What Movie Have You Seen Today?

AVENGERS: ENDGAME

I know, I’m late to that party. I enjoy the Marvel films but I’m not a diehard fan, nor do I know the comic books as well or at all (it´s been more than 40 years since I bought Spider-Man comics, so…)

Okay, since Orion brought the time travel thing up in another thread (and because I actually had three hours to spend on this film) I finally watched the conclusion of all the previous films. I must say, the time flew by, it all is done very well, the ending(s) are well earned and satisfying (and much quicker than the dreaded RETURN OF THE KING endings). I enjoyed myself - but on the other hand I was glad it is over now (with that part of the saga) since watching all those previous movies being essential for the understanding of this one does feel like homework to me. And it made me realize how great it is that Bond films do NOT make it essential to know every film that came before.

All in all, I must say that now that this part of the Marvel saga is over I don’t think that I will want to watch future films (except the “Guardians of the Galaxy” and maybe the next “Thor”). My reason: What I like about the Marvel films is the comedy, not the fight scenes which just have no impact on me. Because they don’t really have an impact on those characters. They pummel each other for minutes, nobody gets really hurt, it´s just a video game.

That is my huge problem with so many fight scenes these days in action blockbuster movies - and this is why I was so happy with Bond films: he does not fight for long, and he does get hurt.

As for the time travel - Orion, what was your gripe about that again? Going back to kill Thanos early would have just killed him for that new timeline, right? The previously existing timeline would continue because everything in it has already happened. What the Avengers do is taking the stones from the past and bringing them into the present in order to reverse their wipeout-effect, true?

My issue is they don’t stick to their own time travel rules, it changes for character need. Time needs to be unchangable so as to allow both Gamora and Black Widow to have their noble sacrifices, but it needs to be changeable for Capt. America to have his happy ending. Those actions are so far apart, and the film is entertaining in its wit and performances that change mostly slips by unnoticed. The problem arises with the guardians of the galaxy characters, which tries to do both time is malleable and time is fixed and all the logic collapses as the events of Guardians 1 suddenly needs to have happened and not happened.

Knowing the film had rewrites during filming, I’m assuming they had the traditional use of time travel at one point, then changed their minds. Antman’s version of “whatever” versus Dr Strange’s which is EXACTLY the version Doc. Brown explains on a chalk board.

It’s better if you don’t think about it, which I think is the mistake I made, just enjoy it for what it is - time travel purely for the excuse to look back at how they got here and have as many cast members back for the end as possible.

Now I am thinking about it…

Captain America goes back in time and lives there - so the past becomes the present.

However, they can’t go back to kill Thanos before he does the wipe out - because it would be another timeline.

BUT… Banner brings Cap back from his new timeline - so it does make sense! If Banner hadn’t done that Cap would have lived out his timeline to the end without returning to the timeline in which the others exist!

I thought Cap lived there and just went back to meet Falcon? May need to watch it again, did not get that Hulk had actually brought him over.

Yes and no. There are two established methods for mucking with time in this storyline. One is to travel through the Quantum Realm, which as established in “Ant Man” (and arguably “Dr Strange”) is not so much a realm as a conduit connecting all versions of reality. A mortal thrown into this realm on his own is likely to be lost forever, neither here nor there for all eternity (as nearly happens to Michelle Pfeiffer’s character in “Ant Man and the Wasp”). But with the aid of the handy doo-dads in “Endgame,” it’s possible to pinpoint specific moments in time and space and “hop out” of the Quantum Realm where – and when – you want to. So if 2019 Avengers living in the reality we’ve become used to in these films (let’s call it Earth Prime, as long as we’re stealing DC’s IP) use the Quantum Realm to travel back to Earth Prime’s 2012, then as soon as they show up there, they’ve created a new timeline, just by virtue of their presence.

That part we have “explained” to us several times. But there’s still a way to change the past without necessarily creating a new timeline, and that is to use the godlike powers of the Infinity Gauntlet. With combined mastery over reality and time (and several other things), the Gauntlet stands apart from any rules of physics, reality or logic, and if it’s possible for it to make true a wish to “return everyone who disappeared 5 years ago and while you’re at it, destroy Thanos and all his troops”, then it should be equally possible for it to make true the wish, “erase the last five years of history and return us to 2018 except with Thanos dead.”

This would have been nice, because as pointed out elsewhere on the web, the “bring everyone back 5 years later” thing creates as many problems as it solves. People would return to find their loved ones have died in the intervening 5 years due to illness, injury or old age, their homes now occupied by new owners, their jobs filled by someone else, their fortunes spent by executors or heirs, etc. The thousands of people who vanished while on a commercial airline flight will reappear at 30,000 feet with no plane around them, folks driving down the highway when they vanished will reappear moving 60mph with no car, etc. The courts would be flooded with disputes over property and finances for decades to come: if you owned and operated a successful corporation, vanished, then reappeared to find someone else in charge – someone legally and properly voted into the job by your Board of Directors – who is the rightful claimant to the job?

