• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Serpens007

Well, Tosca isn't for everyone
Moderator
Oct 31, 2017
8,119
Chile
I'll do you one better guys.

If we accept that the Cap could lift the hammer in AoU, could he have lifted it in 1945 as skinny Steve? I mean, they didn't change his "heart" then, just his body.
 

Gunny T Highway

Unshakable Resolve - One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,990
Canada
I'll do you one better guys.

If we accept that the Cap could lift the hammer in AoU, could he have lifted it in 1945 as skinny Steve? I mean, they didn't change his "heart" then, just his body.
In all intents of purposes yes he could. It is being worthy that allows you to wield it. It only feels heavy if you are not worthy.
 

StarCreator

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,853
He and Sam were together, doing missions and in hiding, from the time of Civil War (in roughly 2016) until 2023. He spent seven years with Sam.
Both your upper and lower bounds are incorrect.

Sam and Cap met in 2014, two years after the Battle of New York. They worked together, first as Avengers and later underground, until Sam's dusting in 2018.
 

FaceHugger

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
13,949
USA
cevkskm756x21.jpg
 

Valkerion

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,225
Now that I saw it again, the only thing this movie seemed to be missing was a Luis rant recapping the story.
 

HotHamBoy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
16,423
This is why we can't have nice things, AV Club.


The Russos are pulling a J.K. Rowling on Avengers: Endgame's coolest moment
https://news.avclub.com/the-russos-are-out-here-pulling-a-j-k-rowling-on-aveng-1834629508/amp

But, hey, did you know that Steve could have picked up that ol' hammer any dang time he wanted to, from Age Of Ultron up to its destruction in Ragnarok? The Russos would like you to, apparently, making clear in the interview a point that the movie itself leaves happily ambiguous: Captain America has always been worthy in their minds; he's just chosen not to pick up Mjolnir in the past because it would have made Thor feel bad. (And robbed the franchise of a big damn heroic moment several years down the line, of course.)

To be fair, the Russos didn't write Avengers: Age Of Ultron, where the famous hammer-lifting scene—in which it moves just a smidge when Steve "tries" to lift it—takes place, so the only true answer to the question is presumably floating around in Joss Whedon's head. Still, they've been stewards of the character—and through him, the wider MCU—since Captain America: The Winter Soldier, so it's not like you can easily contradict them when they say Cap was sandbagging and chose not to haul the hammer around for years. Which is a bummer, both because it's a less narratively interesting choice—isn't it cooler if Steve achieved worthiness over the course of Civil War and its complicated, grief-filled aftermath, rather than just inherently possessing it?—and because it deprives fans of the chance to argue about when he became worthy, or what, exactly, Thor means when he yells, "I knew it!" in the aftermath of the big reveal. (You might not have caught that line, though, because again: big screaming point.)

I posted this because i disagree with it.

To me, it seemed pretty obvious that Steve purposefully didn't lift the the hammer in Ultron. It's clear that he can lift it because it does move. Literally no one else could do that in any movie. This seems like either you can lift it completely or you can't move it even a smidge. On or off magic.

Steve "tries" to lift it to humor Thor, as soon as he feels it budge he stops in a very good natured way and gives up because he is such a fucking good guy he doesn't want to embarass Thor.

The dude was always worthy. He's Steve Rodgers, nothing about him is less worthy than fuckboi Thor.

Thor suspects in that scene that maybe Steve is and has always been worthy and he confirms this suspicion in Endgame.

He wouldn't say "I knew it!" because he suspeced one day Cap was going to be worthy. He suspected he was able to do it the whole time. Part of his elation is just having that confirmed after all these years.

None of this is on the level of what J.K. Rowling is doing and comparing this to shit like "Nagini used to be an asian lady" is insulting.

The subtext for the Mjolner shit is actually in the text.
 
Last edited:

Sephzilla

Herald of Stoptimus Crime
Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,493
I'll do you one better guys.

If we accept that the Cap could lift the hammer in AoU, could he have lifted it in 1945 as skinny Steve? I mean, they didn't change his "heart" then, just his body.
Absolutely.

In fact I was hoping Thanos would use the reality stone to revert Steve back to his pre-Super Soldier self and Cap would use Mjolnir to get it back
 

DeltaRed

Member
Apr 27, 2018
5,746
The Russos didn't write Age of Ultron so it's not for them to say what Steve did there. And he's clearly trying to lift it, you see his muscles bulging and the effort on his face, him pretending not to lift it is dumb. It makes more sense he was worthy but the context of why he was trying to lift it wasn't right.
 

