The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[Starfish35]

Just to clarify, I’m not wanting to pile on Steve; generally speaking I’m far far more on Steve’s side than on Tony’s as far as Civil War goes.  It was just this one thing that just didn’t really feel right.  And I think we only got here by talking about blaming Wanda for Lagos, so I guess I was just trying to point out that Wanda is really no more to blame than Steve is, for all that the movie doesn’t really make that clear.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Starfish35

[GHScorpiosRule]

So I watched Infinity War and Endgame last night--not so I could rage at the ending, but to just cozy up and enjoy the characters and most of the moments I enjoyed. I mean, we have this in Infinity:

Groot: "I am Grrroooot."

Captain America: "I am. Steve Rogers." 

Me: giggling like a tween. 

What?

Or how Quill thinks he's anywhere near the hotness and awesomeness that is Thor.

I fast forwarded the beginning where Loki and Heimdall were killed. Because. Just because.

But the dusting. Especially Peter's. Always guts me.

Endgame:

Hulk, Scott, Rhodey all talking about Time Travel, and shout outs to Quantum Leap! and Scott's disillusion that Back to the Future is shit. I needed that bit of levity.

And the scenes with Thor and his mom--when he's denying he's from the future, to then tearfully admitting yeah, he's from the future. Hit me both ways: me crying and laughing.

Hulk in 2012, grumbling and whining about having to take the stairs instead of the elevator. It's HIS fault Loki got away!🤣

Thanos getting his ass KICKED by Wand and then Captain Marvel.

Hooboy, seeing Tony die, Peter begging him not to, all of that. Still gut wrenching.

Rewatching again just left me with more questions because it's just so confusing.

 

[Bruinsfan]

18 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Speaking of the Bifrost, in the first Thor movie Loki tries to use it as a weapon to destroy the frost giants. In Infinity War the Storm breaker axe can summon it. So why does Thor never use it as a weapon against Thanos and his forces.

Maybe it was powered by the Tesseract/Space Stone, and with that in Thanos' hands using it as a large scale weapon was no longer an option?

[FnkyChkn34]

46 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

And the scenes with Thor and his mom--when he's denying he's from the future, to then tearfully admitting yeah, he's from the future. Hit me both ways: me crying and laughing.

"And Thor... eat a salad." 

[Morrigan2575]

2 hours ago, swanpride said:

Cap refuses to sign the accord because he doesn't want to shift the responsibility. If something goes wrong on HIS watch, he doesn't want a get out of jail free card, he wants to shoulder it. While Tony would like to get rid of it...that is what most of his actions are about, from creating Ultron to signing the accord, to supporting Peter. He is looking for someone who can shoulder the burden for him because he feels inadequate to do so himself.

Brilliant analysis

[AimingforYoko]

2 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

The funny thing is that Steve's super hero name is Captain America, not General America, not Commander in Chief America. His name literally implies that he will be taking director from someone higher up. And even he should know that a soldier or even a unit operation on their own is not a great way to do things.

Yeah, but that was pre-Winter Soldier. That pretty much soured him on taking orders.

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

So I watched Infinity War and Endgame last night--not so I could rage at the ending, but to just cozy up and enjoy the characters and most of the moments I enjoyed. I mean, we have this in Infinity:

Groot: "I am Grrroooot."

Captain America: "I am. Steve Rogers." 

Me: giggling like a tween. 

What?

Or how Quill thinks he's anywhere near the hotness and awesomeness that is Thor.

I fast forwarded the beginning where Loki and Heimdall were killed. Because. Just because.

But the dusting. Especially Peter's. Always guts me.

Endgame:

Hulk, Scott, Rhodey all talking about Time Travel, and shout outs to Quantum Leap! and Scott's disillusion that Back to the Future is shit. I needed that bit of levity.

And the scenes with Thor and his mom--when he's denying he's from the future, to then tearfully admitting yeah, he's from the future. Hit me both ways: me crying and laughing.

Hulk in 2012, grumbling and whining about having to take the stairs instead of the elevator. It's HIS fault Loki got away!🤣

Thanos getting his ass KICKED by Wand and then Captain Marvel.

Hooboy, seeing Tony die, Peter begging him not to, all of that. Still gut wrenching.

Rewatching again just left me with more questions because it's just so confusing.

