Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

FAN: Discuss various fictional worlds that don't qualify for SF.

Moderator: Steve

Post Reply
User avatar
GuppyShark
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2614
Joined: 2005-03-13 06:52am
Location: South Australia

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by GuppyShark » 2019-07-05 05:33am

What on Earth makes you think Cap sat on his ass in his timeline? It's a separate, new timeline. There's no obligation to keep things 'intact' or 'circular'. He can put as much effort as he likes into stopping Hydra before it gets off the ground. Frankly, of the timelines they created, the only one which could possibly be worse than their original is the one where Loki escapes with the Tesseract. A timeline without Thanos is hardly dystopian.

The Ancient One made it pretty clearly that returning the stones to their original timelines ensured the continuity of the timeline, hence why she was willing to part with the Time Stone in the first place. She wouldn't have been willing to doom her existence without the possibility of restoration.

User avatar
Civil War Man
NERRRRRDS!!!
Posts: 3751
Joined: 2005-01-28 03:54am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by Civil War Man » 2019-07-05 03:13pm

Tribble wrote:
2019-07-04 05:10pm
Civil War Man wrote: Presumably it demands a sacrifice because there's something about it that makes it even more dangerous than the others. If you want to be offended that the movies don't hold your hand and explain exactly how it's more dangerous, fine, but that's the logical conclusion of what we're presented with on-screen.
Tbh I don't think it's too much to ask for to see what made the Soul Stone so dangerous vs having to make presumptions about it. Not that hard to do given the MCU is above all a visual effects sci-fi/fantasy extravaganza! If you're going to build it up and make it so that it is the last stone to be seen, make it interesting and use it! All the other Stones had at least one movie which demonstrated some of the things they can do.

I agree with Chuck on SF Debris - I don't give credit to things that are explained outside of the movie... because they were not in the movie. The only confirmed abilities we see the Soul Stone has (apart from being part of the gauntlet) are that it can make you have visions/hallucinations of the dead (I don't think its ever explained what child-Gamora was) it can be used to knock your consciousness out of your body (which technically anyone with sufficient talent and training can learn)... and it demands a sacrifice every time someone wants to get it. Compared to the others... it just doesn't hold up IMO.

Narratively speaking sure I get it, I'm just disappointed.
Alright, but by that token, what do you think of Lord of the Rings? The only things we see the One Ring do is turn the wearer invisible and make people want to possess it, but we generally take the narrative's word for it when it says the Ring is incredibly powerful.

User avatar
Tribble
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2710
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by Tribble » 2019-07-05 03:51pm

Civil War Man wrote:
2019-07-05 03:13pm
Tribble wrote:
2019-07-04 05:10pm
Civil War Man wrote: Presumably it demands a sacrifice because there's something about it that makes it even more dangerous than the others. If you want to be offended that the movies don't hold your hand and explain exactly how it's more dangerous, fine, but that's the logical conclusion of what we're presented with on-screen.
Tbh I don't think it's too much to ask for to see what made the Soul Stone so dangerous vs having to make presumptions about it. Not that hard to do given the MCU is above all a visual effects sci-fi/fantasy extravaganza! If you're going to build it up and make it so that it is the last stone to be seen, make it interesting and use it! All the other Stones had at least one movie which demonstrated some of the things they can do.

I agree with Chuck on SF Debris - I don't give credit to things that are explained outside of the movie... because they were not in the movie. The only confirmed abilities we see the Soul Stone has (apart from being part of the gauntlet) are that it can make you have visions/hallucinations of the dead (I don't think its ever explained what child-Gamora was) it can be used to knock your consciousness out of your body (which technically anyone with sufficient talent and training can learn)... and it demands a sacrifice every time someone wants to get it. Compared to the others... it just doesn't hold up IMO.

Narratively speaking sure I get it, I'm just disappointed.
Alright, but by that token, what do you think of Lord of the Rings? The only things we see the One Ring do is turn the wearer invisible and make people want to possess it, but we generally take the narrative's word for it when it says the Ring is incredibly powerful.
IIRC we saw Sauron curb stomping an army of Elves and Men single-handily in the intro, and it was stated that this was due to the power of the One Ring*. So movie version also enhances his physical strength. If it weren’t for Sauron’s deep personal stupidity in suddenly deciding to grab Ilsildur rather than just stab / stomp on him he likely would have won.

