I think they handled Captain Marvel really nicely.
She’s a very new addition to the cast, and clearly the ‘ardest of the lot. And by a country mile.
Yes, she could go toe-to-toe with Thanos, but not with great ease. He’s still too much when he’s got even a single Infinity Stone.
But we also see that she’s got the strength and skill to tackle him. She doesn’t even flinch when he nuts her (being nutted hurts, forcing him to take more drastic measures.
So much more interesting than doing a Supes and just turning The Bad into a greasy smear.
- Why didn't they stop Thanos from destroying the stones, instead of risking breaking time? That's a much more logical course of action than hopping around time and space and screwing up the time line. Yes, he has the gauntlet, but he's not expecting the Avengers to suddenly ambush him, they'll have Captain Marvel on their side and they've worked out how to stop him from using the gauntlet, as seen in the initial ambush at his garder.
- If removing the infinity stones have disastrous consequences, wouldn't destroying the stones do the same thing? Shouldn't Dornamu or whatever look and go "oh hey, the time stone is gone, so Strange can't stop me anymore. Time to turn this universe into a DOOM clone"
- Why didn't Nebula just teleport out? It takes like 3 seconds. Or at least destroy the teleport device. She had plenty of time to do that before getting captured.
- Hollywood should really stop trying to do huge battles. They never get it right. Ok, so they have tanks, aircraft and advanced firearms, and they decide to run at each other and go at it like school children? I thought the battle in the first part was dumb, this is worse. It should have just been Thanos and his generals, or just Thanos with the gauntlet. Melees are a great tactic if you want a bloodbath and don't care about your men dying. Otherwise they are dumb, especially when firearms are involved, where a combatant can just shoot some guy before his target could react.
They didn’t know where he was until he did that. It was the energy signature of their destruction that allowed them to trace him.
And by then, it was done. There’s also his line about them just being temptation. That’s why he did it, as much as prevent his work being undone. That may well have rung true to the Goodies here. The Infinity Cat is out the Infinity Bag. They’re just going to become a target for every petty Warlord out there demanding the universe kneels before them. It’s genuinely better to let them be gone. Even if they failed in Endgame, things couldn’t get worse. There’s a lot to be said for that.
Removing the Stones from a passed timeline is dodgy. Removing them after the fact isn’t - as that timeline is still unfolding etc.
Nebula was clearly having some kind of technological fit. Gone haywire. She’s also not exactly noted for being completely rational.
They didn’t know where he was until he did that. It was the energy signature of their destruction that allowed them to trace him.
Exactly, they traced the energy signature to that world. So they know exactly when and where Thanos is going to destroy the stones, meaning they can use time travel to intercept him.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: - Why didn't they stop Thanos from destroying the stones, instead of risking breaking time?
You cannot change the future by going back in time. The movie spells that out completely.
Except that doesn't make sense? I mean, what is stopping Thanos from destroying the stones going to do exactly, other than make the movie shorter? Like, I can understand that shooting baby Thanos is a bad idea, as there's a bunch of variables, but there's not that many variables behind not destroying the stones. Edit: Ah wait, that's right, it would make a paradox. Ok, fair enough, but wouldn't stealing the stones also make a paradox or a bunch of nonsense? I mean, they basically freed Loki, right? And they killed past Thanos, which basically undoes everything. Also, if returning the stones resolves the paradox, why didn't they just go back, steal the stones from Thanos by knocking him out (they have Thor and Captain Marvel, should be possible), go back to the present, wish everyone back, go back, destroy the stones, then return? Isn't that basically what they did with the Time Heist, except its 5 years back instead of 9-40 years back?
Because the Stones are put back where and when they found them, the previous events all still happen in the same way.
Even Cap staying with Peggy changes little, provided Peggy kept schtum about it. Because whilst Future Cap is living the good life, past Cap remains a Capsicile.
Because the Stones are put back where and when they found them, the previous events all still happen in the same way.
Even Cap staying with Peggy changes little, provided Peggy kept schtum about it. Because whilst Future Cap is living the good life, past Cap remains a Capsicile.
Except they killed past Thanos and freed Loki. Sounds like a paradox to me. Not to mention that he stole the Tesseract, and I don't even know what can of worms that opens in terms of space time continuity.
So here's what the new time line is like -
They kill past Thanos in 2024, meaning that he can't go back to gather the infinity stones to wipe out 50% of life in the universe, which SHOULD stop the events of Endgame from happening, resulting in a paradox
Loki is too busy being free to help Thor deal with the Dark Elves in Dark World, which probably has all sorts of implications, but I'm not sure what they are. Probably significant though considering how he's a main character.
Because the Stones are put back where and when they found them, the previous events all still happen in the same way.
Even Cap staying with Peggy changes little, provided Peggy kept schtum about it. Because whilst Future Cap is living the good life, past Cap remains a Capsicile.
Except they killed past Thanos and freed Loki. Sounds like a paradox to me. Not to mention that he stole the Tesseract, and I don't even know what can of worms that opens in terms of space time continuity.
So here's what the new time line is like -
They kill past Thanos in 2024, meaning that he can't go back to gather the infinity stones to wipe out 50% of life in the universe, which SHOULD stop the events of Endgame from happening, resulting in a paradox
Loki is too busy being free to help Thor deal with the Dark Elves in Dark World, which probably has all sorts of implications, but I'm not sure what they are. Probably significant though considering how he's a main character.
Nope. They spell this out explicitly in the film. Changing the past does not change events that you have already witnessed, because you have already observed them. Observation of an event cements that event in time. This is a measurable phenomenon in our universe, through observations of quantum mechanical processes. If a quantum process means that you have two possible outcomes with a 50% chance each and you observe it at a specific time to be outcome A, then it was always outcome A at that point of time and will continue to evolve as if it was never possible for it to not be outcome A. Observation changes the universe by removing possible alternative observations.
So when they go back and Loki gets freed, that results in a separate timeline where Loki escaped. This does not change their timeline, only creates a different branch of time. Same with past Thanos. In their timeline he succeeded in the snap. They saw this, it is a part of their past, it happened. That cannot be changed. Past Thanos dying just creates an alternate timeline where Thanos went to their future and died.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: - Why didn't they stop Thanos from destroying the stones, instead of risking breaking time?
You cannot change the future by going back in time. The movie spells that out completely.
They also would have had to face off against a Thanos wearing the Infinity gauntlet. So they ambush him, and...what? He uses the gauntlet to erase the team from existence before they can hurt him?
Because the Stones are put back where and when they found them, the previous events all still happen in the same way.
Even Cap staying with Peggy changes little, provided Peggy kept schtum about it. Because whilst Future Cap is living the good life, past Cap remains a Capsicile.
Except they killed past Thanos and freed Loki. Sounds like a paradox to me. Not to mention that he stole the Tesseract, and I don't even know what can of worms that opens in terms of space time continuity.
So here's what the new time line is like -
They kill past Thanos in 2024, meaning that he can't go back to gather the infinity stones to wipe out 50% of life in the universe, which SHOULD stop the events of Endgame from happening, resulting in a paradox
Loki is too busy being free to help Thor deal with the Dark Elves in Dark World, which probably has all sorts of implications, but I'm not sure what they are. Probably significant though considering how he's a main character.
Nope. They spell this out explicitly in the film. Changing the past does not change events that you have already witnessed, because you have already observed them. Observation of an event cements that event in time. This is a measurable phenomenon in our universe, through observations of quantum mechanical processes. If a quantum process means that you have two possible outcomes with a 50% chance each and you observe it at a specific time to be outcome A, then it was always outcome A at that point of time and will continue to evolve as if it was never possible for it to not be outcome A. Observation changes the universe by removing possible alternative observations.
So when they go back and Loki gets freed, that results in a separate timeline where Loki escaped. This does not change their timeline, only creates a different branch of time. Same with past Thanos. In their timeline he succeeded in the snap. They saw this, it is a part of their past, it happened. That cannot be changed. Past Thanos dying just creates an alternate timeline where Thanos went to their future and died.
Spoiler:
What he said. There are now two fully alternate universes that were not wrapped up at the end of the film (the others branching from where the points in which the stones were collected ran their course (probably involving lots of misery) were retconned after they were returned correctly by cap.)
One where everything changes after Avengers, or at least anything where Loki was involved. Thanos may or may not snap in this one, as he has to collect the Tesseract in a different way depending on how Loki handles it.
One where nothing involving Thanos ever happens from just before Guardians of the Galaxy onward. He suddenly mysteriously dissapears and no one ever hears from him after that. Unfortunately involving Peter Quill never getting to know or love Gamora, or because she never interacts with him at all to help the events of GoTG happen, the team probably never exists, to the point where the "space" portions of that universe are probably different and confusing as all hell.
AduroT wrote: If you can’t change the present by going to the past, how did old Steve get on that bench?
And sure, they have tech that lets them go forward and backwards in time. How do they hop between different alternate timelines?
Because either A) Cap always makes that choice and it's part of all branches every time. B) We have always been watching that branch. or C) The movie switched over to that branch when Steve went back in time.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ahh I see we finally got to the "gak on Brie Larson" part of the thread.
When you do security fornher during her interviews, and only Sam talks to you, acknowledges you, thanks you and shows you any appreciation what so ever coupled with her stigma, yeah I don’t care for her much
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ahh I see we finally got to the "gak on Brie Larson" part of the thread.
When you do security fornher during her interviews, and only Sam talks to you, acknowledges you, thanks you and shows you any appreciation what so ever coupled with her stigma, yeah I don’t care for her much
Good. Do your personal feelings about Brie Larson have anything to do with Endgame?
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ahh I see we finally got to the "gak on Brie Larson" part of the thread.
When you do security fornher during her interviews, and only Sam talks to you, acknowledges you, thanks you and shows you any appreciation what so ever coupled with her stigma, yeah I don’t care for her much
Good. Do your personal feelings about Brie Larson have anything to do with Endgame?
It certainly affected anytime she came on the screen. Which is why I said that I’m glad the SJW part lasted 30 seconds and she had roughly 13 minutes of screen time. The other 2 hours and 47 minutes were glorious though.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ahh I see we finally got to the "gak on Brie Larson" part of the thread.
When you do security fornher during her interviews, and only Sam talks to you, acknowledges you, thanks you and shows you any appreciation what so ever coupled with her stigma, yeah I don’t care for her much
Good. Do your personal feelings about Brie Larson have anything to do with Endgame?
It certainly affected anytime she came on the screen. Which is why I said that I’m glad the SJW part lasted 30 seconds and she had roughly 13 minutes of screen time. The other 2 hours and 47 minutes were glorious though.
So that would be a No.
First, The "SJW part" is a direct reference to the comics. BTW if you don't like "sjw" parts, stop watching marvel movies. It sounds like the x-men are coming. They are one big "sjw part". Outside of the xmen, captain america would be a SJW, and has been, the entire time. Literally. An actual warrior for social justice since his first appearance. If SJW bothers you then Mavel is going to keep shoving it in your face.
Second, I hate Mel Gibson as a person. I don't watch movies with Mel Gibson in them. If I did, I wouldn't go on the internet, find a forum talking about the movie and then tell everyone about how much I hate Mel Gibson. Those are the actions of a person desperate for validation.
AduroT wrote: If you can’t change the present by going to the past, how did old Steve get on that bench?
And sure, they have tech that lets them go forward and backwards in time. How do they hop between different alternate timelines?
Because either A) Cap always makes that choice and it's part of all branches every time. B) We have always been watching that branch. or C) The movie switched over to that branch when Steve went back in time.
Also, because they're using the Quantum Realm to time travel, they may be locked to their own specific timelines when returning to the present, so that no matter how much they might change the past, they'll still return to the present they already have.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ahh I see we finally got to the "gak on Brie Larson" part of the thread.
When you do security fornher during her interviews, and only Sam talks to you, acknowledges you, thanks you and shows you any appreciation what so ever coupled with her stigma, yeah I don’t care for her much
Good. Do your personal feelings about Brie Larson have anything to do with Endgame?
It certainly affected anytime she came on the screen. Which is why I said that I’m glad the SJW part lasted 30 seconds and she had roughly 13 minutes of screen time. The other 2 hours and 47 minutes were glorious though.
So that would be a No.
First, The "SJW part" is a direct reference to the comics. BTW if you don't like "sjw" parts, stop watching marvel movies. It sounds like the x-men are coming. They are one big "sjw part". Outside of the xmen, captain america would be a SJW, and has been, the entire time. Literally. An actual warrior for social justice since his first appearance. If SJW bothers you then Mavel is going to keep shoving it in your face.
Second, I hate Mel Gibson as a person. I don't watch movies with Mel Gibson in them. If I did, I wouldn't go on the internet, find a forum talking about the movie and then tell everyone about how much I hate Mel Gibson. Those are the actions of a person desperate for validation.
Oof, not looking for any validation but I see someone is I’m free to watch if I enjoy the other 90%, just as I’m free to discuss why I didn’t enjoy the movie as those have expressed what they didn’t enjoy or did. I suggest you find a different soap box, my friend
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ahh I see we finally got to the "gak on Brie Larson" part of the thread.
When you do security fornher during her interviews, and only Sam talks to you, acknowledges you, thanks you and shows you any appreciation what so ever coupled with her stigma, yeah I don’t care for her much
Good. Do your personal feelings about Brie Larson have anything to do with Endgame?
It certainly affected anytime she came on the screen. Which is why I said that I’m glad the SJW part lasted 30 seconds and she had roughly 13 minutes of screen time. The other 2 hours and 47 minutes were glorious though.
So that would be a No.
First, The "SJW part" is a direct reference to the comics. BTW if you don't like "sjw" parts, stop watching marvel movies. It sounds like the x-men are coming. They are one big "sjw part". Outside of the xmen, captain america would be a SJW, and has been, the entire time. Literally. An actual warrior for social justice since his first appearance. If SJW bothers you then Mavel is going to keep shoving it in your face.
Second, I hate Mel Gibson as a person. I don't watch movies with Mel Gibson in them. If I did, I wouldn't go on the internet, find a forum talking about the movie and then tell everyone about how much I hate Mel Gibson. Those are the actions of a person desperate for validation.
Oof, not looking for any validation but I see someone is I’m free to watch if I enjoy the other 90%, just as I’m free to discuss why I didn’t enjoy the movie as those have expressed what they didn’t enjoy or did. I suggest you find a different soap box, my friend
Oh I never denied that you were free to do whatever you wanted. You are. Pull a "Gibson" all day every day. Your freedom to show up and express whatever you want doesn't come with immunity from critique. You liked the movie, except when all the people with tits were on screen together and when the one with tits who speaks her mind IRL was on screen. Got it. Opinion noted. I think it's a gross opinion. And again, it makes me think Marvel movies probably are not made for you. You are not their intended audience.
I have no problem with the girls banding up and not really
accomplishing much. That describes Infinity War
Seriously, the shot just shows that they recognize each other and
will fight together as needed. It's a tease for future teamups
and a reminder that not all endeavors are successful (the entire
plot of Infinitywar/Endgame)
malfred wrote: I have no problem with the girls banding up and not really
accomplishing much. That describes Infinity War
Seriously, the shot just shows that they recognize each other and
will fight together as needed. It's a tease for future teamups
and a reminder that not all endeavors are successful (the entire
plot of Infinitywar/Endgame)
Oh they were destroyed, provided nothing to the story and accomplished nothing lol. I did laugh at that part. I believe the above poster thinks I’m being sexcist, when I’m actuality annoyed when arrogant individuals such as Brie(whom some are as revolutionary or open minded or
Not afraid to speak her mind) try to make something about them. There is a petition guys to replace her with a female of color. She should do it, it’s what she is all about after all. Regardless her character is bland the worst marvel brought in to date.
AduroT wrote: If you can’t change the present by going to the past, how did old Steve get on that bench?
And sure, they have tech that lets them go forward and backwards in time. How do they hop between different alternate timelines?
Because either A) Cap always makes that choice and it's part of all branches every time. B) We have always been watching that branch. or C) The movie switched over to that branch when Steve went back in time.
I assume timelines that split off can merge together again once they're free of significant differences. Thinking the universe really cares whether you had Chex or Lucky Charms this morning has always felt a little self important. If putting the stones back can correct the timeline, then going back and living a simple life doesn't necessarily have to alter it either.
AduroT wrote: If you can’t change the present by going to the past, how did old Steve get on that bench?
And sure, they have tech that lets them go forward and backwards in time. How do they hop between different alternate timelines?
Because either A) Cap always makes that choice and it's part of all branches every time. B) We have always been watching that branch. or C) The movie switched over to that branch when Steve went back in time.
I assume timelines that split off can merge together again once they're free of significant differences. Thinking the universe really cares whether you had Chex or Lucky Charms this morning has always felt a little self important. If putting the stones back can correct the timeline, then going back and living a simple life doesn't necessarily have to alter it either.
Well THAT time line does have 2 significant splits.
1) Loki grabs the space stone and feths off. We have no idea what that means yet. Loki show coming in November.
2) Thanos and Co. went to the future and never came back. That means no Gamora for either of the Guardians movies, no Nebula either, no infinity war or end game, no half the remaining Asgaurdians dieing in space.... It changes potentially a lot.
Those events happened at different times. So does that mean there is 2 time lines here? The "original" and the one with both divergences? 3? one for each? 4? one for each and one with both? Then toss in the cap staying back.
It's also possible Marvel will simply do the same thing as Elder Scrolls when it comes to "time stuff." I.E. If there is a divergence of events in time, the magic super dragon (Akatosh, or in Marvel's case the Time Stone itself), simply stitches time back into one thread by merging the timelines.
All timelines happen, run their course, then get stitched back up into a single line at the end. ES calls it a Dragon Break and it's the tidiest/coolest way of explaining time paradoxes I've ever seen in fiction. I'd like that route
LordofHats wrote: It's also possible Marvel will simply do the same thing as Elder Scrolls when it comes to "time stuff." I.E. If there is a divergence of events in time, the magic super dragon (Akatosh, or in Marvel's case the Time Stone itself), simply stitches time back into one thread by merging the timelines.
All timelines happen, run their course, then get stitched back up into a single line at the end. ES calls it a Dragon Break and it's the tidiest/coolest way of explaining time paradoxes I've ever seen in fiction. I'd like that route
I like Discworld's approach, where the History Monks just steal time from other parts of history to put it all back together as needed, since only the most obsessive of historians will notice the differences, anyway. Just always remember Rule One.
LordofHats wrote: It's also possible Marvel will simply do the same thing as Elder Scrolls when it comes to "time stuff." I.E. If there is a divergence of events in time, the magic super dragon (Akatosh, or in Marvel's case the Time Stone itself), simply stitches time back into one thread by merging the timelines.
All timelines happen, run their course, then get stitched back up into a single line at the end. ES calls it a Dragon Break and it's the tidiest/coolest way of explaining time paradoxes I've ever seen in fiction. I'd like that route
One of the Star Trek novels explains time travel like that. The divergent timeline(s) ediet only between the time the traveler left and the time he visited, and outside of that range, forward and backwards, quantum mechanics merges the two timelines into one set of cause(s) and effect. IN that paradigm, old Cap suddenly snapped into existence the moment Endgame cap went back, with al of the intervening time leaving only a few alterations, not on the teams' past but only in their future...and extreme past if there are more Time Heist type events.
LordofHats wrote: It's also possible Marvel will simply do the same thing as Elder Scrolls when it comes to "time stuff." I.E. If there is a divergence of events in time, the magic super dragon (Akatosh, or in Marvel's case the Time Stone itself), simply stitches time back into one thread by merging the timelines.
All timelines happen, run their course, then get stitched back up into a single line at the end. ES calls it a Dragon Break and it's the tidiest/coolest way of explaining time paradoxes I've ever seen in fiction. I'd like that route
I like Discworld's approach, where the History Monks just steal time from other parts of history to put it all back together as needed, since only the most obsessive of historians will notice the differences, anyway. Just always remember Rule One.
That's funny.
Part of me suspects we'll probably see a movie tackling the time paradox issue, maybe the next Ant-Man or Doctor Strange 2.
malfred wrote: I have no problem with the girls banding up and not really
accomplishing much. That describes Infinity War
Seriously, the shot just shows that they recognize each other and
will fight together as needed. It's a tease for future teamups
and a reminder that not all endeavors are successful (the entire
plot of Infinitywar/Endgame)
Not gonna lie when i saw the movie i was thinking they showed too little of Captain Marvel for a while and then the ship just randomly starts shooting at something and i sighed knowing who it was. She wrecks the whole ship solo. Grand entrance yeah but a bit cringy for a new-comer that's automatically the best. The all-girl team up did seem a bit like a "Girl Power!!!" moment. Am i weird for noticing sometimes they put Captain Marvel in the very front of the movie and in other parts she's way in the background almost like they're trying to distance her from the movie? I understand she was busy in Captain Marvel probably while doing this so maybe that makes sense but in some cases it felt like they were parading her and also avoiding her. It just felt a bit weird. Aside from that the movie was pretty good.
I enjoyed the actual comedy of the movie "Big Lebowski", "America's Ass" and "He's an idiot isn't he?"
I honestly expected Iron Man to die and it was sad he did esp. being a family man and all. I didn't see Black Widow going though which also sucks big time. Captain America's ending was actually rather happy.
The only real issue of the movie was Captain Marvel being a little too in the lead for a newbie and the fact the actress that plays her has next to no facial expressions (mostly 2 of them like b**** face expression and nothing's happening expression though the movie had her crack a half-smile like once). I suppose we could complain about Arnold or Sylvester Stallone for the same things but at least they looked like tough characters that were attractive to some people at least. Of course people give them crap for it as well so Brie can't get a free pass here.
LordofHats wrote: It's also possible Marvel will simply do the same thing as Elder Scrolls when it comes to "time stuff." I.E. If there is a divergence of events in time, the magic super dragon (Akatosh, or in Marvel's case the Time Stone itself), simply stitches time back into one thread by merging the timelines.
All timelines happen, run their course, then get stitched back up into a single line at the end. ES calls it a Dragon Break and it's the tidiest/coolest way of explaining time paradoxes I've ever seen in fiction. I'd like that route
I like Discworld's approach, where the History Monks just steal time from other parts of history to put it all back together as needed, since only the most obsessive of historians will notice the differences, anyway. Just always remember Rule One.
That's funny.
Part of me suspects we'll probably see a movie tackling the time paradox issue, maybe the next Ant-Man or Doctor Strange 2.
AduroT wrote: If you can’t change the present by going to the past, how did old Steve get on that bench?
And sure, they have tech that lets them go forward and backwards in time. How do they hop between different alternate timelines?
Because either A) Cap always makes that choice and it's part of all branches every time. B) We have always been watching that branch. or C) The movie switched over to that branch when Steve went back in time.
I assume timelines that split off can merge together again once they're free of significant differences. Thinking the universe really cares whether you had Chex or Lucky Charms this morning has always felt a little self important. If putting the stones back can correct the timeline, then going back and living a simple life doesn't necessarily have to alter it either.
Well THAT time line does have 2 significant splits.
1) Loki grabs the space stone and feths off. We have no idea what that means yet. Loki show coming in November.
2) Thanos and Co. went to the future and never came back. That means no Gamora for either of the Guardians movies, no Nebula either, no infinity war or end game, no half the remaining Asgaurdians dieing in space.... It changes potentially a lot.
Those events happened at different times. So does that mean there is 2 time lines here? The "original" and the one with both divergences? 3? one for each? 4? one for each and one with both? Then toss in the cap staying back.
Doesn't actually matter. Just food for thought.
Yeah, Loki is definitely the big one. It would be interesting if the universe could "course correct" for the lack of Thanos though. It's worth noting that by the end of the story he's dead regardless of timeline so the paradox would technically close if not for the billions he killed directly in the 10ish years he skipped.
flamingkillamajig wrote: (mostly 2 of them like b**** face expression and nothing's happening expression though the movie had her crack a half-smile like once). I suppose we could complain about Arnold or Sylvester Stallone for the same things but at least they looked like tough characters that were attractive to some people at least. Of course people give them crap for it as well so Brie can't get a free pass here.
So your criticism is that she does something other actors do, but it's bad for her because she isn't tough/pretty?
Is there a part of this criticism that actually revolves around anything other than being a sexist pig, or do you really think no one is going to notice the sexist pig comment in this mostly meaningless dribble.
Every actor in the MCU basically has 2 max 3 expressions (and they all pull from the same pool of about 9), so is there a point here other than value flagging how much you don't like Brie Larson?
At the end with the wreath the camera panned over the assembled mourners. I could identify all but one. It was the single man with the black hair, appearing just shortly before the camera got to Capt Marvel. Anyone know?
It could be the naturally all timelines converge back together no matter what.
Like, too many time lines cause a problem.
For example, Loki, Maybe he got cought just a little bit later so spent a bit shorter time in asgard jail. Or he did die but this loki is bumming around with the Tesseract.
For example. Cap went back in time to live with peggy, created and alternate timeline, then after that timeline went for a decade or 2, it converged and joined with the original allowing him back into the new timeline.
I feel like Loki learned a little after Avengers 1. Towards the end of the film he seemed to understand Thor's point that invading Earth was madness and even seemed to somewhat regret starting it at all. He didn't get the development the character got in Thor 2 or 3, but there was a little bit of a shift in how he was behaving after Avengers.
Looking up the TV series (cause I never bothered to read on it before), it seems to be about Loki traveling through time. Maybe Space Stone + Pym Particle = Time Travel? Bit of a Lost in Time sort of situation?
flamingkillamajig wrote: (mostly 2 of them like b**** face expression and nothing's happening expression though the movie had her crack a half-smile like once). I suppose we could complain about Arnold or Sylvester Stallone for the same things but at least they looked like tough characters that were attractive to some people at least. Of course people give them crap for it as well so Brie can't get a free pass here.
So your criticism is that she does something other actors do, but it's bad for her because she isn't tough/pretty?
Is there a part of this criticism that actually revolves around anything other than being a sexist pig, or do you really think no one is going to notice the sexist pig comment in this mostly meaningless dribble.
Every actor in the MCU basically has 2 max 3 expressions (and they all pull from the same pool of about 9), so is there a point here other than value flagging how much you don't like Brie Larson?
First off thanks for the insult i'm sure that'd go over well with the mods. 2nd i also criticize stallone and arnold and say all 3 deserve the criticism but you look right passed that one. I even said up till her re-entrance into the fight she was actually shown too little but they kinda over-emphasize her during the battleship scene. Every other female character had fairly average strength. Her's was probably at the top in strength though this is her 2nd movie. It just feels un-earned.
Read the rest of what i posted as i also talked about the comedy of the movie i enjoyed. I liked the Guardians as well as captain america and other scenes but i mean hey if you want to insult me and throw around the 'sexist' word that's fine. That word's kinda lost all meaning by being used too much these days anyway for pretty much anything that even remotely resembled criticism of a woman even when it's legit. Notice i didn't insult any other female character in the cast except the fact they did a full 'Girl Power!' scene. It was just kinda not needed. You already have the girls fighting so there's no need to throw all the girls together to show it esp. when in the heat of battle it makes more sense just to have whoever is close to captain marvel fighting at her side.
No way that's actually pretty cool. I liked that kid's character. Up till tony had his daughter that guy was like a son to him. Was a pretty good part of that movie.
flamingkillamajig wrote: First off thanks for the insult i'm sure that'd go over well with the mods. 2nd i also criticize stallone and arnold and say all 3 deserve the criticism but you look right passed that one. I even said up till her re-entrance into the fight she was actually shown too little but they kinda over-emphasize her during the battleship scene. Every other female character had fairly average strength. Her's was probably at the top in strength though this is her 2nd movie. It just feels un-earned.
What did Hulk do to pretty much earn the title "strongest avenger" in the Avenger movie which was also the first appearence of the character? Since when do Superhero "earn" the right to be powerful? Technically, Wanda does alone what Thor, Stark and Cap couldn't do together. Did she earned it? She never had a solo-movie before. It seems like a strange criticism.
flamingkillamajig wrote: First off thanks for the insult i'm sure that'd go over well with the mods. 2nd i also criticize stallone and arnold and say all 3 deserve the criticism but you look right passed that one. I even said up till her re-entrance into the fight she was actually shown too little but they kinda over-emphasize her during the battleship scene. Every other female character had fairly average strength. Her's was probably at the top in strength though this is her 2nd movie. It just feels un-earned.
What did Hulk do to pretty much earn the title "strongest avenger" in the Avenger movie which was also the first appearence of the character? Since when do Superhero "earn" the right to be powerful? Technically, Wanda does alone what Thor, Stark and Cap couldn't do together. Did she earned it? She never had a solo-movie before. It seems like a strange criticism.
I dunno i feel like there are just better less political actresses out there than brie larson. Actresses that have a greater range of expression and even if they didn't at least it's not blank face or angry resting face. Perhaps it's also the fact she's kinda taking the reins of the Marvel franchise after everybody else goes. I'd be lying if i said in general that she doesn't make me somewhat bitter. Of course i'm not the biggest marvel fan so i could still just watch what i want and to not watch what i wish not to watch.
AduroT wrote: If you can’t change the present by going to the past, how did old Steve get on that bench?
And sure, they have tech that lets them go forward and backwards in time. How do they hop between different alternate timelines?
Because either A) Cap always makes that choice and it's part of all branches every time. B) We have always been watching that branch. or C) The movie switched over to that branch when Steve went back in time.
I assume timelines that split off can merge together again once they're free of significant differences. Thinking the universe really cares whether you had Chex or Lucky Charms this morning has always felt a little self important. If putting the stones back can correct the timeline, then going back and living a simple life doesn't necessarily have to alter it either.
Well THAT time line does have 2 significant splits.
1) Loki grabs the space stone and feths off. We have no idea what that means yet. Loki show coming in November.
2) Thanos and Co. went to the future and never came back. That means no Gamora for either of the Guardians movies, no Nebula either, no infinity war or end game, no half the remaining Asgaurdians dieing in space.... It changes potentially a lot.
Those events happened at different times. So does that mean there is 2 time lines here? The "original" and the one with both divergences? 3? one for each? 4? one for each and one with both? Then toss in the cap staying back.
Doesn't actually matter. Just food for thought.
Honestly i don't get into time travel in movies. I enjoyed how the movie also talked about like every time travel movie ever and how they just don't tend to make sense. Those are incredibly valid points though with Loki and Thanos. It's just i've never seen any time travel explanation in a movie make sense so far.
Lol at how poor Ant Man can't get any respect. Poor guy. I'd take a picture with you man.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I dunno i feel like there are just better less political actresses out there than brie larson. Actresses that have a greater range of expression and even if they didn't at least it's not blank face or angry resting face.
I don't know the character in a comic book, but it make sense that a tomboyish soldier would not be the most expressive range. She's supposed to be serious and disciplined and when she's not, she's supposed to brash and cynical. You might not be a fan of that type of character, but that's not really the actress fault. I don't view Larson as a political actress. She hasn't played in any political or judicial drama with a clear political message or been seriously involved in certain cause. She's not a Gal Gadot, Emma Watson, Denzel Washington, Steven Seagal, Russel Means, Mel Gibson, etc.
Perhaps it's also the fact she's kinda taking the reins of the Marvel franchise after everybody else goes. I'd be lying if i said in general that she doesn't make me somewhat bitter. Of course i'm not the biggest marvel fan so i could still just watch what i want and to not watch what i wish not to watch.
I don't think she was setup to be the leader of the New Avengers cast. She is definitely going to take a good spot, but she will certainly share the position with Strange, Ant-Man and Spiderman. In fact, it's probable that Spiderman is going to take the spot of the star of the new cast. We will have
flamingkillamajig wrote: I dunno i feel like there are just better less political actresses out there than brie larson.
To make a longer post short, this isn't the "gak on Brie Larson thread." That "thread" got locked and not that long ago either. Go make a new one if that's what you want to do (speaking of things the mods will love). You can't be naive enough to think you can drag it in here and not get called out on it, especially if you're just going to mix it with really bizarre comments that can't be called anything but sexist garbage. If you don't like your comments being called for what they are I can only say endeavor to comment better?
epronovost wrote: I don't think she was setup to be the leader of the New Avengers cast. She is definitely going to take a good spot, but she will certainly share the position with Strange, Ant-Man and Spiderman. In fact, it's probable that Spiderman is going to take the spot of the star of the new cast.
Maybe should we start a betting pool? I'll put 2 Internets on T'Challa being "New Cap." Or maybe Sam Cap will be New Cap?
Actually now I'm curious what a new Cap film would be like with Sam in it. He's not a super soldier. He doesn't have quite the same level of overwhelming morality Steve possessed. Would he add the shield to his Falcon persona, or actually call himself Captain America to carry on the name? We need trailers dang it.
flamingkillamajig wrote: First off thanks for the insult i'm sure that'd go over well with the mods. 2nd i also criticize stallone and arnold and say all 3 deserve the criticism but you look right passed that one. I even said up till her re-entrance into the fight she was actually shown too little but they kinda over-emphasize her during the battleship scene. Every other female character had fairly average strength. Her's was probably at the top in strength though this is her 2nd movie. It just feels un-earned.
What did Hulk do to pretty much earn the title "strongest avenger" in the Avenger movie which was also the first appearence of the character? Since when do Superhero "earn" the right to be powerful? Technically, Wanda does alone what Thor, Stark and Cap couldn't do together. Did she earned it? She never had a solo-movie before. It seems like a strange criticism.
I dunno i feel like there are just better less political actresses out there than brie larson. Actresses that have a greater range of expression and even if they didn't at least it's not blank face or angry resting face. Perhaps it's also the fact she's kinda taking the reins of the Marvel franchise after everybody else goes. I'd be lying if i said in general that she doesn't make me somewhat bitter. Of course i'm not the biggest marvel fan so i could still just watch what i want and to not watch what i wish not to watch.
Nobody has said Captain Marvel was taking over anything. And Wanda was CLEARLY the most powerful person in that or any fight thus far. Scarlett Witch needed a Air Strike just to get her to back off. Not injure her or stop her. Just to make it so Thanos wasn't getting completely trounced. This line of thinking is the same crappy line of thinking that got people worried that Carol was going to show up, over shadow all the old crew and beat Thanos on her own.
Brie Larson has good range and is a fine actress. And her "politics" are "I like when women get real acting jobs and little girls have female heroes to look up to". It's not like Mel Gibson who's politics is hoping gang rape on women while shouting racial slurs. There is nothing to be offended by there.
flamingkillamajig wrote: First off thanks for the insult i'm sure that'd go over well with the mods. 2nd i also criticize stallone and arnold and say all 3 deserve the criticism but you look right passed that one. I even said up till her re-entrance into the fight she was actually shown too little but they kinda over-emphasize her during the battleship scene. Every other female character had fairly average strength. Her's was probably at the top in strength though this is her 2nd movie. It just feels un-earned.
What did Hulk do to pretty much earn the title "strongest avenger" in the Avenger movie which was also the first appearence of the character? Since when do Superhero "earn" the right to be powerful? Technically, Wanda does alone what Thor, Stark and Cap couldn't do together. Did she earned it? She never had a solo-movie before. It seems like a strange criticism.
I dunno i feel like there are just better less political actresses out there than brie larson. Actresses that have a greater range of expression and even if they didn't at least it's not blank face or angry resting face. Perhaps it's also the fact she's kinda taking the reins of the Marvel franchise after everybody else goes. I'd be lying if i said in general that she doesn't make me somewhat bitter. Of course i'm not the biggest marvel fan so i could still just watch what i want and to not watch what i wish not to watch.
Nobody has said Captain Marvel was taking over anything. And Wanda was CLEARLY the most powerful person in that or any fight thus far. Scarlett Witch needed a Air Strike just to get her to back off. Not injure her or stop her. Just to make it so Thanos wasn't getting completely trounced. This line of thinking is the same crappy line of thinking that got people worried that Carol was going to show up, over shadow all the old crew and beat Thanos on her own.
Brie Larson has good range and is a fine actress. And her "politics" are "I like when women get real acting jobs and little girls have female heroes to look up to". It's not like Mel Gibson who's politics is hoping gang rape on women while shouting racial slurs. There is nothing to be offended by there.
Brie does it in such a negative way. Even rubbed the OG stars wrong. Her stance may be “good” but she goes about it in so many wrong ways as some people with a stance like hers does. She is like... the Monica risk of the marvel universe. Whines and bags about things people don’t care about. I honestly could care less if a woman is a super hero or never gets a super hero part. Just like I card less when they allowed women into the special forces in my military branch. They of course then cried for “easier physical tests cause women logic” and we said no (thank god) and told them pass the current one or don’t be special forces..
flamingkillamajig wrote: First off thanks for the insult i'm sure that'd go over well with the mods. 2nd i also criticize stallone and arnold and say all 3 deserve the criticism but you look right passed that one. I even said up till her re-entrance into the fight she was actually shown too little but they kinda over-emphasize her during the battleship scene. Every other female character had fairly average strength. Her's was probably at the top in strength though this is her 2nd movie. It just feels un-earned.
What did Hulk do to pretty much earn the title "strongest avenger" in the Avenger movie which was also the first appearence of the character? Since when do Superhero "earn" the right to be powerful? Technically, Wanda does alone what Thor, Stark and Cap couldn't do together. Did she earned it? She never had a solo-movie before. It seems like a strange criticism.
I dunno i feel like there are just better less political actresses out there than brie larson. Actresses that have a greater range of expression and even if they didn't at least it's not blank face or angry resting face. Perhaps it's also the fact she's kinda taking the reins of the Marvel franchise after everybody else goes. I'd be lying if i said in general that she doesn't make me somewhat bitter. Of course i'm not the biggest marvel fan so i could still just watch what i want and to not watch what i wish not to watch.
Nobody has said Captain Marvel was taking over anything. And Wanda was CLEARLY the most powerful person in that or any fight thus far. Scarlett Witch needed a Air Strike just to get her to back off. Not injure her or stop her. Just to make it so Thanos wasn't getting completely trounced. This line of thinking is the same crappy line of thinking that got people worried that Carol was going to show up, over shadow all the old crew and beat Thanos on her own.
Brie Larson has good range and is a fine actress. And her "politics" are "I like when women get real acting jobs and little girls have female heroes to look up to". It's not like Mel Gibson who's politics is hoping gang rape on women while shouting racial slurs. There is nothing to be offended by there.
Brie does it in such a negative way. Even rubbed the OG stars wrong. Her stance may be “good” but she goes about it in so many wrong ways as some people with a stance like hers does. She is like... the Monica risk of the marvel universe. Whines and bags about things people don’t care about. I honestly could care less if a woman is a super hero or never gets a super hero part. Just like I card less when they allowed women into the special forces in my military branch. They of course then cried for “easier physical tests cause women logic” and we said no (thank god) and told them pass the current one or don’t be special forces..
1) There is no "they". Women are not a single collective. There are whiny bitch females just like there are whiny bitch males. If you don't like being lumped in with scum sexist racist ass holes who didn't like movies because women then I think it's fair to say that you shouldn't lump everyone with a pair of tits into a single negative group either.
