Avengers: Infinity War

[Lethologica]

I think once someone decides that wiping out half of the universe's population, regardless of the motivation, the idea of reasoning with him pretty much flies right out the window. "I know this guy wants to commit genocide on a scale never before imagined, but what if just...ya know...talked it out."

Furthermore if you hear someone has this plan of mass genocide, I feel like most people's first reaction would be "Holy crap you're crazy, we should stop you." not "*Guffaw* So illogical. Let's discuss the fallacies of your plan in open forum." Especially when he is already halfway done collecting stones.

We literally have Mr. "Not a great plan" going face-to-face with Thanos. It could be managed.

Not that the movie would need a character explicitly challenging Thanos on this point to implicitly challenge him. (But again, I think the next movie will do both.)

Is there an explanation of how Thanos's plan in this movie (which has presumably been his plan all along) was served by having previously empowered Loki to invade Earth and Ronon to wipe out his enemies?

They both ended up getting Infinity Stones, until the heroes stopped them. Maybe Thanos was getting them to fetch the groceries, reasoning that this way he knew where those Stones were and could always take them later; if they used the Stones to fulfill their own goals in the meantime, fine.

[Ramza00]

Is there an explanation of how Thanos's plan in this movie (which has presumably been his plan all along) was served by having previously empowered Loki to invade Earth and Ronon to wipe out his enemies?

No it is is never explained why giving Loki the mind stone (the Loki / Chitauri Scepter) is helpful in retrieving the space stone and maybe Thanos knew the time stone was on earth at the time. Maybe an army of mind thralled humans would be helpful in retrieving the time stone from a specific human.

At the time of Avengers 1, the reality stone, also known as The Aether was still undiscovered by the most of the universe. The power stone revealed in Guardians of the Galaxy, is located in an orb on the planet Morag. On Moraq the temple which houses the orb is under the oceans most of the time, but once every 300 years the waters recede enough that you can access the temple.

Spoiler: Soul Stone

Show

And the Soul Stone was found by Gamora on planet Vormir. Now it is not made clear what Gamora knew about the Power Stone as of Guardians of Galaxy 1. We knew she plan to sell the orb to the Collector for enough money to run away and hopefully escape Thanos forever. But we do not know if Gamora knew the orb was an infinity stone until the exposition of the collector where he opens the orb and reveals the infinity stone but also talks about the 5 other infinity stones. As soon as this happens Gamora was advocating giving the Power Stone to Xandar.

So my point is as of Avengers 1, 10 years ago MCU time, the only other Infinity Stone with its location revealed to Thanos who had the Mind Stone was the Space Stone. Perhaps Thanos also knew the Time Stone was also on Earth but that is a perhaps. The rest of the 4 stones were hidden / unknown by the most of the universe and perhaps even to Thano's own knowledge.

[Dr.Samurai]

Did Thanos defeat the Hulk because he had the Power Stone? Or because he's naturally strong enough to take out the Hulk?

Also, anyone have any speculation about the sequel? Like... do you think Dr. Strange cast some time-traveling spells and might either have set things into motion in the past to deal with Thanos' apparent victory, or may reappear in the next movie despite having disintegrated? (Like new heroes being introduced because Strange tapped them to assist.) Or what about if Shuri can communicate wit T'Challa still through their astral plane meditation thing? Like maybe those killed by the Soul Stone are in that plane or can be reached through that plane? (Though I don't remember if that requires more of the plant, which I think was completely destroyed.)

[Cheesegear]

Also, anyone have any speculation about the sequel?

Peter Quill during the events of Guardians of the Galaxy 2 caused an interstellar war between the Sovereigns and Earth (Quill is a Human). This unleashes Adam Warlock on Earth/Humans (the GotG2 stinger), which Captain Marvel is forced to stop, in her movie. The ending of Captain Marvel involves Adam Warlock learning about how Thanos has already invaded Earth. Not only did Thanos beat the Sovereigns to smashing Earth (well that's just not allowed), but, Thanos threatens the Universe. So, the Sovereigns Adam Warlock should kind of be invested in beating Thanos...Somehow. Together, Warlock and Marvel fight crime.

Strange has already been through time, and somehow has foreseen the coming of Warlock.

Warlock somehow wrenches the Soul Gem straight out of the Infinity Gauntlet, and calls Thanos a **** right to his face, and Captain Marvel decks him as the Infinity Gauntlet can't affect Captain Marvel...For some reason (No, it's not 'girl power', she's literally special, don't mug to the camera like that...No, don't...ARGH...).