HotHamBoy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
16,423
The Russos didn't write Age of Ultron so it's not for them to say what Steve did there. And he's clearly trying to lift it, you see his muscles bulging and the effort on his face, him pretending not to lift it is dumb. It makes more sense he was worthy but the context of why he was trying to lift it wasn't right.
Unless they just straight up asked Whedon



Yeah, he flexes and puts on a face but he doesn't actually look like he's trying very hard at all.

He gives up pretty quick for being the only guy to make it move.
 

Lotus

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
105,548

patientzero

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,729
Both your upper and lower bounds are incorrect.

Sam and Cap met in 2014, two years after the Battle of New York. They worked together, first as Avengers and later underground, until Sam's dusting in 2018.

I knew the instant I posted that the starting point was wrong and I'd been forgetting Winter Soldier, but for some reason I totally blanked on Sam getting dusted. I have no clue why.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,771
Sam's first handful of lines in the MCU are pure gold.

"Uh huh, on my left. Got it."

"Don't say it. Don't you say it!" "COME ON!"

"You should take another lap. Did you just take it? I assume you just took it."
 

HotHamBoy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
16,423
So I've been reading the early 90s Infinity comics and the surrounding crossover issues. Never read them before.

It's fascinating what Markus and McFeely used, changed and invented. Like Silver Surfer falling through Strange's skylight instead of Banner. They still used the idea of someone falling through the skylight - that's what's interesting to me.

Also, the lead up to the Snap in the comics has like zero momentum or tension compared to the films. It's not the climax of an act, it's the start of the first act in Infinity Gauntlet proper.

I found this fascinating because at this point zero Earth heroes even know who their enemy is, or that there even is an enemy, when people disappear.

It's really weird that Thanos got all the stones so quickly and easily without any dramatic tension in the comics, looking back now. The Elders were all chumps and the Silver Surfer is an idiot.

No wait, the weirdest thing is that Thanos never mentions the idea of snapping away half the universe. He talks about eliminating 50% but never says how he will do it. He just reaches up and snaps in IG #1. But at this point he's had all the stones for a very long time (over many Silver Surfer issues) and has just been dicking around. Again, it sucks out the dramatic tension.

The comics lack the momentum and focus of the Infinity War film. They lack the urgency. Mad props to the film writers for wringing out the script from those comics.
 
Last edited:

steejee

Member
Oct 28, 2017
8,593
This is why we can't have nice things, AV Club.

The Russos are pulling a J.K. Rowling on Avengers: Endgame's coolest moment
https://news.avclub.com/the-russos-are-out-here-pulling-a-j-k-rowling-on-aveng-1834629508/amp

I posted this because i disagree with it.

To me, it seemed pretty obvious that Steve purposefully didn't lift the the hammer in Ultron. It's clear that he can lift it because it does move. Literally no one else could do that in any movie. This seems like either you can lift it completely or you can't move it even a smidge. On or off magic.

Steve "tries" to lift it to humor Thor, as soon as he feels it budge he stops in a very good natured way and gives up because he is such a fucking good guy he doesn't want to embarass Thor.

The dude was always worthy. He's Steve Rodgers, nothing about him is less worthy than fuckboi Thor.

Thor suspects in that scene that maybe Steve is and has always been worthy and he confirms this suspicion in Endgame.

He wouldn't say "I knew it!" because he suspeced one day Cap was going to be worthy. He suspected he was able to do it the whole time. Part of his elation is just having that confirmed after all these years.

None of this is on the level of what J.K. Rowling is doing and comparing this to shit like "Nagini used to be an asian lady" is insulting.

The subtext for the Mjolner shit is actually in the text.

Yeah I'm with you. I thought it was a case even when I saw Ultron that Rogers opted to stop. I also took "I knew it!" during viewing of Endgame that Thor knew Rodgers was worthy, and he'd always been worthy.

I mean, it moved. I don't think Mjolner has some sort of sliding-scale-of-worthiness. It can either move or it doesn't. So the Russos are more clarifying something about the movies rather than changing a character after the movies are over.
 

HotHamBoy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
16,423
Yeah I'm with you. I thought it was a case even when I saw Ultron that Rogers opted to stop. I also took "I knew it!" during viewing of Endgame that Thor knew Rodgers was worthy, and he'd always been worthy.
It kept Thor up at night.
I mean, it moved. I don't think Mjolner has some sort of sliding-scale-of-worthiness. It can either move or it doesn't. So the Russos are more clarifying something about the movies rather than changing a character after the movies are over.
Right, exactly. All of this.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
Clint and Natasha loved each other, as such, theres Nothing wrong with their emotions guiding the conflict of that scene. Rather than Natasha and Bruce.

Also, there's nothing wrong with the "pose". It's what happens when someone falls. Male or female. (Hulk would survive that fall though)

Lastly, I'm not sure why you reduce the event to how she's depicted in the last frame..it's about how she was depicted for the entirety of the scene - from the assumption that Clint agreed she must be the sacrifice, to beating him hand-to-hand, to her not giving up after Clint went over the edge, to her kicking off the wall when she realized Clint wouldn't let go-

She dominated that scene and it was every bit as heroic as Tony's, if not More so. She PLANNED her own demise, unlike Tony who had to act in an instant. And she did it without even knowing if her actions would seal victory. She went out like a total Badass, and you're worried about a pose...
Bruce and Natasha also loved each other. It's not hard to justify that the soul stone trial kills you whether you'd survive the fall or not.

And you're being really naive with this "it's just a pose" thing. It is very common for media to associate violence on women with a more sensual depiction. Gamora's and Black Widow's deaths are not overtly sensualized, but they're playing with the common visual languages of the trope. It's funny how you feel winning a hand to hand combat undies the bigger underlying issue. Hell, if they have another Avengers movie and Hope is also dies in some manner to get the Soul Stone, would you then be like "wtf is up with this sacrificial altar being used on women for???"
 
Last edited:

Lotus

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
105,548
Yep, like I said, the subtext is there.

I mean, this is Cap we're talking about. He already earned his worthiness before he ever came out of the ice.

Mr. Sacrifice Play

I'll admit, I never saw it like that until recently. But it makes sense, because the idea of Cap only being half-worthy or w/e is kinda dumb.
 

FFNB

Associate Game Designer
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
6,060
Los Angeles, CA
I can't believe people are still arguing about the Bruce/Ancient One scene.

In Doctor Strange they mention multiple realities, and even in Infinity War, Strange tells Tony, "Protecting your reality, douchebag," not, "Protecting your timeline, douchebag."

So, for the scene with TAO, substitute the word "time," in your thinking to "reality." I mean, the only time she says "time" in her talk with Bruce is when she tells him that the six infinity stones create what we perceive as the flow of time in his reality. She then creates a visual representation of her reality, with the six stones circling it. Removing a stone from her reality causes a splinter that will alter her reality, and send it down a doomed trajectory because they will be unable to defeat Dormammu or any other threat that appears from the point the time stone leaves her reality. By returning the stone to her reality at the moment it left, that doomed trajectory is averted.

Bruce's reality is separate from 2012 Ancient One's reality. His 2012 has already come and gone. There's no changing that. It's his past. Her 2012 is her present, which she's trying to preserve. It was a big gamble giving him the time stone. She had no idea if he'd be capable of returning it. When she learned that Strange gave Thanos the time stone of Bruce's reality, she understood it must have been for a reason, so she gives hers to Bruce, believing that it's the right course of action, and that he will return her stone and save her reality from a potential doomed fate.

From her perspective, Bruce gets the time stone, vanishes, then Captain America immediately appears on the rooftop and returns the stone to her, like it never left. It was probably gone from her reality for seconds, much like how they show Scott disappearing into the Quantum tunnel and reappearing (albeit as young and older versions of himself) shortly after leaving, during the time travel tests.
 

MetalMagus

Avenger
Oct 16, 2018
1,645
Maine
So I've been reading the early 90s Infinity comics and the surrounding crossover issues. Never read them before.

It's fascinating what Markus and McFeely used, changed and invented. Like Silver Surfer falling through Strange's skylight instead of Banner. They still used the idea of someone falling through the skylight - that's what's interesting to me.

Also, the lead up to the Snap in the comics has like zero momentum or tension compared to the films. It's not the climax of an act, it's the start of the first act in Infinity Gauntlet proper.

I found this fascinating because at this point zero Earth heroes even know who their enemy is, or that there even is an enemy, when people disappear.

It's really weird that Thanos got all the stones so quickly and easily without any dramatic tension in the comics, looking back now. The Elders were all chumps and the Silver Surfer is an idiot.

No wait, the weirdest thing is that Thanos never mentions the idea of snapping away half the universe. He talks about eliminating 50% but never says how he will do it. He just reaches up and snaps in IG #1. But at this point he's had all the stones for a very long time (over many Silver Surfer issues) and has just been dicking around. Again, it sucks out the dramatic tension.

The comics lack the momentum and focus of the Infinity War film. They lack the urgency. Mad props to the film writers for wringing out the script from those comics.


As much as Marcus and McFeely adapted from Infinity Gauntlet, they pulled a fair amount from Thanos Quest (the concept of Thanos gathering the stones) and Infinity (the Black Order). In looking at the different source materials, they wisely made the decision to change the snap from the inciting incident to the climax.

You're right that there's no dramatic tension to the comic book snap, but there's not really meant to be. It's meant as more of a shock value (wait, did he really just do that?) and then sets up everything that comes after in the mini-series and tie-ins. It's a problem to solve rather than a catastrophe to be stopped.

It's funny because if you think about it - Endgame should be the actual adaptation of Infinity Gauntlet because the bulk of the original IG story comes AFTER the snap, and yet Endgame shares nothing in common with the old storyline. It goes in a much different direction that's more true to the MCU characters and their established arcs rather trying to 1-to-1 adapt things direct from the comics.

If you really want to get into the weeds with it, compare how Marcus and McFeely and the Russos adapted this storyline to how Zack Snyder tried to cram Death of Superman and The Dark Knight Returns into Batman v. Superman. You literally could not have more different lessons on how to pull off a great adaptation and how completely fuck up an adaptation.
 

HotHamBoy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
16,423
As much as Marcus and McFeely adapted from Infinity Gauntlet, they pulled a fair amount from Thanos Quest (the concept of Thanos gathering the stones) and Infinity (the Black Order). In looking at the different source materials, they wisely made the decision to change the snap from the inciting incident to the climax.

You're right that there's no dramatic tension to the comic book snap, but there's not really meant to be. It's meant as more of a shock value (wait, did he really just do that?) and then sets up everything that comes after in the mini-series and tie-ins. It's a problem to solve rather than a catastrophe to be stopped.

It's funny because if you think about it - Endgame should be the actual adaptation of Infinity Gauntlet because the bulk of the original IG story comes AFTER the snap, and yet Endgame shares nothing in common with the old storyline. It goes in a much different direction that's more true to the MCU characters and their established arcs rather trying to 1-to-1 adapt things direct from the comics.

If you really want to get into the weeds with it, compare how Marcus and McFeely and the Russos adapted this storyline to how Zack Snyder tried to cram Death of Superman and The Dark Knight Returns into Batman v. Superman. You literally could not have more different lessons on how to pull off a great adaptation and how completely fuck up an adaptation.
Yeah but trying to rush and cram things is the entire DCEU M.O.

Yeah, I read Thanos Quest (I'm trying as best i can to read all the related books in release order) and that's what I was talking about with the Elders being chumps.

What was the reason for the Soul Gems retcon and who came up with the idea for them to be the lynchpin of this story?
 

Ranvier

Member
Oct 27, 2017
31
Dont know if this has already been talked about/asked as i just saw the movie last night but, shouldnt Ned now be 5 years older/in college vs where Peter is?
 

MetalMagus

Avenger
Oct 16, 2018
1,645
Maine
This is why we can't have nice things, AV Club.


The Russos are pulling a J.K. Rowling on Avengers: Endgame's coolest moment
https://news.avclub.com/the-russos-are-out-here-pulling-a-j-k-rowling-on-aveng-1834629508/amp



I posted this because i disagree with it.

To me, it seemed pretty obvious that Steve purposefully didn't lift the the hammer in Ultron. It's clear that he can lift it because it does move. Literally no one else could do that in any movie. This seems like either you can lift it completely or you can't move it even a smidge. On or off magic.

Steve "tries" to lift it to humor Thor, as soon as he feels it budge he stops in a very good natured way and gives up because he is such a fucking good guy he doesn't want to embarass Thor.

The dude was always worthy. He's Steve Rodgers, nothing about him is less worthy than fuckboi Thor.

Thor suspects in that scene that maybe Steve is and has always been worthy and he confirms this suspicion in Endgame.