*things play out differently in the book IIRC
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - The official Troll motto, as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-05 09:39pm

GuppyShark wrote:
2019-07-05 05:33am
What on Earth makes you think Cap sat on his ass in his timeline?
Perhaps the fact that the film treats it as Cap retiring to live a normal life/as his happy ending? Which, don't get me wrong, if anyone deserves it its Cap, but it does beg the question of whether he really just, as you say, sat on his ass when he could have prevented billions of deaths.

Or maybe its the fact that the whole reason for him going back was to fix all the stuff they fucked up, or so I thought. That they were trying to preserve the timelines as much as possible (hence the stealth approach acquiring the Stones as well, though it quickly fell apart). If so, then doesn't changing this new timeline for the better defeat that?

Either way, there are troubling implications.
It's a separate, new timeline. There's no obligation to keep things 'intact' or 'circular'. He can put as much effort as he likes into stopping Hydra before it gets off the ground.
I agree, and that would be the right course of action. But that's not how the film previously treats time travel, at least not consistently.
Frankly, of the timelines they created, the only one which could possibly be worse than their original is the one where Loki escapes with the Tesseract. A timeline without Thanos is hardly dystopian.
That's a pretty big oops, though. Rogue Norse God on the loose with an Infinity Stone, no big deal.

On the plus side, that timeline might also have lead to Hydra being exposed early regardless, as Hydra will now think Steve is one of their's, and probably inadvertently tip off their timeline's Steve.
The Ancient One made it pretty clearly that returning the stones to their original timelines ensured the continuity of the timeline, hence why she was willing to part with the Time Stone in the first place. She wouldn't have been willing to doom her existence without the possibility of restoration.
Perhaps she overestimated the competency of Earth's Mightiest heroes? :wink:

All I recall, though, is that the Stones not being returned would guarantee fuck the universe, not that returning them would guarantee preserve the timeline regardless of what other changes were made (which frankly would also make no sense).

Edit: Honestly, I think Endgame's biggest problem (besides pseudo-fridging Natasha and giving the much-hyped Captain Marvel a minimal role in the plot- got to keep the incel viewers happy, I suppose) is that it created a whole bunch of stuff as a side effect of its plot that really needs to be further explored, and (to the film's credit) would actually be really interesting to explore, but most of which probably never really will be. I want to see how each of those other timelines played out. I want to see how Cap lived his life with Peggy, how he wrestled with the ethical implications of retiring or not retiring, acting or not reacting, marrying someone who was not really HIS Peggy, etc. I want to see the Guardians dealing with the fact that this isn't our Gamora, and Gamora dealing with the fact that these aren't her Guardians and Nebula. I want to see Cap and Peggy's adventures through the multiverse, and Cap facing Red Skull again. I want to see Clint dealing with his guilt over Natasha's death, his family dealing with the fact that Aunty Nat is never coming home (and that that is the only reason they're there). I want to see more of what happened during the five years post-snap, how Captain Marvel and Nebula and Rocket interacted with the other Avengers. I want to see someone put together that Nebula probably tricked Clint and Natasha into a situation where one would have to sacrifice themselves for the other. I want all of this to be explored, and 90%+ of it probably never will be.

Endgame should have been a mini-series or a trilogy all its own. There's too much crammed into one film, with too little thought.

On the plus (or negative, if you're feeling cynical) side, this film ought to be a fan fic writer's gold mine.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-05 10:17pm

Tribble wrote:
2019-07-05 03:51pm
Civil War Man wrote:
2019-07-05 03:13pm
Tribble wrote:
2019-07-04 05:10pm


Tbh I don't think it's too much to ask for to see what made the Soul Stone so dangerous vs having to make presumptions about it. Not that hard to do given the MCU is above all a visual effects sci-fi/fantasy extravaganza! If you're going to build it up and make it so that it is the last stone to be seen, make it interesting and use it! All the other Stones had at least one movie which demonstrated some of the things they can do.

