Avengers: Endgame (2019)

[stealinghome]

3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

The interesting thing of course is that if the moral choice was to undo the Snap then by the same logic the moral choice should have been to kill Vison in IW snd destroy the mind stone (or at least use it as a weapon).

Would anyone disagree with that other than Cap-for-plot-purposes-in-IW though? I HATED that no one in IW was willing to do that because it was the oh so obvious decision and not making it made everyone look like huge tools

[Perfect Xero]

5 hours ago, paramitch said:

That's not actually true. When viewed from a big-picture, scientific standpoint, there would be very little difference in a child conceived by Tony and Pepper later versus earlier, which is why a lot of fantasy stories handwave this aspect. 

Since I'm not actually a sociopathic supervillain, I was not suggesting that Tony "unmake" his daughter, nor was I arguing to sacrifice "an astronomical number of completely innocent lives."  

I'm not sure what you mean here. A child of Pepper and Tony born earlier or later would, genetically, be Morgan Stark's sibling. If they did time the conception out right the most likely result would still be the same egg with a different sperm. Which still is less genetically Morgan Stark than a clone or identical twin.

IW Thanos thought that eliminating half the life in the universe to make the lives of the remaining 50% better was the easiest solution. EG Thanos decides that the easiest solution is to make a universe that is ignorant of what they lost so that people would be happy.

Undoing the Snap might be easiest, but it's still taking away life on an incredible scale to try to create a better world.

[Raja]

1 hour ago, stealinghome said:

Would anyone disagree with that other than Cap-for-plot-purposes-in-IW though? I HATED that no one in IW was willing to do that because it was the oh so obvious decision and not making it made everyone look like huge tools

Well everybody's opinion  was moot in the end since only Wanda had the power to destroy the stone even if Vision choose suicide for the greater good.

[VCRTracking]

[Dandesun]

56 minutes ago, Raja said:

Well everybody's opinion  was moot in the end since only Wanda had the power to destroy the stone even if Vision choose suicide for the greater good.

I think that was kind of the point, right? It's one thing to sacrifice yourself. Steve's a self-sacrificing idiot and, hell, the first Avengers is all about Tony 'learning' to make the sacrifice play or whatever. The stuff with Vision got really muddy, really fast because you could certainly make arguments that he wasn't actually "real" despite the fact that he was sentient and had developed attachments much like a 'real' boy.

Then there was the issue of how. They weren't going to hand Vision over to Thanos with the hopes of 'and then he'll leave us alone or something' because it was clear early on that wasn't Thanos' goal. Working to remove the stone from Vision and then destroy it was a reasonable option but they ran out of time.

At that point, it was 'Wanda, you have to kill me' which, again, is brutal.

And then it didn't even work. 

[paramitch]

14 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

I'm sure the writers were happy for it to be explained away as that, and knew they could include it to tantalise comic book fans without confusing MCU fans. Although it seems a little odd for Natasha to think that was worth mentioning. I'm sure she's shot plenty of people she doesn't remember.

There's also some nuance in The Winter Soldier, when she actually looks a little frightened as she's running from the Winter Soldier in the gun battle, before he shoots her. She rarely looks scared of a physical confrontation - the scene with the Hulk, as I mentioned, and this scene are the only two I can think of. That could also call back both their previous encounter that she mentions, and the comic book storyline.

But that's about as far as any of it goes.

I love that you bring up this scene because I thought it was just sensationally staged and acted by everyone involved. Natasha's desperation to get bystanders off to safety is palpable, even when she's shot in the shoulder (this was what I thought she was referring to about Bucky shooting her). And she does look genuinely terrified and freaked out, even as she doesn't let it slow her for a moment. 

I love stuff like this -- the little moments when the actors remind us these heroes are human beings putting themselves in harm's way for others  -- another similar moment for me was Tony's fight with Bucky in Civil War using only his suit glove, and Bucky pulls the trigger on the head shot. RDJ's reaction there is fantastic. Cap's final battle here in Endgame with Thanos was another good one for me this way -- Cap's complete indomitability even as he realizes he's losing, his shield chipping away bit by bit, and then the rescue by the returning heroes and the emotional "On your left."