 

Yes to all of this. It was all so epic and fun. I always stop right at Tony’s funeral to maintain my enjoyment and not have rage strokes over the other things.

[FnkyChkn34]

I honestly don't have a problem with the end of Endgame.  It makes for a better movie if there are sacrifices and not everyone lives, IMO.  Sure, it's sad and we don't have to love it, but that doesn't make it a bad movie.  It doesn't always bother me when a movie doesn't give ME exactly what I want - it has to tell the story that the creators intended, not just what I want to see.  Movies have plot holes and require handwaving, but it's all good.  

[swanpride]

Lagos is not on Cap or on Wanda. It's on Crossbones. Period. But that doesn't stop either of them to feel guilty about it. Because feelings aren't logical.

[Spartan Girl]

8 hours ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

I honestly don't have a problem with the end of Endgame.  It makes for a better movie if there are sacrifices and not everyone lives, IMO.  Sure, it's sad and we don't have to love it, but that doesn't make it a bad movie.  It doesn't always bother me when a movie doesn't give ME exactly what I want - it has to tell the story that the creators intended, not just what I want to see.  Movies have plot holes and require handwaving, but it's all good.  

Ironically, the deaths and sacrifice were NOT my problem with Endgame. Those parts were well done (mostly). I actually would have liked it better if Steve had died in battle too. It would have ended his storyline more neatly and he would have kept his integrity intact.

[swanpride]

Honestly, I am not happy with the ending for Steve and Natasha because in both cases their story doesn't feel finished. Like, Loki (at least the Loki from this timeline) his story had gone full circle. Tony's too. Heimdal never had much of a story to begin with, neither did Vision. But with Steve and Natasha it feels like there is still story missing.

[Ohiopirate02]

1 hour ago, swanpride said:

Honestly, I am not happy with the ending for Steve and Natasha because in both cases their story doesn't feel finished. Like, Loki (at least the Loki from this timeline) his story had gone full circle. Tony's too. Heimdal never had much of a story to begin with, neither did Vision. But with Steve and Natasha it feels like there is still story missing.

I would have bought Natasha's ending if the writers didn't force her to sacrifice herself for Clint.  Clint, the man who lost his family and went off the deep end becoming judge, jury and executioner to POC he felt did not deserve to live.  The writers took Clint to a dark place and then ignored it.  Then they decided a wordless fight scene was the way to go instead of giving Natasha some dialog to explain why she felt Clint could still be redeemed.  Then the movie ends and Clint gets to be reunited with his family and face zero consequences.  I know there is a Hawkeye show in the works, but I highly doubt that show will have Clint incarcerated for his crimes.  

And Steve's ending made no sense when the movie premiered and still makes no sense.  There were multiple ways he story could have ended that did not require Steve to abandon his best friend and his beliefs for a woman.  

[FnkyChkn34]

Rewatch all of the Captain America and Avengers movies, and you'll see that Steve is miserable.  Peggy was the love of his life and he never truly lived a life without her.  He was a hollow shell of a person.  Of course he would pick her over Sam or Bucky.  The time travel/science part of it doesn't make sense, nor do some scenes in earlier movies like him visiting her when she's elderly and attending her funeral, but that's the handwaving part.  I actually thought Steve's story WAS finished and that it was a near perfect ending - because he got his happy ending.  It was HIS happy ending, not ours.

As for Natasha, well - Clint tried to be the one to die.  She just wouldn't let him.  Plus she's getting her own movie to be released soon, so we'll probably get more answers.

Edited February 17, 2021 by FnkyChkn34
Added "or Bucky"

[Kel Varnsen]

27 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Clint, the man who lost his family and went off the deep end becoming judge, jury and executioner to POC he felt did not deserve to live.  

Wait where did they say that Clint was just targeting people of colour? It had been 5 years since the snap and he was just getting around to the Yakuza when Natasha found him after attacking a Mexican cartel before that. It seems like that would leave a lot of time before that for him to go after all sorts of organized crime groups.

Plus I thought it was ok for the Avengers to make their own decisions on how they wanted to handle threats. Cap even said the only people he trusts to make decisions were the Avengers.

[Ohiopirate02]

6 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Wait where did they say that Clint was just targeting people of colour? It had been 5 years since the snap and he was just getting around to the Yakuza when Natasha found him after attacking a Mexican cartel before that. It seems like that would leave a lot of time before that for him to go after all sorts of organized crime groups.

