Zuleikha

But why does it matter if Dormammu eats the universe when the universe is just going to break and be undone anyway?

I saw it in the theater. Assuming I don't end up with COVID, I'm glad I did. It had beautiful visuals that were much better seen on a big screen. The bus sequence alone was worth it! It didn't feel particularly to me unique story wise since it echoed a lot of beats from Wu Assassin. But fortunately, it was much better than Wu Assassin. Katy felt like a really fresh character for the MCU, so I'm glad we're going to see more of her. It is very hard to imagine anyone other than Awkwafina playing her. I'll be interested if she ends up with powers. This movie was crowded with story, so I respect Cretton's decision not to put in a romance, but Katy and Shang-Chi felt way more like a couple than like friends to me. I still wish Lewis Tan had been cast instead of Simu Liu, but Liu and Awkwafina had amazing screen chemistry.

I totally forgot about the corpse-devouring ants or wasps or whatever that Wasp used so effectively at the beginning. Now I'm wondering why she didn't keep those around. They seemed the most effective way to deal with superheroes.

How/why did zombie Thanos get to Wakanda? That doesn't make sense. If zombified Thanos had enough of old Thanos to want to collect the Infinity Stones, he would have followed to Lehigh. He wouldn't be able to anticipate they went to Wakanda. I get Vision not being able to save Wanda because of her powers. I don't get Vision seeing the only thing he can do is feed her bits of Black Panther and nothing else. Wouldn't it make more sense to try and lure some random people to keep her calm and then try and capture/cure the superpowered Avengers? I agree the show needs to figure out what tone it wants to have. The Dr. Strange episode was fine, but both the what if all the Avengers died and this one seemed afraid to really commit to their premise. It ended up more whiplashy than effective. I also want to see a story carried through all the way to its end instead of having these final scenes imply a twist.

Yes, I know. That undermines the concept of Absolute Points, though. The previous explanation for paradox was that it doesn't happen because of timeline branches. So let's say (under previous explanation) Dr. Strange successfully went back in time and changed events with Christine. Time would branch. The original branch would continue on with a dead Christine and a Dr. Strange motivated to study the mystic arts. There's no paradox because he does the things he needs to do to lead up to the point where he hops back in time and then onto the new branch. The new branch would continue on with a revived Christine and a variant Dr. Strange-from-the-future-and-also-a-different-branch going about their life. There would probably also be a second Dr. Strange, not studying mystic arts. But now all of a sudden, we have this new concept of Absolute Points. In this branch of the multiverse, for some reason, Christine has to die. But why? Why wouldn't we just have branches and variants? It can't be because certain things just are Absolute Points across all branches of the multiverse because we know factually that the Sacred Timeline branch did not require Christine's death. It can't be because once the car wreck happened and Strange's hands aren't injured, Christine's death is the only way to motivate him (because we see that time can make things happen in very different ways). So why couldn't time just make Strange's hands be injured in a different way? Why does Dr. Strange even need to study mystic arts given that in this universe, it led to the literal destruction of everything?

I can understand them not locking in the director because directors can be replaced. I don't understand Feige et al not locking in actors for the key characters who have unfinished stories... which is basically all of the main characters. All I want from s2 is for a satisfying resolution: Sylvie's nexus event, Mobius on a jet ski, canon-explanation of why Loki variants can look so different/Sylvie seems to be the only female variant, and Loki to make any significant actions or choices that resolve the plotline in the finale.

I wish the Watcher would stop emphasizing "one choice" when it's not one choice. The point of divergence here must have been multiple choices that all led to Christine/Strange having a happy, meaningful, healthy-seeming relationship. Then on top of that, we see that any choice Strange/Christine made on the fateful night still resulted in the same outcome. I don't mind this per se, but it seems inconsistent with everything else we've been shown or told. It also doesn't make sense given that the MCU verse had a completely different set of events. How does the creation of the multiverse lead to the establishment of a branch with an Absolute Point? I thought it was good as a self-contained alternate possibilities episode, though. There's the possibility something in the future will reconcile the discrepancy of the Absolute Point concept with the existence of the MCU verse's events.

