• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Avengers: Infinity War grade and discussion thread

How do you rate "Avengers: Infinity War"?

  • Total voters
    165
I honestly think his reaction was normal. How are you even supposed to process it? I don't think it really hit him until a few moments later, it was just too much. It's not just that Bucky died, it's that half the universe is now gone. It's overwhelming. I don't think anyone is fully capable of even beginning to understand that level of loss. Every single living being in the universe has been affected somehow by it.

When we next see Cap, he may be deep in depression from it because he likely blames himself.
 
By the way, I do have friends that are very seriously arguing that Thanos was the environmentalist hero in this movie, and that he did nothing wrong.

https://www.inverse.com/article/44383-avengers-infinity-war-thanos-ethics-philosophy

Obviously ethics aside, his plan wouldn't work because eventually his action would be forgotten and the same issues that he solved would arise again. Perhaps Thanos is immortal, so he would be able to kill everyone as needed.

Now, human beings perform Thanos' actions every hunting season - we know that a deer population would starve with overpopulation, so we allow hunting season to stable off the population. If you talk to some big name hunters, they will always say that they are in it for conservation. Why are we able to rationalize this with deer and not our own population? The only reason is that we consider ourselves to be the custodians of this planet, and a higher form of life than deer. Thanos considers himself the custodian of the universe and a higher being to any other life form. That makes his ethics morally equivalent to our own. He did nothing wrong by our own definitions of morality.
 
Last edited:
io9's Germain Lussier raises an interesting point about marketing for Marvel films next year, particularly the Homecoming sequel. How does and how should Marvel market the film when the lead character is suppose to be dead? Certainly most comic fans and those who are paying attention to the Marvel film schedule knew that some of these characters weren't going to stay dead in the first place, but that's not necessarily true for the average viewer and they're the ones much of the marketing will be targeting anyways. Lussier argues that perhaps the best way to handle the situation is skipping over the fact that Spider-Man will be coming back to life and instead focousing on developing the mystery of how he returned:

Watching countless films, many of them in the superhero genre, roll out their marketing over the years makes me think the best way Disney and Sony could handle this is to ignore Infinity War. That movie is done. It’s a massive hit. What’s next? Are Spider-Man and Black Panther in Avengers 4? Show us! Not having them promote the film is only holding it back from its true potential. Instead of trying to keep some ridiculous secret, you build a mystery and curiosity about how they come back. It could create a whole new level of interest about the film while having all the stars front and center, as they should be (although you should keep an eye on that Holland guy). In fact, Infinity War’s marketing is a great example of how an onslaught of familiar faces can mask the fact that very little information is actually being revealed about the plot.

Yes, some fans will be mad about the “spoilers,” but those are the same fans who are complaining Infinity War had no real stakes because Marvel is making Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 and Black Panther 2. Fans who know about these kinds of things are different from fans who are influenced by film marketing or licensing. Disney and/or Sony don’t really need to aim at them specifically, they’re going to see the films no matter what. The studios need to sell to the fans who don’t know what’s coming next, who aren’t online every day—the audience who buys toys for their kids because their kids like how they look. The families who want to see a cool movie with stars they like in it. And the more stars you can parade out, whether or not their characters are dead or alive at the end of Infinity War, is a good thing.​
 
crookeddy said:
By the way, I do have friends that are very seriously arguing that Thanos was the environmentalist hero in this movie, and that he did nothing wrong.
Click to expand...
How the hell can they say that after his scene with Nebula and Gamora? Up until that point I thought he'd at least been reasonable, if still probably wrong. But he lost all my sympathy at that point.
 
ATimson said:
How the hell can they say that after his scene with Nebula and Gamora? Up until that point I thought he'd at least been reasonable, if still probably wrong. But he lost all my sympathy at that point.
Click to expand...

Both of his daughters literally tried to kill him...
 
Yes, some fans will be mad about the “spoilers,” but those are the same fans who are complaining Infinity War had no real stakes because Marvel is making Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 and Black Panther 2.
Click to expand...


I don't think these fans are right. For me, it's not that these characters have future films planned by the MCU. I think it's all about how their "deaths" are portrayed. For example, I was very disturbed by one particular death in the film, despite the fact that I'm certain this character will return for future movies.
 
crookeddy said:
Now, human beings perform Thanos' actions every hunting season - we know that a deer population would starve with overpopulation, so we allow hunting season to stable off the population. If you talk to some big name hunters, they will always say that they are in it for conservation. Why are we able to rationalize this with deer and not our own population?
Click to expand...

