-
[QUOTE=Mik;5736873]What did Natasha lead? [/QUOTE]
She was the leader of the Avengers for five years after the snap.
[QUOTE=Albert1981;5736811]I think the Russos were trying to resolve this plot hole "after the fact." [/QUOTE]
Maybe the Russos were trying to resolve it after the fact but it's also possible that they realized during shooting that McFeely/Markus have written nonsense and thus deviated from the script. In my opinion McFeely/Markus are average screenwriters at best and it's known that the Russos changed many things from their script for The Winter Soldier during shooting, so I assume that was the case in later movies, too. I even read somewhere that the time travel rules were different in the original Endgame script and were changed by the Russos. So McFeely/Markus obviously wanted to go with the Back To The Future approach and didn't really get what the Russos went for in the finished movie, which would explain their clueless statements.
Also director's word trumps writer's word as the director is the one who decides how the finished movie looks like, at least as long as the studio bosses or producers don't interfere.
[QUOTE=Albert1981;5736811]For Cap to return to the timeline he left, it would have required time machines, Pym Particles and the geniuses of Tony Stark and Bruce Banner. [/QUOTE]
It was always the plan for him to come back to his timeline, therefore he had a second particle that he used to travel back. He should bring the stones to their timelines and then return, that's why Hulk, Sam, and Bucky were puzzled that the platform stayed empty as they were expecting him to come back, so it's clear he had a particle to return with.
Here's what could have happened without the scene being a plothole: He lived his life with Peggy in the other timeline, then used his second particle as an old man to return but didn't navigate to the point directly after he left but maybe 30 minutes prior, so he came back on the platform before Hulk and the others were there and went to the bench to sit down waiting for Bucky to spot him.
-
[QUOTE=chicago_bastard;5737041]She was the leader of the Avengers for five years after the snap.
Maybe the Russos were trying to resolve it after the fact but it's also possible that they realized during shooting that McFeely/Markus have written nonsense and thus deviated from the script. In my opinion McFeely/Markus are average screenwriters at best and it's known that the Russos changed many things from their script for The Winter Soldier during shooting, so I assume that was the case in later movies, too. I even read somewhere that the time travel rules were different in the original Endgame script and were changed by the Russos. So McFeely/Markus obviously wanted to go with the Back To The Future approach and didn't really get what the Russos went for in the finished movie, which would explain their clueless statements.
Also director's word trumps writer's word as the director is the one who decides how the finished movie looks like, at least as long as the studio bosses or producers don't interfere.
It was always the plan for him to come back to his timeline, therefore he had a second particle that he used to travel back. He should bring the stones to their timelines and then return, that's why Hulk, Sam, and Bucky were puzzled that the platform stayed empty as they were expecting him to come back, so it's clear he had a particle to return with.
Here's what could have happened without the scene being a plothole: He lived his life with Peggy in the other timeline, then used his second particle as an old man to return but didn't navigate to the point directly after he left but maybe 30 minutes prior, so he came back on the platform before Hulk and the others were there and went to the bench to sit down waiting for Bucky to spot him.[/QUOTE]
I didn't know the Russos clashed with Markus and McFeely! This is certainly news to me. Yeah, I think the screenwriters wanted the kind of time travel where if you change your past you change your future. Whereas the directors wanted the kind of time travel where if you go back in time, you automatically create another timeline while not affecting the timeline you originally came from. I do agree with you if the movie had shown Rogers coming back or even talking about how he did it, the film would have made more sense. But now we have theories about two Caps in the main timeline and maybe the two of them attending Peggy Carter's funeral at the same time. Maybe that's why there are rumors of Evans coming back in later MCU projects. So they can clear this shit up.
-
Whoops, I forgot about the 5 years. I think we should've seen a bit more of that
-
[QUOTE=MindofShadow;5736854]I tend to agree and am rather cautious about the future.
Once they "finish" the multiverse stuff... they need to find a way to shut the door on it completely.[/QUOTE]
The MCU's version of time travel/multiverses just bore me. I know I'm in the small minority here, but to me I wasn't really moved by the stories being told in Endgame and Loki when they brought in time travel/multiversal elements. I don't mind time travel stories when they're written well. I actually felt some emotional connection in many great time travel stories. One of my favorites is Star Trek: Voyager's "Timeless" episode. But Marvel Studios has got to do a MUCH job of showing how time travel works.
-
The only plot hole so far is Captain America at the end of Endgame. I'm not sure what else is exactly a problem here
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5737200]The only plot hole so far is Captain America at the end of Endgame. I'm not sure what else is exactly a problem here[/QUOTE]
Nah Endgame is full of stupid holes. I just went back and checked, apparently the way Thanos brings his whole army is that he shrinks his massive ship to a subatomic size using a single pym particle. Why the hell didn't the Avengers just do that if it was possible?
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5737029]No offense, but I'm not sure what about those 2 I'm supposed to like. before FaWS, Sam was basically 'how high?' to Steve's 'jump!'. He had no personality besides snarking at anyone disagreeing with Steve. He only got better after FaWS and still isn't the most interesting or dynamic character. And Natasha is a different character in every movie, and just always feels tacked on. Her whole 'atonement' schtick is potentially interesting but never thematically amounts to much of anything. Hope is underdeveloped but at least has her own motivations and a clear development from appearance to appearance.[/QUOTE]
Sam always seemed like a really supportive, emotive, and caring guy with charisma to me.
And I think if Natasha feels like a different person in each movie it's because she slowly changes in each movie.
I've just never cared that much about Hope. She's just kind of a boring Wasp.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;5737251]Sam always seemed like a really supportive, emotive, and caring guy with charisma to me.
And I think if Natasha feels like a different person in each movie it's because she slowly changes in each movie.
I've just never cared that much about Hope. She's just kind of a boring Wasp.[/QUOTE]
Really? Sam always just seemed like Steve's fanboy. Only in Flaws did he really step out of that. Otherwise he doesn't have much of a personality to me.
Natasha doesn't change slowly from what I've seen. She just acts differently. I'm not sure what her character growth is supposed to be. All I know is she sees some level of redemption but I never saw what it was so it's hard to care.
Hope doesn't have the most personality, but I wouldn't call her boring. She works well with Scott and seems fairly competent.
-
I think most a lot of inaccuracies in Endgame can be explained away with some imagination by audiences, but NOT the Captain America plothole. I think some further elaboration on how Rogers got back to his own timeline would clean things up. I thought this would happen in Loki. But I was disappointed they didn't deal with it then. For a show about explaining the rules and mechanics of time travel/multiverses, I think they should have.
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5737280]Really? Sam always just seemed like Steve's fanboy. Only in Flaws did he really step out of that. Otherwise he doesn't have much of a personality to me.[/QUOTE]
He respected him, but he never came off as a fanboy to me. At least compared to, say, how they wrote Spider-Man.
[QUOTE]Natasha doesn't change slowly from what I've seen. She just acts differently. I'm not sure what her character growth is supposed to be. All I know is she sees some level of redemption but I never saw what it was so it's hard to care.[/QUOTE]
I think it's a pretty clear and gradual process on-screen, but to each their own.
[QUOTE]Hope doesn't have the most personality, but I wouldn't call her boring. She works well with Scott and seems fairly competent.[/QUOTE]
She's competent but too stilted for my tastes. Far from my favorite take on The Wasp.
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5737200]The only plot hole so far is Captain America at the end of Endgame. I'm not sure what else is exactly a problem here[/QUOTE]
I don’t even see how it’s a plot hole.
The movie repeatedly takes time to explain how it’s time travel works than sticks to it throughout the movie. There is no reason to think that Steve suddenly did any different during his jumps throughout time.
-
[QUOTE=Albert1981;5737295]I think most a lot of inaccuracies in Endgame can be explained away with some imagination by audiences, but NOT the Captain America plothole. I think some further elaboration on how Rogers got back to his own timeline would clean things up. I thought this would happen in Loki. But I was disappointed they didn't deal with it then. For a show about explaining the rules and mechanics of time travel/multiverses, I think they should have.[/QUOTE]
What? I just showed how the supposed Steve plot hole can be explained so that it isn't a plot hole.
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5737280]Really? Sam always just seemed like Steve's fanboy. Only in Flaws did he really step out of that. Otherwise he doesn't have much of a personality to me.
Natasha doesn't change slowly from what I've seen. She just acts differently. I'm not sure what her character growth is supposed to be. All I know is she sees some level of redemption but I never saw what it was so it's hard to care.
Hope doesn't have the most personality, but I wouldn't call her boring. She works well with Scott and seems fairly competent.[/QUOTE]
Sam had a lot of personality and Hope had a serious personality but both had zero stories. They have been supporting characters to other characters' stories.
-
Actually, Scott Lang was more of a supporting character in "Ant-man and the Wasp". The emotional stakes hinged on Hank and Hope.
And why are people arguing if Hope is interesting or not? The question was who would lead an all female Avengers and I pointed out that Hope fits that role the best for a variety of reasons that I wrote down in the previous page. It doesn't matter if she's interesting or not. And I do think that the leader of the Avengers being their shortest member is inherently cool.
-
[QUOTE=Derek Metaltron;5736583]Loved the scene, happy to see an A-Force movie, but right now I can’t imagine Brie’s version of Carol leading it, she’s not really a team player. Then again with Natasha dead it’s hard to think who else would lead the team. Wanda is kind of debatable in her current situation. Who do you think besides Carol would make a good leader?[/QUOTE]
I think She Hulk would lead A-Force. She already did so in the comics. None of the remaining female heroes in the MCU gives me leadership vibes.
Carol has so far been shown doing her own thing and not really needing or asking for help. Marvels will probably address the fact that she is always off doing her thing given that Monica seems to carry some resentment towards her for not being around when Maria died.