He wouldn't say "I knew it!" because he suspeced one day Cap was going to be worthy. He suspected he was able to do it the whole time. Part of his elation is just having that confirmed after all these years.

None of this is on the level of what J.K. Rowling is doing and comparing this to shit like "Nagini used to be an asian lady" is insulting.

The subtext for the Mjolner shit is actually in the text.

You're not alone - that article was bullshit.

1) the J.K. Rowling callout is pure clickbait for all the reasons you articulated. Steve and the hammer is nothing like the extraneous "who cares?!?! garbage like the true origins of the main villain's pets or if wizards use bathrooms.

2) The Russos aren't robbing anyone of anything - people keep asking these questions, so what are they supposed to say? "Uh, I dunno guys, he just did, you figure it out." It's lose-lose for them because if they don't answer then we're subjected to several dozen "Endgame Plot Holes Explained!" articles.
 

MetalMagus

Avenger
Oct 16, 2018
1,645
Maine
Yeah but trying to rush and cram things is the entire DCEU M.O.

While it's true that the WB suits are to blame for trying to speed run through the DCEU (gotta get them sweet bonuses!) I think it's as much a failure of Snyder's vision. He's all text no sub-text - glorifying the surface details while missing the actual point of the stories he's adapting. It happened in Watchmen and he did with BvS.

What was the reason for the Soul Gems retcon and who came up with the idea for them to be the lynchpin of this story?

I believe it was likely Jim Starlin who expanded on the ideas of the original soul gem into the collective infinity gems. After all, both Thanos and Adam Warlock were his pet characters. But someone like Slayven would know more.
 

HotHamBoy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
16,423
I really love how Ron Lim draws Thanos.

RCO040.jpg

RCO042.jpg


I don't think anyone else draws him quite so maniacal
 
Last edited:

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,308
Bruce and Natasha also loved each other. It's not hard to justify that the soul stone trial kills you whether you'd survive the fall or not.

And you're being really naive with this "it's just a pose" thing. It is very common for media to associate violence on women with a more sensual depiction. Gamora's and Black Widow's deaths are not overtly sensualized, but they're playing with the common visual languages of the trope. It's funny how you feel winning a hand to hand combat undies the bigger underlying issue. Hell, if they have another Avengers movie and Hope is also dies in some manner to get the Soul Stone, would you then be like "wtf is up with this sacrificial altar being used on women for???"

Because there is no bigger underlying issue. Neither Gamora's or BWs death's were sensualized.

Does the existence of problematic/gratuitous depictions of women dying invalidate all depictions of women falling?

You seem far more interested in saving her character - removing her agency as a selfless leader - than you are at providing acceptable ways write her off.

"She shoulda died like Tony"? The guy who couldn't be told his death was imminent for fear he'd try to think his way out of it? Nah, the woman who ran towards death, refusing to be coddled - her death is problematic?

Specifically, what "visual languages" are they playing with that you find problematic? A what is the message they are sending via her death that you think should be avoided?
 
Last edited:

8byte

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
9,880
Kansas
I gotta say, one of my favorite scenes is when Stark's daughter is sitting on the porch with Happy, and he asks her what she wants, she replies "Cheeseburgers". Happy going down memory lane talking about how much her dad loved cheeseburgers took me straight back to Iron Man 1, when Tony gets back and the first thing he wants is an American Cheeseburger. Small touch but GOD this movie just keeps delivering little nuggets. Going back for my 3rd viewing this weekend.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
Because there is no bigger underlying issue. Neither Gamora's or BWs death's were sensualized.

Does the existence of problematic/gratuitous depictions of women dying invalidate all depictions of women falling?

You seem far more interested in saving her character - removing her agency as a selfless leader - than you are at providing acceptable ways write her off.

"She shoulda died like Tony"? The guy who couldn't be told his death was imminent for fear he'd try to think his way out of it? Nah, the woman who ran towards death, refusing to be coddled - her death is problematic?

Specifically, what "visual languages" are they playing with that you find problematic.
You're basically saying "this problem doesn't exist in media". You're so caught up in the flashiness of the fighting and the story they're writing for the character that you're not looking at from an archetypal standpoint. In IW and Endgame, female heroes die so their male heroes/love interests can either fuck up to keep the plot going because of how much they loved them or use their death as a motivator. This is absolutely a bigger underlying issue in storytelling. You kill women off to push the men forward.