2) I have seen nothing that said any Marvel actors did not like the way she was delivering her message. Everything I have seen about any Marvel actors is that they all get a long really well. If anyone did get rubbed the wrong way by how she went about it.... who gives a gak? Lets just run with the idea that Brie Larson lacks tact in explaining what she thinks. Boo fething hoo. Whos being whiny now? There is no risk. If Disney thought there was risk she would get fired like they have already done. There is just a group of people who take offense at gak that is not offensive because they don't like the message.
At this point who cares honestly, I was happily reading this thread until the "usual suspects" as lordofhats called it started with this nonsense again, why can't you just leave it alone, some people do not like her, let it go, so tired of the fake outrage on other people's behalf.
Can't we talk about where we think the franchise is going or something instead of rehashing the same tired "ism/IST/phone" line that these threads nearly always fall into.
Broadly speaking, 2/3rds of it. A lot of the last act though, felt rather contrived.
Disclaimer: A lot of this is taken from my own point of view. In other words, add 'in my opinion' on a lot of these statements. I've had people get upset at me already for not thinking this is the greatest film ever made (Sidenote: Infinity War was great... In my opinion.)
So the good:
Thor. And Thor + Mum. Pretty much a lot of Thor, really, throughout the film. Hulk and Ant-Man were highlights too.
Most of the scenes in the past on Earth were great.
I loved "On your Left." - Big damn heroes moment, yes!
Marvel finally acknowledges gay people exist, in a single word of dialogue that wasn't left on the cutting room floor. It only took them 22 films to do so.
Things I didn't like:
Hawkeye gone edgy was pretty ridiculous.
I have so many problems with the Soul Stone sequence... Hawkeye doesn't sacrifice Widow, Widow sacrifices herself... "No please, let me kill myself, I should do it, no me!" I can't help but think the superhero movie of me would have felt that Nat waking up alongside Hawkeye in the river would have worked out better - Cosmic Justice and all that, rewarding for sacrificing yourself etc. Then there's the whole thing of we're apparently getting a long overdue movie of a dead character...
Dunking on the rules of other time travel movies felt rather mean-spirited, for them to then, apparently, break their own rules with Steve at the end.
The all-girls teaming up moment scene. It felt rather... Cynical to me? Sort of like, "hey everyone, we care about female characters, see, right, right.... Right... Bueller...?" Of course, having killed off their main female character, that never got a movie, and shortly after she got some real proper character development.
On that note of character development and closure. Like I said, I loved Tony's scene with his dad, but it kind of feels... Worthless... Overall, considering noone ever knows it happened. I'll get onto Tony's death later but it feels, at least, they could have moved up Tony's farewell video to him filming it before the Hulk-snap, and having him talk about it to his daughter.
"The Gauntlet that can do anything, except this thing" felt really arbitrary. Like I said, contrived. A lot of it felt like, "this thing happens because the plot says it needs to happen and this thing can't happen." I don't know how I'd solve it personally. But having someone just straight up say, "Gauntlet says no" feels like shoddy writing to me.
Cap going back in time, then showing up in the present makes my head hurt. - Does this mean he was at Peggy's funeral. - Oh, and the complete abandonment of the Sharon Carter character entirely...
Ok, Tony's death... Plot says Tony needs to die, so Tony snaps the gauntlet. Why? What reason was there to do so? Badguys ship was boomed, good guys were essentially winning the fight. You could just have played keep away longer. There just didn't feel a *need* for Tony to snap the gauntlet.
Personally I would have preferred, if the time travel van plan worked (which was great really, and an exception to my 'contrived' complaint, cause that van was there and might have survived in some shape. I would have gone with - Cap gets the gauntlet and dives through. If you really, really needed to kill Tony (I'd argue you didn't need to, he's already done the 'sacrificial play' thing in the first Avengers movie), you could have had him take a bullet/anti-vibranium-sword for Cap as he jumps through.
So, the way I would have liked it is, Cap goes back in time with the Stones. Leaves the Soul Stone for last. - We get Cap meeting Red Skull one last time. Lets say if the Hawkeye/Nat scene was the same as before (because other people do like it, even if I didn't). There's the "soul for a soul" speech.
Cap dives off the cliff and we get the 'soul stone' colour hue reminiscent of Thanos talking with young-Gamora at the end of Infinity War. Except it's Cap talking with Nat. Cap smiles at her, grinning. "We did it, you did it. We saved them. "I think this is it, Natalya, I think my job is done, I'm... tired. And your family is looking for you..." He reaches up, squeezing her shoulder.
There's a flash. And Black Widow's standing in front of the van, as Thanos' army disappears, fading out, rather than dusting (time paradox).
Film continues until the ending. Final scene. Voice, English, female. "I've been waiting for that dance." The last shot of the film is Peggy dancing with Steve, with the orange morning sun soulstone background.
Anyway, that's Compel's headcanon ending.
EDIT: The thought occurs to me, my opinion of Endgame is very similar to my opinion of Mass Effect 3, both being vast, sprawling epics. - I enjoy the vast majority of the final iteration of them, but when it ultimately comes to tying everything up together at the finale/conclusion of it in the very final act, I end up being frustrated.
I didn't even realize how badly I want to see this moment until you mentioned it. Would have made a great after credit's scene, and much more somber than most of them usually are.
EDIT: The thought occurs to me, my opinion of Endgame is very similar to my opinion of Mass Effect 3, both being vast, sprawling epics. - I enjoy the vast majority of the final iteration of them, but when it ultimately comes to tying everything up together at the finale/conclusion of it in the very final act, I end up being frustrated.
This is how I felt at the end of Black Panther, though for different reasons.
I think Endgame's closing act is going to be contentious a lot mostly because different people have different standards for how far the Rule of Cool can be stretched before it snaps. Valkyrie suddenly having her Pegasus back has been bothering me mildly since someone here mentioned it.
Where does one find a winged horse in what appears to be Scotland?
Are people still talking about the Girl Power moment?
Let me help you.
One of the heroines was the Scarlet Witch, whose super power is "whatever the writer feels like" up to and including blowing up an infinity gem and taking on Thanos one on one.
Compel wrote: I think it's supposed to be Norway. But yeah, I saw it and immediately went "that's Scotland" (and was confirmed in the credits I think).
Well, to be fair if they had Winged Horses anywhere they would have them in Norway XD
So why did a half dozen women assemble at once?
Because the Scarlet Witch wanted them to.
Done.
This... actually makes a disturbing amount of sense.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: If anyone could find a flying horse, a wizard could. A wizard with some sort of portal. We're there any characters with magical portals in the film?
Valkyrie: Don't suppose you could pop over to planet Vrmhyllarwhatever and nab me a flying horse?
Wizard: White, brown or dappled?
I didn't thought about that and it does make a lot of sense.
AduroT wrote: Still hoping for an animated series of Cap traveling thru time returning the stones.
The biggest problem I noticed is the stones where not returned in their original state, The Space Stone is no longer in the tesseract, Mind in the Staff.
Also, is it me, or does Avengers1 no longer Gel with War and Endgame? if Thanos plan was Balance thru genocide and doing it Via the infinity stones, Why give 1 to Loki? just to get another 1? He had two daughters to go down and get it with no fuss.
I kinda like the idea of Kang showing up as a direct result of what the Avengers did in this film. Tony said that time hits back, and Kang would be the ultimate expression of that.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I have yet to see a criticism of her that isnt rooted in sexism.
I reckon you've seen plenty, but you just assume anyone criticising her is sexist. Sure makes discussing her easier if you can just ignore everyone who criticises her.
LordofHats wrote: Where does one find a winged horse in what appears to be Scotland?
Fun fact: 'New Asgard' is in Tønsberg, which is where Odin fought the Ice Giants in a climactic battle and where Odin stored the Space Stone before Red Skull found it.
AduroT wrote: Still hoping for an animated series of Cap traveling thru time returning the stones.
The biggest problem I noticed is the stones where not returned in their original state, The Space Stone is no longer in the tesseract, Mind in the Staff.
Also, is it me, or does Avengers1 no longer Gel with War and Endgame? if Thanos plan was Balance thru genocide and doing it Via the infinity stones, Why give 1 to Loki? just to get another 1? He had two daughters to go down and get it with no fuss.
Yep I noticed that too, it's why time travel stories never work and while they seemed to have tried to address this in the film they ultimately failed like every other "serious" time travel story, doesn't make the movie bad by any stretch and isn't a sticking point for me, it is what it is.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Are people still talking about the Girl Power moment?
Let me help you.
One of the heroines was the Scarlet Witch, whose super power is "whatever the writer feels like" up to and including blowing up an infinity gem and taking on Thanos one on one.
So why did a half dozen women assemble at once?
Because the Scarlet Witch wanted them to.
Done.
Hadnt considered that one When it happened my inital thoughts were that it was a fun shout out to the A-Force comics. Followed by, did they really have all those actors together on set at the same time?(kinda applies to the entire climax and Tony's funeral as well). And then, who thought Captain Marvel needed help after she just punched that ship out of the sky?
Well apparently she couldn't take on Thanos, who just punched her with the power stone. Thanos is ridiculous in this movie. He doesn't even have the gauntlet, and yet he still held off Thor, Captain America, Iron Man and Marvel. The only character he really had trouble with is Scarlet Witch, and that's because magic is bs.
Well there's that. Still doesn't make it not absurd though. I mean, in theory I can have a toddler run up and kick Thanos in the nuts, who immediately goes down. He's not wrong, but he isn't right either. I guess it depends on how much suspension of disbelief you have available.
Am I the only one that wanted nebula to kill off thanos? After all the gak she went though, torture, emotional torture etc. I thought it would be a good pay off.
As for the scarlet witch bit, I was glad they finally started pushing her to be a bit more powerful, she is a weak sad imitation of the comic version, also thought it was funny when thanos was like "I don't even know who you are" after her speech haha.
what I am looking forward to though is how phase 4 will shape up, I still think the MCU as we know it is dead after end game and they will take a very different path, suppose we need to wait until after Spiderman to see since that is his last movie under the licence agreement (unless they renew) with Sony.
Formosa wrote: Am I the only one that wanted nebula to kill off thanos? After all the gak she went though, torture, emotional torture etc. I thought it would be a good pay off.
If we're talking roads not taken, yeah Nebula was my pick to win the whole thing.
Spoiler:
In the original Infinity Gauntlet comic Thanos turned her into a zombie as a joke and (after killing everyone sent after him) ascended to a higher plane of existence/one with the universe sort of thing.
So Nebula stumbled over to his comatose body and snatched the glove. It was a great scene and a nice bit of hubris bringing down the bad guy rather than punching.
A Drax and Nebula team up would have been great. - I mean, Drax's single stated character goal was "Kill Thanos." - Which was dropped down to a joke in Infinity War.
what I am looking forward to though is how phase 4 will shape up, I still think the MCU as we know it is dead after end game and they will take a very different path, suppose we need to wait until after Spiderman to see since that is his last movie under the licence agreement (unless they renew) with Sony.
Personally, I am really hoping that the Fantastic Four will be brought into the MCU in order to develop Dr. Doom as the new overarching villain.
what I am looking forward to though is how phase 4 will shape up, I still think the MCU as we know it is dead after end game and they will take a very different path, suppose we need to wait until after Spiderman to see since that is his last movie under the licence agreement (unless they renew) with Sony.
Personally, I am really hoping that the Fantastic Four will be brought into the MCU in order to develop Dr. Doom as the new overarching villain.
Hmmm a proper Dr Doom would be cool, and they could easily slot him into the universe via the sokovian (so?) Incident like they did with zemo, my bet is on Galactus though, if they bring in the fantastic 4 then we will be seeing avengers 8 in ten years time as they try to take him/it down.
All that being said, still want my Spiderman, wolverine and Deadpool team up... Don't give me any crap about different companies marvel, just make it happen.
I feel like doom is a really good ongoing bad guy but galactus is more a 1 or 2 movie thing in the middle. More a avengers 1 or 2 event so that he is in the universe and can be utilized later.
Maybe in 10 more years we get battleworld with the beyonder which featured both doom and galactus.
Good point Lance, I did see that marvel is hesitant about introducing the more conceptual characters in their movies too, hence why no death etc. Yet, I think as time goes on they will introduce them, it was mentioned after Dr strange 2 or in Dr strange 2 we would see these characters though, could be fun, would also mean yet another reason to introduce Deadpool, like captain marvel though it could be a bad shoe horn to introduce him so I'm hesitant even though I would like to see a that character in the MCU.
I'd honestly be ok if they didn't put deadpool into The Avengers. Dunno if this sounds weird but too many characters with the same personality may become a bit too much. I realize ant man and deadpool are different but i think too many comic relief characters while fun may be too similar.
I love Deadpool and Ant Man but i feel like there are some characters that when spammed 5 or a million times become boring. For instance how they tried to make a ton of han solo (dash rendar and to an extent kyle katarn) or boba fetts (a whole clone army and various other characters) in Star Wars. What makes them good is that they're unique.
Perhaps it's not a big deal though. I just hope it'd work.
Formosa wrote: Good point Lance, I did see that marvel is hesitant about introducing the more conceptual characters in their movies too, hence why no death etc. Yet, I think as time goes on they will introduce them, it was mentioned after Dr strange 2 or in Dr strange 2 we would see these characters though, could be fun, would also mean yet another reason to introduce Deadpool, like captain marvel though it could be a bad shoe horn to introduce him so I'm hesitant even though I would like to see a that character in the MCU.
I think it's less hesitant and more a lesson they took to early. Introduce new elements slowly. The general audience is only on board because they have time to process all these things that have been getting chucked into the comics for 70 years.
We as nerds know magic exists in the MCU but it's not until phase 3 Dr. Strange that we REALLY see them admit it. Thor 1 introduces some magical concepts but always with this technological edge to it and the line "I come from a world where science and magic are one and the same." Dr. Strange uses magic mostly to open a portal and "fire cracker kung fu". But the next time we see him it's all kinds of crazy things and the audience is on board.
You can't just throw the universal concepts like eternity, infinity, eon, the living tribunal, etc etc... at audiences. You need to soften them up. If Antman 1 had Scott Lang shrink between the atom and land in a city full of Microverse people living their lives everyone would have thought it was the dumbest thing ever. But seeing the city in the background of Antman and the Wasp and now with several trips in and out of the microverse... well... lets just say the Microverse isn't off the table any more.
I think Dr. Strange is a good vector to introduce those kinds of things.
Formosa wrote: Good point Lance, I did see that marvel is hesitant about introducing the more conceptual characters in their movies too, hence why no death etc. Yet, I think as time goes on they will introduce them, it was mentioned after Dr strange 2 or in Dr strange 2 we would see these characters though, could be fun, would also mean yet another reason to introduce Deadpool, like captain marvel though it could be a bad shoe horn to introduce him so I'm hesitant even though I would like to see a that character in the MCU.
I think it's less hesitant and more a lesson they took to early. Introduce new elements slowly. The general audience is only on board because they have time to process all these things that have been getting chucked into the comics for 70 years.
We as nerds know magic exists in the MCU but it's not until phase 3 Dr. Strange that we REALLY see them admit it. Thor 1 introduces some magical concepts but always with this technological edge to it and the line "I come from a world where science and magic are one and the same." Dr. Strange uses magic mostly to open a portal and "fire cracker kung fu". But the next time we see him it's all kinds of crazy things and the audience is on board.
You can't just throw the universal concepts like eternity, infinity, eon, the living tribunal, etc etc... at audiences. You need to soften them up. If Antman 1 had Scott Lang shrink between the atom and land in a city full of Microverse people living their lives everyone would have thought it was the dumbest thing ever. But seeing the city in the background of Antman and the Wasp and now with several trips in and out of the microverse... well... lets just say the Microverse isn't off the table any more.
I think Dr. Strange is a good vector to introduce those kinds of things.
All about finding the right lens for the audience to see it through I guess.
As noted, Dr Strange eased us into some aspects, as have the two Ant-Man films. GotG took us into Space, as did it’s sequel and Ragnarok, buttering us up quite nicely for Captain Marvel, and indeed End Game.
Trick is to remember just how straight forward and relatively grounded the first batch of films were. Iron Man, Hulk and Cap were all very, constrained I think is a fair term. Just enough of the fantastic to gently nudge the audience from our world, into Marvel’s.
So, saw it today, in a shockingly crowded theater on a sunday afternoon during a completely storm-washed weekend. (And was reminded yet again why I hate theaters. Fething kids). But things had gotten to the point where I was having to make an actual effort not to be spoiled on the film, so figured it was worth doing.
Pretty good. Not amazing. Was pleasantly surprised there were far fewer shenanigans and consequences in their method of fixing it- I fully expected them not to think about the things and just undo what Thanos did in the last one, not actually try to work around consequences.
Things I could have done without:
- Thor
- Barton (while his presence was plot necessary, his issues weren't, and they could have worked it a bit to make him not plot necessary)
- The establishing shots of NY and SF. The writers' or director's concept of what 'half' meant seemed awfully empty, even with collateral damage (from planes, helicopters, cars, etc) taken into account. In a weird way it supported Thanos' goals- until the memorial scene, those cities seemed a lot more peaceful and sane places to be.
- the massive under-utilization of... most of the cast. Most of the people on the poster were barely in the film, and some of the ones that got large lots of screen-time were.... odd choices. Dictated more by the plot element they fulfilled rather than interesting storytelling. [Except War Machine, actually, who was present for everything but... didn't matter or get a payoff in any way at all]
But I wouldn't call it a great movie since so much was about ticking boxes and then filming what amounted to cameos.
While the rationale for Captain Marvel to be 'out there' rather than on Earth makes logical sense in universe, in movie it made her feel more like a plot device. Especially since the initial rescue isn't ever explained (See Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy on space being 'really big'), after the hype that fell a little flat.
Stark was done well, Rocket was done well, Cap was gifted with a great wrap up and resolution for... reasons that aren't really apparent to me. Everyone else was just 'ensemble'
Mind you some of Nebula's quiet conversations were wiped out by the brat behind me, but they didn't really seem willing to commit to doing as much with her as they should have.
Thanos.... Thanos was treated a lot worse by this film than the previous one. While his rationale was still crazy (and ridiculously temporary, just deleting 50% of the population is a linear decrease in an exponential function. A century or so delay without any accompanying tech changes), he sold his conviction about what he was doing really well, with a respect for his opponents and an understanding of why they're fighting. '2014' Thanos is just a kill-mad brute. He's boring, and anticipating that rather than having to really fight for his prize, it'll just be gifted to him.
Compel wrote: A Drax and Nebula team up would have been great. - I mean, Drax's single stated character goal was "Kill Thanos." - Which was dropped down to a joke in Infinity War.
Drax was, to be fair, something of a joke from GoG 1 onwards, where his actual stated character goal was 'kill Ronan,' and he was laughably ineffectual in his attempt to do so. At no point afterwards did he rise above 'comic relief sidekick,' and after failing at killing the lackey so badly, the idea that he'd be of any use in the real conflict makes no sense.
AduroT wrote: Still hoping for an animated series of Cap traveling thru time returning the stones.
The biggest problem I noticed is the stones where not returned in their original state, The Space Stone is no longer in the tesseract, Mind in the Staff.
Also, is it me, or does Avengers1 no longer Gel with War and Endgame?
Their state doesn't really matter, just their presence in at that point in the other reality. That's the whole point of the conversation with the Ancient One and Hulk. They're effectively invading other Marvel universes (say 677 and 678) and bringing the stones back to Marvel MCU (which presumable isn't 616- the comics universe).
