TR Forums

SecretMaster · Thu May 02, 2019 8:35 am

Saw it on Tuesday night. I'm one of those oddities who watched Infinity War and Endgame without really being invested/watching previous MCU movies (I saw the first Avengers film when it came out, and watched Ironman after seeing Infinity War). I thought Infinity War was really an amazing film; the storytelling and pacing within the movie was really good, not to mention all the shout-outs/buildup from previous MCU movies that I probably did not appreciate. In this regard I don't think Endgame carried that mantle particularly well.

Offing Thanos and destroying the stones in the first 15 minutes of the movie was really anti-climatic, and I don't think it did justice to the buildup and finale in Infinity War. The time-travel aspect was really lame to me, even if it was more or less logically consistent (or part of comic canon in the first place). Granted I'm definitely not the target demographic for these movies, but plenty of fan-oriented movies (or stories) have woven a compelling story while staying true to their particular fandom/universe. I got the sense that this movie was much more of a fan-service movie (with a number of callbacks/references that went over me) than anything else.

To me it seemed super obvious they were going to kill of Tony Stark. They really played the emotional aspect of him being a comfortable, family man real hard. I thought his "sacrifice" (not sure if that's the right word or not) was well done, and probably carries significant weight to actual fans of the MCU.

I'm also not sure what "girl power" scene y'all are referencing. It totally went by me.

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 8:40 am

tanker27 wrote:
My guess is that dragontamer5788 has not even read a single Marvel comic arc or he wouldn't be concerned about the multiverse. My supporting evidence is he keeps citing $#77y DragonballZ.

Marvel Zombies + their crossover into Ultimate Fantastic Four was amazing (Marvel Zombies 2 and 3 were quite bad though, so lets ignore those). Ultimate Spiderman (Miles Morales) is great too. Actually, I like the Ultimate universe more than the mainline universe in the comics. That's not the issue here. The issue was the relatively shallow plotholes left in Endgame which are quite distracting to me.

Dragonball Z (Cell Saga) is probably the best part of Dragonball Z's entire run. I think it deserves recognition. Most importantly, Dragonball Z (Cell Saga) has a time-travel paradox involved, so it is very "similar" to Endgame. So anyone familiar with that Saga will naturally compare it to this movie. Without a doubt in my mind, Dragonball Z's portrayal of time-travel was more fun, more consistent, and more awesome than what happened in this movie. Yeah, you heard me right, and I'll say it again, DBZ: Cell Saga was better than Avengers Endgame.

If it weren't for the callouts in Endgame, the movie was otherwise kinda shallow and bland. That's all I'm saying. It does the callouts really well however, so I give it credit for that. But on its own, Endgame's plot isn't very good. Even if we compare it to other time-travel comic storylines, like DBZ: Cell Saga, Flashpoint. Or other alternative plotlines, like Marvel Zombies or Kingdom Come. The sad part is, maybe 70% to 80% of the movie was great. They just needed to workshop the last 20% of the plot to hold things together a bit better.

Endgame is a great movie from the perspective of great actors coming together to interact with each other. The interpersonal character arcs were done very well with the exception of Hawkeye / Black Widow, as I described earlier in this thread. Hawkeye's loss of his family didn't play very well with the Soul-Stone swap plotline. Its hard for me to resolve Hawkeye's brooding self, loss of family, and with "Love" for Black Widow. Hulk / Black Widow would have been better but other people in this thread have good reasons why that wouldn't work either. So I'll give them a pass on Black Widow's character development, her issues are just 11 years of bad writing and one movie can't fix those problems. All other actors and characters in the movie played their roles extremely well, and reacted in a way that was consistent with each character's ideals and personal story arcs. So while the general plot of Endgame was poor, these inter-personal relationships were handled very well.

tanker27 · Thu May 02, 2019 9:35 am

How about citing Marvel pre-2000. :roll:

only millennials watch Dragnballs :roll:

We get it you hate the movie. Please move on.

Glorious · Thu May 02, 2019 9:44 am

redocbew wrote:
I could mention Independence Day also, but I'm sure we all know a few examples like that.

As a fighter Pilot/President with vast experience of alien combat, I can actually say that Independence Day was right on the money.

As an alien-abductee as well, no, that part of the movie was just inaccurate. It was a wonderful experience, and everyone was enthralled by my retelling of it.

Glorious · Thu May 02, 2019 9:48 am

Also, haven't seen the lastest few movies I guess, but I remember wondering just how Ant-man was going to get out of his predicament

Someone told me it was a rat.

Like, at some point, I'd prefer the plot hole?

(Unless the rat was Splinter. Then I'm on-board).

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 9:51 am

Glorious wrote:
Also, haven't seen the lastest few movies I guess, but I remember wondering just how Ant-man was going to get out of his predicament

Someone told me it was a rat.

Like, at some point, I'd prefer the plot hole?

It was incredibly arbitrary. Not only was it a rat that jumped on the buttons in just the right way... but Ant Man magically knew how time travel worked after experiencing it. I was one of the worst ways to introduce time-travel I've ever seen.

tanker27 wrote:
How about citing Marvel pre-2000.

only millennials watch Dragnballs

We get it you hate the movie. Please move on.

Yeah... I think I'm allowed to cite 15-year old comic stories and claim to be a Marvel fan. If that's not enough for you, well... I dunno, get with the times old man? If you aren't keeping up with stories that have happened in the last 20 years, I'm pretty sure you lose your nerd credits.

Glorious · Thu May 02, 2019 10:16 am

dragontamer5788 wrote:
It was incredibly arbitrary

So what's worse? Arbitrarily plugging plot holes, or just leaving them there?

I'm not sure, but once we end up arguing about the paradoxical impossibilities created by time travel, uh ok? That sort of happens, no?

Like, certain things have to happen for certain characters to be in certain scenes. Whether thematically, like with Captain America--he's in 1940s whatever because that's his arc, as it has always been, and for him to be "inexplicably" on a bench as an old (therefore semiotically COMPLETED) man so that the rest of the characters can have a poignant moment of recognition of that final state(so that we, the audience, can vicariously share it), who cares how?

Or, like Ant-Man, ontologically--I don't care where our intrepid hero last was, he needs to be here now.

Do you want to waste screen-time elaborating on the technically-motivated plug? Or do you want the moment? I don't mind the occasional lacuna if the rest of text remains beautiful, and much like quibbling about holes when time traveling, should we *REALLY* argue about alternative readings over whether Jesus came down from Judea or Galilee when the literal next verse is the monumental plot moment of him getting his first disciplines?

Sure. Both arguments are unsatisfactory, so why focus on them as opposed to not only what happened, but what needed to happen?

redocbew wrote:
I'm guessing you really hated Lost, or any other story that has some inherent ambiguity to it.

Oddly enough, had serious issues with Lost, but not because of plot ambiguity. There's time-travel, fine. Clearly some ideas "developed" as the show progresses and unavoidable exigencies occurred.

My problem is almost entirely thematic: What were they trying to say? It's a total mess, and it doesn't help that the show-runners explicitly denied that they were going to do what they then obviously did, and for them to a year later get in on the fun of ridiculing the ending that they have previously maintained in all seriousness.

Ugh.

It's like the remake of Battlestar Galactica "...and they have a plan".

No, they didn't.

Which is fine, but come on, don't pretend otherwise then.

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 10:21 am

Glorious wrote:
dragontamer5788 wrote:
It was incredibly arbitrary

So what's worse? Arbitrarily plugging plot holes, or just leaving them there?

I'm not sure, but once we end up arguing about the paradoxical impossibilities created by time travel, uh ok? That sort of happens, no?

Good time-travel stories don't have major plotholes. I've listed plenty of them throughout this thread, and I can list more of them if you need me to. But apparently, people around here don't like it when I point out better stories that have come around in the past 20 years.

Do you want to waste screen-time elaborating on the technically-motivated plug?

There was like a 10 minute argument with Professor Hulk arguing with the Sorcerer Supreme over how Time Travel works. They wasted screen time technically plugging the plothole, and then failed to plug the plothole. Not only that, Antman is explaining timetravel in the quantum realm. Professor Hulk is experimenting with time travel for a chunk of the movie. Iron Man even has a bit of exposition on how his final solution will work.. They spent a LOT of time on the mechanics and exposition of this plot device, and it fell completely flat for me.

Endgame got the worst of both worlds. There was wasted screen-time AND kept a plothole. At that point, I'd prefer them to not waste screen-time on exposition if its all going to be plot-hole ridden anyway. Bill and Ted's excellent adventure was better in this regards: no time spent on exposition, all the screen time was just spent on hilarious jokes.

------------

EDIT: At this point, I want to make sure everyone understands that I enjoyed the movie and wouldn't change 80% of it. Its just... the last 20% of the movie I'm focusing on was really distracting and full of plotholes.

Glorious · Thu May 02, 2019 10:29 am

dragontamer5788 wrote:
Good time-travel stories don't have major plotholes. I've listed plenty of them throughout this thread, and I can list more of them if you need me to. But apparently, people around here don't like it when I point out better stories that have come around in the past 20 years.

The MCU isn't a time-travel story.

It's a series of inter-related superhero stories.

And, by the way, the tradition of superhero stories includes long history of using "time travel" to allow have mutually contradictory, but yet self-referentially, retellings of those stories. Seems wholly on-brand, actually. It's a great way to express characters--what if Jor-El launched Kal-El 12 hours later? What if such a son of the Soviet Union (which historically did advocate the concept of a "new soviet man"--it'd be bonkers if they actually had one). Different timelines, you say! No problem!

Ok, but wouldn't it be great if those two different version MET?

Oh, but impossible! <--- Yeah, not the point dude!

----

If you thought that the MCU, or that Endgame was a time-travel story, perhaps I might suggest that you were misinformed?

Endgame, of course, literally connotes the concept that some of these stories, stories about superheroes, characters, would be ending. This, certainly, was what the producers intended and adequately conveyed in promotion.

Accordingly, that's what happened for some of those superheroes, and in order to provide the most satisfactory ending possible for those characters, yes, I have to imagine that technically justifying everything might have detracted from that.

It's an ensemble film. Every second counts. Do you *really* want them to fully explain or develop their version of the inherently amorphous idea of "time travel" when what that *actually* means is that we get less superheroes?

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 10:33 am

Glorious wrote:
It's an ensemble film. Every second counts. Do you *really* want them to fully explain or develop their version of the inherently amorphous idea of "time travel" when what that *actually* means is that we get less superheroes?

They did explain it. That's the problem. They wasted a lot of time explaining and expositioning, and none of that time felt like it payed off. Either do it like "Bill and Ted", where time travel just happens and "don't worry about it", or if you're going to bother explaining it, then make the explanation actually matter.

This movie explained it, and then delivered a bunch of plotholes. Its also a 3-hour long movie, if these expositions weren't going to count, they should have cut it out of the script. Iron Man, Ant-Man, Professor Hulk, and Sorcerer Supreme have multiple scenes where time travel is being explained to the audience.

derFunkenstein · Thu May 02, 2019 10:34 am

please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud. please don't turn this thread into yet another wasteland for your public feud.

Thu May 02, 2019 10:42 am

All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.

Doesn't it, Mr. Torrance? (talk about time travel)

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 10:43 am

Well, to calm things down a bit, here's a few tidbits. I liked a lot of the movie, too many things to count. So perhaps I should list some of them?

The passing of the mantles follows recent comic book tradition, and improves upon it. Capt. America passes his shiield to Falcon. Iron Man arguably passes things on to Pepper (she has her own suit and their daughter). Thor passes the mantle to Valkyrie (but keeps Thor's name. Getting rid of that stupid comic-book mechanic where the wielder of the hammer becomes Thor or something stupid...). All excellent, and brings finality to these characters we've grown to love over the past 10 years..