Meanwhile, back to topic -- I would have loved to have seen the comics Nat/Bucky relationship play out or at least find reference in the Infinity War/Endgame films.

11 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

The interesting thing of course is that if the moral choice was to undo the Snap then by the same logic the moral choice should have been to kill Vison in IW snd destroy the mind stone (or at least use it as a weapon).

Oh, I definitely agree. I would also argue that Strange's insistence upon retaining the Time Stone also dooms them.

8 hours ago, MelloYellow said:

Bucky isn't the only one who (besides Steve) could make the claim to being the 'crux' to the Captain America films. Both Nat and especially Sam can arguably claim to be the crux to at least two of those films, (and in Sam's case a third).

Is there a thread for MCU ship discussion?

I don't really agree. CA:TFA sets up the entire friendship (and that Steve would repeatedly risk himself for his friend, and vice versa). Then, further, the main central conflicts at the heart of Winter Soldier and Civil War directly hinge on Steve versus/supporting Bucky against all odds. However, I definitely think Sam and Nat are important supporting players in both (especially Nat as relating to her larger arc and resolution in Endgame).

I don't mean to derail the thread -- I'm directly attempting to discuss all this stuff as it relates to (and resolves in) Endgame. I'm also not talking as someone with a shipper preference (I love Bucky/Steve just as much as friends as I enjoy the idea that they might be more). 

But I understand anyone who decides to mute me at this point. Apologies, I was basically the last person in the world to see this. 😉

7 hours ago, stealinghome said:

Would anyone disagree with that other than Cap-for-plot-purposes-in-IW though? I HATED that no one in IW was willing to do that because it was the oh so obvious decision and not making it made everyone look like huge tools

Agreed 100%. And I say that as someone who loves Vision.

5 hours ago, Dandesun said:

I think that was kind of the point, right? It's one thing to sacrifice yourself. Steve's a self-sacrificing idiot and, hell, the first Avengers is all about Tony 'learning' to make the sacrifice play or whatever. The stuff with Vision got really muddy, really fast because you could certainly make arguments that he wasn't actually "real" despite the fact that he was sentient and had developed attachments much like a 'real' boy.

Then there was the issue of how. They weren't going to hand Vision over to Thanos with the hopes of 'and then he'll leave us alone or something' because it was clear early on that wasn't Thanos' goal. Working to remove the stone from Vision and then destroy it was a reasonable option but they ran out of time.

At that point, it was 'Wanda, you have to kill me' which, again, is brutal.

And then it didn't even work. 

But it was so, so well-acted by both. And I did like the way it results in that emotional confrontation between Wanda and Thanos in Endgame. It was one of the most powerful moments of the film for me.

Last but not least, stupid question from me:

Why couldn't Vision be returned by Hulk's snap? Since Hulk's rearranging realities and timeline events all over the place (it's implied), couldn't Vision come back because the time stone's unmaking was undone, as could be (presumably) Thanos's brutal action to yank it out?

Or is this probably going to be answered in the upcoming series?

[swanpride]

There is a difference between dying for a cause or sacrificing yourself for a cause in a moment of desperation and handing someone over to an enemy when there are still other options. This is not about counting lives, it is about principles. And I know "principles" sounds like an hollow concept, but they are needed so that we don't see lives as disposable.

[Jeebus Cripes]

8 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

IW Thanos thought that eliminating half the life in the universe to make the lives of the remaining 50% better was the easiest solution. EG Thanos decides that the easiest solution is to make a universe that is ignorant of what they lost so that people would be happy.

Undoing the Snap might be easiest, but it's still taking away life on an incredible scale to try to create a better world.

In my mind, when I think about how the Time Stone was used in Doctor Strange and how Thanos used it to reverse Vision's death, I imagine those five years simply would've never happened. It looks like the stone manipulates the flow of time; in the case of Vision, it isolates him from the rest of time, so to speak, but I can easily imagine the stone in conjunction with the gauntlet could just literally unmake time to before the snap even happened. In that case, all those lives born post-snap just never existed in the first place. The only one who would ever even have knowledge that they did would probably be the wielder of the gauntlet. 

If you look at it that way, the loss seems less horrific than those who absolutely remember losing half the population of the universe, not to mention all the other issues with said half suddenly reappearing. 