And having women dead and crumbled on the floor like that is exactly the visual language I'm talking about. I'm not talking about it because these movies are the first to use it. It's a common depiction used for women. Basically, when you kill a woman, you frame her corpse in a way meant to still be somewhat beautiful or sensual, or even sometimes overtly sexual.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,595
I gotta say, one of my favorite scenes is when Stark's daughter is sitting on the porch with Happy, and he asks her what she wants, she replies "Cheeseburgers". Happy going down memory lane talking about how much her dad loved cheeseburgers took me straight back to Iron Man 1, when Tony gets back and the first thing he wants is an American Cheeseburger. Small touch but GOD this movie just keeps delivering little nuggets. Going back for my 3rd viewing this weekend.
which was itself a reference to RDJ coming out of rehab.

One of two scenes in the movie to choke me up a little. The other was Tony hugging Pete after he comes back.
 

LakeEarth

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,163
Ontario
I laugh when I think about a teamup other than Hawkeye and Black Widow going to get the soul stone. If it was Rocket and Hulk, it'd be like "yeah, I mean you're alright, but..."

It's safe to say all of Peter's friends that'll be in FFH got snapped.
Yeah, from the trailer, it seems like all the major highschool characters got snapped, coincidentally.
 

TheFuzz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,497
You're basically saying "this problem doesn't exist in media". You're so caught up in the flashiness of the fighting and the story they're writing for the character that you're not looking at from an archetypal standpoint. In IW and Endgame, female heroes die so their male heroes/love interests can either fuck up to keep the plot going because of how much they loved them or use their death as a motivator. This is absolutely a bigger underlying issue in storytelling. You kill women off to push the men forward.

And having women dead and crumbled on the floor like that is exactly the visual language I'm talking about. I'm not talking about it because these movies are the first to use it. It's a common depiction used for women. Basically, when you kill a woman, you frame her corpse in a way meant to still be somewhat beautiful or sensual, or even sometimes overtly sexual.

You failed to mention Visions death pushing Wanda forward, or Tony's death paving the way for his wife and daughter. There are some instances that kind of blow up the whole argument as far as IW/Endgame goes.
 

JeTmAn

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,825
I gotta say, one of my favorite scenes is when Stark's daughter is sitting on the porch with Happy, and he asks her what she wants, she replies "Cheeseburgers". Happy going down memory lane talking about how much her dad loved cheeseburgers took me straight back to Iron Man 1, when Tony gets back and the first thing he wants is an American Cheeseburger. Small touch but GOD this movie just keeps delivering little nuggets. Going back for my 3rd viewing this weekend.

Not just any cheeseburger. I remember cringing when he went to Burger King. You can do better, Tony!
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
You failed to mention Visions death pushing Wanda forward, or Tony's death paving the way for his wife and daughter. There are some instances that kind of blow up the whole argument as far as IW/Endgame goes.
What? Wanda is snapped away moments later. It is not the case that Vision is killed so that Wanda can use that rage to lift her up and defeat Thanos. It is not the case that Vision is left dead in a manner meant to show his beauty even when dead. His body is completely incinerated and then later the stone is ripped from his body as you see his body chance color and he returns to a robotic state.

Tony's wife and daughter do not use Tony's death to further their own journey. You're showing your ignorance on this more and more I'd youre going to keep reducing this down to "but men die too sometimes."
 

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
I gotta say, one of my favorite scenes is when Stark's daughter is sitting on the porch with Happy, and he asks her what she wants, she replies "Cheeseburgers". Happy going down memory lane talking about how much her dad loved cheeseburgers took me straight back to Iron Man 1, when Tony gets back and the first thing he wants is an American Cheeseburger. Small touch but GOD this movie just keeps delivering little nuggets. Going back for my 3rd viewing this weekend.

This fell flat for me. I was a little uneasy about what amounts to shockingly bad parenting. You just don't offer a grieving child all the cheeseburgers she wants.

Maybe it's a cultural thing. I noticed you said "American cheeseburger," so it occurs to me that possibly in America cheeseburgers aren't simply regarded as really bad food that should only be eaten occasionally, if ever. Cultural resonance may lend glamour to an otherwise perplexing scene.
 
Oct 25, 2017
32,238
Atlanta GA
I would argue Gamora's death was more about Nebula's arc than Star-Lord's.

This fell flat for me. I was a little uneasy about what amounts to shockingly bad parenting. You just don't offer a grieving child all the cheeseburgers she wants.

