***Spoiler Thread*** Avengers: Endgame

[RandyMossIsBoss]

I thought we’d somehow end up back in 2018, basically get an “everything back to normal” ending. It’s cool that we didn’t, but it will be interesting to see how they handle films set 5 years in the future and if all the releases over the next 5 years stay set in 2024 so that we can catch up in real life, because until now films were always in the present (besides Marvel, maybe a few others).

 

 Guessing, due to snap, they will kind of just have 2024 Earth be the same as present Earth since they can act like world was put on hold for 5 years OR (more likely) just focus largely beyond Earth.

[RandyMossIsBoss]

So what all we do know of MCU’s future?

 

Spiderman Homecoming

Black Widow solo (prequel)

Black Panther 2

GoTG 3 (maybe w/ Thor, could also act as Thor 4)

Shang-Chi

Dr. Strange 2 (not sure if guaranteed?)

Captain Marvel 2 (not sure if there’s any official word but this will def happen)

 

Then the 4 Disney+ series. I read Wanda/Vision is just 6 hours, and since we’re dealing with A/B list actors here I doubt these shows will have “seasons”, likely written out beginning to end, filmed, and that’s that.

 

 

Anything else? 

[Broncofan]

4 hours ago, August4th said:

wonder what the next "big" event film will be for the MCU and if they can reach this kind hype again...

It's probably never going to be 22 movies long.   Basically Phase 1 was the premise, and the wild success of Avengers guaranteed they could plan for Phase 3 (where Iron Man's staying power enabled them to plan for Phase 2).   By the time Phase 3 starts, you're 12 movies in.  I don't think we'll ever see that again, simply because the budgets for the movies, and the time commitment for each major actor/actress, everything has to fall perfectly into place.  The 6-movie deals was brilliant thinking - but even then, so many things have to go right for there not to be a major hiccup.   The origin stories and additional characters have to keep the momentum going.  The writers & directors have to be in sync (Whedon hit it out of the park with Avengers, stumbled with Ultron IMO, Gunn & co. really saved Phase 2 in a huge way, as did Winter Soldier).  And if a couple of movies struggle and don't deliver, the whole series stops prematurely.   Look at the Amazing Spiderman failed trilogy (which IMO was headed places after a strong 1st piece) for proof of this.

And while I'll never put my doubt into Feige & co., I don't think we'll see studios take this kind of risk to make it so long to complete an arc.  I remember when ppl thought New Line was nuts to film LOTR's 3 movies in the can from start to finish.   It was a massive risk.  It paid off handsomely, and we should thank LOTR and then the Dark Knight trilogy - because unlike the previous multi-film series, it came up with the idea to just commit hard and get them all done in bunches, rather than wait & see how it fared before getting the green light.   

With production taking as long as it does for these mega-events, and society's trend to being so impatient for resolution, I'd be happy if there was even a 6-movie arc.  Maybe there will be a 10-12 one.  But 22?  Don't think we'll ever see the likes again.  And even if it's 10-12, it won't be the first.  The first is always the one that sets the standard.  I don't know that anything will ever create the same novelty worldwide buzz for so long as the MCU has done.   I mean, look at Star Wars if you want proof of how hard it is to maintain momentum. 

I think we should all just savor the moment, and realize how special this run has been.   On the other hand, I have no reason to doubt the MCU or Feige & co.   They still have the Midas touch.  I just don't know that we'll ever see the scope of a story arc be as wide as this one was.    And to have that finish in 1 single movie as well as it did, to pay off the prior 20 movies...still floored.  Can't wait to see it again next week with my teenage kids.

 

Edited April 28, 2019 by Broncofan

[dtait93]

31 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Why would Danver's power change? She didn't go through some personal transition like Banner did by choice. Not sure what each has to do with one another. 

Why would Hulk’s power change? Why couldn’t they write him to gain control over when he can turn in to the Hulk again like the first Avengers? They could have wrote him differently. It’s ridiculous they nerfed him that hard for the biggest fight of the MCU while in the meantime they allowed Danvers to stay overpowered.

Edit: And on top of that, not nerfing Hulk doesn’t mean you have to change how powerful Danvers is.

Edited April 28, 2019 by dtait93

[Forge]

Saw it. Would recommend. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

16 minutes ago, dtait93 said:

Why would Hulk’s power change? Why couldn’t they write him to gain control over when he can turn in to the Hulk again like the first Avengers? They could have wrote him differently. It’s ridiculous they nerfed him that hard for the biggest fight of the MCU while in the meantime they allowed Danvers to stay overpowered.

But what does Danvers have to do with the Hulk? Why does she have to have her power change regardless if the Hulk stays the same, or is nerfed to a degree? She didn't go through any transistion like Banner, and she is already the most powerful character in the MCU via the Russo brothers anyway. They stated this months ago. It didn't matter if Hulk stayed the same. We saw what happened when he tried to fight Thanos by himself at the height of his powers, and he got beat down. Hulk wouldn't be a match for Captain Marvel. Just like Thor wouldn't, and Thanos isn't. 