They don't really explain it well while crapping on other time travel movies, but the Ancient One actually uses the terms 'your universe' and 'this universe' (or 'reality'), but they do establish (in the awkward movie conversation) that they can't affect 'the timeline,' because it doesn't work that way.
So the Ancient One gets the time stone back, but that universe also has a Loki running around with the Tesseract. But since they can't change their own past, Avengers 1 links up the same way it always has- they didn't steal the earlier stones from their own universe.
Avatar was still making $1 mil+ per day in March 2010 and was released in December 2009. Endgame is already the biggest movie event ever and it's not even close.
flamingkillamajig wrote: I dunno i feel like there are just better less political actresses out there than brie larson. Actresses that have a greater range of expression and even if they didn't at least it's not blank face or angry resting face.
I don't know the character in a comic book, but it make sense that a tomboyish soldier would not be the most expressive range. She's supposed to be serious and disciplined and when she's not, she's supposed to brash and cynical. You might not be a fan of that type of character, but that's not really the actress fault. I don't view Larson as a political actress. She hasn't played in any political or judicial drama with a clear political message or been seriously involved in certain cause. She's not a Gal Gadot, Emma Watson, Denzel Washington, Steven Seagal, Russel Means, Mel Gibson, etc.
Perhaps it's also the fact she's kinda taking the reins of the Marvel franchise after everybody else goes. I'd be lying if i said in general that she doesn't make me somewhat bitter. Of course i'm not the biggest marvel fan so i could still just watch what i want and to not watch what i wish not to watch.
I don't think she was setup to be the leader of the New Avengers cast. She is definitely going to take a good spot, but she will certainly share the position with Strange, Ant-Man and Spiderman. In fact, it's probable that Spiderman is going to take the spot of the star of the new cast. We will have
I realize the world will probably end by me saying this (and it's probably a Dakka first) but i actually concede some of my original point and mostly that is because you politely and reasonably de-constructed my criticism without the need to insult me. If opposing sides in politics acted this way perhaps we'd all get along better and possibly be friends. It is an important thing in Tabletop to give a handshake regardless of who wins and loses. Sportsmanship and all that.
Thor's role in this film is to be a 1500 year old god who sulks like a 20-something drop-out, acts as comic relief, and ultimately ends up stealing a counterpart's artifact (one himself mourned over) to give Chris Evans a better send-off.
I didn't find any of that particularly interesting to watch, there were literally a dozen MCU characters that I would have rather seen on the screen more often instead.
I say a man who is suffering from crippling depression, who hates himself for his failures and inability to correct them. A man who has given up on life and his people, and now just drinks and eats his pain whilst surrounding himself with people who won't question him (Korg).
I do think seeing Thor in that state was a little cringe worthy. Made complete sense narratively of course but yeah. A little cringe worthy, especially since they dropped the super depressed Norse god angle rather abruptly imo.
Thor's role in this film is to be a 1500 year old god who sulks like a 20-something drop-out, acts as comic relief, and ultimately ends up stealing a counterpart's artifact (one himself mourned over) to give Chris Evans a better send-off.
I didn't find any of that particularly interesting to watch, there were literally a dozen MCU characters that I would have rather seen on the screen more often instead.
Wow. I honestly could not disagree more with this. Thor's descent into alcoholism and seclusion may actually have been my favorite thing about the movie. I loved how badly he wanted to be the one to snap everyone back to assuage his guilt for not stopping Thanos the first time around, and how terrified he was to believe Hulk could offer him a chance to set everything right. The scene with his mom was fantastic, heart-felt stuff. Great message too, about failing who you're supposed to be and succeeding as who you really are. That really gut punched me.
I say a man who is suffering from crippling depression, who hates himself for his failures and inability to correct them. A man who has given up on life and his people, and now just drinks and eats his pain whilst surrounding himself with people who won't question him (Korg).
OK? That isn't inspiring or interesting either. He's TFG on the other end of Xbox headset.
It's in direct contrast to Stark, who lashes out in the moment, finds a way to move on, then risks that new life to try to makes things better.
Thor gets lured onwards with the promise of more beer, then his mother's teat, and still at the end doesn't really accomplish anything (another body in the giant fight, as with all the other extras), just continues to abandon his responsibilities to go looking for another party with someone else who won't question him.
Thor had a pretty big arc of character growth through six films. In this one, he just plummeted off a cliff at the end of the opening act, and didn't come back. At this point I'd be happy to see Thor Four be Beta Rey Bill, Jane Thor, or some random hiker with a walking stick making himself worthy. Hell, I'd even take randomly shoving the X-men into Thor Four for the 'Storm, Goddess of Thunder' issue.
Also that he's 1500 years old. How do you even write a character like that to begin with and why would someone so old be the least mature of the power trio in Endgame?
Avatar was still making $1 mil+ per day in March 2010 and was released in December 2009. Endgame is already the biggest movie event ever and it's not even close.
Avatar was released on xmas break and took about a month or 2 to break 2bil. While mostly selling 17.00 3d imax tickets.
End game did that in april with no break in 12 days. With no gimmicks to raise ticket prices and no breaks to boost sales. 600 mil more before it leaves the box office is very feasible.
trexmeyer wrote: Also that he's 1500 years old. How do you even write a character like that to begin with and why would someone so old be the least mature of the power trio in Endgame?
To be fair, age doesn't really determine one's maturity, and for someone like Thor who's been the Crown Prince since birth and got to basically do whatever he wanted until the events of the first Thor movie, it's possible he lacked any real hardships for growth until the events shown in the movies.
Voss wrote: Thor had a pretty big arc of character growth through six films. In this one, he just plummeted off a cliff at the end of the opening act, and didn't come back.
Thor at the start of endgame... or rather after the 5 year jump... is an extension of his growth.
He receded. And that's the point. He utter despair over his actions in Wakanda followed by his complete inability to change them when he finally did catch up with Thanos a couple of weeks later is what caused him to regress.
And he did come back. By the end of the film he has a completely different outlook and is ready to try something different, leaving the things he knows he cannot do behind (like lead his people), and instead going on a new journey to discover who he wants to be.
Voss wrote: Thor had a pretty big arc of character growth through six films. In this one, he just plummeted off a cliff at the end of the opening act, and didn't come back.
Thor at the start of endgame... or rather after the 5 year jump... is an extension of his growth.
He receded. And that's the point. He utter despair over his actions in Wakanda followed by his complete inability to change them when he finally did catch up with Thanos a couple of weeks later is what caused him to regress.
And he did come back. By the end of the film he has a completely different outlook and is ready to try something different, leaving the things he knows he cannot do behind (like lead his people), and instead going on a new journey to discover who he wants to be.
I guess I kind of feel like he already did that at the start of Infinity War (being depressed) and in his own trilogy (knowing he the throne wasn't his path), and while logical that the first thing it would get worse after the events of that movie, the humor of it ended up not outweighing the cringe. But maybe that's the point. Not every story is supposed to make you feel inspired at all points, but I still think they overplayed it a pit. The bit at the end totally works, I'm ready to see Thor + Guardians and all the fun that comes with it, but I feel like that whole bit was a rehash of development he'd already had.
It's rather clear that at the end of Endgame, we will not see Captain America or Stark again on the big screen until a reboot (which could be years from now). We aren't going to see Black Widow and I doubt we will see Clint either. Are we going to see Thor again though? How about Hulk? Are these two from the original cast of Avenger continue on?
I'm pretty sure RDJ has been looking to leave the role of Stark for awhile, and Chris Evans too for Steve Rogers. Scarlet JoIDK. It's a comic movie, and comics are notorious for never keeping anyone dead so it's not like they can't magic hand her back to life somehow.
Thor seems like he's clearly set up to be in the next Guardians movie at the end of the film. Hulk idk. He's only ever been in Avengers films + a Thor film. Is the actor wanting to leave the character?
But I wouldn't call it a great movie since so much was about ticking boxes and then filming what amounted to cameos.
While the rationale for Captain Marvel to be 'out there' rather than on Earth makes logical sense in universe, in movie it made her feel more like a plot device. Especially since the initial rescue isn't ever explained (See Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy on space being 'really big'), after the hype that fell a little flat.
I'm assuming that any member of the Kree military would have some (or even a lot of) basic knowledge of where Thanos is from, and where Titan is. So she found them between Titan and Earth, which while still being a needle in a haystack, is a bit more believable. Space magic, as well.
epronovost wrote: It's rather clear that at the end of Endgame, we will not see Captain America or Stark again on the big screen until a reboot (which could be years from now). We aren't going to see Black Widow and I doubt we will see Clint either. Are we going to see Thor again though? How about Hulk? Are these two from the original cast of Avenger continue on?
There is a black widow movie scheduled for phase 4. Clint will at least be in disney+ series. Thor will be in guardians 3.
epronovost wrote: It's rather clear that at the end of Endgame, we will not see Captain America or Stark again on the big screen until a reboot (which could be years from now). We aren't going to see Black Widow and I doubt we will see Clint either. Are we going to see Thor again though? How about Hulk? Are these two from the original cast of Avenger continue on?
There is a black widow movie scheduled for phase 4. Clint will at least be in disney+ series. Thor will be in guardians 3.
Didn't they constantly say scarlett is gone for good? Of course this could be like DBZ where you can't wish them back with the dragon balls more than once until you find out there are some namek super dragon balls that override that rule. Of course if death is never permanent wouldn't that just take away the effect of a good guy dying completely. It kinda becomes like 'Looks like we're gonna need another Timmy!' level of comedy from the old Dinosaurs tv show.
Maybe there will be a new character using the Black Widow mantle? I'm not super familiar with the character's comic history. Has anyone else ever used the name?
Or maybe it'll be a prequel and we'll finally find out what happened in Budapest?
The Widow movie is likely a prequel, and assuming she isn't the villain, Yelena Belova could be the 'new' Widow that we get introduced to in the film.
LordofHats wrote: I guess I kind of feel like he already did that at the start of Infinity War (being depressed)
That was't him depressed. That was him determined to get revenge for all that Thanos had done and to stop him from doing more, and then failing. Endgame was the fallout of the failure.
LordofHats wrote: and in his own trilogy (knowing he the throne wasn't his path),
He seemed kind of depressed to me (at the start of the film anyway). And I see how he'd get more depressed. It makes total sense. It's just that it's depressing, and in a way that's really cringe.
ut he accepted the throne in Ragnarok.
Maybe I need to rewatch Ragnarok then (cause I don't remember that). Fortunately it's still on Netflix XD
Avatar was still making $1 mil+ per day in March 2010 and was released in December 2009. Endgame is already the biggest movie event ever and it's not even close.
Avatar was released on xmas break and took about a month or 2 to break 2bil. While mostly selling 17.00 3d imax tickets.
End game did that in april with no break in 12 days. With no gimmicks to raise ticket prices and no breaks to boost sales. 600 mil more before it leaves the box office is very feasible.
may have to go see it again if that will help shove Avatar down the memory hole.
He seemed kind of depressed to me (at the start of the film anyway). And I see how he'd get more depressed. It makes total sense. It's just that it's depressing, and in a way that's really cringe.
ut he accepted the throne in Ragnarok.
Maybe I need to rewatch Ragnarok then (cause I don't remember that). Fortunately it's still on Netflix XD
It's just before his final fight with Hela.
Yeah my one irk with Infinity War/Endgame is how it undid what few bits of a good ending there were in Ragnorok. So not only is Asgard down to a few 100 people, but half of them died too?
Voss wrote: Thor had a pretty big arc of character growth through six films. In this one, he just plummeted off a cliff at the end of the opening act, and didn't come back.
Thor at the start of endgame... or rather after the 5 year jump... is an extension of his growth.
He receded.
No, he regressed. He's again the irresponsible oaf he was at the beginning of Thor 1. But now with pop culture memes.
Only this time no one around is willing (or able) to slap him out of it.
By the end of the film he has a completely different outlook and is ready to try something different, leaving the things he knows he cannot do behind (like lead his people), and instead going on a new journey to discover who he wants to be.
That's a really generous reading of text that isn't there. He abandoned his retrieval mission. He's never tried to lead his people. He rescued them (briefly), and when they magically turned up again in, I guess, a different ship that they didn't have, and he went on a five year bender. He got to re-fight Thanos and be part of the win, but there isn't anything to suggest he really learned anything- he just took his mother's advice as permission that he could just walk away from all his responsibilities and go play with the 'rabbit.' His outlook doesn't seem any different than his Xbox/beer binge with Korg, it simply the road-trip version.
For the other major characters that got screen time in this film, we got to see what they were sacrificing or coming to terms with -in this film-. For Thor, uniquely of the main cast, we got to see jokey Chris Hemsworth from Ghostbusters and little of Thor.
It would be one thing if they had handled it differently (as they did with Natasha, Stark and Steve). But his 'depression' (and therefor the sum total of his arc in *this film*) is treated as a bit piece with jokes. As LordofHats puts it, it's cringey. The film puts his 'depression' as the same level of Ant-man's misunderstanding of time travel because of bad films, and he's assigned the same kind of 'zings' to break up the tension with humor. And, I'll just say again, a depressed god of thunder doesn't make for good entertainment anyway, even when they don't make depression a comic relief element.
So, yeah, I'd rather have not had him in the film at all, and with the Snap that's easily done, as character appearances were up to the writers/producers. There was enough angst in the film that adding Thor's didn't help the tone, and the comic way they handled his 'depression' hurt the tone a great deal. (It seems odd that everyone else's problems was handled seriously). Since the plot required Ant-man, I would have rather had a zany heist with Rocket and Scott in past-Asgard as a legitimate break from all the emotion, and almost anyone taking Scott's place in past New York. Stark's plan of 'give his other self a heart attack' was really odd, when he knew that an angry Hulk would burst into a tense argument and cause a big distraction anyway.
But I wouldn't call it a great movie since so much was about ticking boxes and then filming what amounted to cameos.
While the rationale for Captain Marvel to be 'out there' rather than on Earth makes logical sense in universe, in movie it made her feel more like a plot device. Especially since the initial rescue isn't ever explained (See Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy on space being 'really big'), after the hype that fell a little flat.
I'm assuming that any member of the Kree military would have some (or even a lot of) basic knowledge of where Thanos is from, and where Titan is. So she found them between Titan and Earth, which while still being a needle in a haystack, is a bit more believable. Space magic, as well.
Problem is, most everyone uses jump points. Stark technobabbles about jury-rigging something to get a 'couple more days' out of the ship, but... that doesn't really work for anything but environmental. If they're going somewhere that isn't the local jump point (or somewhere else in the same system), they're just making it harder. If they're going through the local jump point, extra days of power don't matter. Every time we see space travel, its just past orbit, jump, land/enter high orbit at new planet. Except in GoG2, where we see multiple jumps in succession.
If they didn't have the power to jump from Titan to someplace useful, there was no point in going anywhere at all. Just stay on Titan, use far less power for food/water reclamation/emergency beacon.
Voss wrote: That's a really generous reading of text that isn't there.
No, it's exactly what happened. You called him "TFG" because he yelled at someone over voice chat. That's a generous reading of the text.
I call him deeply depressed individual suffering from extreme self-loathing over his failures and inability to fix his failures. He recovers throughout the film, first by speaking to his mother, then seeing himself as worthy of Mjolnir, and then finally having the chance to put right what was wrong in the final battle with Thanos. By the end he is going on to be his own person and leaving behind that which he was meant to be to become what he should be.
To be fair, I have hard time blaming Thor for yelling over voice chat. Years of real life experience tell me anyone who includes "noob" and "69" in their screen name is basically signalling to the whole world that they're a complete douche bag
LordofHats wrote: To be fair, I have hard time blaming Thor for yelling over voice chat. Years of real life experience tell me anyone who includes "noob" and "69" in their screen name is basically signalling to the whole world that they're a complete douche bag
Don't pretend like your own X-Box Live name isn't xXxLordOfHats420xXx!
LordofHats wrote: To be fair, I have hard time blaming Thor for yelling over voice chat. Years of real life experience tell me anyone who includes "noob" and "69" in their screen name is basically signalling to the whole world that they're a complete douche bag
Don't pretend like your own X-Box Live name isn't xXxLordOfHats420xXx!
Thor's journey in Endgame is, quite literally, textbook.
The Ordeal
The Hero engages in the Ordeal, the central life-or-death crisis, during which he faces his greatest fear, confronts this most difficult challenge, and experiences “death”. His Journey teeters on the brink of failure. Indy and Marion are sealed in the Well of the Souls; Annie and Alvy have broken up. And the audience watches in suspense wondering whether the Hero will survive. The Ordeal is the central, essential, and magical Stage of any Journey. Only through “death” can the Hero be reborn, experiencing a resurrection that grants greater powers or insight to see the Journey to the end. The Hero may directly taste death, or witness the death of an Ally or Mentor or, even worse, directly cause that death. The Ordeal may pit Hero against Shadow or Villain, and the Hero’s failure heightens the stakes and questions the Journey’s success
Thor rediscovering he's worthy would be an example of "The Resurrection"
The Resurrection
The Hero faces the Resurrection, his most dangerous meeting with death. This final life-and-death Ordeal shows that the Hero has maintained and can apply all that he has brought back to the Ordinary World. This Ordeal and Resurrection can represent a “cleansing” or purification that must occur now that the Hero has emerged from the land of the dead. The Hero is reborn or transformed with the attributes of his Ordinary self in addition to the lessons and insights from the characters that he has met along the road.
Admittedly, I don't know if a theoretical 'Asguardians of the Galaxy' film would be the Journey Home for Thor, or instead fall under:
In most tales, the Return with the Elixir completes the cycle of this particular Journey. Story lines have been resolved, balance has been restored to the ordinary World, and the Hero may now embark on a new life, forever influenced by the Journey traveled.
In which case, Thor realising it was never his Place to be King, would be the end of that Heroes Journey.
AegisGrimm wrote: Has it ever been said how the remaining Asguardians got to Earth? I thought their ship got blown up by Thanos, with Thor adrift in space?
I must admit that I thought all Asgardians were dead except for Thor at the end of Infinity War. I guess some managed to flee in escape pods and were led by Valkyrie to Earth while the events of Infinity War unfolded. It seems reasonnable.
Also, does anybody know what's supposed to have happened to Sif? She was a no show in Ragnarok and in Endgame yet was alive and well at the end of Thor II.
epronovost wrote: It's rather clear that at the end of Endgame, we will not see Captain America or Stark again on the big screen until a reboot (which could be years from now). We aren't going to see Black Widow and I doubt we will see Clint either. Are we going to see Thor again though? How about Hulk? Are these two from the original cast of Avenger continue on?
We probably won't see Stark or Rogers again. Will Falcon take up the "Captain America" name though? Was the inclusion of the kid from Iron Man 3 keeping their options open on Iron Man reappearing?
I wonder if they will set any of there future films or shows during the five year time skip?
How about a Black Widow movie that's full of flashbacks and seems like a prequel. But is actually Natasha in the Soul Stone? With all the comic book crazy Marvel have gotten movie audiences used to over the years, I'm sure they could pull off a resurrection at the end.
We could still see Rogers. Iirc Evan’s issue with continuing on as Cap was the physical training required to maintain the body for the role. If he just does an old man Mentor thing to Captain Falcon he wouldn’t have to worry about that.
Kind of wished they had introduced Riri before Stark died, although I initially loved that story for interactions with snarky Stark AI, which doesn’t let RDJr off the hook, and Infamous Iron Man Doom, who doesn’t currently exist and in no way could be done at this point. The kid from 3 could fill a similar role, but I can already imagine what that might dredge up if people perceive the white boy as stealing the story line from the poc girl, so they might have to proceed carefully if they go that route. I know I heard some of it from people who think the current Parker is hedging in on Miles’ current themes. They gave Rhodey a lot of screen time, maybe he’ll get a solo to continue the Iron Man name.