That doesn't really make sense, though. He was a great brawler and strong, but he wasn't obviously something more than any other well trained agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. (or even obviously a good guy). Unless Pym thought the hair counted as a superpower.

I am here for full insanity. I thought this was fun, but I do think they need to figure out tone. There was a lot of parody humor here, which undercut the dark serial killer hunting the Avengers. I loved the humor, especially the cut from Loki staying at Midgard to his giving the speech on broadcast, but I would also have liked a genuinely creepy and suspenseful episode as well. I can't feel suspense when Coulson's fanning out over Thor's hair. I also don't really get the invisible fight with Black Widow and Yellowjacket. He's small when we can't see him, not invisible, so how could he land the punches on her that he landed? I can fill in pieces to get Hope to S.H.I.E.L.D. but I do miss the clarity of having one moment where a decision went one way in the MCU and a different way in What If...

All these trailers are working as intended. I really want to see this in the theater with a big screen. It looks beautiful.

I mixed up when Peter was born with when he was kidnapped, creating the early 20s age mistake. But somehow I still got to the correct age of early teens for talking down Thanos, so the underlying point is the same that I don't think it matters if Gamora is the same age as Quill/T'Challa or not.

I'm not following the logic. T'Challa/Quill are early 20s. Gamora's clearly a young adult when she meets Quill in the MCU. Even if she's not exactly the same age, that still doesn't give much of a gap for T'Challa to influence events in the multiverse branch to save Gamora's people. If I crunched things right in my head, the most generous scenario still has T'Challa talking down Thanos in T'Challa's early teens. Which I'm willing to buy for sake of a fun episode, but it seems more like something the writers wanted to make happen for fun then a well-thought through look at how timelines could have changed.

I don't think it makes much sense that T'Challa would talk down Thanos, but I don't care. It was a fun and unexpected twist. Also, I've always felt bad for Carina, who seemed to have a crappy life and a crappy death. I'm glad she got a better ending in another branch of the multiverse. I liked the Wakanda twist because of how in character it was for Yondu, but I also liked the idea of it being destroyed as the price for the otherwise much better version of reality. OTOH, it sounds like Quill/Ego may destroy the world so there may be a price. I suppose it's fair for some branches to just be better.

I don't mean that it feels negative to me. I mean it creates a news cycle with a negative focus, which I don't think is ever helpful to a release. Simu Liu has to think about things like that.

If Black Panther or Spider-Man were the next releases, yes, they would. Because they literally have no choice. We are in the middle of an unpredictable pandemic, and no one knows how/if/when this ends. They tried delaying with Black Widow and ended up releasing straight into the Delta wave. This isn't in their control. I understand it sucks, and that it's probably extra frustrating for Simu Liu since this is his potential big break into the next level of success. But it is what it is, and I don't see the point in getting annoyed with Chapek for making a truthful statement. All it does is create a negative news cycle.

Simu Liu's comments are so weird to me. The release schedule is an experiment. That's not an insult or a debatable statement. It's just an unpleasant fact. It does suck that Black Widow had to suffer from an experimental release strategy, and it sucks that Shang-Chi may suffer from an experimental release. But it doesn't make it any less of an experiment.

I think 30 minutes is too short for this show to live up to its premise. The origin of Captain Carter is believable, and the premise is intriguing. There was a brief bit with exploring how Peggy being a female combined with 40s-era sexism to sideline the super soldier, which was briefly interesting. But then instead of traveling down that fork and seeing what else may have changed or happened, the writers contrived to get the plot back on track with the main characters subbed out. I think it's because figuring out a coherent, satisfying Captain Carter story that can be told in 30 minutes was just too hard. It's a shame because I think the premise is more interesting than the episode was able to demonstrate. Peggy is a very different person from Steve, with very different training, experience, and skills. This probably should have been a multi-episode arc so that they could write a specific Captain Carter story. Or they could have copy-and-pasted Peggy into Steve's role in something like a 5 minutes highlights reel and then focused the main story on Peggy defrosting and learning the modern world.