Warlock resurrects everyone, gives the Time Stone to Gamora, and the Power Stone to Drax.
Captain Marvel decks Thanos again, and tells him that literally any other solution was better than hemi-genocide.

But seriously, the entirety of Part II should involve literally everyone telling Thanos how stupid he is. Explicitly and on-screen.

[Ramza00]

The Captain Marvel Movie takes place in the 1990s MCU time and it is a thus a prequel to the entire MCU from Iron Man 1 (2008 real world time but also MCU time) on.

Ant Man and the Wasp will also be a prequel to Infinity War and will be them doing stuff prior to Infinity War.

[Cheesegear]

The Captain Marvel Movie takes place in the 1990s MCU time and it is a thus a prequel to the entire MCU from Iron Man 1 (2008 real world time but also MCU time).

Well, ****.
I guess it does to be an origin story which involves all the Kree and whatnot.

I still like my idea better.

[The Glyphstone]

I was hoping they had finally outgrown the origin story thing.

[Tvtyrant]

You know what I would really enjoy? A story set in Ye Olde Times of the 1950s-1960s.

There is room there to do a middle continuity of Fury, old Antman and Wasp, and the Fantastic Four. F4 especially would be better served set in the time period of the Space Race, and with a universe where other superheroes are more clandestine compared to them.

[Lemmy]

Nah... I'm actually glad they didn't go with Hank Pym for Ant-man... He is one of the lamest and most unlikable heroes in the MU.

[Malifice]

The movie tries to paint Thanos as an anti-villain, and fails spectacularly.

What?

The movie expressly portrays him as a genocidal monster, hell bent on wiping out half of all life in the entire universe. Literally killing magnitudes more than trillions upon trillions of of beings. To get there he murders his own daughter, amongst countless other henious acts. He is expressly portrayed participating in genocide, torture, and murder on planetary and even universal scale.

If you somehow saw his 'greater good' reasoning behind committing all of these incredibly evil acts to make him as an 'anti-villain' then... wow.

[Malifice]

In Infinity War the antagonist is poorly realised and executed, whilst the protagonists are the only good parts of the movie.

You're aware that Thanos was the movies protagonist right?

[GloatingSwine]

Also, anyone have any speculation about the sequel?

Something like the comic. Except with Gamora in Adam Warlock's shoes and Captain Marvel in Silver Surfer's.

A large part of the original story is how Thanos fails to get what he wants and learns that absolute power is just not all that helpful, and I expect that to also be part of it.

[Ramza00]

You're aware that Thanos was the movies protagonist right?

So people here are using different language terms and thus are talking past each other. (This is the nature of being human, language, and living in a society, we all live in our heads and our heads are different than one another.)

But yes from a screen writers perspective (and there are lots of different screen writter theories there is no unified perfect absolute canon, it is all subjective, but there are majority opinions how to do screen writting that works and creates drama...blah, blah, blah stuff.)

But yes from a screen writer perspective, the narrative of Infinity War is we have a villian as the main mover and shaker of the plot that drives the story forward. Furthermore we have a villian where much of the screen time is going to be focused on the villain from his point of view and we see him as an important "playable character" and not a foreign thing that moves the plot forward but we see things from his point of view.

And thus he is a protagonist in the movie, he is probably the most main / central protagonist in the movie, even if the main protagonist is a villain protagonist. Protagonists need not be good or bad but in many stories heroes are the main protagonists but Infinity War is not like those stories.

Furthermore as someone else mentioned Thanos is cast as a specific type of villian, an "anti-villian" a villian who thinks he is a hero in his own story. An anti-villain are villians with heroic goals, personality traits, and/or virtues. They do not care that they do evil, for they think they are doing some greater good that excuses said evil, and thus their net actions is some how good, or somehow virtuous, or somehow in the right / correct column.

-------

Carry on, this comment was not critiquing any specific user like Malifice (in fact I agree with Malifice). I just feel people were talking past each other so I became that guy, the guy who is often a jerk but he wants everyone to get along even if getting along means people have different opinions and are still dialogue and there may be no unified end of the dialogue in the end of the conversation with changed minds.

[Cheesegear]

Carry on, this comment was not critiquing any specific user like Malifice (in fact I agree with Malifice). I just feel people were talking past each other so I became that guy, the guy who is often a jerk but he wants everyone to get along even if getting along means people have different opinions and are still dialogue and there may be no unified end of the dialogue in the end of the conversation with changed minds.

So, you attempted to fix the thread, without randomly deleting half the posts?
Not possible.