Plus I thought it was ok for the Avengers to make their own decisions on how they wanted to handle threats. Cap even said the only people he trusts to make decisions were the Avengers.

Clint very well could have gone after white supremacists, but that was not specifically mentioned in the movie.  That was a choice on the filmmakers' part. With the way Rhodey and Natasha talked about Clint, it read to me like Clint had gone off the deep end and went full vigilante.  He wasn't coordinating with local law enforcement to bring the threats down or even arresting them.  With the missions we have seen in previous movies, sometimes you have to kill the bad guys, but with Clint he was always killing the bad guys.  He crossed the line between hero and villain.  

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Rewatch all of the Captain America and Avengers movies, and you'll see that Steve is miserable.  Peggy was the love of his life and he never truly lived a life without her.  He was a hollow shell of a person. 

I truly didn't want to start up this debate again when I posted up thread. But, I guess Steve is now a Rorschach Test. In Age of Ultron, he said he wasn't the same man who went down in the ice. A different man emerged. And he was moving on. There was nothing I saw to indicate that he was either a shell of a man or miserable. If that was the case, he wouldn't have made such a good leader, in my opinion. And he was, in my mind, a very good leader.

How it ended for him just made no sense to me, so I choose to ignore it and believe that Steve never returning was the end of Endgame.

[stealinghome]

3 hours ago, swanpride said:

Honestly, I am not happy with the ending for Steve and Natasha because in both cases their story doesn't feel finished. Like, Loki (at least the Loki from this timeline) his story had gone full circle. Tony's too. Heimdal never had much of a story to begin with, neither did Vision. But with Steve and Natasha it feels like there is still story missing.

Agreed. I think it's evident that the characters got killed/written off because Chris Evans and ScarJo wanted out. (I know Tony got killed off because RDJ wanted out too, but imo he had basically gone as far as he was going to go as a character, and Infinity War/Endgame tied his arc up really nicely. It was the right time for the character to bow out. Steve and Natasha, not so much...or at least not in the ways they did.)

[festivus]

What I saw in Steve was a man that was sad and adrift but working to move on and I found that such an admirable narrative. Then Endgame just shat all over it.

I've been feeling like working up a rant for my feelings for how The Snap was handled and today is the day. 

I don't feel like the consequences of the snap are going to be handled in any meaningful way. WandaVision touched on it a bit but look, the world would be in utter chaos. People coming back to find loved ones dead or having moved on, children that would be five years older, or worse, that had died, a spouse that had possibly remarried, etc. Not to mention just the general chaos of 4 billion people reappearing 5 years after the world had got used to having less. I don't think he's perfect, but the Steve I was watching would never abandon a world like that.

Not to mention that they could have returned the world to moment right after but did not because Tony had a child. Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't want the same thing if it was me, but now he's dead and will never have to see the consequences of that decision.

[Kel Varnsen]

28 minutes ago, festivus said:

don't feel like the consequences of the snap are going to be handled in any meaningful way. WandaVision touched on it a bit but look, the world would be in utter chaos.

Marvel has never done a great job of handling the consequences of the movies. Even looking back at phase 1. People find out that aliens exist, and that they are intelligent and don't like earth. That would have a huge effect on people's lives even just for the fact that every crazy alien conspiracy theory person would feel they were right.

And on top of that someone previously worshipped as a mythical God was proven to be a real alien. How does that change how people feel about their own religion?

[FnkyChkn34]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I truly didn't want to start up this debate again when I posted up thread. But, I guess Steve is now a Rorschach Test. In Age of Ultron, he said he wasn't the same man who went down in the ice. A different man emerged. And he was moving on. There was nothing I saw to indicate that he was either a shell of a man or miserable. If that was the case, he wouldn't have made such a good leader, in my opinion. And he was, in my mind, a very good leader.

How it ended for him just made no sense to me, so I choose to ignore it and believe that Steve never returning was the end of Endgame.

He was clearly a man without love, a man alone.  He made a good leader because that's all he had and he threw himself into his work.  But he wasn't a full person.  Natasha wasn't either, but for different reasons.  Tony had Pepper and eventually their daughter, Clint had a whole family, Thor even had Jane... but Steve and Natasha had no one but the Avengers.  (Banner is a different story.)  Steve said he was a different man who came out of the ice than went in because... duh.  He had to be, if for no other reason, it was 70 years in the future for him.  He was trying.  But that didn't mean he wasn't still lonely and loved Peggy.

I will politely and respectfully agree to disagree, but it's fun to see other sides and debate a little. 🙂    

[Bruinsfan]

You're positing that anyone who isn't half of a couple isn't a full person? Life's not worth living if you're not part of a nuclear family?

[FnkyChkn34]

49 minutes ago, Bruinsfan said:

You're positing that anyone who isn't half of a couple isn't a full person? Life's not worth living if you're not part of a nuclear family?

Are you talking to me?  Absolutely not.  I, for one, am single as an adult, and I am most definitely a full person.  I am not lonely, but I also don't have a "one that got away."  Everyone is DIFFERENT.  And this is my take on Steve Rogers.  He loved Peggy so much that he risked time travel for her.  It was obvious - to me - that he loved her that much that he could never fully move on.  Your take on what I said is a gross misinterpretation; I was speaking only for my observation of the character of Steve Rogers.

[FnkyChkn34]

3 hours ago, festivus said:

What I saw in Steve was a man that was sad and adrift but working to move on and I found that such an admirable narrative. Then Endgame just shat all over it.

I've been feeling like working up a rant for my feelings for how The Snap was handled and today is the day. 

I don't feel like the consequences of the snap are going to be handled in any meaningful way. WandaVision touched on it a bit but look, the world would be in utter chaos. People coming back to find loved ones dead or having moved on, children that would be five years older, or worse, that had died, a spouse that had possibly remarried, etc. Not to mention just the general chaos of 4 billion people reappearing 5 years after the world had got used to having less. I don't think he's perfect, but the Steve I was watching would never abandon a world like that.

Not to mention that they could have returned the world to moment right after but did not because Tony had a child. Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't want the same thing if it was me, but now he's dead and will never have to see the consequences of that decision.

He didn't abandon it; he passed the torch and left it in good hands with Sam and Bucky, et al.  He just saw Natasha and Tony sacrifice their lives for the greater good of the world, and took Tony's advice before it was too late for him - he got a life.  And he was able to get the life he'd always wanted because of time travel.  He's Captain America, but why is the saving of the entire world always up to him and him alone? 

Side note:  I think we'll see consequences of the snap in Falcon and the Winter Soldier.  This show was supposed to be the first one to be released, before WandaVision, until the pandemic happened.  It would make sense that it would be addressed there, but it also should have been addressed in the most recent Spiderman as well, so I understand what you are saying.

[Ohiopirate02]

7 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

He didn't abandon it; he passed the torch and left it in good hands with Sam and Bucky, et al.  He just saw Natasha and Tony sacrifice their lives for the greater good of the world, and took Tony's advice before it was too late for him - he got a life.  And he was able to get the life he'd always wanted because of time travel.  He's Captain America, but why is the saving of the entire world always up to him and him alone? 

Side note:  I think we'll see consequences of the snap in Falcon and the Winter Soldier.  This show was supposed to be the first one to be released, before WandaVision, until the pandemic happened.  It would make sense that it would be addressed there, but it also should have been addressed in the most recent Spiderman as well, so I understand what you are saying.

But in order for Steve to get this life, he has to do nothing for decades while Hydra infiltrates SHIELD and Bucky is an assassin kept in cold storage.  He cannot change the events in previous movies without creating a new timeline per Banner in Endgame.  This doesn't square with the Steve from previous movies.  

Hopefully, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier will somehow come up with a way to make Steve's Endgame actually make sense.  I can't believe that the overall writers actually want Steve to be Peggy's husband alluded to in Winter Soldier.  Sharon would have had to have known she was flirting with her aunt's husband.  

[Guest]

4 hours ago, festivus said:

What I saw in Steve was a man that was sad and adrift but working to move on and I found that such an admirable narrative. Then Endgame just shat all over it.

This is the same way I feel. I loved Steve’s arc up until the end of Endgame when they chose poorly written wish fulfillment. 

