It could be a signal to his past self too that this is the one.
Spoilers Avengers: Endgame grade and discussion thread
- Thread starter The Nth Doctor
- Start date
It's too bad the casting is controversial because Tilda Swinton should definitely be playing a sorceress somewhere or maybe even Doctor Who.
There have been a few others (Millennium, Predestination, Looper, the Philadelphia Experiment, and Somewhere in Time). They're the only type of time travel I can take seriously .
That's not what I was rolling my eyes at, and I think you know that.
It's just astounding to me that so many are "bothered" by that scene enough to point it out. I didn't even notice it because, I suppose, I don't have a sexist-mindset looking for such things as "OMG! A scene showing all women!"
Seriously, why is such a thing an issue? I can see it being something a woman would notice given the message or whatever it's sending out but beyond that... To the point of being bothered by it?
Man.
That's not why people have an issue with it and it's disingenuous (and a Straw Man) to suggest otherwise.
I disagree on the first two. We will see what happens on Loki's show which will almost certainly prove or disprove it, but Loki absolutely could have escaped and been recaptured between the last few scenes of avengers (which very clearly do not happen in quick succession, given the costume changes and the intermission of the shawarma scene). In fact, I saw no real reason to believe that confrontation between Stark and Pierce hadn't always happened and no particularly good way to end that scene without Loki escaping. As for Star-Lord, it would be odd and certainly remarkable, but the camera isn't on him in a permanent panning shot and we really have no idea how long exactly he was dancing around before he got to the stone, so he could've just believed he fell and hit his head.
As for the third, that's simply not what happened in the movie, as has been mentioned several times. Whatever you want to believe about the rest, the Ancient One is *crystal* clear about the Infinity Stones and their effect on time. Removing any stone from the timeline creates a branch timeline. Thanos and his army traveled forward after the Avengers removed the Power stone, so they never came from the original timeline at all. And once the power stone was returned, that branch timeline was prevented from ever existing in the first place, so no one would ever miss them.
In a larger amount of cases these days (manbabies et al) it is.
Interesting. I understand why they cut the scene (and I think that was the right decision), but I sure hope they include it with the home media release.
I think the issue is, “It’s pandering, but it’s not pandering to me!” People generally don’t have a problem with (or even notice) pandering when they’re the ones being pandered to, but those who are accustomed to pandering always being targeted at them get upset when they see it targeted at anyone else.
An alternate interpretation would be that nobody notices pandering done well, but if done poorly only the people who aren't being pandered to are bothered. I will admit that while my objection to the Endgame scene is statistical, I'm willing to overlook the improbabilities of all of Peter Parker's close circle of friends all being snapped, so they stay the same age. I'm actually not sure which of the two incidents is more probable.
I don't care why people have an issue with it. Why have an issue with it at all? Why does it freakin' matter? A L A R G E chunk of this thread was burned up by people butt-hurt over it. Why?
It would have been funny if he used a different finger...
grendelsbayne said:
And those movies are single timeline.
grendelsbayne said:
Because, as the movie indicated, a reality missing one of the stones is problematic?
grendelsbayne said:
Nonsense.
Last edited:
I think this is pandering done well, because the people it’s targeted at love it. The people it’s not targeted at getting upset is an inevitable side effect.
Which is still totally irrelevant to the point.
Did it? All she says is that removing a stone causes branch timelines and the time stone is fundamentally important to the defense of earth. If there is supposed to be a single timeline, then the branches have to be trimmed. But if that's not the case, then she gave no reason at all why the other stones never being returned would cause any problems whatsoever.
Nope.
Yes, I was being facetious.
It was at the end of the movie so it stuck in my mind. Let me turn it around then, was there a similar moment that happened that I've ignored because of it? My problem was not in the message but in the execution of it during the final climax. It was the moment that made me forget I was watching a battle for the fate of humanity and think "oh yeah, this is a movie". The same moment might have even played fine in a different context.
Also, this isn't really a right or wrong thing, it's a moment that didn't work for me personally. This thread is full of people saying what worked and didn't work for them. I also said I wish Captain Marvel wasn't basically a big Macguffin and could have been brought deeper into the stories. So why is the other comment such an issue?
Did I miss another moment like this? I'm open to the idea I may have a subconscious bias if that is the case.
At least, for myself, I personally have not read a single other site's thoughts on the matter. Until I saw it last night I was in media blackout to avoid knowing anything. I hadn't even read other MCU threads to avoid any unintentional leaks.
Well my wife and her friend also found it a little bit over the top.
In my opinion it would be better if they wanted to give the female heroes a bigger role was to let them protect Spider-Man. Or hoe they did it in IW was also great
Yes, it's utter nonsense.
If it had been a line up of all male heroes, nobody would have batted an eyelid. The fact that it was all female is noticeable because they've never done it before. It's a bit like there being decades of all-male landing parties in Star Trek but being becoming incandescent with rage when there is an all female landing party, despite the the fact that each has the exact same probability of occurring (except in TOS, where it was half as likely due to them expressly stating that 1/3 of the crew was female).
The point they were making IMO is that Marvel movies no longer have just one principle female to be the love interest of the hero (although that's still a massively over-used trope). This is a capstone adventure for the original Avengers. They had only one woman. That is no longer the case.
It was a symbolic moment that really should have been as commonplace and meh as an all male line up.
Exactly.
And no more Marvel...or Lucasfilm...or Disney movies would be shown in mainland China either until the next regime change in Beijing. And maybe, not even then.
So Disney HQ made a choice to pass an obedience test.
Or the previous timeline collapsed in on itself as somebody mentioned above. Iron Man's snap (by the movies own rules) must put all the bad guys back where they came from with no memory of what happens in the future.
This is interesting. So as soon as the first stone is taken, everything after that comes from an alternate timeline that becomes erased when Cap brings the stones back in time. I like that.
Last edited:
