Thread: [TV] Loki

Page 42 of 51 FirstFirst ...
32
40
41
42
43
44
... LastLast
  1. #821
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You're thinking only in terms of linear time. Kang's fortress past the End of Time is outside time itself. And when (this) Kang ceased to be, because Sylvie killed him, that echoed back instantly through all of time, and the timeline broke apart as it is naturally predisposed to do, bringing forth all those various timelines again.

    Here's the fun bit; the timeline is all of time. That means that, the moment Sylvie killing this Kang, he'd never existed and his TVA had never pruned anything, ever. As Kang said; now that there are billions of varying timelines, this also means billions of Kangs, and Kang is both exceptional enough and inherently driven enough that he tends to seek control and to break through multiversal barriers, in at least enough of his various iterations that it becomes a serious problem of Kangs invading and conquering new timelines.

    It isn't that "Kang doesn't exist yet". It's that "the Kang that was preventing billions of worse Kangs from existing is dead, and now you immediately have those billions of Kangs fighting and conquering each other and more. They will "eventually" come to exist, in some 31st century of most timelines, but then they'll mostly invent time travel and multiversal travel and start jumping around everywhere.

    Once you stir time travel into the mix, anything happening "eventually" happened billions of years ago, too. That's why the rock-solid proof that time travel is almost certainly impossible in the real world is the lack of time travelers. Even if they were mostly super good at blending in, at some point in some distant future, some moron's gonna jump back and be an idiot and the jig would be up. That doesn't happen, so it's pretty clear time travel can't work.
    Gotcha. So one other question, if he got rid of all of the other timelines via the TVA, how did Sylvie exist in the first place? Wouldn't they have pruned it before it got to the part where a female loki was created? Like alligator Loki, what if it never caused its nexus event, wouldn't that leave 2 timelines where you have human and alligator Loki?

  2. #822
    Quote Originally Posted by teverin View Post
    Gotcha. So one other question, if he got rid of all of the other timelines via the TVA, how did Sylvie exist in the first place? Wouldn't they have pruned it before it got to the part where a female loki was created? Like alligator Loki, what if it never caused its nexus event, wouldn't that leave 2 timelines where you have human and alligator Loki?
    They did dodge the exact circumstances of Sylvie's nexus event. Maybe it's part of a larger plot point they aren't ready to reveal yet?

  3. #823
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    68,699
    Quote Originally Posted by teverin View Post
    Gotcha. So one other question, if he got rid of all of the other timelines via the TVA, how did Sylvie exist in the first place? Wouldn't they have pruned it before it got to the part where a female loki was created? Like alligator Loki, what if it never caused its nexus event, wouldn't that leave 2 timelines where you have human and alligator Loki?
    The strong implication (I don't think they ever come right out and say it) is that the "sacred timeline" is actually a whole bunch of timeline that are so nearly identical they basically follow the same path; you could pop out of one and into another and generally never notice. They only diverge if something happens that will affect how things play out.

    The implication for Sylvie is that it wasn't "being born a girl" that caused her to be Variant, it was her playing with her toys and deciding she wanted to become a Valkyrie. Which is at least childishly plausible, as she's a girl, and the Valkyries were all women; it's not the kind of fantasy a boy Loki would've had, typically. That would've deviated her path too strongly, so the TVA pop in right as she decides that, and that's when they take her away.

    As for Gator Loki, we just don't know. Maybe he got "stuck" while shapeshifting? Maybe he's cursed? Maybe he's sulking and refuses to be anything but a gator? The possibilities are pretty endless, even sticking close to the "real" timeline and not getting into crazier things, like "all Asgardians are animals".

    This is also why Classic Loki spent thousands of years on an asteroid, and it was only when he decided to get back involved with things that the TVA showed up to prune him.

    This seems less deliberate by the TVA, though, and more a factor of how they detect variance; they wait for the timeline to diverge and THEN step in. Any changes that don't affect outcomes just never trigger their alerts and summon the TVA agents.


  4. #824
    Quote Originally Posted by teverin View Post
    Gotcha. So one other question, if he got rid of all of the other timelines via the TVA, how did Sylvie exist in the first place? Wouldn't they have pruned it before it got to the part where a female loki was created? Like alligator Loki, what if it never caused its nexus event, wouldn't that leave 2 timelines where you have human and alligator Loki?
    I think alligator Loki and Old Loki are as Endus described - they didn't vary enough to warrant pruning until their Nexus Event. Keep in mind, Mobius was a Loki-hunter, and never remembered Alligator Loki, so there could be some fuckery there, too. But I imagine in Gator Loki's universe, everything being a sentient, thinking animal didn't change the substantive "plot" of the universe enough for it to be picked up by the TVA's sensors. IE, Gator Loki tries to invade NYC, a city of animal-people, the animal-Avengers stop him, and eventually gorilla-Thanos or something snaps his neck. It's only when Gator Loki eats the wrong cat (maybe a flerkin?!?) that he gets pruned. It'd be funny if in that world, the only human is Rocket.

    Sylvie, to me, is a deliberate pruning. Not that she did anything to warrant the pruning, but because Kang saw that the only way anyone could take over for him was via a Twinned Loki that learned to want to love and protect others by literally falling in love with, and wanting to protect...a version of himself. This, btw, directly contradicts the first episode, where Renslayer says the Avengers traveling in time was "supposed" to happen, and Loki grabbing the Tesseract wasn't. According to Kang, he paved that road, so it was indeed SUPPOSED to happen that that particular Loki, and Sylvie, were set up on their collision course, mainly by Loki being captured by the TVA in the first place.

    Which raises the interesting question: why prune the 2012 Loki for that, instead of the post-Thor: Ragnarok Loki? I assume Kang would say it would have to do with the particular journey in question: Loki had to overcome his dickishness in a way that puts him in a position to trust and want to work with the TVA in the future. I think post-Ragnarok Loki would still want to tear down the TVA, whereas this Loki now trusts Mobius and B-15. Edit: Sort of a Stockholm Syndrome type event where Loki is now connected to his former oppressors.

  5. #825
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    I think alligator Loki and Old Loki are as Endus described - they didn't vary enough to warrant pruning until their Nexus Event. Keep in mind, Mobius was a Loki-hunter, and never remembered Alligator Loki, so there could be some fuckery there, too. But I imagine in Gator Loki's universe, everything being a sentient, thinking animal didn't change the substantive "plot" of the universe enough for it to be picked up by the TVA's sensors. IE, Gator Loki tries to invade NYC, a city of animal-people, the animal-Avengers stop him, and eventually gorilla-Thanos or something snaps his neck. It's only when Gator Loki eats the wrong cat (maybe a flerkin?!?) that he gets pruned. It'd be funny if in that world, the only human is Rocket.

    Sylvie, to me, is a deliberate pruning. Not that she did anything to warrant the pruning, but because Kang saw that the only way anyone could take over for him was via a Twinned Loki that learned to want to love and protect others by literally falling in love with, and wanting to protect...a version of himself. This, btw, directly contradicts the first episode, where Renslayer says the Avengers traveling in time was "supposed" to happen, and Loki grabbing the Tesseract wasn't. According to Kang, he paved that road, so it was indeed SUPPOSED to happen that that particular Loki, and Sylvie, were set up on their collision course, mainly by Loki being captured by the TVA in the first place.

    Which raises the interesting question: why prune the 2012 Loki for that, instead of the post-Thor: Ragnarok Loki? I assume Kang would say it would have to do with the particular journey in question: Loki had to overcome his dickishness in a way that puts him in a position to trust and want to work with the TVA in the future. I think post-Ragnarok Loki would still want to tear down the TVA, whereas this Loki now trusts Mobius and B-15. Edit: Sort of a Stockholm Syndrome type event where Loki is now connected to his former oppressors.
    Wouldn't that mean though that the universes that don't get pruned would still make a Kang? Are they guaranteed to be a good one?

  6. #826
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Also, every Loki in this is just as much Loki as "our" Loki. Who isn't the Loki who was choked to death by Thanos and had the big redemption arc with his brother, I might add. This Loki diverged pretty much immediately after the first Avengers film, and never lived through the events of Thor: The Dark World, Thor: Ragnarok, or Avengers: Infinity War.
    Wouldn't he essentially be the same Loki though? The avengers traveled back through their own timeline if I understand correctly, not to an alternate one. This timeline would have branched off into another if they hadn't gone back and replaced the infinity stones (and if the TVA didn't reset it after this Loki's escape). For all intents and purposes though, he's the same Loki minus the experiences from the events in between New York and his death.

  7. #827
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    68,699
    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    Wouldn't he essentially be the same Loki though? The avengers traveled back through their own timeline if I understand correctly, not to an alternate one. This timeline would have branched off into another if they hadn't gone back and replaced the infinity stones (and if the TVA didn't reset it after this Loki's escape). For all intents and purposes though, he's the same Loki minus the experiences from the events in between New York and his death.
    Those experiences include all of his reunification with his brother, his entire turn from villain to potential antihero, the whole thing. All the stuff that made the audience really love the character and which made his death by Thanos a punch to the gut, that was pretty much all post-Avengers.

    They'd be very similar, and he was primed for a similar arc (which they've traveled in the show), but those experiences you're waving off were really meaningful for the character's development; the show basically reset that to approach that development a slightly different way.


