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.
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?
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".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.
I'm thinking of boycotting any movie that doesn't showcase children EXCLUSIVELY having vegan diets.
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.
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".
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.
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.
Yeah but those odds are astronomically small.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.
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.
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.Which odds?
Tiny odds are the basis of action oriented entertainment.
What's jarring is that you believe this moment is sending signals.
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.
That's a lot of Scoville! Or three Iron Man's worth of weirdness.
While we're putting numbers on things:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_childhood_obesity
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.
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.
Alright now this... this is nonsense haha.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.
You can't "wish" one back from the dead with the infinity gauntlet. That is not how it works.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
When people go this far to find a problem with your film you gotta be doing something rightThe 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.
OK. What is the signal being sent by a girl asking for a burger?
Maybe moviegoers will start to think children ask for burgers?
The combinatorics show that the odds are actually very very very extremely low.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.
When people go this far to find a problem with your film you gotta be doing something right
and how does it work?You can't "wish" one back from the dead with the infinity gauntlet. That is not how it works.
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.
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.
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.
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
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)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?
I'm going to eat a cheeseburger tonight and I'm going to bloody enjoy itAll this hamburger talk has convinced me to get a Whopper today
The combinatorics show that the odds are actually very very very extremely low.
Wendy's S'awesome bacon burger wins all for me. Though as long as it's not McDonald's I'm goodAll this hamburger talk has convinced me to get a Whopper today
I'm not arguing that it's impossible. I'm arguing that it's unlikely. And that isn't how probability works with infinity.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 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.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 agree that it would be disturbing, if that's what you mean. Childhood obesity is a serious health issue, so I don't see why we should not be equally concerned
when you think about it the shwarma scene was just disgusting propaganda