Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Important to remember that part of the reason Thanos doesn’t look for alternative gauntlet wishes is that he’s past the hypothesis stage of reasoning. He had a theory, proved his theory on a (relatively) small scale and was looking for a solution to large scale distribution of his proven solution. He wasn’t looking for an answer to the problem anymore, just a shortcut to implementation.

 LunarSol wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I think her concern was not having it on hand for Strange to use when he did to stop his big world ending threat in his movie.

Yup, this. Dormamu would have successfully invaded without the time stone.

IIRC the Ancient One doesn't see any invasion by big D in the future because her vision is limited up to the point of her death. She might speculate that it is needed, but she doesn't know.

 Baragash wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I think her concern was not having it on hand for Strange to use when he did to stop his big world ending threat in his movie.

Yup, this. Dormamu would have successfully invaded without the time stone.

IIRC the Ancient One doesn't see any invasion by big D in the future because her vision is limited up to the point of her death. She might speculate that it is needed, but she doesn't know.

I think the context of the discussion really doesn't point to Dormamu. Maybe Thanos destroying the stones though doesn't really affect their power as much as removing them entirely does. Or maybe this will play a part in the next phase of the MCU/Doctor Strange film.

That scene on the whole was maybe a little flimsy also because TAO didn't have the stone on her person at any point in Doctor Strange that I remember. It was sitting in a vault collecting dust the whole time, and it seems like a contrived convenience for Endgame's Plot that she was actually wearing it during the New York battle.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 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.

 LordofHats wrote:

That scene on the whole was maybe a little flimsy also because TAO didn't have the stone on her person at any point in Doctor Strange that I remember. It was sitting in a vault collecting dust the whole time, and it seems like a contrived convenience for Endgame's Plot that she was actually wearing it during the New York battle.

She wasn't wearing it but as Sorcerer Supreme it was hers to use. Given her duty is to protect the Sanctum Sanctorums, there's no reason to believe she wouldn't retrieve it to help defend one of them if aliens started attacking the city.

 Pacific wrote:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Thanos is also completely insane.

For instance, once the six stones are in the glove, why not achieve much the same thing, by Snapping into existence double the galaxies, rather than halving the inhabitants?

But he’s not without smarts.

Spoiler:

Hence we see him destroy the stones with a second snap. Hence why his earlier self sees the flaw in the initial plan, and conceives of a second way to achieve his plan.

But that’s part of his attraction as a character. He’s incredibly driven. He genuinely believes he’s doing The Right Thing. If he had any doubts, he’d have long flagged and given up, given the sheer scale of the task he assigned to himself.

It’s a very strong character, and that we can understand, if not accept his motivation only adds to that.

Definitely one of the best things about a lot of the Marvel bad-guys, there is always a logic behind their actions and why they are doing what they do, even if it is utterly tyrannical.

I..... wouldn't say that. Especially a lot of the earlier MCU bad guys just go crazy at the end of their movie for no reason. Iron Monger goes from an intelligent person with layers of subterfuge and plans to a guy in a suit of armor manically tearing things apart with no logical way to get out of that situation in tact and not going to jail.

I think my favorite realization is when

 Paradigm wrote:
I think the answer to that is in his dialogue just prior.

Spoiler:

"In all my years of conquest, of violence, it has never once been personal. But I must admit, I'm going to enjoy what I'm about to do to your stubborn, pathetic planet."

He relishes the opportunity to fight the very best Earth has to offer, because in his mind, with the foreknowledge that he has already won one in the future, he can't possibly lose. His army is immense, he's just decked Cap, Stark and Thor, and there's a smile on his face the whole time. It's personal, it's his final test, and he is so supremely confident. So let them assemble, let them fight, because then he can prove once and for all that he's the most powerful being in the universe. Fulfil his destiny.

I thought at the time it exposed the hypocrisy of his 'noble' motives. It revealed that, at heart, he just likes killing things.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 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.

Whether he's right or not isn't as important as whether he believes he's right. We know his solution is insane and there are other ways he could achieve the desired result once he has the Stones. But he's been doing his "kill 50%" thing for a long time on a smaller scale and to him it works, so he sees no reason to change his approach. While he believes he's correct and his logic is unassailable, he's also insane and genocidal, so a solution that just happens to kill trillions appeals to other aspects of his personality.

MarkNorfolk wrote:
I thought at the time it exposed the hypocrisy of his 'noble' motives. It revealed that, at heart, he just likes killing things.

Yea I think that bit was Marvel trying to make him less sympathetic and more of a villain. They must be aware of all the love he gets.

Thanos before then had acted more like a craftsman. He didn't resent his material for resisting his efforts to shape it, he just calmly applied pressure in the right places to form it into something better.

Yes, Thanos' plan will not work when you look at it from a long term perspective.