  8. #828
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    One of the subtle touches which is only tangentially made clear, through the way the screens display the timeline and the way the raw timeline itself is shown, is that the timeline isn't one single line, and there's a deviance tolerance measurement the TVA uses. The strong implication (because they're not outright saying so, either way) is that the "sacred timeline" can actually be multiple timelines that all fall within tolerances. They wind among each other, and being kicked out of one such strand and into another would probably not even be noticeable. "Was there always a Starbucks on that corner?" kind of stuff.

    So I think the idea with deviations like Classic Loki is that his presence on that asteroid didn't really change anything. His timeline remained close enough to the "trunk" to avoid pruning. Until he decided to get involved again, and then that choice made his strand diverge and made him Variant enough for the TVA to notice. Until that point, his strand was "within tolerances", so to speak.

    If Kang's intent is just to prevent other, divergent Kangs from existing, then it's all about ensuring a Kang like himself is the only Kang there is. That's literally the only objective. Other variations that don't affect that outcome can be ignored.
    Not sure if that's the case but even if so I don't think that's the case for this particular Loki (Classic Loki). He essentially just died at the same time as our original Loki except he faked it then lived in isolation up until that point of his pruning and resetting of the timeline. It's likely that branch of the timeline always existed along with the sacred timeline until that moment he was pruned and it was reset. It was never detected because, as you said, it wasn't divergent enough for the TVA to detect it. I don't think it was that their method of detection allows some level of deviation but just that they literally can't detect low levels of deviation. You kind of said that when you said it wasn't noticeable but unlikely it's because the TVA chooses to allow the tolerance. I think it's the same reason Loki's can look so different. How a Loki looks likely has little to no impact on the overall timeline. There's likely less variance undetectable for Loki's in general though since he seems to be a major piece of the desired outcome of the timeline up until that point. That's likely why any Loki who was at the point of a personality change was immediately detected and pruned. I imagine this is likely the cause of the nexus event detected between Loki and Sylvie as well. Or well, that nexus event was more likely that they were about to die and them dying would have a major impact since then "he who remains" would not have been confronted.

  9. #829
    The Insane Kathandira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ziltoidia 9
    Posts
    17,969
    Quote Originally Posted by Fencers View Post
    Eh, kind of a dud finale. Pretty boring. Though I enjoy Majors' work, I did not overly enjoy this version of Kang.
    I feel like that is ok. It is an odd version we didn’t exactly expect. A brilliant mind, and quite eccentric. The next version may be more of what we expect.

    And if Majors pulls off radically different versions of the same character, it will be awesome!
    RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18

    Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.

  10. #830
    Quote Originally Posted by Zorachus View Post
    Last night's finale totally confused me. Who was that black dude? The ultimate time God or something? And when lady Loki kills him does she become the ultimate God of time now?

    And the very end, so Loki sees a statue of that black time God guy. What's the meaning of that?

    And Owen Wilson doesn't know who Loki is at the end, does that mean Loki was transported back to some other timeline?

    I'm lost. LOL.
    Seems like you didn't pay much attention. He literally says his name. Kinda cringe to just keep referring to him as the black dude.

  11. #831
    I think it's also worth considering that if the entire TVA/Sacred Timeline construct is a result of Kang trying to prevent his other selves from meddling, you can make an argument that a wildly divergent timeline could be completely acceptable so long as it doesn't produce a Kang.

  12. #832
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Gorefiend View Post
    The TVA was run entirely by humans from Earth. Maybe it was another one of the TVA's lies that it operates around all corners of the universe and only has authority on Earth? Each planet must have their own TVAs. For a company operating on the cosmic level for it to be entirely humans using an amalgamated blend of 1960s Earth tech and scifi makes sense they were lying to Loki about being universe-spanning. That level of complete coincidence makes no sense (plus the only actual "aliens" were just robots)
    How do you know they're humans from Earth?

  13. #833
    The Insane Kathandira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ziltoidia 9
    Posts
    17,969
    Quote Originally Posted by tyrlaan View Post
    I think it's also worth considering that if the entire TVA/Sacred Timeline construct is a result of Kang trying to prevent his other selves from meddling, you can make an argument that a wildly divergent timeline could be completely acceptable so long as it doesn't produce a Kang.
    Interesting thought there.
    RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18

    Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.

  14. #834
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Those experiences include all of his reunification with his brother, his entire turn from villain to potential antihero, the whole thing. All the stuff that made the audience really love the character and which made his death by Thanos a punch to the gut, that was pretty much all post-Avengers.