 

4 hours ago, festivus said:

I don't feel like the consequences of the snap are going to be handled in any meaningful way. WandaVision touched on it a bit but look, the world would be in utter chaos. People coming back to find loved ones dead or having moved on, children that would be five years older, or worse, that had died, a spouse that had possibly remarried, etc. Not to mention just the general chaos of 4 billion people reappearing 5 years after the world had got used to having less. I don't think he's perfect, but the Steve I was watching would never abandon a world like that.

Not to mention that they could have returned the world to moment right after but did not because Tony had a child. Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't want the same thing if it was me, but now he's dead and will never have to see the consequences of that decision.

I completely agree. Reversing the snap after 5 years would have been more destructive than the initial snap in ways they will never be willing to address. 

12 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

But in order for Steve to get this life, he has to do nothing for decades while Hydra infiltrates SHIELD and Bucky is an assassin kept in cold storage.  He cannot change the events in previous movies without creating a new timeline per Banner in Endgame.  This doesn't square with the Steve from previous movies.  

 

According to Banner, Steve created a new timeline when he went back in time. The writing isn’t great at explaining it but it’s impossible with the way they set it up for Steve to have been married to Peggy in the main MCU timeline. The very act of going back in time would have to create a new timeline. 
I know the writers have said something different but I’m discarding that and assuming the producers are more knowledgeable on what Marvel intends. 

Edited February 17, 2021 by Guest

[festivus]

You know, not to mention all the people that would come back to no job. Your job would either be just gone or taken over by someone else. How are these people supposed to take care of themselves? What if their home was sold or it burned down. Maybe their whole family is dead. Sorry, but I don't think that this will be explored in the way it should be. F & WS will probably go into it more, since WandaVision is more of a self-contained story, but I'm not holding out much hope of it being thoroughly explored. Not to say that I won't keep enjoying the MCU but it still leaves me with opinion that fixing the snap should have been them putting things right back to the moment it happened. Because I just don't think we will ever get the full horror of what such a thing would really be like. 

They could still have Tony's daughter exist by having Pepper already be pregnant. Yes, he would never know her and that would be just as sad as what we got.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, festivus said:

You know, not to mention all the people that would come back to no job. Your job would either be just gone or taken over by someone else. How are these people supposed to take care of themselves? What if their home was sold or it burned down. Maybe their whole family is dead. Sorry, but I don't think that this will be explored in the way it should be. F & WS will probably go into it more, since WandaVision is more of a self-contained story, but I'm not holding out much hope of it being thoroughly explored. Not to say that I won't keep enjoying the MCU but it still leaves me with opinion that fixing the snap should have been them putting things right back to the moment it happened. Because I just don't think we will ever get the full horror of what such a thing would really be like. 

They could still have Tony's daughter exist by having Pepper already be pregnant. Yes, he would never know her and that would be just as sad as what we got.

I hadn’t thought about the job thing but it’s very true. The most disturbing consequence I’ve seen mentioned is the impact on the supply chain. The world would have adjusted to the smaller population and would not have the capability to feed billions more over night. We saw first hand last year how long it took to adjust to a relatively small disruption with Covid. The impact of Endgame would be catastrophic. 

Edited February 17, 2021 by Guest

[FnkyChkn34]

My problem with the snap and the people reappearing just as quickly as they disappeared is their physical location.  As Monica showed in WandaVision, she reappeared exactly where she had been sitting.  For people who were driving cars, their cars would have crashed and been removed and they would have appeared just into thin air, 3 feet above a road?  What if another car was coming and they they got hit?  Or what if another car was where they were?  They appear in another person's lap?  What about people who were sleeping in bed and their furniture was removed and a new person now owns their house?  Surprise!  And as I saw someone here mention before, airplanes.  Ugh.  What if a child was playing in a field where there is now a building?  

I think jobs and livelihoods are also a great concern, but I think more about the initial 3 minutes, LOL.

[FnkyChkn34]

30 minutes ago, Dani said:

According to Banner, Steve created a new timeline when he went back in time. The writing isn’t great at explaining it but it’s impossible with the way they set it up for Steve to have been married to Peggy in the main MCU timeline. The very act of going back in time would have to create a new timeline. 
I know the writers have said something different but I’m discarding that and assuming the producers are more knowledgeable on what Marvel intends. 

This is what I think, too.  It had to have; it's the only way to reconcile any of it to make even a little bit of sense.  Otherwise, why wasn't "old Steve" in touch with "young Steve" and the Avengers the entire time?