It doesn't matter that by randomly selecting which posts get deleted, the Thread would no longer make coherant sense.
But you'd do it anyway.
Because deleting half of all posts will definitely make sense after the fact.
True story.
I said so. And nobody told me I was wrong. So I am definitely right.
Half. Selected randomly. Deleted. Works every time.

[Ramza00]

So, you attempted to fix the thread, without deleting half the posts?
Not possible.

With great power comes great responsibility, but also sticky webbing and other stuff.

[LaZodiac]

I was hoping they had finally outgrown the origin story thing.

Yeah for heroes we know about.

Look I think Carol Danvers kicks ass but ask me what her backstory is and I'm gonna shrug my ass off into space. Origin story is okay when it's woven into the narrative in a good way like Doctor Strange's was, and when it's an obscure character no one really cares about like the Guardians of the Galaxy.

[GloatingSwine]

Captain Marvel is likely going to have some origin story because super few people know it.

It is, however, also going to tie in to other characters. Lee Pace and Djimon Honsou are coming back, so it's also going to be backstory/origin story for Ronan and Korath. Probably leading to the situation they're rebelling against in Guardians 1.

[Psyren]

I was hoping they had finally outgrown the origin story thing.

For Captain Marvel they kinda have to. Let's use Wonder Woman as a parallel:

1) For Wonder Woman, everybody in the world knows who she is already and even have decent ideas of what she can do (super strength, super tough, lasso, bracers, sometimes flight/sword/shield.) Not only is she famous just in the comic book world, but she had a pretty popular live-action TV show too that a huge chunk of the audience still remembers, has appeared in a bunch of well-received animated vehicles, and also several high-profile video games, particularly the Netherrealm ones. Thus they could introduce her in medias res in BvS with the promise to fill in the blanks later, and everyone could easily roll with it because we knew enough to begin with. Captain Marvel meanwhile has none of that - she's relatively B-tier even in the comics (which isn't damning at all - the Guardians were D-tier until 2014) and outside of even that she's been in basically nothing mainstream.

2) They have to establish her powers so we know what the rules are. It's a safe bet that folks know she's got the bog-standard FISS loadout as her core set, being Marvel's answer to Supergirl, but few know how she got it or what the benchmarks are (how strong/fast/invulnerable/etc.) And comics being comics, there's a huge mythology of ancillary powers they could draw from for her; other powers she's exhibited in the past include a Spidey-sense-like precognitive ability, unassisted space flight, energy absorption, energy blasts, and even a healing factor that may or may not be tied to the previous items. An origin story grounds all of that and lets both her and us come to terms with them as well as clearly establishing what she can and can't do. Wonder Woman didn't need all that because, again, her stuff is well known - and even if they wanted to give her more than FISS+lasso they always have the opportunity to do so later.

3) We have to know where she's been all this time. Sure she's (apparently) going to show up and help against Thanos, but where was she during Sokovia, or New York, or Hydra taking over Shield, etc? Especially since they've established that Fury apparently knows her, they're going to need a damn good reason why we haven't seen her until now. How she even met Fury is a story all its own, and that appears to be (at least in part) the one they're going to tell. Contrast Wonder Woman again - there's nothing really established in the DCEU up until now, everybody is still getting to know each other. Hell, Clark and Bruce becoming friends is still very new, and that is the emotional core of the entire League. So "where was she" just never had to come up.

[Dr.Samurai]

My hope is the Ms. Marvel movie ends with Rogue absorbing her powers and an introduction to a new X-men franchise .

That's likely right? Right??

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I think once someone decides that wiping out half of the universe's population, regardless of the motivation, the idea of reasoning with him pretty much flies right out the window. "I know this guy wants to commit genocide on a scale never before imagined, but what if just...ya know...talked it out."

Furthermore if you hear someone has this plan of mass genocide, I feel like most people's first reaction would be "Holy crap you're crazy, we should stop you." not "*Guffaw* So illogical. Let's discuss the fallacies of your plan in open forum." Especially when he is already halfway done collecting stones.

I also feel that Thanos is an ideas person over a practicality person. He deals heavily in philosophic thought and imagery, like how he uses his nifty balancing dagger to demonstrate his idea, or how he follows a strict "every time Nebula loses, replace part of her" policy. He's a visionary-type character who gained the ability to directly seize the power to implement his schemes. He doesn't care about getting details right. His M.O. so far has been "massacre, then ignore", and it's only working because he's got a team of total fanatics doing his bidding.

Is there an explanation of how Thanos's plan in this movie (which has presumably been his plan all along) was served by having previously empowered Loki to invade Earth and Ronon to wipe out his enemies?

I figured that was him trying to wipe out half of Earth the usual way: invasion. He unwittingly created superhero teams, though.

Xandar may have been a scheme to flush out the power stone.

[Psyren]

My hope is the Ms. Marvel movie ends with Rogue absorbing her powers and an introduction to a new X-men franchise .

That's likely right? Right??

If they follow that up by replacing Carol with Kamala Khan - then yes, yes, a thousand times yes!

I figured that was him trying to wipe out half of Earth the usual way: invasion. He unwittingly created superhero teams, though.

Xandar may have been a scheme to flush out the power stone.

Keep in mind also that the Time Stone was lurking on Earth somewhere during the New York battle too, in the care of the Ancient One. If Thanos knew or suspected that somehow - it seems likely that he did, given how quickly his Black Order goons seemed to hone in on Strange - he could have just as easily surmised that engineering a global crisis/pogrom there might have flushed out whoever was holding onto it. Say, someone who would emerge and try to reverse time if enough people innocent died to Loki and the Chitauri army. What neither he nor Loki anticipated was the level of resistance the sleepy backwater planet would be able to put up, in the form of the Avengers.

Adding credence to this is the event that led to Thanos finally putting on the Gauntlet in the first place - namely Ultron's failure and the loss of the Mind Stone, which Thanos previously had in his possession (before lending it to Loki.) As a matter of fact, it was the stone that Thanos had for the longest amount of time before Infinity War began - well that and the Power Stone, before he lent that to Ronan. Remember that the Mind Stone, like the Soul Stone, has a consciousness within it; If Thanos came into contact with that consciousness while he possessed it, he may have been willing to sit back and see what kind of destruction the stone would cause on its own. (A lot as it turned out, via Ultron.)

(Actually, Thanos getting the Mind Stone could be a story all its own. It was probably instrumental in him creating the fanatical Black Order and learning about the other gems' existences and locations.)

[Douglas]

So, you attempted to fix the thread, without randomly deleting half the posts?
Not possible.

It doesn't matter that by randomly selecting which posts get deleted, the Thread would no longer make coherant sense.
But you'd do it anyway.
Because deleting half of all posts will definitely make sense after the fact.
True story.
I said so. And nobody told me I was wrong. So I am definitely right.
Half. Selected randomly. Deleted. Works every time.

Hey, I have the ability to actually do that if I wanted to. And I don't even need Infinity Stones or a Finger Snap to do it. Does that make me stronger than Thanos?

[Ramza00]

Hey, I have the ability to actually do that if I wanted to. And I don't even need Infinity Stones or a Finger Snap to do it. Does that make me stronger than Thanos?

Points the Fantastic Four's Ultimate Nullifer at you, and extracts a promise that *Galatcus* will not "eat" the Earth or any "post in this thread" for the express purpose of nourishment.

[Malifice]

Furthermore as someone else mentioned Thanos is cast as a specific type of villian, an "anti-villian" a villian who thinks he is a hero in his own story.

Pretty much all villians do think that they're the hero of their own story. When I think of recent evil protagonists like Walter White, Tony Soprano, Dexter or Frank Castle. All four evil murderous psychopaths.

To Godwin the thread, Im sure even Hitler and the Nazis thought they were the good guys.

[Ramza00]

Pretty much all villians do think that they're the hero of their own story. When I think of recent evil protagonists like Walter White, Tony Soprano, Dexter or Frank Castle. All four evil murderous psychopaths.

To Godwin the thread, Im sure even Hitler and the Nazis thought they were the good guys.

Not going to have a debate with you that is lots of back and forth, but some people like being evil for evil sake, such as it brings them pleasure (like sadism), or they feel a rush of dominance (aka it is climbing a pyramid and they like being top), of they like to collect money for money sake (keeping up with the joans, or it is just a mental putting stars on a starboard), or they just don't care about consequences, and so on and so on.

Pretty much everything I can describe as 1) virtue ethics, 2) duties / obligations to oneself or others 3) consequences, or 4) some sort of pleasure principle, another form of #4 is seeing something as a form of beauty. But we do not usually describe reality that way.

So why did I use my previous language when I could use the 4 types of ethical frameworks I listed above.

Because a villain can be a villain while serving some form of goal that they think is heroic, but there are some people are simply not motivated by heroism but they may be motivated by different things. Said villains are people who do not see themselves as heroes even if they seem themselves as doing X and doing X is somehow maximizing X.

Anti-villains are different, they see themselves as doing some form of heroics but they also understand that heroism is not black and white simple and they are fine with trading one form of heroism for another form of heroism.

[Lethologica]

Pretty much all villians do think that they're the hero of their own story. When I think of recent evil protagonists like Walter White, Tony Soprano, Dexter or Frank Castle. All four evil murderous psychopaths.

To Godwin the thread, Im sure even Hitler and the Nazis thought they were the good guys.

Everyone's the protagonist of their own story. But heroes are principled in some way; they stand for something. Lots of people, in fiction and real life both, don't really do that. Some of the fictional ones are villains. Maybe they think ideals are meaningless or nonsensical; maybe they just don't care. Either way, they pursue their goals without much regard for fulfilling ideals in the process. For every Redcloak, there's a Xykon. For every Durkon* or Tarquin, there's a Bozzok or Crystal.

Anyway...This incarnation of Thanos is the ultimate well-intentioned extremist. Whether that makes him an anti-villain or whatever...meh. That term never had a really solid meaning to begin with. Arguing about it is like building on quicksand.

[Malifice]

Not going to have a debate with you that is lots of back and forth, but some people like being evil for evil sake

That is exceedingly rare.

Virtually all villains both historical and contemporary in the real world do evil for 'a greater good'. The 'greater good' is the default reasoning put forward for nearly every act of genocide, torture and murder.

If I am going to go out and murder 100 people, I have a reason for doing it. I have somehow justified this hideous act to myself. What most people do is they rationalise it as being for some sort of greater good. In service to your God or your nation or family or some higher ideal.

Even the most monstrous of people don't see themselves as monstrous. Or if they do see themselves as monstrous, they justify it in other ways.

I personally think those justifications are interesting to explore. It is in part why we have seen the success of so many shows lately that explore a villain as the protagonist (The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Punisher, Dexter).

I would find a villain that does evil like murder or torture, simply for the sake of murdering or torture, to be boring.

[Cheesegear]

I personally think those justifications are interesting to explore. It is in part why we have seen the success of so many shows lately that explore a villain as the protagonist (The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Punisher, Dexter).

Again, you're talking about Anti-Villains, those are compelling, because their motivations make sense.
However, when you go back a few years, maybe even your childhood, you'll find that there are Villains, who are just Villains. "Give me ten billion dollars, or I'll blow up the moon!" Uh...Okay?
You have people who kidnap other people, just to get a ransom payment.
You have people who abuse other people, because it's fun.

There are villains who are evil, because they want to be, generally at the expense of others. Why is the villain people-trafficking? 'Cause he gets paid.
Being evil for evil's sake, isn't unnatural, and it can be found in a whole boat-load of stories going back forever.

Walter White, however, begins life as an anti-hero. Not a villain. He does bad things, in order to provide for his family, which we most certainly relate to, and root for him to succeed. Eventually he crosses the line, to Anti-Villain, where he starts doing shady things, in order so that worse things don't happen, including screwing over his own family, and at this point, you're going "Whoa. Walt. Hang on." ...Until eventually Walt becomes an actual Villain, where he does bad things, because he likes doing it.
But Walt didn't start as a villain. He was a hero, well into Season 2.

The Punisher is essentially the definition of Anti-Hero. Bad guys killed his family. We immediately sympathise with him. What he does, proves to work. Because Frank's method of doing things is effective, consistent, and we want him to succeed - even at the expense of the police - he is a hero, not a villain. If Frank was a villain, we wouldn't want him to succeed. But we do. Thus, he is the Hero, even when he does bad things. Thus, Anti-Hero.

Dexter Morgan, likewise, is a hero, who does bad things...Except when he's a villain, who does bad things.

Just because someone does bad things, doesn't make them a villain. Just because someone does good things, doesn't make them a hero.
Grey morality is real thing, and often makes for really compelling storytelling.

Except when you do it badly, it comes off as...Bad, and very noticeable. Do the writers of Infinity War really want me to relate to a guy whose goal is to hemi-genocide the Universe? WHY IS THANOS CRYING? I DON'T EMPATHISE WITH THIS MONSTER. WHY IS THIS SCENE IN THE MOVIE!?

[-D-]

Except when you do it badly, it comes off as...Bad, and very noticeable. Do the writers of Infinity War really want me to relate to a guy whose goal is to hemi-genocide the Universe? WHY IS THANOS CRYING? I DON'T EMPATHISE WITH THIS MONSTER. WHY IS THIS SCENE IN THE MOVIE!?

Thanos is crying, because he misses his favorite fighting child (as in dog fighting).

[ben-zayb]

Thanos is crying, because he misses his favorite fighting child (as in dog fighting).

D'awww. So kibda like Ash Ketchum, except he just looks old? Hey, we even got Ash collecting stones all over the region.