The fight scenes were mostly great. I had one issue with the unlikely "Girl power" scene, but because that was only 30 seconds long, I'll let it slide. Otherwise, all the action shots were great, and the fan-fights of Capt. America (2019) vs Capt. America (2014)... Professor Hulk vs Sorcerer Supreme... everyone vs Thanos, and yes... even Hawkeye vs Black Widow... were all great. I didn't like the exposition to them sometimes, but the fight scenes were excellently choreographed and had me at the edge of my seat the whole time. A lot of love was put into the action and it really showed.

-------

My habit is to focus on the parts that I disagree with. Its more efficient than listing all the parts I agree with other people. :-)

There's too many good things in the movie to count.

Glorious · Thu May 02, 2019 10:44 am

dragontamer5788 wrote:
There was like a 10 minute argument with

Haven't seen it, but perhaps that was the bigger mistake?

At any event, they have to at least explain generally how this roughly works, you know, basic theater: Place, Time, Purpose.

So, perhaps that could have been done better or more efficiently, but given that they have to introduce "what the heck is happening!?" on some level, that immediately differentiates it from your demand that they fully and appropriately explain it on -all- levels.

That's just not the same thing.

dragontamer5788 wrote:
They did explain it. That's the problem.

No, that is not the "problem".

They -CLEARLY- have to explain it on SOME LEVEL, because otherwise the entire movie is literal nonsense: Where! When! Why! <--- you *NEED* those things.

You *DON'T* need to fully explain every. single. moment. just because you *HAVE* to explain the basic plot concept.

Those two things don't even remotely equate.

You seem to be arguing that if it isn't perfect according to your statements of coherence, that it fails altogether. Which is -bizarre-, because if that's actually true, you're saying that this one moment in which they failed is equivalent to the entire movie just not existing at all.

Because, without "wibbily-wobbly timey-wimey", how do you fix what happened in the *LAST* Avengers movie?

Thanos won. Fin.

Huh?

dragontamer5788 wrote:
They wasted a lot of time explaining and expositioning, and none of that time felt like it payed off.

Again, it did pay off: It justified the existence of the movie.

Which is, as I said, this: "wibbily-wobbly timey-wimey" --- Thanos didn't actually win! (I presume, haven't seen it and don't think such a statement would be spoiler even if I knew it was true for a fact).

derFunkenstein · Thu May 02, 2019 10:47 am

Also, the guy who hasn't actually SEEN THE MOVIE was the first to post a spoiler in a non-spoiler'd post.

superjawes · Thu May 02, 2019 11:10 am

To quote Peter Parker from Into the Spider-Verse, "I am so tired."

Whenever you write a long, interconnected story with lots of fantasy, Step 1 is creating the story. Step 2 is writing the explanation to reconcile inconsistencies or changes in continuity and/or rules. Sometimes that means new reconciliation stories.

Step 2 is optional.

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 11:39 am

superjawes wrote:
To quote Peter Parker from Into the Spider-Verse, "I am so tired."

Whenever you write a long, interconnected story with lots of fantasy, Step 1 is creating the story. Step 2 is writing the explanation to reconcile inconsistencies or changes in continuity and/or rules. Sometimes that means new reconciliation stories.

Step 2 is optional.

Step 2 is the difference between a good movie, and a great movie. Into the Spider-Verse was a great movie, for example. It side-steps the inconsistencies by leveraging multiple-universes. Furthermore, the multiple Peter-Parkers in the movie reference the 1970s style Peter Parker syndicated comic strip + the 2000s Peter Parker from the Sony Movies, allowing "Into the Spiderverse" to fit neatly into the general timeline of Spiderman films and comics.

I mean, critically, between Into the Spiderverse, and Avengers Endgame, which would you rate as the better movie? Spider-verse simply avoids all of the "reconcile inconsistencies" step by simply not having major inconsistencies throughout the film.

EDIT:

Glorious wrote:
Because, without "wibbily-wobbly timey-wimey", how do you fix what happened in the *LAST* Avengers movie?

Thanos won. Fin.

Huh?

I'd watch that. Raising a new set of heroes to overthrow the new galactic overlord. Actually, that sounds way more awesome and also way more consistent at the same time. Heroes have to lose sometimes to make the other fights more glorious. If the villain wins one fight, that just means a bigger fight is yet to come.

EDIT: They didn't need time travel to fix the problems in the original Infinity Gauntlet comics by the way. The infinity stones were sufficient for the task. It was the movie-writer's mistake to destroy the infinity stones 15 minutes into the film to create a sense of false-tension

derFunkenstein wrote:
Also, the guy who hasn't actually SEEN THE MOVIE was the first to post a spoiler in a non-spoiler'd post.

To be fair, its hard to know what a spoiler is and isn't if you haven't see the movie yet. Lol.

tanker27 · Thu May 02, 2019 4:52 pm

dragontamer5788 wrote:
I dunno, get with the times old man? If you aren't keeping up with stories that have happened in the last 20 years, I'm pretty sure you lose your nerd credits.

You're talking to the person that has had numerous subs and still has said subs since the late 70"s. And what I don't get in hardcopy is digital through Marvel Unlimited. I guess you glossed over when I said: Time travel is rarely a good plot device or even good story telling, its the easy way out. However it works in this case. Dumbed down for the masses. It created the multiverse that the comics have had for decades. It also explains away those awful Fox X-men movies. In the comics time travel brought us great stories and great teams that we wouldn't have otherwise seen if it was a single timeline.

dragontamer5788 wrote:
Well, to calm things down a bit, here's a few tidbits.

Too little too late, in fact you just go right back to arguing your point ad nauseum. To reiterate: you didn't like the movie, we get it, now move along.

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 6:12 pm

To reiterate: you didn't like the movie, we get it, now move along.

I get that you're so personally insulted at my opinion to the point that you are needlessly escalating this otherwise nerdy topic. But if you were really an adult you claim to be, you'd know how to de-escalate this situation. Back off dude.

EDIT: This is a topic, nominally, about the MCU. Presumably, the only thing that should be discussed is Marvel movies, and maybe closely related plot lines that parallel some of those movies. (Ex: Shakespeare's Hamlet and Black Panther). So can you at least keep your posts at least nominally related to Marvel?

Redocbew · Thu May 02, 2019 6:39 pm

NERDFIGHT! NERDFIGHT!!!

Usacomp2k3 · Thu May 02, 2019 7:09 pm

Went and saw it with my wife this afternoon. Lots of crying, some laughing, lots of shock. A couple “holy sh*t” moments. What a roller coaster. I definitely want to see it again

dragontamer5788 · Thu May 02, 2019 7:20 pm

Usacomp2k3 wrote:
Went and saw it with my wife this afternoon. Lots of crying, some laughing, lots of shock. A couple “holy sh*t” moments. What a roller coaster. I definitely want to see it again

Any particular holy sh*t moments you'd like to point out? My personal favorite was...

Captain America's "Hail Hydra" in the elevator scene.. Its a perfect reference to the (poorly written) comics where Captain America ends up leading Hydra. Yeah, it didn't make much sense.... But the concept in isolation is extremely funny and was hilariously executed in "Endgame". It was probably the best 30-seconds of the entire movie for me. A perfect blend of pulling in comic-book material, and making it work in the MCU.

Usacomp2k3 · Thu May 02, 2019 7:31 pm

The Marvel destroying Thanos’ ship made say that out loud. If they weren’t both done by Disney, I would say it was specifically a nod to the ep8 lightspeed destruction but not ridiculous.

MileageMayVary · Fri May 03, 2019 8:02 am

dragontamer5788 wrote:
Any particular holy sh*t moments you'd like to point out? My personal favorite was...

HULK NO LIKE STAIRS!!!!

gigafinger · Fri May 03, 2019 8:48 am

Wow. This thread... While I tend to agree that time travel is pretty much the worse plot device, I didn't mind it here because COMICS ARE WEIRD! Basically any movie with time travel pisses me off to some degree, especially all the big hitters like Interstellar and Arrival.

I really enjoyed the character arcs being resolved, and while some where not that special/great (Ronin/Black Widow), I think the Captain America and Iron Man scenes hit home and hard. I will say that besides the girl power scene, there was also the Wakanda shows up scene that also made me go ugh. I'm all for the giving fan service to underrepresented people, but do it gracefully and don't make it a jarring moment. I fell like those two scenes would have made great promo posters. Not my favorite MCU film, but it wasn't at the level of Thor 2 or GotG2 bad.

TurtlePerson2 · Fri May 03, 2019 9:38 am

SecretMaster wrote:
To me it seemed super obvious they were going to kill of Tony Stark. They really played the emotional aspect of him being a comfortable, family man real hard. I thought his "sacrifice" (not sure if that's the right word or not) was well done, and probably carries significant weight to actual fans of the MCU.

It was obvious before the movie even started.

The actor has been doing the movies for a long time and so he's probably ready to move on. Additionally, he charges the most of any actor to do the movies, so the business people want him out if anyone leaves. The early movies are a bit of an embarrassment to the studio now with the increased focus on sexual harassment that has happened since their release.

Finally, Stark's death completes the character arc. Stark was selfish and arrogant and other characters mention as much in previous movies. Captain America even tells him that he's not the one to lay down his life for the team (I think it was Avengers 1). To have him transform into the one who does ultimately sacrifice himself completes the transformation that began in Iron Man 1. It's just good storytelling. Even if it's not a surprise to a lot of us, it's the classic storyline for a reason.

I told my wife when we were leaving the theater from Infinity War, that I was confident all the characters that "died" would come back in the sequel. My two reasons were that there was a Spiderman film incoming (can't make a movie if he's dead) and that Iron Man would be killed off if anyone was going to be killed off.

dragontamer5788 · Fri May 03, 2019 11:29 am

dragontamer5788 wrote:
Here's another inconsistency, but unfortunately I didn't figure it out on my own. Its just a more "popular" inconsistency that people are beginning to talk about on various websites.

Yes, again with the time travel. So in the final scenes of the movie, Capt. America goes back in time to put the "infinity stones back into place". He then is supposed to time travel into the present and "complete the loop" so to speak. Unfortunately, that's not what Capt. America does. So what exactly what did Capt. America experience from the 1950s through 2019 ??

1. Capt. America returns to 2014, 2012, and 2011 to return the Power Stone (Purple), Soul Stone (Yellow); Thor's Hammer, the Reality Gem (Red); Time Stone (Green), Mind Gem (Yellow).
2. Capt. America returns to 1950 to return the Tesseract (Blue Stone).
3. Capt. America gets married in the past (presumably Peggy Carter, but we don't really know for sure)
4. Capt. America experiences life between 1950 through 2014 in secret.
5. Inconsistency point #1: 2014 Thanos time-warps to the future and dies.
6. Inconsistency point #2: 2018 Thanos collects all infinity stones. But he should be dead because of #5.
7. Inconsistency point #3: 2019 Captain America finally returns to 2019 as an old man. This doesn't make sense as per the "multiple dimensions" theory that was proposed by the Sorcerer Supreme / Iron Man / literally what everyone else said in the movie.

There's pretty much no way to consistently describe Capt. America's experience. With 2014 Thanos dead, the events of 2018 will simply not happen. And the alternate-realities theory is just destroyed by the fact that Capt. America is sitting on the bench over there, its clearly the same reality.

Apparently this has been resolved. Lemme explain if anyone cares.

As I described earlier, #1 and #2 are explained by the Sorcerer Supreme. The main issue is inconsistency #3, which destroys the Sorcerer Supreme's explanation from earlier in the movie.