I was thinking that Shuri could take over that character role (not as a new Iron Man, but as sarky gadgeteer). And then as you say, keep Rhodey on to do the actual punchy punchy robot stuff.
LordofHats wrote: I do think seeing Thor in that state was a little cringe worthy. Made complete sense narratively of course but yeah. A little cringe worthy, especially since they dropped the super depressed Norse god angle rather abruptly imo.
On the plus side it now seems legitimately possible to have the body of a Norse God in real life.
LordofHats wrote: I do think seeing Thor in that state was a little cringe worthy. Made complete sense narratively of course but yeah. A little cringe worthy, especially since they dropped the super depressed Norse god angle rather abruptly imo.
On the plus side it now seems legitimately possible to have the body of a Norse God in real life.
For women it's "plus"; men still get classified as "XXL". Although I think it would be fair to say Thor hit XXXL.
LordofHats wrote: I do think seeing Thor in that state was a little cringe worthy. Made complete sense narratively of course but yeah. A little cringe worthy, especially since they dropped the super depressed Norse god angle rather abruptly imo.
On the plus side it now seems legitimately possible to have the body of a Norse God in real life.
For women it's "plus"; men still get classified as "XXL". Although I think it would be fair to say Thor hit XXXL.
LordofHats wrote: To be fair, I have hard time blaming Thor for yelling over voice chat. Years of real life experience tell me anyone who includes "noob" and "69" in their screen name is basically signalling to the whole world that they're a complete douche bag
Don't pretend like your own X-Box Live name isn't xXxLordOfHats420xXx!
I would never!
*runs to quickly change XBox screen name*
Or that they're 12. Besides does anybody ever use voice chat anymore in games? It got so bad years ago that family and friends just muted anybody that wasn't a part of their friend group.
LordofHats wrote: To be fair, I have hard time blaming Thor for yelling over voice chat. Years of real life experience tell me anyone who includes "noob" and "69" in their screen name is basically signalling to the whole world that they're a complete douche bag
Don't pretend like your own X-Box Live name isn't xXxLordOfHats420xXx!
I would never!
*runs to quickly change XBox screen name*
Or that they're 12.
That too.
Besides does anybody ever use voice chat anymore in games? It got so bad years ago that family and friends just muted anybody that wasn't a part of their friend group.
I think it's gotten more common on consoles? Hard for me to say cause I haven't used one in years. PC is basically all Discord now for voice chat, but I do occasionally see people using the ingame VOIP.
Looked like Thor and his buddies were playing Fortenight, but I think they're missing out. Thor playing SMITE would be hilarious
Also could've been worse names. What if they went by the name "MILF-Slayer69"?
To be entirely fair i think i went by somewhat edgy names as a teen (not really pervy usually). Some were sorta meh names and some were just edgy. We can all look back on our past and find something we might cringe that we did. Of course i grew up in some ways.
You know you've had a nickname too long when something you created maybe 10 years ago is still being used as your nickname.
My old gamertags were 'Your Armpit' and 'Blessed Pig'
The first so that if I killed you the killmessage would say "You were killed by Your Armpit" and the second because it was free and didn't need any numbers.
DarthDiggler wrote: It’s a comic book movie. No one is ever really dead. In the Spider-Man trailer they say the snap opened a multiverse. All rules are out the window.
I remain unconvinced that's actually true, given the antagonist.
I still don't understand why they put 6 x's in usernames. I for one am a fan of the classics, and will either use CthuluIsSpy out of habit, or Biggus_Dickus for a laugh
DarthDiggler wrote: It’s a comic book movie. No one is ever really dead. In the Spider-Man trailer they say the snap opened a multiverse. All rules are out the window.
I remain unconvinced that's actually true, given the antagonist.
Indeed. But, the best lies contain a grain of truth? It could be Mysterio isn’t from another dimension, but is aware it’s now possible?
I still think Mysterio is less a villain in the traditional sense, and more a showboating wannabe. I think he'll be creating the "elementals", and using the story of the multi-verse to make people think he's there to save them, thereby making himself famous.
Remember back in January when we started to speculate about 13 Reasons Why star Katherine Langford‘s mystery role in the 22nd Marvel Studios live-action feature film? We thought perhaps her (at the time) new red tresses could be a clue to her possible character, and apparently one of those guesses was correct.
Just when you thought the gut punches and feels were over, here comes The Russo Brothers with the description of a cut scene that featured Langford’s actual character, Morgan Stark (daughter of Tony Stark and Pepper Potts).
While chatting with Josh Horowitz on his HappySadConfused podcast, Joe and Anthony Russo revealed how things would have gone.
Joe said:
“There was an idea that we had that Tony was going to go into the metaphysical way station that Thanos goes in when he snapped his fingers. And that there was going to be a future version of his daughter in that way station.
The intention was that his future daughter, because these films are dealing with magic, his future daughter forgave him and sort of gave him peace to go. And the idea felt resonant. But it was just too many ideas in an overly complicated movie.”
Anthony admitted that the emotional impact just wasn’t hitting the right way, saying: “What we realized about it was we didn’t feel an emotional association with the adult version of his daughter. So it wasn’t ringing to us and resonating with us on an emotional level.”
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Well apparently she couldn't take on Thanos, who just punched her with the power stone. Thanos is ridiculous in this movie. He doesn't even have the gauntlet, and yet he still held off Thor, Captain America, Iron Man and Marvel. The only character he really had trouble with is Scarlet Witch, and that's because magic is bs.
Thanos in the comics was mega-strong even without the Gauntlet.
I find MCU Scarlett Witch annoyingly overpowered - she did become super-powerful eventually, but it took time from her to discover full extent of her power. Most of her Brotherhood/Avengers stint she had only modest powers.
To be fair, Wanda’s power is super erratic in terms of how strong it is even by comic standards. I remember in XMen Evolution alone she was depicted with radically different levels of control at three different points in one season.
Well Captain America, Iron Man and Thor were playing Thanos at his own game, strength and speed, which is why he was so comfortable there. Without the stones Thanos doesn't have any defence against magic, so I didn't see anything inconsistant about him struggling aginst Scarlett Witch.
It was wierd that Dr Strange, the team's most powerful mage, was just re-directing water over in the corner instead of trapping Thanos in the miror dimension or taking the gauntlet half way around the world...
In comics it is sometimes hard to tell apart whether Wanda is using her mutant powers, or her mastery of mystic arts.
Oh one small thing I especially liked in this movie: Bruce-Natasha were apparently no longer a thing. THANK GOD. They actually again bit teased Cap-Natasha in the beginning.
Kroem wrote: Well Captain America, Iron Man and Thor were playing Thanos at his own game, strength and speed, which is why he was so comfortable there.
Without the stones Thanos doesn't have any defence against magic, so I didn't see anything inconsistant about him struggling aginst Scarlett Witch.
It was wierd that Dr Strange, the team's most powerful mage, was just re-directing water over in the corner instead of trapping Thanos in the miror dimension or taking the gauntlet half way around the world...
Again, just like in the last movie, that would ultimately end badly. There was only one way they would win. And this was it. And strange knew it.
LordofHats wrote: To be fair, Wanda’s power is super erratic in terms of how strong it is even by comic standards. I remember in XMen Evolution alone she was depicted with radically different levels of control at three different points in one season.
And she was riding a huge wave of grief and anger when she took on Thanos. To her, the events of Infinity War were just a few minutes before, where she not only had to kill Vision herself, but then watched Thanos just undo it with a flick of the wrist and kill Vision all over again in front of her.
Backfire wrote: In comics it is sometimes hard to tell apart whether Wanda is using her mutant powers, or her mastery of mystic arts.
Oh one small thing I especially liked in this movie: Bruce-Natasha were apparently no longer a thing. THANK GOD. They actually again bit teased Cap-Natasha in the beginning.
I've not seen the film a second time to see, but I've heard some comments that while Bruce-Natasha was apparently something only Joss Whedon was interested in, there's the odd look between the two of them. The actual ... mechanics of how it'd work are perhaps best not thought about.
Tony already commented that they play "Hide the Zucchini" in AoU. And yes, Bruce was very upset at the loss of Natasha. They might have played it down, but he showed anguish at her death; moreso than the others.
timetowaste85 wrote: Tony already commented that they play "Hide the Zucchini" in AoU. And yes, Bruce was very upset at the loss of Natasha. They might have played it down, but he showed anguish at her death; moreso than the others.
Plus they had that awkward moment in Infinity War. So while it's clear that Bruce/Natasha are never gonna be a "thing", at least they acknowledge what has come before. That's one of the best things about the MCU
Backfire wrote: What I rather meant, that whatever they had going, it was over when we rejoined the timeline 5 years after the Snap, they had broken up or something.
I got the impression that it was over well before that. With Hulk being on Sacaar for 2 years and all. That is what made the moment in IW when Bruce says hit to Nat so awkward.
I never got the impression that they "rekindled" whatever was going on in AoU
Btw something semi-related does anybody else go to AMC theatres for viewing their movies? Does anybody else think they have one of the most fake openings with obnoxious smiles? Seriously they could win an award for that.
flamingkillamajig wrote: Btw something semi-related does anybody else go to AMC theatres for viewing their movies? Does anybody else think they have one of the most fake openings with obnoxious smiles? Seriously they could win an award for that.
I do think they're pretty cheesy.
Regal does it too, and they're even worse imo. My favorite is the "Breakfast" club of unnamed randoms who just randomly decide to all go to the movies together and all of the actors seem to be silently screaming inside.
timetowaste85 wrote: Tony already commented that they play "Hide the Zucchini" in AoU..
That they should, not that they were. It was an unfulfilled thing that was lost when he chose to take the jet rather than stay around and deal with his issues. When he came back, they didn't try to pick it back up, and didn't really try to do so during the five years. A shared pained grimace was about all the acknowledgement that got.
Mind you, in this one, Nat was one of the ones that coped with the Snap the least. She threw everything into trying to deal with the world's issues rather than her own. She handled it in a healthier way than Barton or Thor (mass murder and abject failure), but she wasn't in a healthy state of mind (unlike Stark, or even Steve, who wasn't there but was at least trying).
And honestly this leads into one of the movie's plot holes: the Soul Stone. Unless there was some unwritten rule that no one bothered to share, their competition to NOT be the one to make the sacrifice (to be the sacrifice), should have disqualified them both for gaining the stone. Both wanted to die, neither was willing to make the sacrifice the stone supposedly required. Barton waking up with it moves the plot along, but actively trying to NOT sacrifice the other person doesn't strike me as fulfilling the terms laid out.
I also feel like we missed out by not getting to see the 'Holy Carp!' moment that seemed inevitable with Captain America returning the Stone to Vormir and finding Red Skull is the guardian...
The Russos have said that once the soul stone left Red Skull was free to leave. He may have done so.
Also You probably can't just return the soul stone. Where it actually ended up is up in the air. Nobody has ever acquired it before. Once it was taken it's probably done. It's out and about. Traditionally Adam Warlock has a very close association with the soul stone. Maybe that will come up?
Finally, the "rules" about the sacrifice are not that clear. It's the soul stone that decides what does and does not happen. That much is said. That the stone requires a sacrifice is known. It doesn't have a RAW document that say "You yourself have to kill the person you love most to gain the soul stone." It could be as simple as you have to "loose that which you love". The words Red Skull actually used. A Soul for a Soul. That one person went willingly doesn't take away the loss or the sacrifice.
Imo, I don't think they needed to return the stones to their exact spot, just the exact time.
Like, the stones just need to exist and removing them from the timeline completely feths it up.
Well, Hawkeye DID “drop” her. If anyone wanted to be super technical, he killed her by letting her go. Even though they fought to kill themselves to save the other. I wrestled with that too, but that’s the only way the sacrifice made sense to me. He held on as long as he could to save her life, then “let” her fall.
I've seen some discussion on whether or not Black Widow being the one to die (and likewise with Gamora in the last film) was "fridging" or not. I can see both sides of the argument, but my opinion is that those two had to be the ones to die because they were the only ones with long red hair; so it can spread out under them when they fall looking like a bloodstain on the ground.
They couldn't kill Hawkeye as he had a family. Black Widow by contrast had no relatives or loved ones, so she was expendable.
Well, technically HE did not have family left at that point, but it was what he was in for.
AduroT wrote: Gamora’s death motivated Quill to frack up their whole plan right when they almost had it.
It doesn't constitute fridging though as Quill was already motivated in fighting Thanos. Her death just derailed the plan. Fridging implies that the female character was only killed (maimed or raped) to lead the hero to accept his call to action or to show the villain's cruelty. Neither Black Widow and Gamora were fridged in my opinion.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Neither of them died to provide motivation for another character. They weren't fridged.
I would agree.
Especially in the case of Black Widow, she's had an undercurrent of seeking redemption to her character for the entire Avenger's film franchise, and sacrificing herself to wipe the red from her ledger as it were seems completely in keeping with what she would do, especially to save Clint after he saved her in the past (at least that's what she seems to imply as to how they met). Gamora is maybe a bit more close to fridging, since it played a bit into Thanos' character and motivations, but even if it were fridging in a very technical sense, the scene was great and gave Thanos a sort of emotional depth few villains ever get in comics or film so I don't know that I'd even care. Even then Gamora had a fully developed character and wasn't just eye candy (though obviously...) so even if her death served Thanos' plot development it's not like that's the only thing she did in the franchise.
Maybe add this to my list of trick questions I sometimes throw out to gauge how much thought someone's put into their opinions
I agree, myself; "fridging" was probably a poor choice of word (although it is the case that the female characters were only the "logical" choice because the male writers chose to make them so; it's as likely that the script was written to justify their choice to kill those two); it just occurred to me that both of their bodies were framed with their hair surrounding their heads like a pool of blood, and it seemed just as likely that those two were chosen for that visual as for any other reason.
Definitely not a fridge. Honestly it would probably be worse if Hawkeye had died to “save the girl” since there’s really no argument for it being him otherwise.
I honestly didn't love the movie. I guess when any story starts trying to seriously resolve conflict by introducing either cosmic godlike powers, or time travel, or in this example BOTH, it kind of falls apart for me.
For one thing, it was odd that all of a sudden using the infinity stones causes grievous bodily harm. When thanos used it to erase half of all life, it seemed simple and it didn't bother him in the slightest.
Slight aside - I thought the whole 'Snap' thing was supposed to be a metaphor. Like it would be that easy to do whatever you wanted. Not, which is what happened, that is literally how the infinity stones are activated. I mean, when the hulk used them, he was in incredible pain and was struggling to simply snap his fingers.
Anyways, it seemed like they retconned the infinity stones to cause massive bodily harm to utilize their godlike powers, which I guess is the only reason they didn't use them to revive everyone.
And the whole time travel thing to go back and grab the stones when they existed seemed kind of cheesy, like a clip show in a sitcom that has run out of ideas. And they could just keep going to any point in time and space to solve literally any problem, as was shown when they went back to the 70s to get more pimm particles.
Lastly, the former sorcerer supreme said something to the tune of if the stone didn't exist, it would cause great harm to the universe (which is why she was hesitant to loan the time stone). What does that mean for the present timeline for the movie, in which the universe has been more or less restored, but all the stones are gone?
The big fight scene near the end was solid.
I guess I think I would have liked the story a lot more if they had enlisted Kap'n Marvel and come up with some plan to defeat an empowered thanos with the resources they could muster, rather than what amounted to an episode of time-traveling dragonball z.
Kap'n Krump wrote: For one thing, it was odd that all of a sudden using the infinity stones causes grievous bodily harm. When thanos used it to erase half of all life, it seemed simple and it didn't bother him in the slightest.
You might wanna go back and watch IW. In addition to nearly destroying the gauntlet itself, it left visible charring on Thanos' arm and neck. He also seemed quite disoriented just afterward.
The only reason is doesn't do as much damage as it did to Banner and Stark is because they AREN'T Thanos, whose been shown already to be way more powerful than either.
Also, the first gauntlet was designed as a magic shock absorber that still mostly fried itself. Tony’s gauntlet worked, but didn’t seem capable of providing the user with the same kind of protection.
LunarSol wrote: Also, the first gauntlet was designed as a magic shock absorber that still mostly fried itself. Tony’s gauntlet worked, but didn’t seem capable of providing the user with the same kind of protection.
Thanos is incredibly strong and durable, more so than any of the Avengers, even Hulk. Tony is a regular human, if anything his gauntlet worked super well, otherwise he would have been reduced to pile of ash straight away.
I was disappointed that Thanos’ final version became a bad-guy shell, after all the development that came before it.
I have a genuine dislike of time-travel to fix the present. As a device, it diminishes the importance of any character’s actions. I recognize it was needed to reset the snap, but the time heist was a failure other than to nod at the previous films.
I would have rather seen the Avengers battle on from the snap, to recover the stones, and send Thor back to “aim for the head” as Thanos advised at the end of IW.
I would rather the movie had gone full circle, rather than “psych!” It didn’t count! I would have rather seen the older, wiser, but less powerful Thanos have to fight to keep his prize, and ultimately lose it. Victory for the Avengers, and a tragic end for Thanos. I realize I’m wishing into my fist, but I think it would have been a better movie.
Gael Knight wrote: Did Steve have his alternate timeline life then come back to the film timeline as an old man?
No, it was the same Steve. He was technically in the ice while he went back for Peggy, but only a handful of people really knew anything about that. So his timeline goes WW2 > Ice > MCU Movies > back into mid 20th Century. He knew to come to that spot in his old age as he knew Sam would be there to pass the shield to.
Gael Knight wrote: Did Steve have his alternate timeline life then come back to the film timeline as an old man?
No, it was the same Steve. He was technically in the ice while he went back for Peggy, but only a handful of people really knew anything about that. So his timeline goes WW2 > Ice > MCU Movies > back into mid 20th Century. He knew to come to that spot in his old age as he knew Sam would be there to pass the shield to.
Except he can’t do that because you can’t change the past. Like, he can go back and live that, but old him shouldn’t be there in the present like he was. For all the crap they gave other time travel movies, they couldn’t even manage their own consistency.
Although to be honest, if what happened went as intended, Cap has actually survived two snaps by the end of the movie, not to mention holding Mjolnir in one hand AND every Infinity Stone in a case in the other, and doing absolutely nothing untrustworthy.
Kap'n Krump wrote: For one thing, it was odd that all of a sudden using the infinity stones causes grievous bodily harm. When thanos used it to erase half of all life, it seemed simple and it didn't bother him in the slightest.
You might wanna go back and watch IW. In addition to nearly destroying the gauntlet itself, it left visible charring on Thanos' arm and neck. He also seemed quite disoriented just afterward.
The only reason is doesn't do as much damage as it did to Banner and Stark is because they AREN'T Thanos, whose been shown already to be way more powerful than either.
-
That was established since at least GG1. Ronan can barely hold one stone long enough to stick it in his hammer. Quill is almost disintegrated leveraging the power of a single stone in a small way. This wasn't some last minute change for plot convenience.
The powerstone does seem to be the most rawly destructive though. Nobody explodes holding the soul stone in their hand. Or the mind stone in visions head. Or the space stone in thonses ungloved hand.
Its really the power stone that feths you just for touching it.