Audiences like characters who are fun and interesting. Loki is fun and interesting and a major character in the Thor world. He's only really evil in the first Avengers as well. He does bad things in other movies, but more in line with his amoral trickster characterization... they're bad things for self-interest (or in the first Thor, a mix of self-interest/genuine concern for the safety of Asgard). We also don't see people suffer really as a result of Loki's actions. He threatens Frost Giants and kills randoms in a general cartoon violence type of way. The only time we see Loki really delight in cruelty is in one scene in the first Avengers, and Loki gets pounded to pulp by the Hulk and then imprisoned as a result. I like Scarlet Witch in WandaVision, but I think the writers made bizarre choices there. Movies and TV are visual mediums... what we see is what we tend to focus on. So if the shows focus a lot on characters suffering as a result of the hero's actions, we're going to view the hero more negatively than if a show doesn't focus on that. WandaVision focused on the bewitched town suffering a lot--possibly more than it actually focused on Wanda's suffering. I don't think it was necessary to make Wanda's spell so cruel. But given that the writers both made that choice and focused on that choice, I don't think it's meaningful that audiences also focus on that and want to see Wanda pay some price for redemption. I, personally, think Wanda's issues are way more legitimate than Loki's, though. I don't really get Loki's issues. He was a younger prince, so I don't know where he got the idea that he was owed the throne of Asgard. He also seemed to be genuinely loved. Whereas life really screwed over poor Wanda at every turn. I would have rewritten reality into a sitcom, too, if I were her and had no idea what price other people were paying.

I don't understand how this list shows a male character type that is as overused as the non-powered ass-kicking female spy. Of the characters you listed, Sam Wilson is a superhero with a unique set of powers (at least until he became Captain America, but there's a character journey there). Agent Coulson is the original non-powered shield agent. Nick Fury is the mastermind and lead. What's supposed to be the common character type?

That was oddly sweet. Both the married couples seem very real and in love. I think Amber is a horrible person, but she and Barnett are a good fit for each other. I still couldn't get over her defense of Mark, and her attitude that LC should have just expected the possibility of being lied to and cheated on. When one person lies to, cheats on, and makes another person ill, there aren't two sides. There is one person being a horrible scumbag. Diamond came off well in these episodes. She seems like a wonderful friend. But she didn't treat Rumeal very well. She put him in an awkward situation for a first date, and if she was serious about trying a relationship, she should have picked a different event for a real first date. GiGi and Damien are so strange. I'll be curious what the tabloids have to say about whether they're still together or not. I don't know what Damien was thinking. What he did seemed so rude to Francesca that it's like, "did the producers bribe you into this?" It was a level beyond rude to GiGi, so shockingly cold. And he knew he was being filmed! Did he want to turn into the new show villain? It's hard to imagine what he brings to the table that GiGi's stayed with him for so long. My heart still breaks for Carlton. He can claim that he loves and accepts himself, but he clearly does not. Unfortunately, he's a living embodiment of hurt people hurt people. Until he can love himself, he is going to push away everyone who offers him love and compassion. Lauren and Cameron are so wonderful to watch. It's beautiful to see happiness on a show like this.

