Endgame Official Avengers: Endgame General Discussion Thread!

[shinlyle]

Can you imagine if Endgame came out this summer with everything getting pushed back because of the virus? We were fortunate we got it when we did so that it could be watched as a community experience as intended.

We were honestly blessed that we got Endgame when we did. I have a feeling that the steps studios are taking with the virus are going to end up changing the industry considerably...Endgame may be the last true blockbuster of its kind. Fitting.

I don't know. I could also be totally wrong, and this summer will be a blip on the radar, and next year will be back to normal.

 

[samsnee]

It was going to be a relatively quiet year for blockbusters anyway with no new Avengers or Star Wars. Will be interesting what weekends all these big movies get pushed back to.

 

[KevTravels]

Can you imagine if Endgame came out this summer with everything getting pushed back because of the virus? We were fortunate we got it when we did so that it could be watched as a community experience as intended.

people would be rioting

 

[NotNickFury]

people would be rioting

The nerd/geek crowd of us talking about these things on message boards and such might be. The general public and people who just walk into theaters to see what's playing? Wouldn't care nearly as much.

 

[psylockolussus]

Can you imagine if Endgame came out this summer with everything getting pushed back because of the virus? We were fortunate we got it when we did so that it could be watched as a community experience as intended.

Endgame wouldn't have earned 2.7 billion after a pandemic. Thank God, we got the movie in 2019 instead of 2020.

Endgame breaking all the records was phenomenal! I don't know if a movie from the future could ever top that.

 

[BoredGuy]

The nerd/geek crowd of us talking about these things on message boards and such might be. The general public and people who just walk into theaters to see what's playing? Wouldn't care nearly as much.

Everybody was a nerd when it came to Endgame
I don't think many people went to see it because they just so happened to walk past a movie theater
Hell, tickets were sold out for quite some time, you couldn't low-effort your way into a showing even if you tried

That said, the nerd version of "rioting" is "let's b*tch and make petitions and tweet at people to let them know how very mad we are"... I'm continually disappointed in my inability to start an actual riot. lol

 

[InvisibleWoman]

I did a rewatch of all 4 movies whilst in isolation (not much else to do!) and I think I do prefer Endgame to IW. However, even though I wasn't a critic of Thor's characterisation in Endgame, having watched it in close succession to his earlier characterisation... I'm not sure it was the best route they could have gone with it. I found myself missing the Thor we had in Avengers 1 and AoU. I liked that he was deeply affected by what happened in IW and it made him question himself, but I think playing it for laughs didn't quite work. Strange how I didn't mind it when I watched Endgame at the cinema but looking at it now, I just found him a bit irritating and wanted to skip any scene which focussed on him.

 

[KevTravels]

Fat Thor was funny for 5 minutes and they continued that joke far too long. far

i wish we got more focus on the final battle. Making it two minuted longer but a more zeroed in focus on those who snapped and their contributions.

 

[terry78]

This is trending on Twitter right now as people relive audience reactions from the showing last year.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Avengers Endgame is trending on Twitter!

 

[psylockolussus]

I saw Endgame four times in the theaters, and all of those screenings had a great audience response. They were cheering, laughing, crying, like that movie was really a crowd pleaser. And all those screenings were full! Like it was a cinema event. Everybody in the streets were talking about it and it shows at the boX office.

Its crazy 12 months later, the cinemas are closed because of this damn virus.

 

[samsnee]

Black Widow’s original death in Endgame. I like the one we got better. It was more personal and focused on the relationship between her and Clint, which calls back to the first Avengers. A action heavy death was not needed.

 

[KevTravels]

how many deleted scenes are there from Endgame?

 

[Sony23]

I still much prefer Infinity War. It's far superior in every way. It has more energy and higher stakes and less meandering nonsense, lazy writing and mishandled characters.

 

[RockyRaccoon]

I do agree that time travel is sort of expected and "uncreative", but I don't really see anyone providing alternative plotlines. I really loved both movies but I'm gonna drive away from the herd here and say I loved Endgame. Without time travel we probably wouldn't have the time stone because if they didn't end up using it, that'd be just flat out stupid (arguably the most powerful stone.) We also wouldn't have got such a emotional plotline without all the (temporary) deaths and all. Let's face it, after all of these years they wouldn't dare to permanently kill off roughly half of the heroes we love so much in a finale-feeling movie like Endgame.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Endgame is easily better. In basically every way. Better story, character development, best action sequence in the series, etc. Infinity War is awesome, don't get me wrong. I watched both movies this weekend, and Infinity War is an absolute blast. But, I still would rate it as the 3rd best Avengers film.

Avengers: Endgame
The Avengers
Avengers: Infinity War
Avengers: Age of Ultron

Though it must be said, I love all 4 of these movies.

 

[Flint Marko]

It's hard to decide between Avengers, Endgame, and Infinity War. Any nitpicks I have about each each are very minor and eclipsed by what all they do right. Gun to my head Infinity War is 3rd, but just by a hair.

I return to the battle on Titan more than I expected. It really delivered as a memorable, thrilling set piece and made the 10 year build up to fighting Thanos worth it. Not to mention Thor's arrival to Wakanda which might be the loudest cheer I've ever heard in theaters.

Choosing between the first Avengers and End Game is tough, but I shed real tears in End Game and that's got to count for something.

 

[Erzengel]

I think what tips the scales is that the Battles of Wakanda/Titan are separate while the Battle of Upper State NY involves everybody.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Also that Wakanda's battle was not the quality of Titan or the finale of Endgame.

 

[Sony23]

Yeah I too liked all that character development in Endgame... A pity most of it happened OFF-SCREEN

I liked how Captain Marvel went from a piece of cardboard with long hair to a Deus Ex Machina with short hair!

I like how Thanos went from being an intimidating villain to a weak and lazy plot device that is killed off in the first 10mins while cooking a stew.

I like how Thor went from a character to a fat drunk SNL sketch.

Banner was great. He didn't even have to try all that hard. All he had to do is develop into a CGI green version of himself!

 

[Spider-Fan]

There was PLENTY of on-screen character development in Endgame. Almost the entire first half of the movie was a character study.

Your summaries are very reductive, and I don't think accurate. At all.

 

[Sony23]

There was PLENTY of on-screen character development in Endgame. Almost the entire first half of the movie was a character study.

Sure. Black Widow. CAP... It just didn't involve any of the characters I described.

Your summaries are very reductive, and I don't think accurate. At all.

OK. Which one? Was Captain Marvel given any character development? How does she develop as a character from the beginning of the film to the one at the end? Please point to any part of her 15 minutes of screentime where she isn't there for the sole purpose of solving a problem? Do we learn anything more about her as a person? Why does she cry when seeing the image of Fury? Was she just as concerned for the family she hasn't seen in 30 years? How does Steve suddenly talk like he knows her, yet her reaction to Natasha describing past events implies she is just learning of this now?. No we don't learn anything about her. Because she doesn't speak to anyone. She remains stone faced with no personality. She's barely in the movie to be called a character let alone one with character development. No. She is just as I accurately described. A Deus Ex Machina with a bad hair cut. That is all she is. Horribly written and terribly executed.

Killing Thanos - a character you built up for 10 years and developed in your previous movie and only to have him killed off at the beginning of your next, was probably one of the dumbest decisions I've ever seen in film history. It would be like if you killed Darth Vader and the Emperor in ROTJ. You want to talk about character development. What a waste of a villain and any potential tension you could've had with him still present and a threat. How about you don't kill off your main villain that has a history with these characters and then replace him with what is essentially a clone or twin brother trope.

Thor: Throughout his solo films he went through various trials and tribulations. From his father and mother dying to seeing his whole world destroyed. We saw all of that pain in Infinity War come to ahead in the scene with Rocket. A scene that has more depth than anything a fat suit can ever convey. The Russos completely ignored all of that character development for the sake of a joke, making Thor one of the most mishandled portrayals of a character since Luke Skywalker in The Last Jedi.

Hulk: Replace all of Professor Hulk's scenes with just Bruce Banner. Would it really be any different? Replacing your human character with a green CGI version of the same character isn't character development. It's purely a cosmetic change. If they continued ON-SCREEN, the character arc setup in Infinity War with Banner struggling with his inner conflict with The Hulk then that would be considered character development. Instead, once again this character arc is resolved through exposition off-screen. Why do you think so many Hulk fans are angry with his portrayal in Endgame? The Hulk never reemerges ever again. All we get is a green Banner that dabs. Stupid



Skipping 5 years and then telling the audience the progression characters may have made is a cardinal sin of storytelling. We should've seen Tony's resentment towards Steve resolved throughout the movie. Did Tony and Steve not speak in 5 years? Why? Endgame would rather spend more time on Fortnite and Taco jokes.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Hulk is the only one where I agree. Well, and Thanos but that was by design. The gauntlet needed stakes for the user, so Thanos couldn't be a god for the whole movie. So his role makes sense.

Thor is very developed. He's battling PTSD and facing the worst failure of his life, which he conquered. That's called an arc.

As for Captain Marvel, yeah she had little arc. But tell me, what was Drax's arc in Infinity War? Not every single character will have one. In the grand scheme, she was minor to the plot.

 

[Sony23]

Hulk is the only one where I agree. Well, and Thanos but that was by design. The gauntlet needed stakes for the user, so Thanos couldn't be a god for the whole movie. So his role makes sense.

There are ways around that, just like they did with ignoring the fact that destroying the stones should've been impossible. God of War did it all the time. For example: Instead of him being killed like a punk, he could've been using the reality stone to deceive them. This results in an ambush. A small battle ensues. During the fight Captain Marvel surprising Thanos with her powers manages to snatch a stone (e. g the Soul Stone, causing the gauntlet to depower) may even malfunction. Thanos escapes.

Thor is very developed. He's battling PTSD and facing the worst failure of his life, which he conquered. That's called an arc.

I would agree with this except the problem with Thor's PTSD is that it's undercut by the amount of jokes that tells us we are supposed to be laughing at him. Not empathizing with him. His trauma is not in anyway explored. His teammates don't seem concerned for him. Nothing. He is nothing but a buffoon. An SNL parody disguised as a metaphor for depression and PTSD. It also ignores all the character progression that was made in Ragnarok and Infinity War. His talk with Rocket was more effective.

As for Captain Marvel, yeah she had little arc. But tell me, what was Drax's arc in Infinity War? Not every single character will have one. In the grand scheme, she was minor to the plot.

The problem with Captain Marvel isn't that she didn't have an arc, it's that she was underwritten and horribly executed as a character. I think we're talking about two different things. I understand if Captain Marvel didn't have a well developed character arc. Would it have been great if she had one? Sure. (They could've explored her learning to work as a team as Natasha pointed out) but I agree it isn't necessary. We are talking about the handling of Captain Marvel as a character first and foremost, and all the motivations hopes, and dreams that comes with writing a character so we get a sense of her as a human being and not just a plot device. It's why I compare her to the T Rex in Jurassic Park. Because it's all she is.

Furthermore, comparing her to Drax is a false equivalence as Drax function in the story differs from Carol's. Drax wasn't a new character that was setup at the end of your previous movie as a "call in the calvary" moment. We don't know Carol in the MCU. Carols introduction and purpose in the MCU was supposed to be a sign of the heroes receiving assistance in saving the universe. Instead, all she is a deus ex machina with no role in the plot. Drax, even in a minor role took part in the events of Infinity War. Drax may not have a character arc, but he was still written as character that interacted with other characters. He wasn't hand waived away because they didn't know what to do with him. If she wasn't going to be integral to the story, then don't include her at all. But don't BS the audience and look for contrived reasons why she doesn't appear for the remainder of your movie. It 's lazy. Just thinking about her bonding with Rocket over Quill's taste in music or sharing her concern for her family with Thor shows the potential they threw away for meandering fan service and fat jokes.

 

[Spider-Fan]

There are ways around that, just like they did with ignoring the fact that destroying the stones should've been impossible. God of War did it all the time. For example: Instead of him being killed like a punk, he could've been using the reality stone to deceive them. This results in an ambush. A small battle ensues. During the fight Captain Marvel surprising Thanos with her powers manages to snatch a stone (e. g the Soul Stone, causing the gauntlet to depower) may even malfunction. Thanos escapes.