But they ALL feth you for using them. Remember how bad things were going for jane foster and malekith with the aether?
watched it, its alright and pretty much on par with what I expected (even if they stuck in a blatant 'dont worry over the timey wimey, just go with it)
also needed more Korg, one more thing to hate fortnight over I guess
Gael Knight wrote: Did Steve have his alternate timeline life then come back to the film timeline as an old man?
No, it was the same Steve. He was technically in the ice while he went back for Peggy, but only a handful of people really knew anything about that. So his timeline goes WW2 > Ice > MCU Movies > back into mid 20th Century. He knew to come to that spot in his old age as he knew Sam would be there to pass the shield to.
Except he can’t do that because you can’t change the past. Like, he can go back and live that, but old him shouldn’t be there in the present like he was. For all the crap they gave other time travel movies, they couldn’t even manage their own consistency.
He didn't change the past, though. All of that had already happened in Peggy's past but Peggy's past is not the same as Steve's past.
Gael Knight wrote: Did Steve have his alternate timeline life then come back to the film timeline as an old man?
No, it was the same Steve. He was technically in the ice while he went back for Peggy, but only a handful of people really knew anything about that. So his timeline goes WW2 > Ice > MCU Movies > back into mid 20th Century. He knew to come to that spot in his old age as he knew Sam would be there to pass the shield to.
Except he can’t do that because you can’t change the past. Like, he can go back and live that, but old him shouldn’t be there in the present like he was. For all the crap they gave other time travel movies, they couldn’t even manage their own consistency.
He didn't change the past, though. All of that had already happened in Peggy's past but Peggy's past is not the same as Steve's past.
You can’t change the present. They explicitly tell you that. If Steve goes to the past and lives a life, he doesn’t end up in the same present he left as an old man because he didn’t exist in the past. Its why they can’t just go back and murder baby Thanos.
Gael Knight wrote: Did Steve have his alternate timeline life then come back to the film timeline as an old man?
No, it was the same Steve. He was technically in the ice while he went back for Peggy, but only a handful of people really knew anything about that. So his timeline goes WW2 > Ice > MCU Movies > back into mid 20th Century. He knew to come to that spot in his old age as he knew Sam would be there to pass the shield to.
Except he can’t do that because you can’t change the past. Like, he can go back and live that, but old him shouldn’t be there in the present like he was. For all the crap they gave other time travel movies, they couldn’t even manage their own consistency.
He didn't change the past, though. All of that had already happened in Peggy's past but Peggy's past is not the same as Steve's past.
You can’t change the present. They explicitly tell you that. If Steve goes to the past and lives a life, he doesn’t end up in the same present he left as an old man because he didn’t exist in the past. Its why they can’t just go back and murder baby Thanos.
He didn't change the present, though. Steve going to the past and living a life to end up back in the present does not change any of his current past. His living in the past was still his future from the perspective of the present (i.e the point at which he travelled back in time).
Steve goes back in time from point A to point B. From point B he lives his life until point A comes around again. Nothing in that requires changing any aspect of the future of point B. Any "changes" he brings about by living in the past have already been observed by others in that timeline (Peggy's never seen husband, for example), so they are not a paradox.
So, Steve living in the past does not create a paradox as anything he does has already been observed in others pasts and relativity says that the pasts and futures of different observers does not need to match. Steves future from the point he went back in time to live his life was the past of the rest of the characters.
The rules of time travel means that you cannot change events which have already been observed. But that means that any changes you make have already been observed. We have not observed anything in the films which precludes the existence of two Steve's in the past (one from the future running around and one frozen in ice).
The killing of Baby Thanos doesn't work because adult Thanos has already been observed. So killing him cannot change the present. We know Steve must be in the ice to get thawed out. All that means is that Steve cannot go back in time and thaw himself out without changing to a different timeline. As long as his actions which he is taking in his current present are the actions observed in the past of the observers who lived through that time, then he will not end up in a different present to the other characters.
The timeline we have been watching through all of the MCU films has always been the one in which Steve went back in time in Endgame and grew old. Nothing has been changed by his doing so as it was already observed (just not by us).
Observed by whom? Arre you suggesting nobody ever saw Steve Rogers as her husband? Did he live in the house for 50 years?
I don't see what the problem would have been to have him lived out his life in an alternate timeline and then return. At least that makes sense with what we are told.
Gael Knight wrote: Observed by whom? Arre you suggesting nobody ever saw Steve Rogers as her husband? Did he live in the house for 50 years?
I don't see what the problem would have been to have him lived out his life in an alternate timeline and then return. At least that makes sense with what we are told.
I mean, you do get how people work right? Elvis is dead. Some people insist he is not, and works as a shoe salesman in Bumfeck Nowhere, Idaho. How many rational people believe the latter? Not many, because it's preposterous, he died, the news said so.
Well, Captain America died, the news said so. He has a museum and everything. OK, that guy there might look a bit like Cap, but I mean, you, Average Joe, only really "saw" him in propaganda movies, mostly wearing a helmet-mask, so the similarity likely isn't as strong as you first thought, right?
And that's how people would dismiss the guy who looks quite a lot like Captain America mowing Peggy's lawn. Providing he avoids contact with people who don't personally know him other than Peggy, he could go completely undetected, but even if a few people did find out that still doesn't change anything because providing they kept silent it doesn't alter the timeline we've been seeing up until now, which is WW2 > Capsicle > Avengers & MCU > travel back to post WW2 > old man in "present" day.
Gael Knight wrote: Did Steve have his alternate timeline life then come back to the film timeline as an old man?
No, it was the same Steve. He was technically in the ice while he went back for Peggy, but only a handful of people really knew anything about that. So his timeline goes WW2 > Ice > MCU Movies > back into mid 20th Century. He knew to come to that spot in his old age as he knew Sam would be there to pass the shield to.
Except he can’t do that because you can’t change the past. Like, he can go back and live that, but old him shouldn’t be there in the present like he was. For all the crap they gave other time travel movies, they couldn’t even manage their own consistency.
Umm why cap can't be simultaneously frozen and as the future self? Provided he doesnt' go around changing past(sure if he does something and becomes public that changes what was known to happen...but if he lives quietly on his own that wouldn't be public knowledge so no inconsistency there. We don't know he didn't do that all the time because he kept quiet about himself.
Gael Knight wrote: Did Steve have his alternate timeline life then come back to the film timeline as an old man?
No, it was the same Steve. He was technically in the ice while he went back for Peggy, but only a handful of people really knew anything about that. So his timeline goes WW2 > Ice > MCU Movies > back into mid 20th Century. He knew to come to that spot in his old age as he knew Sam would be there to pass the shield to.
Except he can’t do that because you can’t change the past. Like, he can go back and live that, but old him shouldn’t be there in the present like he was. For all the crap they gave other time travel movies, they couldn’t even manage their own consistency.
He didn't change the past, though. All of that had already happened in Peggy's past but Peggy's past is not the same as Steve's past.
You can’t change the present. They explicitly tell you that. If Steve goes to the past and lives a life, he doesn’t end up in the same present he left as an old man because he didn’t exist in the past. Its why they can’t just go back and murder baby Thanos.
Where does it show there was no old cap living all the time there but not making fuss of it? If he was there's no inconsistency. And he wouldn't be known about because he's not going around shouting "I'm captain america!" and doing heroic deeds. He's just one more worker in the big world living his life, marrying, having kids. Nobody knew he was from the future. Except maybe wife but if she held the secret as well(hardly impossible) no timeline was changed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gael Knight wrote: Observed by whom? Arre you suggesting nobody ever saw Steve Rogers as her husband? Did he live in the house for 50 years?
I don't see what the problem would have been to have him lived out his life in an alternate timeline and then return. At least that makes sense with what we are told.
Did any of those know he was cap america from the future? If we knew for SURE he was not in past living quietly that would be changing past. If we knew for sure he was not sending would change past. There's no evidence he wasn't though. And not being public figure is kinda point of living quietly...
It all breaks down when you realise that Shield would know its captain america and as Shield is Hydra as soon as that kicks off they take a little wander over to peggies house and put a bullet in him, not to mention they would be getting reports that there are in fact two captain americas.
time travel stories never work... EVER, the made a good effort but failed like every other time travel story
As long as he didn't change a single thing about what happened in the wider world after he got frozen up to when he left, things are perfectly ok. The really hard part would have been standing by and watching everything bad unfold without lifting a finger.
Formosa wrote: It all breaks down when you realise that Shield would know its captain america and as Shield is Hydra as soon as that kicks off they take a little wander over to peggies house and put a bullet in him, not to mention they would be getting reports that there are in fact two captain americas.
time travel stories never work... EVER, the made a good effort but failed like every other time travel story
We could have always been watching the time line where cap goes to the past to hang with peggy carter. We could have switched perspective to the time line where he goes to the past to hang with peggy at any point. Steve could go back to hang out with peggy in every time line. Steve could have rejoined the main time line after peggys death in civil war and just hung about as an old man in the current time line.
Those are 4 very reasonable explanations for steve living his life in the past and not "breaking" anything in the continuity.
Formosa wrote: It all breaks down when you realise that Shield would know its captain america and as Shield is Hydra as soon as that kicks off they take a little wander over to peggies house and put a bullet in him, not to mention they would be getting reports that there are in fact two captain americas.
time travel stories never work... EVER, the made a good effort but failed like every other time travel story
Why would SHIELD know?
Because reasons obviously
Obviously cap america is going to go around telling people around he's captain america and not say settle down in some quiet suburb, taking regular 8-5 work. No way. Too boring. He would go for his own home and walk up to shield HQ and ask "what's next gig?"
Formosa wrote: It all breaks down when you realise that Shield would know its captain america and as Shield is Hydra as soon as that kicks off they take a little wander over to peggies house and put a bullet in him, not to mention they would be getting reports that there are in fact two captain americas.
time travel stories never work... EVER, the made a good effort but failed like every other time travel story
Why would SHIELD know?
Because reasons obviously
Obviously cap america is going to go around telling people around he's captain america and not say settle down in some quiet suburb, taking regular 8-5 work. No way. Too boring. He would go for his own home and walk up to shield HQ and ask "what's next gig?"
Do you really think he could sideline himself and not help out when people were in need? This is a man literally willing to throw his life away to save others.
Isn't "sidelining" himself so that events play out as they should 100% what Cap would do? Cap has proven on several occasions that he would "sacrifice" himself for the greater good and do "whatever it takes" So not interfering with the known events of the timeline so that they play out "correctly" IS a sacrifice for Cap. Resisting the urge to help because he knows that it would create a divergent timeline in which Thanos WINS is perfectly within Cap's character.
And actually, I think this above all proves (or at least supports) that Old Cap is indeed in the main MCU timeline all along. Because in the other 14 million potential timelines, Thanos wins. It doesn't appear that Old Cap comes from such a timeline. Could be wrong, but it doesn't seem to fit
I also find it interesting that we never see Peggy's husband when mentioned in Winter Solider or Civil War. It could entirely have been Cap all along and was always part of this timeline
Yeah, the majority of cap's alternate young life is lived out during the ice cap. At
least there's good odds he'll turn old before people recognize his likeness in
the public eye years later.
On the other hand, Cap could have very well lived a very public life as Captain America in an alternate timeline that would have had had no impact on the prime MCU timeline due to branching off as an alternate timeline. He was able to come back to the prime timeline since the method of time travel used the Quantum Realm, thus returning him to a specific quantum reality.
The whole climactic battle is a massive paradox unless the quantum "time travel" is actually about jumping between different reality's. So Steve could have beaten Hydra at all three of the Earth drop offs, saved Freya, hung out with "past" Starlord, and reunited with Peggy without affecting the main MCU timeline.
skyth wrote: I just assumed he used the device to return to the timeline after staying in an alternate one for awhile and getting his happy ending.
That makes the most sense to me. He stays there then pops back after she dies and he's dying. Has all sorts of adventures that don't matter to the prime universe (unless something/someone chases him through, which a nice hook for future movies and seemingly the kind of thing they intend, going by latest trailers)
Formosa wrote: It all breaks down when you realise that Shield would know its captain america and as Shield is Hydra as soon as that kicks off they take a little wander over to peggies house and put a bullet in him, not to mention they would be getting reports that there are in fact two captain americas.
time travel stories never work... EVER, the made a good effort but failed like every other time travel story
Why would SHIELD know?
Because reasons obviously
Obviously cap america is going to go around telling people around he's captain america and not say settle down in some quiet suburb, taking regular 8-5 work. No way. Too boring. He would go for his own home and walk up to shield HQ and ask "what's next gig?"
Because Peggy is one of the main members of Shield, because they can and do spy on themselves, because a person as famous as captain america WOULD be noticed in short order, or has everyone forgotten about all the propaganda vids they did of him during WW2 including pics of him without his mast on, the fella was mega famous, then on top of that Hydra sure as hell would know who he was and as soon as they take even a quick look at peggies life they would be like "who is the big fella your living with that looks exactly like captain america"
Or we can go with your explanation, he lived in a secure bunker underground with no human contact ever for the rest of his life and didnt turn up to his wifes funeral and she somehow forgot he was still alive
You have to remember that Cap only got recognized by one child while in the Cap museum, while surrounded by pictures of himself, so I don't think given the stupidity of the general P in comic book universes that it's a gimme.
Formosa wrote: It all breaks down when you realise that Shield would know its captain america and as Shield is Hydra as soon as that kicks off they take a little wander over to peggies house and put a bullet in him, not to mention they would be getting reports that there are in fact two captain americas.
time travel stories never work... EVER, the made a good effort but failed like every other time travel story
Why would SHIELD know?
Because reasons obviously
Obviously cap america is going to go around telling people around he's captain america and not say settle down in some quiet suburb, taking regular 8-5 work. No way. Too boring. He would go for his own home and walk up to shield HQ and ask "what's next gig?"
Do you really think he could sideline himself and not help out when people were in need? This is a man literally willing to throw his life away to save others.
With the MCU version of time travel, yes, because Cap is driven to do the right thing, and the right thing is to keep things as they were to avoid creating any paradoxes.
AegisGrimm wrote: As long as he didn't change a single thing about what happened in the wider world after he got frozen up to when he left, things are perfectly ok. The really hard part would have been standing by and watching everything bad unfold without lifting a finger.
Because he knows that “he” is already there, doing exactly that. From the time he thaws, anyway. He knows his other self is doing the job needed, so he knows the world is in good hands.
If I had a clone, and my clone went to work for me, did things exactly as I would so I could stay home and paint models, would I go to work to back him up? Nope. Cuz “I’m” already at work.
AegisGrimm wrote: As long as he didn't change a single thing about what happened in the wider world after he got frozen up to when he left, things are perfectly ok. The really hard part would have been standing by and watching everything bad unfold without lifting a finger.
Because he knows that “he” is already there, doing exactly that. From the time he thaws, anyway. He knows his other self is doing the job needed, so he knows the world is in good hands.
If I had a clone, and my clone went to work for me, did things exactly as I would so I could stay home and paint models, would I go to work to back him up? Nope. Cuz “I’m” already at work.
That... isn't how psychology works for people with Cap's mentality. He's got 'evil triumphs when good men do nothing' written into his blood. He'd be constitutionally incapable of not doing _more_ good.
Which he could do freely in an alternate universe, which he'd be disposed to do anyway, to 'make up' for whatever their interference they might have caused by taking the stones in the first place.
Atonement, doing good, getting what he wants _and_ not taking risks with the primary timeline? Easy sell. He'd stay over there and pop back to Prime after everything is over.
Occam's razor wins, and it neatly avoids plot holes, and doesn't violate the rules they're laying out for time/alternate reality travel. Coming back and trying to live in secret does.
GoatboyBeta wrote: The whole climactic battle is a massive paradox unless the quantum "time travel" is actually about jumping between different reality's. .
It explicitly is. They discuss it (badly) among themselves, then the Ancient One lays it out for Bruce, with magic pictures. So yes, Cap can 'fix everything' from the point he lands in those realities. Narratively, that will probably end badly with unintended consequences, but he can definitely try.
AegisGrimm wrote: As long as he didn't change a single thing about what happened in the wider world after he got frozen up to when he left, things are perfectly ok. The really hard part would have been standing by and watching everything bad unfold without lifting a finger.
Because he knows that “he” is already there, doing exactly that. From the time he thaws, anyway. He knows his other self is doing the job needed, so he knows the world is in good hands.
If I had a clone, and my clone went to work for me, did things exactly as I would so I could stay home and paint models, would I go to work to back him up? Nope. Cuz “I’m” already at work.
That... isn't how psychology works for people with Cap's mentality. He's got 'evil triumphs when good men do nothing' written into his blood. He'd be constitutionally incapable of not doing _more_ good.
Which he could do freely in an alternate universe, which he'd be disposed to do anyway, to 'make up' for whatever their interference they might have caused by taking the stones in the first place.
Atonement, doing good, getting what he wants _and_ not taking risks with the primary timeline? Easy sell. He'd stay over there and pop back to Prime after everything is over.
Occam's razor wins, and it neatly avoids plot holes, and doesn't violate the rules they're laying out for time/alternate reality travel. Coming back and trying to live in secret does.
GoatboyBeta wrote: The whole climactic battle is a massive paradox unless the quantum "time travel" is actually about jumping between different reality's. .
It explicitly is. They discuss it (badly) among themselves, then the Ancient One lays it out for Bruce, with magic pictures.
Except he also knows if he does anything, he can screw things up royally. So he knows he’s already out there doing good deeds. Adding a second version of himself to do more good deeds could yield disastrous results. So he exhibits control and lets current-Cap do what he has to do.
AegisGrimm wrote: As long as he didn't change a single thing about what happened in the wider world after he got frozen up to when he left, things are perfectly ok. The really hard part would have been standing by and watching everything bad unfold without lifting a finger.
Because he knows that “he” is already there, doing exactly that. From the time he thaws, anyway. He knows his other self is doing the job needed, so he knows the world is in good hands.
If I had a clone, and my clone went to work for me, did things exactly as I would so I could stay home and paint models, would I go to work to back him up? Nope. Cuz “I’m” already at work.
That... isn't how psychology works for people with Cap's mentality. He's got 'evil triumphs when good men do nothing' written into his blood. He'd be constitutionally incapable of not doing _more_ good.
Which he could do freely in an alternate universe, which he'd be disposed to do anyway, to 'make up' for whatever their interference they might have caused by taking the stones in the first place.
Atonement, doing good, getting what he wants _and_ not taking risks with the primary timeline? Easy sell. He'd stay over there and pop back to Prime after everything is over.
Occam's razor wins, and it neatly avoids plot holes, and doesn't violate the rules they're laying out for time/alternate reality travel. Coming back and trying to live in secret does.
GoatboyBeta wrote: The whole climactic battle is a massive paradox unless the quantum "time travel" is actually about jumping between different reality's. .
It explicitly is. They discuss it (badly) among themselves, then the Ancient One lays it out for Bruce, with magic pictures.
Except he also knows if he does anything, he can screw things up royally. So he knows he’s already out there doing good deeds. Adding a second version of himself to do more good deeds could yield disastrous results. So he exhibits control and lets current-Cap do what he has to do.
No he can't. They hammer this several times. You can't change the past. It's why they go to alternate realities in the first place.
It's not based on observers or anything else, it fundamentally can't be done, any more than he can benchpress the sun. Its simply an immutable rule of physics in the MCU, if you want to muck about in the past you have to go to a different reality and muck about with their timeline as it happens (your point of entry is the 'present')
I'm pretty sure after some thought that he definitely went and lived as a hero from the 40's on in an alternate timeline created by his appearance in the past, and then as an old man he used his suit and remaining Pym particles to return back to where he left, bringing along his trusty shield to give to Falcon.
