Movies Avengers: Endgame Trailer and Discussion Thread

[CitizenVectron]

13 minutes ago, elbobo said:

oh yeah I want to talk about Antman's incredible inconsistent power. In the first Antman movie it is explicated stated that he maintains his mass regardless of size, so Paul Rudd sized Antman, grain of rice sized Antman and 100' tall Antman should all weigh about 170lbs but they clearly don't. If you are going to bother to explain the "science" in comicbook movies you need to try and stick to it, if you want it to just be fun no one cares magic that is fine but once you throw some dialogue in about how things work don't get mad when people call you out on it. 

 

 

Nah, Giant Man looks sick so it's cool.

[EternallDarkness]

35 minutes ago, elbobo said:

oh yeah I want to talk about Antman's incredible inconsistent power. In the first Antman movie it is explicated stated that he maintains his mass regardless of size, so Paul Rudd sized Antman, grain of rice sized Antman and 100' tall Antman should all weigh about 170lbs but they clearly don't. If you are going to bother to explain the "science" in comicbook movies you need to try and stick to it, if you want it to just be fun no one cares magic that is fine but once you throw some dialogue in about how things work don't get mad when people call you out on it. 

 

Consistency isn't something Marvel seems to care all the much about. Hell just look at the infinity gauntlet itself. How many are there? We saw one in Odin's treasure room in Thor. Later after Age of Ultron we see Thanos put a gauntlet on...so he already had one? If that was the case why the hell did he have to go slaughter the dwarfs and force the imp to make him a new one? 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

40 minutes ago, elbobo said:

oh yeah I want to talk about Antman's incredible inconsistent power. In the first Antman movie it is explicated stated that he maintains his mass regardless of size, so Paul Rudd sized Antman, grain of rice sized Antman and 100' tall Antman should all weigh about 170lbs but they clearly don't. If you are going to bother to explain the "science" in comicbook movies you need to try and stick to it, if you want it to just be fun no one cares magic that is fine but once you throw some dialogue in about how things work don't get mad when people call you out on it. 

Ok, so I did remember correctly. I thought it seemed odd when he punched that giant flying thing. I was thinking, “how would he have enough strength and force to do that if he’s got the same mass as regular sizes man?”  

[Pikachu]

The gauntlet in Odin's room was explained as a fake when Hela knocks it over. Joe Russo stated that the AOU scene is a flash forward to him stealing gauntlet from the Dwarves: https://www.businessinsider.com/avengers-infinity-war-directors-answer-movie-questions-2018-5?IR=T#how-does-avengers-infinity-war-fit-with-age-of-ultron-6

[EternallDarkness]

2 minutes ago, Pikachu said:

The gauntlet in Odin's room was explained as a fake when Hela knocks it over. Joe Russo stated that the AOU scene is a flash forward to him stealing gauntlet from the Dwarves: https://www.businessinsider.com/avengers-infinity-war-directors-answer-movie-questions-2018-5?IR=T#how-does-avengers-infinity-war-fit-with-age-of-ultron-6

 

stealing from the dwarfs? Does that really make sense give what we are told in IW? According to IW he didn't steal it from the dwarves he slaughtered them in order to force its creation. 

[Pikachu]

Yeah, forced their hand is what I meant to say. He obtained the gauntlet from Nidavellir in that scene.

[Kal-El814]

2 hours ago, elbobo said:

oh yeah I want to talk about Antman's incredible inconsistent power. In the first Antman movie it is explicated stated that he maintains his mass regardless of size, so Paul Rudd sized Antman, grain of rice sized Antman and 100' tall Antman should all weigh about 170lbs but they clearly don't. If you are going to bother to explain the "science" in comicbook movies you need to try and stick to it, if you want it to just be fun no one cares magic that is fine but once you throw some dialogue in about how things work don't get mad when people call you out on it. 

They’ve never been consistent about that, even within the first Ant-Man. Hank carries a tank on a keychain, Scott crawls on people without them falling over, etc. There’s obviously more to it then just mass retention. 

 

Every hero in the MCU goes through this, they get what they need when they need it and don’t when they don’t. 

[TwinIon]

3 hours ago, elbobo said:

oh yeah I want to talk about Antman's incredible inconsistent power. In the first Antman movie it is explicated stated that he maintains his mass regardless of size, so Paul Rudd sized Antman, grain of rice sized Antman and 100' tall Antman should all weigh about 170lbs but they clearly don't. If you are going to bother to explain the "science" in comicbook movies you need to try and stick to it, if you want it to just be fun no one cares magic that is fine but once you throw some dialogue in about how things work don't get mad when people call you out on it. 

