What happens with Cap isn't at all mysterious or nonsensical, the movie lays out what has to happen.
For him, it's the exact same Peggy but his arrival splits the timeline. For all intents and purposes, he does live out his life with Peggy and it's his Peggy, Rogers is the one that is different. According to the very explicitly-defined MCU rules of time-travel, he then lives in that alternate timeline until he catches up to the moment where he originally leaves the prime timeline. He can then use the Stark tech, either carefully preserved or restored/copied in the alternate timeline, to go back to his original timeline with a replacement shield relatively moments after he left.
After that, he could either hang around the prime timeline or go back to the alternate one, which is the only thing that is actually uncertain. And that would be a matter of choice for him because he has the means to reach either timeline, the only question is which one he feels like he belongs in.
What happens to the frozen Steve in the alternate timeline?
Depends entirely on what future Steve decides to reveal. They're two entirely independent people from the moment older Steve hits the past. Older Rogers can impact the future of THAT Steve, but it doesn't change anybody's past in that time line.
The time line rules they set up basically mean every "duplicate" from time travel is entirely and uniquely their own person: one here from the futere, the other from that time line. Thus, no paradox because all following events are unique.
I still disagree that "a coherent storyline with time travel" is impossible.
Coherent stories about time travel are absolutely possible. The movie version of 12 Monkeys, for example. Stephen King's 11/22/63. The original Time Machine.
Using time travel as a plot device or a way to make a plot work almost always ends up being a mess because it's just getting the plot from point A to a logically-incompatible-with-point-A point B so the ramifications of the actual time travel are generally ignored.
PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
+4
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
I still disagree that "a coherent storyline with time travel" is impossible.
Coherent stories about time travel are absolutely possible. The movie version of 12 Monkeys, for example. Stephen King's 11/22/63. The original Time Machine.
Using time travel as a plot device or a way to make a plot work almost always ends up being a mess because it's just getting the plot from point A to a logically-incompatible-with-point-A point B so the ramifications of the actual time travel are generally ignored.
With the caveat that the more you probe into it, the better the chances you start finding something stupid.
Best done with a few simple rules and without testing the boundary conditions because by its very nature, it's a paradox.
+4
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Yeah, there's a decided difference between really exploring what kind of story time travel allows and simple oldschool comic time travel where it just let's you unfuck everything with no complexity.
Endgame definitely was hewing away from traditional comic book time travel and more towards something practical enough to work. The rules they lay out are pretty simple, the results are much more complex. They just aren't the rules of Hollywood time travel most people are used too.
What happens with Cap isn't at all mysterious or nonsensical, the movie lays out what has to happen.
For him, it's the exact same Peggy but his arrival splits the timeline. For all intents and purposes, he does live out his life with Peggy and it's his Peggy, Rogers is the one that is different. According to the very explicitly-defined MCU rules of time-travel, he then lives in that alternate timeline until he catches up to the moment where he originally leaves the prime timeline. He can then use the Stark tech, either carefully preserved or restored/copied in the alternate timeline, to go back to his original timeline with a replacement shield relatively moments after he left.
After that, he could either hang around the prime timeline or go back to the alternate one, which is the only thing that is actually uncertain. And that would be a matter of choice for him because he has the means to reach either timeline, the only question is which one he feels like he belongs in.
What happens to the frozen Steve in the alternate timeline?
Depends entirely on what future Steve decides to reveal. They're two entirely independent people from the moment older Steve hits the past. Older Rogers can impact the future of THAT Steve, but it doesn't change anybody's past in that time line.
The time line rules they set up basically mean every "duplicate" from time travel is entirely and uniquely their own person: one here from the futere, the other from that time line. Thus, no paradox because all following events are unique.
As a corollary, because the past remains unchanged, and apparently you can bring things and people between timelines, you could endlessly re-do the heist (spawning a new timeline each time you return to the original past) because you can travel to your immutable past as a copy, there are infinite available copies of everybody and everything that has ever existed
What happens with Cap isn't at all mysterious or nonsensical, the movie lays out what has to happen.
For him, it's the exact same Peggy but his arrival splits the timeline. For all intents and purposes, he does live out his life with Peggy and it's his Peggy, Rogers is the one that is different. According to the very explicitly-defined MCU rules of time-travel, he then lives in that alternate timeline until he catches up to the moment where he originally leaves the prime timeline. He can then use the Stark tech, either carefully preserved or restored/copied in the alternate timeline, to go back to his original timeline with a replacement shield relatively moments after he left.