I addressed this already. I think the real truth is that TPTB didn't think anything through, but canonically, Loki's appearance is an enchantment by Odin rather than genetic and Loki is a shapeshifter. Loki is one character who actually can look any which way without it indicating anything about his underlying genetics. We have no idea what Sylvie's Nexus Event was. The show explicitly dodged establishing it. Alligator Loki's Nexus event being eating the wrong neighbor's cat means that in the Sacred Timeline, there is a right cat (or at least a not-wrong cat). This logically leads to Loki shapeshifting into or being enchanted into an alligator at some point in time and eating a cat. If Alligator Loki came about because a young not-quite-in-control-of-his-magic Loki shapeshifted into an alligator, got stuck, ate a wrong cat, got pruned, and was never rescued, it would be easy for the Sacred Timeline to include Loki shapeshifting into an alligator, getting stuck, eating the right (or not-wrong) cat, not getting pruned, and getting rescued by Frigga or someone else. But I am all-but-100% sure that I have now put way more thought into this than the writers did. I don't think HWR's reveal in ep 6 materially changes the understanding of the Sacred Timeline. All it does is explain the criteria for "sacred" vs. "pruned." But his explanation is functionally the same as Miss Minutes' original explanation with HWR subbing for the Time Keepers, down to the end goal being to avoid a multiversal war. But we were always shown that timelines are allowed to exist in parallel to the Sacred Timeline as long as they don't branch in a way that leads them to the redline. In practice, this means that there can't be timelines that significantly differ from the MCU (prior to the unleashing of the multiverse anyway).

I meant He Who Remains for the character with too much screentime, but the "at the expense of" is also key. I think the lengthy monologue is very different from a traditional Final Boss set up, but I don't think I would have minded it had it been revealing interesting things about Loki/Sylvie/TVA/Mobius to me. I also don't think I would have minded it had Loki been involved in the universe-altering action that it led to. But taken altogether, the choices sidelined the characters we'd been watching. Loki is the most problematic, but even seeing so little of the resolution at the TVA was problematic to me for a series finale. It's so bizarre to me that I don't genuinely believe the creative team really didn't know there was a second season. The choices make perfect sense for a cliffhanger ending to lead to another season. They make no sense for an end to a complete story.

Based on reading around, the problem wasn't the talking vs. bashing/shooting for most of us who didn't like the finale. The problem was the large amount of screentime given to a brand new character who we didn't care about at the expense of showing us what was happening to the characters we do care about. Also, the writer's failure to set up a compelling dilemma that would justify the Sylvie/Loki fight and the choice to sideline our Loki from the climactic, universe-altering action.

The creative team has given us nothing to indicate this is the case. What we know is that we have a single Sacred Timeline that is allowed to exist. Per logic, this timeline must be what we've seen in the MCU. We also know that the TVA aggressively prunes branches that diverge from it. This is inconsistent with the idea of a completely different universe on the genetic level. Branches would be pruned before such a thing occurred. Just as our Loki variant is the same on the physical level as the Loki that we watched in the MCU, logically the Laufey who fathered Sylvie-Loki must be the same as the Laufey who fathered Loki. It doesn't make sense for there to be some kind of non-Nexus Event creating branch that led to a physically different frost giant with the same name. Based on interviews, I genuinely don't think the creative team thought through the logic of what they put on screen. I think they threw the Loki variants up without actually thinking about the how/why of them. I find this very frustrating. (but I don't actually mind the incestuous nature of Sylvie/Loki because it's fiction, and the whole thing should be narcissistic and twisted). Alligator Loki makes no sense, and per interviews, he was basically a joke concept that made it to the screen. But he cannot be from a different universe because a universe that different would have been pruned long before the timeline reached the birth of Loki. However, he could be Odin enchanting the frost giant baby into an animal shape and bringing home a pet for Thor instead of a brother (my favorite fanwank) or he could have been a young Loki not-in-control-of-magic practicing shapeshifting and getting stuck. The writers have an out in that Loki is canonically capable of shapeshift and Tom Hiddleston Loki is canonically an enchanted-by-Odin appearance rather than a genetically determined appearance.

I'm not sure. Sometimes I wonder, but it also seems like she saw Sylvie simply as a tool to externalize the concept of Loki's self-love/self-acceptance. (Mostly, I think she just badly misjudged how the final actions would read.) ETA: This Mary Sue article does a decent job laying out why the finale didn't land the way I think the writers intended it to.