Current Events > Loki Episode 6 Finale Topic *SPOILERS*

(+) Yeah! (+)

Maybe Mephisto will be a Kang variant and that's why he wasn't in Wandavision

---

We get it UR. You didnt like it. Repeating that over and over doesnt move the topic forward.

---

Ive been thinking. The timing of What If seems really specific. As soon as the Multiverse opens we get a show about what if scenarios. I do wonder if there will be some continuation with Uatu

---

Lokison posted...

We get it UR. You didnt like it. Repeating that over and over doesnt move the topic forward.

I'm not? I was responding to what Darmik said.

Why are you so angry towards the concept of discussion.


---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Yes I get that.

I don't get why that's dramatically different or more interesting then what was already established. Which was effectively the same thing.

If someone is going to kill you with a giant cannon unless you hide behind a wall. Nothing dramatic or interesting is gained or developed by learning the guy firing the cannon is a short French dude called Andre with bad facial hair.

The important factors and cause and effect the same. It's not an interesting development. Nor does it take 30 minutes to explain...

It's just bad storytelling and television.

When that short French guy is going to go on and be relevant for a significant portion of your life because you survived the cannon blast and he has multiple versions of himself, both good and bad, it is relevant.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I'm not? I was responding to what Darmik said.

Why are you so angry towards the concept of discussion.

Im not angry, but all you're doing is reiterating why you didnt like the show as if we didnt get it that last 5 posts. You're making the topic go stale because you can stop saying "The show was bad and offered nothing I liked" but in different ways. Its pointless.

---

Imagine not having UR on ignore in 2020

---

Lokison posted...

last 5 posts

Last 5 topics.

---

Doom_Art posted...

Imagine not having UR on ignore in 2020

2021, even.

---

BLAKUboy posted...

2021, even.

Lol I don't remember what year it is apparently

---

Hmm. If Immortus knew exactly what was going to happen up until that threshold, meaning he knew Loki and Sylvie would meet with him face to face...

Why did Miss Minutes pop up before they met him and offer them a chance to go back to their timelines? Just to fuck with them one last time?

Also what did files did he have Miss Minutes send to Renslayer/where did she go?

---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

When that short French guy is going to go on

I guess this is the difference between us.

I don't get why a TV show or movie can't be good AND set up future plots. At the same time.

You know, like all good TV shows and movies in history have done. Fairly easily.

This "Well it set up a future plot via 30 minutes of dull conversation rehashing what we already knew while nothing else went anywhere or was explained and there was no climax or drama whatsoever. Therefore it's good" is an odd take to me.

I mean Thanos in Avengers 1 was just a puppet master who we saw for 2 seconds and everyone seemed cool with it because the plot established who he was. The big bad behind all this jazz who will come up later. Then the movie was good.

Didn't need 2 hours of Thanos and Ironman discussing that Thanos was behind all this shit only to then go "It'll be concluded later" that'd be a shitty movie.

"It's setting stuff up for later" is cool and all but I don't get why that's an excuse for not bothering to make a good show. There's zero reason why you can't do both.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

This "Well it set up a future plot via 30 minutes of dull conversation rehashing what we already knew while nothing else went anywhere or was explained and there was no climax or drama whatsoever. Therefore it's good" is an odd take to me.

lol no

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I guess this is the difference between us.

I don't get why a TV show or movie can't be good AND set up future plots. At the same time.

You know, like all good TV shows and movies in history have done. Fairly easily.

This "Well it set up a future plot via 30 minutes of dull conversation rehashing what we already knew while nothing else went anywhere or was explained and there was no climax or drama whatsoever. Therefore it's good" is an odd take to me.

I mean Thanos in Avengers 1 was just a puppet master who we saw for 2 seconds and everyone seemed cool with it because the plot established who he was. The big bad behind all this jazz who will come up later. Then the movie was good.

Didn't need 2 hours of Thanos and Ironman discussing that Thanos was behind all this shit only to then go "It'll be concluded later" that'd be a shitty movie.