But who the hell knows how those stones really work. They never get too specific.

55 minutes ago, paramitch said:

Why couldn't Vision be returned by Hulk's snap? Since Hulk's rearranging realities and timeline events all over the place (it's implied), couldn't Vision come back because the time stone's unmaking was undone, as could be (presumably) Thanos's brutal action to yank it out?

I guess Vision was included with those he couldn't bring back like Nat. I can understand Nat because of the Soul Stone sacrifice but why not Vision? 

Edited August 21, 2019 by Jeebus Cripes

[swanpride]

I shudder to think what it do to the fabric of time to rewind five years.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, swanpride said:

I shudder to think what it do to the fabric of time to rewind five years.

It should have awful repercussions but the solution they went with should also have massive repercussions. If they went with that option of resetting time logic wouldn’t have mattered. 

Personally I wish they had made the time jump at lot shorter. 

3 hours ago, Jeebus Cripes said:

I guess Vision was included with those he couldn't bring back like Nat. I can understand Nat because of the Soul Stone sacrifice but why not Vision? 

The stones not bringing back the dead is what the producers and writers have given as a reason. Realistically reviving Vision didn’t fit what they wanted to tell so they came up with a crap explanation that doesn’t make any sense. 

[blueray]

5 hours ago, paramitch said:

Why couldn't Vision be returned by Hulk's snap? Since Hulk's rearranging realities and timeline events all over the place (it's implied), couldn't Vision come back because the time stone's unmaking was undone, as could be (presumably) Thanos's brutal action to yank it out?

He wouldn't come back to life because the events of his death still happened. Thanos still got all the stones and caused the snap. The hulk just simply brought back the people that were taken. So unfortunately people that were killed before this remained dead. The one question I have is what about the people that were killed as a result of someone being snapped, a pilot of a plane or someone in surgery?

[swanpride]

I suspect those people are still dead.

[Raja]

If you take the prejudice that the snapture didn't kill but rather just removed all life in some way, there where no body remains after all, then it worked. On rewatch professor Hulk said he tried to bring Nat back but it didn't work. They really should have showed some trees snap away in Infinity War however.

[Bruinsfan]

Or on Clint's farm at the beginning of Endgame. The filmmakers really should have just limited the snapture to sentient life, then you don't have the problem of ecosystems crashing everywhere in the wake of it and Thanos having less than a 6th grader's understanding of ecology.

Regarding the Vision, I'm assuming no one thought of asking Dr. Strange about using the Time Stone to rewind his inert body and restore him to "life." I think there's still some possibility that he could have be repaired by science alone, though. Presumably Shuri made the best backup Wakandan tech was capable of before trying to untether the Mind Stone from him, and they have a better understanding of how vibranium works than anyone.

[Perfect Xero]

This was one of the worst aspects of adapting the story. They tried to give Thanos depth and a motivation that paints him as believing that he's serving a greater good. Okay, fine, but having him snap away half the plants when he spends most of the movie pointing at limited resources as his motivation is just dumb.

Thanos in the comics was just a lunatic that wanted to kill half the life in the universe to impress Death. So of course he'll kill off half the animals and the plants too.

[swanpride]

Since they never clarified the plants/animal thing in the movie I chose to ignore it.

[Raja]

33 minutes ago, swanpride said:

Since they never clarified the plants/animal thing in the movie I chose to ignore it.

Besides the phone call from Hawkeye's wife the proof of the counter snap working was Scott Lang walking to the window to hear birds chirping. Now it could have been an alert of missile strikes incoming but I took it as twice as much wildlife suddenly appeared.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Raja

[Dandesun]

52 minutes ago, Raja said:

Besides the phone call from Hawkeye's wife the proof of the counter snap working was Scott Lang walking to the window to hear birds chirping. Now it could have been an alert of missile strikes incoming but I took it as twice as much wildlife suddenly appeared.

Yeah, that's what I thought too. Natasha said something about Thanos wiping out 'half of all living things' which paints with a VERY broad brush.

But, yeah, suddenly there were birds out the window and that suggested that Bruce had succeeded in the un-snap.

As for Thanos and his motivations... yes, it was a bit much for him to carry on as if his crusade was anything more than his ego going 'they didn't listen to me, now I'll show them!' But when he showed up from the past with the same crusade, he stopped pretending to be noble. At that point, he wanted to wipe out EVERYTHING because no one appreciated him the way he thought they should.

[Danny Franks]

14 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

This was one of the worst aspects of adapting the story. They tried to give Thanos depth and a motivation that paints him as believing that he's serving a greater good. Okay, fine, but having him snap away half the plants when he spends most of the movie pointing at limited resources as his motivation is just dumb.

Thanos in the comics was just a lunatic that wanted to kill half the life in the universe to impress Death. So of course he'll kill off half the animals and the plants too.

I thought that was one of the better aspects. I never cared for Thanos or his methods, but arguments about overpopulation and how we deal with it have been around for a long time now, and are only growing more pressing as the Earth's population rises drastically.

The Malthusian view that resources are finite and we can only ever support a certain number vs. the view that technology and innovation will always provide a way out. And so far, humanity has been able to rely on innovation (Norman Borlaug and people like him) to resolve population crises. But we are approaching a point again where people are asking 'what do we do when there's not enough food and water? What do we do when climate change reduces the amount of liveable land?'

They're important questions, exacerbated further by medical advances that mean disease and illness are increasingly less likely to act as limiters on population growth. As superficial as the conversation around the subject may have been, at least the MCU sparked it. I'd much rather that than just another insane villain who wants to kill people for dumb reasons. The fact that his plan was half-baked and extreme was a reflection of who he is - noble intentions in a fatally flawed mind.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Danny Franks

[swanpride]

The issue with the The Malthusian view is more that he was working of the assumption that birth rates would stay stable even if living conditions improve. We now know that this isn't the case: People who live in stable living conditions actually stop breeding so to speak. Hence the low birth rates in the majority of the European country, which is below replacement level. So it isn't necessarily about invention - invention might actually be an additional problem because it sometimes does lead to us using more resources then a single person should use - it is about humans actually adapting their "breeding habits" to their needs.

[Spartan Girl]

Finally got it on blu ray and watching it now. Still good but I will be forever salty that the Russos thought that Cap and Peggy deserved more closure than Ross getting any sort of comeuppance. Wish vigilante Clint had gone after him, that would have been a good plotline.

The part where they're on the Benatar about to ambush Thanos, and Steve is mooning over that picture on Peggy pissed me off. Like, she wasn't Snapped, she died peacefully in her sleep of old age years ago. What did she have anything to do with what happened?! You're pining over her, but not Thanos' actual victims like Bucky, Sam, or even Sharon? Fuck you, Steve.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Spartan Girl

[Chyromaniac]

On 8/18/2019 at 8:58 PM, Lonesome Rhodes said:

The biggest thing for me was that Thanos actually became the anti-Gollum.  He destroyed his Preciousssssss!  What an outstanding and unusual action by a "bad guy" in an epic story.

FWIW, I don’t feel like Thanos ever actually cared about the gems or gauntlet in and of themselves- they were always a means to his ends.  Once his plan was completed, they needed to go to ensure that it could never be undone (so he believed).

This does lead me to my personal Avengers Hot Take™️ though: as someone who read many of the Infinity Gems stories from the 90s, it’s really weird to me that they’ve spent two movies treating “the snap” as if it’s a physical function of the glove. That’s... not how that works. Iirc, once you have all the gems, you have complete control over all aspects of reality- comics Thanos only snapped his fingers because he was an @$$hole who wanted to demonstrate how little effort wiping out half the universe would take.  Designing entire action sequences around preventing characters from rubbing their fingers and thumbs together is, IMO, a bizarre bit of literalism.

As for the ending- I actually felt it was very true to Steve’s character.  He went into the ice to stop Red Skull’s plan. He sacrificed his freedom and reputation to save Bucky. He risked being lost in time to undo the (ugh...) snap.  In all of these films, if there is even a sliver of a chance, he’ll take it.  Sure, he can’t change his own past- but he now knows he can go back to “a past” - I don’t think it’s so hard to believe he’d chose to leave everything for a second chance with Peggy.

[starri]

It may be a reflection of my vulnerable emotional state, but I was watching most of the Thanos battle when I was on the elliptical at the gym this afternoon, and got kind of verklempt all over again.

It's still such a strange realization to me that one of my favorite things about the movie was seeing Pepper in her Rescue armor.

[Jeebus Cripes]

8 hours ago, Chyromaniac said:

This does lead me to my personal Avengers Hot Take™️ though: as someone who read many of the Infinity Gems stories from the 90s, it’s really weird to me that they’ve spent two movies treating “the snap” as if it’s a physical function of the glove. That’s... not how that works. Iirc, once you have all the gems, you have complete control over all aspects of reality- comics Thanos only snapped his fingers because he was an @$$hole who wanted to demonstrate how little effort wiping out half the universe would take.  Designing entire action sequences around preventing characters from rubbing their fingers and thumbs together is, IMO, a bizarre bit of literalism.

Heh. Word. I wish they had devoted a little more time into exploring how the stones actually work, even independently of the glove. The only one I recall getting a decent learning on was the Time Stone in Doctor Strange. Everything else seems somewhat vague. Even Vision didn't know what the stone in his head was really about; was it only powering him or could he use it to control minds if he wanted? I don't see why not.

I still think if Wanda's powers were gonna be connected to one of them, the Reality Stone makes more sense but whatever. 

[swanpride]

The snap was a good idea, because it put a visible clock on what the audience was seeing...and it allowed them to actually fight with Thanos. If just having the stones would have been enough, the whole attempt to get the glove off him would have been pointless.

[JessePinkman]

15 hours ago, Chyromaniac said:

This does lead me to my personal Avengers Hot Take™️ though: as someone who read many of the Infinity Gems stories from the 90s, it’s really weird to me that they’ve spent two movies treating “the snap” as if it’s a physical function of the glove. That’s... not how that works. Iirc, once you have all the gems, you have complete control over all aspects of reality- comics Thanos only snapped his fingers because he was an @$$hole who wanted to demonstrate how little effort wiping out half the universe would take.  Designing entire action sequences around preventing characters from rubbing their fingers and thumbs together is, IMO, a bizarre bit of literalism.

I've always thought it was funny that the crux of the Infinity Saga rested on Thanos being sassy.

[Kel Varnsen]

41 minutes ago, JessePinkman said:

I've always thought it was funny that the crux of the Infinity Saga rested on Thanos being sassy.

It is also kind of funny when you consider the number of MCU characters that have had a hand or arm chopped off. Not to mention the characters like Miek that don't even appear to have hands.

[Lonesome Rhodes]

Of course it's absurd that the glove was the key.  Proximity and ownership of the stones was everything.

What is the opposite of absurd was the realization by TPTB that so long as Thanos had them, it was impossible, under ALL scenarios, to stop him.  That's the box they put themselves in.  So long as Thanos chose to live, he would.  Untouchable.  Literally.  No Mt. Doom.  No nothing.

[Anduin]

5 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

It is also kind of funny when you consider the number of MCU characters that have had a hand or arm chopped off. Not to mention the characters like Miek that don't even appear to have hands.

See what happens when you have Star Wars in the house? It's hand-lopping time.

[Chyromaniac]

On 8/26/2019 at 2:27 AM, Jeebus Cripes said:

I still think if Wanda's powers were gonna be connected to one of them, the Reality Stone makes more sense but whatever. 

As I recall it was the mind stone that made Pietro super fast and gave Wanda hex bolts, so... 🤷‍♂️

On 8/26/2019 at 2:45 AM, swanpride said:

The snap was a good idea, because it put a visible clock on what the audience was seeing...and it allowed them to actually fight with Thanos. If just having the stones would have been enough, the whole attempt to get the glove off him would have been pointless.

The clock could just be Thanos collecting the stones - and I don’t think fighting to get the glove would be pointless, since that’s where he keeps them.

But look, I understand why they chose to do it this way (and even that I expect it to be an unpopular opinion, hence “hot take”) - it’s just an element of these movies that I personally find a little silly and distracting.  It’s like, someone (Gamora???) early on says he can wipe out half the universe by snapping his fingers, and then everyone - even characters not present, including Thanos - treat it like that’s just how the glove works.  That seems goofy to me.  And, I feel it’s the kind of goofy that Marvel usually jokesplains out of their films - “he wants to steal a necklace from a wizard”- so maybe make a comedy beat out of it?

