|
OpenSourceBurger posted:Cap had also told Tony right to his face that he never had the spine to make a play that would end up with him sacrificing himself. Tony's journey since Avengers 1 has been of fear and attempts to stave off his own demise through things like Ultron. Tony sacrificing himself after he had lived a life he always wanted and leaving it behind to make a play to stop Thanos caps off his narrative journey since Avengers and arguable since Iron Man 1. Tony was ready to make the sacrifice play at the end of The Avengers by lobbing the nuke into space himself when no one else could; he went into the portal knowing full well that could mean his death. That moment, admittedly, was good! But he completed that character arc already.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Yeah, I guess I just can't understand how a character having less to lose sacrificing themselves is more poignant than a character who has a happy family and who has successfully conquered his
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Yeah, I guess I just can't understand how a character having less to lose sacrificing themselves is more poignant than a character who has a happy family and who has successfully conquered his Because I find it selfish that Stark would leave his own daughter behind fatherless in act of self-annihilation when he didn't have to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:30
|
|
|
So you're saying a guy tackling a gunman and dying to save others is selfish if he had a family? What?teagone posted:Tony was ready to make the sacrifice play at the end of The Avengers by lobbing the nuke into space himself when no one else could; he went into the portal knowing full well that could mean his death. That moment, admittedly, was good! But he completed that character arc already. Except for two major elements. 1. After Avengers he's traumatized and has severe PTSD over this issue as well as the fact that he only prolonged the inevitable. Had he died he would have only stalled an even worse invasion coming later. He's hosed up beyond words by that and Iron Man 3 shows him turning to drinking to handle it. 2. He's been given the life he always. This isn't Tony dying to save Pepper after being a miserable gently caress for most of his life, this is Tony having sampled fatherhood and a life with people who love him making that play, sacrificing so much more in his eyes and in the eyes of the viewer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:31
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:So you're saying a guy tackling a gunman and dying to save others is selfish if he had a family? What? That's... not what I said. I'm arguing that Cap should've been the one to die because it makes way more sense from a writing standpoint to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:36
|
|
|
teagone posted:Because I find it selfish that Stark would leave his own daughter behind fatherless in act of self-annihilation when he didn't have to. He's not leaving her a homeless orphan. He's taking into account the future of not just his daughter, but everyone's daughers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:38
|
|
|
teagone posted:That's... not what I said. I'm arguing that Cap should've been the one to die because it makes way more sense from a writing standpoint to me. Except Cap couldn't do it in time. Your arguing something from a writing standpoint and your argument that Tony is selfish is because Cap should have ben written in a way to do it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:39
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:Except Cap couldn't do it in time. Your arguing something from a writing standpoint and your argument that Tony is selfish is because Cap should have ben written in a way to do it. Yes, I'm arguing that the result of writing it so that it could only be Stark who could snap the gauntlet ends up being a regression of the growth his character has experienced over however many films prior. And that to me, it makes more sense to write it in a way where Cap would, as in the beginning, be always willing to make the sacrifice play, even at the end. Cap snapping the gauntlet would've simply been emblematic of his uncompromising resolve.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:48
|
|
|
teagone posted:Yes, I'm arguing that the result of writing it so that it could only be Stark who could snap the gauntlet ends up being a regression of the growth his character has experienced over however many films prior . And that to me, it makes more sense to write it in a way where Cap would, as in the beginning, be always willing to make the sacrifice play, even at the end. Cap snapping the gauntlet would've simply been emblematic of his uncompromising resolve. Then how the hell is Tony selfish? If you admit Tony is literally the only character WHO WAS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY to be able to stop Thanos, then how on earth is stopping Thanos from vaporizing half of existence, including Tony's wife and daughter, selfish?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:50
|
|
|
teagone posted:And that to me, it makes more sense to write it in a way where Cap would, as in the beginning, be always willing to make the sacrifice play, even at the end. Cap snapping the gauntlet would've simply been emblematic of his uncompromising resolve. That feels like more of a regression, to me. Steve would be literally doing the same thing he'd be willing to do from the start. It doesn't really challenge his character at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 21:53
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:Then how the hell is Tony selfish? If you admit Tony is literally the only character WHO WAS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY to be able to stop Thanos, then how on earth is stopping Thanos from vaporizing half of existence, including Tony's wife and daughter, selfish? His death being pre-ordained by fate as the single scenario where they win kind of sullies the whole sacrifice a bit. That the writers made up it so that Stark was the one to snap the gauntlet, as I've mentioned, retroactively ends up making it feel as though the character has now reverted BACK to his narcissistic self when, over the course of a bunch of other films, he had moved beyond that line of thinking. The Stark post-Iron Man 3 leading up to Endgame wouldn't throw his life away like that. He had already grown beyond superheroics and was living the family life, raising a daughter. That Stark was so eager to sacrifice himself at the end just showcases what I feel is poor writing and characterization. [edit] Phylodox posted:That feels like more of a regression, to me. Steve would be literally doing the same thing he'd be willing to do from the start. It doesn't really challenge his character at all. I see it more so as the apex of Cap's arc 
teagone fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
I legitimately cannot begin to comprehend this argument. He loving dies to save trillions of beings including his wife and child and somehow that's selfish and narcassitic. Like, I'm seriously struggling to understand this. Tony having a family makes the decision MORE heroic. It's simple to die when you have nothing to live for and don't truly value your life, it's a million times harder and more powerful to have so much to live for but instead give all of it up to save others. Do you think his daughter was tossed into an orphanage or something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:05
|
|
|
teagone posted:I see it more so as the apex of Cap's arc That's not really an arc, though, so much as a flat plane. Which is okay, not every character needs an arc. But obviously they didn't feel it was as satisfying as having Cap have to give up the fight and live a civilian life. I agree.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:07
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:I legitimately cannot begin to comprehend this argument. He loving dies to save trillions of beings including his wife and child and somehow that's selfish and narcassitic. Like, I'm seriously struggling to understand this. Because he didn't have to sacrifice himself. That's the point I'm making wrt the argument I'm making about poor writing/characterization. quote:Do you think his daughter was tossed into an orphanage or something? No. But I fail to see how her being well off is relevant to her now being fatherless. teagone fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:12
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:That's not really an arc, though, so much as a flat plane. Which is okay, not every character needs an arc. How about viewing it more like a rising incline then I guess? That ends with big BOOM after snapping the gauntlet. Lmao.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
teagone posted:Because he didn't have to sacrifice himself. That's the point I'm making wrt to poor writing. I...you...you literally just loving said the writing made it so he was the only one to do so. How does, in your opinion, bad writing putting him in a position to be the one to stop Thanos proof of HIS selfishness. This is the most insane argument I've ever seen. You are literally arguing that it's the characters fault the writing was poor and put him in a position to sacrifice himself. That's utter madness.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:14
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:Then how the hell is Tony selfish? If you admit Tony is literally the only character WHO WAS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY to be able to stop Thanos, then how on earth is stopping Thanos from vaporizing half of existence, including Tony's wife and daughter, selfish? Technically all of existence this time
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:14
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:I...you...you literally just loving said the writing made it so he was the only one to do so. How does, in your opinion, bad writing putting him in a position to be the one to stop Thanos proof of HIS selfishness. This is the most insane argument I've ever seen. You are literally arguing that it's the characters fault the writing was poor and put him in a position to sacrifice himself. That's utter madness. I just don't think you're understanding what I'm trying to say here to be honest, but that might be my fault for not articulating my point across well enough so that it's easily digestible. I feel like my argument is sound, but I understand that not everyone will agree with it, especially Iron Man fans probably. Here are the basic points again, just to be clear again: Writing it in a way so that it has to be Stark to snap the gauntlet because Doctor Strange said so I feel weakens the drama behind the sacrifice a bit. But that's not my major complaint. Writing it in a way so that it has to be Stark to snap the gauntlet ends up going against the character development Stark experienced in previous films is what I have issues with. Those are the simplest terms I can put my thoughts in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:20
|
|
|
I don’t care about Stark’s arc or w/e but the suggestion a few people made in the avengers threads that Dr. Strange was bullshitting and just wanted to get rid of Iron Man is really funny and makes more sense than the alternative
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:22
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:I don’t care about Stark’s arc or w/e but the suggestion a few people made in the avengers threads that Dr. Strange was bullshitting and just wanted to get rid of Iron Man is really funny and makes more sense than the alternative SMG actually came up with that I think. And yeah, it's hilarious when you go back and watch the films because you can tell Doctor Strange just hates Tony based on their interactions, lol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