"It's setting stuff up for later" is cool and all but I don't get why that's an excuse for not bothering to make a good show. There's zero reason why you can't do both.

No the difference between us is you consistently say this show is bad and you didn't like it but can't actually articulate why or what you didn't like about it without being artociously vague, where as I actually liked the show and enjoyed it.

---

Lokison posted...

"The show was bad and offered nothing I liked" but in different ways. Its pointless.

I liked a few things.

For a start the premise. A show about Loki is a good idea. A pity we didn't get one.

I liked Owen Wilson and this episode suffered from him doing nothing in it.
I liked Classic Loki who managed to be near enough the only guy in the show to have an arc.
I liked some of the little touches like the Polybius arcade and Loki's "another!"

But the show was meh and the Finale was just bad all over.

---

Unfair is explaining why he doesn't like it, the people who do like it all just say "it sets up the rest of the phase" without actually saying anything about the show itself.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Yes I get that.

I don't get why that's dramatically different or more interesting then what was already established. Which was effectively the same thing.

Because we were originally led to believe that the threat was the existence of the multiverse itself, not one guy looking to conquer multiple timelines. This gives us a tangible, actual character that can be fought against and has actual goals and motives.

I don't see how you can argue that that isn't an important detail.

UnfairRepresent posted...

If someone is going to kill you with a giant cannon unless you hide behind a wall. Nothing dramatic or interesting is gained or developed by learning the guy firing the cannon is a short French dude called Andre with bad facial hair.

This would be a compelling argument if the literal only thing people cared about in their TV shows is the practical role a character serves in a story.

I mean, it really sounds like you're just complaining to complain.


---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Because we were originally led to believe that the threat was the existence of the multiverse itself, not one guy looking to conquer multiple timelines. This gives us a tangible, actual character that can be fought against and has actual goals and motives.

I don't see how you can argue that that isn't an important detail.

This would be a compelling argument if the literal only thing people cared about in their TV shows is the practical role a character serves in a story.

I mean, it really sounds like you're just complaining to complain.

First UR encounter?

His gimmick is trash.

---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

but can't actually articulate why or what you didn't like about it without being artociously vague, where as I actually liked the show and enjoyed it.

I think I've gone into considerable detail about the reasons why the show was meh.

I don't really get what you think I've been vague about, the other dude is literally whining that I'm going into too uch detail about all the problems.

DarthAragorn posted...

Hmm. If Immortus knew exactly what was going to happen up until that threshold, meaning he knew Loki and Sylvie would meet with him face to face...

Why did Miss Minutes pop up before they met him and offer them a chance to go back to their timelines? Just to fuck with them one last time?

Also what did files did he have Miss Minutes send to Renslayer/where did she go?

DarthAragorn posted...

Hmm. If Immortus knew exactly what was going to happen up until that threshold, meaning he knew Loki and Sylvie would meet with him face to face...

Why did Miss Minutes pop up before they met him and offer them a chance to go back to their timelines? Just to fuck with them one last time?

My interpretation was that he had to do that in order to create the chain of events that leads them to going to the chamber. Since he claims he planned everything and knew everything they would do.

If they weren't offered a chance to back out, then they would do some action that would fuck the timeline up. Like fall out of the castle or something.

Yes I know that's "The force wills it" bollocks but this show was badly written

Also what did files did he have Miss Minutes send to Renslayer/where did she go?

Would have been nice to know

---

IfGodCouldDie posted...

No the difference between us is you consistently say this show is bad and you didn't like it but can't actually articulate why or what you didn't like about it without being artociously vague, where as I actually liked the show and enjoyed it.

Even more so than that. You have shit on it almost the entire time. Why would you still watch it? It's absolutely baffling forcing yourself to watch something you hate. Who fucking does that.

That being said, I just watched the episode and I assume they got exactly what they wanted. I went from ecstatic when she kissed Loki to just empty from what came next. I did like they confirmed season 2 but....I dunno. Sylvie was my favorite character. Knowing there is a season 2 helps.

---

LightningAce11 posted...