The film pokes fun at “Back to the Future’s” version of time travel – that you can change your own timeline – and really in a way, it’s right. When Marty changes the circumstances of his parents’ courtship and thus the nature of their relationship, he effectively creates a new timeline. A timeline in which George McFly is confident and successful and so are his children. A timeline that includes a version of Marty McFly, but it can’t be the SAME version. When Marty “returns” to 1985, it’s a different 1985, one that logically would’ve been inhabited by a Marty McFly with a whole different life experience and mindset. In addition to that spiffy new truck he finds in the garage, he should also find a doppleganger Marty living in his bedroom!

Endgame takes a more logical approach, sort of, but they make a hash of it. When Steve goes back in time and stays there, what exactly happens? If he lives out the next few decades in a separate timeline, then it must be one where Peggy also knew, loved and missed him, or else how can there be a reunion? But for that to be true, then there must be another version of Cap stuck in the ice in that reality, and so “our” Steve is stealing that Steve’s Peggy! He’s the only person in that reality who knows “Captain America” is not dead, but rather stuck in the ice somewhere, and he keeps that information to himself so he can give himself a happy ending. That’s not very “heroic,” is it? Alternately, if he somehow manages to live in the “Prime” timeline…creating two Steves in one universe…and we simply haven’t seen him until now, then there are other problems. If he’s been married to Peggy in “our” reality, it would’ve had to be a secret marriage, so secret he didn’t even come out of the shadows to appear at Peggy’s funeral for Pete’s sake. Some husband. And for a lot of that history, he’d still have had the powers and abilities of Captain America, but kept himself secret so as not to upset his “happy ending.” So the champion of America watched quietly and did nothing as history unfolded tragedies he knew were coming: JFK, MLK, the Oklahoma City bombing, 9/11, etc. Nice.

But he has to be in another timeline, or else where does he get the shield he hands to Sam Wilson at the end? The shield from our timeline is destroyed, and we know its whereabouts until that happens. So not only did he steal the happy ending owed to another universe’s Cap, he also trudged up to the Arctic and stole the shield out of his frozen hands!

Actually, I’ve mentally written my own solution to that one: Steve goes back to 1945 with the aim of rescuing his alternate self so that guy has the chance at a happy ending. But on finding the plane, he learns the other Steve is not frozen, but in fact dead (so it’s already a new timeline). He buries that Steve, takes the shield and vows to live enough life for the two of them.

Anyway, Endgame is a mess, but it’s a fun mess (which makes it a perfect capstone to the MCU). I’m grateful to get any ending at all to 10 years worth of storylines, and now I can jump off and be done with the whole thing, not the usual way I leave a franchise – in either boredom or disgust – but with an actual ending. And thanks to Amazon’s “The Boys,” I can throw the last shovel full of dirt on the whole superhero genre.

2 Likes

Wow, those Marvel movies are really a workout for one´s grey cells… :wink:

1 Like

Greyer every day, alas.

2 Likes

Hey, can you now explain why in all the Terminator movies Skynet is not clever enough to destroy the time machine of the rebels? :upside_down_face:

Or… the further you go back for more ancestors there are. Kill anyone one of them and sarah doesn’t get born, let alone John.

1 Like

Basically the writers of Endgame still havn’t decided on the time travel they’re using.

It is a very enjoyable film, with brilliant performances and some poignant moments. Just don’t think into it.

1 Like

It doesn’t make sense to say “Steve didn’t change history because he couldn’t change history.” All the heroes DO change history in the film, just not their OWN timeline’s history. Steve knocks out another Steve, Loki escapes capture in NY and his staff goes missing. This creates a new timeline with an alternate history. Fat Thor takes the hammer from the " Dark World" storyline and thus creates an alternate timeline where a younger Thor has no hammer. Starlord is knocked out at what would have been the start of GOTG 1 and, logically, gets killed when the bad guys show up a few minutes later. Past Thanos is killed before he can even find all the stones, let alone USE them, so there’s another timeline ( "Prime"Thanos is already dead 10 minutes in!)