But it can be resolved pretty simply. Captain America lived in a new dimension for 50 or 60 years. Then, he time-warps back to give the shield to Sam / Falcon. It wouldn't be too hard, since he would have had the Pym particles needed for the final jump anyway. He just stayed "in the past" longer than anyone expected.

I'm happy with this resolution, and can kick this inconsistency off the list. Which is the biggest inconsistency I've heard so far about the movie. So its a good feeling to have it resolved. The main issue is that

Capt. America "teleports" to the bench as he comes out of the time machine. This is inconsistent with the representation of the film so far, but its a "lesser" inconsistency. So I'm more than willing to accept it.

So it feels like people are making up a story to fit the film... which is fine. Its how comic book nerds create explanations in their heads. And I enjoy this part of the comic book fanbase.

superjawes · Fri May 03, 2019 12:46 pm

dragontamer5788 wrote:
Capt. America "teleports" to the bench as he comes out of the time machine. This is inconsistent with the representation of the film so far, but its a "lesser" inconsistency. So I'm more than willing to accept it.

Who says he came out of the time machine that day? Or out of a time machine at all? If he spent 50-60 years in an alternate dimension/timeline/reality, then it is perfectly possible that he created his own version of the Avengers/S.H.I.E.L.D. there, and he either came back early (when Peggy died), or his new team sent him there using their own machine.

Also, would Cap age? Red Skull appeared to be ageless in Infinity War and Endgame. That could be evidence that Cap did a lot more than just get married in his alt life. On top of that, his shield was destroyed in the "main" MCU timeline, so he had to get another clean one built for Sam.

dragontamer5788 wrote:
So it feels like people are making up a story to fit the film... which is fine. Its how comic book nerds create explanations in their heads. And I enjoy this part of the comic book fanbase.

"Making up stories" to fit an extended continuity is how the "official" explanations are created, too :wink:

Fri May 03, 2019 12:53 pm

Who says we're even looking at events on Earth-616?

dragontamer5788 · Fri May 03, 2019 1:03 pm

superjawes wrote:
Who says he came out of the time machine that day? Or out of a time machine at all? If he spent 50-60 years in an alternate dimension/timeline/reality, then it is perfectly possible that he created his own version of the Avengers/S.H.I.E.L.D. there, and he either came back early (when Peggy died), or his new team sent him there using their own machine.

This contradicts with #1 and #2, and the Sorcerer Supreme's explanation of time travel. Remember that time travel in "Endgame" is the alternate-universe mode. Or as Ironman put it, You can't change your past because its YOUR past. You end up changing someone else's past, not you anymore or something along those lines. In either case, Endgame has a huge amount of elaboration and explanation that solidifies the alternate-universe model..

All in all, it means that Capt. America Had to use the time machine to "warp" back to the main timeline.. If he did things the way you say so, then there's the big Thanos contradiction. Did Thanos die in 2014, or die in 2019? Capt. America's timeline is self-contradictory under your supposition. I mean, think about it, were the infinity stones destroyed in (Old Man) Capt. America's timeline?. It self-contradicts with itself if you have your set of assumptions.

Under the new assumptions that my coworkers laid out, the ending of the movie almost works, as long as you ignore the off-screen teleport going on.

"Making up stories" to fit an extended continuity is how the "official" explanations are created, too

I agree. But its better when these things were thought out before the movie comes out. Ex: Inception. They don't have to be "perfect", no movie is ever perfect. Its more about a sliding scale: it depends on how your peers are doing. Comic book movies are a LOT better today.

Days of Future Past is far more consistent for example. Not perfect, but more consistent than Endgame.. These films are judged off of their peers, and other movies that have come out at roughly the same time period.

Captain Ned wrote:
Who says we're even looking at events on Earth-616?

Obviously, we're not. Nick Fury is an African American, so we're looking at Ultimate universe.

TR Forums

MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Re: MCU

Who is online