Unfair is explaining why he doesn't like it

Not liking a show is fine, but coming in to whine about it every week with arguments that basically boil down to "This show is badly written because literally nothing outside of getting from Point A to Point B matters to me" gets very tiring.

---

So discussion topics should be full of people who just kiss ass and don't "discuss"?

He said what he liked and what he didn't like, but people are only focused on the latter.

---

LightningAce11 posted...

Unfair is explaining why he doesn't like it, the people who do like it all just say "it sets up the rest of the phase" without actually saying anything about the show itself.

Yeah they seem to think "It's setting stuff up" means it can't be a good show.

Even though there's 0 reason why you can't do both

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Because we were originally led to believe that the threat was the existence of the multiverse itself, not one guy looking to conquer multiple timelines.

That's still the same threat through. It's still the threat of the multiverse

This gives us a tangible, actual character that can be fought against and has actual goals and motives.

As I said if anything that's less interesting than going "ABsolutely anything can happen due to the infinite effects of the multiverse that threaten all life" now you're going "One dude is doing it." well half the intrigue and possibilities is gone.

And the threat is still the same established threat. We don't know the name of the dude who pulled the lever on the Death Star to blow up planets. He wasn't really that important to the established threat.

I don't see how you can argue that that isn't an important detail.

Because we already knew it and didn't need 30 minutes to reestablish while nothing happened

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

This would be a compelling argument if the literal only thing people cared about in their TV shows is the practical role a character serves in a story.

I mean, it really sounds like you're just complaining to complain.

Nope. Just pointing out my observations.

In fact the dudes complaining are the fanboys who are mad that I dare to not say it's a masterpiece.

---

LightningAce11 posted...

So discussion topics should be full of people who just kiss ass and don't "discuss"?

He said what he liked and what he didn't like, but people are only focused on the latter.

He did say that. Now why does he have to keep repeating it instead of letting the discussion move forward.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Not liking a show is fine, but coming in to whine about it every week with arguments that basically boil down to "This show is badly written because literally nothing outside of getting from Point A to Point B matters to me" gets very tiring.

I like how I'm being yelled for being overly detailed and going on too much and too vague and not saying enough at the same time.

I think that says a lot.

And I openly praised stuff I liked. This episode was just the worst one, for a number of reasons.

Deep down I think you know that otherwise my opinion wouldn't bother you so much

---

I don't think it's a masterpiece either but some of your complaints don't make sense.

Kang isn't important because the multiverse is a threat either way is nonsensical. That's like saying Thanos doesn't matter because Tony knew a threat was coming from space in The Avengers.

Saying there was no drama during the exposition dump when Loki and Sylvie betray each other to complete their respectable character arcs is nonsensical. It's just ignoring major developments that happened in the show to twist it into the complaint you want.

---

Lokison posted...

He did say that. Now why does he have to keep repeating it instead of letting the discussion move forward.

You're the one stiffling discussion by interrupting conversations to insist anyone who isn't saying solely positive things has to stop.

No one is "repeating" the same thing, I'm responding to the different things (including contradictory complaints) people aresaying

That's discussion, it's moving forward even with you holding it back

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

You're the one stiffling discussion by interrupting conversations to insist anyone who isn't saying solely positive things has to stop.

No one is "repeating" the same thing, I'm responding to the different things (including contradictory complaints) people aresaying

That's discussion, it's moving forward even with you holding it back

Whatever dude.

---

Lokison posted...

Now why does he have to keep repeating it instead of letting the discussion move forward.

People are trying to explain in response and hes disagreeing.

Its discussion. I actually prefer his posts because he at least gives effort.

---

I was prined before you even existed. That makes Sylvie seem a lot older than we thought.

---

Just block his ass and move on, he legitimately never posts anything of value, just his contrarian gimmick

---

So is Kang going to be the next Thanos

as in the next big bad threat built up over several entries in the franchise

---

littlebro07 posted...

So is Kang going to be the next Thanos

as in the next big bad threat built up over several entries in the franchise

100%

---

I don't think Kang will last as long as Thanos personally. Didn't Feige even say that phase plots will overall be shorter now?

But at the very least he'll be around for a few things like Loki was.