Though, I will say this... in the scene for Peggy's funeral, where Steve is a pallbearer, there is another pallbearer, an older gentleman on the back left corner of the casket who is only seen in an aerial shot from behind, but has hair very similar to "old Steve."  Coincidence?

[Ohiopirate02]

10 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

My problem with the snap and the people reappearing just as quickly as they disappeared is their physical location.  As Monica showed in WandaVision, she reappeared exactly where she had been sitting.  For people who were driving cars, their cars would have crashed and been removed and they would have appeared just into thin air, 3 feet above a road?  What if another car was coming and they they got hit?  Or what if another car was where they were?  They appear in another person's lap?  What about people who were sleeping in bed and their furniture was removed and a new person now owns their house?  Surprise!  And as I saw someone here mention before, airplanes.  Ugh.  What if a child was playing in a field where there is now a building?  

I think jobs and livelihoods are also a great concern, but I think more about the initial 3 minutes, LOL.

Those contingencies were discussed in Endgame.  Monica reappeared where she was sitting because she was in a safe place when she was snapped.  By the looks of the chaos in the hospital, more people reappeared there than what actually happened 5 years earlier.  My theory is Banner had all of those people in airplanes, cars etc. show up somewhere safe like a hospital.  I have no idea if that would have included people who were in buildings that were subsequently demolished when they were snapped.  

[Raja]

13 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

My problem with the snap and the people reappearing just as quickly as they disappeared is their physical location.  As Monica showed in WandaVision, she reappeared exactly where she had been sitting.  For people who were driving cars, their cars would have crashed and been removed and they would have appeared just into thin air, 3 feet above a road?  What if another car was coming and they they got hit?  Or what if another car was where they were?  They appear in another person's lap?  What about people who were sleeping in bed and their furniture was removed and a new person now owns their house?  Surprise!  And as I saw someone here mention before, airplanes.  Ugh.  What if a child was playing in a field where there is now a building?  

I think jobs and livelihoods are also a great concern, but I think more about the initial 3 minutes, LOL.

They played those scenarios as a joke in Spider-man Far From Home. Members of a marching band being run over by basketball players and Aunt May telling of blipping back in and being thought of as the other woman in an affair as part of her charity work for the displaced.

[Ohiopirate02]

8 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

Though, I will say this... in the scene for Peggy's funeral, where Steve is a pallbearer, there is another pallbearer, an older gentleman on the back left corner of the casket who is only seen in an aerial shot from behind, but has hair very similar to "old Steve."  Coincidence?

Complete coincidence.  The script for Endgame was finished on set.  No way the writers knew when casting and filming Civil War how the story would play out for Steve.  Yes, Chris Evans's contract was up, but that could always be renogiated.  

[FnkyChkn34]

1 minute ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Complete coincidence.  The script for Endgame was finished on set.  No way the writers knew when casting and filming Civil War how the story would play out for Steve.  Yes, Chris Evans's contract was up, but that could always be renogiated.  

Right.  But still makes you think a little, if you want to. 😉  

[Morrigan2575]

Ignoring Steve going back to the 40s/50s for a minute...Loki had to have created a new timeline after 2012, right? 

[Raja]

Just now, Morrigan2575 said:

Ignoring Steve going back to the 40s/50s for a minute...Loki had to have created a new timeline after 2012, right? 

Presumably many and from the trailer that is the seemingly the focus of his miniseries

[Danny Franks]

12 minutes ago, Raja said:

Presumably many and from the trailer that is the seemingly the focus of his miniseries

Which is a shame, because pre-Ragnarok, treacherous trickster Loki was very played out. Thor said it himself - "You've become predictable, brother. I trust you, you betray me, round and around we go." 

To carry a miniseries he needs more complexity than being constantly untrustworthy and selfish.

Edited February 17, 2021 by Danny Franks

[Morrigan2575]

33 minutes ago, Raja said:

Presumably many and from the trailer that is the seemingly the focus of his miniseries

Thanks. I wasn't sure because I remember reading something about the Russo Bros arguing against it but maybe they were talking specifically about Steve.

Edited February 17, 2021 by Morrigan2575

[Kel Varnsen]

2 hours ago, Dani said:

I hadn’t thought about the job thing but it’s very true. The most disturbing consequence I’ve seen mentioned is the impact on the supply chain. The world would have adjusted to the smaller population and would not have the capability to feed billions more over night. We saw first hand last year how long it took to adjust to a relatively small disruption with Covid. The impact of Endgame would be catastrophic. 

A lot of the supply chain stuff can be handwaved just because of of crazy advanced the tech in the MCU is (which is one of the things that they never really touch on). I mean Tony has spray on skin repair. Plus also keep in mind that the Snap wiped out half of all life not just people. So when Hulk brought everyone back there were all of the sudden twice as many cows, and twice as many chickens and twice as many apple trees. Sure it takes time to get that food to people but at least the food is available. I also like how in Homecoming May was at an event to help people displaced.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

A lot of the supply chain stuff can be handwaved just because of of crazy advanced the tech in the MCU is (which is one of the things that they never really touch on). I mean Tony has spray on skin repair. Plus also keep in mind that the Snap wiped out half of all life not just people. So when Hulk brought everyone back there were all of the sudden twice as many cows, and twice as many chickens and twice as many apple trees. Sure it takes time to get that food to people but at least the food is available. I also like how in Homecoming May was at an event to help people displaced.

To me you can’t handwave an extra 3+ billion people reappearing on Earth. Maybe if the pre-Infinity War MCU was presented as a world that had already solved world hunger and poverty but that’s not the case. The scale of what was done is just too massive for it to not be catastrophic. 

[Kel Varnsen]

41 minutes ago, Dani said:

Maybe if the pre-Infinity War MCU was presented as a world that had already solved world hunger and poverty but that’s not the case. The scale of what was done is just too massive for it to not be catastrophic. 

But the MCU should have solved those things and it is annoying that the MCU looks anything like our world. Like what is the life expectancy in the MCU when you have that tissue growing thing from age of Ultron. I assume there is no more climate change what with the magic pollution free power of the arc reactor. And what is transportation like in a world where you can fly across the US in minutes. Hell what is a home computer like when JARVIS is a thing.

[Raja]

9 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

But the MCU should have solved those things and it is annoying that the MCU looks anything like our world. Like what is the life expectancy in the MCU when you have that tissue growing thing from age of Ultron. I assume there is no more climate change what with the magic pollution free power of the arc reactor. And what is transportation like in a world where you can fly across the US in minutes. Hell what is a home computer like when JARVIS is a thing.

Given the MCU at the time of Black Panther through Infinity War,  the uber tech of Stark and the Wakandan's had not yet reached the guy on the street. And San Francisco and New York establishing shots during the Blip did have an abandoned feeling

[Kel Varnsen]

10 minutes ago, Raja said:

Given the MCU at the time of Black Panther through Infinity War,  the uber tech of Stark and the Wakandan's had not yet reached the guy on the street. And San Francisco and New York establishing shots during the Blip did have an abandoned feeling

The fact that lower quality or knock off Stark tech hadn't trickled down to the average person always bugged me. Howard Stark invented the flying car in the 1940s and presented it to the world. Even if it was just the ability to float or hover that would have had a huge effect on transport and energy use.  Tony opened Stark Tower in 2012 and it was a huge building powered by an arc reactor. By the time Thanos comes to town how many other buildings would use the same tech?

[Bruinsfan]

Some of those things may be based on materials whose rarity precludes their wider release to the world, though. Certainly Wakanda's tech would since so much of it uses Vibranium.

[Kel Varnsen]

7 minutes ago, Bruinsfan said:

Some of those things may be based on materials whose rarity precludes their wider release to the world, though. Certainly Wakanda's tech would since so much of it uses Vibranium.

Sure for Wakanda, but for Stark you have to wonder how he makes his money. He is not selling weapons so selling products based on the tech he developed seems like it would make the most sense. So maybe you can't buy an actual arc reactor to power your house or your office building but maybe you can buy the less advanced and less expensive Arc Junior. And maybe the average consumer can't buy their own Jarvis, but based on the tech that went into developing Jarvis I bet the Stark brand smart speaker is way more advanced than Alexa.

