|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on May 10, 2019 5:07:12 GMT
No matter what the movie would've done story wise you still would've rated it no higher than a 1/10 and troll this place like a five year old upset that he didn't get desert after dinner. he rated it a 4. Same as Infinity War though he lowered that to a 3 just a few months later. got the 'will troll' part exactly right though.
Close enough I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2019 20:11:03 GMT
How is it wimpy? Tony doesn't get a hero Happy ending. His life is taken away and a little girl has to grow up with out her father. He looses out on seeing her grow up as well as spending the rest of his life with his wife. It's wimpy because it's been done many, many times in plenty of Hollywood movies. You think Bruce Willis' character got a happy ending in Armageddon or Randy Quaid's character in Independence Day got to see his children grow up? Steve Trevor certainly didn't get a hppay ending in Wonder Woman. And neither did Steven Seagal's character in Executive Decision. Like I said in a previous post, characters have sacrificed themselves for the greater good in plenty of Hollywood movies. But what is rare is a hero/protagonist having to make the difficult choice of giving up someone they love for the greater good. If Endgame had the balls to do that, then I would've rated Endgame higher. But Endgame wimped out and did what has been done many, many times in plenty of Hollywood movies. Endgame wasted a lot of potential by taking the easy route and not requiring Tony Stark to make the difficult choice of giving up someone he loves for the greater good. This just shows how heartless you truly are because: 1. We already saw at least 1 5-year-old getting dusted in the very beginning of the film. Do you want a 5-year-old to die permanently? 2. What you're describing is so unlike Tony's character. If he was given this kind of choice, HE would've been the one who threw himself off the cliff. 3. Why in the f**k would Avengers allow a 5-year-old to come to this dangerous trip? Is your brain really that fragmented?
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 14, 2019 21:58:05 GMT
It's wimpy because it's been done many, many times in plenty of Hollywood movies. You think Bruce Willis' character got a happy ending in Armageddon or Randy Quaid's character in Independence Day got to see his children grow up? Steve Trevor certainly didn't get a hppay ending in Wonder Woman. And neither did Steven Seagal's character in Executive Decision. Like I said in a previous post, characters have sacrificed themselves for the greater good in plenty of Hollywood movies. But what is rare is a hero/protagonist having to make the difficult choice of giving up someone they love for the greater good. If Endgame had the balls to do that, then I would've rated Endgame higher. But Endgame wimped out and did what has been done many, many times in plenty of Hollywood movies. Endgame wasted a lot of potential by taking the easy route and not requiring Tony Stark to make the difficult choice of giving up someone he loves for the greater good. This just shows how heartless you truly are because: 1. We already saw at least 1 5-year-old getting dusted in the very beginning of the film. Do you want a 5-year-old to die permanently? 2. What you're describing is so unlike Tony's character. If he was given this kind of choice, HE would've been the one who threw himself off the cliff. 3. Why in the f**k would Avengers allow a 5-year-old to come to this dangerous trip? Is your brain really that fragmented? Who said anything about throwing her off a cliff or taking her on a trip? Do you not understand what I was saying? I was saying Endgame took the easy route: just bring everyone back 5 years later as if nothing happened. That's an easy for choice fot Tony so of course Tony is going to want to do that. But if the options was revert the timeline 5 years back so the snap never happens and 3.5 billion people don't get dusted, but it also means that babies born in the past 5 years (including Tony's daughter) aren't born. So Tony's choice is save 3.5 billion people and his daughter will never even exist, or keep his daughter and let those 3.5 billion people remain dusted. That's the ultimate decision for a hero to make. If Endgame had done that and presented Tony with that choice, then I would've rated Endgame higher for having the balls to have Tony make the ultimate decision. But Endgame wimped out and took the easy route.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2019 23:42:30 GMT
This just shows how heartless you truly are because: 1. We already saw at least 1 5-year-old getting dusted in the very beginning of the film. Do you want a 5-year-old to die permanently? 2. What you're describing is so unlike Tony's character. If he was given this kind of choice, HE would've been the one who threw himself off the cliff. 3. Why in the f**k would Avengers allow a 5-year-old to come to this dangerous trip? Is your brain really that fragmented? Who said anything about throwing her off a cliff or taking her on a trip? Do you not understand what I was saying? I was saying Endgame took the easy route: just bring everyone back 5 years later as if nothing happened. That's an easy for choice fot Tony so of course Tony is going to want to do that. But if the options was revert the timeline 5 years back so the snap never happens and 3.5 billion people don't get dusted, but it also means that babies born in the past 5 years (including Tony's daughter) aren't born. So Tony's choice is save 3.5 billion people and his daughter will never even exist, or keep his daughter and let those 3.5 billion people remain dusted. That's the ultimate decision for a hero to make. If Endgame had done that and presented Tony with that choice, then I would've rated Endgame higher for having the balls to have Tony make the ultimate decision. But Endgame wimped out and took the easy route. Really? Then how do you explain... this thread of yours?:
imdb2.freeforums.net/thread/147027/endgame-turn-avengers-child-killers
"Did you think we would forget?!" - T'Challa/Black Panther, Black Panther
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 15, 2019 3:06:12 GMT
In all seriousness, if the movie had actually made it so that Tony would’ve had to decide between resetting the timeline and losing his daughter, or keeping everything as is but allowing billions if not trillions of beings in the universe to stay dead, I would’ve commended it for that. Still, that probably would’ve been too depressing for a PG-13 superhero movie, so I don’t really blame them for not going that route.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 15, 2019 3:09:01 GMT
In all seriousness, if the movie had actually made it so that Tony would’ve had to decide between resetting the timeline and losing his daughter, or keeping everything as is but allowing billions if not trillions of beings in the universe to stay dead, I would’ve commended it for that. Still, that probably would’ve been too depressing for a PG-13 superhero movie, so I don’t really blame them for not going that route. Also, keeping everyone dead like that would’ve made some of the MCU sequels becoming impossible to be made, not to mention that DC-Fan would’ve found new ways to trash the film anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 4:33:20 GMT
Tony only sacrificed himself, no biggie... I guess your own life isnt important to you DCfan? His daughter's/flash's mother's/kirk's lady's life was replaced with his own is my point...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 4:35:22 GMT
No matter what the movie would've done story wise you still would've rated it no higher than a 1/10 and troll this place like a five year old upset that he didn't get desert after dinner. "I'm not a troll" - DC-Fan
|
|