Hulk and Banner are now more together than they are separate after 5 years of Banner tinkering away in the "gamma lab" as he put it. This is the result because it was written to be that way. He was never in consistent control of the Hulk. Avengers 2 and Thor 3 clarified that. Probably not as strong because he's not as angry when he's the Hulk now. That's how I looked at it. 

Edited April 28, 2019 by PapaShogun

[Broncofan]

 

 

1

13 hours ago, ET80 said:

I was so excited/impressed with Paul Rudd/Ant Man in this movie. After not getting him at all in IW, he was probably one of the key heroes in everything - thinking of the time heist, being the first to observe that the snap worked, then completely going to war in the final scene - it was great, he left it all on the line for the team and his two reunions (with Cassie and Hope) had some really good emotional pull.

I don't know if Rudd is still contractually committed to the MCU, but if he isn't - he went out with a massive explosion. 

I really agree - and to wit, I'd add that Karen Gillan and Jeremy Renner elevated their characters with standout performances.  Instead of being 2nd-tier supporting characters in the ensemble piece, they were integral to the story, and you really felt their struggles, pain, and ultimately, their growth.   Rudd was amazing, as was Gillian  who added so much complexity and nuance both Thanos-loyal and Avenger-loyal versions of Nebula.   Renner was great in limited action in prior movies, and his self-deprecating humor with a guy equipped with arrows vs. heroes/supervilliains was always spot-on before - but the Ronin angle really brought out his chops as an actor.   The fact that they're not even in the top 8-10 characters we associate with the ensemble...that speaks volumes to how amazing the Russo bros & cast were in nailing the conclusion of the entire MCU Phase 1-3 arc.

Don't get me wrong, the main core actors & actresses knocked it out of the park - I think Hemsworth is the only one who didn't give his absolute best of the entire series because his work in Ragnarok and IW was unbelievable.  The depth of the pain/suffering and then sacrifice we saw, as well as the bond the original Avengers shared, and wounds they healed with each other, was just amazing.   But what makes an ensemble movie work is the entire ensemble - and it's hard to see a really weak link.  Even Larson gave a much more cohesive performance as Captain Marvel - I much preferred her here than in Captain Marvel (I enjoyed it, but the performance and writing were all over the place, Larson had better delivery of who CM is now - maybe that was the point of the origin story, of course).   And supporting cast like Swinton and Hiddleston were just nails in their character moments, as short as they were.

It's exactly the excellence in the 2nd/3rd tier characters for Endgame which highlights why I don't think we'll ever see anything quite like Phase 1-3 again.   While there were a few missteps (Iron Man 2 with Rourke, Thor 2 with almost all of it lol, IM3 with Mandarin angle, Ultron's bloated script) - new characters and movies righted the ship, and by the end, even the weakest of the ensemble in prior movies were standouts in this finale.   That is something that's so hard to say.  It's not that Downer/Evans/Johanssen gave perhaps their best performances - the entire ensemble just nailed their characters when it was their moment in the sun.  You just don't see that level of synchonicity 4-5 characters deep into an ensemble....let alone 15-20, or more.  Yet that's what we witnessed with Endgame.   It's what makes Endgame so complex and deep in its impact and story delivery for a finale, and why I don't think we'll ever see the likes again, at least not to this scale.

[dtait93]

1 minute ago, PapaShogun said:

Again, what does Danvers have to do with the Hulk? What does she have to have her power change regardless if the Hulk stays the same, or is nerfed to a degree? She is already the most powerful character in the MCU via the Russo brothers. This was stated months ago. It didn't matter if Hulk stayed the same. We saw what happened when he tried to fight Thanos by himself at the height of his powers, and he got beat down. Hulk wouldn't be a match for Captain Marvel. Just like Thor wouldn't, and Thanos isn't. 

Hulk and Banner are now more together than they are separate after 5 years of Banner tinkering away in the "gamma lab" as he put it. This is the result because it was written to be that way. He was never in consistent control of the Hulk. Avengers 2 and Thor 3 clarified that. Probably not as strong because he's not as angry when he's the Hulk now. That's how I looked at it. 

When did I ever say she had to have her powers changed? I never did, so that answers your first paragraph. If she got to remain as powerful as she was I find it ridiculous Hulk didn’t get to stay as strong as he was for the biggest fight of the MCU.

As for the 2nd paragraph....well duh. That is my whole point. They could just have easily wrote him to be in control of the Hulk like he was at the end of the first Avengers and chalked it up to, “tinkering away in the gamma lab” and then said that was the result because it was written to be that way. Instead they nerfed him in to the ground and it was unnecessary in my opinion.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

23 minutes ago, dtait93 said:

When did I ever say she had to have her powers changed? I never did, so that answers your first paragraph. If she got to remain as powerful as she was I find it ridiculous Hulk didn’t get to stay as strong as he was for the biggest fight of the MCU.

As for the 2nd paragraph....well duh. That is my whole point. They could just have easily wrote him to be in control of the Hulk like he was at the end of the first Avengers and chalked it up to, “tinkering away in the gamma lab” and then said that was the result because it was written to be that way. Instead they nerfed him in to the ground and it was unnecessary in my opinion.

Hunh? You just implied that she should have her power changed because the Hulk's was. Or rather that it doesn't make sense that she remained the same, and he didn't like some equation. But again, what does Danvers and how powerful she is have to do with the Hulk and his power? "She got to remain as powerful..." And she wouldn't remain as powerful because??? Should Captain America not be as powerful too because...just because? How about Dr. Strange? What does Captain Marvel or any other characters power have to do with the Hulk? Like why is Marvel even brought up in comparison? Because she's stronger? She was always stronger than anyone. 

What does Carol Danvers have to do with the Hulk? You still haven't answered my question. 

 

Edited April 28, 2019 by PapaShogun

[ET80]

5 hours ago, August4th said:

wonder what the next "big" event film will be for the MCU and if they can reach this kind hype again...

Wild idea...but if anyone could pull it off, it would be Feige and the Russo Brothers: How about the X-Men, but...have it happen in real time, during the events of the Infinity Stone saga?

In essence, the X-Men movies all take place at the same times that all of the Avengers/GOTG movies are happening in this universe. Loki and the Chitauri are attacking NY? The X-Men want to help, but they're busy liberating mutants from Genosha Island and destroying the Sentinel program along with Mr. Sinister. Sokovia is about to be hurled into the Earth? Can't do much right now, the X-Men are desperately trying to remove Xavier's mind from the entity known as Onslaught before he escapes the astral plane and destroys the Earth. Half the universe vanish? Well, the other half that made it is now in even more danger, as Dark Phoenix is whipping around the universe and destroying everything in her path. Thunderbolt Ross gets a notice of mutant activity in NY? He ain't got time for that, but he can pass the notice to his colleague Stryker...

The overarching aim here is that at any given moment, there's an extinction level event going on - even multiple ELEs at a time. There is no all knowing, all seeing group that can intervene - Earth's mightiest heroes or Xavier's Gifted Students can only solve one crisis at a time. 

The rub here is that the Avengers can operate in plain sight - if Ultron hijacks a country, they can go in with guns, suits, shields, arrows, hammers and Infinity stones blazing; The X-Men HAVE to keep their exploits in the dark, or the big secret of mutants in the world is exposed, and a whole host of issues come from that. 

I think that Feige and co. could do it in a way that - by the end of these movies - you can weave in and out of Infinity Saga and X-Men movies, knowing that the events are all happening at the same moments in time, but completely outside of the view of the other group. 

[dtait93]

2 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Hunh? You just implied that she should have her power changed because the Hulk's was. That is a point you just made. Again what does Danvers and how powerful she is have to do with the Hulk and him being nerfed? "She got to remain as powerful..." And she wouldn't remain as powerful because??? Should Captain America not be as powerful too because...just because? How about Dr. Strange?

 

No. This is my exact quote...”pretty dumb they nerfed him in to the ground but Danvers, who is more overpowered, stayed at the same power level.” That does not mean Danvers has to be nerfed and brought to Hulk’s level. That means they can buff Hulk to his rightful power level. There’s a very clear and obvious difference.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

35 minutes ago, dtait93 said:

No. This is my exact quote...”pretty dumb they nerfed him in to the ground but Danvers, who is more overpowered, stayed at the same power level.” That does not mean Danvers has to be nerfed and brought to Hulk’s level. That means they can buff Hulk to his rightful power level. There’s a very clear and obvious difference.

But you're still soliciting change in the narrative via irrelevancy. 

What does Carol Danvers have to do with the Hulk?

Edited April 28, 2019 by PapaShogun

[dtait93]

6 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

What does Carol Danvers have to do with the Hulk?

Because the Hulk should never have been nerfed if a character stronger than him was going to be introduced. But because one was in Danvers, he should have been left alone. Why is that so hard to understand?

[TecmoSuperJoe]

1 hour ago, dtait93 said:

Because the Hulk should never have been nerfed if a character stronger than him was going to be introduced. But because one was in Danvers, he should have been left alone. Why is that so hard to understand?

According to what rule? 

Edited April 28, 2019 by PapaShogun

[TecmoSuperJoe]

I posted this last year before War, and I was hoping at some point we would get some kind of scene similar to it. What we got was close enough for me to be satisfied.