Gamora: ...all he has to do is snap his fingers.

Thor: really?  Is that something the glove just does?

Gamora: no, but my dad is kind of melodramatic that way.

Alternately, they could have just not mentioned it, and left it as a cool surprise moment like it was in the comics.

[swanpride]

Then it would have looked like an a-pull.

[Perfect Xero]

Some of the stones in the MCU are shown to require physical action/manipulation to use. Ronan has to strike the planet with the Power Stone, Loki has to touch someone's chest with the scepter to mind control them, to the point that Tony's Arc reactor protects him. Strange has to do turning hand motions to use the Time Stone. The idea that the collected stones would require some sort of physical action/motion to activate and use them all at once is at least consistent with what they showed of the stones in previous films.

[Zuleikha]

I'd much rather that than just another insane villain who wants to kill people for dumb reasons. The fact that his plan was half-baked and extreme was a reflection of who he is - noble intentions in a fatally flawed mind.

I loved the way they interpreted Thanos's love of Death, but I wish they hadn't made canon the IMHO silly interpretation that he wiped out half of ALL life, including animals. His whole thing was the resource/population mismatch. Reducing the resources along with the population makes no sense.

[Jeebus Cripes]

On 8/27/2019 at 3:58 PM, Zuleikha said:

I loved the way they interpreted Thanos's love of Death, but I wish they hadn't made canon the IMHO silly interpretation that he wiped out half of ALL life, including animals. His whole thing was the resource/population mismatch. Reducing the resources along with the population makes no sense.

It will never not be odd to me that after all that careful construction of the MCU at large, interweaving plot lines and characters throughout movies, they finally get to the culmination of it all, and just start hand-waving all over the place. It seems like no one did any serious brainstorming about the repercussions of Thanos' snap, time traveling, or Steve's character-- none of that shit was handled with finesse at all, IMO.

Edited August 31, 2019 by Jeebus Cripes

[Cirien]

Oh my god can they just stop talking????

Every interview they do just makes it worse:  https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/avengers-endgame-writer-explains-cap-change-history/

[Bruinsfan]

These are the same writers who worked on all the actual Captain America movies, right? Who gave us Steve's uncompromising determination to stand against evil wherever he found it, and Peggy Carter's awesome independence and agency? Not new people totally unfamiliar with them and their narrative? Did they suffer traumatic brain injuries over the last few years or something?

[Spartan Girl]

23 minutes ago, Bruinsfan said:

These are the same writers who worked on all the actual Captain America movies, right? Who gave us Steve's uncompromising determination to stand against evil wherever he found it, and Peggy Carter's awesome independence and agency? Not new people totally unfamiliar with them and their narrative? Did they suffer traumatic brain injuries over the last few years or something?

I suspect they're suffering from the same case of stupiditus that infected the Game of Throne writers.

[festivus]

I'm honestly not understanding the sticking with the closed loop thing, never mind what I think they did to Steve. The movie states that when you go back and change something it creates a new timeline. It also just baffles the mind that they think the character they've been writing for years would just rest when bad things are happening. That's not Steve Rogers.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, festivus said:

I'm honestly not understanding the sticking with the closed loop thing, never mind what I think they did to Steve. The movie states that when you go back and change something it creates a new timeline.

They say the movie states that the infinity stones control the flow of time and removing them is them is the only thing that creates a new timeline.

Since they will not stop talking about their stupid version I wish someone would press them on how the hell that would work with the other things that were changed in the past. 

[festivus]

4 minutes ago, Dani said:

They say the movie states that the infinity stones control the flow of time and removing them is them is the only thing that creates a new timeline.

But but.... That's not how it works right? Correct me if I'm wrong. Steve went and put the stones back at the exact moment they were taken and that should keep this main timeline the same but any of stuff that happened after they took them in the first place made alternate timelines. Like Loki stealing the tesseract. Like Steve telling his past self that Bucky was alive. Like Tony talking to his dad in 1970. Which should also mean Steve having a dance with Peggy that never happened creates a new timeline.

You know, I don't know why I care anymore. Bleh.

13 minutes ago, Dani said:

Since they will not stop talking about their stupid version I wish someone would press them on how the hell that would work with the other things that were changed in the past. 

This.

[Kel Varnsen]

19 minutes ago, Dani said:

They say the movie states that the infinity stones control the flow of time and removing them is them is the only thing that creates a new timeline.

Since they will not stop talking about their stupid version I wish someone would press them on how the hell that would work with the other things that were changed in the past. 

They also say that going back will delete the not good stoneless timelines. But there is also a timeline where Thanos just weirdly disappeared and people that had either heard of him or worked for him, never heard from him again. Did that always happen, since it wasn't stone related, or is that an alternate timeline.

[clack]

Eh, Steve retired his Captain America role in the comics a good half-dozen times, including once for a romance with Agent 13.

Steve retiring to be with Peggy is totally in character. Killing him off in the same movie in which they killed off Tony would have been a bit much -- retirement was the better option.

[swanpride]

Sure, but if he retires in the past without changing anything, it basically means that he is sitting on his hands for 70 years knowing fully well that Bucky gets tortured by Hydra in the meantime. That isn't quite the same thing as saying "yeah, there are so many Avengers and heroes out there, someone else can take care of sh... for a while". Frankly, it sounds like Steve's personal hell.

[Raja]

1 hour ago, clack said:

Eh, Steve retired his Captain America role in the comics a good half-dozen times, including once for a romance with Agent 13.

Steve retiring to be with Peggy is totally in character. Killing him off in the same movie in which they killed off Tony would have been a bit much -- retirement was the better option.

It is not just retiring but taking retirement with 100% certainty that Hydra was growing inside of S.H.I.E.L.D and held Bucky as a slave soldier 

[stealinghome]

Right? It’s a little fucked up that if Steve doesn’t change anything it means Steve married and had children with Peggy and yet never told her HYDRA was growing inside SHIELD, her other baby. Like...the hell?

They really should just have stuck with alternate timeline. It’s amazing that it’s been months and Marvel still looks like complete amateur hour on this issue.

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, clack said:

Eh, Steve retired his Captain America role in the comics a good half-dozen times, including once for a romance with Agent 13.

So why not just stick to him going off to be with Sharon/Agent 13 IN THE PRESENT instead of going back to hook up with Peggy and alter her history to his liking?

Seriously, I know everyone loves to diss Sharon/Emily Van Camp because she's "boring"/"bland"/whatever excuse you want to use just because Stucky didn't happen, but that you can't deny that would have been a less complicated ending than this time traveling/multiverse crap.

And you know what? This might be an unpopular opinion, but I'm glad Sharon/EVC is going to be a part of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. She deserved better than what the Russos gave her.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Spartan Girl

[Jenniferbug]

54 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

And you know what? This might be an unpopular opinion, but I'm glad Sharon/EVC is going to be a part of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. She deserved better than what the Russos gave her.

I will join you at your table. I'm interested to see what they do with the character and I don't dislike EVC. 

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

And you know what? This might be an unpopular opinion, but I'm glad Sharon/EVC is going to be a part of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. She deserved better than what the Russos gave her.

I agree. Sharon hasn’t been a great character because she was used as a stand in for Peggy. I’m excited to see what they do with her now that she can actually be her own character. 

[Dandesun]

There is a lot of cool interaction between Sharon and Bucky or Sharon and Sam in the comics. I've never been a Sharon/Steve fan. Period. So I'm not exactly heart-broken that they didn't take off in the MCU... probably would have preferred Steve hanging up the shield and maybe trying to give it a go with her at the end of Endgame instead of this nonsense mess although I would have honestly hated that, too, just because I didn't feel any THERE there between them in the movies.

HOWEVER, giving Sharon something to do in TFATWS and make use of her as a kick ass Agent 13 is something I can get down with. I do NOT want them to try to romantically pair her with anyone because... just... can we not? I'd just rather see them work as a team. If there is any chemistry there and someone feels like scratching an itch, so be it, but leave romance out of it! These people have shit to do and I really can't get on board with the MCU's abysmal record when it comes to romance.

[swanpride]

I look forward to more sharon.