He kills 50% of all life. Okay, there is no longer so much drain on resources. But all the non-renewable resources that have been used are still used, they aren't coming back. Pretty quickly the population recovers and the resources are still going down during that recovery time, just at a lesser rate. Now he needs to snap again to reduce the population again. Same thing happens again, resources are still being used, non-renewables are still not being replenished. Repeat again. And again. And again. Eventually the resources still run out, just further down the line.

Even his Endgame plan will not work. He creates a new universe and the exact same problems will crop up. Distribution of resources will always be an issue.

Thanos thinks he is a great thinker who is willing to do what is necessary when others refuse to make the sacrifice. But the others aren't unwilling to make the sacrifice, they can just see that the sacrifice will not solve the underlying problem.

Well I think his plan has the following steps (whether he realises this is why it works is another thing!);

1. Kill off half of life.
2. The stark comparison before and after makes societies realise how terrible their lives of runaway consumption were.
3. They reform and create different societies which don't voraciously hoover up resources and reproduce uncontrollably.

As others have said this isn't a thought experiment, Thanos has tried this on a smaller scale and seen it working.
He's effectively an eco-terrorist! He even has the integrity to practice what he preaches, after the snap he lives a simple, subsistence life style on his farm.

Saw it yesterday. I'll caveat by saying I am not the target audience having no real interest or background in marval or comics in general.
As a result I found it all a bit ho hum and rote.
Queue opening act getting the gang reassembled and Stark re-finding his mojo
Queue middle act of time travel shenanigans and character "development"
Queue big CGI battle at the end



I was lost frankly.

A solid meh from me

mod edit fixed

 Ratius wrote:
Saw it yesterday. I'll caveat by saying I am not the target audience having no real interest or background in marval or comics in general.

Spoiler:

As a result I found it all a bit ho hum and rote.
Queue opening act getting the gang reassembled and Stark re-finding his mojo
Queue middle act of time travel shenanigans and character "development"
Queue big CGI battle at the end

Also unless you are in invested in the franchise:
Who was the cosmic super girl character?
Who was the girl on the pegasus?
Who were the asian guys whjo could generate kine shields?
When was Starks dad shown before?
Why did Thanos simply retire at the start?
Is scarlett johannson really dead?

I was lost frankly.

A solid meh from me

Dude, it was requested a full week of spoiler tags for those who couldn’t go opening weekend. You could have tagged that easily. Why didn’t you?

Asian dude is Wong from Dr. Strange
Cosmic girl is Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers)
Girl on Pegasus is Valkyrie from Thor Ragnarok
Stark’s dad was in Cap 1

If you’ve watched the rest of the movies, all of these questions are answered. If you don’t care about the series, why did you go see it and post spoilers without tags? Frankly, you were extremely rude to all of the people on here who requested no spoilers in this thread for a week. Seeing how you have no vested interest in the series, I’d say you owe your fellow Dakka-members an apology. And yes, I’m talking about your last question.

 Kroem wrote:
Well I think his plan has the following steps (whether he realises this is why it works is another thing!);

1. Kill off half of life.
2. The stark comparison before and after makes societies realise how terrible their lives of runaway consumption were.
3. They reform and create different societies which don't voraciously hoover up resources and reproduce uncontrollably.

As others have said this isn't a thought experiment, Thanos has tried this on a smaller scale and seen it working.
He's effectively an eco-terrorist! He even has the integrity to practice what he preaches, after the snap he lives a simple, subsistence life style on his farm.

Which, once again, is utterly meaningless when you have the means to make runaway consumption irrelevant. Teaching people to value scarce things is only a worthy goal - methods aside - for as long as there is scarcity. Once you set your mind to acquiring a device that could, if you wanted, rewrite reality to eliminate scarcity then even the fig leaf of credibility Thanos had left to cover over his evident psychopathy falls away because he doesn't even consider fixing the actual problem, just enacting his mental genocide on a bigger scale.

If you’ve watched the rest of the movies, all of these questions are answered. If you don’t care about the series, why did you go see it and post spoilers without tags? Frankly, you were extremely rude to all of the people on here who requested no spoilers in this thread for a week. Seeing how you have no vested interest in the series, I’d say you owe your fellow Dakka-members an apology. And yes, I’m talking about your last question

Woah there.
That was a genuine error on my behalf.
Ive always spoilered things in relation to TV/movies in this forum, that was a total oversight so I apologise in retrospect..

And no need to imply I was being rude or spiteful tyvm.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
Saw it yesterday. I'll caveat by saying I am not the target audience having no real interest or background in marval or comics in general.
mod edit spoiler
If you’ve watched the rest of the movies, all of these questions are answered. If you don’t care about the series, why did you go see it and post spoilers without tags? Frankly, you were extremely rude to all of the people on here who requested no spoilers in this thread for a week. Seeing how you have no vested interest in the series, I’d say you owe your fellow Dakka-members an apology. And yes, I’m talking about your last question.

