• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,363
Sure. It's just kinda funny that they explicitly point out that it's not a "don't change anything" situation and yet they try to not change anything even though it would've been better to help with Thanos.

But I get why the movie wouldn't go there.

The thing is, you can never be sure what the effects of the changes would be. It could make matters worse.

The worst case scenario of not changing anything is the alternate Avengers will come Up with a similar plan to undo Thanos' work.

Well I'm relieved at that. The exploitation would be too painful if the brand placement were paid for, and a piece of fan art is likely to get much less exposure than promotional material.




Yes, funny how some posters seem to hold consistent opinions, isn't it? Seriously, yes, I'm one of the people who occasionally post strong opinions about child abuse and exploitation. How weird.




Yes, I really hate pop culture being used to promote unhealthy diet choices to vulnerable children. Again, how weird am I?

I know, right?!? How much do you think the beef lobby paid to have this invasive commercial displayed to influence children?

I'm thinking of boycotting any movie that doesn't showcase children EXCLUSIVELY having vegan diets.
 
Last edited:

Ravenwraith

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,352
Wasn't crazy about IW but I thought this was kinda brilliant. Surprisingly thoughtfull and emotional. They really could have gone lot lighter and got away fine but everyone brought their A game instead.
 

Sande

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,982
The thing is, you can never be sure what the effects of the changes would be. It could make matters worse.

The worst case scenario of not changing anything is the alternate Avengers will come Up with a similar plan to undo Thanos' work.
True. But I can't see much going wrong with "summon Captain Marvel and go handle this Thanos guy before he gets any of the stones".
 

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,363
I assume there's a missing sarcasm tag there. In any case I certainly won't be boycotting films for dietary reasons. That doesn't mean I think it's great to encourage small children to eat junk food.

They didn't encourage small children to eat junk food anymore than they encouraged children to hunt down Triad.

The mere depiction of something isn't an endorsement of it. A child asking for a cheeseburger isn't some spectacular occurrence.
 

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,363
True. But I can't see much going wrong with "summon Captain Marvel and go handle this Thanos guy before he gets any of the stones".

Its hard to imagine something going wrong... But what if Captain Marvel was lost in the attempt?

Or what if someone worse than Thanos fills the void he leaves?
 

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
They didn't encourage small children to eat junk food anymore than they encouraged children to hunt down Triad.

The mere depiction of something isn't an endorsement of it. A child asking for a cheeseburger isn't some spectacular occurrence.

The context is relevant. A grieving child asks for a cheeseburger and one of her parent figures promises her as many as she can eat. Without showing any sign of awareness that this might send inappropriate signals, the writers thus revived an obscure moment from Iron Man's cinematic history and elevated it to a defining characteristic explicitly associated with children's dietary choices.

It's not the worst thing, but it's the only really jarring moment of the posthumous sequence in this film.
 

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,363
The context is relevant. A grieving child asks for a cheeseburger and one of her parent figures promises her as many as she can eat. Without showing any sign of awareness that this might send inappropriate signals, the writers thus revived an obscure moment from Iron Man's cinematic history and elevated it to a defining characteristic explicitly associated with children's dietary choices.

It's not the worst thing, but it's the only really jarring moment of the posthumous sequence in this film.

What's jarring is that you believe this moment is sending signals.

Children don't generally have dietary choices. They eat what is provided to them. MAYBE, some small kid, somewhere will be compelled to ask his/her parents for a burger after watching this movie, at which this parent will say yes or no- just like they had been doing prior to this movies release.

The writers didn't show awareness because the notion that the scene is problematic is nonsensical. This film isn't about to negatively change anyone's diet.
 
Last edited:

Venuslulu

Member
Oct 28, 2017
685
The context is relevant. A grieving child asks for a cheeseburger and one of her parent figures promises her as many as she can eat. Without showing any sign of awareness that this might send inappropriate signals, the writers thus revived an obscure moment from Iron Man's cinematic history and elevated it to a defining characteristic explicitly associated with children's dietary choices.

It's not the worst thing, but it's the only really jarring moment of the posthumous sequence in this film.

I mean these are big illogical leaps, and a slippery slope of nonsense that can be applied to a majority of films if you nitpick enough.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
You mad because comic book characters survived an impossible situation? I guess you haven't watched ANY of the MCU movies for the last decade or ever read a comic book...

The phone stuff is silly...just tell yourself it was a voip call or something, and she called from the house

As far as Wakandan trees, how do you know that some other part of the country didn't lose a lot of its plant life. For all you know there's some planet that no longer any plants at all. Random doesn't mean proportional.
Yeah but those odds are astronomically small.
 

