Lot of stuff, going to pick and choose what I reply to, hopefully this won't get insanely long.
What about when Luthor was president? He was doing all kinds of bad stuff behind the scenes, but on the surface his presidency appeared perfectly good and decent. Superman didn't like having Luthor in office, but he couldn't get any dirt on him and he couldn't just boot him out of office because the people elected him and it's not in Superman's character to just blatantly disrespect the people of his adopted country like that. It was a no-win situation for Superman. Was he still stupid for not magically transforming into someone who isn't and could never be Superman and just kicking Luthor through the wall of the Oval Office?
No, Superman didn't storm the Oval Office when Luthor was President. But was he not wary of him, expecting some scheme, some act? Did he genuinely believe that Luthor would suddenly be an innocent cherub without a care in the world? Did he encourage Luthor to waltz around without any sort of suspicion around the homes of his friends, allies, and family? Or was Superman sort of going, "Look, we know Luthor is Luthor, but he's President and we have to go along until he does something, which we all know he will," and sure enough, he did.
When Thor initially let Loki back in, I was sort of imagining it could have worked as a "keep your enemies close" think, but it wasn't. Thor just let him in. Handed him the keys to New Asgard and dared Loki to steal it, and sure enough, he did. There's no way to justify how stupid that was.
That's what fresh start means. You can't have an almost fresh start or a fresh start with exceptions. It either is or it isn't. Thor wanted to break the cycle and it was the only way to do it. Exiling Loki would have continued that cycle.
So instead Thor allows Loki into his fresh new Asgard without any restrictions (and, by the way, doesn't immediately inform Balder of that secret because he is too damned stupid to figure out that Loki will use that as leverage), probation, task to earn trust again, nothing, and thus gives Loki all the keys he needs to just destroy Asgard anyway?
Loki IS the cycle. He is always the one who starts Ragnarok. No Loki, no trouble for Asgard. Period. Thor killed Loki once, and has acted against him plenty of times to defend himself. Thor outright allowed Loki to talk him into the "we're all got a clean slate now" baloney.
Again, changing the cycle. Loki also hasn't always been bad with everything, both in the comics and myths.
He's been for most of "the modern era" as the Handbooks would say. He's been acting against Thor far longer. Loki IS the cycle. It always starts with him. Without him all Asgard would have to fear is random troll attacks. Loki is always the one who sparks Ragnarok. Whether you invite him or exile him or whatever. If Thor can't realize that after all this time, he's learned nothing, and that gets old.
That's like if Superman remade Metropolis brick by brick and person by person via some cataclysm, and chose, deliberately, not only to allow a reborn Luthor into Metropolis again, but gave him free access to everything he held dear, then was shocked, SHOCKED when things went wrong.
(I keep using Superman because few characters are comparable or have so predictable a dynamic with their mortal enemy. Plus, every other Marvel god is smarter with their evil relatives, literally.)
Yeah why tell someone who their real father is? Why would balder want to know that? I'd be pissed. Also thor and loki are brothers, they hate/love each other in that weird relationship. Sometimes I don't think loki wants to kill thor as much as prove he's as good as him.
Loki's sure tried to kill Thor plenty of times. Or those he loved. Didn't the last Ragnarok actually succeed?
I understood Balder being pissed. But Loki should clearly be someone he wouldn't trust at all, in any way, for any reason.
We'll disagree on that. I think balder is much more likely to kill loki then you think. Loki has earned balder's trust in a few ways. Remember he hasn't lied yet, he's exposed the lies of others.
Balder needs Loki, he won't kill him. He's indecisive without him/her. Besides, the story won't work if Balder has a pair. JMS has a very rigid story he has going. Balder HAS to be a patsy, just as Thor HAD to be a gullible short memoried tool. Otherwise the story would have needed to be rewritten.
But it's in the nature of a hero to be easily duped. You're saying Spider-Man here take my wife satan and make my aunt live against her will that's cool by me wouldn't have fallen for that? Have you read any recent spider-man? The guy's clown shoes. He's rooming with a guy that's trying to frame him for multiple murders, and paling with eddie brock again after his good friend matt murdock helped get that multiple murder out of jail. Not the best example.
I know Spidey is gullible, I was making a point.
And, hey, look, everyone calls Spider-Man when he is being gullible, and stupid, and short sighted. They don't come up with baloney reasons why being gullible and stupid with his deadliest enemies is the best writing ever.
It would be in line with the past to not trust loki and treat him like **** they way they have all his life, this makes him resentful, he plots, asgard falls. Rinse, repeat. This is a very different day and age for asgard.
So now Thor has set himself up to lose Asgard to his deadliest enemy, who has made alliances with other deadly enemies of Asgard or Midguard in the past, who had free reign before Thor's exile, and surely has more now? That's better!? Really?
So, the alternative to possibly triggering a return to a vicious cycle is to hand the key component of that cycle the keys to recreate it, just not in exactly the same way? Thank god Thor isn't a therapist.
Regarding Thor always being duped by Loki... people forget that they're family.
People will put up with a lot when it comes to family. Yeah on an intellectual level you KNOW that they're just gonna **** you over again but that doesnt stop you from giving them a chance.
It's stupid but it's realistic.
I speak from experience here. I literally do have an evil older brother. And i say that with no exaggeration whatsoever.
But would you allow your evil brother free reign in your home, with your friends, never being wary, watching, wondering, and then when the inevitable happens, being shocked, shocked?
I honestly don't want to say anything that may hit a nerve with you personally over comics. I will say that I have my own rotten relatives (my aunt and cousin), and I would never be so foolish as to ever trust them or to be in a position to be suckered by them again. And they're not the God of Evil. They haven't tried to blow up me and my entire universe with monsters. They haven't empowered random goons with super-powers to beat me to death with a crowbar. They haven't tried to trick me into being killed by a giant green monster. They haven't sought to use my lover to weaken me, or so on.
Loki had a hard life? So has everyone. Carnage had a hard life; does that mean no one should seek to stop his murders? There is always a choice, and there is always a choice in how we react.
Exactly. I don't care what Thor and Loki do to each other over the years, they love each other. You can't grow up with someone for a couple decades, let alone centuries, and not love them. Loki's love is obviously buried under an inferiority complex the size of Spain and Thor's love is constantly getting battered because of Loki's inferiority complex, but they love each other. And love's a b****.
So why doesn't Thor just allow Loki to kill him? That'd end the cycle and get it over with.
Loki has no love for Thor. And if Thor has any left for Loki, well....I am tired that all superheroes have to be such blind, bloody fools sometimes just to set up melodrama. I'm of the sort who believes in the "fool me once, shame on you," and so on mantra. Well, this is shame on Thor, take 5,000.
Jeez, the way I talk, you'd think I'd read indie books at this rate.