Maybe it's a cultural thing. I noticed you said "American cheeseburger," so it occurs to me that possibly in America cheeseburgers aren't simply regarded as really bad food that should only be eaten occasionally, if ever. Cultural resonance may lend glamour to an otherwise perplexing scene.

That's really overthinking things. Her dad loved cheeseburgers too, and Happy would do anything for Morgan like he'd do anything for Tony. That's the weight of the moment. It's just a really great callback to when he was driving Tony home from the airfield in Iron Man 1.
 

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,308
You're basically saying "this problem doesn't exist in media". You're so caught up in the flashiness of the fighting and the story they're writing for the character that you're not looking at from an archetypal standpoint. In IW and Endgame, female heroes die so their male heroes/love interests can either fuck up to keep the plot going because of how much they loved them or use their death as a motivator. This is absolutely a bigger underlying issue in storytelling. You kill women off to push the men forward.

And having women dead and crumbled on the floor like that is exactly the visual language I'm talking about. I'm not talking about it because these movies are the first to use it. It's a common depiction used for women. Basically, when you kill a woman, you frame her corpse in a way meant to still be somewhat beautiful or sensual, or even sometimes overtly sexual.

No I'm not saying the problem doesn't exist in media. I'm saying the problem doesn't exist in Endgame.

Running away from character development for the sake of avoiding tenuous comparison to problematic depictions of women is exactly the type of shitty cop out that would lead to hideously contrived alternatives like throwing a Bow or a Hulk off of a cliff.

Having someone dead and crumbled on the floor isn't inherently problematic... That's what happens when people die from falling. Would it have been better if she fell into a bottomless pit?

There was nothing sexual or beautiful about either woman's final frame, beyond the fact that both actresses are beautiful. Both moments were sad. but the first was an unforgivable betrayal- an act of cowardice, confused as personal sacrifice by an evil villain. the second rang of undying heroic leadership and selflessness.

would it be somehow better if their final frames were more grotesque? Or if it had been beautiful men instead - even if that didn't benefit character development?

You're now arguing that Natasha was fridged, Which is demonstrably false. She didn't die to motivate anyone. Everyone already had there motivations. She died because she was willing to do whatever it took to undo the snap. Clint didn't suddenly get his shit together when BW died. He was gung-ho for the cause once he heard time travel was a possibility.

Gamora's death wasnt about getting StarLord to fuck up. It was about showing that Thanos has the capacity to love, but even that doesn't shake his conviction.

What types of female deaths are OK?
 
Last edited:
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
I would argue Gamora's death was more about Nebula's arc than Star-Lord's.
Nebula is already on Gamora's side in IW. And I don't know how you can make that argument. They have Thanos captured and are ready to defeat him and Gamora's death is used to ruin the plan because Quill's immense love for her caused him to go against the plan and ruin everything......even though he was prepared to kill her himself. Gamora dies so the audience can see that Quill loves her so much that he's willing to throw away everything even when she's already gone.
 

TheFuzz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,497
What? Wanda is snapped away moments later. It is not the case that Vision is killed so that Wanda can use that rage to lift her up and defeat Thanos. It is not the case that Vision is left dead in a manner meant to show his beauty even when dead. His body is completely incinerated and then later the stone is ripped from his body as you see his body chance color and he returns to a robotic state.

Tony's wife and daughter do not use Tony's death to further their own journey. You're showing your ignorance on this more and more I'd youre going to keep reducing this down to "but men die too sometimes."

The hell? I wasn't even referring to your sexualized/beauty death argument or whatever that was, I'm referring to a man dying to further advance the females story.
And Wanda absolutely uses that rage in Endgame and specifically refers to Vision when she's crushing Thanos. I have no idea what you're talking about when you say "it absolutely does not happen that way." Did you even see the same movie as everyone else?

And I don't know what the last part of your post is implying because this is the only comment I've made on the matter. You're making delusional arguments based on things that didn't happen in Endgame and pretending they did. Endgame doesn't have the issues you're torn up about.

If you found either female deaths beautiful or sexualized, you have some internal things to work out with yourself because no one else even remotely thought that.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,595
Zoe Saldana and Scarlett Johansson are beautiful women, but I have to be honest, I did not find their characters' bleeding, crumpled corpses all that alluring.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
No I'm not saying the problem doesn't exist in media. I'm saying the problem doesn't exist in Endgame.

