Oh, I'm famous? Right, I forgot, I have my own dedicated stalker around these parts and everything, it's mad fun when I bother to comment.
Anyway, I figure that if that theory is true, the reason they didn't mention it is because it will be brought up in greater depth and actually dealt with in Thor 2, when they'll have time to properly work it out. But yeah, as you said, it's just a theory at this point. The problem with such a vast and complex 'verse as MCU, I suspect, is that we're going to have to wait until more of the individual character films, and possibly even until Avengers 2, to work through all of the little details and issues that weren't able to be fully and thoroughly addressed in Avengers.
I don't think it would be as simplistic or "ruin" anything if they went that route, personally. I think it would add considerable depth to what I felt was mostly a phoned in appearance -- Loki in Avengers, at face value, lacked ALL of the depth and complexity that made his appearance in Thor so memorable. He was a cardboard cut-out villain, evil for the sake of being evil. If it turns out, come Thor 2, that that really is all there was to it, I'll be sorely disappointed in their apparent inability to write an ensemble Avengers movie without resorting to turning a three-dimensional, complex, deep villain into a two-dimensional Disney villain who lacks completely in motivation, skill and sympathy.
We're all allowed to have whatever opinions we want, of course. But for me, Loki's appearance in Avengers was the lowest point in the movie, and I'll be kind of pissed if it turns out that was sincerely what they intended with the character.
no subject
Anyway, I figure that if that theory is true, the reason they didn't mention it is because it will be brought up in greater depth and actually dealt with in Thor 2, when they'll have time to properly work it out. But yeah, as you said, it's just a theory at this point. The problem with such a vast and complex 'verse as MCU, I suspect, is that we're going to have to wait until more of the individual character films, and possibly even until Avengers 2, to work through all of the little details and issues that weren't able to be fully and thoroughly addressed in Avengers.
I don't think it would be as simplistic or "ruin" anything if they went that route, personally. I think it would add considerable depth to what I felt was mostly a phoned in appearance -- Loki in Avengers, at face value, lacked ALL of the depth and complexity that made his appearance in Thor so memorable. He was a cardboard cut-out villain, evil for the sake of being evil. If it turns out, come Thor 2, that that really is all there was to it, I'll be sorely disappointed in their apparent inability to write an ensemble Avengers movie without resorting to turning a three-dimensional, complex, deep villain into a two-dimensional Disney villain who lacks completely in motivation, skill and sympathy.
We're all allowed to have whatever opinions we want, of course. But for me, Loki's appearance in Avengers was the lowest point in the movie, and I'll be kind of pissed if it turns out that was sincerely what they intended with the character.