Skip to main content

marvel cinematic universe - In what sense are Asgardians "immortal" in the MCU?



In Thor: The Dark World, Odin and Loki are discussing Loki's actions during The Avengers. Loki argues that he would have ruled Earth as "a benevolent god", and Odin replies:



Odin: We are not gods! We are born, we live, we die, just as humans do.



Now that's pretty definitive. And Loki's snarky reply ("Give or take five thousand years...") would seem to confirm that Asgardians have a limited lifespan, and will eventually die of old age.1 And we know that Asgardians can die in battle, because we've seen it happen over and over with supporting characters and Asgardian soldiers.


Now, I've always been more of a fan of Thor stories (like Jason Aaron's Thor: God of Thunder arc) in which Thor and the Asgardians are gods. Straight-up, genuine, higher-level-of-existence gods, not von-Däniken-esque wannabes playing on the tired old notion of magic just being super-advanced science. BUT, despite my preferences, this exchange would seem to confirm once and for all that in the MCU, the Asgardians are not gods, but rather were mistaken for gods because of their ram-horns full of awesome-sauce and their magnificent bulging pecks.


But wait! Watch that movie for about 30 seconds longer and we come across this exchange:



Thor: She is ill.


Odin: She is mortal. Illness is their defining trait.




Wait, what? I thought Asgardians weren't immortal? They can die in battle, and they naturally die of old age. In my book, that makes them long-lived, but entirely "mortal". Surely Odin isn't splitting a hair so fine as to say that resistance to disease alone makes one "immortal"?


So, if the Asgardians of the MCU aren't actually gods (grumblegrumblegrumble...), and they can't live forever (or even particularly long in a cosmic sense), and they can be killed in battle, in what sense are they "immortal" at all?




1 Fun fact: adjusted for a roughly 5,000 year lifespan, 1,048-year-old Loki is currently in the tail-end of his rebellious teenage phase.



Answer



Since the Marvel Cinematic Universe has not confirmed or denied the existence of Idunn, the goddess in charge of the legendary Golden Apples of Immortality, we have nothing to confirm the true nature of the MCU's Asgardians "immortality".



  • Given Asgardian superhuman levels of resistance to injury, their incredible physical stamina and innate regenerative abilities, they would have certainly appeared to be immortal to the first Norse barbarians who interacted with them in the 11th century. They would have survived injuries and wounds that normally killed human beings of that era. This only added to the illusion of godhood.






  • Even though they can survive tremendous amounts of physical punishment than a normal human being, they can be hurt or damaged. That is when their advanced regenerative abilities take over. It enables them to heal much faster than an normal human being. No form of Earth disease can infect them at all. However, when receiving damage that even their regenerative abilities cannot heal, they do have a "healing room" that possibly helps with their regenerative abilities.




  • It seems that low-level Asgardians and mid-level Asgardians need it, except Odin, who goes through the Odinsleep and Thor, the son of Odin, whose regenerative ability is stronger than the vast majority of his race.




  • Also, their regenerative abilities enable them to have longer lifespans. While humans would see them as immortal, as Odin stated, they are not. Loki pointed out even though they are not truly immortal, they can live a lot longer, at least by 5,000 years.





  • This explains why Bor is no longer living, because he could have reached his 5,000 years lifespan sometime after the War with the Dark Elves. Asgardians age as humans do in the first years of their lives, but when they reach their late twenties, they start to age much more slowly. Marvel Cinematic Universe - Asgardians






  • However, given their immensely long lifespans even without the existence of the Golden Apples, in comparison to human lives, they would seem immortal and nearly everlasting.


Comic Apocrypha




  • In the canon comic universe, the Asgardians were "long-lived" not immortal and had to have their immortality "recharged" by eating the Golden Apples of Idunn. This was also the case in the original Norse Legends.


enter image description here


It would seem the Asgardian "immortality" is very conditional and dependent on the Golden Apples. It would seem in at least one of Loki's schemes it was revealed the immortal nature of the Asgardians would slowly be lost if they were unable to partake of said apples. Loki devised a scheme by which such apples would be lost in the belief it would make the Asgardians vulnerable to their enemies because of their loss of their godly vitality.


enter image description here


enter image description here


See Also: How Long Do Asgardians Live for?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir

the lord of the rings - Why is Gimli allowed to travel to Valinor?

Gimli was allowed to go to Valinor despite not being a ring bearer. Is this explained in detail or just with the one line "for his love for Galadriel"? Answer There's not much detail about this aside from what's said in Appendix A to Return of the King: We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Glóin's son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter. And Appendix B: Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf . And when that sh

Did the gatekeeper and the keymaster get intimate in Ghostbusters?

According to TVTropes ( usual warning, don't follow the link or you'll waste half your life in a twisty maze of content ): In Ghostbusters, it's strongly implied that Dana Barret, while possessed by Zuul the Gatekeeper, had sex with Louis Tully, who was possessed by Vinz Clortho the Keymaster (key, gate, get it?), in order to free Big Bad Gozer. In fact, a deleted scene from the movie has Venkman explicitly asking Dana if she and Louis "did it". I turned the quote into a spoiler since it contains really poor-taste joke, but the gist of it is that it's implied that as part of freeing Gozer , the two characters possessed by the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper had sex. Is there any canon confirmation or denial of this theory (canon meaning something from creators' interviews, DVD commentary, script, delete scenes etc...)? Answer The Richard Mueller novelisation and both versions of the script strongly suggest that they didn't have sex (or at the very l

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed.