Oh I didn't mean anyone specifically it's just reflected in some of the official responses.
Anyone of us has every right to interpret a piece of fiction, yeah? It's all good.
Spoilers Avengers: Infinity War grade and discussion thread
- Thread starter The Nth Doctor
- Start date
Anyone of us has every right to interpret a piece of fiction, yeah? It's all good.
So that's what it was about?
I was reading the thread until I had to give up in total confusion, as I couldn't understand how Thor failed everyone. So it's the axe to the heart thing? Wow.
That's silly. Yes, it's technically true – people don't die (immediately) after being stabbed through the heart, medical science was amended a long time ago not to treat stopped heart as death, and your brain has been long known to be temporarily alive even after being completely severed from your heart and blood flow. And even after your brain activity stops you're probably still ‘alive’ (though not in the strictest biological sense) for some time – it's only the inability of current medical science to fix it (like Dr. Crusher was resurrecting ‘dead’ people in TNG: season 1). Besides, Thanos is alien, and Thor is alien, so they ought to have/know fancier biology.
But if it's such a total failure to stab someone through the heart, it's also on everyone else who didn't go straight for the head. Not just in Infinity War, but every film ever made. Quite the opposite, though – it's normal to aim for the chest to stop somebody. If only because it's harder to miss, so your chances are probably higher. (Although after getting sick of watching S.H.I.E.L.D. battle enemy No. 274619 who seems unstoppable and unkillable, some amendments may be needed.)
It's also normal for people, regardless of planet of origin, to fail to consider a few seconds of consciousness with the infinity gauntlet. In a moment like this, I barely know any people who wouldn't fail to consider it. So the ‘Oops, he can still use the gauntlet’ moment was coming for almost anybody.
I mean, the whole purpose of the scene was that the entire audience would fail to consider it, and come surprised when Thanos simply wins a few seconds later. Worked for me, by the way. I was fooled.
Yeah, it's not like people are wondering what is Hawkeye there for.
Exactly where Loki was going for. Too bad Thor didn't pay attention to that. I wouldn't put it past Loki to surmise if Thanos has time to think after the blow he has the power to fix the damage.
Sure, but some interpretations are clearly more accessible and in line with both the intent, the established character and the perspectives of the majority of passably intelligent people in the audience ho watched the show.
Our friend is clearly not happy with the perceived emasculation of Thor as a means to set up Captain Marvel and it's really not hard to speculate why. It's also really disappointing that you seem to be again supporting such a viewpoint on general principle of disagreeing with certain posters, although why you'd do that regardless of the obvious inherent prejudice in his position is mystifying.
Frankly it's more about the absurd complaint that Thor was somehow dumbed down (he wasn't) to endorse a feminist agenda and set the scene for a character we haven't even met yet in the MCU, much less had cause to fault. There, it's out in the open now and we can stop dancing round the real issue and lending faux intellectualisations to what is patently obvious to anyone familiar with the posting histories of the various players in the thread.
Such a sad case. You have two modes: the immature flaming nonsense as you do here, and in other forums, and the other, where you scream that you have made some point, which would not require you return post after post, day after day to argue (or defend) if you actually had solid ground to stand on. Defending anything too much is (usually) the evidence of an indefensible position.
Its your business if you want to support a weak plot device, but you're not convincing anyone that the film's choices to get to A4 were motivated by continuity of character that stands on the polar opposite of film examples presented (which you typically ignore).
Continue abusing your moderator position by flaming and making baseless accusations--its what you do, and endless examples are easy to find on this board. When you cannot force your often hollow arguments on any number of subjects or ideology (about anything) on others, you attack, then pretend you were simply having some sort of conversation. There is no conversation with you, as you are so shaking with--frankly disturbing--levels of rage and desperation in trying to force your myopic, "my way or no way" views on others. The moment your opinion is rejected/dismissed (all for legitimate reasons), in comes the lies and flames, as seen in this thread.
Grow up. Its a movie, not real life. That brand of keyboard warrior crap stopped being in fashion ages ago, but I'm sure you will continue be as abusive as ever.
Grow up. Its a movie, not real life. That brand of keyboard warrior crap stopped being in fashion ages ago, but I'm sure you will continue be as abusive as ever.