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm pretty sure after some thought that he definitely went and lived as a hero from the 40's on in an alternate timeline created by his appearance in the past, and then as an old man he used his suit and remaining Pym particles to return back to where he left, bringing along his trusty shield to give to Falcon.
Then he should have came back via the main time machine, not by the shore where it's heavily implied that he stayed in the same timeline until he got old. Plus, how did he get back then without the machine? It's not like his transponder is linked with any other time machine.
That's also way too much of a jump from what was shown on film. Objectively speaking.
But also, it's completely fine. It's completely ok for you to go with that's how it happened. Death of the Author is a thing and if it helps you enjoy the movie more and Steve's arc, go for it.
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm pretty sure after some thought that he definitely went and lived as a hero from the 40's on in an alternate timeline created by his appearance in the past, and then as an old man he used his suit and remaining Pym particles to return back to where he left, bringing along his trusty shield to give to Falcon.
Then he should have came back via the main time machine, not by the shore where it's heavily implied that he stayed in the same timeline until he got old. Plus, how did he get back then without the machine? It's not like his transponder is linked with any other time machine.
Who knows? Maybe he got the other Stark and/or Banner to aid him? Or even easier- Hank himself?
I'm just saying it seems to be the easiest way to mesh his travelling through the two timelines cleanly, with no mess. There's definitely tons of story that could be told about what happened after he left that pad, with about 47 different good explanations how he is there by the lake.
If we REALLY need a pointless complex explanation here:
We're following timeline 219743. Cap 219743 went back and created timeline 219744 at the end of which, he gave the shield to Sam 219744. Luckily, Cap 219742 had also gone back, creating timeline 219743 at the end of which he gave the shield to Sam 219743.
AegisGrimm wrote: I'm pretty sure after some thought that he definitely went and lived as a hero from the 40's on in an alternate timeline created by his appearance in the past, and then as an old man he used his suit and remaining Pym particles to return back to where he left, bringing along his trusty shield to give to Falcon.
Then he should have came back via the main time machine, not by the shore where it's heavily implied that he stayed in the same timeline until he got old. Plus, how did he get back then without the machine? It's not like his transponder is linked with any other time machine.
The machine doesn't seem strictly necessary. They jump directly from past New York to Camp Nostalgia without one. (Or, admittedly, a scene could have been cut).
But really, arriving 50' from the arrival pad (which is now portable and significantly miniaturized) for a dramatic reveal isn't that much of a stretch. It's a better story moment and still doesn't break any of the established rules. Given that it allows for interplanetary, dimensional and time travel simultaneously, with different people going to different destinations (and can be jury-rigged as the basis for a gateway that can encompass an entire battleship/carrier of ridiculous size), I'm willing to spot it a dozen or so yards.
LunarSol wrote: If we REALLY need a pointless complex explanation here:
We're following timeline 219743. Cap 219743 went back and created timeline 219744 at the end of which, he gave the shield to Sam 219744. Luckily, Cap 219742 had also gone back, creating timeline 219743 at the end of which he gave the shield to Sam 219743.
So does anyone else think that the chill Hulk is modelled on that famous American lifecoach guy from Shallow Hal? (Tony Robbins) I couldn't put my finger on it at the time but it just clicked!
Just saw it on Sat. Was about what I expected. The problem with a flick like this is that any suspense thats built with the multiple points of near victory/defeat is immediately dispelled when you realize X/Y/Z character hasnt shown up yet
Visually very impressive, but the story was basically contrived macguffins over and over.
Vaktathi wrote: Just saw it on Sat. Was about what I expected. The problem with a flick like this is that any suspense thats built with the multiple points of near victory/defeat is immediately dispelled when you realize X/Y/Z character hasnt shown up yet
Visually very impressive, but the story was basically contrived macguffins over and over.
Yeah, I saw it yesterday. It was fun, but about what I expected. The Cap arc didn't make strict sense, but I'm not sure that their approach to time travel did anyway. And hey, it's time travel. In an MCU film. I can easily let it go.
But I remain disappointed that the Captain America we got in the MCU was ultimately a man unable to move on from the past. I've been a fan of the comics character since I was a kid, and that character is a man with roots in the past who both reflects on and continually adapts to the present. To be fair though, we're not talking about hundreds of issues of comics, but a few films worth of time. Winter Soldier is still my fave MCU film, and it's mostly a pretty great Cap film. But Civil War was really more of an Iron Man film...the character arc belonged to Tony, not Steve. I could have used another genuine Cap film to develop him more, but that's probably just me. *shrug*
Anyway, back on topic, Endgame felt 20 minutes too long to me. There was tons to do and cover, so it had to be a long one. Still, it was almost a little slow in spots, which is something it shares with the original Avengers film.
I thought it was nice to see Jon Favreau get one of the last 'goodbye' shots at the cabin. RDJ is the #1 reason why the MCU worked, but IMO #2 is probably Favreau, even ahead of Feige. Favreau's Iron Man gave Feige the blueprints -- story, tone, and look -- for the rest of the MCU, and he doesn't get enough credit for that IMO.
Just saw the movie this evening. I thought it was awesome! I'm still digesting it right now so I don't have much as far as specific thoughts, but I can definitely say that they ended this phase of the MCU with a very nice bang.
I read somewhere an interesting idea that might be practical from a real world standpoint.
Armin Zola was able to preserve his conscious mind, and he was both not as smart as Tony and using WW2 era tech.
So while accepting RDJ is probably done as Iron Man, do we think we might see him in future as an AI voice a la Jarvis/Friday and the occasional hologram?
Seems eminently doable in-Universe and would likely need a much smaller physical and time commitment for the actor.
Alright, no more arguing about if old Cap should have been sitting on that bench. Instead we can argue about why they don’t just repeat their earlier time travel failure on Cap to make him young again.
AduroT wrote: Alright, no more arguing about if old Cap should have been sitting on that bench. Instead we can argue about why they don’t just repeat their earlier time travel failure on Cap to make him young again.
Probably because he doesn't want to. He lived a good life.
I think that's kind of the joke. Steve would know all that stuff works out sort of okay in the end, so while everyone else in panicking he's just going on with life.
If you want to go dark:
Peggy: Oh god the Twin Towers!
Cap: Don't worry. We get them. *drinks a smoothie*
Azreal13 wrote: I read somewhere an interesting idea that might be practical from a real world standpoint.
Armin Zola was able to preserve his conscious mind, and he was both not as smart as Tony and using WW2 era tech.
So while accepting RDJ is probably done as Iron Man, do we think we might see him in future as an AI voice a la Jarvis/Friday and the occasional hologram?
Seems eminently doable in-Universe and would likely need a much smaller physical and time commitment for the actor.
I hope not. That doesn't seem rarratively satisfying. The Avengers series (specifically Assemble, Age of Ultron, Infinity War and Endgame, but also the Iron Man and captain America trilogies) are Steve and Tony's stories, and it's good to see them both end. Have someone else take up the disguises, but leave the characters alone, please.
I Did really enjoy snarky AI Tony from the beginning of Riri’s run, but the MCU hasn’t really done much of anything to set up a similar circumstance, and it would require RDJ to keep doing it, and iirc doesn’t he want to be done? Like, they’re aging out, it’s why they’ve gotten be replaced.
LordofHats wrote: I think that's kind of the joke. Steve would know all that stuff works out sort of okay in the end, so while everyone else in panicking he's just going on with life.
If you want to go dark:
Peggy: Oh god the Twin Towers!
Cap: Don't worry. We get them. *drinks a smoothie*
There's something deeply uncomfortable about "Captain America" not preventing 9/11
LordofHats wrote: I think that's kind of the joke. Steve would know all that stuff works out sort of okay in the end, so while everyone else in panicking he's just going on with life.
If you want to go dark:
Peggy: Oh god the Twin Towers!
Cap: Don't worry. We get them. *drinks a smoothie*
There's something deeply uncomfortable about "Captain America" not preventing 9/11
I think around the time that happened they covered it in one of the comics. Cap's guilt about not being able to prevent it or something. I only heard about it though, as I don't read comic books much.
Really impressive - lots of lovely character moments and dialogue, writers worked veyr hard on this one. The cast bill must have been pretty astronomical!
Great work in giving so many people short but signifcant moments.
Lots of heart in this film and always good to have that magical contrast between humour and darker scenes / emotion.
LordofHats wrote: I think that's kind of the joke. Steve would know all that stuff works out sort of okay in the end, so while everyone else in panicking he's just going on with life.
If you want to go dark:
Peggy: Oh god the Twin Towers!
Cap: Don't worry. We get them. *drinks a smoothie*
There's something deeply uncomfortable about "Captain America" not preventing 9/11
I think around the time that happened they covered it in one of the comics. Cap's guilt about not being able to prevent it or something. I only heard about it though, as I don't read comic books much.
Right, most comics pulled a 'everybody was away' bit. (Alongside a fair amount of debate whether or not it would be tasteless to just have superheroes stop it in various comic universes)
But this would be Cap aware it was coming because of time shenanigans (alternate universe or not), and dismissing it with a shrug and a smoothie is *way* out of character, even if he is 'laying low' and somehow successfully hiding from SHIELD while married to someone who'd get a lot scrutiny 24/7. And its one of dozens of incidents where he'd have to actively discard his character and morals to have an anonymous 'happily ever after.'
Voss wrote: But this would be Cap aware it was coming because of time shenanigans (alternate universe or not), and dismissing it with a shrug and a smoothie is *way* out of character, even if he is 'laying low' and somehow successfully hiding from SHIELD while married to someone who'd get a lot scrutiny 24/7. And its one of dozens of incidents where he'd have to actively discard his character and morals to have an anonymous 'happily ever after.'
Of course for all we know on Earth-Steve he started making calls in the 60s and averted the Kennedy Assassination and Vietnam War. So by the time 2001 rolled around the world was so different there was no attack to avert.
Or basically if he messed with history on Earth-Steve there's no chance the Sept 11 attacks would have been on the same day/time if they happened at all. There were lots of things to avert first so that Earth would look very different. Maybe better, maybe not, but certainly different.
The Loki TV show might provide answers for how that would work. Of course, it's also possible Steve morally decided that he had no right to alter the course of history. We've all seen the Butterfly Effect, right
The Loki TV show might provide answers for how that would work. Of course, it's also possible Steve morally decided that he had no right to alter the course of history. We've all seen the Butterfly Effect, right
That's the other possibility, and if he decided not to prevent the Communists from winning the Chinese Civil War or the Soviets getting the atomic bomb, then he'd certainly hold the line for anything more recent.
His very presence alters history though. That’s the whole point of the butterfly effect. I don’t even have a problem with Cap living that new life. My only issue is him being on the bench. He should have come back thru the machine as the movie had established that was required to get to a specific future.
AduroT wrote: His very presence alters history though. That’s the whole point of the butterfly effect. I don’t even have a problem with Cap living that new life. My only issue is him being on the bench. He should have come back thru the machine as the movie had established that was required to get to a specific future.
He doesn't need to if the timeline we have been following is the one with him already living his life back in time in.
And the movie specifically calls out the no changing history, only creating new futures. It's Dragonball Z Future Trunks android saga rules.
They work well enough. You might as well say Spider-man stories don't work because irradiated spiders don't grant super powers.
Alternate realities or not - the impression was that Steve got a happy ending that he deserved and then met up with his friends at the end to pass on the shield, finishing that character's story arc on a positive note.
AduroT wrote: Which means every person who has died is someone Steve sat back and let die without trying to save them.
Well, no. That would only be true if he came back to the past of the original time line and hid for... basically Tony Stark's entire life (give or take a couple extra days/weeks at either end).
But the movie explicitly says he can't do that (by the physical laws of MCU time travel), so presumably he went to an alternate timeline and did Cap appropriate things while also living his happy life.
The only way that he suddenly becomes a horrible person is if you ignore the conversation the Hulk, Rocket and Nebula have with Antman and Warmachine about how Back to the Future and other time travel movies are stupid and wrong, because (at the very least) MCU time travel doesn't work like that, and it's completely impossible to travel into your own past because you inherently nullify any reason to actually do it. (If you time travel to stop X, you've stopped X, so don't have any reason to time travel in the first place).
So he goes back to the various time lines at the point X+1 (X being the point at which they stole the various stones in each time line), doesn't change 'the past' in any of them, and lives on over there after 'Camp Nostalgia,' then pops back after he left to return the stones, which changes nothing, because he's returning to each time line after the point he left it, including the primary one.
So the 'Camp Nostalgia' universe would be fairly different to the MCU we're familiar with, it also doesn't actually matter, unless and until characters from that universe wander into the primary one. (Which, going by the Spider trailers, is a thing that can potentially be happening)
---
While its a sappy end for a character I don't particularly like, it's consistent with both the character and the time travel rules they've established, and nothing in the film contradicts it (despite post movie interviews with the writers confusing the issue).
MarkNorfolk wrote: They work well enough. You might as well say Spider-man stories don't work because irradiated spiders don't grant super powers.
Alternate realities or not - the impression was that Steve got a happy ending that he deserved and then met up with his friends at the end to pass on the shield, finishing that character's story arc on a positive note.
It didn't work though, you have all spent ages trying to rationalize that part of the movie, it broke its own rules and the happy ending is irrelevant, the timey wimey stuff failed, like it has done in every single film that has ever done it
Don't make it a bad film though, can't expect them to get right something no one else has ever managed.
Frazzled wrote: Yes if you control time space matter etc. just double the resources, half the resources needed etc.
Turns out he's just a psychopath after all.
It was pointed out in the Infinity War thread last year, but the reason he didn't do this was "nobody would learn a lesson and it would just happen all over again". The part he didn't think of was that 1000 years in the future, he'd be gone, everyone who survived the cull would be gone, and it would just be a myth of legend. But in his mind's eye, he's right; in the immediate time, people wouldn't learn any lessons if they suddenly just gained a whole ton without a travesty to "give it" to them. The cull (or Snap) made the survivors remember what they lost and appreciate what they still had (again, in his mind's eye). He's driven, he honestly believes he's doing the right thing, and his reasoning is sound. But he sees the immediate future, and not a millennia into the future when the same thing will happen again, and his Infinity War passes into the realm of legend. So he's right and wrong all in the same breath.
How is he right though? He's only right if there's some inherent value in people "learning the lesson" that he wants them to learn, and there really isn't - frugality only has value insofar as resources are scarce, if resources were no longer scarce then there's no longer any need to be frugal and so no justification for his actions. Thanos possessed a device capable of rewriting reality to eliminate scarcity permanently if he so chose, and instead chose to mass-murder in order to preserve the status quo. There's no part of his ideology or actions that's right.
Which is why he's the villain of the piece. He's given a motive we can understand to make him more human and not just 'evil for the LOLZ!'...
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Of course for all we know on Earth-Steve he started making calls in the 60s and averted the Kennedy Assassination and Vietnam War. So by the time 2001 rolled around the world was so different there was no attack to avert.
Or basically if he messed with history on Earth-Steve there's no chance the Sept 11 attacks would have been on the same day/time if they happened at all. There were lots of things to avert first so that Earth would look very different. Maybe better, maybe not, but certainly different.
I'm assuming if what likely happened did happen- his going back spawning an alternate timeline- then things post-WW2 were very different, as there's no way he didn't take part. Then, like I said before, at sometime he probably had either Pym, Banner or Stark send him back somehow.
Pretty sure the people who invented the technology involved can change it to send him back elsewhere than the pad.
He’s insane. We know that. But he’s also entirely earnest that what he’s doing, he’s doing for the good of the universe and it’s inhabitants. And he even says the aim with the infinity stones is to to make the division random. He doesn’t pick and choose exactly who’s dusted and who survives. He’s not passing a moral judgement on anyone.
That he could just as easily have doubled resources, or altered reality so all resources are self replacing? Testament to his utter madness and the ego behind it. And possibly self-justification for the slaughter he inflicted on his own people. Any other solution could be admitting he was wrong.
He’s insane. We know that. But he’s also entirely earnest that what he’s doing, he’s doing for the good of the universe and it’s inhabitants. And he even says the aim with the infinity stones is to to make the division random. He doesn’t pick and choose exactly who’s dusted and who survives. He’s not passing a moral judgement on anyone.
That he could just as easily have doubled resources, or altered reality so all resources are self replacing? Testament to his utter madness and the ego behind it. And possibly self-justification for the slaughter he inflicted on his own people. Any other solution could be admitting he was wrong.
Any good villain, like most characters, is imo defined by their contradictions.
Thanos likes to talk down to others, calling them arrogant or prideful. Incapable of thinking rationally or objectively, and he defines himself by this mask. I don't think it's coincidance.
Not to mention, by the time Thanos got the infinity stones, he has saw his plan work several times. So he started with the conclusion of "Kill half" and went from there.
Not to mention, he was shown to be evil, Letting Ronan destroy the entire kree planet, killing 299 dwarves and deforming the remaining.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Not to mention, by the time Thanos got the infinity stones, he has saw his plan work several times.
So he started with the conclusion of "Kill half" and went from there.
Not to mention, he was shown to be evil, Letting Ronan destroy the entire kree planet, killing 299 dwarves and deforming the remaining.
Where is he shown seeing his plan work?
I'd imagine most planets, having suffered his interference, would go full-on consumption mode trying desperately to build up defenses in case he comes BACK....
I rather enjoyed the movie.
Are there potential plot holes? Yes, yes there are. Comic books are like that.
Why do the plot holes not bother me? Because I enjoyed the movie. Because the characters were, for the most part, given the respect they deserve.... and therefore the FANS were given the respect they deserve for making 22 movies in 11 years successful.
I do note, having waded through this thread the past couple days since seeing the movie makes me a tiny bit more sympathetic for those who liked TLJ (despite it's gross disrespect for the established characters) and had to put up with people like me trashing it....
hotsauceman1 wrote: Not to mention, by the time Thanos got the infinity stones, he has saw his plan work several times.
So he started with the conclusion of "Kill half" and went from there.
Not to mention, he was shown to be evil, Letting Ronan destroy the entire kree planet, killing 299 dwarves and deforming the remaining.
Where is he shown seeing his plan work?
I'd imagine most planets, having suffered his interference, would go full-on consumption mode trying desperately to build up defenses in case he comes BACK....
He did state in Infinity War that the planets he has "balanced" are now paradises.
Regarding Cap's timeline, I still maintain that Cap stayed in the main MCU timeline and that he had always comeback. He didn't change anything and there was no "butterfly effect" because Old Cap was always there. Time loop style. The clues are there. We never see Peggy's husband, therefore it could always have been Cap.
And no, he would not have had an issue with "side-lining" himself. Cap's arc showed that sometimes you do have to trade lives. Tony made that sacrifice and Cap would honor that. Plus, he knows how things work out, so by interfering, he risks changing the timeline where he's at, thus making it worse. Cap would not risk damning an alternate timeline to be Snapped. Remember, there is only 1 out of 14+million timelines in which they Avengers successfully stop Thanos. So Cap HAS to be in that 1 timeline
Plus, the rules they establish only imply that removal of the stones themselves is what creates an alternate timeline. Cap returned the Stones, hence no alternate timeline. At list but the movie's own rules
But if you really want to see a messed up (in a good way) Time Travel movie, watch Predestination with Ethan Hawk. That's a mind bender.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Not to mention, by the time Thanos got the infinity stones, he has saw his plan work several times.
So he started with the conclusion of "Kill half" and went from there.
Not to mention, he was shown to be evil, Letting Ronan destroy the entire kree planet, killing 299 dwarves and deforming the remaining.
Where is he shown seeing his plan work?
I'd imagine most planets, having suffered his interference, would go full-on consumption mode trying desperately to build up defenses in case he comes BACK....
