible for Kang to exist.
> 
> The statue at the end is Kang. I have a feeling when we finally see him, it will be a very different performance.


OK, I guess I misunderstood. There was so much talk of Kang in this thread, I just assumed that must be the guy's name, even thought he was never named in the show.

But the statue at the end is the same guy. So just like Sylvie and all the characters in E5 were Loki variants, why isn't the guy in this episode considered a Kang variant?



GDG76 said:


> I didn't get cheesy or hammy at all from him personally but to each their own. I'll be rewatching it later this week and may see it differently but thought it was great on the first watch. Compared to the Russian dude in Black Widow, he was light years better of an actor and character.


Now that I know the character in this episode was not Kang, but that it appears the same actor will be playing Kang later, I can see how the actor was making choices in this episode that were tempered. He couldn't go totally over the top or it wouldn't give him anywhere to go with the Kang character. So while I still thought the performance was really bad, I can at least understand why.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> OK, I guess I misunderstood. There was so much talk of Kang in this thread, I just assumed that must be the guy's name, even thought he was never named in the show.
> 
> But the statue at the end is the same guy. So just like Sylvie and all the characters in E5 were Loki variants, why isn't the guy in this episode considered a Kang variant?


He is a Kang variant.

In fact, every character in the entire series is a variant.

-smak-


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Now that I know the character in this episode was not Kang, but that it appears the same actor will be playing Kang later, I can see how the actor was making choices in this episode that were tempered. He couldn't go totally over the top or it wouldn't give him anywhere to go with the Kang character. So while I still thought the performance was really bad, I can at least understand why.


I edited my comment to reflect that given what he has been through, the character he played here was expected to be a bit over the top and dramatic IMO given what he has accomplished (and also giddy at the unknown after all these years). Combined with Richard E Grant as classic Loki, I thought it was two great jobs at really tough acting and true to the comics without falling into being fake.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> But the statue at the end is the same guy. So just like Sylvie and all the characters in E5 were Loki variants, why isn't the guy in this episode considered a Kang variant?


Kang is the variant. He Who Remains is the real thing, and he was preventing his own variants from existing. When Lady Loki killed him, that allowed Kang to exist.

The actor was the star of Lovecraft Country, in which he shows he can bring the drama.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

smak said:


> He is a Kang variant.
> 
> In fact, every character in the entire series is a variant.
> 
> -smak-


He is a variant, and one of his variants is who will we eventually know as "Kang". They even foreshadowed "we have been called many names, conqueror, etc"


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Kang is the variant. He Who Remains is the real thing.


I got the feeling this was just the lucky "variant" that won and crafted the sacred timeline to avoid other versions of himself, but I guess that perspective is all just from what multiverse you're looking from...

I can see your side, that Earth 616 is/was "the sacred timeline" and this version of who will become Kang is the "winner" who was on that timeline all along, hence 616 was the only ongoing reality of any importance. But not anymore....

Either way, really looking forward to the rewatch


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

GDG76 said:


> He is a variant, and one of his variants is who will we eventually know as "Kang". They even foreshadowed "we have been called many names, conqueror, etc"


He's not a variant. He is the Sacred Timeline version of himself. The whole point of the TVA was to keep his timeline the only one, and stop all the others (with their warlike variants) from existing. (Variants are beings who break off from the Sacred Timeline.) And now that he's dead, the timelines can split off freely again, and the He Who Remains variants can exist again...including Kang.

(And presumably this means the Spider-Man and Doctor Strange movies can now exist, since they depend on the multiverse!)


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That wasn't Kang. That was the guy whose death made it possible for Kang to exist.
> 
> The statue at the end is Kang. I have a feeling when we finally see him, it will be a very different performance.


I thought that was a variant of Kang? Have been reading that he was the "Immortus" version of Kang.


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)




----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

logic88 said:


> I thought that was a variant of Kang? Have been reading that he was the "Immortus" version of Kang.


No, Kang is a variant of him.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> He's not a variant. He is the Sacred Timeline version of himself. The whole point of the TVA was to keep his timeline the only one, and stop all the others (with their warlike variants) from existing. (Variants are beings who break off from the Sacred Timeline.) And now that he's dead, the timelines can split off freely again, and the He Who Remains variants can exist again...including Kang.


I agree but I'm not quite sure what exactly the "Sacred Timeline" is other that the one "He Who Remains" controls and has architected. I don't think we know that this was his original timeline, just the one he built that was able to contain all of his other variants. But I could be entirely wrong and not really sure it even matters


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> No, Kang is a variant of him.


Ah, thanks. Was just reading up on Nathaniel Richards. He has a lot of incarnations.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

By the way, He Who Remains isn't really Immortus. In the comics, He Who Remains and Immortus/Kang are entirely different people. Immortus and Kang aren't variants of each other; Immortus is Kang as an older, wiser, less conquest-oriented man. (And Rama Tut is Kang as a younger, less ambitious conqueror who is satisfied with ruling Ancient Egypt, but that's neither here nor there. Um, neither now nor then?)

Here, they've conflated He Who Waits and Kang/Immortus, and He has Immortus-like qualities in that incarnation.


GDG76 said:


> I agree but I'm not quite sure what exactly the "Sacred Timeline" is other that the one "He Who Remains" controls and has architected. I don't think we know that this was his original timeline, just the one he built that was able to contain all of his other variants. But I could be entirely wrong and not really sure it even matters


It doesn't contain all his variants. All his variants are dead because all the other timelines have been pruned. In his mind, there can be only one. The only one that was left was his.

But now, he's no longer running things, and there can be many.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It doesn't contain all his variants. All his variants are dead because all the other timelines have been pruned. In his mind, there can be only one. The only one that was left was his.
> 
> But now, he's no longer running things, and there can be many.


