UNMARKED SPOILER THREAD - Avengers: Endgame - "Avenge the fallen"

A solid 7/10 for me; a worse film than IW but a great way to see out the first 10 years.

I got a bit watery eyed at the 'Assemble!' bit and the female supers being the only ones able to handle Thanos was a real 'strawberry float yeah!' moment but apart from that it was a surprisingly messy affair. Fewer laughs than the other films, and none of the time travel stuff made any sense at all.

Edit: Wow at people seeing this twice or even three times at the cinema. I genuinely don't think I could stomach it.

Corazon de Leon wrote:
mcjihge2 wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Tomous wrote:Can anyone explain the time travel to me. It they killed past Thanos how does the original snap happen? Is there anything I’ve missed beyond Banner saying it doesn’t work like other movies and the Ancient one talking about branched timelines. Are there two branched timelines now? The original MCU and now MCU up to 2014 then no Thanos.

Ok.

This basic version is "you can't change your past". Anything they do in the past won't change your present (because you already lived the past. It happened for you). . It's very different from most other media presenations of time travel. But the present is fixed. You can't change it, because it's you. If you take that as the starting point it largely makes sense.That's no cause/effect

That's why !PresentNebula could shoot !PastNebula without herself disappearing/changing. (And !PastThanos and his army were destroyed with no effect on our history)

The Ancient one explains it as if you change the past you make a new timeline (i]your[/i] timeline doesn't change). So when Bruce took the stone, he was making a new (darker) timeline for her world. That's why Bruce said they'd take the stone back to her.

So there's potentially many different timelines around now - 2012 Morag split, 1970s Tessect/Pym Splt, 2013 Ether Split etc (My guess is Doctor Strange 2 might explore them)

This only problem with the "past becomes different timelines" thing is that then how does Cap go back, make a different timeline where he stays....but then end up in our timeline at the end to pass on the shield?

(Edit This also means that even if Thor saved his mum, he'd have made a different timeline where she lived, when he came back she'd still be dead)

I like Hexxs post. If Thanos was to be "eliminated" from the MCU films from 2014 then would it greatly affect any of the later films? (apart from IW).

Is it not possible that they're already in a timeline where Cap stayed in the past? So in Winter Soldier where Peggy says she married someone, the person she married was actually Steve Rogers and everything else in the universe went the way it did with him in the background.

I dunno, if you think too much about time travel it'll pickle your brain. I'm just happy he got his dance.

Looking into this, I've just seen the directors say his staying in the past created a divergent timeline that he lived in with her.

Firstly, what is this obsession with pop sci-fi in making sure all little plot details are laid out and explained for the audience in full? What happened to having a little mystery?

Secondly, that's a much more unsatisfying explanation than the one the film suggests, which is Steve and Peggy get together and have always got together in secret.

Corazon de Leon

Agreed on both points really.

I was just thinking about the whole Steve and Peggy thing, and The Winter Solder came to mind, so I found a transcript online:

I was remembering just the first half, which works really well at being ambiguous enough that it could work with the end of End Game, but the second half doesn't seem to support that plot point. Feels at best Cap created an alternative universe, grew old there, then came back to the universe we know. At worse the time travel stuff is inconsistent, which is a shame.

Corazon de Leon

She's about 90 and I'm relatively sure has dementia to be fair, so I'd say it's still ambiguous-ish. :slol:

I can't believe anyone actually gives a strawberry float.

On the time travel issues, I'm with Basil Exposition.

Saw yesterday and still deciding whether I liked it or not. The 2nd half is tremendous and hits all the right notes, the first half less so. Wasn't too struck on the retrieval of the stones section, those time travel episodes were all a bit obvious. Didn't like Hulk, less keen on Thor this time around too. He felt like too much comic relief. Korg was awesome though.

Also, the backup for Marvel seemed a little pointless. She's just singlehandedly destroyed a spaceship, not sure she needs help.

Spidey though :wub:

And Cap with the hammer :wub:

I'm almost certainly in the minority but I don't want Thor in my Guardians movie.

Corazon de Leon

It's nice to speculate on stuff. I'm of the opinion that ambiguity and fan theories can really help a bit of fiction achieve cult/legendary status. The "Was Cap there all along" idea could work that way. Look at Blade Runner - guarantee you nobody remembers that movie as fondly as they do if Deckard had definitely been a Replicant.

Personally, I don't care. Like I said before, I'm just happy he was happy at the end of the film. It was the closest I came to tears. :slol:

Denster wrote:I can't believe anyone actually gives a strawberry float.