I agree with Chuck on SF Debris - I don't give credit to things that are explained outside of the movie... because they were not in the movie. The only confirmed abilities we see the Soul Stone has (apart from being part of the gauntlet) are that it can make you have visions/hallucinations of the dead (I don't think its ever explained what child-Gamora was) it can be used to knock your consciousness out of your body (which technically anyone with sufficient talent and training can learn)... and it demands a sacrifice every time someone wants to get it. Compared to the others... it just doesn't hold up IMO.

Narratively speaking sure I get it, I'm just disappointed.
Alright, but by that token, what do you think of Lord of the Rings? The only things we see the One Ring do is turn the wearer invisible and make people want to possess it, but we generally take the narrative's word for it when it says the Ring is incredibly powerful.
IIRC we saw Sauron curb stomping an army of Elves and Men single-handily in the intro, and it was stated that this was due to the power of the One Ring*. So movie version also enhances his physical strength. If it weren’t for Sauron’s deep personal stupidity in suddenly deciding to grab Ilsildur rather than just stab / stomp on him he likely would have won.

*things play out differently in the book IIRC
In the books, at least, the Ring is said to give power based on how strong you were to begin with. So, say, Aragorn or Gandalf would get way more out of it than Frodo would. But ultimately, of course, its a trap for the user- it will slowly corrupt them and turn them into a wraith under Sauron's control. It also would have allowed Sauron to somehow undermine the Elven rings (possessed by Gandalf, Elrond, and Galadriel), and perceive what their wearers were up to. And it has some ill-defined mental manipulation powers (for example, servants of Sauron are intimidated by its presence, and it can be used to dominate lesser wills in its thrall).

All of this is poorly, or not at all, explained in the films, IIRC, other than the corrupt/turn into a wraith thing.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2472
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by EnterpriseSovereign » 2019-07-06 12:28pm

(besides pseudo-fridging Natasha and giving the much-hyped Captain Marvel a minimal role in the plot- got to keep the incel viewers happy, I suppose)
Wait, this is minimal? :wink:
It's no use debating a moron; they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Just because you have the attention span of a fruit fly doesn't mean the rest of us are so encumbered.

"As you know science is not fact"- HuskerJay
"The Delta Fyler [sic] isn't even a shuttle craft" -HuskerJay69
"The Dominion War wasn't really all that bad"- Admiral Mercury

User avatar
Coop D'etat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 563
Joined: 2007-02-23 01:38pm
Location: UBC Unincorporated land

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by Coop D'etat » 2019-07-06 07:45pm

Captain Marvel's solo outing was in production itself in production at the same time as Endgame. They most likely didn't have that big a role for her because they wanted to leave as little established about her for the other people to work with. Not some nonsense conspiracy theory about wanting to appease whatever faction of the too-much-online is bitching about this week.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-06 09:39pm

EnterpriseSovereign wrote:
2019-07-06 12:28pm
(besides pseudo-fridging Natasha and giving the much-hyped Captain Marvel a minimal role in the plot- got to keep the incel viewers happy, I suppose)
Wait, this is minimal? :wink:
Jokes aside, thanks for bringing this up, because this is a very common mix-up, and I'd like to address it here:

Writing a physically powerful female character is not the same as writing a strong female character, or writing a feminist film. A lot of people seem to think (not you, necessarily) that if you make a female character "bad ass" and powerful, that's all it takes to be progressive. Maybe that was true a few decades ago, when expectations were considerably lower and female action heroes much more rare (though even then, there were some damn well-written female action stars in the likes of Sarah Connor, Ellen Ripley, and, albeit inconsistently, Buffy Summers and company). But it certainly ain't enough now. Now, I've obviously got nothing against physically-powerful female characters (few things trigger incel and Alt Reichist types like the idea of a woman they can't physically dominate, and that alone is reason enough to write them). But what's much harder is to write female characters who play an equally-significant, non-stereotypical role in the plot, have complex, believable, and diverse characters, and are basically strong characters, not physically-impressive cardboard cutouts.

Captain Marvel is physically powerful, no doubt about that. She takes out a star ship, and she and Wanda and Mjolnir-empowered Cap are the only ones who remotely threaten Thanos one on one in Endgame. But she has very little screen-time, very little characterization, and very little role in the plot. She's better when you factor her own film into account, but we're talking about Endgame, here. People attack Rey in the Star Wars sequels for being an under-developed character, but she plays a far more central role, and gets more characterization and development, in her films than Marvel gets in Endgame. That's why I say her role is minimal- because while her power is not minimal, her role in the film is. You could cut Marvel from the film, and other than bringing Tony and Nebula to Earth at the start, it would have virtually no effect on anything, either on her character or on the Marvel Universe or the plot of the movie. She doesn't matter in this film.

I wouldn't ding Marvel for that by itself, though. There are lots of characters, male and female, and not all of them can take center-stage. It only stands out because the after-credits scene of Infinity War, and the between-films hype (and subsequent misogynist whining), made out like Captain Marvel would play a key role in Endgame, and she really didn't, beyond giving Tony and Nebula a lift at the start. And because in combination with the death of Black Widow (and of Gamora in Infinity War), there's a pattern of Marvel and the Russo brothers sidelining the MCU's major female characters.

On the plus side, and just to show I'm not trying to just bash Endgame, I was very pleasantly surprised by the central role played by Nebula, and how much it furthered her characterization. She becomes a genuine hero and part of the team (albeit a dark one, who is low-key implied to have set-up Black Widow's sacrifice), confronts her past self, and plays an absolutely central role, for both good and bad, in the plot. If you asked me who the female lead of Endgame is, I wouldn't say Black Widow, and I sure as hell wouldn't say Captain Marvel. Its Nebula, without a shadow of a doubt.

The stars of this movie are hands down Tony, Thor, Nebula, and maybe Clint. They are the ones who grow, who get the most focus and characterization, who have real, fleshed-out arcs. Everyone else is just a background character or a plot device for one or two key scenes.

Edit: This ties into my issue with the "Women of Marvel Assemble" scene, too. I dislike that scene strongly, not because its too feminist, but because its faux feminist. They have a bunch of female characters pose looking bad ass and then kick some mooks' asses together to protect Peter, and it comes off feeling very unnatural and forced, like Marvel is waving a big flag saying "See, look at all our female heroes!" Its like they want everyone to think "Look at how progressive we are" without putting in the leg-work to earn those accolades. And it feels like a promo-poster inserted into the middle of the narrative.

Pretty the only effect that scene has on me besides making me want to role my eyes at the shear ham-fistedness of it is remind me that the person who most deserves to be in that moment isn't, because Marvel just threw her off a cliff.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-06 09:53pm

Anyhoo, a couple other Endgame quibbles:

1. Why did Thor not bi-frost over to Tony and Nebula and bring them home? Maybe there's some reason, like he can't hit a target he's not familiar with (apparition in Harry Potter, for example, seems to work that way), but otherwise, it feels like the only reason they needed Captain Marvel was because Thor didn't use his brain.

2. Not really a complaint, but a question: if Natasha and Gamora are in the Soul Stone, and the Soul Stone is destroyed by Thanos, what happens? Do they come back (unlikely)? Do their souls get to "move on" to whatever afterlife the MCU has waiting for them, if any? Or are they just obliterated from existence?
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
FaxModem1
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7478
Joined: 2002-10-30 06:40pm
Location: In a dark reflection of a better world

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by FaxModem1 » 2019-07-06 10:17pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-06 09:53pm
Anyhoo, a couple other Endgame quibbles:

1. Why did Thor not bi-frost over to Tony and Nebula and bring them home? Maybe there's some reason, like he can't hit a target he's not familiar with (apparition in Harry Potter, for example, seems to work that way), but otherwise, it feels like the only reason they needed Captain Marvel was because Thor didn't use his brain.
Thor Ragnarok spoilers.

Basically, Asgard is kaput, completely gone. Dead. It has ceased to be. It is no more. That includes the rainbow bridge that the Warriors 3 wimpily defended against Hel as she took them out.

A better question would be "Where the hell is Sif?"
Image

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-06 10:20pm

FaxModem1 wrote:
2019-07-06 10:17pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-06 09:53pm
Anyhoo, a couple other Endgame quibbles:

1. Why did Thor not bi-frost over to Tony and Nebula and bring them home? Maybe there's some reason, like he can't hit a target he's not familiar with (apparition in Harry Potter, for example, seems to work that way), but otherwise, it feels like the only reason they needed Captain Marvel was because Thor didn't use his brain.
Thor Ragnarok spoilers.

Basically, Asgard is kaput, completely gone. Dead. It has ceased to be. It is no more. That includes the rainbow bridge that the Warriors 3 wimpily defended against Hel as she took them out.
I know that, of course. But Thor was still able to teleport to the battle in Wakanda, Bifrost-style. My impression was that that power was imbued in Stormbreaker, but maybe that's just a fan theory or something? But that's why I asked- because post-Ragnarok, he demonstrated the capacity to teleport himself across interstellar space to a precise location. Unless we assume that Giant Peter Dinklage transported him, but I don't recall that being stated.
A better question would be "Where the hell is Sif?"
That too.

Edit: Said teleport involved being able to take two others along with him, as well. So there seems to me no good reason given why he couldn't have rescued Tony and Nebula himself, unless its simply that he didn't know where to look (on that note, how the hell did Marvel scour the entirety of space, or at least that region of space, for them before their air ran out- that's hands-down her most impressive feat, in my opinion).

They really nerfed Thor for this movie compared to Infinity War, now that I think about it. Really, Thor should have been able to solo everything in this movie, other than figuring out time travel and retrieving the Soul Stone.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
FaxModem1
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7478
Joined: 2002-10-30 06:40pm
Location: In a dark reflection of a better world

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by FaxModem1 » 2019-07-06 10:32pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-06 10:20pm
FaxModem1 wrote:
2019-07-06 10:17pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-06 09:53pm
Anyhoo, a couple other Endgame quibbles:

1. Why did Thor not bi-frost over to Tony and Nebula and bring them home? Maybe there's some reason, like he can't hit a target he's not familiar with (apparition in Harry Potter, for example, seems to work that way), but otherwise, it feels like the only reason they needed Captain Marvel was because Thor didn't use his brain.
Thor Ragnarok spoilers.

Basically, Asgard is kaput, completely gone. Dead. It has ceased to be. It is no more. That includes the rainbow bridge that the Warriors 3 wimpily defended against Hel as she took them out.
I know that, of course. But Thor was still able to teleport to the battle in Wakanda, Bifrost-style. My impression was that that power was imbued in Stormbreaker, but maybe that's just a fan theory or something? But that's why I asked- because post-Ragnarok, he demonstrated the capacity to teleport himself across interstellar space to a precise location. Unless we assume that Giant Peter Dinklage transported him, but I don't recall that being stated.
Let's assume it was Peter Dinklage, and Thor was cocky enough to think he wouldn't need to set up a return trip. He also had no way to know what was happening on Titan, as it's not like he knew that Tony, the nice wizard who made him a beer, and some teenager were off planet in the first place. Or even where they went if he did.

Post snap, he was rather devastated as his fellow refugees were mostly horribly killed and then divided again by giant purple guy with his bling glove. That put him in a bad place, thinking killing Thanos would solve everything. And this was only a few weeks after his entire kingdom was destroyed and his father died. But that's okay, because we're supposed to laugh at Thor's Depression because he's lost everyone he cares about.
Image

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-07 12:00am

FaxModem1 wrote:
2019-07-06 10:32pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-06 10:20pm
FaxModem1 wrote:
2019-07-06 10:17pm


Thor Ragnarok spoilers.