    They'd be very similar, and he was primed for a similar arc (which they've traveled in the show), but those experiences you're waving off were really meaningful for the character's development; the show basically reset that to approach that development a slightly different way.
    I'm not saying they weren't significant but obviously he's much closer to the original Loki than 99.9999% of other variants. I'm also pretty sure the one scene of him watching his death, didn't he watch pretty much all events as well? Obviously that's much different than actually experiencing them. I guess I'm just thinking they seem to have set it up for him to step back into the "sacred" timeline we've been watching. I'd be very surprised if it doesn't lead to that eventually.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by tyrlaan View Post
    I think it's also worth considering that if the entire TVA/Sacred Timeline construct is a result of Kang trying to prevent his other selves from meddling, you can make an argument that a wildly divergent timeline could be completely acceptable so long as it doesn't produce a Kang.
    It doesn't mean someone else that isn't one of his variants doesn't make the same discovery as him. So, he'd have to prevent that as well.

  15. #835
    The Unstoppable Force PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    23,437
    Quote Originally Posted by tyrlaan View Post
    I think it's also worth considering that if the entire TVA/Sacred Timeline construct is a result of Kang trying to prevent his other selves from meddling, you can make an argument that a wildly divergent timeline could be completely acceptable so long as it doesn't produce a Kang.
    The actor said Kang doesn't appear in the show. Technically he isn't lying and techincally he is.

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  16. #836
    Elemental Lord Templar 331's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Waycross, GA
    Posts
    8,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You're thinking only in terms of linear time. Kang's fortress past the End of Time is outside time itself. And when (this) Kang ceased to be, because Sylvie killed him, that echoed back instantly through all of time, and the timeline broke apart as it is naturally predisposed to do, bringing forth all those various timelines again.

    Here's the fun bit; the timeline is all of time. That means that, the moment Sylvie killing this Kang, he'd never existed and his TVA had never pruned anything, ever. As Kang said; now that there are billions of varying timelines, this also means billions of Kangs, and Kang is both exceptional enough and inherently driven enough that he tends to seek control and to break through multiversal barriers, in at least enough of his various iterations that it becomes a serious problem of Kangs invading and conquering new timelines.

    It isn't that "Kang doesn't exist yet". It's that "the Kang that was preventing billions of worse Kangs from existing is dead, and now you immediately have those billions of Kangs fighting and conquering each other and more. They will "eventually" come to exist, in some 31st century of most timelines, but then they'll mostly invent time travel and multiversal travel and start jumping around everywhere.

    Once you stir time travel into the mix, anything happening "eventually" happened billions of years ago, too. That's why the rock-solid proof that time travel is almost certainly impossible in the real world is the lack of time travelers. Even if they were mostly super good at blending in, at some point in some distant future, some moron's gonna jump back and be an idiot and the jig would be up. That doesn't happen, so it's pretty clear time travel can't work.
    The more I think about Kang the more I feel like this....


  17. #837
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathandira View Post
    I feel like that is ok. It is an odd version we didn’t exactly expect. A brilliant mind, and quite eccentric. The next version may be more of what we expect.

    And if Majors pulls off radically different versions of the same character, it will be awesome!
    Yea, I am confident Majors can play anything. I just didn't think this version of Kang was all that compelling. He was eccentric in a way that seemed overly comical to me. Like when he squats on the desk or picks his nose. It just felt really silly in an obvious way.
    Last edited by Fencers; 2021-07-16 at 09:42 PM.
    "It's a big club. And you ain't in it. It is also the club they use to beat you with." - George Carlin

  18. #838
    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    The actor said Kang doesn't appear in the show. Technically he isn't lying and techincally he is.
    The actor said "I don't know what you're talking about" when asked if he'd be in Loki, in a stern voice, according to the interviewer (the interview was written down, so the interviewer had to point that out^^). Afaik the question wasn't about Kang, but if he, Jonathan Majors, would be there.
    I don't think it's a hint or was anything else but an 'ask stupid questions get stupid answers'-scenario. The actors are not allowed to say anything about their roles and if you ask them about it, they have to lie.

  19. #839
    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    The actor said Kang doesn't appear in the show. Technically he isn't lying and techincally he is.
    I think my point still stands regardless of quibbling over the name of He Who Remains and other versions of him.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter3000 View Post
    It doesn't mean someone else that isn't one of his variants doesn't make the same discovery as him. So, he'd have to prevent that as well.
    Good point.

    Ultimately what I'm getting at though is what the TVA's stated mission was/is vs. the actual mission of the TVA are very different things, which could have very significant implications on what timelines didn't get pruned.

  20. #840
    but but but but....

    IF Kang prime eventually prunes all other kangs to create the sacred timeline.
    And Sylvie kills KP outside the timeline resulting in the sacred timeline splitting again as if it never existed.
    Wouldn't that mean that another KP would also then exist that would have again created the sacred timeline?

    Read that they've announced a second season, noice.
    Last edited by P for Pancetta; 2021-07-16 at 10:32 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •