Avengers: Endgame Spoilers

[Mutant 77]

But............................................... ........................................
................................................. Why did they kill Iron Man?

He could have retired as well.

[kmeyers]

But............................................... ........................................
................................................. Why did they kill Iron Man?

He could have retired as well.

That's not dramatic enough and everyone knew Robert Downey Jr was done with the role.

[Mutant 77]

Interesting:

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/05/av...ot-1202132458/

[The Cool Thatguy]

But............................................... ........................................
................................................. Why did they kill Iron Man?

He could have retired as well.

Could he, though?

The threats the next Avengers team will face will be world ending. Meaning that when say, Kang threatens to blow up the world, Tony is putting his family at risk by not donning the armor and pitching in.

And hell, remember that Tony wouldn't even have to be physically at the battle. He could operate his suit as a drone, providing support while not really risking his life.

I had hoped he would have retired too, but from a logistical standpoint, in verse and out, him dying simply works better at keeping him off the board.

[Tofali]

Agreed! Cap deserved a happy ending.

Language

[luprki]

I loved how the Cap story ended, he deserves to be happy

[Jokerz79]

Nice Map of the Timelines from Endgame.

https://images.app.goo.gl/weJyNdkKMNBH3U4v6

[Cyke]

Could he, though?

The threats the next Avengers team will face will be world ending. Meaning that when say, Kang threatens to blow up the world, Tony is putting his family at risk by not donning the armor and pitching in.

And hell, remember that Tony wouldn't even have to be physically at the battle. He could operate his suit as a drone, providing support while not really risking his life.

I had hoped he would have retired too, but from a logistical standpoint, in verse and out, him dying simply works better at keeping him off the board.

AHAHAHA, you silly goose, do you think death will stay Iron Man's hand?

Remember the Disney Empire! The inevitable Star Wars crossover!

Say hello to Force Ghost Tony!

Nice Map of the Timelines from Endgame.

https://images.app.goo.gl/weJyNdkKMNBH3U4v6

But where's the timeline where Imperfect Cell finds the Gray's Sports Almanac?

[Mutant 77]

Nice Map of the Timelines from Endgame.

https://images.app.goo.gl/weJyNdkKMNBH3U4v6

I don't agree with it.
Timelines did not collapse. Once a time traveler traveled in the past, well, that's a CHANGE. You cannot reverse that.

[Soubhagya]

Based on the time travel mechanics established within the movie, the end must mean one of 2 things:

1- Old Man Steve was always in the MCU Prime timeline. This would mean that Steve from 2023 returning to Peggy sometime in the 20th century while the OG Cap is stuck in the ice has always been a part of the sequence of events that make up the timeline.

2- Steve returning to Peggy created an alternate branch. This means he found another way home to his reality that didn’t require the beacon. Or maybe he just returned to the OG pad somewhere between the time the team returns from the time heist but before Thanos destroyed it.

Knowing which of the 2 it is does nothing for me. I’m perfectly ok with them not explaining how he got back because by that point time travel mechanics had already been established & demonstrated so I don’t see a need for them to do it again. At best it would just be useless exposition about something that doesn’t really matter within that specific moment and the scene itself is better off without it (imo of course).

I agree. The scene is better without the explanation.

But i still find it a bit of a dampener as i don't know how he managed that. It is the ending of Cap's story. Emotionally its fitting. But logically it has holes in it. I think the film hints at theory #1. Cap was always there. We don't see him return as expected. But sit in the bench as if its perfectly normal and natural.

But theory #1 is a plothole. You can't change the past to change the present. If Steve went in the past and stayed all this while, the present is changed because now there are two Steve Rogers: the young and the old. This breaks the rule the film had itself set.

Theory #2 is more plausible and makes sense. One issue with this is we don't see how he manged to return to the timeline he left. This also helps to strengthen the 1st theory.

[OceanStar]

OH OH Did they think this through :O!!! :O!!!

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j2...WARS_05-20.jpg

[Arsenal]

I agree. The scene is better without the explanation.

But i still find it a bit of a dampener as i don't know how he managed that. It is the ending of Cap's story. Emotionally its fitting. But logically it has holes in it. I think the film hints at theory #1. Cap was always there. We don't see him return as expected. But sit in the bench as if its perfectly normal and natural.

But theory #1 is a plothole. You can't change the past to change the present. If Steve went in the past and stayed all this while, the present is changed because now there are two Steve Rogers: the young and the old. This breaks the rule the film had itself set.

Theory #2 is more plausible and makes sense. One issue with this is we don't see how he manged to return to the timeline he left. This also helps to strengthen the 1st theory.

Theory #1 works if you view it as Steve completing the necessary sequence of events to preserve the timeline opposed to him changing it.

Theory #2 works if you assume Cap found a different way home, be it using the original pad and waiting to meet them at the lake or used some other way. Since we never know what he did differently beside marry Peggy, it’s impossible to know what resources he had available.

It’s fun to speculate about how he managed it but it’s not necessary for the moment to work. Like you said, it works so much better without one.

[DennisTheMenace]

It's funny that I read that the writers and directors can't even agree on this topic. The writers say their intention was that Steve lived in the Prime past (was Peggy's secret husband/father of children) and aged up to 2023 while the Russos say he lived in an alternate timeline and somehow traveled to the Prime universe to give Sam the shield. Unless this is addressed in the future, I guess either theory is valid.

[Soubhagya]

Theory #1 works if you view it as Steve completing the necessary sequence of events to preserve the timeline opposed to him changing it.

Theory #2 works if you assume Cap found a different way home, be it using the original pad and waiting to meet them at the lake or used some other way. Since we never know what he did differently beside marry Peggy, it’s impossible to know what resources he had available.

It’s fun to speculate about how he managed it but it’s not necessary for the moment to work. Like you said, it works so much better without one.

Theory 2 surely makes sense. But theory 1? It does not seem plausible. Or perhaps i am missing something. So Cap completed the tasks necessary to preserve the timeline. But just by being present, the timeline has changed. There were two Steve Rogers all this time due to this action.

A rule was set that you can't change the present by going to past. That was mentioned by Banner. Steve's going back changes both the past and the present because there was only one Steve Rogers in the original timeline.

Edit: While posting this a thought came to my mind. We consider the main timeline as the prime timeline. Where the movies are set. The ones where Loki escaped with the Tesseract or where Thanos of 2014 died are alternate timelines. What if the one we consider as Prime Timeline wasn't the Prime one at all? All this while we were following an alternate timeline. Does this make sense?

[Arsenal]

Theory 2 surely makes sense. But theory 1? It does not seem plausible. Or perhaps i am missing something. So Cap completed the tasks necessary to preserve the timeline. But just by being present, the timeline has changed. There were two Steve Rogers all this time due to this action.

A rule was set that you can't change the present by going to past. That was mentioned by Banner. Steve's going back changes both the past and the present because there was only one Steve Rogers in the original timeline.

It depends on how time works: is it all predetermined and everybody is simply doing what they were supposed to do or is the future constantly being determined by the actions of the present? If it’s former than the theory works because everything played out how it was always supposed to and Steve leaving to marry Peggy simply connected the sequence of events to preserve what already happened (this would probably make much more sense with a diagram tbh). If it’s the later, obviously it doesn’t work because there’s no way Steve could do what he did without causing a branch from the prime timeline .