After that, he could either hang around the prime timeline or go back to the alternate one, which is the only thing that is actually uncertain. And that would be a matter of choice for him because he has the means to reach either timeline, the only question is which one he feels like he belongs in.
What happens to the frozen Steve in the alternate timeline?
Depends entirely on what future Steve decides to reveal. They're two entirely independent people from the moment older Steve hits the past. Older Rogers can impact the future of THAT Steve, but it doesn't change anybody's past in that time line.
The time line rules they set up basically mean every "duplicate" from time travel is entirely and uniquely their own person: one here from the futere, the other from that time line. Thus, no paradox because all following events are unique.
As a corollary, because the past remains unchanged, and apparently you can bring things and people between timelines, you could endlessly re-do the heist (spawning a new timeline each time you return to the original past) because you can travel to your immutable past as a copy, there are infinite available copies of everybody and everything that has ever existed
And if you keep it all organized, you could even return all those people back to their time lines without taking away their respective futures.
But the Avengers didn't need the army, they needed the stones. And with the stones, an army is redundant anyway if the one guy who would threaten your plans is supposed to dead and not stealing your tech to chase the stones through time.
However, I'm betting the TVA would not be happy with anyone making a time duplicate army of themselves at any point.
0
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
I'm curious...have we heard who's "responsibile" for the TVA and their particular mission yet from the trailers? Cause I'd kind of assumed
Has to be Uatu the Watcher, right?
As far as I know, the Watchers are literally that: watchers. Basically, they just bear witness as the various realities unfold. Uatu interfering was a huge no-no among his people, similar to how wildlife photographers aren't supposed to interact with subjects.
But they could also enforce the proper follow of time in MCU,yes.,
What happens with Cap isn't at all mysterious or nonsensical, the movie lays out what has to happen.
For him, it's the exact same Peggy but his arrival splits the timeline. For all intents and purposes, he does live out his life with Peggy and it's his Peggy, Rogers is the one that is different. According to the very explicitly-defined MCU rules of time-travel, he then lives in that alternate timeline until he catches up to the moment where he originally leaves the prime timeline. He can then use the Stark tech, either carefully preserved or restored/copied in the alternate timeline, to go back to his original timeline with a replacement shield relatively moments after he left.
After that, he could either hang around the prime timeline or go back to the alternate one, which is the only thing that is actually uncertain. And that would be a matter of choice for him because he has the means to reach either timeline, the only question is which one he feels like he belongs in.
What happens to the frozen Steve in the alternate timeline?
Depends entirely on what future Steve decides to reveal. They're two entirely independent people from the moment older Steve hits the past. Older Rogers can impact the future of THAT Steve, but it doesn't change anybody's past in that time line.
The time line rules they set up basically mean every "duplicate" from time travel is entirely and uniquely their own person: one here from the futere, the other from that time line. Thus, no paradox because all following events are unique.
Yeah, but like...now you've got piles of fanfic about Peggy and her 2 Steves. Why wouldn't Steve want to talk about his life? Because he's been living in a thruple with himself.
What happens with Cap isn't at all mysterious or nonsensical, the movie lays out what has to happen.
For him, it's the exact same Peggy but his arrival splits the timeline. For all intents and purposes, he does live out his life with Peggy and it's his Peggy, Rogers is the one that is different. According to the very explicitly-defined MCU rules of time-travel, he then lives in that alternate timeline until he catches up to the moment where he originally leaves the prime timeline. He can then use the Stark tech, either carefully preserved or restored/copied in the alternate timeline, to go back to his original timeline with a replacement shield relatively moments after he left.
After that, he could either hang around the prime timeline or go back to the alternate one, which is the only thing that is actually uncertain. And that would be a matter of choice for him because he has the means to reach either timeline, the only question is which one he feels like he belongs in.
What happens to the frozen Steve in the alternate timeline?
Depends entirely on what future Steve decides to reveal. They're two entirely independent people from the moment older Steve hits the past. Older Rogers can impact the future of THAT Steve, but it doesn't change anybody's past in that time line.
The time line rules they set up basically mean every "duplicate" from time travel is entirely and uniquely their own person: one here from the futere, the other from that time line. Thus, no paradox because all following events are unique.
Yeah, but like...now you've got piles of fanfic about Peggy and her 2 Steves. Why wouldn't Steve want to talk about his life? Because he's been living in a thruple with himself.
And don't forget Bucky, you know Rogers would've freed him for more than attachments!
I'm curious...have we heard who's "responsibile" for the TVA and their particular mission yet from the trailers? Cause I'd kind of assumed
Has to be Uatu the Watcher, right?
I'm going with the Living Tribunal, because some of the sculpture work reminds me of them. Not really an educated guess, though.
I'd put money on that one, actually, considering the bigass tribunal statue shown in the trailer
In the comics the TVA is the brain-child of He Who Remains, a being who winds up being the last living entity in this multiverse's cycle who a little like Liara in Mass Effect tries to leave knowledge to the next universe's denizens. The trio of statues in the foyer are the Time Keepers (Ast, Vorth, Zant) who he sets up as the protectors of the primary timeline. They do have a working relationship with Uatu
BlackDragon480 on
No matter where you go...there you are. ~ Buckaroo Banzai
On one hand I'm a sucker for time travel stories and love them
On the other hand *rubs temples*
They're like fairly tales to me
Once you're thinking "Wait why were Hansel and Gretel even out in the woods by themselves that does seem right" and "Hey wait a minute witches aren't even fucking real!" you've gone 'round the bend :P
On one hand I'm a sucker for time travel stories and love them
On the other hand *rubs temples*
They're like fairly tales to me
Once you're thinking "Wait why were Hansel and Gretel even out in the woods by themselves that does seem right" and "Hey wait a minute witches aren't even fucking real!" you've gone 'round the bend :P
Give me all the time travel movies. Even the terrible ones. ESPECIALLY the terrible ones.
TV Series too. Daybreak, Journeyman, Seven Days, ALL THE TIME TRAVEL!
I'm okay with a little hand-waving in my fantasy/sci-fi/comic stories, just so long as the hand-having isn't so much that it actually detracts from the overall story.
What happens with Cap isn't at all mysterious or nonsensical, the movie lays out what has to happen.
For him, it's the exact same Peggy but his arrival splits the timeline. For all intents and purposes, he does live out his life with Peggy and it's his Peggy, Rogers is the one that is different. According to the very explicitly-defined MCU rules of time-travel, he then lives in that alternate timeline until he catches up to the moment where he originally leaves the prime timeline. He can then use the Stark tech, either carefully preserved or restored/copied in the alternate timeline, to go back to his original timeline with a replacement shield relatively moments after he left.
After that, he could either hang around the prime timeline or go back to the alternate one, which is the only thing that is actually uncertain. And that would be a matter of choice for him because he has the means to reach either timeline, the only question is which one he feels like he belongs in.
What happens to the frozen Steve in the alternate timeline?
Depends entirely on what future Steve decides to reveal. They're two entirely independent people from the moment older Steve hits the past. Older Rogers can impact the future of THAT Steve, but it doesn't change anybody's past in that time line.
The time line rules they set up basically mean every "duplicate" from time travel is entirely and uniquely their own person: one here from the futere, the other from that time line. Thus, no paradox because all following events are unique.
As a corollary, because the past remains unchanged, and apparently you can bring things and people between timelines, you could endlessly re-do the heist (spawning a new timeline each time you return to the original past) because you can travel to your immutable past as a copy, there are infinite available copies of everybody and everything that has ever existed
This only works if you don't give a shit about what happens in the alternate timelines you create. The Avengers are pretty cavalier about it but they do at least care enough to return the stones. The ramifications of this form of time travel being abused are too insane to really explore though. They need to lock up this tech and throw away the key.
Yeah, like you could time travel to when the asteroid hit Wakanda over and over again to mine vibranium. You could do crazy experiments giving an arc reactor to Da Vinci and then jumping forward in that timeline to see what crazy shit exists. Hell, you could travel back to a million BC and crack open the moon just to see if it has a candy center, consequence free. It's already nuts that the world can just absorb 3.5 billion people and have class trips to Europe already rolling in months. This tech would change the galaxy so fast, it basically is the singularity all at once. You can't keep doing it and then having punch em ups with street thugs, it doesn't make sense.