Apart from the ongoing absurdity of this argument from an ecological standpoint, which is totally off topic, you're just attention seeking with the infantile posturing.
 
Last edited:
Spot261 said:
Apart from the ongoing absurdity of this argument from an ecological standpoint, which is totally off topic, you're just attention seeking with the infantile posturing.
Click to expand...

You don't know me too well, nor do I seek a deep philosophical discussion. Just providing a valid opinion on the mad titan.
 
Emh said:
io9's Germain Lussier raises an interesting point about marketing for Marvel films next year, particularly the Homecoming sequel. How does and how should Marvel market the film when the lead character is suppose to be dead? Certainly most comic fans and those who are paying attention to the Marvel film schedule knew that some of these characters weren't going to stay dead in the first place, but that's not necessarily true for the average viewer and they're the ones much of the marketing will be targeting anyways. Lussier argues that perhaps the best way to handle the situation is skipping over the fact that Spider-Man will be coming back to life and instead focousing on developing the mystery of how he returned:

Watching countless films, many of them in the superhero genre, roll out their marketing over the years makes me think the best way Disney and Sony could handle this is to ignore Infinity War. That movie is done. It’s a massive hit. What’s next? Are Spider-Man and Black Panther in Avengers 4? Show us! Not having them promote the film is only holding it back from its true potential. Instead of trying to keep some ridiculous secret, you build a mystery and curiosity about how they come back. It could create a whole new level of interest about the film while having all the stars front and center, as they should be (although you should keep an eye on that Holland guy). In fact, Infinity War’s marketing is a great example of how an onslaught of familiar faces can mask the fact that very little information is actually being revealed about the plot.

Yes, some fans will be mad about the “spoilers,” but those are the same fans who are complaining Infinity War had no real stakes because Marvel is making Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 and Black Panther 2. Fans who know about these kinds of things are different from fans who are influenced by film marketing or licensing. Disney and/or Sony don’t really need to aim at them specifically, they’re going to see the films no matter what. The studios need to sell to the fans who don’t know what’s coming next, who aren’t online every day—the audience who buys toys for their kids because their kids like how they look. The families who want to see a cool movie with stars they like in it. And the more stars you can parade out, whether or not their characters are dead or alive at the end of Infinity War, is a good thing.​
Click to expand...
Homecoming 2 actually comes out after the next Avengers. Up next is Ant-Man and Wasp, then Captain Marvel. After that the next Avengers is released, the next Spider-Man will be the first release after Avengers.
 
crookeddy said:
Obviously ethics aside, his plan wouldn't work because eventually his action would be forgotten and the same issues that he solved would arise again. Perhaps Thanos is immortal, so he would be able to kill everyone as needed.
Click to expand...

Obviously it will never come up because going into too much detail turns a movie into a boring thesis paper and Thanos's snap will be reversed anyway, but there's no logical reason to assume that his snap was limited to just killing half the people. The gauntlet can change reality itself and Thanos is a smart guy whose spent his entire life thinking about this. He didn't just forget that people can still have sex. Ergo, the snap also changed the reality of procreation to make it physically impossible to have massive population explosions.
 
crookeddy said:
By the way, I do have friends that are very seriously arguing that Thanos was the environmentalist hero in this movie, and that he did nothing wrong.

https://www.inverse.com/article/44383-avengers-infinity-war-thanos-ethics-philosophy

Obviously ethics aside, his plan wouldn't work because eventually his action would be forgotten and the same issues that he solved would arise again. Perhaps Thanos is immortal, so he would be able to kill everyone as needed.

Now, human beings perform Thanos' actions every hunting season - we know that a deer population would starve with overpopulation, so we allow hunting season to stable off the population. If you talk to some big name hunters, they will always say that they are in it for conservation. Why are we able to rationalize this with deer and not our own population? The only reason is that we consider ourselves to be the custodians of this planet, and a higher form of life than deer. Thanos considers himself the custodian of the universe and a higher being to any other life form. That makes his ethics morally equivalent to our own. He did nothing wrong by our own definitions of morality.
Click to expand...
You are making a gibbering lunatic argument. Mass murder, somewhere I am pretty sure murder is bad.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top