So, the Loki TV series has ended after 6 episodes. Three weeks ago, I wrote a rather disparaging review of episode 3, criticizing the direction the show was taking.
At the end of my review, I gave my prediction of how the remaining episodes would play out.
So in the end, how accurate were my predictions? [WARNING: MAJOR SPOILERS]
Episode 4 - Lokie and Sylvie do get captured, they do get pulled up to the TVA, and -- surprise, surprise -- the Timekeepers are fake and Mobius discovers he's a variant. Bang on the money.
What I didn't predict: That Mobius would be pruned so quickly. That there was a realm beyond the pruning. Being introduced to 4 variant Lokis.
Episode 5 - Loki and Sylvie escape the TVA, join forces with Mobius. Got about 30% of this episode right.
What I didn't predict: Mobius leaves to take down the TVA alone. The Loki variants being my new favorite side characters. Some light comedic moments with Croaki and President Loki, a few cameos by Throg and the Thanos-copter, and the highlight of the episode was Classic Loki's "Glorious Purpose" sacrifice.
Episode 6 - Sylvie betrays Loki by distracting him with a tear-filled kiss before kicking him into another dimension. I knew she'd betray him, it makes sense to subvert audiences' expectations that Loki was going to betray her by having it done to him instead.
What I didn't predict: The biggest reveal of all -- the Citadel at the End of Time, and inside, it's Jonathan Major. Long teased as Kang the Conqueror, he's revealed as He Who Remains, the man behind the curtain. I honestly didn't think it would happen in this series, but they went right ahead and reveal Kang in Loki, a full 2 years before his scheduled appearance in Antman & The Wasp: Quantumania (2023).
Theories for where this is all heading:
Now that Sylvie has pulled a Starlord maneuver and basically opened a Pandora's box worth of branching timelines, it very neatly sets up the future movies Marvel has in store for Phase 4:
- Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness
- Antman & The Wasp: Quantumania
- The Eternals
- Spider-man: No Way Home.
Will we finally see 3 spider-men in the same movie?
"No Way Home" is a very telling movie title - it sounds like Peter will find himself stranded somewhere...possibly in another timeline. Tobey Maguire's Spider-man timeline, maybe? That would be amazing.
Imagine Tom Holland meeting alternate universe Aunt May. Or a universe where Tony Stark is still alive. Seeing 3 spider-men in the same scene would break the internet, because it's been teased and memed for at least 7 years now.
But let's get back to our main cast of reprobates and try to speculate where the show's writer's will take them next:
Where would Loki end up in Season 2?
If we know anything about how a TV series is like, they like to end on a cliffhanger and then resolve it the next episode, not really dragging it out for too long. It would be fun to see Loki stay in that new timeline for all 6 episodes of season two, then hop into yet another timeline at the end of it - but most likely, he'll be there for half an episode, easily find or steal someone's tempad, and attempt to find Sylvie again.
Where would Sylvie end up?
Sylvie on the other hand, with her life's purpose finished, will likely drift away somewhere to live alone on some barren rock, wracked with guilt over what she did. Because as we see at the end of episode 6, she kneels to the ground, sobbing. It's like a release of all the anguish she's felt over the years. People have been reading 'regret' into that motion but I think it's the same sort of reaction we got from Gamora when she thought she killed Thanos. A combination of everything: grief for what was lost, anger for what it took to reach this point, overall a sense of loss for how for so many years, her life had been stripped from her.
Where would Mobius end up?
As a character that quickly became a fan-favorite early on in the series, Mobius is going to feature greatly in season 2. His status as someone who can move across dimensions also gives him the added opportunity to cameo in future Marvel movies. It'll be like a neat little Easter egg if he shows up in the end credit scene of Ant-Man in order to set up the next movie.
Why Sylvie Killed Kang
If a few lone comments are to be taken seriously, Sylvie is apparently now even more 'hated' than Starlord because her act of killing the Good Kang had far greater ramifications than his loss of self-control which led to the Avengers losing the fight against Thanos on Titan.
I heartily disagree. For one thing, she just gave us 4 more Marvel movies, thank you very much. For another thing, no matter how convincing Jonathan Majors was in his breakout role: She was justified -- but not because of her personal motivation for revenge.
The truth is, Loki was wrong. Loki simply bought into the lie that Kang was the lesser of two evils. But nobody really knows how bad the chaos that ensues would be for the net benefit of the universe. What if it's actually good?
The fact that an infinite amount of possibilities will occur means that there's a chance for an even better solution to present itself, rising to the surface from the muck of a billion failed attempts at justice, like proto-bacteria emerging for the first time from Earth's primordial soup.
Loki and Sylvie were offered a binary choice, a choice that is no choice at all, because it's manipulative of their innate desires to do good. If they had taken the blue pill, they would have chosen the status quo, the convenient lie, the "lesser of two evils."
But no matter how you slice it, variant timelines would continue to be erased, more and more Loki variants would be unjustly removed from the timeline, and more and more injustices like what happened to Sylvie would pile up. Yes, harmony would prevail - but at what hidden cost?