I do sort of agree with you, strangely enough. Banner's "our present would then be your future and the past your present" was Basil Exposition's "And neither should you!" line. None of it makes sense and the narrative results outweigh the logic.

Although I also think it's one of the reasons it's not as good a film as IW. It's a mess of a script that relies on nostalgia and familiarity to work as well as it does.

Corazon de Leon wrote:It's nice to speculate on stuff. I'm of the opinion that ambiguity and fan theories can really help a bit of fiction achieve cult/legendary status. The "Was Cap there all along" idea could work that way. Look at Blade Runner - guarantee you nobody remembers that movie as fondly as they do if Deckard had definitely been a Replicant.

Personally, I don't care. Like I said before, I'm just happy he was happy at the end of the film. It was the closest I came to tears.

It's already been confirmed Cap wasn't there all along. He was living in an alternate timeline then 'jumped' back to the real timeline at the end when he was an old man.

So, has Cap been living in the past this whole time — or did he go and live in another dimension?

The directors say it’s the latter.

https://ew.com/movies/2019/04/30/avenge ... ssion=true

Tafdolphin wrote:
Denster wrote:I can't believe anyone actually gives a strawberry float.

I do sort of agree with you, strangely enough. Banner's "our present would then be your future and the past your present" was Basil Exposition's "And neither should you!" line. None of it makes sense and the narrative results outweigh the logic.

Although I also think it's one of the reasons it's not as good a film as IW. It's a mess of a script that relies on nostalgia and familiarity to work as well as it does.

Which is why I wish the Russos kept quiet on it. Let the film speak for itself and allow ambiguity to the details.

Rex Kramer wrote:I'm almost certainly in the minority but I don't want Thor in my Guardians movie.

Why so? Each to their own obviously, but Chris Hemsworth is a rather deft comedic performer and seems to gel well with the Guardians.

Corazon de Leon

Lagamorph wrote:
Corazon de Leon wrote:It's nice to speculate on stuff. I'm of the opinion that ambiguity and fan theories can really help a bit of fiction achieve cult/legendary status. The "Was Cap there all along" idea could work that way. Look at Blade Runner - guarantee you nobody remembers that movie as fondly as they do if Deckard had definitely been a Replicant.

Personally, I don't care. Like I said before, I'm just happy he was happy at the end of the film. It was the closest I came to tears.

It's already been confirmed Cap wasn't there all along. He was living in an alternate timeline then 'jumped' back to the real timeline at the end when he was an old man.
So, has Cap been living in the past this whole time — or did he go and live in another dimension?

The directors say it’s the latter.

https://ew.com/movies/2019/04/30/avenge ... ssion=true

I see that, and raise you the film's writers - Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely's - thoughts:

https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1122922/Avengers-Endgame-plot-hole-Captain-America-end-Peggy-Carter-Bucky-time-travel

Looks to me like they're trying to inject a little bit of ambiguity in there.

Call and Answer wrote:
Rex Kramer wrote:I'm almost certainly in the minority but I don't want Thor in my Guardians movie.

Why so? Each to their own obviously, but Chris Hemsworth is a rather deft comedic performer and seems to gel well with the Guardians.

I think the chemistry between the existing Guardians is enough, the Thor vs Quill dick swinging contest is getting old really quick.

Straight back from my first viewing so I haven't had a chance for the internet tell me I'm wrong yet, but I loved that.

It was Back to the Future 2, after having acknowledged that the movie doesn't want to play by the rules laid down by Back to the Future.

Skarjo wrote:Straight back from my first viewing so I haven't had a chance for the internet tell me I'm wrong yet, but I loved that.

I think most of it agrees with you. I'm not as hot on it as most people and even I enjoyed it, and I've yet to see anyone say they outright disliked it. Which, is quite the achievement, really.

I sweat Ant Mans daughter got about 15 years older in those 5 years.

Skarjo

Skarjo wrote:I sweat Ant Mans daughter got about 15 years older in those 5 years.

The actress playing her in Endgame is only 15 or 16.

PatSharpsMullet wrote:
Skarjo wrote:I sweat Ant Mans daughter got about 15 years older in those 5 years.

The actress playing her in Endgame is only 15 or 16.

All Skarjo saw there was “hmm probably legal then”

UNMARKED SPOILER THREAD - Avengers: Endgame - "Avenge the fallen"

Who is online

Affiliates