 I was using contain as in "stop/limit/kill" (by never letting them exist) not as in "have in it". Again, I'm not sure it matters though what the sacred timeline is or what version is here at the end. I can see your point, anything other than sacred timeline is a variant, and by definition, this version of the character is the "one" in the sacred timeline all along...

I still feel like he could have come from any reality and started creating the sacred timeline only through his discovery of Alioth as a tool for world ending but it is making my head hurt a bit.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

this has got me all sorts of confused.. People here can't even agree who this guy in the castle really is.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

So why did He Who Remains allow Sylvie to exist and not be pruned immediately? I guess it's because he didn't know she would kill him... it was just a possibility back then. Before the thunder.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

martinp13 said:


> So why did He Who Remains allow Sylvie to exist and not be pruned immediately? I guess it's because he didn't know she would kill him... it was just a possibility back then. Before the thunder.


Well, he seemed perfectly happy to let her kill him. Almost eager, in fact...

He was tired.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> So why did He Who Remains allow Sylvie to exist and not be pruned immediately? I guess it's because he didn't know she would kill him... it was just a possibility back then. Before the thunder.


Sylvie said in this episode that she was pruned once before (previous to the self-prune in E5) so perhaps he didn't think it would help?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

martinp13 said:


> So why did He Who Remains allow Sylvie to exist and not be pruned immediately? I guess it's because he didn't know she would kill him... it was just a possibility back then. Before the thunder.


He clearly knew Loki and Sylvie were going to come to his fortress with the intent to kill him. He must have known Sylvie wasn't the type to be persuaded to do something else after she had set her mind on something. So that leaves me to believe he wanted this outcome. He was ready to be done managing the timeline and, while he made a half-hearted pitch to have Loki and Sylvie take over his duties, I don't think he really believed they would ever agree to that.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

logic88 said:


> Sylvie said in this episode that she was pruned once before (previous to the self-prune in E5) so perhaps he didn't think it would help?


So she knew about the End of Time? How did she escape? (Since no one ever did before Mobius, it seems)


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> So she knew about the End of Time? How did she escape? (Since no one ever did before Mobius, it seems)


I have no idea. Sylvie says to Loki at the beginning of the episode: "Loki, shut up. I was pruned before you even existed. I have been waiting for this moment my entire life."

I guess she might have had a TemPad with her that first time?


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

So as he was explaining, all I could think of was:

"Ok, so you're Rick Sanchez" (from Rick and Morty)

If the infinite Ricks decided there could only be one true Rick, and all went to war destroying the infinite realities leaving only one Rick remaining, I could absolutely see him sitting alone, victorious and miserable at the end of time. Framed that way, the entire episode made perfect sense.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

kdmorse said:


> So as he was explaining, all I could think of was:
> 
> "Ok, so you're Rick Sanchez" (from Rick and Morty)
> 
> If the infinite Ricks decided there could only be one true Rick, and all went to war destroying the infinite realities leaving only one Rick remaining, I could absolutely see him sitting alone, victorious and miserable at the end of time. Framed that way, the entire episode made perfect sense.


Of course, Rick and Morty stole the concept from Marvel in the first place. There is a Council of Kangs even and a council of Reeds (Richards)

But yeah your analogy is spot on. Except for that Rick is also actively preventing any new branches and sick of that too.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

GDG76 said:


> Of course, Rick and Morty stole the concept from Marvel in the first place. There is a Council of Kangs even and a council of Reeds (Richards)
> 
> But yeah your analogy is spot on. Except for that Rick is also actively preventing any new branches and sick of that too.


Interestingly one of the writers for Rick and Morty is writing the next Antman movie script, so&#8230;.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> He's not a variant. He is the Sacred Timeline version of himself.


Upon rewatch, He Who Remains even referred to himself as a "variant".


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

martinp13 said:


> So she knew about the End of Time? How did she escape? (Since no one ever did before Mobius, it seems)


I believe she may be referring to the original pruning of her timeline (which she escaped by getting out before it disappeared)..?


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Hoffer said:


> *I was really excited for this last episode. Thought it was going to be epic. Really let down that it was just a bunch of dialogue,*


The short version posted by me upthread:
In [Sylvie's] determination to destroy the Time Keepers to save the Universe I hope a warning from history does not come to bite. "We have slain a large dragon, but we live now in a jungle filled with a bewildering variety of poisonous snakes. And in many ways, the dragon was easier to keep track of."
--James Woolsey Director of CIA Feb 5 1993-Jan 10 1995

The talkie talkie version:
*He Who Remains:* You came to kill the devil, right? ( Chuckles ) Well, guess what? I keep you safe. And if you think I'm evil, well, just wait till you meet my variants. And that's the gambit. Stifling order or cataclysmic chaos. ( Chuckles ) You may hate the dictator, but something... ( Exhales deeply ) ...far worse is gonna fill that void if you depose of him.
...
*He Who Remains*: There's two options! One... you kill me and destroy all this, so you don't just have one devil, you have an infinite amount. Or... you two. You two run the thing.
...
*Loki*: I believe him. 
*Sylvie*: Believe what? That a bazillion boogeymen will turn up just because we give people free will? He's a liar, Loki.
...
*He Who Remains*: That's the gambit. Remove the dictator and what fills the void?
...
*Loki*: But what if by taking him out, we risk unleashing something even worse?
...
*Loki*: Maybe he's lying! Maybe he's not. The cost of getting this wrong is too great.
...
*Loki*: It's done, Mobius. We made a terrible mistake.
...
*Loki*: But someone is coming. Countless different versions of a very dangerous person. And they're all set on war. We need to prepare.

And even with all that talkie talkie it was one of the shorter episodes. However I do like the geopolitics set-up for season 2, I will be waiting and watching.