I try not to get bogged down in these kinds of things, but for some reason Ant-man's physics bother me more than anything else in the MCU. There's something about the inconsistency of mass and momentum that makes everything about him feel off. As much as I try not to nit-pick something like the physics of Marvel, when it just feels wrong in the moment, it's harder to enjoy the movie.

[CitizenVectron]

50 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

They’ve never been consistent about that, even within the first Ant-Man. Hank carries a tank on a keychain, Scott crawls on people without them falling over, etc. There’s obviously more to it then just mass retention. 

 

Every hero in the MCU goes through this, they get what they need when they need it and don’t when they don’t. 

 

11 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

I try not to get bogged down in these kinds of things, but for some reason Ant-man's physics bother me more than anything else in the MCU. There's something about the inconsistency of mass and momentum that makes everything about him feel off. As much as I try not to nit-pick something like the physics of Marvel, when it just feels wrong in the moment, it's harder to enjoy the movie.

 

An easy way to rationalize it is that Ant-Man can control on his little discs if it will change the mass or the object (including himself).

[EternallDarkness]

The real question is how many times did Scott shrink or grow in that final battle. We know he was out of Pym particles when he returned from the past. Stark grabbed 4 vials in 1970. Two of them got used bringing him and Steve back to the future, which means they only had two to give to Scott for that final battle. I know for sure he shrank to dive underground and then grew again to shave Hulk and company...but I am almost certain he shrank again later while working with Hope, when she call's captain America Cap. So if we are to go on what they were showing us earlier in the movie, Scott should have been out of juice mid final battle....and yes I am nitpicking  

[Kal-El814]

2 minutes ago, EternallDarkness said:

The real question is how many times did Scott shrink or grow in that final battle. 

Is it?

[EternallDarkness]

1 minute ago, Kal-El814 said:

Is it?

believe that!

[Pikachu]

I thought the two use thing for the particles were specifically regarding time travel. I don't think it's ever mentioned how many particles are used to grow and shrink in size. Neither of the two Ant-Man movies or Civil War show Ant-Man changing vials after shrinking and growing from what I remember. The growing and shrinking discs are one time use only.

[elbobo]

2 minutes ago, Pikachu said:

I thought the two use thing for the particles were specifically regarding time travel. I don't think it's every mentioned how many particles are used to grow and shrink in size. Neither of the two Ant-Man movies or Civil War show Ant-Man changing vials after shrinking and growing from what I remember. The growing and shrinking discs are one time use only.

 

I agree with this, I don't recall the consumption of the particles from regular growing and shrinking being a thing 

[SuperSpreader]

My only problem with big ant man is the same problem I have with all giants, why so they make them move slow? It's not like ants or other small animals outrun us or exist at a different time rate. Happens in every "big thing" movie. Like.. yeah a coyote is faster, but we don't run in slow motion after them. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

The amount of particles used could correlate to how big or small Scott goes. To go quantum dice takes a full vial. To go as small as a inch may take less. Maybe significantly less. 

[CitizenVectron]

14 minutes ago, 2user1cup said:

My only problem with big ant man is the same problem I have with all giants, why so they make them move slow? It's not like ants or other small animals outrun us or exist at a different time rate. Happens in every "big thing" movie. Like.. yeah a coyote is faster, but we don't run in slow motion after them. 

 

It's a property of physics. As size of an object doubles, the energy required to move it quadruples. If speed increased proportionately with muscle size, Elephants would run at over 200km/h.

[EternallDarkness]

3 hours ago, Pikachu said:

I thought the two use thing for the particles were specifically regarding time travel. I don't think it's ever mentioned how many particles are used to grow and shrink in size. Neither of the two Ant-Man movies or Civil War show Ant-Man changing vials after shrinking and growing from what I remember. The growing and shrinking discs are one time use only.

oh I agree and as I wasn't being all that serious at all and was as I said nitpicking. They made a point of introducing that plot point that they were running low on Pym particles so it begged the question where did more come from? While watching I didn't in fact give the notion a seconds thought. 

[SuperSpreader]

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

It's a property of physics. As size of an object doubles, the energy required to move it quadruples. If speed increased proportionately with muscle size, Elephants would run at over 200km/h.

Yeah but elephants don't run in slow motion relative to everything around it.  

 

 

[CitizenVectron]

30 minutes ago, 2user1cup said:

Yeah but elephants don't run in slow motion relative to everything around it.  

 

 

 

But they do. Their legs move much slower than ours when they run, as well as dogs, ants, etc. 

[SuperSpreader]

They run slower not in perpetual slow motion

[Firewithin]

Ok saw my second viewing and the theater was half full on a Monday night after work.  People still Poppin for cap picking up mjolnir and "assemble"

 

Ok seeing the new Spiderman trailer this morning I started thinking that at the end when Peter and ned look emotional it might be because the world knows Ironman is gone and since ned knew Peter was hanging out with him it's why they look like they are consoling each other

[Dragonseeker]

11 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

They’ve never been consistent about that, even within the first Ant-Man. Hank carries a tank on a keychain, Scott crawls on people without them falling over, etc. There’s obviously more to it then just mass retention. 

