[SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

The place to talk about your favorite movies, tv series, cartoons, music and theater.
User avatar
L-Space
Posts: 727
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by L-Space » Thu May 10, 2018 7:18 pm

I never minded Vision's color scheme in the movies, granted I have a mild case of red-green color blindness so take that with a grain of salt :lol:.

I do think a white or gray-ish coloration could look really cool too, even if it was only for a temporary time.
Image
Formerly luketheduke86

User avatar
L-Space
Posts: 727
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by L-Space » Sat May 12, 2018 3:00 am

Saw this and figured it would get some appreciation here.
Image
Image
Formerly luketheduke86

RainOnTheSun
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by RainOnTheSun » Sat May 12, 2018 7:55 am

BriarThrone wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 4:35 am

1. Vision should have been able to beat Thanos. This version of Vision incorporates the Mind Stone. WHY THE ACTUAL FUCK is this entity, basically an extension of the Mind Stone, trying to fight with lasers? If you want your enemy to be somebody else, change their mind. In fact, there were very few ambitious, creative uses of the Infinity Stones by anybody in this movie, which seems like just a huge waste. Sure, some Plot Induced Stupidity is necessary to move the plot in the desired direction, but it makes you cringe when you spot it.
I don't know if the gauntlet has any special properties in the comics beyond keeping the gems from falling out, but in the movie Thanos had it specially made to draw out their power. I get the impression that an infinity stone without the gauntlet is like a bullet without a gun.
BriarThrone wrote:
Sun May 06, 2018 4:35 am

3. Drax finally meets Thanos. This should have been the moment where it's revealed that Drax, for all the comedy relief he's doing, is one of the few beings that Thanos legitimately fears. That didn't happen. At all. Drax remains an afterthought.
I was disappointed by this too. Drax suddenly going from comedy goofball to implacable killer would have been awesome to see. Oh well. Still a good movie.

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 2043
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Ares » Sat May 12, 2018 1:56 pm

We've seen other people make use of the Gem's power before, but they've also made it clear that using the Gem without some kind of object to control it is very dangerous for the person holding it. Just touching an Infinity Gem can cause a normal person to explode, and even people like Ronan required implanting his Gem into his Universal Weapon so that he could control it's energies safely. The Tesserac's cube form was likewise likely designed as an interface for the Gem so that Odin and other Asgardians could use it safely, and the Scepter Thanos gave to Loki likewise let Loki use its mind powers without harm. So far the only person to use an Infinity Gem without exploding was the Dark Elf Maleketh, who was able to absorb the Reality Gem's power into himself, possibly due to Dark Elves being immortal or from a time before existence. The only other people that achieved something similar was the Guardians of the Galaxy, though that was largely due to them working as a group and Peter being half-Celestial.

Vision, meanwhile, basically was designed to be an interface for the Gem, but the Mind Gem's main purpose was to act as a housing unit for Vision's personality and as a power source, while most of his powers came from his unique Vibranium-based physiology. So Vision not having Mind powers makes sense, since he wasn't really designed to make use of the Gem's power, he acknowledged that he didn't really understand the Gem, and he likely didn't want to mess too much with the thing that was basically functioning as his brain.

With Thanos, the Gauntlet was clearly designed to let him use the powers of the gems in unison without killing himself, as his "wipe out half the universe" finger snap resulted in a blackened, potentially damaged gauntlet, showing that he won't be able to make use of its power casually.

Chris Brady
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:59 am

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Chris Brady » Sun May 13, 2018 1:56 am

I thought it was a terrible film. Not character-wise... Well, OK, Thanos was horrible, but all the other Marvel heroes were well acted and written. And don't... You know what, no, I AM going to rant a bit about the Hulk.

HOW DO YOU SCARE THE PERSONIFICATION OF RAGE? I mean, it's a fear response to begin with! The Hulk doesn't get scared, he gets back and gets STRONGER! He has no upper limit! That was a terrible moment, because now, we know that when the chips are really down, Hulk will just turn tail. His character is damaged permanently. He's a coward at heart, a bully, the moment someone is stronger than he is shows up, he folds faster than Superman on Laundry day.

Next up, Thanos. He's the MAD TITAN! He wants to destroy all life and gift wrap the remains to give to his love, the personification of Death! He's not reasonable, he should NEVER be reasonable! He should be SCARY, not personable. He kills not because he enjoys it, it's because he believes that's what his 'girlfriend' wants.

Now, let me point out why I think Infinity War is a terrible film, it's two fold and it depends a lot on the next film. First off, he 'killed' Black Panther and Spiderman, two of the best selling films in the franchise. So, if the heroes bring all the dead back (because there ain't NO WAY the Mouse is leaving all that green on the table), then everything in the first part is utterly meaningless, because they can just undo it.

However, if Marvel Studios does NOT bring back neither of these two high profit characters back (as well as all the others that were killed) than no matter what happens, Thanos has won. And there's nothing the heroes can do to stop him. So the second film is pointless, because they couldn't save anyone.

The flash and flare is nothing more than a distraction to fool us into thinking that Marvel hasn't painted themselves into a corner.

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Batgirl III » Sun May 13, 2018 2:28 am

The Hulk is a fear response, true, but it’s not a rage monster. Hulk is a personification of Banner’s repressed emotions stemming from his childhood abuse. It’s fight or flight given greenskin... Most of the time, the response is fight. But when confronted by a bigger bully, it cowers, it chooses flight. Hulk is pure Id, there’s no rationality there.

MCU Thanos doesn’t worship Lady Death, he’s just an insane Malthusian (well, more insane, since any who buys into Malthus’ theory is already a bit of a nutter).
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

Ken
Posts: 1993
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:40 pm
Location: DeKamore, Madiganistan

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Ken » Sun May 13, 2018 3:01 am

Batgirl III wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:28 am
Hulk is pure Id, there’s no rationality there.
Beware the ids that march.
Does a Winnie poo in the 100-acre wood?

User avatar
Woodclaw
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:05 pm
Location: Como, Italy

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Woodclaw » Sun May 13, 2018 9:21 am

Batgirl III wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:28 am
The Hulk is a fear response, true, but it’s not a rage monster. Hulk is a personification of Banner’s repressed emotions stemming from his childhood abuse. It’s fight or flight given greenskin... Most of the time, the response is fight. But when confronted by a bigger bully, it cowers, it chooses flight. Hulk is pure Id, there’s no rationality there.
Exactly, Hulk (liek Batman) is a childhood trauma with legs. During his life Banner suffered abouse after abuse from many authority figures (first his dad, later General Ross) and he always backed away because he had no power to face them. Hulk is the result of all is suppresed rage and his reaction to any danger to strike back because he knows he can ... until Thanos. Thanos wrecked Hulk that now feels small and insignificant as Banner.
Hulk refusal to appear is an appropriately childish reaction to a situation that is out of control. Whereas Bruce willingness to fight is an adult reaction.
Batgirl III wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:28 am
MCU Thanos doesn’t worship Lady Death, he’s just an insane Malthusian (well, more insane, since any who buys into Malthus’ theory is already a bit of a nutter).
I've heard people comparing his ideas to Ann Raynd's.
"You're right. Sorry. Holy shit," I breathed, "heckhounds.”

WareHouse W (main build thread for M&M)

BriarThrone
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by BriarThrone » Sun May 13, 2018 9:37 am

Woodclaw wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:21 am
I've heard people comparing his ideas to Ann Raynd's.
Do... do you mean Ayn Rand? That's, uh... that's quite the stretch. It's not even that I don't agree - I don't even see the logical connection. How sure are you that these people aren't just using Rand as the philosophical equivalent of Hitler - the evil that must be equivalent to everything you don't like? Because someone is full of shit.

Unless there's a writer named Ann Raynd out there I haven't heard of, of course, who advocates for addressing resource scarcity by reducing the number of consumers. That could be true also.

In fact, Thanos secures ultimate power, makes himself capital-G God, in an effort to deal with resource scarcity relative to population growth, and he uses his unlimited power to... cull the population, instead of multiply resource availability to make existing populations more viable. ... Huh.

User avatar
Woodclaw
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:05 pm
Location: Como, Italy

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Woodclaw » Sun May 13, 2018 9:48 am

BriarThrone wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:37 am
Woodclaw wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:21 am
I've heard people comparing his ideas to Ann Raynd's.
Do... do you mean Ayn Rand? That's, uh... that's quite the stretch. It's not even that I don't agree - I don't even see the logical connection. How sure are you that these people aren't just using Rand as the philosophical equivalent of Hitler - the evil that must be equivalent to everything you don't like? Because someone is full of shit.

Unless there's a writer named Ann Raynd out there I haven't heard of, of course, who advocates for addressing resource scarcity by reducing the number of consumers. That could be true also.

In fact, Thanos secures ultimate power, makes himself capital-G God, in an effort to deal with resource scarcity relative to population growth, and he uses his unlimited power to... cull the population, instead of multiply resource availability to make existing populations more viable. ... Huh.
Yeah, it's Ayn Rand, sorry I misspelled the name. I'm not sure what the rational behind this comparison was, because I'm not too familiar with Rand's work.

Still, I've heard way too many people making the "resource multiplication" argument and I'd like to counter with one thing: the Gems are a tool, even possessing all of them at once doesn't make the user in any way wiser. Thanos believed that the only way to save the universe was to cut the poplation in half, the Gems were only a way to do so in the blink of an eye instead of a long a tedious war that would have caused the rest of the galaxy (at least) to ally against him. The Gems gave him god-like power, the control over the entire reality, but they didn't provide him with the wisdom to use them at their best. He had power, he used it as he saw fit, without considering alternatives because he was so damn sure to be right.
"You're right. Sorry. Holy shit," I breathed, "heckhounds.”

WareHouse W (main build thread for M&M)

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Batgirl III » Sun May 13, 2018 3:18 pm

Ayn Rand wasn’t an especially nice person and she’s a very boring writer (I’ve read all her works) but the philosophy of MCU Thanos is world’s — nay, galaxies — apart from Objectivism.

Thanos is espousing the Malthusian theory of linear production of necessary resources (e.g., food) versus an exponential increase in consumption (e.g., population). Thanos’ solution is about as absolutely authoritarian as you can get one solitary person literally gains the power to kill half of all life in the universe. At a literal snap of his fingers.

Under Rand’s philosophy, Thanos would have instead used his infinite power to become a cosmic Norman Borlaug. That’s what John Galt — Rand’s idealized hero from Atlas Shrugged — would have done.

More thoughts on the subject here.
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

Jabroniville
Posts: 9362
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:05 pm

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Jabroniville » Mon May 14, 2018 6:03 am

The thing about "Why didn't Thanos just make MOAR STUFF?" isn't really a Plot Hole- it's just something they didn't bring up. And I mean, they HAVE a sequel. It's entirely likely someone will bring that up.

Several Theories & Ideas:

1) Thanos had already started killing people before he came up with the "Infinity Stones" idea. Maybe it's already too late. He's gone down this path, and he feels he can't just come up with a New Plan, or else everything he's done to this point has been meaningless.

2) Thanos is a BAD PERSON. He deliberately taunts Quill with Gamora's life, forcing him to make the decision, THEN going "haha, you failed- I just wanted to see if you'd try". Never mind all the mass murder, and having the Black Order as his evil minions. So even if he could... he probably doesn't give a shit. He's a horrifically-evil piece of garbage.

There's more options than just "creating more stuff". He could have made people sterile, and had far less bloodshed for the same results. Or made it so nobody had to eat any longer.

3) Maybe the Gauntlet CAN'T do that? Destruction is easier than creation, after all. And the Gauntlet has been seen to be somewhat finite in power, given what happened after the "Finger-Snap".

4) If it COULD do that, maybe Thanos sees that as just putting a band-aid on things, and the same problem would occur quickly.

To me, a more interesting development is... what next? It's not like halving the universe's population will solve this problem forever. Earth's population is only 3.5 billion now? Big friggin' deal- IT WAS THAT SIZE FORTY YEARS AGO. He's probably gonna have to do all of this again in only a couple generations! Unless he made people sterile as well.

Personally, I think someone's gonna bring it up in Avengers 4, and there'll probably be an explanation. It's not a "plot hole" just yet. Never mind that the "finger-snap" wasn't until the very end.

BriarThrone
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by BriarThrone » Mon May 14, 2018 7:16 am

I wouldn't call it a "plot hole," no. It's more a PHILOSOPHICAL hole. Thanos presents his actions as justified by necessity. Obviously, as we see from his various acts of sadism that he does NOT attempt to justify by his "pragmatic" philosophy, he's pretty nasty. But the philosophy itself unravels once you point out that his proposed solution also presents him with alternatives that he is uninterested in exploring.

The flaw isn't with the writing. It's with Thanos. He's a deeply flawed character. In the way that makes this version of him very interesting in a way that other versions are not. He's still an irredeemable villain, but at least he believes he's pursuing a noble goal, making the universe a better place.

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Batgirl III » Mon May 14, 2018 2:41 pm

I don’t see it as a flaw of any sort. Thanos is the Big Bad Evil Guy, I fully expect him to be evil.

It’d be like asking why does the Wicked Prince in the medieval action-adventure try to assassinate the Goodly King, kidnsp the Lovely Princess for a forced marriage, and murder the One True Heir? Why not just come to power via a election as a representive of the people?

I’m just saying that Thanos’ philosophy, such as it is, isn’t Objectivism.
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 2043
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: [SPOILERS] Avengers Infinity War: Part 1

Post by Ares » Mon May 14, 2018 3:04 pm

Yeah, Thanos' plan being a plot hole is only one for the idiots saying "Thanos was right" or "Thanos did nothing wrong". Unless Thanos is willing to randomly murder half of the universes population every 100 years or so, nothings going to change. Plus, his assumption comes from the idea that the universe is, in fact, finite, and that our resources are in fact limited. Hell, Thanos could have just shrunk all sentient life and their creations down to 1/10th their size, which increases available space and resources.

Thanos is not in the right, he simply has a reasonable starting point for his line of logic and has a reasonable problem that he wants to solve. The methods he uses to fix said problem is what's wrong. But again, he's the villain, and on some level, he enjoys what he does.

What's more annoying to me is how outrage culture can't even let us enjoy a superhero movie.

Kate Leth attacks Infinite War for lack of LGBT representation

Writer claims Infinity War is racist due to number of minority characters killed in films ending

When I found out about those articles, I literally yelled "Man, fuck off!" at my computer screen. I am just so tired of these assholes and what they continue to try to do to comics and the superhero genre.

Post Reply