Warning: spoilers aheadThe main reason I was excited about this movie was that it would be connected to the next Agents of SHIELD episode. There was also the Zachary Levi and Tom Hiddleston factors.
I went into the movie without knowing anything about the plot. I didn't care. It's a Marvel movie, it's Thor and Loki, and it should be fun. I actually forgot that Malekith, the movie's main villain, was played by the ninth Doctor, Christopher Ecclestone, until I saw his name in the credits. I didn't even remember much from the previous movies (the first Thor and The Avengers).
Ecclestone as Malekith was awesome; the dark elves were great; but, Thor: The Dark World felt like another Thor vs. Loki show. Or, maybe it was just me who focused on the two. I do love their chemistry together. And I really did enjoy all the twists they allowed Loki's character throughout the movie; helping Thor try to save Jane with his non-betrayal (but really, Thor's hand cut off like that was really disturbing), dying a hero, and it ended with yet another one of his illusions, another trick, and was in the throne of Asgard. Does that mean that it was actually Odin who died in Thor's hands? I mean, it could have been no one, just one of Loki's tricks, but if Odin was alive, why was Loki in his throne?
Speaking of Loki's illusion, is it just him and his mother who can do that? And, speaking of Frigga, it's quite interesting that it's her death that kinda brought Thor and Loki together (at least it helped), similar to Coulson's death in The Avengers. Also, another connection, I think Coulson's death helped the believabilty of Loki's fake death scene. Loki is a very popular character, and if Coulson he hadn't "killed" Coulson in The Avengers, I think I wouldn't believe that Loki really died. I guess Joss Whedon was right about killing Wash in Serenity, that it was necessary to tell the viewers that, from this point on, no one is safe.
Anyways, I was torn. There was actually a part of me that thought maybe Loki should have died. I mean, I absolutely love Loki, and I adore Tom Hiddlestone, but I think his story in Thor's world is done. He started off as a good kid, who felt betrayed and left out when Odin chose Thor as his successor, and he rebelled. And he rebelled some more in The Avengers. He kinda atoned himself in The Dark World by helping Thor, but in the end they showed that his heroic death was another lie. I don't know; I don't want the third Thor movie to still be about these two.
Unless, of course, Marvel is planning a Loki movie. I honestly think that it could work. I mean, if we can have these awesome superhero movies, why can't we have one good super-villain movie? Villains are usually more interesting as characters to begin with. Actors who play villains say that you don't think you're the bad guy; you always have your motifs. I think that's a good point of view for the movie. Show their intentions and their points of view. Let the bad guy win. Tom Hiddleston himself discussed the possibility of a Loki movie on his Nerdist podcast episode (he was as delightful as you would expect). He said that he's for it, but he doesn't see how it's possible without having Thor there. I disagree. I think now is the perfect time to do a Thor-less Loki movie since Thor is "busy" in Earth. There are other realms where Loki can play.
PS - Love Cap's cameo!
I've got a theory... it could be bunnies! (Sorry, I had to)
But, really, I think Odin made a mistake. Loki is the better choice as king; especially if we consider the Loki and the Thor from before Odin's decision. Loki was the smart one, who used his wit to get his way; Thor, on the other hand, was the warrior who wanted to fight wars. Loki's intelligence and conniving ways, in my opinion, are qualities better suited for a leader. Thor would have been better as a war general. Or whoever is in charge of war stuff. How is Thor the better successor? See, if it had been Loki who was chosen to be king, none of these would have happened. So, basically, I'm blaming all this mess in Thor and The Avengers on the Allfather; wouldn't have happened if Odin made the right(*) decision.
A different scenario if Loki *had* been chosen as king, one I'm quite interested in, is that these Thor movies could have been Loki movies. Thor might turn out to be the jealous one, the one fighting to take his birthright. And, Loki would be the kind trying to keep his people safe.
Basically, I just want Loki movies; I think they would/could be brilliant.
(*) by right I mean right according to me.
Something I noticed, but it didn't click for me until I read this: at the end of The Dark World, Thor gave up his Asgardian throne to be with Jane in Earth, which suggests that he's giving up his superhero self to be a mortal. This is the same as what happened at the end of Iron Man 3; Tony Stark did pretty much the same thing, getting rid of the thing that made him Iron Man in the first place. Now I'm expecting Steve Rogers to get sick of being Captain America and want to be a normal citizen at the end of Captain America: The Winter Soldier. And then, something big would have had to happen to bring each and every one of them back, and together again. If the first Avengers was about making them a team, Age of Ultron would be about making them superheroes again.
Man, this thing that Marvel is doing, having Agents of SHIELD to go along with their MCU movies, is really working. Now I'm sucked in to their universe and can't wait to see what happens next, both in the show and in the upcoming movies.
No comments:
Post a Comment