...and that's the problem with Thor in the final minutes of Infinity War: he was already presented as a man knowing that in the protection of those he cares about, absolute lethal force is necessary. As mentioned days ago, his actions in the New York battle from The Avengers was Thor doing what was necessary against the doomsday threat posed by the Chitauri; Erik Selvig's life was in danger--that was on Thor's mind from the second Selvig's compromised mind was revealed to him Thor was emotionally invested in the fight--he had someone to lose, so he could not--and would not pull back or halfass his duty. Character continuity has to inform every appearance going forward, and if it did not at any point after The Avengers, then that's a failure on the part of the writers--which is clear in the final moments with Thanos, where once again, Thor was facing a doomsday threat--only its potential (now) made the Chitauri seem like playing softball in the park by comparison. No other character--as developed--would have shared the same level of understanding about the infinity stone threat, but stop short of the lethal blow...unless the plot needed them to suddenly act out of character for the purposes of a sequel.
Tactically I'm torn that he didn't seal the deal. To move the plot along he needed to failYou know it would have been the end of the story as such (obviously) but man he had the ability and the weapon to do it. He just needed to stop that bastard from snapping his fingers, lol.
Its the equivalent of your random, experienced movie vampire hunter (in the last minutes of the film) hammering the stake into the vampire's chest stopping short of piercing the heart to have some final word, when the known threat--if having even a moment of opportunity--will take it...and he does by slapping the stake away, knocking the hunter across the room, and making his escape. That would be weak plotting effectively making the hero look like an idiot, instead of the writers just creating a believable conflict which prevented victory.
That's the Thor situation, and its a poor way to move to a sequel.
Nope, sorry, still way off the mark.
Well I'm glad anyone here has enjoyed the movie and their take on it. However I'm not going to be shamed into pretending my reaction was not what it was 
Thor was dumbed down in my opinion. He is not the same Thor as when we first saw him. The Hulk did go into hiding and was actually emasculated, eHulkulated. These elements were part of the plot. Obviously it makes a lead in for further adventure to be explored, gosh that's simply being part of a franchise.
Thor was dumbed down in my opinion. He is not the same Thor as when we first saw him. The Hulk did go into hiding and was actually emasculated, eHulkulated. These elements were part of the plot. Obviously it makes a lead in for further adventure to be explored, gosh that's simply being part of a franchise.
Well I'm glad anyone here has enjoyed the movie and their take on it. However I'm not going to be shamed into pretending my reaction was not what it was
Again, though, if Thor was dumbed down, where does that actually show in the context of previous portrayals? Both as a fictional character within Marvel and as a mythological figure he has always been defined by the folly of martial pride and hubris. It's why he exists and even reducing the focus to the narrative of the film we literally see him doing exactly what he states he intends to do. Pausing to look Thanos in the eye and assert his victory is not only in fitting with the character but is exactly what we are led to expect within the film.
That's not poor writing, poor writing would be having him out perfectly rationally where that is completely out of fitting with every thing we know about him.
To claim that is a deliberate dumbing down in order to set up Captain Marvel is therefore a bizarre statement when we have no pre existing pattern of him behaving differently. We all know exactly where that criticism comes from and it has nothing to do with the writing or structure of the narrative, it has everything to do with a perceived political agenda. An agenda which some people find threatening and feel the need to dismiss but justify that dismissal after the fact because they know the reality is socially frowned upon. An agenda which would frankly be entirely in fitting with the long established ethos of Marvel publications anyway.
I often wonder in movies when they go for the body shot and the victim is wearing a vest why the baddie didn't shoot him in the head.
That's rather a limited assessment, lol. Maybe he's a bit more than that? Consider...
As for the set up for future Marvel adventures in the franchise, it's more than one movie. That's the way these movies work, one often leads to another.
Thor failed the least:
It was Rogers who persuaded them to try to remove the stone from Vision, sacrificing scores of Wakandan lives to possibly save him
It was Scarlett Witch who went along with that plan, then decided to go join the fight halfway through
It was Starlord who broke Mantis' hold on Thanos when they had nearly got the gauntlet off
It was Heimdall that, rather than using the bifrost to push Thanos into a blackhole, used it to send Hulk to earth to give Strange and Stark about 3 minutes warning
It was Gamora that gave up the location of the Soul stone
It was Rogers who persuaded them to try to remove the stone from Vision, sacrificing scores of Wakandan lives to possibly save him
It was Scarlett Witch who went along with that plan, then decided to go join the fight halfway through
It was Starlord who broke Mantis' hold on Thanos when they had nearly got the gauntlet off
It was Heimdall that, rather than using the bifrost to push Thanos into a blackhole, used it to send Hulk to earth to give Strange and Stark about 3 minutes warning
It was Gamora that gave up the location of the Soul stone
Yes they do, but wouldn't your statement work better as "That's a rather broad assessment" given you want me to limit my assessment to the MCU portrayal?