----------



## secondclaw (Oct 3, 2004)

I'm not sure why He Who Remains should be treated as a benevolent ruler, or a lesser evil, holding other Kangs at bay. He was essentially Thanos, believing that genocide was an acceptable option to prevent strife and war, only at a level Thanos could only dream of. What exactly is a difference between Multiverse at war vs multiple timelines annihilated by TVA? Death and destruction is there for both.

While Sylvie probably should have tried to enchant him to see his memories, and it would have replaced needless exposition with something better, I don't see why outcome should have been any different.

For Sylvie and Loki, he didn't give them a good option. It's either genocide+slavery or war. The difference is that with war, people have a fighting chance. And I assume within Phase 4 someone will figure out exactly how to stop Kangs.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

logic88 said:


> I have no idea. Sylvie says to Loki at the beginning of the episode: "Loki, shut up. I was pruned before you even existed. I have been waiting for this moment my entire life."
> 
> I guess she might have had a TemPad with her that first time?


I thought she meant they pruned her timeline before he even existed, then she subsequently escaped and went on the run before she, personally, was pruned. I never got the impression she had previously been to the "end of time" dumping ground.

She's basically saying that she has been working towards this moment for a very long time, longer than he has been alive.

(Edit: SMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

zordude said:


> I thought she meant they pruned her timeline before he even existed, then she subsequently escaped and went on the run before she, personally, was pruned. I never got the impression she had previously been to the "end of time" dumping ground.
> 
> She's basically saying that she has been working towards this moment for a very long time, longer than he has been alive.
> 
> (Edit: SMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK)


I also don't think she literally meant that she was older than Loki, but just that she became a variant long before he did.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

This Loki is the age of the Loki in the first Avengers movie, which is 7 or so years younger than the "real" Loki killed by Thanos.

But isn't Loki like 1,000 years old anyway?


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I also don't think she literally meant





Turtleboy said:


> This Loki is the age of the Loki in the first Avengers movie, which is 7 or so years younger than the "real" Loki killed by Thanos.
> 
> But isn't Loki like 1,000 years old anyway?


In one of the movies I think they mention the number 1500 years, but i'm unsure if that is both Thor and Loki


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> No, Kang is a variant of him.


No, you're the variant!


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Did not like the season finale. I am a huge fan of the series and do look forward to more.

The season finale though, just felt to me like one huge monologue, and a monologue that kept repeating the same thing over and over again, "if you kill me things will get worse". Things have presumably become worse. I don't think I even have any questions or anything I that I'm stuck thinking about. It feels like everything has been adequately explained.

The series has been refreshing, exciting, edgy, and unpredictable (in a series that is entirely based on predictability). The season finale was none of these things.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

The 'Loki' Season Finale Exit Survey


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

What happened to Checkov's Jetski?


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

smbaker said:


> Did not like the season finale. I am a huge fan of the series and do look forward to more.
> 
> The season finale though, just felt to me like one huge monologue, and a monologue that kept repeating the same thing over and over again, "if you kill me things will get worse". Things have presumably become worse. I don't think I even have any questions or anything I that I'm stuck thinking about. It feels like everything has been adequately explained.
> 
> The series has been refreshing, exciting, edgy, and unpredictable (in a series that is entirely based on predictability). The season finale was none of these things.












I'm excited for season 2, although I fear that could be 2 years away due to the MCU expanded story needing time flesh things out. Felt the season could've ended at episode 5 and I still would've known what I know now as we didn't really get to see any repercussions of the Loki and Sylvies actions other than the final scene where Mobius doesn't know who Loki is and the statue of 'He Who Remains' in the library. I also kind of expect some explanation and repurcussions to be revealed in the next few MCU movies.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

Yeah, put me in the 'meh' camp about the finale. A finale should have some sort of climax but this didn't seem to have that. We just had a bunch of cliffhangers: where's Renslayer going, what was in the file she read, what is Slyvia doing now, where is Loki now (a new reality or did the TVA change), and so on.

I like a climactic battle in my finales, season or series. What we got was a little minor spat between Loki and Sylvia. Last week we battled a giant time/space/world eating smoke/dragon monster at the end of time. This week we are going to argue among ourselves about whether or not to kill a somewhat average appearing, slightly crazy person who really isn't threatening us in any immediate way.

And the mid-credit scene of just a stamped "Loki will return in season 2" was an annoying bait and switch, IMHO.

And yeah, I'll still be back for season 2 on day 1 or release...


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Like I said yesterday, episode 5 was pretty epic. All these Loki running about. Giant purple smoke bear thing. It was a great episode, and I just thought the finale would ratchet it up even more. 

It's very possible I'll appreciate this finale more in the future. As the multi-verse stuff rolls out in movies and more TV shows, it might be great to go back and see when the dude that remains made his appearance. For now, it was just a let down for me. I too will be there day one for season 2.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

smbaker said:


> *I am a huge fan of the series and do look forward to more. The season finale though, just felt to me like one huge monologue, and a monologue that kept repeating the same thing over and over again.*


Miss Minutes is every bit as insane as He Who Remains but unlike He Who Remains and Loki she understands that exposition is best served succinct.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

ehusen said:


> Yeah, put me in the 'meh' camp about the finale. A finale should have some sort of climax but this didn't seem to have that.


Introducing a likely Phase 4 major villain, killing a dictator who has been stamping out entire universes for millions of years and allowing countless multiverses and Loki/Sylvie fight/breakup doesn't qualify as a climax? I'm glad I'm not a Marvel writer


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> Giant purple smoke bear thing.


LOST would like their smoke monster back.



pgogborn said:


> Miss Minutes is every bit as insane as He Who Remains but unlike He Who Remains and Loki she understands that exposition is best served succinct.


I usually don't read blogs as I don't want to be spoiled, but one place I read expected Ms Minutes to be _the_ big bad. Basically a (sentient) computer algorithm run wild. When she appeared at the castle at the end of time, I thought for a moment they were right.