It would be the same with Steve: he rescues Bucky in 1946 or so, or saves JFK or prevents 9/11 because of course he can. But as soon as he does, he’s living in a new timeline and can’t show up as an old man in the “prime” timeline. But what’s more important, living to old age to amaze his pals and hand off the shield, or defending his country and fellow citizens even if it means he wont be able to meet his old friends at a park one day?I

Even if Old Steve does live through the established MCU timeline as a “let 'em help themselves” observer – because he only cares about Peggy --where is he when she’s in the nursing home, or being buried? Creep. Peggy was the first director of SHIELD, for Pete’s sake: is he really going to stay home working on model planes or building shelves while she puts her life on the line, and he might’ve helped her?

It’s worth noting even the directors and writers cannot agree on what happened to Steve in his missing years here, and if the people who made the film can’t make any sense of it, I’d argue there’s no sense to be made.

3 Likes

JOKER.

This is not a popcorn movie, it’s something much more. Phoenix’s performance really is all that it’s made up to be. JOKER feels like it’s own thing but the core tenets of the DC character are all there. We’ve had various different interpretations of the clown prince, and this is no different. Everyone attached to this film brought their A game. If you get the chance, make sure you see this one.

1 Like

Us (2019)

After a very promising first 30 minutes, I was hugely disappointed with what came next. Nowhere near as good as Get Out (2017).

1 Like

Pet Sematary (2019)

I think Stephen King´s novel is one of his best. At least it´s one of my favorite ones of his. The 1989 film version, despite a great Elliot Goldenthal score and one really good idea (the polaroids in the aftermath of Gage´s death), was a huge letdown for me back then because the film focused on the grotesque and typical horror tropes and totally neglected the emotional core of the story: a family dealing with death. Director Mary Lambert did not establish any bond between the audience and the protagonists, a mistake so many directors have made when adapting King. However it is the forging of believable and lovable characters, the establishing of their everyday lives, the groundwork for total identification which is always King´s most potent ability in his writing. Only when you are with his characters you will suffer the horror that happens to them, no matter how supernatural that is.

The new movie, unfortunately, rushes through all the exposition, just to get to the usual horror tropes, and it not even offers the visual qualities Lambert arguably brought to her film. Instead all looks drab and perfunctory at best. The actors are better but don’t get enough to do. There is one major twist which is nicely done, I have to admit, if you think you know what will happen - and then something else happens. However, this new idea is not used to actually develop the theme that is buried in here (despite one scene in which my hope was raised that this would actually be revisited and deepened). Instead, the film is content with offering - sorry - zombie action. Instead of atmosphere, it is just going through the motions. Another missed opportunity to do justice to King´s novel. And quite frankly, after two strikes who would want to see another film of this?

2 Likes

I strongly believe it’s impossible to transfer Stephen King’s wonderful characters and scenarios into film, and yes, I include Shawshank Redemption in that.

THE IRISHMAN

In his latest movie THE IRISHMAN, Martin Scorsese–the cinematic master interrogator of violence–dials back depictions of violence. The killings and other mayhem are restrained in an almost 1950’s style. Where in previous movies, Scorsese might flash cut to a character’s violent end, in this film he opts to have a graphic appear on screen alerting the audience to the gruesome finish awaiting a particular character (though there is violence, it is not offered up in the Tarantino fanboy-fetish style). What Scorsese emphasizes is the enormous costs of violence to the souls/spirits/integrity of the men who commit it.

THE IRISHMAN is a gangsters-in-autumn requiem laying before the audience the degenerative effects of cruelty. The fact that the de-aging technology is not flawless (but far better than I thought possible) lends a sense to the proceedings that once a person starts on the path of violence, the rot sets in and he begins to age before his time. The film seems the cine-love child resulting from SILENCE having an affair with THE DEPARTED.

Scorsese deepens the aesthetic experience through the invocation of so many films–both by him and others. He doesn’t name drop just to show off his knowledge or flatter his audience. He weaves an incredible cinematic tapestry that advances the language and form of film itself. Do see it on the largest screen you can, and more than once if possible.

5 Likes

To celebrate Roger Moore’s birthday I watched the new version of North Sea Hijack on blu ray.

7 Likes

Hot Fuzz (2007)

A top London cop who is so good at his job that he makes his fellow officers look like slackers by comparison is “promoted” to serve in the sleepy village of Sandford. But all is not as it seems in the quiet town.

Funny buddy cop parody - great fun, as always, and great to see Timothy Dalton in action, as a smarmy supermarket boss, and hear David Arnold’s soundtrack.

2 Likes

Charlie Varrick
What a taut little thriller, I urge anyone who hasn’t seen it to watch it. Walter Mattheau on top form, a genuinely creepy villain in Joe Don Baker and a cracker of a plot. Don Siegel was a genius at this type of movie.

3 Likes

Rear Window (1954)

Classic Hitchcock thriller

2 Likes