teagone posted:I just don't think you're understanding what I'm trying to say here to be honest, but that might be my fault for not articulating my point across well enough so that it's easily digestible. I feel like my argument is sound, but I understand that not everyone will agree with it, especially Iron Man fans probably. Here are the basic points again, just to be clear again: Writing it in a way so that it has to be Stark to snap the gauntlet because Doctor Strange said so I feel weakens the drama behind the sacrifice a bit. But that's not my major complaint. Writing it in a way so that it has to be Stark to snap the gauntlet ends up going against the character development Stark experienced in previous films is what I have issues with. Those are the simplest terms I can put my thoughts in. But again, HOW DOES THAT MAKE HIM SELFISH? He is literally the only one, AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, who could stop all of existence including his child from vaporizing and HE GIVES HIS LIFE to stop it. Like....it would be more character appropriate had he poo poo himself and let all life die because "My kid needs a dad!" OpenSourceBurger fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:But again, HOW DOES THAT MAKE HIM SELFISH? He is literally the only one, AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, who could stop all of existence including his child from vaporizing and HE GIVES HIS LIFE to stop it. Like....it would be more character appropriate had he poo poo himself and let all life die because "My kid needs a dad!" Write it so that Cap does it instead. Or somehow get Captain Marvel to snap the gauntlet. I don't know. Something other than having Stark do it is what I'm saying, because I feel like having Stark blow himself up is an ideological regression of his character.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
teagone posted:Write it so that Cap does it instead. Or somehow get Captain Marvel to snap the gauntlet. I don't know. Something other than having Stark do it is what I'm saying, because I feel like having Stark blow himself up is an ideological regression of his character. loving how!? Like am I taking crazy pills here? How does dying to save all of loving existence including his child regress his character back to being selfish? You keep harping on the writing but you keep dodging that central core question: How does giving your life for your child equal a selfish act?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:31
|
|
|
I'm not going to stuff up the thread and repeat what I've already posted explaining my thoughts again, so feel free to go back and read my posts if you want. [edit] Except I'll give you this one: OpenSourceBurger posted:How does giving your life for your child equal a selfish act? Again, because he didn't have to give his life. Poor — or cheap, whatever you want to call it — writing dictated that he had to. Cap could've easily done it, that makes the most sense. I'm not sure how they could've gotten Captain Marvel to do it, but I'm sure they could've figured out a way to make it cool. I've mostly already said this though. And again, you don't to have agree. That's just how I feel about it 
teagone fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:33
|
|
|
teagone posted:I'm not going to stuff up the thread and repeat what I've already posted explaining my thoughts again, so feel free to go back and read my posts if you want. But you haven't explained it. Your central conceit is that Tony was selfish for dying and leaving his child fatherless because the writing made him the only one to do it. Like the implication is Tony should have broken the fourth wall and asked for a script rewrite instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:Like the implication is Tony should have broken the fourth wall and asked for a script rewrite instead. No. That would be absurd. Am I not allowed to be critical of the writing? Like, I understand the logic of what the writers came up with wrt Stark's death. I just think they basically used cheap tactics to hold up a facade of drama. It works though, I admit. I'm just not a fan, and have expressed why in detail in my last few posts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
teagone posted:No. That would be absurd. Am I not allowed to be critical of the writing? Like, I understand the logic of what the writers came up with wrt Stark's death. I just think they basically used cheap tactics to hold up a facade of drama. It works though, I admit. I'm just not a fan, and have expressed why in detail in my last few posts. No one is saying you can't be critical but your argument is patently false on it's face wrt Tony being selfish and regressing. Let's ignore how bad you thinking the writing is. As the movie exists now, Tony is the only person who, at that singular moment, could use the stones and stop all existance from dying. You have agreed multiple times that Tony was the only person written in a way to do that. My point is that by being the only person who could save the world and taking that fall despite it killing him and him losing the family he wanted for so long is literally the exact opposite of being selfish.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
OpenSourceBurger posted:Let's ignore how bad you thinking the writing is. My whole argument is based on how bad I feel the writing and characterization is though. [edit] And I've already acknowledged that the choice to have Tony die makes sense in context of the story, in both the literal sense and meta-narrative sense lol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:50
|
|
|
teagone posted:No. That would be absurd. Am I not allowed to be critical of the writing? Like, I understand the logic of what the writers came up with wrt Stark's death. I just think they basically used cheap tactics to hold up a facade of drama. It works though, I admit. I'm just not a fan, and have expressed why in detail in my last few posts. teagone posted:My whole argument is based on bad I feel the writing and characterization is though? I think he's just hung up on you calling the character selfish, when what the character did wasn't selfish based on the narrative the character was stuck in. This doesn't make the narrative GOOD, but it's a different problem than the character having an obvious out from killing themselves and doing it anyway to be a narcissistic glory hound. I think. It would have been hilarious if they actually played it that way though, and everyone was like "So what was that? Adam Warlock (or whoever) was RIGHT THERE, man..."
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:52
|
|
|
teagone posted:My whole argument is based on bad I feel the writing and characterization is though? You are literally arguing that Tony killing himself to save his child is selfish because the writers could have had Cap do it. You are placing the blame of the writing on the character in the story, you seriously don't see how loving absurd that is?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
I'll end with this. From the Endgame thread again:teagone posted:Stark isn't wrong, because any good father would do the same, but that doesn't mean he's not being selfish. Greater good and all that. Further shows how Stark regressed as a character and wasn't willing to make the sacrifice play. He preferred the narcissist play, so people would built monuments to him in the aftermath of his self-annihilation, feeding his ego into the afterlife.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
teagone posted:I'll end with this. From the Endgame thread again: That's the single most nonsensical argument I have ever seen someone make in regards to a film.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 22:56
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:I think he's just hung up on you calling the character selfish, when what the character did wasn't selfish based on the narrative the character was stuck in. Or could be I'm just bad at articulating my thoughts (which I admittedly am). I'm more so criticizing the narrative constructed to develop the context/scenario in the first place, which unfortunately directly affects Stark's character in negative fashion imo. That's all. [edit] OpenSourceBurger posted:That's the single most nonsensical argument I have ever seen someone make in regards to a film. drat, even more nonsensical than the stuff SMG was spitting? teagone fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Jun 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
zero chill itt
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:13
|
|
|
teagone posted:I'll end with this. From the Endgame thread again: Here's the thing, though; the Tony you're talking about, the one who wants all the statues and adulation, isn't the Tony we see in Endgame. Nothing we see about him in that movie implies that he's the kind of guy who would make that sacrifice for the glory of it. We start the movie with Tony completely broken. He's always been the guy who thought he could come up with a clever solution and cheat death, but being so thoroughly defeated by Thanos taught him different. So he becomes the kind of guy who's happy to live out in the middle of nowhere and take care of his family. He does kind of regress, you're right about that, but it's when they come to him and ask him to invent time travel for them. Then he relapses and thinks he can tech his way out of the problem and save everyone and be the hero. But at the end of the movie, when Thanos is about to wipe out the whole universe, he realizes that this time there's no out for him. No clever solution, no gizmo. He's not doing it because he knows he'll be lauded, he's doing it because that's who he's become, a guy who's willing to give it all up for his family.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:58
|
|
|
holy crap "Captain America wasn't close enough" stop taking the film to be a literal record of historical events, he could have flexed his bicep and destroyed all the baddies if the writers wanted him to. All you have to talk about in these films is the boring poo poo that happens in them which is all just the result of a big whiteboard meeting anyway
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 23:59
|
|
|
Rabelais D posted:holy crap "Captain America wasn't close enough" stop taking the film to be a literal record of historical events, he could have flexed his bicep and destroyed all the baddies if the writers wanted him to. All you have to talk about in these films is the boring poo poo that happens in them which is all just the result of a big whiteboard meeting anyway Everyone here is talking and discussing the movies, you don't need to post in every thread even if its about things you don't care about, it'll be okay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 00:05
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Here's the thing, though; the Tony you're talking about, the one who wants all the statues and adulation, isn't the Tony we see in Endgame. Nothing we see about him in that movie implies that he's the kind of guy who would make that sacrifice for the glory of it. We start the movie with Tony completely broken. He's always been the guy who thought he could come up with a clever solution and cheat death, but being so thoroughly defeated by Thanos taught him different. So he becomes the kind of guy who's happy to live out in the middle of nowhere and take care of his family. He does kind of regress, you're right about that, but it's when they come to him and ask him to invent time travel for them. Then he relapses and thinks he can tech his way out of the problem and save everyone and be the hero. But at the end of the movie, when Thanos is about to wipe out the whole universe, he realizes that this time there's no out for him. No clever solution, no gizmo. He's not doing it because he knows he'll be lauded, he's doing it because that's who he's become, a guy who's willing to give it all up for his family. I acknowledge all of what you just wrote was what the scene is meant to evoke. And it does a good job at that. I'm not that dense (maybe, lol), and I can "read" what's being presented on screen and engage with it beyond just the literal context. And again, like I've said before, I agree Stark's death works in both the literal and meta-narrative sense. It's an effective solution to the conflict. I just—plain and simple—don't agree with the decision to tell the story that way, specific to ending Stark's character. It doesn't work for me, because of what I think is the result of poor writing and characterization. Singling this out: quote:Here's the thing, though; the Tony you're talking about, the one who wants all the statues and adulation, isn't the Tony we see in Endgame. You're right. But I believe the decision to have Stark be the only one who could snap the gauntlet at the time inadvertently reverts him right back to where he started the moment that decision is finalized by the character. I'm just really not a fan of that choice, and I think my reasonings as to why I'm not a fan are able to bolster that line of thinking despite however weak you might think my argument is. Like yeah, of course Stark's sacrifice is meant to play out as a dramatically heroic act, saving his family and the universe. Endgame isn't coy when it comes to being ostentatious in its presentation. The writers knew exactly what they were doing with Stark's death. But just because the movie is able to put up an effective show of drama and is directly aimed to hit the feels, that's not enough to distract me from my own opinion of "Wait, why didn't Cap die instead? That makes way more sense to me." teagone fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Jun 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 00:50
|
|
|
Tony Stark does not so much leap on the grenade as he does pull the pin out of one while losing a fistfight with Thanos
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 12:12 |
|
|
Former arms dealer/weapons manufacturer resolves conflict by unleashing the greatest WMD the universe has ever seen on the enemy, only to blow himself up in the process. Actually, I guess that arc kinda owns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 00:56
|
|