That doesn't help one bit though given that even limiting ourselves to the film series the character has been consistent with that broader picture, his arc from the beginning has been about how he falls short of the ideals Odin and his ordained role required of him.
He has matured and rounded yes, but the extent of that is nowhere near approaching the point where those flaws are no longer defining features. He is still Thor, just an ever so slightly more self aware Thor. Whether it is Odin, Cap, Loki, Valkyrie, The Warriors Four, Heimdall, he consistently shows how much he benefits from having a moderating influence from other more pragmatic and focused characters. Nothing thus far has suggested a paradigm shift in the way he thinks and acts, so taking that statement of intent within the film is hardly "narrow" when the picture remains the same no matter how we tighten or widen focus of our analysis. The consistency is spot on whether we stay within the film, look at the MCU more generally, the Marvel character historically or the cultural and mythological figure which inspired that character.
I actually suspect you realise this but don't want to acknowledge that fact or the agenda behind the argument and that is why you are presenting such knee jerk responses given e know you are more than capable of framing and structuring much stronger arguments.
It's funny, because this is just an absolutely perfect description of the way you're acting in this thread.
And once again, to counter the many different clear examples you've been given you still have nothing to offer other than the Chitauri. Of course, aside from the many reasons already clearly explained why the Chitauri are actually not at all comparable to IW (and, hey, let's add yet another to the list while we're here: the Chitauri are literally paper-thin drones. Killing them with one blow is like ripping a kleenex with one tear. I highly doubt Thor ever had a single conscious thought about it at all), let's also take another look at this one singular example that somehow invalidates everything else we know about the character:
CAPTAIN AMERICA
What's the story upstairs?
THOR
The powers surrounding the cube is
impenetrable.
IRON MAN (V.O.)
Thor is right. We gotta deal with these
guys.
BLACK WIDOW
How do we do this?
CAPTAIN AMERICA
As a team.
THOR
I have unfinished business with Loki.
HAWKEYE
Yeah, get in line.
CAPTAIN AMERICA
Save it. Loki's gonna keep this fight
focused on us and that's what we need.
Without him these things could run
wild. We got Stark up top, he's gonna
need us...
Just then, BANNER ARRIVES ON A SMALL MOTORBIKE. Getting off, he
looks around the city.
So, looky there. Halfway through the battle that you say Thor would never half-ass, he's already ready to skip out and satisfy his PRIDE by subduing his brother. Captain America literally has to tell him that containing the Chitauri and preventing more people from getting hurt comes first. Guess Selvig didn't mean that much to him...
So we're saying that the average experienced movie vampire hunter is a guy who's literally never fought a vampire before? Because Thor never fought anything like Thanos before this movie, and the Thanos at the end of the movie isn't even on the same power tier as the one he fought at the beginning...
Sure. But remind me again why this thread is repeatedly obsessing about Thor's so called emasculation being setup for one particular character when there is in fact no reason at all to think his situation is doing anything other than setting up Avengers 4 (ie, the grand final hurrah of all the original Avengers, including Thor) as a whole?
You're right in that I am basing Thor on the Thor I've seen in the movie franchise as I'm doing the other characters. I was watching Ellen the other day and she had Chris Hemsworth on as a guest. She wanted to show him (as Thor) over the years he has portrayed the character. Cut to a shot of long haired Chris without a shirt on to a shot of short haired, eye patch Thor... without a shirt on. It got cheap laughs but it was played for laughs. I could see a change in Thor from the first Avengers when he extended a hand to Captain America, the same man he mocked earlier. Life has a habit changing people and he has been influenced by being part of a team. By his losses. Really fighting Thanos was not his first rodeo.
I don't know if my responses have been 'knee jerk' more irreverent. If Thor had gone for the head shot, took out the arm we wouldn't be having this conversation.
The last in a long line of failures.
Did anyone come out both competent and useful? Aside from most of the GotG lot, Spiderman and Iron Man are the only main characters that seemed to have done as well as they could, I suppose their main accomplishment was delaying Thanos long enough for Thor to get his axe.
If anyone had their powers reduced in this movie, it was Vision. He went from being Superman with a freakin laser beam on his head, to being a wimpy kid with nothing to do. He and Scarlett Witch were allegedly the strongest two, at least before Hulk and Thor turned up, but they failed miserably in Glasgow against a henchman, and did pretty much nothing later.
