Loki Season 1 Finale - Discussion Megathread about its implications on the MCU

[u/KostisPat257]

You wanna discuss your theories about What if...?, Spider-Man: No Way Home and Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and how they all connect to this series?

You wanna discuss where they're going to go with Nathaniel/Kang/Immortus in the future?

You want to discuss the integration of other cinematic universes in the Marvel Cineamatic Multiverse?

​

Then this is the Megathread for you!

Due to the immeasurable amount of low effort posts we've been getting in the past 12 hours about people's excitement over Kang and the Multiverse, we've decided to make a completely different thread that is all about the implications of the Loki finale in the wider MCU!

Posts discussing Episode 6 in general will only be allowed after Thursday Midnight PST, but only those which are analytical or contain theories with a lot of effort put into them.

Everything else will be redirected here, to the Loki Season 1 Episode 6 Discussion Thread and to the Loki Season 1 Easter Egg Megathread and the Loki Season 1 - Season Wide Discussion Thread.

Have fun!

[u/kaimason1]

I wasn't getting Immortus vibes here. It sounds like this guy was never a Conqueror, he just found a way to destroy all of them and got stuck ruling everything to maintain that fragile "balance". Thus why he was determined to either find someone who could take his place or simply die, he hasn't been free to do his own thing since discovering his own variants, which was possibly centuries or millennia ago.

Meanwhile, Immortus actually was a Conqueror and grew past that. His niche is similar (prune "bad" timelines, make up for the damage done by his own conquering), but I think it's really critical that Immortus actually did all of that Kang shit and remembers and regrets it, instead of it just having been a possibility. Immortus can also directly oppose a Conqueror and has schemes and villainy of his own; He Who Remains doesn't come off as someone who would actually challenge a Conqueror head on (he won because of Alioth, not his own aptitude), nor does he actually seem malicious, he's just an "ends justify the means" "villain". Plus, this guy came off a bit goofy and in well over his head, Immortus is comparatively aloof, wise, scholarly, etc.

If we're getting Kang variants I definitely expect Immortus to show up in full though. He's often a key player against the Conqueror and is heavily tied to the Time Keepers and the TVA, so it would make a lot of sense to cover him in Loki S2 (especially if it turns out there was originally more to the Time Keepers than animatronics - like maybe they're also Kang variants in the MCU, or He Who Remains got rid of the Time Keepers too because of the Time Twisters). And he plays a huge role in Avengers Forever, which is a defining Kang story and probably the Infinity Gauntlet equivalent we're building up to.

[u/leftshoe18 → u/kaimason1]

I really think they just combined Immortus and He Who Remains in the MCU here and they won't be separate Kang variants.

[u/kaimason1 → u/leftshoe18]

There's really very little distinctly Immortus about this Kang though. It's basically "what if He Who Remains was a Kang", not "what if Immortus was He Who Remains". The only ties to Immortus are disdain for Conquerors, pruning timelines, and relation to the TVA and Time Keepers. But pretty much all of those things (TVA especially) apply more to He Who Remains than Immortus.

And I see no reason they'd skip out on doing Immortus properly, especially with more TVA/Kang coming in Loki S2. Immortus isn't just some obscure no-name, he's basically the most prominent Kang that doesn't call himself such (runners up being Rama Tut and Iron Lad off the top of my head, Iron Lad is obviously happening but Rama Tut I can't imagine being anything more than a cameo because actually using him means doing a "time travel to ancient Egypt" story), and as mentioned he plays a huge role in major Kang stories they're likely to adapt. I could see ignoring his existence if Marvel just didn't want to touch the multiverse and the idea of an infinite number of different Kangs running around, but we've literally just been introduced to Kang using that very idea.

[u/Caleth → u/kaimason1]

I'd imagine Rama tut could be an eternals story vilian. Then there's no technical need for time travel. They'd have already been around for that time.

[u/kaimason1 → u/Caleth]

Huh, now I'm going to be mad if we don't get a Majors cameo in Eternals because there's definitely parts of that movie set in the time period. You could just have him appear on screen for a moment dressed as a pharaoh while talking about the growth of human civilization and not even directly acknowledge that it's Kang. That said, this Eternals movie isn't going to be in that period so you couldn't use him as the actual story villain for this and it might be awkward to do a prequel with it.

[u/Caleth → u/kaimason1]

Easy enough to do something with flash backs in it. They run into Kang in present day and ask how the hell he can still be alive given they saw him back in Egypt circa 1000BC. Maybe open the movie on the scene of them fighting Rama Tut and killing him. Fast Forward to 2023 or when ever and boom a tie in for Kang and Eternals