|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 15, 2019 16:14:42 GMT -5
It’s a little to “real” for my favorite hero. But wasn't that the whole shtick Stan brought to super-heroes with the Marvel Age, heroes with real feet of clay, heroes with failings they overcome to be heroes anyway? To me the Thor arc in the movies is pretty much the epitome of that Marvel ideal. -M I like the illusion of change , where they end up like they started. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 15, 2019 21:21:35 GMT -5
It’s a little to “real” for my favorite hero. But wasn't that the whole shtick Stan brought to super-heroes with the Marvel Age, heroes with real feet of clay, heroes with failings they overcome to be heroes anyway? To me the Thor arc in the movies is pretty much the epitome of that Marvel ideal. -M Thor turned into a fat drunk was played for laughs, at a time when all other characters understood the gravity of what they wanted to attempt. The MCU Thor was completely subverted, making any lessons learned from previous Thor movies (pre Ragnarok) pointless. Next to that, the Hulk having permanent damage to his arm, seemed like a way of making sure he was no longer one of the most powerful beings going forward. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 15, 2019 21:26:02 GMT -5
One thing I noticed during the final battle with Thanos: When he was wearing the Infinity Gauntlet with all 6 stones he was not strong enough to hurt Captain Marvel. He had to take one of the stones out of the gauntlet to increase his physical strength. So having the gauntlet may have made him more powerful overall, but it did not make him punch harder. Any infinity stone that can make him punch harder has to be used in a specific way. That made no sense at all. In Infinity War, he made Hulk Buster intangible, then merged with a side of the hill and (and he did not have all of the stones at that point), so why didn't he do that to Captain Marvel...or was it more plot convenience since she's set up as the all-powerful, de facto leader of all things Marvel going forward? |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 15, 2019 21:30:02 GMT -5
In Bronze Age comics, it was difficult to take Thanos seriously when he engaged in fisticuffs with the heroes so much instead of working through minions. This movie had a good balance of him using armies and high-powered lieutenants, but also wading into battle himself just for the thrill of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on May 16, 2019 11:10:32 GMT -5
One thing I noticed during the final battle with Thanos: When he was wearing the Infinity Gauntlet with all 6 stones he was not strong enough to hurt Captain Marvel. He had to take one of the stones out of the gauntlet to increase his physical strength. So having the gauntlet may have made him more powerful overall, but it did not make him punch harder. Any infinity stone that can make him punch harder has to be used in a specific way. That made no sense at all. In Infinity War, he made Hulk Buster intangible, then merged with a side of the hill and (and he did not have all of the stones at that point), so why didn't he do that to Captain Marvel...or was it more plot convenience since she's set up as the all-powerful, de facto leader of all things Marvel going forward? In Infinity War he relied on the stones too much. He beat up the Hulk but otherwise relied on closing his fist for most things he did for the rest of the movie - so any time they could keep him from closing his fist he temporarily lost the upper hand. In Endgane he has never used any of the stones before, so he relies on his brute strength instead, and Captain Marvel was holding his hand open, preventing him from using any stones without taking them out of the gauntlet with his other hand. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 16, 2019 16:06:44 GMT -5
Is it explained anywhere that the gesture is important? Why does his hand have to be closed, or do a snap, or give the finger or anything else as long as he has the stones?
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 16, 2019 16:37:17 GMT -5
Is it explained anywhere that the gesture is important? Why does his hand have to be closed, or do a snap, or give the finger or anything else as long as he has the stones? Nope. He certainly doesn't snap when he's using the stones individually, nor do other stone users like Doctor Strange. It wasn't even necessary plotwise; they could easily have written Endgame so that {Spoiler: Click to show}
Thanos never had the gauntlet on his hand in the final fight. |
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on May 16, 2019 17:15:20 GMT -5
Is it explained anywhere that the gesture is important? Why does his hand have to be closed, or do a snap, or give the finger or anything else as long as he has the stones? Dr. Strange specifically tells his cloak to not let Thanos close his fist during their fight in Infinity War, and he is shown closing his fist nearly every time he uses any of the stones except for the Time Stone when he brought Vision back. Beyond that no explanation is given. The stones presumably don't respond to just thoughts but need some sort of motion like when Jedi use the Force. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on May 16, 2019 20:17:36 GMT -5
The snap just feels gimmicky to me. Closing the fist feels a bit more natural, it could be like...channeling all the energies together...or something....
|
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 17, 2019 2:04:57 GMT -5
The snap just feels gimmicky to me. Closing the fist feels a bit more natural, it could be like...channeling all the energies together...or something.... It was meant to be an exact representation of the action's effects "just like that," but it did not need to be so on the nose. The audience was adult enough to know what he would/could do with the gauntlet without the snapping action. |
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on May 17, 2019 13:31:19 GMT -5
The MCU has shown that several of the stones were installed in some kind of apparatus or device in order to harness the power of the stones in a controllable manner. The Mind Stone was in Loki's staff (and later Vision's head), the Time Stone in Dr. Strange's necklace, the Space Stone was in various devices used by S.H.I.E.L.D. , Selvig, and Hydra. The gauntlet clearly serves the same kind of purpose. Maybe closing the fist turns them "on", and his thoughts specify the actual manifestation. The snap... probably just for dramatic effect and because that's a pretty memorable panel from the comics.
|
|
|
|
Post by String on May 18, 2019 12:50:20 GMT -5
But wasn't that the whole shtick Stan brought to super-heroes with the Marvel Age, heroes with real feet of clay, heroes with failings they overcome to be heroes anyway? To me the Thor arc in the movies is pretty much the epitome of that Marvel ideal. -M Thor turned into a fat drunk was played for laughs, at a time when all other characters understood the gravity of what they wanted to attempt. The MCU Thor was completely subverted, making any lessons learned from previous Thor movies (pre Ragnarok) pointless. Next to that, the Hulk having permanent damage to his arm, seemed like a way of making sure he was no longer one of the most powerful beings going forward. No, it was more the fact that he felt personally responsible for the snap happening because he failed in his duty to kill Thanos and avenge Asgard. Knowing there was no way to undo it, living with that knowledge and feeling for five long years, I can see where he would slip into despair and depression. I also think he understood the gravity of the situation when his friends said they had a solution. After so long, they dare offer him some glimmer of hope? And if he should fail again? No, I thought Thor was great here and his last scenes with the Guardians showed me signs that he was starting to heal, to be himself again (Loved the shout-out to the current Asgardians of the Galaxy title! And yes, it premiered quite a bit before this film was released). Now Hulk on the other hand, yeah they wrecked Hulk in these two films, making him far weaker in comparison. Thanos stands up to him, smacks him around some then Hulk runs away and hides?? No, I don't buy that. Finding someone who could actually stand toe-to-toe with him should have angered Hulk making him stronger by far, not some coward. Now you have Bruce bumbling around as Professor Hulk trying to perfect time travel. The scenes of him back in the battle of New York 'pretending' to smash was weak. Professor Hulk became the running joke instead of Thorbowski. The only good benefit of his appearance here was at least they acknowledged his burgeoning relationship with Natasha again if only in mourning. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 20, 2019 0:40:55 GMT -5
No, it was more the fact that he felt personally responsible for the snap happening because he failed in his duty to kill Thanos and avenge Asgard. Knowing there was no way to undo it, living with that knowledge and feeling for five long years, I can see where he would slip into despair and depression. I also think he understood the gravity of the situation when his friends said they had a solution. After so long, they dare offer him some glimmer of hope? And if he should fail again? His depression and despair turned him into a fat drunk who sleeps through important conversations, and acts as if he's suffered some sort of alcohol-induced head trauma--all for laughs. Yeah this is the same Banner who was "...always angry." The same Hulk who fearlessly fought a murderous soldier-turned-Abomination, and the same Hulk who single-handedly punched a Chitauri Leviathan to a dead stop...yet he's easily defeated by / afraid of Thanos? ..and it subverted his own personality, which includes the aforementioned "...always angry" while in Banner mode, and the Hulk is an explosive extension of that, but Disney/Marvel had to burn/disable one of his arms and under-power him overall, to the point where he's not that "ultimate" weapon anymore. I guess someone else is. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 31, 2019 20:17:21 GMT -5
My wife hadn't seen it yet, so I took her today. Enjoyable the second time as well. I noticed at the end when Tony used "End" and "Game" in a sentence together. Getting the Soul Stone made sense; it was about "losing someone you love" not specifically "giving" them. However, touching the various stones did not make as much sense. Wasn't the Power Gem unsafe to touch? And Jane having the Reality Stone/Aether inside her was bad news too. Yet various humans handled various Stones with impunity in this film.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jun 1, 2019 9:34:43 GMT -5
Getting the Soul Stone made sense; it was about "losing someone you love" not specifically "giving" them. I've always thought that was a cheap gimmick for hollow drama; what if someone is a loner and shows up to get the soul stone? Are they permanently barred from getting it? What if you are a hate monger and love nothing? Again, hollow drama. More make-it-up as you go, since Captain America: The First Avenger established that holding the stone--even encased in the tesseract--was potentially lethal, and we found out what happened to the Red Skull as a result. That should happen to anyone touching it. Then again, why would the power stone send the Red Skull to the location of the soul stone...and to guard it? |
|
