Avengers: Endgame - April 2019. OFFICIAL CONFIRMED UPDATED! Tickets on sale!

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JujuFish

Diamond Member
Feb 3, 2005
9,850
29
116
I'd have to go watch it again, but they spent the entire setup of the 'time heist' repeatedly saying they needed to preserve the timeline. Not once did they say they were OK with splitting things as it would risk issues in their own timeline. I remember Banner saying that the AC's issue of it splintering off wasn't an issue because they were going to fix it all by putting it all back. Not going, we're going to splinter off, but don't worry we'll bring your stone back to your timeline. She just wasn't convinced that they could do it, and wasn't willing to risk the stone on them until she heard that Strange said it was their only hope. Hell, keeping the timeline intact and not splintering it off is the whole reason for bringing everyone back 5 years later... I have a really hard time with everyone trying to explain away the movie's giving up the last third of the movie. It's all fine to whoever if that's what they want to believe, but not once in the movie did they explain any of this. This is all tacked on afterwards in attempts to cover the fact the movie had plot holes big enough to have a parade in.
You're right; you do have to watch it again.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
6,201
178
126
Yeah, the plot holes aren't really plot holes if you remember that not every character in the movie knows exactly what is going on with all other characters at all times.

Tony Stark explaining the "rules" of time travel? Just theory.
Bruce Banner promising to set the timeline right? He had no idea that Loki was creating an alternate time line at that very moment.
Undoing the snap the way they did? Nobody knew Nebula was going to forever skew the "main" timeline.

It's like people who think Rey's parents in Star Wars HAVE to be nobodies because Ben Solo said so. Like he somehow knows this to be gospel truth AND doesn't have huge motivation not to lie about it.
 
Nov 27, 2001
28,963
29
126
Tony Stark explaining the "rules" of time travel? Just theory.
According to the latest Because Science on YouTube, it appears that Endgame actually follows what's considered proper rules of quantum mechanics and the ability to traverse through time. Although, their "solution" is likely just some sort of mumbo-jumbo, but the use of quantum mechanics and being unable to change the past is considered accurate.


EDIT:

Although, I think the real question that we're not asking is... did Cap have to inject the goo back into Jane? o_O
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
4,198
444
136
Time-travel in fiction almost never stands up to scrutiny. I gather the movie 'Primer' made a serious effort at making sense, but that's why there are vastly complicated flowcharts on the web trying to explain that movie.

(I only ever saw the first 5 minutes of Primer, before future-me appeared and explained I would never be able to understand it so shouldn't bother watching it).
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
4,198
444
136
Also, I'm sure we're living in an alternate time-line right now, and I expect we'll all vanish in a puff of temporal logic, once Marty gets that Sports Almanac back from 'Biff' Trump.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
42,655
229
126
Finally saw it, a month after release. Theater was still packed!

THE FEELS :weary::weary::weary:
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
42,655
229
126
No. The Ancient One wasn't going to give Banner the stone because she didn't want her reality changed for someone else's reality, so Banner explained that they would bring the stones back at the point they took them, to fix her reality.
I thought that was a sufficient explanation, without getting too deep into the headaches of time-travels. The visualization of the timeline & the splinter going black, with the stone being restored to fix it, was good 'nuff imo.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
42,655
229
126
1. Why didn't Tony just snap himself back to life?

2. I think they messed up a shot - when Scott was hot-wiring the van during the final fight, it showed him a second later as a giant WWF-bodyslamming one of the snake-ships.

3. I wonder what happened to Loki...or is that how he got back to Asgard, and then had to steal it back at the end of Thor Ragnarok?
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
5,799
88
116
1. Why didn't Tony just snap himself back to life?

2. I think they messed up a shot - when Scott was hot-wiring the van during the final fight, it showed him a second later as a giant WWF-bodyslamming one of the snake-ships.

3. I wonder what happened to Loki...or is that how he got back to Asgard, and then had to steal it back at the end of Thor Ragnarok?
3. He's got a show on the new Disney streaming service. That'll prob be where they show what happened to him.
 

spacejamz

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
9,794
169
126
Finally saw it yesterday....that movie could have easily been shaved by 30 minutes or more and still have the same feel (for example, opening sequence could have been cut in half)...

we enjoyed the movie though....
 

Meghan54

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2009
8,565
300
126
Finally saw it, a month after release. Theater was still packed!

THE FEELS :weary::weary::weary:

Saw it maybe 2 weeks ago at an 11AM showing. 6 people in the theater, including the two of us (my wife and myself.) Decent enough movie, but maybe shoulda waited for it to come out on DVD/streaming. Don't quite think it was worth the $30 we spent. (Small Coke is $6...???? WTF????? And this reminded me of one reason we don't go to the movies much any longer...)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS