Spoilers Avengers: Endgame grade and discussion thread

[urbandefault]

The company line as far as I know is that this Avengers lineup is done. They're going to focus on single character movies until further notice.

Disney+ will have some teamup shows. Wanda & Vision, Falcon & Winter Soldier, et al, whatever.

Projecting wishes for a big screen resurrection of Tony and de-aging of Steve is at this point a waste of energy.

Better to help Girl Scouts toast marshmallows for smores ... or something.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Depends how long the dead dude is out of action. When it’s only three days, the whole “He died for us” thing feels like a weaselly bait-and-switch.

"Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins."

 

[Ovation]

"Jesus gave up his weekend for our sins."

I remember putting it to the nuns something like that back in the day. Can't say they were very happy with me (but, you know, that was merely a day that ends with a "y").

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I've never understood the complaint that resurrecting a character ruins their death. As long as there isn't time travel involved, then it still happened, the character still did what they did, and made the choices that they made, even the death itself is reversed.

Because if you know any character who dies will just come back you stop caring if they die.

It’s not the character’s death it cheapens, it’s all future deaths. The next death scene will have zero impact if we know in the back of our minds death is a temporary inconvenience.

 

[Awesome Possum]

They shouldn't bring him back. We don't really need another Iron Man movie, Tony's arc is over. He's gone from a weapons merchant to a man who want to protect the world to a man who died saving half the life in the universe. There's nothing to add. But his legacy lives on in Spider-Man, his surrogate son, and his daughter who could grow up to be a hero herself.

 

[Claudia]

I've never understood the complaint that resurrecting a character ruins their death. As long as there isn't time travel involved, then it still happened, the character still did what they did, and made the choices that they made, even the death itself is reversed.

It always matters whether the character's arc is done. Tony's arc was done. Resurrecting him would do nothing for the character, it would be fan-service, milking the cash-cow, you name it.

And yes, making a death stick means more in this time and age (where loved characters are resurrected left and right, used in flashbacks, "missing" scenes etc) because consequences are rarely shown. Let other characters deal with loss and grief and work their way through to the other side. But often, especially in movies heavily relying on action and SFX this is glossed over because it's easier to undo the death than to show slow/character-driven scenes.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Not sure about that he specifically needed Steve for that, his whole arc since IM went in that direction before ever meeting Steve.

The argument between the two (in The Avengers) would not have been possible at all if not for Stark not knowing the meaning of sacrifice. At that time, Stark was arrogant, believing technology was the slick way out of anything, which reinforced his belief that he would never consider laying down his life. He was as far removed from having a moral compass as anyone could get. Without Steve's influence, I doubt he would have pursued the missile for the purpose of getting rid if no matter the cost to himself.

I'd rather turn the tables: Steve had to learn the meaning of living for something (beyond being "a laboratory experiment"), of putting his own happiness at least on equal standing, of having something worth sacrificing everything for

100% disagreement with that, since Steve was always wiling to fight for / sacrifice himself for what was right and who he cared for (the grenade scene) before he became Captain America--its the reason he was selected above all others. Sacrificing himself for one he cared about--or millions he would never know with no thought of "can I get myself out of this" is living for something--that's caring for others (taking the Valkyrie into the ice / allowing the Winter Soldier to come close to beating him to death all for the sake of reaching / honoring his brotherhood with Bucky), which Stark did not comprehend, hence his attitude (among many things) about Bucky (note the disdain in spitting out "your war buddy" in Civil War) long before he ever learned of the Bucky's involvement in the death of Stark's parents.

I like to imagine Steve and Peggy, a rescued Bucky, and Howard Stark (incl his eventual family) and Jarvis (and his wife) to be live happily ever after, Hydra destroyed etc. *g* Maybe the Bucky and Sam-series will shed some light, dropping some soundbites.

The time travel matter was so convoluted that the more fans even think about it--and the less than sound writer/director explanations--the more it will forever stand as a bad coda for this period of the MCU and one of its most important characters.

 

[Set Harth]

And yes, making a death stick means more in this time and age

You want to go home and rethink your life.

 

[Gaith]

The Avengers: creators of a whole lotta problems:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[ichab]

It always matters whether the character's arc is done. Tony's arc was done. Resurrecting him would do nothing for the character, it would be fan-service, milking the cash-cow, you name it.

And yes, making a death stick means more in this time and age (where loved characters are resurrected left and right, used in flashbacks, "missing" scenes etc) because consequences are rarely shown. Let other characters deal with loss and grief and work their way through to the other side. But often, especially in movies heavily relying on action and SFX this is glossed over because it's easier to undo the death than to show slow/character-driven scenes.

I agree . Keep Tony dead. I would have liked to see him take on the REAL Mandarin before biting the dust, but Downey is getting older and I don't want to see that part recast. Just pass the Iron man mantle on to someone else.

 

[Turtletrekker]

The Avengers: creators of a whole lotta problems:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This sums up so many of the problems I had with this movie. I almost felt as if the solution to the snap was as bad as the snap itself. it actually represents the single biggest storytelling issue I have not only with this movie, but with the entirety of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Don’t go into these movies expecting realism. Otherwise most of the Avengers would be dead by their origin alone and Thor wouldn’t look like a pirate had a baby with an angel, he be some alien thing.

 

[Gaith]

This sums up so many of the problems I had with this movie. I almost felt as if the solution to the snap was as bad as the snap itself. it actually represents the single biggest storytelling issue I have not only with this movie, but with the entirety of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

I thought the movie was excellent, and I'm avoiding the Spider-Man previews for spoilers, but to me, the big storytelling changes start right after Endgame. I've certainly seen enough Voyager episodes ("Endgame" included!), however, to not miss a full narrative reset.

I heard an interesting interview with the directors in which the interviewer observed the five-year time jump was a very well-chosen one. If it were days or a year or two after the Snap, there'd be no hesitation to bring the missing back. If it were a dozen years after, OTOH, society would have moved so far along that there could be a compelling argument to not do so. Five years is right on that border, where it still feels like a moral imperative, but there'll be lasting and far-reaching consequences. (And thanks to an immediately wildly overstrained global food and resource economy, an immediate spike in global warfare...)

 

[Anwar]

The Avengers: creators of a whole lotta problems:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

So basically they decided to resolve the big storyline of the first three Phases but leave an interesting setting for Phase 4 to explore and how the characters navigate it.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

The company line as far as I know is that this Avengers lineup is done. They're going to focus on single character movies until further notice.

That's a good thing. Disney/Marvel has drained the battery with this end-all, "biggest EVER" fourth Avengers film, so they cannot just leap back into some big group plot.

Projecting wishes for a big screen resurrection of Tony and de-aging of Steve is at this point a waste of energy.

Agreed, and I say this believing Rogers/Cap was the far and away best character of the MCU, with his absence having a major impact on the MCU world in-universe, and certainly where moviegoers are concerned.

 

[PsychoPere]

Five years is right on that border, where it still feels like a moral imperative, but there'll be lasting and far-reaching consequences. (And thanks to an immediately wildly overstrained global food and resource economy, an immediate spike in global warfare...)

Although this likely wouldn't have the wide-ranging appeal that Disney and Marvel would want in order to produce such a thing, I would love to see a Disney+ or Hulu series set during the five-year period showing how the world struggled to deal with the aftermath of the Decimation. Something like The Leftovers meets the MCU, except also encompassing the wider political effects - not just the lives of everyday folks.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Although this likely wouldn't have the wide-ranging appeal that Disney and Marvel would want in order to produce such a thing, I would love to see a Disney+ or Hulu series set during the five-year period showing how the world struggled to deal with the aftermath of the Decimation. Something like The Leftovers meets the MCU, except also encompassing the wider political effects - not just the lives of everyday folks.

I would also love to watch that, but it's such a niche focus that I doubt we would ever see it, except maybe in comic form.

 

[Saul]

Watched this for the fourth and final time today. Still gets me every time. Can't believe I went to see a 3 hour movie at the theater this many times.

I agree . Keep Tony dead. I would have liked to see him take on the REAL Mandarin before biting the dust, but Downey is getting older and I don't want to see that part recast. Just pass the Iron man mantle on to someone else.

I'd really like to see a War Machine movie Often rumored but never happened, maybe now we can have one.

 

[Gaith]

I've heard a whole lot of Leftovers comparisons, which of course makes sense, but, having never seen the show, I have a hard time imagining how a mere 2% population snap could be dramatic enough to sustain a whole series. One out of every 50 people suddenly disappearing would be shocking and unsettling, no doubt about it, but hardly a fundamental threat to economies and society the way Thanos' 50% (or even a 20% disappearance) would be?

 

[Captrek]

I wouldn’t worry about businesses losing their workforces. Most jobs can be done by the Iron Legion. The real problem comes five years later, when all these resurrected people want to go back to work but their jobs have been eliminated by machines.