Basically, Asgard is kaput, completely gone. Dead. It has ceased to be. It is no more. That includes the rainbow bridge that the Warriors 3 wimpily defended against Hel as she took them out.
I know that, of course. But Thor was still able to teleport to the battle in Wakanda, Bifrost-style. My impression was that that power was imbued in Stormbreaker, but maybe that's just a fan theory or something? But that's why I asked- because post-Ragnarok, he demonstrated the capacity to teleport himself across interstellar space to a precise location. Unless we assume that Giant Peter Dinklage transported him, but I don't recall that being stated.
Let's assume it was Peter Dinklage, and Thor was cocky enough to think he wouldn't need to set up a return trip.
I'll buy that, at least if not for the fact that IIRC the effect looked very much like the bi-frost. But I suppose its as good an explanation as any.
He also had no way to know what was happening on Titan, as it's not like he knew that Tony, the nice wizard who made him a beer, and some teenager were off planet in the first place. Or even where they went if he did.
I mean post-Snap- why wouldn't he use it to go pick up Tony and Nebula once he knew where they were?

I suppose needing to know the location of the target could be the answer, though I don't recall Thor ever going to Wakanda before (then again, he's lived thousands of years- he very well might have, even if we can't say for sure).
Post snap, he was rather devastated as his fellow refugees were mostly horribly killed and then divided again by giant purple guy with his bling glove. That put him in a bad place, thinking killing Thanos would solve everything. And this was only a few weeks after his entire kingdom was destroyed and his father died. But that's okay, because we're supposed to laugh at Thor's Depression because he's lost everyone he cares about.
Yeah, though to be honest I barely even picked up on the mean-spiritedness of the humour at Thor's expense. Probably because I'm so used to mean-spirited humour in Hollywood action films.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 15224
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by Gandalf » 2019-07-07 04:29am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-06 10:20pm
\I know that, of course. But Thor was still able to teleport to the battle in Wakanda, Bifrost-style. My impression was that that power was imbued in Stormbreaker, but maybe that's just a fan theory or something? But that's why I asked- because post-Ragnarok, he demonstrated the capacity to teleport himself across interstellar space to a precise location. Unless we assume that Giant Peter Dinklage transported him, but I don't recall that being stated.
"We're gonna hit him with a brick?"
"It's a mold. A king's weapon. Meant to be the greatest in Asgard. In theory, it could even summon the Bifrost."
"Did it have a name?"
"Stormbreaker."

It's a pretty safe bet that Stormbreaker explains how they get from place to place.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-07 06:07am

Well, I guess that settles that question.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-08 05:51am

The Russos have weighed in a bit more on the time travel stuff, and Cap's story:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D27Nd1o8uIg

They confirm Cap was in an alternate timeline, and that he somehow came back to the original timeline to return his shield, using Pym particles.

They also vaguely tease the possibility of a future Captain America story.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-08 06:13am

Coop D'etat wrote:
2019-07-06 07:45pm
Captain Marvel's solo outing was in production itself in production at the same time as Endgame. They most likely didn't have that big a role for her because they wanted to leave as little established about her for the other people to work with. Not some nonsense conspiracy theory about wanting to appease whatever faction of the too-much-online is bitching about this week.
The idea that companies are likely to try to pander to as wide a fan base as possible is not "some nonsense conspiracy theory"- its basic logic.

But whatever their motives, it still leaves Marvel a minor character, and makes the hype around her role in the film, and Infinity War's set-up, feel like a bait-and-switch.

If they didn't want to interfere with what another film was doing, then they should have sat down and hashed it out. This is why large franchises with multiple writer/director teams working at the same time need effective editorial oversight to make sure that everyone is following more or less the same game plan.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Steve
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9520
Joined: 2002-07-03 01:09pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by Steve » 2019-07-08 06:19am

I view Carol's role in Endgame as being more quality than quantity. She's only in it for ten minutes, but she does crucial things in that short time (bringing Tony home, helping to track down Thanos, and at the end, downing Thanos' warship and going toe-to-toe with the Mad Titan in a way that even the Hulk failed to do).
”A Radical is a man with both feet planted firmly in the air.” – Franklin Delano Roosevelt

"No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism." - Sir Winston L. S. Churchill, Princips Britannia

American Conservatism is about the exercise of personal responsibility without state interference in the lives of the citizenry..... unless, of course, it involves using the bludgeon of state power to suppress things Conservatives do not like.