It’s been out for over a week. Also the thread title clearly says spoilers.

It was requested a week after opening weekend. And yes, I’ve seen it already, but it’s still rude. Not everyone can go opening weekend but wants to hear from like-minded individuals if they liked it or not (since critics generally suck these days). So please spoiler tag the comments, and I’ll go spoiler tag my response for those who haven’t seen it yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thank you mods for adding the tags!

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Kroem wrote:
Well I think his plan has the following steps (whether he realises this is why it works is another thing!);

1. Kill off half of life.
2. The stark comparison before and after makes societies realise how terrible their lives of runaway consumption were.
3. They reform and create different societies which don't voraciously hoover up resources and reproduce uncontrollably.

As others have said this isn't a thought experiment, Thanos has tried this on a smaller scale and seen it working.
He's effectively an eco-terrorist! He even has the integrity to practice what he preaches, after the snap he lives a simple, subsistence life style on his farm.

Which, once again, is utterly meaningless when you have the means to make runaway consumption irrelevant. Teaching people to value scarce things is only a worthy goal - methods aside - for as long as there is scarcity. Once you set your mind to acquiring a device that could, if you wanted, rewrite reality to eliminate scarcity then even the fig leaf of credibility Thanos had left to cover over his evident psychopathy falls away because he doesn't even consider fixing the actual problem, just enacting his mental genocide on a bigger scale.

Yea I saw you put that before, do we actually know what the limits of the infinity gauntlet are?

As others have said creating more resources isn't a long term fix if people keep consuming and reproducing, but rewritng the laws of physics so that entropy goes backwards and the laws of thermodynamics don't apply could solve the problem.

A rule of comic books is that no one ever uses their powers to
change the state of things outside of fighting or dying.

The stones are literally what makes the universe. It's even said as such by a sorcerer in both infinity war and endgame.

Thanos COULD wipe reality and rebuild it down to the atom however he chooses.

The only apparent limitation is bringing back the soul traded for the soul gem. A limitation placed BY the soul gem. (the stones are all semi sentient btw. And in fact a 7th stone exists that is the consciousness of the collective entity that is the universe who splits himself in the big bang to make the universe.)

Also, the movie Gauntlet really comes off more limited and less omnipotent than its comic counterpart. It's still insanely powerful, but its clear there are limits on what it can accomplish.

I wouldn’t say there’s limits on the gauntlet itself, but on how much of its power the wearer can withstand.

 AduroT wrote:
I wouldn’t say there’s limits on the gauntlet itself, but on how much of its power the wearer can withstand.

Agreed. The gauntlet, and the gems themselves, in the comic can be used with no physical toll on the user.

In the movies there is a very obvious toll. Down right horrific.

 Lance845 wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I wouldn’t say there’s limits on the gauntlet itself, but on how much of its power the wearer can withstand.

Agreed. The gauntlet, and the gems themselves, in the comic can be used with no physical toll on the user.

In the movies there is a very obvious toll. Down right horrific.

It’s a shame the movies will never get to do Drax’s Power Stone fueled sax solo.

 Lance845 wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I wouldn’t say there’s limits on the gauntlet itself, but on how much of its power the wearer can withstand.

Agreed. The gauntlet, and the gems themselves, in the comic can be used with no physical toll on the user.

In the movies there is a very obvious toll. Down right horrific.

Well, the gauntlet itself took heavy damage after Thano's first Snap in IW, so I would say the toll affects the gauntlet and the wearer pretty badly with each use, meaning the gauntlet itself probably can only withstand a few snaps.
The second gauntlet the Avengers make is made on nano-tech, so it can "heal" after each use.

But in a way, this makes the movie stones seem MORE powerful than the comic stones. Because snapping can kill you in the movies.

I also like the callback to Tony and Bruce's conversation in Avengers, in which Tony tells Bruce that "the other guy" saved him from the Gamma incident for a reason.
And in Endgame, we get to see that reason as Prof Hulk says he was "made for this" in regards to using the guanlet

-

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Stark’s dad was in Cap 1

And Iron Man 2. And Civil War. And Ant-Man 1. And Mad Men... no wait... not that last one.

 Ratius wrote:
I was lost frankly.

A solid meh from me

I sat down to watch the series finale of a television show I know almost nothing about, it didn't make sense to me, so I didn't like it.

I found it hilarious they tried to “empower women heroes” which then lasted 30 seconds to end with them getting their butts handed to them.. especially since Brie Larson is such an idiotic individuals, I loved that her screen time was so short

Ahh I see we finally got to the "gak on Brie Larson" part of the thread.