0
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
Stumbled across this and goddamn is this a molotov cocktail
But is OP wrong? I feel like they make a perfect case for their argument
They make a few fair points but for the most part just seem really, really angry that MCU Spidey is not faithful enough to the comics. Which is a direct result of real world fatigue over repeatedly rebooting the exact same story. It is what it is.
Stumbled across this and goddamn is this a molotov cocktail
But is OP wrong? I feel like they make a perfect case for their argument
They make a few fair points but for the most part just seem really, really angry that MCU Spidey is not faithful enough to the comics. Which is a direct result of real world fatigue over repeatedly rebooting the exact same story. It is what it is.
They mustn't have read Spider-man Team Up or how he looked up to Tony, especially during half of Civil War. Spider-man knows everyone. It makes sense for Peter to idolise Stark in the MCU.
Stumbled across this and goddamn is this a molotov cocktail
But is OP wrong? I feel like they make a perfect case for their argument
Honestly, I don't think they are saying much of anything at all. They assert how they thinks Spider-man has to be without doing the work to really demonstrate it, and then complains the movies didn't stick to that very narrow vision of it. Spider-man as a street level hero went out the window years and years ago. He has long been an Avenger, and a billionaire in the some of the more recent arcs. There is also some complaints that rather that replacing Uncle Ben with a fleshed out, and real character is somehow harmful. I guess it is a problem that there is a relationship shown to be developed over a few movies rather than a minor character murdered to advance the plot of our hero with no other purpose. I can't say I feel that is a weaker narrative arc. Really almost nothing they say rings true to me at all.
IMO it's the equivalent of "latest Batman is bad not because he's a casual murderer, but because they didn't show the pearls, they have to show the pearls, every single time!"
(by now the pavement of Crime Alley must be covered with the damn things)
On one hand I'm a sucker for time travel stories and love them
On the other hand *rubs temples*
They're like fairly tales to me
Once you're thinking "Wait why were Hansel and Gretel even out in the woods by themselves that does seem right" and "Hey wait a minute witches aren't even fucking real!" you've gone 'round the bend :P
Give me all the time travel movies. Even the terrible ones. ESPECIALLY the terrible ones.
TV Series too. Daybreak, Journeyman, Seven Days, ALL THE TIME TRAVEL!
okay
hold the phone here
another human being on this planet earth actually watched Daybreak?
There was a steam sig here. It's gone now.
+3
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Stumbled across this and goddamn is this a molotov cocktail
But is OP wrong? I feel like they make a perfect case for their argument
They make a few fair points but for the most part just seem really, really angry that MCU Spidey is not faithful enough to the comics. Which is a direct result of real world fatigue over repeatedly rebooting the exact same story. It is what it is.
They mustn't have read Spider-man Team Up or how he looked up to Tony, especially during half of Civil War. Spider-man knows everyone. It makes sense for Peter to idolise Stark in the MCU.
The author says everything he needs to say when he decries "the masses" for liking the movie and defending it (I really wish he'd started with that point to save me the time of trying to take any of the rest of it seriously) while he whines about Parker not being a 1:1 match to the comics with his secret identity, where Uncle Ben's death fits into his life, Aunt May being a hugely positive and supportive influence instead of massive worry-pit, etc. He's mad because shitloads of people are getting to enjoy Spider-Man, not the "right" people in the form of comics lawyers analyzing shots frame-by-frame to make sure they properly adhere to comic panel shots of the same scenes.
Plus he's factually wrong on like ten different points, not the least of which is considering it bad writing that Stark would hand a drone army off to a highschool kid. I mean, this is the same Stark that drafted the kid into a superhero fight, invented an evil robot by going behind everybody's back, tried to stop said evil robot by going behind everybody's back and building another sentient robot, then also decided the commandeered Iron Legion wasn't that big a deal and built a space-based drone army to replace it. Of fucking course he would hand the drones off to Parker. Parker is the only person Stark identifies with emotionally and intellectually, it wouldn't even register to Stark that giving a highschool kid a drone army could be a bad idea.
On one hand I'm a sucker for time travel stories and love them
On the other hand *rubs temples*
They're like fairly tales to me
Once you're thinking "Wait why were Hansel and Gretel even out in the woods by themselves that does seem right" and "Hey wait a minute witches aren't even fucking real!" you've gone 'round the bend :P
Hansel and Gretel are abandoned by their parents in the woods because their parents, the woodcutter and his wife, can't afford to feed them.