It also shows how hypocritical the TVA are, when it's only Lokis that are unfairly targeted. Why does Steve get to have his happily ever after, but all Lokis are destined to die as failures?
It brings to mind to many instances in real-life history where the downtrodden are ignored, cast aside, or used as scapegoats simply in order for the cogs of big industry to continue grinding forward.
The sacrifice of an unwilling few for the "good of the many" negates that good altogether.
If Loki and Sylvie had taken their place as King and Queen of the Sacred Timeline, they would, more likely than not, have made things worse. Even if by some miracle they managed to come to an uneasy truce in governance, they would simply continue to perpetuate the same erasure of alternative histories that Kang's benevolent dictatorship did.
Two monarchs deposing an old monarch does not change the fact that the people would still be living under a monarchy.
The problem boils down to whether you believe that people have agency to make their own decisions, or whether it's better to rule as a 'philosopher-king". I think it would have been far more interesting if Sylvie had countered Loki's caution with her own very good point: That no matter how dangerous Kang's variant's are, people should not be allowed to be stripped of their agency, even if it leads to chaos. People should be allowed to choose their own destiny, even if it's a bad one. Because if not, what would be the point of living?
The fact that Sylvie made that choice to kill Kang, in spite of of the fate of the multiverse in the balance, in spite of the net overall "good" of that action being negative, because it was her right to choose. And even if it seems like she chose wrong, the important thing was that she chose it for herself.
Loki's delve into the paradox of free will is something that I hold close to my heart as someone formerly a devout Christian. The paradox is that if God exists and sees all, knows all, and controls all, then everything we do is preordained. If so, do humans truly have free will?
You can argue this from a purely non-religious standpoint by replacing 'God' as the mental construct with the more materialist concept of 'the human body's biological drives': To eat, sleep, gain economic and social capital, and procreate.
Loki: A Character Study on the Nature of Free Will
This leads me to another aspect of the series I enjoyed: How it really gave the characters a proper character growth arc. Too often, plot-driven story arcs make character growth secondary to the main plot. In Loki, the character growth IS the plot.
Because of that principle, Loki didn't shy away from making potentially unpopular (i.e. not pandering to the fans) decisions throughout its run. Many thought that this series was a chance for him to shine and really show off his trickery and cunning. Many thought he would be like a chaotic Dr. Who, just willy-nilly creating multiple timelines in whichever timey-wimey timeline he went into.
But that wasn't the route they took with this at all. Instead, we get to see him grow as a person, becoming somewhat disenchanted with his own self-proclaimed 'glorious purpose'. We see that it was a crutch, a way for him to feel less bad about himself, but still a maladaptive coping mechanism to mend the psychic wound that Odin, his father placed in him: Cast out of Asgard, a bastard son, rejected, unwanted, unloved.
This series really was a huge therapy session for Loki, with Mobius being his therapist. It could have very easily fallen into the pitfalls of feeling sappy and maudlin, but the fine line of pathos and vulnerability was sold by the strength of Tom Hiddleston's performance.
It's funny how back when episode 3 first aired, I disliked the way they initially introduced Sylvie.
I thought she'd give Loki a run for his money, I thought she would be a 'superior Loki'. A Loki that was actually badass for once. But she ended up looking as foolish as he did in that episode.
I see now why they wrote her character this way, and why it was so important for Loki and Sylvie to have that budding chemistry going on the train station.
Look how cute they are together.
If you've come away from watching Loki with a feeling of "I didn't get what I expected", it helps to think of it as a story that was meant to surprise you, because the whole point is to subvert people's expectations, yet give them what they want - where it really counts.
The only way you could do a twist properly is by setting up the characters in a way that you do see the twist coming, but when it happens you knew that it was going to happen based on the little quirks (hints) the characters give you. The foreshadowing was done so beautifully in this series. No throwaway line is wasted, no micro-facial expression left uncaptured.
They set up Mobius' backstory with just a couple of lines about liking jet skis, but it ended up being the crux of his character, someone who just had a very humble wish to enjoy a very specific and niche thing before his whole life flashes before his eyes. When the big twist happens, it's a gut punch to the soul, knowing that he will never live out that dream.
I had a real reaction to that scene, that sense of loss. I yelled "No!" while shaking my fists, unable to accept that a soul as pure as Mobius would have his dreams snatched away from him. This is not meant to mirror real-life, this is supposed to give me the happy ending my emotions deserve!
In that sense, Loki as a series succeeded in making me feel for the characters in a way that a series full of flashy Asgardian magic and slow-motion flying daggers wouldn't have. It made me really sympathise with not just our title character, but with almost every other character (except Renslayer, who has no redeeming qualities in the series).
Loki was meant to have character growth and choose the less morally horrible option (compared to when he started the series) whereas Sylvie is a foil, the alternate path that Loki would have taken, the 'dark' Loki. One was on the path to self-actualisation, one went down the path of revenge.
Finally, if you are wondering what's next in store for our favorite, trickster, villain, and recently-turned anti-hero, a quick look at Marvel's new ensemble banner should give you an idea of they have in mind:
I, for one, can't wait.
