ByJames Ingram, writer at Creators.co
Movies, TV, other assorted things. It's all happening.
James Ingram

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is rapidly expanding. New films, TV shows and characters are joining all the time. Two upcoming films are Captain America: Civil War and Thor: Ragnarok. And whilst these movies seem awesome so far, there are some who think that they would be better with the addition of a character called Ragnarok. This article will aim to prove why Ragnarok would not be a good addition to the MCU.

Who is Ragnarok?

Who is this Ragnarok character. Well, from his Wikepedia page,

When the real Thor was missing in action, presumed dead, Tony Stark took one of his hairs, which he had retained from the first meeting of the Avengers, and helped Reed Richards and Hank Pym clone the Asgardian DNA within, fusing him with Stark technology. This resulted in the creation of a new, cyborg Thor.

I'll give you a moment to take all of that in.

Loki needs a moment for that to sink in
Loki needs a moment for that to sink in

And if that paragraph full of ridiculousness isn't enough to make you hope this character stays away, I do have other points.

The Logic Doesn't Work in the MCU

In case you've been living under a rock (or indeed The Rock), you'll know that the next film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is Avengers: Age of Ultron. This film will see Tony Stark creating a powerful robot which he hopes will aid the world. Unfortunately, the robot goes bonkers and causes mass destruction and, potentially, the death of one of his closest friends. The film will aim to break Tony down and put the quilt of the situation all on him.

Given that he has just created a robot that went bad, does it seem at all likely that he would immediately make another one? One that is even more powerful than the previous one? No. After Ultron, Tony's robot building days will be well and truly over.

He's just created a robot which caused mass destruction, he will not be making and other attempts. If he does not feel immensely guilty and morally distraught after creating Ultron, well then, frankly, the film isn't being realistic. Imagine if you built a little drone. It's quite nice, but one day you lose control of it and it explodes, killing several people including one of your best friends. Now, would you then immediately start working on a bigger, more advanced drone or would you never ever build anything ever again? I'd wager it would be the later.

In summary, unless Marvel wants to present Tony Stark as an unfeeling man of no guilt or sorrow, then Ragnarok should never appear.

He's not needed

Mr T is spot on here.
Mr T is spot on here.

Ragnarok is a side plot in Civil War. He is activated in battle, kills a hero and this further puts the blame on Iron Man's side.But then he is simply "fixed" and returns to fight. However, in the film version the story will be vastly different. The Civil War movie will have to incorporate much of the seven key issues, plus the hundreds of tie-ins, into a cohesive and compelling film. This is very hard to do. The film needs to fully demonstrate the key relationship between Captain America and Iron Man, how their ideals and values clash. It also needs to tell a story which involves lots characters and sub-plots. Overall, there will be enough content in Civil War without rushing Ragnarok into things, he would be an unnecessary and confusing addition.

But what about Thor: Ragnarok I year you say? Well, what if I told you that Ragnarok, the storyline, is very different to Ragnarok, the character? In fact, the character has never appeared in a Ragnarok storyline. Ragnarok is the Norse apocalypse, Thor battles giant fire demons, summoned by Loki and Asgard is pulverised in what should be some wonderful destruction porn. There is no time for any clone plot in a Ragnarok movie.

Would you like to have Thor face off against a clone of himself which did not work out as planned, the exact plot of Superman IV: The Quest for Peace?

... or this?

Clone Story or this, I know what I'd prefer.
Clone Story or this, I know what I'd prefer.

Hemsworth

Chris Hemsworth is a big star, and he doesn't come cheap. Marvel will want to use his contract correctly, they wouldn't want to waste precious Hemsworth movies on him playing Ragnarok instead of Thor.

Also, just imagine it, Chris Hemsworth is not just playing an alien demigod based off Norse mythology, he's now playing a robot clone of said alien demigod who believes that he is actually the real demigod. Hemsworth will be wandering around scowling, saying things like, "I am the real Thor". It's too bad to even conceive.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there are lots of reasons as to why Ragnarok should never appear in the MCU. His character is extremely goofy, undermines the events of Age of Ultron and the effect they have on Tony Stark, is completely unnecessary, could deny us seeing Thor fighting some awesome fire giants and would pretty much be impossible for anyone to play with even a hint of believability.

Poll

Ragnarok (the character) in the MCU?

What do you think? Do you still, for some unknown reason, want Ragnarok in the MCU? Comment Below with your opinions.

Some of my other articles:

Who will be in the Civil War?

Things you'll come to know and love about Moviepilot

Marvel decisions which seemed bad at first.

Trending

Latest from our Creators