-
[QUOTE=kmeyers;4333877]Why would they even have it in the movie at all then? There's a reason for every line in that 3 hour movie, and Marvel LOVES their Easter eggs.[/QUOTE]
The point of the scene was showing Widow falling apart and trying to keep her family (avengers) together by any means. To the point she is obsessing about things that are relatively normal... like earthquakes
[QUOTE]It is estimated that there are 500,000 detectable earthquakes in the world each year. 100,000 of those can be felt, and 100 of them cause damage.
[/QUOTE]
-
[QUOTE=kmeyers;4333354]That's why she was like yeah, we don't do anything, as in, we leave him alone unless he starts messing with the land. No need to start a huge war.[/QUOTE]
Yea feel like your reading into something where theres nothing. The whole point was Nat cant solve every problem. And a underwater earthquake theres nothing that can be done. If thye had shown a monitor with the location being where Ironman 2 set up Atlantis then fine. But if not you have to add some fan fiction in your head to make that a Namor Easter egg. Future Namor appearance could definetly go back and say that was caused BY Atlantis but we ain't got enough info for that to be true right now
-
[QUOTE=90'sCartoonMan;4332960]Into the Spider-Verse (the first movie after Stan's death) had a great quote and dedication at the end. And then Captain Marvel had an all Stan Lee Marvel Studios logo. Maybe they could've saved that logo for Endgame, but I feel like after those two, there's not a lot more they could do in the third Marvel-related movie after Stan passed away (and it's not like they could've done more to the cameo without him around).[/QUOTE]
Spiderverse was Sony, not Marvel, so I dn't count that one (but it was good).
Putting the logo tribute from Captain Marvel into Endgame would have been inapproriate when you consider the opening scene. Starting with soemthing that jovial/celebratory would have worked against the mood they were trying to set. It just didn't fit to put as an opener, so I get it's omission. But leaving the only final tribute in what was effectively "optional viewing" (an origin movie wedged between a 2-part finale for a character who wasn't central to the story) is just poor decision making IMO. Everyone knew the turnout would be huge for EndGame ... there should have been no doubt where to place the tribute.
Just a swing and a miss.
-
[QUOTE=kmeyers;4333877]Why would they even have it in the movie at all then? There's a reason for every line in that 3 hour movie, and Marvel LOVES their Easter eggs.[/QUOTE]
To show that Widow is still unhinged and can't move past the event even 5 years later. She's nervous about every tremor, she's constantly following up on clint, she's become obessive over what terrible thing _could_ happen next. This was on the heels of Lang walking through town with garbage piled up and memorials to the "vanished". That entire arc was about showing how "Avenging" by killing Thanos wasn't enough. The damage was done and they couldn't get over it.
-
[QUOTE=GrandEleven;4334516]That entire arc was about showing how "Avenging" by killing Thanos wasn't enough. [/QUOTE]
Yup, Stark even foreshadows this by calling out how the very name of the team contains implicit failure: if you're "avenging" someone, then by definition you failed to protect them. The team's very name is rooted in failure.
-
[QUOTE=Midvillian1322;4332862]Yes a Disney Plus series. But hes still called falcon in the title but I'm guessing the show is Bucky helping in transition into Cap[/QUOTE]
This sounds spectacular.
-
[QUOTE=MichaelC;4334581]Yup, Stark even foreshadows this by calling out how the very name of the team contains implicit failure: if you're "avenging" someone, then by definition you failed to protect them. The team's very name is rooted in failure.[/QUOTE]
[img]https://media.tenor.com/images/0c7ccd224070013d847040d4d616d854/tenor.gif[/img]
-
[QUOTE=MichaelC;4334581]Yup, Stark even foreshadows this by calling out how the very name of the team contains implicit failure: if you're "avenging" someone, then by definition you failed to protect them. The team's very name is rooted in failure.[/QUOTE]
Tony was forever being negative because he was depressed about losing Peter Parker, so Tony made this comment about the name Avengers, that was a stretch. The Avengers had been around forever. They were not a failure, because they always addressed the threat directly, not came in after the disaster to help with clean-up.
-
Someone on the Blu-ray forums posted this--
[QUOTE] My daughter's 6th grade Art teacher began giving out detentions for students purposefully revealing spoilers. [/QUOTE]
[url]https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=212222&page=926[/url]
Wow.
-
[QUOTE=jackolover;4334912]Tony was forever being negative because he was depressed about losing Peter Parker, so Tony made this comment about the name Avengers, that was a stretch. The Avengers had been around forever. They were not a failure, because they always addressed the threat directly, not came in after the disaster to help with clean-up.[/QUOTE]
In the context of the movie it was absolutely said to help sell the proper mood for that first act and foreshadow the 2nd. A beaten, demoralized team, a dire throw back to Stark's first monologe to Loki turned on its head ("we may not be able to save the earth, but we can avenge it"). No, that line was pretty delibrate. You could argue they havn't been failures, but thats missing the point.
-
[QUOTE=Gaastra;4335062]Someone on the Blu-ray forums posted this--
[url]https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=212222&page=926[/url]
Wow.[/QUOTE]
Not all heroes wear capes.
-
I've heard some complaints about Captain Marvel's "attitude" problem in the film. In the opening act. Personally, I don't see her being condescending in the film towards others. I just thought she was pretty confident in her abilities. However, I wonder if those same people that were turned off by her presence, were also turned off by Tony Stark in the first Avengers film. Definitely took him a while to work with everyone else.
-
[QUOTE=PapaShogun;4335290]I've heard some complaints about Captain Marvel's "attitude" problem in the film. In the opening act. Personally, I don't see her being condescending in the film towards others. I just thought she was pretty confident in her abilities. However, I wonder if those same people that were turned off by her presence, were also turned off by Tony Stark in the first Avengers film. Definitely took him a while to work with everyone else.[/QUOTE]
I think the way they have Brie Larson playing Captain Marvel is problematic. She is some kind of snarky/aloof/smug and it just doesn't quite work. At least not for me. (My wife straight up dislikes the character)
-
[QUOTE=Theleviathan;4335294]I think the way they have Brie Larson playing Captain Marvel is problematic. She is some kind of snarky/aloof/smug and it just doesn't quite work. At least not for me. (My wife straight up dislikes the character)[/QUOTE]
I completely agree. Even when Tony was being difficult in the earlier films he was still charismatic and likable.
-
[QUOTE=Gaastra;4335062]Someone on the Blu-ray forums posted this--
[url]https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=212222&page=926[/url]
Wow.[/QUOTE]
Oh, I told my classes if they spoil it they are getting lunch detention until the end of the year! Even the other teachers started talking about the film!! I had to go see it way earlier than planned so it didn’t get spoiled, but I am very glad I did :D