-
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.
"Thanos is the protagonist - How Infinity War works" and "Thanos deserved to win", two video essays.
- Thread starter ZattMurdock
- Start date
Yes, he does unless I'm making a mistake. I watched the film again last weekend.
I mean there are plenty of great action movie blockbuster villains out there. Just the premise that something that came out last year is even considered is kinda loony.
I don't believe Thanos is the protagonist, mainly because when you think about it, he doesn't have any soliloquies. You always see him dialoging with characters in some way. The story is never framed as what Thanos thinks or believes separate from what he is telling other characters. You get that with several Avengers characters who have moments by themselves where you see what they're actually thinking or believing aside from interacting with other characters.
Note I'm not saying you have to soliloqize to be a protagonist, but rather it's part of the argument that Thanos is not the protagonist (aside from what the Russo's think)
Also, every argument for Thanos being the protagonist can also be used for the Avengers themselves.
Note I'm not saying you have to soliloqize to be a protagonist, but rather it's part of the argument that Thanos is not the protagonist (aside from what the Russo's think)
Also, every argument for Thanos being the protagonist can also be used for the Avengers themselves.
Reposting for the new page.
https://screencraft.org/2018/05/17/...-war-created-a-complex-protagonist-in-thanos/
https://screencraft.org/2018/05/17/...-war-created-a-complex-protagonist-in-thanos/
OP
OP
Obviously, neither Thanos or Darth Vader are in the same level of Hannibal Lecter or Corleone, but those aren't really "blockbuster" films.
I'll add to the OP.
I'll add to the OP.
To be fair, what the creators intended can be different from how the art is actually received and presented.
Thanos is the protagonist, he is the main character in the movie, IW is a Thanos movie. This has been stated by Feige, McFeely, Markus and the Russo Brothers in past interviews.
Using that description though, a lot of films that are classicly described as blockbusters wouldn't fit the bill. Take Jaws, which is commonly cited as the movie to bring the discussion about blockbuster film back into the mainstream (even though it existed before). Using the descriptor 'a blockbuster movie is an action heavy, fast paced movie', Jaws would be disqualified because it's neither of those. In fact, most pre-80's blockbusters wouldn't count as a blockbuster.
yeah, his motivation was much better when it included "praising Death by just killing people"
If Thanos is the protagonist, how do we explain Thor's Stormbreaker arc.
Side plot. This has also been stated by them. They wanted to give him a side plot.
Thanos and Thor are the two with the most screentime in the movie.
From said article:
Protagonist
The character who changes over the course of the story, travelling from Point A to Point B, either literally or figuratively. She learns and grows as the story progresses. Generally, Protagonists want something at the start of the tale, and discover they need something else.
Sounds like Thanos to me. Even more so that the movie feels like an adaptation of "Thanos Quest" in which he is the Main character. (albeit a "loose" adaptation) Furthermore, there is not one character in the film that can't be removed and the film only take a slightly different turn to conclusion...except THANOS.
Alright, let us say in the Marvel Universe, Earth's population was 8 billion. Now its 4 billion and the avengers don't manage to fix things.
Does Thanos plan to come back and snap his fingers again when the population gets back up to 8 billion? The problem with Thanos is that his "solution" can only ever be temporary unless he finds a way to permanently keep the population of the universe below a certain threshold.
Also he could have just doubled or even tripled the resources
Does Thanos plan to come back and snap his fingers again when the population gets back up to 8 billion? The problem with Thanos is that his "solution" can only ever be temporary unless he finds a way to permanently keep the population of the universe below a certain threshold.
Also he could have just doubled or even tripled the resources
🙄 so in what way does that make Thor not the protagonist but Thanos the protagonist other than word-of-god
Sure, but given a choice of accepting the screenwriting credentials of the Infinity War writers or random Era posters, I'll go with the former.
I'm really kinda surprised to see so many takes along these lines. I don't want to get too deep into a semantic discussion of what is a protagonist, but I will say this, this is really not how this term is generally used. In fact, Thanos is written like a pretty standard antagonist, I don't think they even did anything out of the ordinary in terms of explaining his motivation, I mean, it's slightly more than "get MacGuffin to shoot blue laser into the sky" that many MCU villains had, but it's still silly as fuck and mostly there just as an excuse to move the plot forward.
I've never read a comic book about Thanos so I've no idea what you're talking about. I was talking about the film itself. His motivations and logic were irrational, and that's putting it mildly.
He's an okay villain. His motivations and means are not nearly relatable as other villains' are. You never feel an emotional attachment to him. You never sympathize with him. He doesn't come off as intellectual either.