---

Darmik posted...

I don't think Kang will last as long as Thanos personally. Didn't Feige even say that phase plots will overall be shorter now?

But at the very least he'll be around for a few things like Loki was.

I assume hes going to be the big bad of phase 4, with maybe some mentions in phase 5, but otherwise I believe they said "Big Bads" will be single phase villains only. That may not be 100% true.

---

Darmik posted...

I don't think it's a masterpiece either but some of your complaints don't make sense.

Like what?

Kang isn't important

I didn't say he wasn't important. I said he wasn't at all interesting. I didn't even know he was called Kang. He talked for so fucking long and I didn't even pick his damn name.

because the multiverse is a threat either way is nonsensical. That's like saying Thanos doesn't matter because Tony knew a threat was coming from space in The Avengers.

You're not following my point.

In the MCU (Well until now anyway) Thanos was the threat overall threat. I covered this in an earlier post. The events of several movies were ultimately his machinations.

But those movies were good. Thanos was just in the background as the established big bad who you learned about as things progressed. In Avengers he appears for like 3 seconds and that's all he needed for set up. You knew he was the big bad, you knew he was behind everything and you knew the future shit was going to be about him

In Loki by comparison the multiverse is the threat. They establish that. Then spend 30 minutes of the finale reestablishing it but going "And it's this bloke I guess." when the threat is the same.

The Avengers movie wasn't Iron Man and Thanos disussing how big of a threat Thanos is for 2 hours and then promising Thanos' shit later might actually be interesting. IT was a good film that also had some set up for the future

That's the difference. Kang could have been set up in this finale and ended up at the exact same point we did, while the episode was actually good. You didn't have to sacrifice the entire finale and all excitement and plotthreads and drama just to talk about Kang for 30 minutes to tell us shit we already knew

Saying there was no drama during the exposition dump when Loki and Sylvie betray each other to complete their respectable character arcs is nonsensical. It's just ignoring major developments that happened in the show to twist it into the complaint you want.

I don't get how either Loki had an arc. Loki didn't act like Loki, FemLoki acted wildly different in every single episode and their drama of "y dun u trust me bby ;_;" to someone you've known for 2 days who hates you is fucking dumb drama.

There's no reason for either character to think like that. If you wanted to have them reluctantly fight the that's fine but the way they set it up was awful writing. And their fight was boring too.

I'm reminded of that bit of Ross Scott's Deus Ex HR review:

https://youtu.be/vYLEuQrvND0?t=1843

---

LightningAce11 posted...

So discussion topics should be full of people who just kiss ass and don't "discuss"?

No, discussion topics should be a place for people to post their opinions and have those opinions challenged. Which is what is happening here, because UR's arguments don't make any sense and are completely disingenuous.

It also gets annoying when it's same whining week after week with the same bad faith arguments.

---

Loki and Sylvie's relationship was no different than that one fire dude calling the suicide squad his family when they only knew each other for a couple of days.

---

Darmik posted...

I don't think Kang will last as long as Thanos personally. Didn't Feige even say that phase plots will overall be shorter now?

But at the very least he'll be around for a few things like Loki was.

Thanos wasn't really the driving force for the first three phases exactly. The stones were. He was only a major player a few times, but his machinations were felt throughout.

Kang is definitely deep enough to do something similar. Some version of him only gets directly involved from time to time, but "multiverse shenanigans" influence everything until he's finally dealt with.

I'm not sure it will happen that way, but it's definitely possible that it lasts for a while.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I don't get how either Loki had an arc. Loki didn't act like Loki, FemLoki acted wildly different in every single episode and their drama of "y dun u trust me bby ;_;" to someone you've known for 2 days who hates you is fucking dumb drama.

Loki gave up the opportunity for supreme power because he believed the possibility that there would be consequences to their actions. Something he usually isn't concerned with. His goal in the show overall was to take over the TVA and he gave up that opportunity when presented to him because he cared about Sylvie and others.

Sylvie sacrificed her relationship with Loki to get the revenge she wanted for the entire show and didn't care about the consequences that would happen due to it. Which leads to He Who Remains variants being unleashed on the multiverse.

