Avengers: Endgame [** SPOILERS FROM POST 613 **]

Bacchus

Penn wrote: »

I almost think at this stage Magneto's backstory doesn't work given what age he'd have to be to remember being in a concentration camp. Even if he was 10 in 1945, he'd be 85 by the earliest time they could make a new MCU-Xmen movie. Unless slow aging is added as one of his abilities.

I'd be very much interested in a fresh take on the X-Men, and giving Magneto a new origin like the comics did in the Ultimates version of the character.

TBH, I think I'd like a break from Magneto being a focal point of the X-Men... even just hold him back from the first MCU X-Men outing... maybe tease him as a 'big bad'.

Ideally though I hope they don't rush into the X-Men at all. I'd rather the next phase or two (if they keep that model) introduce the Fantastic Four and set up Doctor Doom or Galactus as the baddie of the next saga. The FF would tie in nicely with the (Spiderman trailer spoiler)

multiverse they are now building

too.

El Duda

Avengers: Endgame – 9/10

Decided to wait for the (snap) dust to settle before doing a write up on this. I have seen the film twice, once in iMax 3D and the other in a crumby old Odeon in 2D. The laser projected iMax 3D at Cineworld Leicester Square looked incredible. Easily the best-looking 3D film since Avatar/Gravity. Shooting it on iMax cameras adds so much clarity to the image, this film will look incredible on 4K.

The writing and plotting here from the Russo’s is fantastic. I had no idea about the plot, so the time travel element was a complete surprise to me and it took a while to win me over. The first time-travel sequence with Clint doing a dummy run was the perfect way to ease the audience in. I loved the way it tied back to the cold open and gave me comfort that the time-travel wouldn’t get too wacky.

The thing that really impressed me is the execution of going back to different moments in past MCU films. Take the Star Wars revival as an example of just how difficult it can be to revisit known and loved properties without alienating or aggravating the masses of mega fans. It felt to me like the Russo’s were spinning plates and running the risk of plot-holes and inconsistencies. Over here they have the first Avengers film with added Dr Strange and Winter Soldier. Over there they have the first Guardians film. Also spinning is Thor 2 and a bit of Infinity War. With so many arcs and plot threads at play, they really were dancing with the devil and taking huge risks but they’ve pulled it off without breaking a single plate. Without causing mass uproar. Without any of it somehow diminishing the previous films. Staying true to the characters and being respectful of work done by previous directors and most importantly, they have great fun with the premise.

Some of the distain for the ‘girl power’ scene is infuriating. Why does it annoy so many adult males that they dared to give the girls a moment? A lot of people citing the contrived convenience that they all found there way to the same point on the battle field at the same time. Did these people have the same qualms when Captain America and co popped up in Scotland conveniently? Or when Hulk managed to control his rage in the first Avengers seemingly out of nowhere? Or at the shoehorned in fight between Falcon and Scott Lang in the first Ant-Man? Etc… The entire MCU is filled with these moments, besides, isn’t this what comic books are like? Some people really need to get over themselves and realise that these are mammoth, mass appeal movies for everyone to enjoy.

To wrap up a 20+ film series in such a satisfactory way is no mean feat. Although it isn't as tight as Infinity War, it is certainly a triumph and it sets the bar impossibly high for the next 20 movie arc. How on earth will Marvel top this?

Calhoun

El Duda wrote: »

Avengers: Endgame – 9/10

Some of the distain for the ‘girl power’ scene is infuriating. Why does it annoy so many adult males that they dared to give the girls a moment? A lot of people citing the contrived convenience that they all found there way to the same point on the battle field at the same time. Did these people have the same qualms when Captain America and co popped up in Scotland conveniently? Or when Hulk managed to control his rage in the first Avengers seemingly out of nowhere? Or at the shoehorned in fight between Falcon and Scott Lang in the first Ant-Man? Etc… The entire MCU is filled with these moments, besides, isn’t this what comic books are like? Some people really need to get over themselves and realise that these are mammoth, mass appeal movies for everyone to enjoy.

To wrap up a 20+ film series in such a satisfactory way is no mean feat. Although it isn't as tight as Infinity War, it is certainly a triumph and it sets the bar impossibly high for the next 20 movie arc. How on earth will Marvel top this?

I also don't get the massive hate for it either, i really liked the girl scene. To be fair the one in Infinity wars was much better. The only criticism i have of the girl scene and this would be a criticism of the film is that there wasn't a consistent female lead in that female rally scene. I think thats why it feels so out of place, the natural leader should have been Black Widow but unfortunately it was not to be.

Was that Scotland? for some reason i thought it was somewhere in Norway.

They have big boots to fill for sure but hell i left excited to see the next GOTG, the next chapter of Black Panther and finally would love to see a Black Widow and Scarlet Witch film.

AMKC

Went and seen it a second time yesterday. So much better the second time I have to say. I really enjoyed it and was sad for both Natasha and Iron Mans deaths.

Audi must be delighted having there e-Trons in this. I doubt they make the noise Tony's one made do would they?

Slydice

I assume by now there's a restaurant with Hulk Out breakfast special?

Mitch Connor

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Cause they are going to introduce the X-Men, starting with Rogue, and Rogue is going to syphon away Marvel's powers; becoming an uber strong villain and depowering Marvel.

Or that is what I would do - given that is a comic origin for Rogue.

Love to see it but cannot see the nerfing Marvel now, after all this

branie2

It was nice to see Bruce embrace his hulk side

Doctor DooM

If we're talking next phase, I'd actually like Doom to be a wild card type, much like Loki. You don't know if you're getting ally Doom or villain Doom until the film is over.

He's a great opportunity for another villain people will care about. He is just trying to save his mammy after all.

I'd love to see villain Rogue getting help from Prof X with Carol's voice in her head too while Carol herself builds a good relationship with the X-Men (especially Wolvie, they have some great moments in the comics) as she is recovering.

Or you could do a thing where Rogue is just a kid, doesn't know what she's doing when she absorbs all the powers and memories, and the X-Men have to defend her from the angry Avengers at her hurting their pal Cap Marvel.

pixelburp

If, and it's a big if, Far from Home is legit introducing multiverse, this could be way the the MCU keeps the X-Men in their own universe while still allowing for crossover with the Avengers; I've never bought the idea of this group of oppressed people in a world where the Hulk, Thor et al reside in. They work within their own context best, so the movies should keep that, by way of some of that MCU pseudo science

Penn

pixelburp wrote: »

If, and it's a big if, Far from Home is legit introducing multiverse, this could be way the the MCU keeps the X-Men in their own universe while still allowing for crossover with the Avengers; I've never bought the idea of this group of oppressed people in a world where the Hulk, Thor et al reside in. They work within their own context best, so the movies should keep that, by way of some of that MCU pseudo science

Could also tie it in with the Un-Snap though. That some people's mutations have shown throughout the years (Magneto, Logan etc, whoever's stories need to go back into the past), but when half the population were brought back after the snap, the fact it was Hulk that did it maybe caused them to come back and "activate" some people's mutations which hadn't shown yet. That's what causes a huge influx of new mutants in the world. Could tie in their oppression with that, being oppressed not just because they're mutants, but how people now believe they're "damaged" or "wrong" because they came back wrong.

RayCun

Penn wrote: »

Could tie in their oppression with that, being oppressed not just because they're mutants, but how people now believe they're "damaged" or "wrong" because they came back wrong.

That just spotlights the craziness of the "spider-bite/lab accident/cosmic ray/superserum good, mutation bad" dichotomy.

Your daughter discovers a glowing rock on the ground and now she can fly - great, give her a costume and a cool name!
Your daughter turns to dust in front of your eyes, you mourn her for five years, then she comes back to life! oh, and now she can fly - :mad: BURN THE WITCH :mad:

Bacchus

It is a bit of a fine line, but there is a distinction between these heroes who were scientists in accidents, or super geniuses, or Gods, and just any Joe Soap getting powers because they're a mutant. The stage is already set in Civil War that humanity has a growing fear of all these super people. Now imagine ANYONE could potentially get devastating powers, and then you have the rise of the Brotherhood who basically fuel the hatred for mutants. It's not a stretch at all, and would actually be a strong parallel to real life trends where insular, anti-immigration, parties are gaining power. Transfer that hate to mutants and there's your narrative.

kerplun k

pixelburp wrote: »

If, and it's a big if, Far from Home is legit introducing multiverse, this could be way the the MCU keeps the X-Men in their own universe while still allowing for crossover with the Avengers; I've never bought the idea of this group of oppressed people in a world where the Hulk, Thor et al reside in. They work within their own context best, so the movies should keep that, by way of some of that MCU pseudo science

I dunno, we live in a funny world, many people would accept a religion like christianity, but would be a bit prejudice against Islam. IMO they are both as crazy as each other, but one is more accepted than the other.

pixelburp

Penn wrote: »

Could also tie it in with the Un-Snap though. That some people's mutations have shown throughout the years (Magneto, Logan etc, whoever's stories need to go back into the past), but when half the population were brought back after the snap, the fact it was Hulk that did it maybe caused them to come back and "activate" some people's mutations which hadn't shown yet. That's what causes a huge influx of new mutants in the world. Could tie in their oppression with that, being oppressed not just because they're mutants, but how people now believe they're "damaged" or "wrong" because they came back wrong.

Naw, it just doesn't work IMO, the only reason all characters share the same world in the first place was because, fadó fadó, comics were badly written childrens stories and so it was fun to smash all the toys together in the same universe.

If the Mutants work as any kind of allegory for an oppressed people, it has to operate within a universe where their presence is inherently aberrant, not typical. Retrofiting the Sokovia kerfuffle into some anti-mutant sentiment is a stretch, and narratively lazy.

Easier to just make X-gene related stories happen in their own universe, and they can cross over when the next big 'Infinity War' sized event occurs.

RayCun

Bacchus wrote: »

It is a bit of a fine line, but there is a distinction between these heroes who were scientists in accidents, or super geniuses, or Gods, and just any Joe Soap getting powers because they're a mutant.

But that relies on

1) the general public knowing where people got their powers. Fine for the Fantastic Four who go by their real names, or Captain America who is government-approved. But there are loads of superheros who have secret identities and not very believable backstories. "Bitten by a radioactive spider? Nice try, mutie!"

2) Family and friends turning their backs on kids who develop mutations. Sure, you might be suspicious of the kid in the next town who gets superpowers (however he gets them), but your kid? Your niece or nephew? Your kid's best friend? The kid you know from school/parties/sports? Their skin turns blue so now you hate them?

pjohnson

RayCun wrote: »

But that relies on

1) the general public knowing where people got their powers. Fine for the Fantastic Four who go by their real names, or Captain America who is government-approved. But there are loads of superheros who have secret identities and not very believable backstories. "Bitten by a radioactive spider? Nice try, mutie!"

2) Family and friends turning their backs on kids who develop mutations. Sure, you might be suspicious of the kid in the next town who gets superpowers (however he gets them), but your kid? Your niece or nephew? Your kid's best friend? The kid you know from school/parties/sports? Their skin turns blue so now you hate them?

Icemans own parents practically disowned him when he came out as gay. We saw in Last Stand Warren Worthington II saw his son (Angel) as a freak.

Theres also the fact the mutant themselves may not like what they become Hoults Beast a good example but in the comics you've the large amount of student disasters from Glenn Morrisons run ie. Beak, Glob Herman, Rockslide, No Girl.

Shunting the X-Men away now is just stupid. With the exception of Hulk most Avengers didnt accidentally get powers. The thing with mutants is its random and its not always good.

RayCun

pjohnson wrote: »

Icemans own parents practically disowned him when he came out as gay. We saw in Last Stand Warren Worthington II saw his son (Angel) as a freak.

Would you disown your son if he could create ice? Grew wings?

If your son grew a beak would you turn him out of your house? What if your son had craniodiaphyseal dysplasia?

I know that's what people do in the comics, my point is that isn't realistic human behaviour.

pixelburp

RayCun wrote: »

Would you disown your son if he could create ice? Grew wings?

If your son grew a beak would you turn him out of your house? What if your son had craniodiaphyseal dysplasia?

I know that's what people do in the comics, my point is that isn't realistic human behaviour.

The x-gene isn't realistic in the first place, powers often defying common sense or any common theme - more like whatever it was the writers wanted to use it for in the plot.

As a simple analogy though, the x-gene works quite effectively because, yes, parents do shun or abandon their children for 'differences', be it sexuality or maybe dating / marrying the wrong ethnicity. Maybe not so much a problem in Ireland anymore - though it absolutely happened along flavours of religion - but as a commentary on America's continuing struggle with basic progressive ideals it remains a hot topic.

And I just think if you try to tell that tale, within a realm of Asgardians, a friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man, a Hulk who's now a celebrity with children, it will rob all the power and importance the x-men stories can tell. Ring-fence it off, let it breath within its own space & not be constantly looking over its shoulder with those infuriating "where's Captain Marvel??" questions.

pjohnson

RayCun wrote: »

Would you disown your son if he could create ice? Grew wings?

If your son grew a beak would you turn him out of your house? What if your son had craniodiaphyseal dysplasia?

I know that's what people do in the comics, my point is that isn't realistic human behaviour.

Iceman wasnt disowned for his mutation. It was his sexuality. They could accept his ice abilities but were shocked he was gay.

RayCun

pixelburp wrote: »

The x-gene isn't realistic in the first place, powers often defying common sense or any common theme - more like whatever it was the writers wanted to use it for in the plot.

Oh, of course, the science doesn't make any sense at all :pac:

But you can accept that as the thing you need to have a story, just like any superhero origin. How can Superman fly and shoot lasers from his eyes and move superfast and punch planets? He just can, okay? He just can.

The thing about the x-men is that the fear and mistrust was universal. Not just some people kicked out their mutant kids, but everyone did. In our world, some people disowned their kids for being gay or marrying the wrong people or whatever, but lots of people didn't. In the x-world, every mutant is an outcast and the only question is whether they join up with Xavier or Magneto. (And this supposedly in a world where there are lots of other people who are equally weird and different, but accepted.)

RayCun

pjohnson wrote: »

Iceman wasnt disowned for his mutation. It was his sexuality. They could accept his ice abilities but were shocked he was gay.

eh, not in 1963 he wasn't.
That was retconned in, when, sometime in the last ten years?

pjohnson

RayCun wrote: »

eh, not in 1963 he wasn't.
That was retconned in, when, sometime in the last ten years?

Oh okay then I'll ignore all the modern stuff.

You claimed that all mutants were hated and rejected. You should know then even from the classic stuff that Storm was treated as a literal god and the Proudstars werent rejected by their tribe? And thats only from the top of my head from the early runs.


It is realistic that people abandon their child. If you remember the 60's then surely you are aware of the likes of thalidomide were parents abandoned their child. Its also hilariously false to claim that ALL parents reject mutant children. Some do and some dont.

Plenty of Humans even work in the institute. Are you getting the world confused with Mutant only Genosha?

RayCun

pjohnson wrote: »

You claimed that all mutants were hated and rejected. You should know then even from the classic stuff that Storm was treated as a literal god and the Proudstars werent rejected by their tribe? And thats only from the top of my head from the early runs.

(wow, treated as a literal god. Those simple natives, eh?)

Okay, let's agree on 99% of mutants are outcasts, hated and feared. You know

The X-Men are hated, feared and despised collectively by humanity for no other reason than that they are mutants. So what we have here, intended or not, is a book that is about racism, bigotry and prejudice.

pjohnson wrote: »

It is realistic that people abandon their child. If you remember the 60's then surely you are aware of the likes of thalidomide were parents abandoned their child.

Some parents. Many didn't.

pjohnson wrote: »

Its also hilariously false to claim that ALL parents reject mutant children. Some do and some dont.

Of the well-known x-men characters, say the ones that appear in the movies, how many lived with parents who accepted their mutations?

pjohnson wrote: »

Plenty of Humans even work in the institute. Are you getting the world confused with Mutant only Genosha?

So, are you saying mutants in the comics are just like other people with powers, judged on their actions and not their mutation, and definitely not hunted by giant robots because of their genes?

Foxtrol

pixelburp wrote: »

Naw, it just doesn't work IMO, the only reason all characters share the same world in the first place was because, fadó fadó, comics were badly written childrens stories and so it was fun to smash all the toys together in the same universe.

If the Mutants work as any kind of allegory for an oppressed people, it has to operate within a universe where their presence is inherently aberrant, not typical. Retrofiting the Sokovia kerfuffle into some anti-mutant sentiment is a stretch, and narratively lazy.

Easier to just make X-gene related stories happen in their own universe, and they can cross over when the next big 'Infinity War' sized event occurs.

Yes, it would be easier to have them in their own universe but thankfully Marvel have shown they generally don't go for the easy route with their long term story telling. They're going to need to bolster the MCU with the loss of key characters and bringing in well known Mutants could help that. Aside from interesting narratives, like Rouge and Cpt Marvel, they could mix other mutant origin stories with current properties, like Storm as part of a Black Panther movies before getting to a full X-men movie.

Posts are making it seem that the whole world loves the Avengers when the fact is that half them were thrown in jail and went on the run up until Endgame. They had strict rules in place for their registration and use of their powers. It isn't a stretch that in that world if people suddenly have powers, many times destructive and uncontrolled, they would be clamped down on by the government.

The only thing lazy about it is that it was already done a few seasons ago with Inhumans on Agents of Shield, around the time of Civil War. The whole story line basically subbed in Inhumans for the normal mutants, where they had government and 'evil' groups chasing Inhumans while a 'good' group tried to bring them to safety, with others of their kind. They probably never expected to get the mutant rights back, but that story line fitted perfectly within the wider MCU.

RayCun

Foxtrol wrote: »

Posts are making it seem that the whole world loves the Avengers when the fact is that half them were thrown in jail and went on the run up until Endgame. They had strict rules in place for their registration and use of their powers. It isn't a stretch that in that world if people suddenly have powers, many times destructive and uncontrolled, they would be clamped down on by the government.

The question is, why would Scarlet Witch (given powers by evil scientists, helped Ultron try to take over the world) be allowed to register with the government and be part of the Avengers, but Scarlet Witch (has powers because she's a mutant) not have that choice?

Foxtrol

RayCun wrote: »

The question is, why would Scarlet Witch (given powers by evil scientists, helped Ultron try to take over the world) be allowed to register with the government and be part of the Avengers, but Scarlet Witch (has powers because she's a mutant) not have that choice?

Marvel have shown the ability to not be rigid with their narratives. There are plenty of ways to make mutants fall into the category of being feared without saying 'mutants bad, other powered people good'.

The government gave people the option to register but as part of that they also agreed to not use their powers, which would be difficult for mutants who don't have control of their powers yet. We see in the US, fears of school school shootings and protests for gun control, what if, somewhat like the comic books, a mutant kid blows up a school. There would be instant public fear and calls to clamp down until they can control their powers. When they make the discovery of the mutant gene it would also allow the government to find those mutants who haven't declared themselves, which isn't possible for people who gain powers other ways. Finding mutants will be low hanging fruit. It isn't saying mutants are 'bad', it would be 'public safety' which isn't a fear with Spider Man and Prof Hulk.

RayCun

Foxtrol wrote: »

The government gave people the option to register but as part of that they also agreed to not use their powers, which would be difficult for mutants who don't have control of their powers yet. We see in the US, fears of school school shootings and protests for gun control, what if, somewhat like the comic books, a mutant kid blows up a school. There would be instant public fear and calls to clamp down until they can control their powers. When they make the discovery of the mutant gene it would also allow the government to find those mutants who haven't declared themselves, which isn't possible for people who gain powers other ways. Finding mutants will be low hanging fruit. It isn't saying mutants are 'bad', it would be 'public safety' which isn't a fear with Spider Man and Prof Hulk.

But if a mutant can control their powers, and someone who gets bathed in gamma rays can't, why would the public fixate on the mutant bit? Why would the green rage monster be okay and a member of the Avengers, but the guy with wings who is fine with only flying when he has clearance from air traffic control be a problem?

You can go down the Civil War route and have 'registered' and 'unregistered' people, sure, but that doesn't map on to 'powered by unlikely events' and 'powered by unlikely mutation'.

pjohnson

RayCun wrote: »

The question is, why would Scarlet Witch (given powers by evil scientists, helped Ultron try to take over the world) be allowed to register with the government and be part of the Avengers, but Scarlet Witch (has powers because she's a mutant) not have that choice?

What are you trying to say here?

Foxtrol

RayCun wrote: »

But if a mutant can control their powers, and someone who gets bathed in gamma rays can't, why would the public fixate on the mutant bit? Why would the green rage monster be okay and a member of the Avengers, but the guy with wings who is fine with only flying when he has clearance from air traffic control be a problem?

You can go down the Civil War route and have 'registered' and 'unregistered' people, sure, but that doesn't map on to 'powered by unlikely events' and 'powered by unlikely mutation'.

But they've shown that they aren't ok with people who get powers other ways and cant control them. Hulk and Scarlet Witch were two of the causes of the requirement to register, with the former going into self imposed exile and the latter being basically under house arrest to being in jail to being on the run for years.

In the US, more people die from domestic terrorism than foreign terrorists, but that didn't stop them electing a President who ran on a 'Muslim Ban', mainly due to fear-mongering about terrorists acts by people of that faith. Looking closer to home, look at Brexit and how much of that was driven by further fear mongering of foreigners. What people fear isn't necessarily rational and there is a big difference between a handful of super powered Avengers on TV and mutants popping up in your local area, who could blow up your child's school or burn down your house. With their gene they can be targeted and put 'under control'.

RayCun

pjohnson wrote: »

What are you trying to say here?

I thought it was clear?

It doesn't really make sense for the government, or the general public, to worry about exactly how someone got their powers. They are going to be a lot more concerned about what they do with those powers.

If they are robbing banks, they are robbing banks - using guns, or a supersuit, or a mutant power, whatever.
If they are catching bank robbers, same deal.
If the problem is that they aren't in control of their powers, or are so powerful that the authorities can't control them, it doesn't matter whether those powers come from a mutation or a mystic gem.

You can make this work* in a setting where all people with powers have powers because of mutations. Because then you can rationalise it as a fear of the different, and a fear of people with extraordinary powers.

But in a setting where there are lots of people running around with powers and some of them are public heroes, one set of powered people being pariahs doesn't make sense.

Scarlet Witch was the example because sometimes she's a mutant and sometimes she isn't.

* if you handwave all parents being monsters