And his victory is contrived. The powerful time stone is never used against him. The ending is seen coming a mile away because people know what happened in the comics, and even the ones who dont, know that a part 2 is coming soon.
And his victory is contrived. The powerful time stone is never used against him. The ending is seen coming a mile away because people know what happened in the comics, and even the ones who dont, know that a part 2 is coming soon.
This is a weak and reductionist standard. Is Ultron the protagonist of Age of Ultron because he can't be removed from the film without changing it drastically? Loki in Avengers?
OP
OP
Simple:
Thor - and the rest of the heroes - in Infinity War are in fact the antagonists. Some excellent points addressing the culmination of Stormbreaker's arc can be seen on this point of the second video on the OP:
Sure but on the first page you tried arguing that Thanos doesn't fit the definition of the protagonist. He actually does fit that definition.
"an advocate or champion of a particular cause or idea. "
"the leading character or one of the major characters in a drama, movie, novel, or other fictional text. "
Ask Feige, McFeely, Markus and the Russo Brothers. Im stating what they have stated.
Also about Thanos being villain and therefore he cannot be a protagonist discussion here:
https://www.mpaa.org/2018/04/the-russo-brothers-say-avengers-infinity-war-is-a-thanos-movie/
OP
OP
They tried to make it too "real" and "grounded" and ended it making it dumber than it was before, happens a lot with CBMs
It doesn't take a screenwriter to understand basic literary practices!
In the comics his main motivation is that he is in love with Marvel's personification of Death. And he wants senpai to notice him, so killing half of the population is a good start. He also has talks about the balance thing but the main stuff is the "court death" that he references in the end of Avengers 1. The difference that in the comics it is LITERALLY courting Death
None of those definitions don't fit the Avengers so where does that leave them
I fully understand the villain and protagonist not being mutually exclusive. I've already explained in another post what I feel is a main characteristic that disqualifies Thanos from being considered the protagonist. He never talks to himself, we never see him alone.
He is called the mad titan. Strange explicitly tells him that Thanos wants genocide, but Thanos brushes it off, because he believes he is right extremely strong.
Thor is, essentially, the deuteragonist of the movie. Like Thanos, he too has a journey in it. Thanos sacrifices everything and overcomes great odds to achieve his goal, whereas Thor is driven by the knowledge that he has already lost everything. In the end, both acquire weapons of incredible power and just like your typical protagonist Thanos is able to succeed even against an enemy much stronger than him.
It's actually pretty fascinating when you frame it that way because we're only halfway through. Thor and Thanos are not done with each other yet.
Yeah, the film is better than that, but still not up to par to other villains like Killmonger.
Alright, let me jut post some quick thoughts. First, mind you I'm at work and on break so I can't type up a proper response with appropriate citations/support at the moment. Second, I've not fully watched both videos. I stopped half-way through the first as the author was doing nothing more than offering superfluous praise towards the film as opposed to arguing towards the actual text in the film. Now, maybe he gets to that in the later parts of the video, but that turned me off immediately. As towards the second video, I've not completed it and have only gotten about a quarter of a way through.
Regardless, I'm going to respond now as I've seen the movie several times and can speak enough on the subject matter without directly refuting any specific points brought up in the videos I haven't completed.
First, Thanos is NOT the protagonist. This is a laughable suggestion and is only ever brought up because the Russos thew the idea out there, likely to cover up the fact that the film is half a film where none of our actual protagonists actually grow as characters nor does the film actually provide a conclusion but instead ends on a big cliffhanger. Mind you before anyone jumps down my throat, I enjoyed Infinity War. So, drop all your "you just hate the film" knee-jerk response. But, I enjoy it for what it is, a big Marvel victory lap and a big action-hoorah. It is NOT the Empire Strikes Back of the MCU. Empire is more than ending on a cliffhanger and IW has none of the character development or depth found in Empire. If any film in the MCU is close to Empire it is GOTG2. But, that is a discussion for another time.
Again, let's start with Thanos as the protagonist. What is a protagonist? Well, they are the typically the "center of the story." The story revolves around the protagonist and they are typically the main character of the story, though this may not always be the case. More importantly, the protagonist is the one that "changes" over the course of the story and who "pursues the goal" of the story. It is there transformation that the whole story is about. Now, a protagonist does not have to be a "good guy," they are simply who the transforms over the course of the story and who it revolves around. One can follow the story of a bank robber who would be the protagonist of their story. And, their antagonist would be the police officers and detectives meant to stop them. In some stories, like Heat, we can have dual protagonist with each being the protagonist and antagonist of their counter part.