Admin of SFD, Moderator of SDN, Former Spacebattles Super-Mod, Veteran Chatnik

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-08 06:26am

Steve wrote:
2019-07-08 06:19am
I view Carol's role in Endgame as being more quality than quantity. She's only in it for ten minutes, but she does crucial things in that short time (bringing Tony home, helping to track down Thanos, and at the end, downing Thanos' warship and going toe-to-toe with the Mad Titan in a way that even the Hulk failed to do).
The only one of those that actually really impacted the plot was picking up Tony and Nebula, though, and none of them really developed her as a character.

Which like I said before is fine by itself- its a big cast, not everyone can get center stage. It just stands out because such a big deal was made out of Captain Marvel, so it feels like there was a change in plan half-way through, and because of the whole Black Widow/Gamora sacrifice thing meaning that they're running a bit short on effective female protagonists.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
NeoGoomba
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2002-12-22 11:35am
Location: Upstate New York

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by NeoGoomba » 2019-07-08 08:20am

Steve wrote:
2019-07-08 06:19am
I view Carol's role in Endgame as being more quality than quantity. She's only in it for ten minutes, but she does crucial things in that short time (bringing Tony home, helping to track down Thanos, and at the end, downing Thanos' warship and going toe-to-toe with the Mad Titan in a way that even the Hulk failed to do).
Yeah, I actually liked how they handled her. As shown in the MCU, she is a truly cosmic hero that is needed throughout the galaxy. There was nothing there on Earth that she could do that the Avengers couldn't during the five years of hell, so of course she would be out helping everyone else. And that she knew damn well that once the beings lost in the snap re-appeared that the Avengers were probably the reason, so she high-tailed it back to Earth to see WTF went down.

Now, granted, the Avengers could have waited for Carol to return before starting the Time Heist, but the survivors were obviously too determined to do it asap as soon as they realized they could.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know...tomorrow."
-Agent Kay

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-08 08:28am

NeoGoomba wrote:
2019-07-08 08:20am
Steve wrote:
2019-07-08 06:19am
I view Carol's role in Endgame as being more quality than quantity. She's only in it for ten minutes, but she does crucial things in that short time (bringing Tony home, helping to track down Thanos, and at the end, downing Thanos' warship and going toe-to-toe with the Mad Titan in a way that even the Hulk failed to do).
Yeah, I actually liked how they handled her. As shown in the MCU, she is a truly cosmic hero that is needed throughout the galaxy. There was nothing there on Earth that she could do that the Avengers couldn't during the five years of hell, so of course she would be out helping everyone else. And that she knew damn well that once the beings lost in the snap re-appeared that the Avengers were probably the reason, so she high-tailed it back to Earth to see WTF went down.

Now, granted, the Avengers could have waited for Carol to return before starting the Time Heist, but the survivors were obviously too determined to do it asap as soon as they realized they could.
I do like the acknowledgement that there is a whole universe out there that doesn't have the Avengers. I just wish we'd seen more of it.

Hmm, makes me wonder if any other worlds have their own hero teams (besides the Guardians of the Galaxy). I guess Thor and the Warriors Three plus Sif were sort of that for Asgard, back in the day.

Yeah, I can see why they'd want to just do it, but after waiting five years, you could wait a few more hours/days for your heaviest gun to come back. Unless... was it mentioned whether they actually had any way of contacting her? If not, then yeah, they've got to just go ahead an do it without her. But if they do, then...

I can see that sort of sloppy planning from Tony or Thor, or from Antman or Nebula, but I'd expect a seasoned warrior like Cap or a master spy like Natasha to be a bit more methodical.