Comics and movies are not the same thing. So the stone being able to be destroyed in the universe of the movies is perfectly acceptable. Endgame is not Thanos's story. It's an Avengers story. It's about watching The Avengers try to live with a failure and rectify their mistakes. Santos in the previous movie one, so the conflict did not actually need to directly be the same Thanos. The entire metaphor is the past catching up to the heroes, so past Thanos kind of fits the narrative.

Another thing your proposed beginning takes away is the sense of hopelessness. The entire first third of the movie it supposed to set up the world after Thanos won. It's supposed to feel like a hopeless world. If Thanos never destroyed the stones, then that undermines what they were going for. You don't get that same sense of weight and gravitas by doing it your way. You may get a fancy action sequence, but you're not investing the audience enough in that sense of hopelessness and like our heroes can't win. What they did in the movie was much more original, much more interesting from a narrative point of view, and pays dividends for the stakes of the rest of the movie

I would agree with this except the problem with Thor's PTSD is that it's undercut by the amount of jokes that tells us we are supposed to be laughing at him. Not empathizing with him. His trauma is not in anyway explored. His teammates don't seem concerned for him. Nothing. He is nothing but a buffoon. An SNL parody disguised as a metaphor for depression and PTSD. It also ignores all the character progression that was made in Ragnarok and Infinity War. His talk with Rocket was more effective.

Yeah, they made a few jokes about Thor. But his struggle is 100% dealt with in this movie. He has a heart-to-heart with Hulk, he has a heart-to-heart with his mother, all the heroes are just kind of watching his life spiral out of control uncomfortably. This is exploring the root of Thor's problem. His arc is 100% defined and explored in the movie. The presence of jokes does not diminish the fact that it was explored. Whether you feel the joke devalue the effectiveness of his story in the movie is completely up to you, as that's up for audience interpretation whether you enjoy something or not. But the statement that they don't explore his arc at all is just flat-out false. If you feel that way, then I don't feel like you watch the movie closely enough.

The problem with Captain Marvel isn't that she didn't have an arc, it's that she was underwritten and horribly executed as a character. I think we're talking about two different things. I understand if Captain Marvel didn't have a well developed character arc. Would it have been great if she had one? Sure. (They could've explored her learning to work as a team as Natasha pointed out) but I agree it isn't necessary. We are talking about the handling of Captain Marvel as a character first and foremost, and all the motivations hopes, and dreams that comes with writing a character so we get a sense of her as a human being and not just a plot device. It's why I compare her to the T Rex in Jurassic Park. Because it's all she is.

Furthermore, comparing her to Drax is a false equivalence as Drax function in the story differs from Carol's. Drax wasn't a new character that was setup at the end of your previous movie as a "call in the calvary" moment. We don't know Carol in the MCU. Carols introduction and purpose in the MCU was supposed to be a sign of the heroes receiving assistance in saving the universe. Instead, all she is a deus ex machina with no role in the plot. Drax, even in a minor role took part in the events of Infinity War. Drax may not have a character arc, but he was still written as character that interacted with other characters. He wasn't hand waived away because they didn't know what to do with him. If she wasn't going to be integral to the story, then don't include her at all. But don't BS the audience and look for contrived reasons why she doesn't appear for the remainder of your movie. It 's lazy. Just thinking about her bonding with Rocket over Quill's taste in music or sharing her concern for her family with Thor shows the potential they threw away for meandering fan service and fat jokes.

No, what I'm seeing you argue is what you perceived to be her role in the story. Yeah we had a cutscene that hinted she was going to be in the movie, but that cutscene was basically a glorified commercial for her own solo adventure. Her role in the story is not that to come and save the day and be the answer to fixing everything. She is a supporting player like Drax or any other character that's not a lead. The heart of the story is about the original Avengers coming together once again to undo their greatest mistake. This movie was never about Carol Danvers walking in, thrashing Thanos, and undoing anything. Her role in the story is small. That's not a flaw in the narrative for a supporting character. Carol was never the shark in Jaws. Nor was she ever intended to be. Remember, they made Endgame before her solo movie, so they knew from the onset that her role was going to be small in this movie.