GDG76 said:


> killing a dictator who has been stamping out entire universes for millions of years and allowing countless multiverses


He didn't really seem to care*, and even engineered his own demise. Stamping out entire universes may have been a positive thing from the perspective of Loki's universe. This guy was bigger and badder than Thanos by orders of magnitude, but Thanos was a much more compelling character to me.

* I get this, and I don't mind it. He was tired and wanted to hand things off, one way or the other.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

smbaker said:


> He didn't really seem to care*, and even engineered his own demise. Stamping out entire universes may have been a positive thing from the perspective of Loki's universe. This guy was bigger and badder than Thanos by orders of magnitude, but Thanos was a much more compelling character to me.
> 
> * I get this, and I don't mind it. He was tired and wanted to hand things off, one way or the other.


I agree, not as interesting as Thanos, but they took 10 slow years to flesh him out. Clearly Marvel didn't think He Who Remains' story was that much more interesting either since he's gone by the end but I thought it was a pretty cool end for a TV series to jumpstart who will eventually be Kang. What did WandaVision or Falcon and the Winter Soldier really give us in plot advancement by the end of their runs? Most characters were in the same exact place as the start of the show. This felt bigger and the first thing of consequence I've seen in a Marvel TV show.

Thankfully, if you want self contained action and climax/wrap-up, Black Widow is still playing in a theater near you. I'm glad Marvel is giving us both.

All that being said, I think there is a huge potential for all of this Multiverse stuff to go off the rails pretty quick (as I've thought all along). Actions and events lose their consequences and impact with time travel/alternate dimensions and I think it's hard for the casual fan to want to care enough to understand it. I'm not sure it's the direction I would have gone for the next phase of Marvel flicks honestly given how many Deus Ex Machina type situations it opens up.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

I liked the series. I liked the finale if I judge it as an episode. I'm not a big fan of where they went with the plot in the last episode.

I'm not quite sure how to explain it. I don't have anything against the episode itself, I have no objection to it being largely exposition centered around the big bad - that was fine. I just, don't like where they went with it plot wise. The way they ended it just kinda seemed to meh the entire series - and we're going from a grand universe, to what I imagine to be a off-brand fork. Loki ends up in the kirkland brand TVA to reinvent his relationships, and Sylvia being left behind at the end of time surely to come back and cause trouble again, is kinda cliche. Kinda, meh.

Although, I never quite followed. Who opened the door that Loki got kicked through?


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

It's very interesting to read all the mixed reviews.. Not just here in this thread, but out there on the internet from all the "pros" and what not.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Loki may end up being the only one with knowledge of what happened. I’d expect Kang to kill Sylvie the second he shows up. Kang wouldn’t even know about Loki either.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

secondclaw said:


> While Sylvie probably should have tried to enchant him to see his memories, and it would have replaced needless exposition with something better, I don't see why outcome should have been any different.


That wouldn't have worked because Sylvie needed to think that He Who Remains was lying in order to preserve her desire to destroy whoever was behind the TVA. If she had enchanted him and been able to see his backstory and see the chaos he described and why he chose to become the time dictator, then her motivation would have necessarily changed, which wouldn't have allowed her to do what needed to be done at the end.



kdmorse said:


> Although, I never quite followed. Who opened the door that Loki got kicked through?


Sylvie did. She used the magical armband thingie that HWR had been using but removed from his arm shortly before.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

zordude said:


> I thought she meant they pruned her timeline before he even existed, then she subsequently escaped and went on the run before she, personally, was pruned. I never got the impression she had previously been to the "end of time" dumping ground.
> 
> She's basically saying that she has been working towards this moment for a very long time, longer than he has been alive.
> 
> (Edit: SMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK)


Could be but the dialog could have been clearer in that case, IMO. Like "my world got pruned" or "everything I loved got pruned" or something along those lines.

The finale was great for setting up Phase 4 of the MCU but I think a lot of folks got used to a bit more resolution since WV and F&W were single season series. If we knew Loki was going to be an ongoing series, expectation could have been appropriately calibrated. I guess we'll be seeing a lot more of Hiddleston now as he'll be chasing down Kang. Though I'm curious how much screentime he'll get in the next Dr. Strange.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

They have also mentioned that they will have two different focuses in the next phase:

Earth (Falcon and Winter Soldier, Wandavision, Black Widow, Shang Chi (guess), Spiderman (even with multiverse stuff))

Space/Mystical (Loki, Dr Strange, Eternals, What if.. Antman, etc)

The Earth stories are likely going to be self contained and the others more universe impacting but with less individual closure.


----------



## ehusen (Jan 7, 2002)

GDG76 said:


> Introducing a likely Phase 4 major villain, killing a dictator who has been stamping out entire universes for millions of years and allowing countless multiverses and Loki/Sylvie fight/breakup doesn't qualify as a climax? I'm glad I'm not a Marvel writer


Point taken. And pIease note I am as big a MCU fanboy as any out there. Taking my family out to see "The Avengers" opening night (on my birthday no less, yeah I'm a Star Wars geek too so being born on May 4th was clearly prophetic) is one of those warm memories of my life that I hold dear.
I loved WandaVision, liked Falcon and the Winter Soldier, and really enjoyed the other 5 episodes of Loki.

But the "universe destroying, ageless, dictator, major villain" was portrayed as a wonky, tired, 'weak', human who was no threat at all. The Loki/Slyvie fight was never going to result in either of them killing the other, so it was just a small lover's spat in context. The ending where all the universes were splitting apart was a little "exciting" but the TVA didn't seem that concerned about it when it was happening at the end of the show.

So yeah, I stick with my feeling the finale was kind of anti-climatic.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

ehusen said:


> The ending where all the universes were splitting apart was a little "exciting" but the TVA didn't seem that concerned about it when it was happening at the end of the show.


Although why would they? That TVA is being run by Kang...who thrives on chaos.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Is it even called the TVA anymore. Does it have a new purpose?

Do all the Kangs want to destroy the other Kangs or are they in partnership with each other?

-smak-


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

smak said:


> Do all the Kangs want to destroy the other Kangs or are they in partnership with each other?
> 
> -smak-


isn't that specifically why the multiverse is bad, because all the kang's go to war against each other's timelines?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

zordude said:


> isn't that specifically why the multiverse is bad, because all the kang's go to war against each other's timelines?


Yes, although one presumes it's like Survivor...complete with alliances (and then broken alliances) along the way.


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

OK, jumping in with a risk of Smeekage...

Does anyone else feel like the final episode of every Marvel D+ is a letdown? Maybe not F&TWS as much[1], but this and Wandavision both had that similar feeling, and I think for the same reason --that the last episode is where an otherwise wholly unique and inventive story arc has to bend to the service of the Sacred $ MCU. WV had to establish


Spoiler



Scarlet Witch, White Vision, etc.


 while this one had to introduce not only the multiverse, but "Kang" as well.

I feel like the penultimate episode was so wonderful, and this last was such a letdown in so many ways. Perhaps some of that was legitimate storytelling decisionmaking, but I can't shake the feeling that some of it was corporate ...influence as well.

[1]F&TWS just sucked all around, IMHO. But YMMV


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

I thought it was great.

And Every second of every show is under corporate influence.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

dcheesi said:


> Does anyone else feel like the final episode of every Marvel D+ is a letdown?


The way I put it - in the TV arena, they just haven't quite learned how to stick the landing.

I wouldn't use the word letdown myself, although I won't argue with it either. They just haven't quite figured out how to make a truly satisfying ending, instead seeing the end as a means to an end - to get characters and plotlines into specific places for the next whatever. And our expectations are so high, because we know that at the end of 2 hours, they can stick the landing - we expect them to do fabulous things when we give them 6 hours. And then, not always so much in the end.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

dcheesi said:


> OK, jumping in with a risk of Smeekage...
> 
> Does anyone else feel like the final episode of every Marvel D+ is a letdown? Maybe not F&TWS as much[1], but this and Wandavision both had that similar feeling, and I think for the same reason --that the last episode is where an otherwise wholly unique and inventive story arc has to bend to the service of the Sacred $ MCU. WV had to establish
> 
> ...


Alan Sepinwall hits the issue in depth in his season review and he's generally correct IMNSHO, it's about serving the greater Marvel need
'Loki' Finale Recap: What's In a Name?


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

dcheesi said:


> OK, jumping in with a risk of Smeekage...
> 
> Does anyone else feel like the final episode of every Marvel D+ is a letdown?


I listen to a number of podcasts. I heard more than once that the Marvel TV shows have an issue with their finales. That is being a letdown in one way or another.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Hoffer said:


> I listen to a number of podcasts. I heard more than once that the Marvel TV shows have an issue with their finales. That is being a letdown in one way or another.


That's because they are using them to setup the movies. I can understand that and it will help temper my expectations for the next series.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DavidTigerFan said:


> That's because they are using them to setup the movies. I can understand that and it will help temper my expectations for the next series.


Yeah, it's an interesting (and welcome) dynamic they've set up in the post-Netflix era. Using the TV shows to set up background for the movies, but doing it in REALLY interesting ways.

Sure beats having the movies pretend the TV shows don't exist, and the TV shows having to bend to the will of the movies without getting any benefit from it.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I believe she may be referring to the original pruning of her timeline (which she escaped by getting out before it disappeared)..?


 Well, she survived the pruning of her timeline because Renslayer took her to the TVA as a Variant before they set the charge that pruned the timeline. Then, she escaped from the TVA before her fate could be decided. As a Loki she certainly would have been sent to the Void rather than turned into a TVA employee like other variants.



secondclaw said:


> I'm not sure why He Who Remains should be treated as a benevolent ruler, or a lesser evil, holding other Kangs at bay. He was essentially Thanos, believing that genocide was an acceptable option to prevent strife and war, only at a level Thanos could only dream of. What exactly is a difference between Multiverse at war vs multiple timelines annihilated by TVA? Death and destruction is there for both.


 I'm not sure I would equate them. Pruning the timelines is kind of like Plan B for timelines. It's not the same as killing half the universe because those multitudes of beings in those multiverses never existed at all, in the same way that birth control is not the same as genocide. I don't mean to be political here: this analogy won't work for folks who think birth control and genocide are basically the same thing.



ehusen said:


> But the "universe destroying, ageless, dictator, major villain" was portrayed as a wonky, tired, 'weak', human who was no threat at all.


 The mistake you're making is, as described above, that WAS NOT the "universe destroying, ageless, dictator, major villian", if you mean Kang. That was He Who Remains. Yes, he did all prevent all the other multiverses from forming, so in that sense he was "universe destroying", but otherwise he's at least neutral and if you don't count the removal of free will (when people don't even know it's being removed), and compared to the alternative he describes, he might even be considered "good".

Think of it this way: in the timeline of the Loki series (until the last few minutes) Kang as he is known in the comics (the major villian) never exists at all, because He Who Remains prunes the timeline where that Kang comes into existence.

Then Sylvie kills He Who Remains, and now all his variants come into existence across the multiverse, including the Kang from the comics, and that Kang now apparently controls the TVA which can only be Very Bad News for the entire multiverse.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> I'm not sure I would equate them. Pruning the timelines is kind of like Plan B for timelines. It's not the same as killing half the universe because those multitudes of beings in those multiverses never existed at all, in the same way that birth control is not the same as genocide. I don't mean to be political here: this analogy won't work for folks who think birth control and genocide are basically the same thing.


Of course they existed! We saw them being literally wiped out!