 

Every hero in the MCU goes through this, they get what they need when they need it and don’t when they don’t. 

 

Thor's powers are incredibly inconsistent too. In the first Avengers movie, he was summoning a lighting storm to decimate the enemies coming out of the portal. 

 

Then 80 percent of the time, we don't see his lightning power and he start fighting hordes of enemies hand to hand. 

 

Thor's inconsistency is similar to Storm's in the X-Men movies. She could summon tornadoes and hurricanes but only use lightning powers 80% of the time. 

[CitizenVectron]

15 hours ago, 2user1cup said:

They run slower not in perpetual slow motion

 

All movement is slowed at larger speeds (relative to size) due to the quadrupling of energy for doubling of size. This is why there is a functional limit on animal size on Earth, as beyond a certain size muscles are not able to move bodies.

[SuperSpreader]

22 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

All movement is slowed at larger speeds (relative to size) due to the quadrupling of energy for doubling of size. This is why there is a functional limit on animal size on Earth, as beyond a certain size muscles are not able to move bodies.

Hrm. I get it. I'm not disagreeing, but they way they film the slower movement it looks like slow motion not a larger animal moving slower. It looks like a normal person filmed at a faster pace and slowed down. It doesn't look like their muscles have to produce more energy to move larger mass.

[elbobo]

So how does 2014 or whenever it was Thanos going to 2023 not create an alternate timeline? With the stones they spelled out as long as they return them to the point in the time when they were taken it won't screw things up. With 2014 Thanos though he dies in 2023 so he can't be returned to his original place in time and then if he just disappears from the timeline after 2014 he could never do his original snap to begin with. So they did create a timeline in which there is no Infinity War, they should have just strangled baby Thanos in the crib like Rhodes suggested. 

[Jason]

5 minutes ago, elbobo said:

So how does 2014 or whenever it was Thanos going to 2023 not create an alternate timeline? With the stones they spelled out as long as they return them to the point in the time when they were taken it won't screw things up. With 2014 Thanos though he dies in 2023 so he can't be returned to his original place in time and then if he just disappears from the timeline after 2014 he could never do his original snap to begin with. So they did create a timeline in which there is no Infinity War, they should have just strangled baby Thanos in the crib like Rhodes suggested. 

 

You answered your own question...they created A timeline, they didn't reboot THE timeline. 

[elbobo]

1 minute ago, Jason said:

 

You answered your own question...they created A timeline, they didn't reboot THE timeline. 

 

The whole conversation Banner Hulk had with Tao though made it seem incredibly important to not create another timeline though. 

[Jason]

Just now, elbobo said:

 

The whole conversation Banner Hulk had with Tao though made it seem incredibly important to not create another timeline though. 

 

@Kal-El814 did I fall asleep during the PowerPoint presentation? I could have sworn her concern was the alternate timelines going to shit with the stones missing from them, not preventing the alternate timelines from existing in the first place. 

[elbobo]

they showed when they plucked a stone out it created a new branch and that was bad but if they put the stone back it got rid of the branch and everything was cool, unless I am misremembering it. 

[Jason]

I think the branches were the various ways the new timeline could go to hell, not the new timeline splitting off from the OG timeline?

[Remarkableriots]

15 minutes ago, elbobo said:

 

The whole conversation Banner Hulk had with Tao though made it seem incredibly important to not create another timeline though. 

It was about a horrible timeline that would have been created without the stones.

[Pikachu]

This is the actual dialogue courtesy of IMDB: 

 

Quote

TAO: The Infinity stones create what you experience as the flow of time. Remove one stone and that flow splits. Now, this may benefit your reality but my new one, not so much. In this new branched reality, without our chief weapon against the forces of darkness, our world will be over run. Millions will suffer. So, tell me Doctor, can your science prevent all that?

 

 

[SuperSpreader]

7 minutes ago, Pikachu said:

This is the actual dialogue courtesy of IMDB: 

 

 

 

Bish just wanted her rock back

[Remarkableriots]

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2471448/the-russo-brothers-confirm-that-hulks-avengers-endgame-damage-is-permanent

Quote

He’s lost an arm. He lost Natasha. That’s not coming back. He’s damaged himself. I don’t know. It’s interesting. That’s permanent damage, the same way that it was permanent damage with Thanos. It’s irreversible damage. His arm, if you noticed, is a lot skinnier. It’s blackened. So, he loses a lot of strength there.e

I had figured he would have eventually healed up so this is kinda surprising. I would like to see him cameo in other MCU movies like Black Panther or something.