I wonder how Stark will get back to Earth?
Quill's ship should be there*, which Nebula knows how to fly. Tony could figure it out quick enough, I'd say. I'd like to see Nebula come to Earth and get involved with the remaining Avengers, but she'll probably drop Tony off and skedaddle.
*If it wasn't destroyed when Thanos threw a moon at everyone, that is.
Rocket. He's cute.
I'm still just not at all understanding your complaints about Thor. Like in my mind he was easily the most powerful Avenger in that whole movie, and I felt it was so amazing when he came to Wakanda and pretty much turned everything around all by himself. He had his plan and he fully acted on it, but like it just didn't work - how is that his fault and making him dumbed down in any way? I mean he didn't pull any punches at all or anything, he buried his ax deep in Thanos' chest. Your comparison to a vampire hunter is completely wrong, she's not holding back from the heart, she plunged her stake right in, but then suddenly learned "Oh crap, this vampire can't be killed by a stake to his heart!" That's not bad writing or a hero making a mistake, that's just a new type of villain she wasn't expecting and where traditional tactics won't work.
I feel your attack on Awesome Possum was very uncalled for and was unacceptably vile, I'm very disappointed you'd do that. You're talking too about over defending something, well what are you doing with your extremely weak argument going on and on still trying to defend it even though so many people have demonstrated very clearly how your main points don't make any sense at all.
I feel very disturbed if your motivation really is about trying to discredit Captain Marvel just because you can't handle a woman being more powerful than the male heroes, I really sincerely hope that's not the case. Thor has definitely not been made less powerful, if anything you can see he's clearly gotten more and more powerful throughout his whole story, and like did you even watch the battle of Wakanda? I mean like he seriously turned that whole thing around pretty much all by himself! He's more powerful than all the others put together, but Thanos is just more powerful, right? I don't feel anything you're saying makes any sense to me at all. Like did you and I watch different movies or something?
I thought Vision's weakness was caused because that one guy (I'm so sorry I don't know his name, I only know Proxima Midnight) who took away his power to phase through things, and he wasn't used to like being beaten around and everything, so he was confused and afraid, plus like just somehow those two had weapons meant to fight someone with the Mind Stone, right? Vision seemed really shaken up and scared to me, and he knew Thanos was coming to take away his very essence, and he knew his failure would bring Thanos closer to destroying the universe, so he's not really going to be his usual self right?
I'm also so very sorry to say this, but I really cringe anytime someone uses "emasculate" as such a dire insult for a male character, you're basically saying he's weaker because he's being made less of a man, and obviously if he's not a man we know what he's becoming more like, right? I'm just pretty sure we can find another way to say he's been weakened, or humiliated, or neutralized or something without misogynistic undertones?
I feel your attack on Awesome Possum was very uncalled for and was unacceptably vile, I'm very disappointed you'd do that. You're talking too about over defending something, well what are you doing with your extremely weak argument going on and on still trying to defend it even though so many people have demonstrated very clearly how your main points don't make any sense at all.
I feel very disturbed if your motivation really is about trying to discredit Captain Marvel just because you can't handle a woman being more powerful than the male heroes, I really sincerely hope that's not the case. Thor has definitely not been made less powerful, if anything you can see he's clearly gotten more and more powerful throughout his whole story, and like did you even watch the battle of Wakanda? I mean like he seriously turned that whole thing around pretty much all by himself! He's more powerful than all the others put together, but Thanos is just more powerful, right? I don't feel anything you're saying makes any sense to me at all. Like did you and I watch different movies or something?
I thought Vision's weakness was caused because that one guy (I'm so sorry I don't know his name, I only know Proxima Midnight) who took away his power to phase through things, and he wasn't used to like being beaten around and everything, so he was confused and afraid, plus like just somehow those two had weapons meant to fight someone with the Mind Stone, right? Vision seemed really shaken up and scared to me, and he knew Thanos was coming to take away his very essence, and he knew his failure would bring Thanos closer to destroying the universe, so he's not really going to be his usual self right?
I'm also so very sorry to say this, but I really cringe anytime someone uses "emasculate" as such a dire insult for a male character, you're basically saying he's weaker because he's being made less of a man, and obviously if he's not a man we know what he's becoming more like, right? I'm just pretty sure we can find another way to say he's been weakened, or humiliated, or neutralized or something without misogynistic undertones?