And you're right...it's not the same as killing half the universe. It's not even the same as killing ALL the universe, over and over and over. It IS killing all the universe, over and over and over.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

madscientist said:


> *... if you don't count the removal of free will (when people don't even know it's being removed), and compared to the alternative he describes, he might even be considered "good"*


Yes, but did he make the trains run on time?

I am reminded of a Doctor Who episode that had a similar theme of human development being held back. The Editor, the apologist for the big bad the Jagrafess asked the Doctor "Is a slave a slave if he doesn't know he is enslaved?". The Doctor had a quick one word answer.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

The pruning is to prevent branches made from the “sacred timeline”, how is it that there are many (many!) Loki variants if they are only theoretical forks from the sacred timeline?

‘Wouldn’t they have to be from an alternate universe/dimension, not just a branch that forks off from a single timeline? timeline?

I guess it’s possible that the “sacred timeline” includes a multiverse, should have thought of that sooner


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

I think there's some vagueness there concerning how much of a timeline "exists" (independent of the original) during the nexus-event window.

I think that they are only pruning/resetting small areas around the offending Variant. We see this in Ep.5, when the warship pops into the Void; it wasn't a whole universe, just that one ship. Presumably the original timeline is able to "heal" from the excision of that small area somehow.

The existence of the "red line" suggests that the new alternate-timeline universe doesn't pop into existence fully formed; there's a specific window of time (and space?) in which they can act to prevent it coming to fruition. The question, then, is how that window is defined?

Personally, I think the whole point of the Red Line is that there's a limit to how much matter/energy they can "prune" in one go; they stop the new timeline branch from continuing by sending just the Variant and its immediate surroundings to the Void, and the Red Line limit is defined by the reach of their "reset" bombs. The longer the nexus alteration persists, the further its effects ripple out into the surrounding universe, until ultimately there's too much alteration to feasibly "reset".

Analogy time: think of a thin, stretchy film adhered to a large surface. You pick at a point in the film until loosens, then begin to pull on it. Little by little, more and more of the film starts to separate from the surface substrate. Pull hard enough & long enough, and the whole thing pulls free and exists on its own.

But if, early on, someone comes along and slices free just the little bit of loosened film between your fingertips, then the remaining film will continue to cleave to the surface, and your leverage point on it is lost. The remaining pinch of material is useless, and incapable of growing any further. And with just a little smoothing, the original surface looks the same as if nothing had happened at all.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

So now there are many universes, but that doesn't explain how any of these universes will crossover into the main MCU universe. Or vice versa.

Somebody has to do a deliberate (or I guess accidental) act to bring that to fruition. We don't really know what happens in No Way Home, but most people are assuming that characters cross over into a different universe.

-smak-


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Is there even a "main" MCU Universe now?


they might need to change it from MCU to MCMV


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Just watched the season finale last night and my only major disappointment was that the season was too short and it left me hanging. I came here to get caught up on the discussion and all I got from it was a headache. Everyone keeps talking about Kang as the villain, yet I don't recall his name ever being mentioned in any of the episodes so clearly I'm missing something. I haven't read any of the Marvel comics since back in the late 70's so I'm way behind on the characters and the storylines in the comics. I do recall a baddie named Kang in the comics but I forget which books where he was introduced (FF maybe?). I can only assume that everyone is talking about Kang because he was introduced in the stories with Loki in the comics.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

mr.unnatural said:


> Everyone keeps talking about Kang as the villain, yet I don't recall his name ever being mentioned in any of the episodes so clearly I'm missing something.


You're not missing anything, they did indeed just pull the character out of the air for the finale.
That being said, it's still not clear which of the comic storylines they're using, and on a technicality it may not specifically be Kang vs the other "Kang centric/adjacent" characters.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

From what we saw in the show, "pruning" a timeline involves a localized reset of the parts of the timeline that were impacted by the variant immediately after it deviates from the Sacred Timeline, and that's all. That reset removes a small fork of the timeline in a specific area, it doesn't reset the entire universe.

Of course, there are many obviously ridiculous things about this. But maybe we shouldn't think too hard about it.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

madscientist said:


> From what we saw in the show, "pruning" a timeline involves a localized reset of the parts of the timeline that were impacted by the variant immediately after it deviates from the Sacred Timeline, and that's all. That reset removes a small fork of the timeline in a specific area, it doesn't reset the entire universe.
> 
> Of course, there are many obviously ridiculous things about this. But maybe we shouldn't think too hard about it.


I'm not sure it just involves a "localized reset" or that's all that needs to be reset because the TVA jumps on things so quickly.

A timeline fork occurs when someone does something not destined by the "sacred timeline" which we found is the timeline(s) where "he who remains" exists, so if the sacred timeline says someone will pick up a can of carrots and instead he picks up a can of peas and the TVA comes in right after that all the reset would do is put the peas back and remove the carrots.

Also the TVA only cares about forks that will lead to a different Kang variant forming. In the example above, the TVA wouldn't prune the variant who picked up the can of peas as that is unlikely to actually change which Kang variant forms.


----------



## secondclaw (Oct 3, 2004)

I'm not sure this explanation makes sense either. Taking Sylvie for example, when she was a child, TVA came in, grabbed her, and reset the timeline. Does that mean the timeline continues without a Loki? Does it somehow roll back to the point she decided to become a threat? By taking variants, I was under impression that they completely destroy that timeline, otherwise it wouldn't make sense without the person they took.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

secondclaw said:


> By taking variants, I was under impression that they completely destroy that timeline, otherwise it wouldn't make sense without the person they took.


That's certainly what seemed to be happening in the instances where they showed it...


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

My take. The big bad weaponized Alioth for some purpose, Alioth needs to feed, so part of the bureaucratic system he created was a way to pull variants from branched timelines to feed Alioth, then destroy those branches.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

The reset is local because the variation hasn’t spread out from the point (the variant) yet. And it isn’t a “destroy” but a reset. That means it returns. They have to take the variant out because the original is restored during the reset. Look at the scene where they took Loki. That scene still continues in the movie WITH Loki. A reset Loki.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I was watching the movie Yesterday last night. I see this blonde woman, and I'm like "that's Sylvie". Looking at IMDB, the actress that plays Sylvie was in the movie Yesterday. Not a big part, but I immediately recognized her. Even though I say that, I also didn't really think it looked like her.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

secondclaw said:


> I'm not sure this explanation makes sense either. Taking Sylvie for example, when she was a child, TVA came in, grabbed her, and reset the timeline. Does that mean the timeline continues without a Loki? Does it somehow roll back to the point she decided to become a threat? By taking variants, I was under impression that they completely destroy that timeline, otherwise it wouldn't make sense without the person they took.


I think Sylvie was different. After all HWR said he guided her and Loki on a path to him, which includes having the TVA prune her. The TVA just prunes whomever they are told to. They don't question why, so HWR had the TVA prune Sylvie so she would reach him.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> I was watching the movie Yesterday last night. I see this blonde woman, and I'm like "that's Sylvie". Looking at IMDB, the actress that plays Sylvie was in the movie Yesterday. Not a big part, but I immediately recognized her. Even though I say that, I also didn't really think it looked like her.


I knew her from that movie. Yesterday is one of my favorite movies, I've watched it several times. Not a big role, she's part of the couple that are Jack & Ellie's best friends.


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

Thankfully, I managed to avoid spoilers for Eps 5 & 6 while on vacation. It's a good thing too, or I might have gone into them with very different expectations (especially after catching up on this thread). Watching them back to back may have also been an advantage, as they felt like one big episode. Definitely wasn't disappointed. Lots of great moments throughout.

Having no prior knowledge of all of the Kang talk was probably a good thing. Having now read through it all, I can see where it may have skewed my viewpoint for Ep 6 a bit. 

When Loki returned to what he had previously known as the TVA, and discovered things were very different, it definitely left me wanting more. Can't wait to see how things unfold from here, both within the series, and the MCU.


----------



## dwatt (Jan 11, 2007)

What happened with the judge and was her walking through the time portal what triggered HWR's loss of sight for future actions?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

dwatt said:


> What happened with the judge and was her walking through the time portal what triggered HWR's loss of sight for future actions?


I'm assuming where Renslayer went will be answered in season 2.

As for HWR, I'm guessing it was the TVA no longer doing its job (as a result of the Hunter and Mobius revealing to everyone that they are all variants) and the timelines splitting. Once that happened he wouldn't know what happens next.


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

secondclaw said:


> I'm not sure this explanation makes sense either. Taking Sylvie for example, when she was a child, TVA came in, grabbed her, and reset the timeline. Does that mean the timeline continues without a Loki? Does it somehow roll back to the point she decided to become a threat? By taking variants, I was under impression that they completely destroy that timeline, otherwise it wouldn't make sense without the person they took.


After they arrest the Variant, they set a "reset" charge, which wipes out all of the changes in the immediate vicinity (the area in which the Variant has had an immediate effect). Doing so effectively destroys the timeline-branch. How exactly this process works, and how much of that
timeline/universe gets sent forward to the Void, is a matter of current debate.

If an instance of Variance immediately spawns a complete duplicate universe, then that whole universe would have to be sent to the Void. If only the Variant is duplicated, and/or the matter/energy with which they interact (and m/e with which said m/e then interacts...), then only that m/e would need to be sent to the Void. IMHO the latter seems more feasible, and more in line with what's seen in the show.

Either way, the original Loki (or whoever) in the "original" timeline is entirely unaffected. And the "new" timeline no longer exists (once devoured by Alioth in the Void).


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Ok, then what did Sylvie do when she sent all those bombs to different timelines. That just kinda went away as a plot point.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

dcheesi said:


> After they arrest the Variant, they set a "reset" charge, which wipes out all of the changes in the immediate vicinity (the area in which the Variant has had an immediate effect). Doing so effectively destroys the timeline-branch. How exactly this process works, and how much of that
> timeline/universe gets sent forward to the Void, is a matter of current debate.


So at the point Loki disappeared with the Tesseract, he actually did disappear. And then the TVA will show up and reset that disappearance.

Because we did hear Thor say where is Loki. Then I'm assuming the TVA showed up, and reset the timeline. But to what? Do they do more than just reset the timeline, because what happens to the Tesseract. Doesn't it just keep on getting kicked over to Loki?

-smak-


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Ok, then what did Sylvie do when she sent all those bombs to different timelines. That just kinda went away as a plot point.


I think it was a distraction move. All of the TVA personnel got sent to prune those timelines so Sylvie could get to the Timekeepers.


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

smak said:


> So at the point Loki disappeared with the Tesseract, he actually did disappear. And then the TVA will show up and reset that disappearance.
> 
> Because we did hear Thor say where is Loki. Then I'm assuming the TVA showed up, and reset the timeline. But to what? Do they do more than just reset the timeline, because what happens to the Tesseract. Doesn't it just keep on getting kicked over to Loki?
> 
> -smak-


I think the Endgame time travel branches must be a special case; either the entire timeline branch was reset after the Avengers left, or else those few select timelines were allowed to continue, presumably with special treatment to prevent a rival Kang from becoming a menace (e.g., by heading to the 31st century and killing baby Kang in his crib). The latter must have happened at least once, since Cap spent far more time in one branch than seems possible without passing "red line" on that timeline.

Given that the events of Endgame pre-date Kang by many centuries, and are rather momentus in their impact, it's likely that He Who Remains simply couldn't exist without them. So he chose to make exceptions and/or workarounds for those pre-Kang time-traVersal[1] events.

[1]See? 'Cause they tra_verse_d various _vers_ions of the '_Verse_! ...I'll see myself out


----------



## dcheesi (Apr 6, 2001)

logic88 said:


> I think it was a distraction move. All of the TVA personnel got sent to prune those timelines so Sylvie could get to the Timekeepers.


Yeah, but there's still something weird there. Presumably the reset bombs created branches by "resetting" material that was still part of the Sacred Timeline (not a branch), so in that case it seems like there would be gaping holes where that original material used to be.

And if the bombs went off at full range, then by definition the responding TVA agents' reset bombs wouldn't have been able to encompass all of the surrounding material that had since failed to interact with the missing material, so those branches should have been instantly "red lined" and irreversible. Unless the limits to the reset "range" are something other than simple volume or mass-equivalent?[1]

[1]Again, this depends on whether you follow the "whole universe" theory or the "spreading contamination" theory of how matter/energy are created during a Nexus Event


----------



## hapster85 (Sep 7, 2016)

logic88 said:


> I think it was a distraction move. All of the TVA personnel got sent to prune those timelines so Sylvie could get to the Timekeepers.


I think so, too. There's no further mention of the situation. Surely if it had been anything more than that, we would have heard about it.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

There’s an hour long Making of Loki episode of Marvel Studio ASSEMBLED available now.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

morac said:


> There's an hour long Making of Loki episode of Marvel Studio ASSEMBLED available now.


And it's excellent.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

yeah... well narrated by Tom Hiddleston


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

I just figured out that the movie Yesterday is actually part of the MCU. Sylvie was there to check up on this deviation from the sacred timeline.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

But he watched a video.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Interview with the head writer of Loki. I found it an interesting read...

'Loki' Head Writer Michael Waldron -- and 'Rick and Morty' Alum -- on MCU, 'Heels' and More
_
All television shows are collaborative creations, but the Marvel Cinematic Universe shows add a few layers beyond what's normal. For Loki head writer Michael Waldron, that meant not only coming into the job with the series already having a premise - a variant of Loki, who was plucked from the timestream after the events of The Avengers, runs afoul of the Time Variance Authority, an obscure group even by Marvel standards - but having to set up the idea of a multiverse of parallel realities, which will be at the center of the MCU's upcoming Phase Four films.

It's an unconventional arrangement, but one that worked for Loki, which turned out to be the wildest of Disney+'s three Marvel shows so far, and the one with the most satisfying finale. (And Marvel was pleased enough to hire the Rick and Morty alum to write a screenplay for the upcoming Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.) Waldron spoke with Rolling Stone about the show's unusual genesis, how things changed once Jonathan Majors nailed the audition to play He Who Remains - who will turn out to be time-traveling villain Kang, a big part of Phase Four - about his upcoming Starz pro wrestling drama Heels (which debuts August 15th), and more._


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I wasn't interested in Heels until this very moment...


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)




----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

I know I'm late to the game, but my wife and I just finished Loki S1. I had avoided this thread entirely but now have read through the whole thing, so it has been interesting to see how theories developed. Neither of us was wowed by the finale, though for a long time we had no clue where the story was going. At this point, with the cliffhanger finale, we still don't.

Three things that bugged me, but I have not seen discussed here are 1) how is the Void at the End of Time so much like a run-down 1960s America, 2) how did Mobius find that car and the gas to run it, and 3) how did Mobius activate a portal to leave the Void and return to the TVA?

My wife and I both cringed when Loki and Sylvie kissed, though that was inevitable.

I don't know anything about the comic book history of these characters.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

stevel said:


> Three things that bugged me, but I have not seen discussed here are 1) how is the Void at the End of Time so much like a run-down 1960s America, 2) how did Mobius find that car and the gas to run it, and 3) how did Mobius activate a portal to leave the Void and return to the TVA?
> .


3. Sylvia stole a tempad before going to the end of the time. She gave it to Mobius, he used to to get back to the TVA. While it makes sense, the way it played out, did seem to be out of place and sudden.
2. Things are constantly being dropped there. He could have found a spare battleship, a might could be no problem. (Although being in working condition is a bit of a stretch.)
1. Mostly plot convenience. You could rationalize that maybe different sections of the timeline tend to get dropped in certain sections of the Void. You could rationalize all sorts of answers. But I think mostly, just, because that was the look the show was going for. Not something to overthink.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Here's the headline...









’Loki’ Season 2: Release Date, Plot, And More Info


Here’s everything we know about ’Loki’ Season 2 ahead of its Disney+ release.




uproxx.com





Here's the actual story... in their own words.


Marvel has not yet shared a release date for Loki Season 2
Like all things Marvel, the plot for Loki Season 2 is being kept tightly under wraps.
As of this writing, Marvel hasn’t released a trailer for Loki Season 2 yet.

This is the winner of the best clickbait of the day award. I expect this from no-name clickbait sites, but UpRoxx?


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

It's probably true for tons of other subjects, but the amount of clickbait nonsense articles and YouTube's for Marvel stuff is way up there.

Even for the places I like.

-smak-


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

astrohip said:


> As of this writing, Marvel hasn’t released a trailer for Loki Season 2 yet.


That’s partially true. A trailer for Season 2 was released, just not publicly. It was only shown at D23, though it leaked online. 

Disney just recently publicly released a coming in 2023 video narrated by Hiddleson which does have a few brief scenes from Loki season 2 from the unreleased trailer.


----------



## Pokemon_Dad (Jan 19, 2008)

morac said:


> Disney just recently publicly released a coming in 2023 video narrated by Hiddleson which does have a few brief scenes from Loki season 2 from the unreleased trailer.


This one? (Just practicing my google-fu.)


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Pokemon_Dad said:


> This one? (Just practicing my google-fu.)


Yep.


----------