But I get why they had to sideline her- they made her so powerful that she really should have been able to solo most of the movie herself. Then again, the same is true for Thor- they nerfed him a lot. Either of them should have been able to handle everything except inventing time travel and getting the Soul Stone on their own.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
NeoGoomba
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2002-12-22 11:35am
Location: Upstate New York

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by NeoGoomba » 2019-07-08 08:34am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-08 08:28am

Yeah, I can see why they'd want to just do it, but after waiting five years, you could wait a few more hours/days for your heaviest gun to come back. Unless... was it mentioned whether they actually had any way of contacting her? If not, then yeah, they've got to just go ahead an do it without her. But if they do, then...
She stated that she was going to be out of contact, possibly indefinitely, during Natasha's conference call with War Machine/Rocket/Okeye. I wouldn't be surprised if she sent her a message but had no way of knowing if she could have received it, so they just said fuck it we can't wait around forever.
But I get why they had to sideline her- they made her so powerful that she really should have been able to solo most of the movie herself. Then again, the same is true for Thor- they nerfed him a lot. Either of them should have been able to handle everything except inventing time travel and getting the Soul Stone on their own.
Yeah, except Thor was an emotional wreck for the Time Heist, and really wasn't in any condition to go anywhere he wasn't familiar. If Infinity War-Thor was there, yeah, he was a man on a mission.

That was also why I liked that Thanos dropped Thor and Iron Man so quick in Endgame. The two of them were really able take Thanos head-on in Infinity War because they were both at the top of their game. But in Endgame they are rusty from five years of peace, and only Cap was still at his peak.
Last edited by NeoGoomba on 2019-07-08 08:38am, edited 1 time in total.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know...tomorrow."
-Agent Kay

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 19176
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2019-07-08 08:36am

NeoGoomba wrote:
2019-07-08 08:34am
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-08 08:28am

Yeah, I can see why they'd want to just do it, but after waiting five years, you could wait a few more hours/days for your heaviest gun to come back. Unless... was it mentioned whether they actually had any way of contacting her? If not, then yeah, they've got to just go ahead an do it without her. But if they do, then...
She stated that she was going to be out of contact, possibly indefinitely, during Natasha's conference call with War Machine/Rocket/Okeye. I wouldn't be surprised if she sent her a message but had no way of knowing if she could have received it, so they just said fuck it we can't wait around forever.
Fair enough.

I'd still have liked to see more of her in the movie, though. Even if she's off Earth, I'd have liked to see more of what was going on in the rest of the universe post-Snap too.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver: https://youtube.com/watch?v=zxT8CM8XntA

User avatar
Bedlam
Jedi Master
Posts: 1325
Joined: 2006-09-23 11:12am
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by Bedlam » 2019-07-08 01:43pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2019-07-08 08:36am
I'd still have liked to see more of her in the movie, though. Even if she's off Earth, I'd have liked to see more of what was going on in the rest of the universe post-Snap too.
Given that about 99.99% of the universe had no way of knowing why the snap happened in the first place and why it was reversed I can imagine lots of religions springing up trying to explain it. As far as anything else knows the return could be temporary it could just keep happening in a five year cycle.

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8251
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: Avengers: Endgame release thread (spoilers)

Post by Solauren » 2019-07-08 05:44pm

I can imagine how Earth would be regarded by societies with space flight after Iron Man's snap. The Ravagers are gonna talk.

Here is a world, star flight, barely local space flight, politically and religiously fractured and near environmental collapse, that in the course of about 25 years...

Drove off a Kree Accuser attack, destroying one of the attacking vessels. (Captain Marvel)
The counter assault by a single human may have forced the Kree into their treaty with the Nova Corps.

Held off a Chi'tari invasion, and then destroyed a Chi'tari command vessel in response, using a SINGLE weapon. (Avengers)

Held off an invasion by Dark Elves (Thor: Dark World)

Trapped and then Exiled Dormamu (Dr. Strange) <- Admittedly, no one may care about this.

Held off an invasion by Thanos's forces. Thanos himself had to enter the field, with near godlike powers, to claim victory. (Avengers: Infinity War)
Note: This is something the Nova Corps was unable to do.

Had no problem, and didn't feel threatened, by 2000+ Asgardians settling on their world. (Time skip between Avengers Infinity War + Endgame)

Found a way to restore all the people Thanos killed, and then held off a second invasion by Thanos, the resulted in the complete loss of of Thanos forces (possibly across the Universe). (Avengers: Endgame)

The Odds are, the various galactic powers near Earth, are looking at it and going 'Do we leave them alone, or make peaceful friendly contact?'
\

Post Reply