[Ravenya003]

On 2/17/2021 at 4:16 PM, FnkyChkn34 said:

I honestly don't have a problem with the end of Endgame.  It makes for a better movie if there are sacrifices and not everyone lives, IMO.  Sure, it's sad and we don't have to love it, but that doesn't make it a bad movie.  It doesn't always bother me when a movie doesn't give ME exactly what I want - it has to tell the story that the creators intended, not just what I want to see.  Movies have plot holes and require handwaving, but it's all good.  

Of the three massive franchises that ended in 2019 (MCU, Game of Thrones, Star Wars) it can't be denied that the MCU was most successful in sticking the landing. As those other IPs proved, it could have been SO much worse. 

Ironically, it was also the story that I was LEAST invested in, so while I can intellectually understand the objections to Black Widow getting chucked off a cliff or Steve going back in time to hijack Peggy's life, none of it sticks in my craw the way Daenerys going genocidal over the sound of bells, or Kylo Ren's incoherent and undeserved "redemption" did. So... I can live with it.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Ravenya003

[swanpride]

Sure that many people suddenly reappearing would be chaos BUT it is not like all the apartments aso just vanished in the meantime. And regarding the food supply, we overproduce food as it is in the rich countries. The poor countries, now, that is another question, but in a situation like that people have a tendency to suddenly become very helpful.

Were there "causalities" of the snap? sure. There were certainly people who were already dying before they snapped and they wouldn't suddenly be healthy. There were certainly also people who didn't find their way back. There were certainly families which were torn apart.

The question is what happened to the accounts aso of the people who vanished...were they frozen? Are there now heirs which aren't longer heirs?

Frankly, there is a LOT to explore there, and I'll be happy to witness the MCU doing so, bit by bit.

[Perfect Xero]

16 hours ago, Dani said:

This is the same way I feel. I loved Steve’s arc up until the end of Endgame when they chose poorly written wish fulfillment. 

 

I completely agree. Reversing the snap after 5 years would have been more destructive than the initial snap in ways they will never be willing to address. 

According to Banner, Steve created a new timeline when he went back in time. The writing isn’t great at explaining it but it’s impossible with the way they set it up for Steve to have been married to Peggy in the main MCU timeline. The very act of going back in time would have to create a new timeline. 
I know the writers have said something different but I’m discarding that and assuming the producers are more knowledgeable on what Marvel intends. 

I haven't gone back and watched Endgame in a while, but from what I recall the writers version is that Banner sets up is that major changes create new timelines, not just the act of time travel itself. So if they kill Baby Thanos or remove an infinity stone it creates a new timeline, but if they just stroll down the street or whatever, they don't.

Time Travel itself creating a new timeline would make more sense for the main narrative of the film. But they tried to have it both ways so Steve could get his "happy ending" where he goes back in time and ends up on that bench as an old man.

I don't have any issue with Steve ending up with Peggy (I'm all for it in theory), but the idea that Steve looked the other way while horrible things were happening around him and that he either chose to not warn Peggy about those things or that he did and she also looked the other way will never sit right with me as the ending for either Steve or Peggy.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

Time Travel itself creating a new timeline would make more sense for the main narrative of the film. But they tried to have it both ways so Steve could get his "happy ending" where he goes back in time and ends up on that bench as an old man.

I don't have any issue with Steve ending up with Peggy (I'm all for it in theory), but the idea that Steve looked the other way while horrible things were happening around him and that he either chose to not warn Peggy about those things or that he did and she also looked the other way will never sit right with me as the ending for either Steve or Peggy.

The producers have said that Steve would have had to return to the MCU timeline off screen before he ended up on that bench. The writers have said the opposite but their version creates many issues and seems less likely to be the official explanation. 

[Kel Varnsen]

2 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

don't have any issue with Steve ending up with Peggy (I'm all for it in theory), but the idea that Steve looked the other way while horrible things were happening around him and that he either chose to not warn Peggy about those things or that he did and she also looked the other way will never sit right with me as the ending for either Steve or Peggy.

Yea if Steve was Peggy's husband all along how would that even work? Is he like sitting at home watching daytime TV. She comes home and when he asks her how her day was she is like "ok, but that Pierce guy I told you about was being a real wanker for reasons I can't figure out" or "ok but I have to go to Howard Stark's funeral on the weekend. He and his wife died in a mystery car crash" or "ok but a mysterious assassin with a robotic arm keeps killing my agents And then he is like don't worry honey you will figure it out" while trying to keep a straight face.

[Bruinsfan]