That guy subscribes to the idea that "Peter Parker Must Suffer" and tbh I like movie spidey, he still gets his shit kicked around and cries, it's just not his only character trait. I'm ok with Peter getting a few W's instead of being on the "everyone hates you/is out to kill you, Pete"
One of the best scenes in FFH is when he gets Happy to come get him, and that's as a result of his connections to stark. They clearly put a lot of thought into it.
Stumbled across this and goddamn is this a molotov cocktail
But is OP wrong? I feel like they make a perfect case for their argument
They make a few fair points but for the most part just seem really, really angry that MCU Spidey is not faithful enough to the comics. Which is a direct result of real world fatigue over repeatedly rebooting the exact same story. It is what it is.
They mustn't have read Spider-man Team Up or how he looked up to Tony, especially during half of Civil War. Spider-man knows everyone. It makes sense for Peter to idolise Stark in the MCU.
The author says everything he needs to say when he decries "the masses" for liking the movie and defending it (I really wish he'd started with that point to save me the time of trying to take any of the rest of it seriously) while he whines about Parker not being a 1:1 match to the comics with his secret identity, where Uncle Ben's death fits into his life, Aunt May being a hugely positive and supportive influence instead of massive worry-pit, etc. He's mad because shitloads of people are getting to enjoy Spider-Man, not the "right" people in the form of comics lawyers analyzing shots frame-by-frame to make sure they properly adhere to comic panel shots of the same scenes.
Plus he's factually wrong on like ten different points, not the least of which is considering it bad writing that Stark would hand a drone army off to a highschool kid. I mean, this is the same Stark that drafted the kid into a superhero fight, invented an evil robot by going behind everybody's back, tried to stop said evil robot by going behind everybody's back and building another sentient robot, then also decided the commandeered Iron Legion wasn't that big a deal and built a space-based drone army to replace it. Of fucking course he would hand the drones off to Parker. Parker is the only person Stark identifies with emotionally and intellectually, it wouldn't even register to Stark that giving a highschool kid a drone army could be a bad idea.
MCU Tony Stark makes almost as many bad decisions/new problems by trying to fix his previous bad decision(s) as the Guardians of Oa. :P
Also, Peter Parker not being allowed to change/improve his status quo is a big part of what gave us One More Day. 'Nuff said. :bigfrown:
Posts
That makes perfect sense, and she's dead sexy.
~ Buckaroo Banzai
Like Loop...er.
:cool:
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Depends entirely on what future Steve decides to reveal. They're two entirely independent people from the moment older Steve hits the past. Older Rogers can impact the future of THAT Steve, but it doesn't change anybody's past in that time line.
The time line rules they set up basically mean every "duplicate" from time travel is entirely and uniquely their own person: one here from the futere, the other from that time line. Thus, no paradox because all following events are unique.
Coherent stories about time travel are absolutely possible. The movie version of 12 Monkeys, for example. Stephen King's 11/22/63. The original Time Machine.
Using time travel as a plot device or a way to make a plot work almost always ends up being a mess because it's just getting the plot from point A to a logically-incompatible-with-point-A point B so the ramifications of the actual time travel are generally ignored.
With the caveat that the more you probe into it, the better the chances you start finding something stupid.
Best done with a few simple rules and without testing the boundary conditions because by its very nature, it's a paradox.
Endgame definitely was hewing away from traditional comic book time travel and more towards something practical enough to work. The rules they lay out are pretty simple, the results are much more complex. They just aren't the rules of Hollywood time travel most people are used too.
As a corollary, because the past remains unchanged, and apparently you can bring things and people between timelines, you could endlessly re-do the heist (spawning a new timeline each time you return to the original past) because you can travel to your immutable past as a copy, there are infinite available copies of everybody and everything that has ever existed
I actually do not like the diner scene at all, because it's basically a 4th wall break, and also breaks the verisimilitude of the entire movie.
And if you keep it all organized, you could even return all those people back to their time lines without taking away their respective futures.
But the Avengers didn't need the army, they needed the stones. And with the stones, an army is redundant anyway if the one guy who would threaten your plans is supposed to dead and not stealing your tech to chase the stones through time.
