Dinostar77 wrote:

Though scarlett witch could do with a wardrobe upgrade.

She seems to be unhappy about being given a costume that shows cleavage.

Dinostar77 wrote:

there is a continuity error in the movie. when was the gaunlet forged as it appeared in the early clips with thanos (avengers 1?) therefore he must have attacked the dwarf forging place awhile back. lastly, when are they going to introduce adam warlock? also i wonder if the living tribunal will make an apperance in part 2.

Sorry long draw back to this comment so may have been answered but I thought the gauntlet they showed in the original Avengers or whenever was shown to be fake by Death lady in Thor Rag as she walked through the "hall of treasures" place. So the forging would have happened more recently.

Also the start was great. That Loki death was quite brutal for this kind of movie and really set the tone. It actually upset me a bit because I rather liked Loki.

Anyone listen to the Empire spoilercast? I was chuckling heartily at the Peter Dinklage impression

Uh so the purple bloke is a textbook Malthusian pissking who wants all the power ever to eliminate resource crises via murder but his solution is not to just use the glove to make more resources?? How is this writing.

Okay but that's an audience assessment. I find it baffling that wouldn't even be raised as a plot angle. As a fucking quip even.

If he increases the food supply, the population would go up and eventually outstrip that supply again. Killing half of everything off wouldn’t stop the population rising again either so pretty dumb either way.

monkey wrote:

If he increases the food supply, the population would go up and eventually outstrip that supply again. Killing half of everything off wouldn’t stop the population rising again either so pretty dumb either way.

So just make more stuff?? I mean

Is it ever explained what The Balance actually is in this context, or is that also to be inferred somehow during all the punching.

The Balance involves a knife and if it goes too much one way or the other that’s bad for some reason.

I'll take a stab at the Thanos thing.

In the movie Thanos explains that when his planet Titan reached over-saturation point , he proposed a random elimination of half the population to reduce the strain but also so they could start again and not make the same mistake. The rest of the population say no to this and Titan falls into ruin and everyone dies (I'm guessing Thanos loses his family here and that has a big impact on why he keeps creating 'Children' of Thanos but thats me guessing)

It's important to remember that this happens before he has the gauntlet or possibly even the notion that such a powerful thing could exist so in his mind the solution  was and always will be to randomly kill half the population. The fall of his planet turns him a bit mad and now he is so focused on this being the only way to fix the problem.

Also worth thinking about is that no one apart from Thanos sees the problem of finite resources in the Galaxy. Its never been brought up in a film before and it isn't here. This is an assumption of Thanos and in a way it's like a hypochondriac in this regard. He thinks the Universe is running out of resources but that could really all be in his head. 

In reference to why not just use the gauntlet to add more resources, apart from the final act of removing half the population of the galaxy, the effects of the stone are shown throughout the movie to be both temporary and linked to how close Thanos is. When he leaves a scene usually any effects caused also get removed. Even in the last scene where the gauntlet is fully powered he fuses Banner in the Hulk buster into rocks but once he is gone Banner is back to normal. I thought this was very deliberately done.

For me the major problem with the Thanos is not the why (he is insane and often referred to as such) but the how. It's never explained how the combination of the Stones allows Thanos to produce the ultimate kill switch (or why flipping that switch seems to be a once off move which destroys the gauntlet). I don't need a huge logic fill for this plot hole but some general explanation I think would have helped.

As with any of this comic movies (and to be fair superhero comics themselves) I think you either buy into it being about the characters and the action or not. Too much explanation is really for the excess nerds and you can see how that's poisoned the star wars scene.

What I liked about Thanos (if like is the right word) was the weariness. He had his solution and remained convinced of it. His remark to Stark about being cursed with knowledge further indicates his conviction in the solution and in the fact that he is the one to do it. It's not high brow but it's good for comic book fodder.

RedDave2 wrote:

I'll take a stab at the Thanos thing.

In the movie Thanos explains that when his planet Titan reached over-saturation point , he proposed a random elimination of half the population to reduce the strain but also so they could start again and not make the same mistake. The rest of the population say no to this and Titan falls into ruin and everyone dies (I'm guessing Thanos loses his family here and that has a big impact on why he keeps creating 'Children' of Thanos but thats me guessing)

It's important to remember that this happens before he has the gauntlet or possibly even the notion that such a powerful thing could exist so in his mind the solution  was and always will be to randomly kill half the population. The fall of his planet turns him a bit mad and now he is so focused on this being the only way to fix the problem.

Also worth thinking about is that no one apart from Thanos sees the problem of finite resources in the Galaxy. Its never been brought up in a film before and it isn't here. This is an assumption of Thanos and in a way it's like a hypochondriac in this regard. He thinks the Universe is running out of resources but that could really all be in his head. 

In reference to why not just use the gauntlet to add more resources, apart from the final act of removing half the population of the galaxy, the effects of the stone are shown throughout the movie to be both temporary and linked to how close Thanos is. When he leaves a scene usually any effects caused also get removed. Even in the last scene where the gauntlet is fully powered he fuses Banner in the Hulk buster into rocks but once he is gone Banner is back to normal. I thought this was very deliberately done.

For me the major problem with the Thanos is not the why (he is insane and often referred to as such) but the how. It's never explained how the combination of the Stones allows Thanos to produce the ultimate kill switch (or why flipping that switch seems to be a once off move which destroys the gauntlet). I don't need a huge logic fill for this plot hole but some general explanation I think would have helped.

As with any of this comic movies (and to be fair superhero comics themselves) I think you either buy into it being about the characters and the action or not. Too much explanation is really for the excess nerds and you can see how that's poisoned the star wars scene.

Bish, bash bosh. you smashed it.

Brooks wrote:

RedDave, you have to appreciate how much heavy lifting you're having to do to get this thing to make a lick of sense right. In a populist comicbook movie that isn't exactly selling itself on pensive ambiguity whatsoever.

I'd argue that given the heroes in marvel movies spend more time fighting each other over different motivations rather than the villains, it fits fine.

It's not like the jokers actions in dark knight stand up to much scrutiny either in terms of the why or how either. You either are prepared to have fun with the ride or maybe just don't go to this type of film.

Saw it yesterday, engaged us throughout. Props to everyone envolved, esp Brolin.
Can understand how uncomfortable it was for the nippers to watch their heros disintegrate. Bleak ass fuck.