ZattMurdock

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
10,333
Earth 616
The context is relevant. A grieving child asks for a cheeseburger and one of her parent figures promises her as many as she can eat. Without showing any sign of awareness that this might send inappropriate signals, the writers thus revived an obscure moment from Iron Man's cinematic history and elevated it to a defining characteristic explicitly associated with children's dietary choices.

It's not the worst thing, but it's the only really jarring moment of the posthumous sequence in this film.

I think you don't understand the context because maybe you haven't a relation as strong with the main characters as most of the fans that were there from the beginning or know the films by heart.

While I completely get your concerns, that was a nod to a moment of the first film and let me tell you, it's the moment that it literally broke me in the theaters, not one, but nine times. It's an over exaggeration, it works as a cute funny moment but in truth it's something to remind the audience how while Tony isn't there anymore, that he sacrificed his life for his friends and family, his daughter still carries a lot of him in her. It works in so many levels because the actor who plays Happy is the director of the first film, he also became very close to RDJ for obvious reasons in the last 11 years. Also, it is not a coincidence that the "I love you 3000" thing sounds so real: that is an actual thing between Downey and his kids. That moment is special and of course that Happy won't give all the cheeseburgers in the world. That scene serves to imply that Happy will help raise her in his father's absence, and it's just... hard, for those who have been following these characters for so long.
 
Last edited:

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
What's jarring is that you believe this moment is sending signals.

All popular culture sends signals. It's how it works. For instance, white guy in white coat with stethoscope used to be the American representation of a medical doctor, long after this stopped being representative of the American medical community. As time goes on this representation has been challenged, revised, reasserted, subverted and so on, but the signal is still there as a stereotype.
 

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,363
The odds that a forest wouldn't lose any trees or even a noticeable amount of trees if each tree has a 1/2 odd dog disappearing.

And I don't think that particular practically impassible thing is a part of the entertainment of the movie.

I thought you may have were talking about surviving the bombardment from Thanos' ship.

As far as the plantlife thing... The fact that he snaps the whole universe, i'd day the probability is high that there are forests where an observer wouldn't notice plants getting snapped.
 

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,363
All popular culture sends signals. It's how it works. For instance, white guy in white coat with stethoscope used to be the American representation of a medical doctor, long after this stopped being representative of the American medical community. As time goes on this representation has been challenged, revised, reasserted, subverted and so on, but the signal is still there as a stereotype.

OK. What is the signal being sent by a girl asking for a burger?

Maybe moviegoers will start to think children ask for burgers?
 

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
I think you don't understand the context because maybe you haven't a relation as strong with the main characters as most of the fans that were there from the beginning or know the films by heart.

I think it's reasonable to assume that the film has been watched by far more people than any tiny band of superfans. I get the reason why this scene and similar ones resonated so well with you. This doesn't change my concern. I would have similar concerns if Tony were depicted as a cigarette smoker and Peter were shown enjoying the same brand of cigarette as a reference to his erstwhile patron.
 

Majukun

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,542
after all this time, did we get any reason why they didn't just wish back tony stark with the gauntlet at the end of the movie?
i'm sure the hulk wouldn't have minded to hurt his other arm to save a friend
 

ZattMurdock

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
10,333
Earth 616
I think it's reasonable to assume that the film has been watched by far more people than any tiny band of superfans. I get the reason why this scene and similar ones resonated so well with you. This doesn't change my concern. I would have similar concerns if Tony were depicted as a cigarette smoker and Peter were shown enjoying the same brand of cigarette as a reference to his erstwhile patron.
Alright now this... this is nonsense haha.
 

Son Goku

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
4,332
The context is relevant. A grieving child asks for a cheeseburger and one of her parent figures promises her as many as she can eat. Without showing any sign of awareness that this might send inappropriate signals, the writers thus revived an obscure moment from Iron Man's cinematic history and elevated it to a defining characteristic explicitly associated with children's dietary choices.

It's not the worst thing, but it's the only really jarring moment of the posthumous sequence in this film.
When people go this far to find a problem with your film you gotta be doing something right
 

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
OK. What is the signal being sent by a girl asking for a burger?

Maybe moviegoers will start to think children ask for burgers?

Maybe little children will start to think they deserve all the burgers they want.

The substantial signal here is that a burger is a reasonable food choice for an adult to offer to a five-year-old.

I didn't invent the obesity epidemic.
 

Aadiboy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
3,652
What LL_Decitrig expects Happy to buy for Morgan:
hqdefault.jpg
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
I thought you may have were talking about surviving the bombardment from Thanos' ship.