Both of these characters will have to deal with the consequences of their actions in season 2.

Both of these are the arcs that were built up over the season. Not really sure how you missed them.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

No, discussion topics should be a place for people to post their opinions and have those opinions challenged. Which is what is happening here, because UR's arguments don't make any sense and are completely disingenuous.

You keep saying that but not actually saying what about them you don't understand. No one else is having any trouble finding the sense in my views.

I think you're just saying "they don't make sense" because they're different to yours

LightningAce11 posted...

Loki and Sylvie's relationship was no different than that one fire dude calling the suicide squad his family when they only knew each other for a couple of days.

Yeah

Worse I'd say considering at least Suicide Squad dude forced to be there.

Femloki literally pruned herself and nearly died just for a chance to get back to Loki....who she had known for about 27 hours and hated for 24.... And who then Loki was upset that he hadn't earned her trust...

It's just poor character writing. It's like a first draft when you're laying out plot-beats but haven't actually thought how any of it fits together yet.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Yeah

Worse I'd say considering at least Suicide Squad dude forced to be there.

Femloki literally pruned herself and nearly died just for a chance to get back to Loki....who she had known for about 27 hours and hated for 24.... And who then Loki was upset that he hadn't earned her trust...

It's just poor character writing. It's like a first draft when you're laying out plot-beats but haven't actually thought how any of it fits together yet.

This is fair criticism. I think it's just the consequence of trying to shoehorn a romance into a six-episode series, where said love interest only shows up half-way through the show. I enjoyed the show but the romance was the only thing I thought off about it.

The two Lokis teaming up because they had assumed the same goals would've been just fine. Maybe set up the romance in the second season.

---

Darmik posted...

Loki gave up the opportunity for supreme power because he believed the possibility that there would be consequences to their actions. Something he usually isn't concerned with. His goal in the show overall was to take over the TVA and he gave up that opportunity when presented to him because he cared about Sylvie and others.

Sylvie sacrificed her relationship with Loki to get the revenge she wanted for the entire show and didn't care about the consequences that would happen due to it. Which leads to He Who Remains variants being unleashed on the multiverse.

Both of these characters will have to deal with the consequences of their actions in season 2.

Both of these are the arcs that were built up over the season. Not really sure how you missed them.

Neither of those are arcs. Loki not really wanting power or to be in charge was established in Episode 1 (and Thor 2/3/Infinity War etc)

And he wouldn't have been. Sure he'd have been the figurehead but his actions would be to ensure the pure-timeline. So his hands would be tied. He would still be a chess piece just a King instead of a Rook.

And the relationship FemLoki had with Loki was 2 days old and consisted of hatred and constant fighting.

Neither character showed any sense of change or growth.

hell the fact you call "Loki betrayed...." as the end of a character arc kinda says it all. There was no logic or reason or sense behind the drama. Both characters only did stuff because the plot willed it and the plot was dumb.

Again Ross Scott put it well

You have to suspend disbelief about all the shit that makes no sense to have characters do things that aren't relatable and make no sense so they can talk about and push the plot that makes no sense.

meanwhile nothing else goes anywhere or is resolved. Judge Girl and Owen Wilson hyped up to nothing, The giant langolier who is alive has no explanation. IT's just a bunch of stuff.

No real drama, no good action, no interesting characters, no climax... Just 30 minutes of re-establishing already known facts in a boring way. It was a really bad finale and a really bad episode to cap of a meh series.

---

Well Tony Stark became Peter's father figure after a small number of interactions.

With stuff like this you just have to roll with the fact that extreme circumstances bring people closer together quicker.

Besides Unfair is specifically focusing on the line "After everything we've been through together"

In a couple of days they survived two apocalypses together and took down the TVA. They did go through a lot in a short period. It wasn't enough to keep them loyal to each other anyway.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Neither of those are arcs. Loki not really wanting power or to be in charge was established in Episode 1 (and Thor 2/3/Infinity War etc)

He had no power in episode 1. He even specifically says later on in the series that he intends to take over the TVA to Sylvie.