Running away from character development for the sake of avoiding tenuous comparison a to problematic depictions of women is exactly the type of shitty cop out that would lead to hideously contrived alternatives like throwing a Bow or a Hulk off of a cliff.

Having someone dead and crumbled on the floor isn't inherently problematic... That's what happens why people die from falling. Would it have been better if she fell into a bottomless pit?

There was nothing sexual or beautiful about either woman's final frame, beyond the fact that they are both beautiful. Both were sad, but the second rang of heroism. would it be somehow better if their final frames were more grotesque? Or if it had been beautiful men instead - even if that didn't benefit character development?
Why are you acting as if Natasha's character could only develop by being willfully thrown down a sacrificial altar? Just because they use that as a vehicle for character development doesn't make it the right way to do it.

And you're showing your ignorance to this massive problem in media if you're seriously going to say there's nothing common or wrong with having a woman's final shot be her dead and crumbled on the floor that still tries to represent her beauty even in death. You're just going "yup, looks like a person that fell to death to me" while ignoring that this is the visual language done in media.
 

TheFuzz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,497
Why are you acting as if Natasha's character could only develop by being willfully thrown down a sacrificial altar? Just because they use that as a vehicle for character development doesn't make it the right way to do it.

And you're showing your ignorance to this massive problem in media if you're seriously going to say there's nothing common or wrong with having a woman's final shot be her dead and crumbled on the floor that still tries to represent her beauty even in death. You're just going "yup, looks like a person that fell to death to me" while ignoring that this is the visual language done in media.

You really need to stop telling everyone that they're 'showing their ignorance' because they don't agree this social problem you're proposing is an issue in Endgame. You already sound silly and being condescending about it is not going to get you any closer to meaningful conversation with anyone.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
The hell? I wasn't even referring to your sexualized/beauty death argument or whatever that was, I'm referring to a man dying to further advance the females story.
And Wanda absolutely uses that rage in Endgame and specifically refers to Vision when she's crushing Thanos. I have no idea what you're talking about when you say "it absolutely does not happen that way." Did you even see the same movie as everyone else?

And I don't know what the last part of your post is implying because this is the only comment I've made on the matter. You're making delusional arguments based on things that didn't happen in Endgame and pretending they did. Endgame doesn't have the issues you're torn up about.

If you found either female deaths beautiful or sexualized, you have some internal things to work out with yourself because no one else even remotely thought that.
Wanda is snapped away and gets to show up at the end where hundreds of others are fighting along side her. But sure, pretend that is the same as Quill reacting to Gamora's death or the team reacting to Natasha's death.


And what is with this necrophile jab? You're seriously blind to this issue if you are going to go about this argument that way.

You really need to stop telling everyone that they're 'showing their ignorance' because they don't agree this social problem you're proposing isn't an issue in Endgame. You already sound silly and being condescending about it is not going to get you any closer to meaningful conversation with anyone.

I am not tellling everybody anything. I'm telling a single person who I genuinely think is showing their ignorance. Nothing is wrong with that.
 

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
That's really overthinking things. Her dad loved cheeseburgers too, and Happy would do anything for Morgan like he'd do anything for Tony.

It's the parent in me. The scene puzzled me at the time. I raised my eyebrow and moved on. I really associate Tony Stark with his brilliance and wit. The fact that he once asked for a cheeseburger is far down the list of things to know about him.
 

TheFuzz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,497
Wanda is snapped away and gets to show up at the end where hundreds of others are fighting along side her. But sure, pretend that is the same as Quill reacting to Gamora's death or the team reacting to Natasha's death.


And what is with this necrophile jab? You're seriously blind to this issue if you are going to go about this argument that way.

Ok so now we are saying there are too many people around for Wanda's moment to count? And her screaming and crying is different than Quill's reaction how? Wanda's moment is absolutely the example you said the woman never gets, you just don't like it because it weakens your argument. And the necrophile jab wasn't one, it's saying you're seeing something sexualized that no one else does. Take it how you want.

Both characters are attractive and both died. That's as far as you're going to get with most of us. I've already countered it with an example that you didn't like due to "too many people around."

And for the 100th time, no one is blind, ignorant, deaf or whatever other attack word you want to use to your point. We are saying that the examples you're using in Endgame don't support the argument you're trying to make. It might be an issue in media, but it's certainly not one in Endgame.