As far as the plantlife thing... The fact that he snaps the whole universe, i'd day the probability is high that there are forests where an observer wouldn't notice plants getting snapped.
The combinatorics show that the odds are actually very very very extremely low.
 

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,326
I think it's reasonable to assume that the film has been watched by far more people than any tiny band of superfans. I get the reason why this scene and similar ones resonated so well with you. This doesn't change my concern. I would have similar concerns if Tony were depicted as a cigarette smoker and Peter were shown enjoying the same brand of cigarette as a reference to his erstwhile patron.

Personally I'm just pissed she didn't get fries with her burger.

Blatant child abuse to deny her french fries.
 

Majukun

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,542
For example, you can't bring back either Nat or Gamora by simply "wishing" them back with the gauntlet. You can't really revert your wounds for using the gauntlet, let alone revert someone's death that wasn't done unaturally.

At least... For now. Maybe with the recasting?
from what it's said in the movie, gamora and nat can't be brought back to life because they were the payment for the soul stone, it's a specific rule to avoid an easily exploitable loophole where you sacrifice someone for the gem and then wish him/her back with the gauntlet, effectively sacrificing nothing and making the porve pointless...but for the rest of the world there shouldn't be any kind of problem, the gauntlet is described as literally being able to rewrite reality, kill half the universe with a snap, terraforming an inhabitable planet and , yes, bringing people back to life like they did with half of the universe in the movie (sure it might be a special case just vecause it was the gauntlet that did it in the first place, but it's never said or specified so in the movie)

Thanos himself says that he is gonna use it to delete the entire universe and create a new one.

the only price is the amount of energy you have to withstand to be able to use it..but the hulk just did it and ended up just with a wounded arm..he has the other perfectly healthy

hell, they can even just wait for him to heal and then wish tony stark back to life..again, nothing in the movie seens to indicate they can't do that.
 
Last edited:

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
The combinatorics show that the odds are actually very very very extremely low.

The universe is huge. We don't know for sure that it isn't infinite, in which case it follows that there will be an infinite number of even the most unlikely combinations.

But in this situation I'm happy to attribute stuff like this to a minor continuity error and/or artistic licence.
 

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
and how does it work?

I don't think we know how it works. As far as Thanos is concerned often things work a little like in the Roger Rabbit universe, where impossible things can only happen if they're funny. Bruce Banner mentions that he tried unsuccessfully to bring someone back to life (Natasha?) but possibly this failure is due to her being a sacrifice to the Soul Stone.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,210
The universe is huge. We don't know for sure that it isn't infinite, in which case it follows that there will be an infinite number of even the most unlikely combinations.

But in this situation I'm happy to attribute stuff like this to a minor continuity error and/or artistic licence.
I'm not arguing that it's impossible. I'm arguing that it's unlikely. And that isn't how probability works with infinity.


There are an infinite number of integers. There are an infinite number of integers that are divisible by 1,000,000,000,000. But the odds that a random integer is divisible by 1,000,000,000,000 is still 1/1,000,000,000,000.
 

Deleted member 2145

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
29,223
when you think about it the shwarma scene was just disgusting propaganda

I bet some children left that movie wanting to try lamb

imagine the signal that sent to impressionable minds, that it's ok to just flush your exercise down the toilet with a carb and fat filled meal

kevin feige and the entire MCU should be ashamed
 

ZattMurdock

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
10,333
Earth 616
from what it's said in the movie, gamora and nat can't be brought back to life because they were the payment for the soul stone, it's a specific rule to avoid an easily exploitable loophole where you sacrifice someone for the gem and then wish him/her back with the gauntlet, effectively sacrificing nothing and making the porve pointless...but for the rest of the world there shouldn't be any kind of problem, the gauntlet is described as literally being able to rewrite reality, kill half the universe with a snap, terraforming an inhabitable planet and , yes, bringing people back to life like they did with half of the universe in the movie (sure it might be a special case just vecause it was the gauntlet that did it in the first place, but it's never said or specified so in the movie)

Thanos himself says that he is gonna use it to delete the entire universe and create a new one.

the only price is the amount of energy you have to withstand to be able to use it..but the hulk just did it and ended up just with a wounded arm..he has the other perfectly healthy

hell, they can even just wait for him to heal and then wish tony stark back to life..again, nothing in the movie seens to indicate they can't do that.
I don't think you can revert the damage done to the wielder of the infinity stones. Hulk won't be healing either. So death or injury, it's one way trip.