This Loki never went through those movies events.

UnfairRepresent posted...

hell the fact you call "Loki betrayed...." as the end of a character arc kinda says it all. There was no logic or reason or sense behind the drama. Both characters only did stuff because the plot willed it and the plot was dumb.

What don't you understand about their logic in the final episode?

The problem with discussing you with any of this stuff it's always the same routine.

"None of this stuff mattered or happened"
"Yes it did. Here was when those things happened"
"Those don't count."

---

The show was pretty good. I liked the settings of Lamentis and the void, but I feel like they really fucked up Lokis characterization. He really doesnt do anything, he just gets led around by Owen Wilson and then Sylvie while making quips.

I was really hopeful that he would pull a clever master manipulator surprise in this season finale, but no, he acts in the typical hero protagonist way even though thats not what his character is down to its core.

---

Do you think Loki will show up in any of the films? Thor Love and Thunder or Ant-Man Quantumania perhaps? Those are the two most obvious possibilities. Obviously any Thor movie increase the chance of Loki showing and Quantumania likely ties in heavily to Loki Season 2/in general.

Multiverse of Madness is also possible.

Or will season 2 kill him off?

---

Throg and Lokigator need a spinoff, dammit.

pikachupwnage posted...

Do you think Loki will show up in any of the films? Thor Love and Thunder or Ant-Man Quantumania perhaps? Those are the two most obvious possibilities. Obviously any Thor movie increase the chance of Loki showing and Quantumania likely ties in heavily to Loki Season 2/in general.

Or will season 2 kill him off?

I mean. He was already killed off, so who knows.

---

Darmik posted...

With stuff like this you just have to roll with the fact that extreme circumstances bring people closer together quicker.

And I would understand that IF it was in service to a really good plot or twist or scene

But it wasn't. People were doing things that made no sense for no reason to push a plot that made no sense and was boring.

Why did Thor stop firing lighting at the Battle of New York when it was super effective? Well because they wanted to do a cool action scene. Fine.

There's a scene in Star Trek The Next Generation where a child runs in front of a Klingon. The Klingon picks him up menacingly. Security all go nuts, then the Klingon harmlessly puts him down and they're like "OMG u thought a Klingon would hurt an innocent child!? WE're an honorable warrior race"..... Well then why the fuck did you pick him up aggressively in the first place? Well so they could establish the ground rules of how Klingon honor works and give the villain some nuance.

Well it makes no sense but it was to make a plot point.

You can suspend disbelief for a story no problem but when the character actions AND plot AND scenes all go no where. That excuse runs out. You're suspending disbelief to suspend disbelief just to watch boring dull unrelatable crap that doesn't draw emotions out of you.

People dodged the question but I don't think anyone would have given a crap if Judge Lady died. No one cared because her character and plot went no where

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

And I would understand that IF it was in service to a really good plot or twist or scene

But it wasn't. People were doing things that made no sense for no reason to push a plot that made no sense and was boring.

Why did Thor stop firing lighting at the Battle of New York when it was super effective? Well because they wanted to do a cool action scene. Fine.

There's a scene in Star Trek The Next Generation where a child runs in front of a Klingon. The Klingon picks him up menacingly. Security all go nuts, then the Klingon harmlessly puts him down and they're like "OMG u thought a Klingon would hurt an innocent child!? WE're an honorable warrior race"..... Well then why the fuck did you pick him up aggressively in the first place? Well so they could establish the ground rules of how Klingon honor works and give the villain some nuance.

Well it makes no sense but it was to make a plot point.

You can suspend disbelief for a story no problem but when the character actions AND plot AND scenes all go no where. That excuse runs out. You're suspending disbelief to suspend disbelief just to watch boring dull unrelatable crap that doesn't draw emotions out of you.

People dodged the question but I don't think anyone would have given a crap if Judge Lady died. No one cared because her character and plot went no where

We get it. You didnt like it. Good for you.

And I would have cared if Renslayer died; she has an unresolved plot that I want to see come to fruition.

---