He did state in Infinity War that the planets he has "balanced" are now paradises.
Possibly because they’re terrified of Thanos returning to re-educate them once again?
hotsauceman1 wrote: Not to mention, by the time Thanos got the infinity stones, he has saw his plan work several times.
So he started with the conclusion of "Kill half" and went from there.
Not to mention, he was shown to be evil, Letting Ronan destroy the entire kree planet, killing 299 dwarves and deforming the remaining.
Where is he shown seeing his plan work?
I'd imagine most planets, having suffered his interference, would go full-on consumption mode trying desperately to build up defenses in case he comes BACK....
He did state in Infinity War that the planets he has "balanced" are now paradises.
Possibly because they’re terrified of Thanos returning to re-educate them once again?
Also possible he never actually bothered going to check and is just assuming that it became great. Like how he made no attempt to check how it worked out after the Snap before he destroyed the stones.
Compel wrote: It's also worth highlighting that, Thanos, after seeing that "kill half" didn't work out how he'd hope. His solution changed to "kill everyone"
Thanos is a complete loony - Nothing about his plan makes any sense - at all. Thats fair enough cos he is a loony
Really enjoyable film.
I do note, having waded through this thread the past couple days since seeing the movie makes me a tiny bit more sympathetic for those who liked TLJ (despite it's gross disrespect for the established characters) and had to put up with people like me trashing it....
The primary difference is that one element of the film is causing some friendly debate - few have any kind of issue with the meat of the film - plot, pacing, characters, story - all the things that TLJ failed so much at.
Galef wrote:
Remember, there is only 1 out of 14+million timelines in which they Avengers successfully stop Thanos. So Cap HAS to be in that 1 timeline
Compel wrote: It's also worth highlighting that, Thanos, after seeing that "kill half" didn't work out how he'd hope. His solution changed to "kill everyone"
Thanos is a complete loony - Nothing about his plan makes any sense - at all. Thats fair enough cos he is a loony
Really enjoyable film.
I do note, having waded through this thread the past couple days since seeing the movie makes me a tiny bit more sympathetic for those who liked TLJ (despite it's gross disrespect for the established characters) and had to put up with people like me trashing it....
The primary difference is that one element of the film is causing some friendly debate - few have any kind of issue with the meat of the film - plot, pacing, characters, story - all the things that TLJ failed so much at.
Yeah, we are arguing about minutia and stuff we think of way after the fact.
TLJ has two camps, Love it or Hate it. And both are convinced the others are morons.
Compel wrote: It's also worth highlighting that, Thanos, after seeing that "kill half" didn't work out how he'd hope. His solution changed to "kill everyone"
Thanos is a complete loony - Nothing about his plan makes any sense - at all. Thats fair enough cos he is a loony
Really enjoyable film.
I do note, having waded through this thread the past couple days since seeing the movie makes me a tiny bit more sympathetic for those who liked TLJ (despite it's gross disrespect for the established characters) and had to put up with people like me trashing it....
The primary difference is that one element of the film is causing some friendly debate - few have any kind of issue with the meat of the film - plot, pacing, characters, story - all the things that TLJ failed so much at.
Yeah, we are arguing about minutia and stuff we think of way after the fact.
TLJ has two camps, Love it or Hate it. And both are convinced the others are morons.
I hate and despise TLJ but I don't think anyone who likes it is a moron. Why exactly do you say that? People like what they like.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Not to mention, by the time Thanos got the infinity stones, he has saw his plan work several times.
So he started with the conclusion of "Kill half" and went from there.
Not to mention, he was shown to be evil, Letting Ronan destroy the entire kree planet, killing 299 dwarves and deforming the remaining.
Where is he shown seeing his plan work?
I'd imagine most planets, having suffered his interference, would go full-on consumption mode trying desperately to build up defenses in case he comes BACK....
He did state in Infinity War that the planets he has "balanced" are now paradises.
And this statement by Thanos is credible because...?
You sure he's not just saying that because he wants desperately to believe it?
Let's be brutal for a moment. If the snap was real, and our population went from 7,000,000,000 to 3,500,000,000? That would be, environmentally, a good thing. Categorically it would be. And with how inheritance laws work, we may even see a financial benefit, depending on who got snapped out of existence. Imagine the immediate family of significant land owners all went. From there, it's a matter of tracing that family tree to survivors, and divvying the assets up from there.
What Thanos didn't take account of is the psychological impact. That his Gift (and he did see it as a solely benevolent act) wouldn't be well received. That grief would see many seek to undo it. Such short sightedness helps portray him as a lunatic zealot. He simply cannot imagine another viewpoint.
So to those who benefitted, in his mind he has only left them a paradise. A fully developed world without the incumbent population. A chance to better embrace population control (I am not endorsing this, just in case anyone wondered). A roof for every head. Food for every belly. And a lasting terror that if we don't maintain that new status quo, the horror will happen again and again and again until the lesson is learnt.
Let's be brutal for a moment. If the snap was real, and our population went from 7,000,000,000 to 3,500,000,000? That would be, environmentally, a good thing. Categorically it would be. And with how inheritance laws work, we may even see a financial benefit, depending on who got snapped out of existence. Imagine the immediate family of significant land owners all went. From there, it's a matter of tracing that family tree to survivors, and divvying the assets up from there.
What Thanos didn't take account of is the psychological impact. That his Gift (and he did see it as a solely benevolent act) wouldn't be well received. That grief would see many seek to undo it. Such short sightedness helps portray him as a lunatic zealot. He simply cannot imagine another viewpoint.
So to those who benefitted, in his mind he has only left them a paradise. A fully developed world without the incumbent population. A chance to better embrace population control (I am not endorsing this, just in case anyone wondered). A roof for every head. Food for every belly. And a lasting terror that if we don't maintain that new status quo, the horror will happen again and again and again until the lesson is learnt.
Yeah but he was not that well organised - he just (as far as we can tell) just selected half at random and they die - you might have whole areas with just kids left or old people. We saw the impact on Earth - it ws a total disaster. There are far more poor people than rich people so its likely most of those who vanished were poor and therefore more opportunity for any surivivng greedy corps or billionires to increase their power, wealth and proprety.
There is no real method to his madness.
And of course if the planet survives - then its population grwos again and nothing changes..... he becomes nothing more than a madman that killed untold numbers of people for....nothing.
LordofHats wrote: I think that's kind of the joke. Steve would know all that stuff works out sort of okay in the end, so while everyone else in panicking he's just going on with life.
If you want to go dark:
Peggy: Oh god the Twin Towers!
Cap: Don't worry. We get them. *drinks a smoothie*
There's something deeply uncomfortable about "Captain America" not preventing 9/11
I think around the time that happened they covered it in one of the comics. Cap's guilt about not being able to prevent it or something. I only heard about it though, as I don't read comic books much.
Right, most comics pulled a 'everybody was away' bit. (Alongside a fair amount of debate whether or not it would be tasteless to just have superheroes stop it in various comic universes)
But this would be Cap aware it was coming because of time shenanigans (alternate universe or not), and dismissing it with a shrug and a smoothie is *way* out of character, even if he is 'laying low' and somehow successfully hiding from SHIELD while married to someone who'd get a lot scrutiny 24/7. And its one of dozens of incidents where he'd have to actively discard his character and morals to have an anonymous 'happily ever after.'
And prevent death of waaaaaaaay more people than died in the 9/11.
Save those to make for even worse future? Yep yep.
Ripples in the pond. Cap knows he shouldn't interfere, because whilst you prevent one atrocity, who knows what will follow?
Example, In-Universe.
9/11 lead to the spotlight being put on Islamic Extremism. From there, we got the War in Afghanistan, War in Iraq, ISIL and numerous terrorist atrocities across the world.
Now, remove 9/11. It's prevented by Cap. The evil never happens (we can find out where they parked their car, simple enough matter to lurk around then give them a battering).
Suddenly, no reason for a war in Afghanistan. And where was Tony Stark when he became Iron Man?
Nice one, Cap. You just prevented the hero that unsnapped the snap from ever coming to be. Now what? Without Tony's funding, you also don't have Spiderman at the level you need him. Dr Strange likely snuffs it at Thanos' hands. Vision never exists. Wanda Maximoff likely doesn't join The Avengers.
It'd take me longer than I currently have to work out the full impact of a simple 'remove Iron Man from the equation'. But I'm pretty sure it includes New York being Nuked, quite possibly killing all the Avengers (not completely convinced Hulk or Thor could survive that).
Cap is walking down the sidewalk. Another guy trips and Cap catches him. That guy was Nick Fury’s father. Because he didn’t trip Nick Fury’s mother didn’t stop to help him up and they never met. Nick Fury was never born. The Avengers were never created. New York was nuked.
AduroT wrote: Cap is walking down the sidewalk. Another guy trips and Cap catches him. That guy was Nick Fury’s father. Because he didn’t trip Nick Fury’s mother didn’t stop to help him up and they never met. Nick Fury was never born. The Avengers were never created. New York was nuked.
Alternatively, Cap accidentally trips Nick Fury's father causing him to bump into Nick Fury's mother and that was how they met originally. Thus Nick Fury can be born
I'm maintaining that there have ALWAYS been 2 Caps in the MCU timeline, and old Cap was just staying behind the scenes. He didn't change anything by stay in the past, because he ALWAYS stayed in the past. It's a time loop Any explanation that involves Cap creating/living in an alternate timeline means it is one of the 14+ million timelines that Thanos succeeds with his snap. The whole POINT of returning the stone to there original times/places was to prevent any of those timelines existing at all.
Yup. Cap going back, and staying back, so far as we currently know, is just dandy. There's still the Capsicle for The First Avenger, so him kicking about Civvy Street isn't a clash.
And he knows enough about his time out of the ice to be able to keep his head down.
However - it does open up Cap sequel/prequel type affairs, where perhaps he does play a role? I, mean, heck. Bucky managed to remain unidentified, despite being a legendary assassin. Why not Cap?
But ultimately, we still only have Bruce and Nebula's word for how time works. And as we've seen, Bruce's knowledge of the Quantum Realm is......incomplete, shall we say?
I've also heard an argument that Steve returned all the stones to where he found them, then popped over to an alternate universe to live out his life with Peggy, then popped back to hand over the shield to Falcon. I'm not entirely happy with that* but there you go.
* Mainly because I find alternate realities irritating and an excuse for bad split-screen effects. However, the trailer for Spiderman Far From home seems to be going that way so I'll just need to suck it up.
Easy E wrote: I have seen the Far From Home trailer, but am unsure how it points to alternate realities in Marvel Universe.
Can someone help a fellow out and explain it to me?
One of the Trailers has Mysterio (or Fury in reference to Mysterio) say he's from an alternate universe or something to that affect.
However given Mysterio's tendency to deceive, it might not be true.
They specifically say Mysterio is from an alternate earth. They call the MCU earth 616, which oddly is the comic reality when the movie reality was previous said to be iirc 199999. Mysterio is from the earth of the UK Spider-Man.
Automatically Appended Next Post: But also yes I don’t know if I believe him either.
So the writers of Endgame (who also wrote the Cap trilogy) have confirmed in interviews that Cap was always meant to go back and be Peggy's husband and have 2 kids with her.
Pretty sure that confirms Old Cap was always in the MCU.
Any hints of who they might be and/or if the benefits of the Super Soldier Serum is also somehow passed on to them?
the writers hinted at that, but were cryptic about it. Basically his kids would be in the 60s, so it would be Caps grand kids showing up with powers if at all
Galef wrote: So the writers of Endgame (who also wrote the Cap trilogy) have confirmed in interviews that Cap was always meant to go back and be Peggy's husband and have 2 kids with her.
Pretty sure that confirms Old Cap was always in the MCU.
-
No?
For one, the writers and directors have disagreed over 'what means what' in interviews over a lot of things, including the time/reality travel. So its less 'confirmed' and more 'the opinion of one voice among several.'
For two, having kids doesn't at all suggest which reality they're in. Nor is either a barrier to a plot just having them show up- this is Marvel after all: future, past and alternate universe children are a long and tedious plot point.
See anyone with the last name Summers or anyone who might be married to/cloned/spawned from them.
As for Mysterio- absolutely, that might be fake. But...it also might not be fake. And alternate universe Loki is pretty much a guarantee at this point (what with him getting a series and all), so alternate universe shenanigans can never be ruled out anymore. Ever.
And in very real sense it doesn't matter. Whether Mysterio or Kang or Cable or literally whoever shows up from an alternate reality or gets powered in the prime reality is... of no consequence whatsoever. Its a trivial backstory detail that doesn't even need to come up after the first time it gets mentioned. Or, even the first time, honestly. While the Infinity Stones were indirectly responsible for many of the powered individuals running around, that ship has sailed (and wasn't ever ironclad anyway)- radiation, alien genetics, passing gods or whatever. Bring it all on.
---
Hmm. All that gets me thinking about the years of fake outs and teases, the ultimate fourth dimensional chess move after all these years is the actual Fenris Twins showing up and they turn out to be Cap's kids (and mutants) from another reality and nonsense rejuvenation ensues to get Cap back in the game to take them down. Because that's storytelling. Or at least, storytelling on alternate realities.
Because honestly that doesn't even get near the bottom of the well in how silly this can get.
[The silliest being the Jean Bomb (tm), something that actually turned up in an issue of X-men in the hands of alien invaders- a genetic bomb guaranteed to destroy relationships and bonds, even the bonds of reality itself, their last ditch super weapon when they were defeated). Havoc blew it up, iirc.
Galef wrote: So the writers of Endgame (who also wrote the Cap trilogy) have confirmed in interviews that Cap was always meant to go back and be Peggy's husband and have 2 kids with her.
Pretty sure that confirms Old Cap was always in the MCU.
-
No?
For one, the writers and directors have disagreed over 'what means what' in interviews over a lot of things, including the time/reality travel. So its less 'confirmed' and more 'the opinion of one voice among several.'
For two, having kids doesn't at all suggest which reality they're in. Nor is either a barrier to a plot just having them show up- this is Marvel after all: future, past and alternate universe children are a long and tedious plot point.
Even acknowledging that it's just the writers "opinion", the point was that they were always planning Cap's time-travel back to be with Peggy. That's one of the reasons we never see Peggy's husband in the photos with her kids in Winter Soldier, or hear his name.
But as I've said previously, and no one has yet refuted, Old Cap HAS to be in the main MCU timeline based solely on it being the only one in 14+million that doesn't involve Thanos winning. Dr. Strange saw 14+million potential timelines play out. The point of Cap returning the stones to their respective times/places was to prevent those timelines existing.
Old Cap also didn't use the machine to return to the lakeside, so by the movies rules alone, Old Cap was there all along and couldn't have come from any other timeline.
Any hints of who they might be and/or if the benefits of the Super Soldier Serum is also somehow passed on to them?
the writers hinted at that, but were cryptic about it. Basically his kids would be in the 60s, so it would be Caps grand kids showing up with powers if at all
Maybe?
I thought the Super Soldier Serum slowed aging too?
Or was that the somewhat confusingly named Infinity Formula that Nick Fury (comic book version) used to take?
Either way, I'd love for them to follow that thread and show us what's what - even if it is 'just' his grandkids!
Had a chance to watch it, and now enjoying the director’s commentary and other extras.
In terms of paradoxes.....the Loki one still stands out.
But then, that’s assuming nobody takes steps to track him down. I mean, there’s nothing preventing the Avengers from time travelling again, as it’s not powered by Infinity stones.
So we could see this addressed in the TV show. Or even see Loki learn a little something, and decide to go back to where he left in the end.
Oh, it’s also confirmed in the commentary The Ancient One does take Banner’s word for it, as she still couldn’t see beyond her own death (Strange technically could of course, as five years after death he stops being ded).
Compel wrote: That would require the movie having coherent logic or sense to it.
And considering the directors and the writers disagree on a major plot point of the movies ending... I don't think that's going to be a thing...
Please, more detail here!
I think he's referring to the writers stating the OldCap was ALWAYS meant to come back a spend a life with Peggy in the MCU prime timeline, while the Directors have stated that OldCap lived out his life in another timeline, then hopped back over to the main one to give Sam the shield.
Personally, I agree with the writers for 2 reasons: A) the not only wrote the script, but the script for Winter Soldier, which has many clues that Old Cap was in the background already and B) MOST IMPORTANTLY Cap went back to return the stones to "clip the branches" and remove all other timelines created without the stones, presumably the 14+million ones that Dr Strange saw in Infinity War. If Old Cap wasn't in the MCU prime timeline, then he MUST have been in one of those 14mil timelines in which Thanos wins. And I highly doubt that he would let one of those timelines exist (as that was the friggin' POINT on returning the stones)
Ergo, Cap MUST have lived out his life in the main MCU timeline this entire time, despite the Directors' opinions otherwise. An opinion, btw, which I feel is only there so that it doesn't "tarnish" Caps character not trying to change things he knew were happening (Hydra infiltrating Shield, Tony's parents being killed, etc). And if that is the reason they don't want him in the main MCU timeline, I think that's silly. Cap NOT preventing those things is 100% within his character. He is making the sacrifice of NOT being the hero so that the timeline proceeds as it is supposed to.
Cap knows how bad things get. He also, broadly, knows how they got there.
See my comment above about him preventing 9/11 (and how easy that would be, given we know where the perps parked their car).
Do that? No war in Afghanistan. Tony Stark doesn't get taken prisoner, no Iron Man as a result.
So yes, you stop a single terrorist atrocity - but nothing else. And you only risk making everything far, far worse - because you've started removing central pieces.
And realized my blue ray player is still in a crate somewhere in the Atlantic.
At any point do they talk about the world after the snap. We see some shots of 100s of ships docked off of Liberty Island, a tent city outside Shea Stadium, abandoned cars, piles of trash etc but I couldn't get a real handle on how the world was. I'm guessing the idea was that after the snap everyone just sort of gave up on life?
The only new place we see is the memorial in San Francisco that Ant Man visits.
I remember even at the time of Winter Soldier thinking that they went out of their way to hide the identity of Peggy's husband and that it felt like a real possibility they wanted to somehow roll Cap's story back there. The main reason it didn't feel likely was just that at that point the franchise was still keeping its feet fairly grounded and time travel didn't seem like a plot element they would go with.
And realized my blue ray player is still in a crate somewhere in the Atlantic.
At any point do they talk about the world after the snap. We see some shots of 100s of ships docked off of Liberty Island, a tent city outside Shea Stadium, abandoned cars, piles of trash etc but I couldn't get a real handle on how the world was. I'm guessing the idea was that after the snap everyone just sort of gave up on life?
The only new place we see is the memorial in San Francisco that Ant Man visits.
The impression I got was that the world keeps going, but there's a lot of empty places and everyone is dealing with the loss of someone important to them and I'm sure more than a little survivors guilt. There are a lot of things we see abandoned because they were built to support a population that's not there anymore. Houses for families that are gone, half the ships either don't have crews or aren't needed because there's less to produce and ship. The places we see like the neighborhood in San Francisco and the streets of Tokyo(?); just relatively empty with a lot of abandoned maintenance work.
I’m free to watch if I enjoy the other 90%, just as I’m free to discuss why I didn’t enjoy the movie as those have expressed what they didn’t enjoy or did. I suggest you find a different soap box, my friend 
When it happened my inital thoughts were that it was a fun shout out to the A-Force comics. Followed by, did they really have all those actors together on set at the same time?(kinda applies to the entire climax and Tony's funeral as well). And then, who thought Captain Marvel needed help after she just punched that ship out of the sky?
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10758335/IMG_0178.jpg)