Let's turn to IW, Thanos is certainly a central figure but he clearly slots into the role of an antagonist than any protagonist. Again, I can't provide specific support at the moment, but I'm almost positive that Thanos does not have sufficient screen-time in the movie to justify the label of a protagonist. He shows up sporadically and mostly to simply punch people. And, the movie does not flow nor follow his movements, rather it flows with the "Heroes" of our story as each attempt to oppose him. Events are constructed to flow as we follow each hero's efforts to prepare for and ward off Thanos. We rarely flow from one Thanos scene directly to another Thanos scene. On the other hand, we do follow our heroes continuously. NOTE: I'm using "heroes" to refer to our Marvel heroes, not to suggest that Thanos cannot be the "Hero" of his own story simply because he is "bad." The movie flows from our Marvel heroes, only to be interrupted sporadically by our antagonist, Thanos, which then we switch back to our "heroes" who must deal with these new events. The protagonists of IW are clearly are actual Marvel heroes, not Thanos.
Why then avoid this truth? Likely because they make for poor protagonists as they neither transform or grow over the course of the film.
Still, let us accept for argument's sake that Thanos is the protagonist of the film, not only is he a terrible protagonist he also is nowhere near the "greatest villain." Again, a story should revolve around a protagonist and they should grow over the course of the film as they encounter obstacles on the way to their goal. While Thanos laughably encounters obstacles on his mad goal to kill half the universe, he does not transform over the course of the film. His obstacles are laughable because they hardly deter his goal and rarely if ever challenge his views. Thanos shows up and proceeds to punch down the Marvel squad, his "struggle" is using his magic gauntlet better than everyone else and punching harder than everyone else. The ONLY challenge he faces is with regards to Gamorra and it is a laughable challenge at best. Gamorra is supposed to challenge Thanos' commitment to his goal, except that his care for Gamorra is revealed as a surprise to the audience ad Gamorra herself. We are told and shown that Thanos is a mad man who doesn't care about anyone except for pursuing his goal. Gamorra herself hates him and the abuse she suffered under him. We are introduced to how they met by showing his slaughter of her parents and world in pursuit of his balance goal.
So, where comes the challenge? Well, Thanos is told to obtain a magic space rock he has to sacrifice something he loves, at which point it is revealed he actually does love Gamorra in his own sick and twisted way. He then proceeds to shed a single manly tear before throwing her off a cliff. How is that a challenge or obstacle? Previously te entire audience didn't believe he cared for anyone, so it is a sudden turn. Second, it is a "struggle" he immediately gets over as he doggedly pursues his end goal. The movie isn't built up to overcoming this obstacle, nor does the obstacle challenge what he already knew. He's already had to sacrifice much to obtain his end goal, Gamorra was simply another sacrifice to toss towards his goal. It is not Luke confronting his father and the lies of the Jedi. It is not Ellen Ripley confronting her fears of the Alien and Motherhood. It is not George McFly decking Biff and learning to stand up to himself. It's not Luke Skywalker coming to grips with his legend to face his old apprentice. It's a nothing struggle revealed in the very scene it is resolved.
Thus, Thanos doesn't really struggle in the film, he just punches some dudes as he collects magic space rocks before using them to complete his goal. Further, his victory is spoken in terms of almost certainty by the "heroes" in the film. He isn't some underdog, he starts the film wasting the Strongest Avenger while te rest of the gang speaks about how unstoppable this dude is, which proves correct. And, without any real struggle Thanos fails to transform. Tell me, how did Thanos grow throughout the film? How is he different now than he is at the start?
He starts the film relentless in his goal of balancing the universe, he ends the film completing that goal, still convinced of its righteousness. He never once really questions whether he is wrong, he never wavers from his goal, he doesn't encounter some new perspective on the matter, he is single-minded and utterly free from all forms of doubt as he pursues his goal. His sacrifice of Gamorra is evidence of this. Thus again, how did he change? What, because he shed his armor that somehow means he's some religious monk on a journey of transformation?
GTFO. Thanos is a basic ass villain who fulfilled his role of an antagonist to a decent degree. He was big, scary, and intimidating and he punched our heroes around. He is neither deep nor is he really ay sort of protagonist. He fails to grow throughout the film and the film doesn't really revolve around him.
Come on.
Who gives a shit what they say? All that matters is the text of the film. Again, I'm at work but I can easily go through the whole Hero's Journey and refute why Thanos fails at being classified as part of the classic monomyth. Shit, he doesn't even "Refuse The Call."
Regardless, I'm going to respond now as I've seen the movie several times and can speak enough on the subject matter without directly refuting any specific points brought up in the videos I haven't completed.
First, Thanos is NOT the protagonist. This is a laughable suggestion and is only ever brought up because the Russos thew the idea out there, likely to cover up the fact that the film is half a film where none of our actual protagonists actually grow as characters nor does the film actually provide a conclusion but instead ends on a big cliffhanger. Mind you before anyone jumps down my throat, I enjoyed Infinity War. So, drop all your "you just hate the film" knee-jerk response. But, I enjoy it for what it is, a big Marvel victory lap and a big action-hoorah. It is NOT the Empire Strikes Back of the MCU. Empire is more than ending on a cliffhanger and IW has none of the character development or depth found in Empire. If any film in the MCU is close to Empire it is GOTG2. But, that is a discussion for another time.
Again, let's start with Thanos as the protagonist. What is a protagonist? Well, they are the typically the "center of the story." The story revolves around the protagonist and they are typically the main character of the story, though this may not always be the case. More importantly, the protagonist is the one that "changes" over the course of the story and who "pursues the goal" of the story. It is there transformation that the whole story is about. Now, a protagonist does not have to be a "good guy," they are simply who the transforms over the course of the story and who it revolves around. One can follow the story of a bank robber who would be the protagonist of their story. And, their antagonist would be the police officers and detectives meant to stop them. In some stories, like Heat, we can have dual protagonist with each being the protagonist and antagonist of their counter part.
Let's turn to IW, Thanos is certainly a central figure but he clearly slots into the role of an antagonist than any protagonist. Again, I can't provide specific support at the moment, but I'm almost positive that Thanos does not have sufficient screen-time in the movie to justify the label of a protagonist. He shows up sporadically and mostly to simply punch people. And, the movie does not flow nor follow his movements, rather it flows with the "Heroes" of our story as each attempt to oppose him. Events are constructed to flow as we follow each hero's efforts to prepare for and ward off Thanos. We rarely flow from one Thanos scene directly to another Thanos scene. On the other hand, we do follow our heroes continuously. NOTE: I'm using "heroes" to refer to our Marvel heroes, not to suggest that Thanos cannot be the "Hero" of his own story simply because he is "bad." The movie flows from our Marvel heroes, only to be interrupted sporadically by our antagonist, Thanos, which then we switch back to our "heroes" who must deal with these new events. The protagonists of IW are clearly are actual Marvel heroes, not Thanos.
Why then avoid this truth? Likely because they make for poor protagonists as they neither transform or grow over the course of the film.
Still, let us accept for argument's sake that Thanos is the protagonist of the film, not only is he a terrible protagonist he also is nowhere near the "greatest villain." Again, a story should revolve around a protagonist and they should grow over the course of the film as they encounter obstacles on the way to their goal. While Thanos laughably encounters obstacles on his mad goal to kill half the universe, he does not transform over the course of the film. His obstacles are laughable because they hardly deter his goal and rarely if ever challenge his views. Thanos shows up and proceeds to punch down the Marvel squad, his "struggle" is using his magic gauntlet better than everyone else and punching harder than everyone else. The ONLY challenge he faces is with regards to Gamorra and it is a laughable challenge at best. Gamorra is supposed to challenge Thanos' commitment to his goal, except that his care for Gamorra is revealed as a surprise to the audience ad Gamorra herself. We are told and shown that Thanos is a mad man who doesn't care about anyone except for pursuing his goal. Gamorra herself hates him and the abuse she suffered under him. We are introduced to how they met by showing his slaughter of her parents and world in pursuit of his balance goal.
So, where comes the challenge? Well, Thanos is told to obtain a magic space rock he has to sacrifice something he loves, at which point it is revealed he actually does love Gamorra in his own sick and twisted way. He then proceeds to shed a single manly tear before throwing her off a cliff. How is that a challenge or obstacle? Previously te entire audience didn't believe he cared for anyone, so it is a sudden turn. Second, it is a "struggle" he immediately gets over as he doggedly pursues his end goal. The movie isn't built up to overcoming this obstacle, nor does the obstacle challenge what he already knew. He's already had to sacrifice much to obtain his end goal, Gamorra was simply another sacrifice to toss towards his goal. It is not Luke confronting his father and the lies of the Jedi. It is not Ellen Ripley confronting her fears of the Alien and Motherhood. It is not George McFly decking Biff and learning to stand up to himself. It's not Luke Skywalker coming to grips with his legend to face his old apprentice. It's a nothing struggle revealed in the very scene it is resolved.
Thus, Thanos doesn't really struggle in the film, he just punches some dudes as he collects magic space rocks before using them to complete his goal. Further, his victory is spoken in terms of almost certainty by the "heroes" in the film. He isn't some underdog, he starts the film wasting the Strongest Avenger while te rest of the gang speaks about how unstoppable this dude is, which proves correct. And, without any real struggle Thanos fails to transform. Tell me, how did Thanos grow throughout the film? How is he different now than he is at the start?
He starts the film relentless in his goal of balancing the universe, he ends the film completing that goal, still convinced of its righteousness. He never once really questions whether he is wrong, he never wavers from his goal, he doesn't encounter some new perspective on the matter, he is single-minded and utterly free from all forms of doubt as he pursues his goal. His sacrifice of Gamorra is evidence of this. Thus again, how did he change? What, because he shed his armor that somehow means he's some religious monk on a journey of transformation?
GTFO. Thanos is a basic ass villain who fulfilled his role of an antagonist to a decent degree. He was big, scary, and intimidating and he punched our heroes around. He is neither deep nor is he really ay sort of protagonist. He fails to grow throughout the film and the film doesn't really revolve around him.
Come on.
Who gives a shit what they say? All that matters is the text of the film. Again, I'm at work but I can easily go through the whole Hero's Journey and refute why Thanos fails at being classified as part of the classic monomyth. Shit, he doesn't even "Refuse The Call."
And where does that leave the Avengers left on earth. And the avengers left in space?
I think it's pretty obvious from the movie that they tried to do more work in fleshing out Thanos' motivations.
Personally, I don't think they succeeded, I think Thanos motivation was dumb as fuck and I can believe that I say it, but I think it would have better if he was just going for some space cube.
Also, none of this really directly relates to the question of whether or not Thanos can be seen as a protagonist, and again, I think that's a very unusual way to think about the term. And I would imagine most people would call him the antagonist of the story, I know I do.
I do. I believe the writers, the directors and Feige are right.
I found Thanos to be a great villain and he is the protagonist of the movie despite being the villain. The whole movie is from his perspective and is about what he wants to do.
Maybe, but I feel like more than enough evidence has been presented that Thanos was written and intended as the protagonist of the movie. I trust the movie's writers on this because they've proven to know what they're talking about.
You can have more than one antagonist. The Avengers as an organization are the antagonist. If you need to focus on a singular figure then Tony Stark is the central antagonist. He is the core reason the Avengers exist, Fury is important but he couldn't drive them together like Coulson did and neither or them could maintain that bond like Stark did.
Stark was also one of the two characters who had the biggest influence on Civil War and Age of Ultron. In Age of Ultron even though he and Banner created that mess it was his motivations for kickstarting that project to defend all of mankind that is the main focus of why Ultron was made, a motivation that is diametrically opposed to Thanos.
In Civil War even though he and Ross are equally culpable for this mess it's clear that Stark is painted as the more important figure of the two and must be dealt with. Again his ideology that power must be regulated and contained is diametrically opposed to Thanos/Steve Rogers philosophy of doing what you believe to be the right thing (others be damned).
In infinity War the possible future endings are framed as Stark being the most important character arc in discerning when that end has come.
lolol
There have been at least three different instances of people claiming they're gonna boycott Endgame that I know of, and I don't believe anyone is actually going through with that shit. Thor and Thanos finna run that shit back, and the Avengers finna trade for Carol in free agency to get that man some help.
You think they're crazy now? Wait until Black Panther doesn't win movie of the year.
The only legitimate argument people have is the word-of-god claim that Thanos is the protagonist. Every other contrary argument, primarily various definition of "protagonists" presented ITT are not exclusive to Thanos in IW
There is no actual argument on why the Avengers are the antagonist in this post. It's literally just a claim and a bunch of rambling.
Those films feel like a story about the Avengers coming together and overcoming the obstacles laid before them and they do it.
Thanos wins, the climax of the film is about him accomplishing his goals (like a Michael Corleone). The avengers are an afterthought at best, dealing with loss. The film is sorta framed like a tragedy in which their are multiple forces working against the goal of the main character's path.
The most key factor I think is "for a mass audience" but whatev we can agree to disagree on our definitions, like I originally said even under my definition of blockbuster Thanos still isn't the best villain IMO.
Yeah, but I didn't feel like he was written like a dumb character or even a crazy one. I think the movie tried to do a lot of work in establishing that he's Serious Villain, who might even Have A Point, and I also think this thread is proof that it worked for at least some people.
It didn't quite work for me though.