However, I'm betting the TVA would not be happy with anyone making a time duplicate army of themselves at any point.
But does it take you to the edge of tomorrow?
But they could also enforce the proper follow of time in MCU,yes.,
Yeah, but like...now you've got piles of fanfic about Peggy and her 2 Steves. Why wouldn't Steve want to talk about his life? Because he's been living in a thruple with himself.
And don't forget Bucky, you know Rogers would've freed him for more than attachments!
~ Buckaroo Banzai
On the other hand *rubs temples*
They're like fairly tales to me
Once you're thinking "Wait why were Hansel and Gretel even out in the woods by themselves that does seem right" and "Hey wait a minute witches aren't even fucking real!" you've gone 'round the bend :P
Give me all the time travel movies. Even the terrible ones. ESPECIALLY the terrible ones.
TV Series too. Daybreak, Journeyman, Seven Days, ALL THE TIME TRAVEL!
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
This only works if you don't give a shit about what happens in the alternate timelines you create. The Avengers are pretty cavalier about it but they do at least care enough to return the stones. The ramifications of this form of time travel being abused are too insane to really explore though. They need to lock up this tech and throw away the key.
"This is why time travel gives me nosebleeds." - Geordi LaForge
I read once that the core of every story in the genre is the child's tearful wish, "Make it didn't happen."
Hah. That's a really good description.
No.
Stumbled across this and goddamn is this a molotov cocktail
But is OP wrong? I feel like they make a perfect case for their argument
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
They make a few fair points but for the most part just seem really, really angry that MCU Spidey is not faithful enough to the comics. Which is a direct result of real world fatigue over repeatedly rebooting the exact same story. It is what it is.
They mustn't have read Spider-man Team Up or how he looked up to Tony, especially during half of Civil War. Spider-man knows everyone. It makes sense for Peter to idolise Stark in the MCU.
Honestly, I don't think they are saying much of anything at all. They assert how they thinks Spider-man has to be without doing the work to really demonstrate it, and then complains the movies didn't stick to that very narrow vision of it. Spider-man as a street level hero went out the window years and years ago. He has long been an Avenger, and a billionaire in the some of the more recent arcs. There is also some complaints that rather that replacing Uncle Ben with a fleshed out, and real character is somehow harmful. I guess it is a problem that there is a relationship shown to be developed over a few movies rather than a minor character murdered to advance the plot of our hero with no other purpose. I can't say I feel that is a weaker narrative arc. Really almost nothing they say rings true to me at all.
(by now the pavement of Crime Alley must be covered with the damn things)
okay
hold the phone here
another human being on this planet earth actually watched Daybreak?
The author says everything he needs to say when he decries "the masses" for liking the movie and defending it (I really wish he'd started with that point to save me the time of trying to take any of the rest of it seriously) while he whines about Parker not being a 1:1 match to the comics with his secret identity, where Uncle Ben's death fits into his life, Aunt May being a hugely positive and supportive influence instead of massive worry-pit, etc. He's mad because shitloads of people are getting to enjoy Spider-Man, not the "right" people in the form of comics lawyers analyzing shots frame-by-frame to make sure they properly adhere to comic panel shots of the same scenes.
Plus he's factually wrong on like ten different points, not the least of which is considering it bad writing that Stark would hand a drone army off to a highschool kid. I mean, this is the same Stark that drafted the kid into a superhero fight, invented an evil robot by going behind everybody's back, tried to stop said evil robot by going behind everybody's back and building another sentient robot, then also decided the commandeered Iron Legion wasn't that big a deal and built a space-based drone army to replace it. Of fucking course he would hand the drones off to Parker. Parker is the only person Stark identifies with emotionally and intellectually, it wouldn't even register to Stark that giving a highschool kid a drone army could be a bad idea.
Hansel and Gretel are abandoned by their parents in the woods because their parents, the woodcutter and his wife, can't afford to feed them.
One of the best scenes in FFH is when he gets Happy to come get him, and that's as a result of his connections to stark. They clearly put a lot of thought into it.
MCU Tony Stark makes almost as many bad decisions/new problems by trying to fix his previous bad decision(s) as the Guardians of Oa. :P
Also, Peter Parker not being allowed to change/improve his status quo is a big part of what gave us One More Day. 'Nuff said. :bigfrown: