Jump to content
Bazza

Avengers Endgame with spoilers

Recommended Posts

On ‎5‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 2:14 PM, Starlord said:

I prefer the explanation that Cap is worthy but the hammer only allows others to use it during the most dire circumstances.  YMMV.

 

In Avengers/JLA 4, Superman is able to use it to help defeat Krona. After the battle, he's no longer able to lift it. Thor says...." My father is stern, but not stupid. In times of need, certain worthy individuals are worthy of lifting it. " I imagine something like that taking place in the MCU version more or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2019 at 2:24 PM, slikmar said:

Don't forget, regarding the Hammer, that when Cap wields it Thor shouts "I KNEW IT". I think he recognized that of all the mortals he knows, Steve was worthy.

 

I really like this moment for the characters.  I don't like what the Russo's are saying after the fact, because it doesn't feel right.

 

The reason I liked that is that Thor was worried in that scene that Cap could potentially lift the hammer.  He was almost sweating bullets.

 

But in Endgame he was filled with -delight- that Cap could.  So as a story, it sounds much better that both of them became better people through everything they've been through.  Cap can become worthy (even the desire to rest, now, may be part of that), and Thor has become happy for someone else rising up to this stature.  That's a really important moment for both characters, who don't show a lot of direct, positive character growth in their movies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

ODIN: Thor Odinson, do you swear to guard the Nine Realms?

THOR: I swear.
ODIN: Do you swear to preserve the peace?
THOR: I swear.
ODIN: Do you swear to cast aside all selfish ambition and pledge yourself only to the good of all the Realms?
THOR: I swear.

 

 

It was when Thor failed this that he was unworthy, and became worthy again when he fulfilled this. 

 

If Cap is to be worthy to lift Mjolnir he would have to be capable to guard the other 8/7 realms (beside Earth & Asgard), and pledge himself to the good of all the 9 Realms. 

 

To my mind, it was only during the battle in Wakanda during Infinity War that Steve, Bruce, Rhodey & Rocket, and the other Earth-based Avengers; 1) guarded the Nine Realms, 2) preserved the peace, and 3) cast aside personal ambition for the Good of the Nine Realms; that they became worthy. 

 

Now I'm thinking about Rocket wielding Mjolnir. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

The reason I liked that is that Thor was worried in that scene that Cap could potentially lift the hammer.  He was almost sweating bullets.

 

But in Endgame he was filled with -delight- that Cap could.  So as a story, it sounds much better that both of them became better people through everything they've been through.  Cap can become worthy (even the desire to rest, now, may be part of that), and Thor has become happy for someone else rising up to this stature.  That's a really important moment for both characters, who don't show a lot of direct, positive character growth in their movies.

 

 

I liked that too, its part of Thor's growth from the arrogant self-absorbed spoiled godling he was in Thor 1.  I mean they took him in a weird direction (great, he's Hercules now) but I like that he grew to understand that this was a good thing finally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve seen it twice, and I realized something about it today.

 

Endgame isn’t a movie.  It’s the series finale of a beloved TV show.  Endgame doesn’t work at all as a stand alone film.  You have no idea what is going on, no one is introduced and nothing is explained.  No character goes through any sort of growth or character arc.  Nobody learns anything about themselves.  

 

As a movie, it’s pretty bad.  But as a TV finale, it’s pretty awesome.  We already know these characters.  They don’t experience a character arc in this film, they’ve already experienced it over the previous 21 movies.  This is a loving farewell to these characters that we’ve grown to care for.  Some characters take their bows, and others come back for what will surely be the coming spinoff.  They don’t have to explain who Sam and Norm are because we’ve been watching Cheers for 11 years.

 

I don't think I'll want to rewatch Endgame the same way I do certain other Marvel movies.  The original Avengers, Iron Man 1, Winter Soldier, Civil War, Thor Ragnarok, and several others are great movies on their own.  I can watch them and have the full "movie" experience, with character arcs and all that good stuff.  Endgame won't have the same lasting rewatch value, just like people don't go and rewatch the last episode of MASH.  But it's a great event movie.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, massey said:

I’ve seen it twice, and I realized something about it today.

 

Endgame isn’t a movie.  It’s the series finale of a beloved TV show.  Endgame doesn’t work at all as a stand alone film.  You have no idea what is going on, no one is introduced and nothing is explained.  No character goes through any sort of growth or character arc.  Nobody learns anything about themselves.  

 

As a movie, it’s pretty bad.  But as a TV finale, it’s pretty awesome.  We already know these characters.  They don’t experience a character arc in this film, they’ve already experienced it over the previous 21 movies.  This is a loving farewell to these characters that we’ve grown to care for.  Some characters take their bows, and others come back for what will surely be the coming spinoff.  They don’t have to explain who Sam and Norm are because we’ve been watching Cheers for 11 years.

 

I don't think I'll want to rewatch Endgame the same way I do certain other Marvel movies.  The original Avengers, Iron Man 1, Winter Soldier, Civil War, Thor Ragnarok, and several others are great movies on their own.  I can watch them and have the full "movie" experience, with character arcs and all that good stuff.  Endgame won't have the same lasting rewatch value, just like people don't go and rewatch the last episode of MASH.  But it's a great event movie.

 

 

Almost exactly my thoughts on it.

 

I really enjoyed it, but I won't watch it 4-5+ times like I did the first one.  It is a fantastic finale to the series.  Very well done and the upgrade to Time Travel thinking was great.  I've felt like that was the correct way for decades now and its the first film that didn't have all the time paradox issues of Time Cop and Back to the Future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Avengers series has suffered a bit from the first one being so very, very good.  It was a terrific, rip roaring fun movie that got almost all the characters just perfect.  Even if the sequels had been better, they would not measure up to that first one, so they all suffer from comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, massey said:

I’ve seen it twice, and I realized something about it today.

 

Endgame isn’t a movie.  It’s the series finale of a beloved TV show.  Endgame doesn’t work at all as a stand alone film.  You have no idea what is going on, no one is introduced and nothing is explained.  No character goes through any sort of growth or character arc.  Nobody learns anything about themselves.  

 

As a movie, it’s pretty bad.  But as a TV finale, it’s pretty awesome.  We already know these characters.  They don’t experience a character arc in this film, they’ve already experienced it over the previous 21 movies.  This is a loving farewell to these characters that we’ve grown to care for.  Some characters take their bows, and others come back for what will surely be the coming spinoff.  They don’t have to explain who Sam and Norm are because we’ve been watching Cheers for 11 years.

 

I don't think I'll want to rewatch Endgame the same way I do certain other Marvel movies.  The original Avengers, Iron Man 1, Winter Soldier, Civil War, Thor Ragnarok, and several others are great movies on their own.  I can watch them and have the full "movie" experience, with character arcs and all that good stuff.  Endgame won't have the same lasting rewatch value, just like people don't go and rewatch the last episode of MASH.  But it's a great event movie.

 

 

Generally agree, but I would dispute your "no character arc" assertion. To me Clint, Thor, and Tony had strong and compelling story arcs. To a lesser extent Steve, Natasha, and Nebula did as well. They all went to emotional places we'd never seen from them before, and grew as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Generally agree, but I would dispute your "no character arc" assertion. To me Clint, Thor, and Tony had strong and compelling story arcs. To a lesser extent Steve, Natasha, and Nebula did as well. They all went to emotional places we'd never seen from them before, and grew as a result.

 

Nebula in particular was excellently done in terms of taking her 2-dimensional character from the GotG movies and making her really move forward and grow. For the first time, I really bought the whole Nebula/Gamora rivalry sisterhood. 

I thought there was a ton of character development... Natasha fully fleshed out her position as the most committed Avenger of all of them... Tony's move to satisfied and willing to sacrifice, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think massey meant (lack of) character arc/development strictly within the confines of the one movie (Endgame). Obviously there is lots of character development over the course of the 22-movie series, and that's why he describes Endgame as being more like a series finale than a standalone movie.

 

And massey isn't the first person to arrive at this conclusion. Grace Randolf has been describing the MCU as "serialized cinema" since Thor: Ragnarok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, though I wouldn't say that really qualifies as "character development". Thor went from a situational funk back to his post-Ragnarok jolly self. He didn't fundamentally change, it's just that his mood tracked the trajectory of the mood of the movie's narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, over the course of the entire series, we see significant character arcs from everyone.  But within Endgame itself?  Everybody is pretty static.  The closest you could say to a real arc would be Hawkeye, but really we only get a minute and a half or so of him being "loving father" before his family disappears, and then he becomes "vengeful ninja" in his next scene, and then after that he's "buddy cop" with Natasha.  Nothing is really explained, but it doesn't have to be within the context of the larger universe.

 

I was just thinking about how I'm going to buy the complete set when Marvel releases it on BluRay, but I don't know that I'll ever really sit down to watch Endgame again.  My wife still hasn't seen Infinity War, so I've been catching her up over the past few months (she's got Guardians 2 and then she'll be ready for IW), so I'll probably watch it once more with her.  After that though, the movie is a huge time commitment, and only works in the context of the entire series.  It'll probably be a "watch it once every 10 years" kind of film.  I still really liked it, but it isn't self-contained at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused with the Hawkeye/Black Widow thing.  I know they got along well, as co workers, so to speak but... Banner should have been there to be the loved one, not Black Widow.  Their relationship wasn't one where it was that huge a loss, but I guess you could say the same thing about Thanos and Gamora; there wasn't any love or real relationship there.  The man tortured his daughter and forced them to fight together constantly.  Honestly I wonder if the point of those scenes was less about the stones than about the Red Skull being back and all spiritual and stuff.  Kind of a waste of Hugh Weaving's considerable talents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Black Widow wasn't Clint's sacrifice, she was sacrificing herself to save everyone else. Problem was, the explanation from Skull was sacrificing what you love most, not yourself. Maybe the powers that be only told that to Skull and therefore Thanos knowing they probably didn't have anything they loved that much other then themself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Kind of a waste of Hugh Weaving's considerable talents.

 

I would agree, except that wasn't Hugo Weaving (in either of the last two Avengers movies).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I'm a bit confused with the Hawkeye/Black Widow thing.  I know they got along well, as co workers, so to speak but... Banner should have been there to be the loved one, not Black Widow.  Their relationship wasn't one where it was that huge a loss, but I guess you could say the same thing about Thanos and Gamora; there wasn't any love or real relationship there.  The man tortured his daughter and forced them to fight together constantly.  Honestly I wonder if the point of those scenes was less about the stones than about the Red Skull being back and all spiritual and stuff.  Kind of a waste of Hugh Weaving's considerable talents.

 

Hugo Weaving wasn't in  Infinity War or Endgame. Ross Marquand played Red Skull in those movies, after Weaving declined the offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ross Marquand played Red Skull in those movies, after Weaving declined the offer.

 

He did a pretty fine job with Weaving's voice and accent.  That was one thing I particularly liked about his performance in First Avenger: he didn't do the typical prison guard accent, it was more a very high aristocratic duelist accent which was perfect for the character.  I also very much appreciated his performance in V, where he never took the mask off.  Its something many other actors could learn from, like Spider-Man where he's constantly whipping that mask off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hugo Weaving's performance in V for Vendetta was a masterclass in acting without the use of one's face. However, props must also be given to the vfx team who went to extraordinary lengths to add subtle hints of facial expressions to the mask by ingenious use of CG shadows. It was so effective that nobody realized the work they did, only that V was incredibly "expressive" despite wearing a mask at all times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2019 at 1:05 PM, TrickstaPriest said:

That's a really important moment for both characters, who don't show a lot of direct, positive character growth in their movies.

 

Thor in his movies doesn't show direct positive character growth? 

 

His whole series has been built around the classic novice-journeyman-master ideal. The first film has him acting like a spoiled brat that nearly caused a war between Giants and Asgard. It was only coming to see that an act of self-sacrifice might make his brother spare his friends and Earth. 

 

With the Bifrost destroyed, Asgard, led by Thor maintains the peace across the nine realms. In Thor 2, he makes his own decision on safeguarding Asgard and defies his king. This is the beginning of Thor's leadership of Asgard. He is acting on his own counsel. 

 

In Thor 3, he knows that Hela has invaded Asgard and tries to get back there ASAP. As Odin says, Thor is a better & wiser king than he. After Thor's arc including the Avengers films, one has to agree. To save Asgard the people (Aesir) he destroyed their home. He leads by example. 

 

It was in Endgame when Thor gave up the Kingship that was mostly out of character. One can also make the credible argument that his lethargy is also out of character. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bazza said:

It was in Endgame when Thor gave up the Kingship that was mostly out of character. One can also make the credible argument that his lethargy is also out of character. 

 

Of course it was. Thor acting out of his usual character was intended to convey how hard it hit him that half of all living beings in the entire universe had been destroyed and he was helpless against that fact. O.O.C. Is Serious Business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...