It was just such a clumsy piece of dialogue, and I remember that it required a lot of post-hoc discussion amongst people regarding why it was even in there
Really, my only issue with that scene is Widow uses it as justification on why she's a "monster" when really they should have just had her echo the idea of a family being something she can't have either and leaving it at that.
+10
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Really, my only issue with that scene is Widow uses it as justification on why she's a "monster" when really they should have just had her echo the idea of a family being something she can't have either and leaving it at that.
I am pretty sure she was referring to herself as a monster via all the 'red in her ledger'
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
God, the fucking "red in my ledger" lines. That was whedon, right? And I'm sure he was really proud of that dumb line considering it popped up several times.
+4
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
Really, my only issue with that scene is Widow uses it as justification on why she's a "monster" when really they should have just had her echo the idea of a family being something she can't have either and leaving it at that.
She’s only using that as justification for being a monster if you ignore the previous 2 minutes of dialogue where she’s goes through everything else that was done to her and what she’s done.
+1
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Really, my only issue with that scene is Widow uses it as justification on why she's a "monster" when really they should have just had her echo the idea of a family being something she can't have either and leaving it at that.
She’s only using that as justification for being a monster if you ignore the previous 2 minutes of dialogue where she’s goes through everything else that was done to her and what she’s done.
My problem was, as I recall, they didn't actually do that. The progression of the scene was: Hulk talking about why he's a monster, culminating with why he can't have kids, then Widow trying to bond, because she can't have kids, either.
And progressing immediately to "I am a monster because I was sterilized" seemed pretty gross to me.
Even if I misremember that progression, Widow talking about how something done to her makes her an unfit person also squicked me out.
+3
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
I still think it's unfairly dunked on. I enjoy it a lot, and Spader is fantastic voicing Ultron. It's biggest problem is Ultron should have been a multi-movie villain. They should have done two films, like they did with Infinity War and Endgame, and had a bit more breathing room and chance for Spader to chew the scenery as Ultron.
This may just be me, bit I never clearly understood Ultron's goals and motivations. Why does he hate the Avengers? Why does he want an extinction level event? He did not seem to be a Skynet type AI.
‘Peace in our time’. Except like usual for AI he decided that was only possible for humans if humans weren’t around.
I thought it was pretty clear.
The weird post credits addition of Thanos saying he'd do it himself after Ultron failed would imply that he's, consciously or not, working for him. Since he came from Loki's sceptre, which came from Thanos, that all makes sense IMO - he's a failsafe trap in the event Loki lost.
But then that scene seemed to get thrown in the trash / doesn't make sense with Infinity War, so...
Oh brilliant
+2
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I still think it's unfairly dunked on. I enjoy it a lot, and Spader is fantastic voicing Ultron. It's biggest problem is Ultron should have been a multi-movie villain. They should have done two films, like they did with Infinity War and Endgame, and had a bit more breathing room and chance for Spader to chew the scenery as Ultron.
This may just be me, bit I never clearly understood Ultron's goals and motivations. Why does he hate the Avengers? Why does he want an extinction level event? He did not seem to be a Skynet type AI.
‘Peace in our time’. Except like usual for AI he decided that was only possible for humans if humans weren’t around.
I thought it was pretty clear.
The weird post credits addition of Thanos saying he'd do it himself after Ultron failed would imply that he's, consciously or not, working for him. Since he came from Loki's sceptre, which came from Thanos, that all makes sense IMO - he's a failsafe trap in the event Loki lost.
But then that scene seemed to get thrown in the trash / doesn't make sense with Infinity War, so...
Thanos saying "Fine, I'll do it myself" only makes sense as a teaser to Avengers 3/4 and not connected to anything in Ultron at all.
Like yeah, the juxtaposition of it at the end of the movie seems to imply that he's saying that based on the movie itself but it makes zero sense for him to do so contextually.
Remember: Ultron wanted to glass the planet.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
Really, my only issue with that scene is Widow uses it as justification on why she's a "monster" when really they should have just had her echo the idea of a family being something she can't have either and leaving it at that.
She’s only using that as justification for being a monster if you ignore the previous 2 minutes of dialogue where she’s goes through everything else that was done to her and what she’s done.
My problem was, as I recall, they didn't actually do that. The progression of the scene was: Hulk talking about why he's a monster, culminating with why he can't have kids, then Widow trying to bond, because she can't have kids, either.
And progressing immediately to "I am a monster because I was sterilized" seemed pretty gross to me.
Even if I misremember that progression, Widow talking about how something done to her makes her an unfit person also squicked me out.
It's not even about what she did or had done to her- it's about how she was OK with it at the time. She WAS a monster. Not because she can't have kids now, that's just a consequence of her mistakes.
+1
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
I still think it's unfairly dunked on. I enjoy it a lot, and Spader is fantastic voicing Ultron. It's biggest problem is Ultron should have been a multi-movie villain. They should have done two films, like they did with Infinity War and Endgame, and had a bit more breathing room and chance for Spader to chew the scenery as Ultron.
This may just be me, bit I never clearly understood Ultron's goals and motivations. Why does he hate the Avengers? Why does he want an extinction level event? He did not seem to be a Skynet type AI.
‘Peace in our time’. Except like usual for AI he decided that was only possible for humans if humans weren’t around.
I thought it was pretty clear.
The weird post credits addition of Thanos saying he'd do it himself after Ultron failed would imply that he's, consciously or not, working for him. Since he came from Loki's sceptre, which came from Thanos, that all makes sense IMO - he's a failsafe trap in the event Loki lost.
But then that scene seemed to get thrown in the trash / doesn't make sense with Infinity War, so...
Thanos saying "Fine, I'll do it myself" only makes sense as a teaser to Avengers 3/4 and not connected to anything in Ultron at all.
Like yeah, the juxtaposition of it at the end of the movie seems to imply that he's saying that based on the movie itself but it makes zero sense for him to do so contextually.
Remember: Ultron wanted to glass the planet.
He also wanted to make permanent use of the Mind Stone.
If he was Thanos’ lackey, he’d not have built it into his visions head.
I didn't think Ultron came from the stone, the stone just removed Banner and Starks internal failsafes in regards to creating him is how I thought it was meant to be read?
Has the MCU ever clarified how Ultron got put into the staff in the first place?
I always kinda assumed it was something Thanos did as a trap or whatever, but if not him, then who?
IIRC, Ultron was the combination of some sort of sentience within the Mind stone, and whatever Stark and Banner were already working on. That same sentience also made up part of Vision, so I don't think it was so much that there was a trap contained in the Mind stone but that when it "woke up" it got out of hand and went crazy.
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
It’s another part of the film that would have benefited from either chopping a redundant scene to give them more time on it, or splitting the film for double the run time.
Someone mentioned earlier making Ultron's origin movie Iron Man 3 and I really like that idea.
You can still hit a lot of the same character beats, you can even have it be a buddy movie with Banner and you could have Ultron scale up as a villain.
Would also have been fun to have a clone escape narrowly at the end with Ultron's final scene in Avengers being a call back except Vision is still waiting there for him.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
+1
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Has the MCU ever clarified how Ultron got put into the staff in the first place?
I always kinda assumed it was something Thanos did as a trap or whatever, but if not him, then who?
It's explained in the movie. Ultron was a novel AI that Tony built using the Mind Stone casing as a basis (presumably whatever was in there had some mix of science and magic to make it work with the infinity stone)
Tony gave the Ultron AI a simple goal, "Peace in Our Time," and then Ultron concluded the only way to do this was by killing everything on the planet.
It's basically the Mitchell and Webb "Have you tried killing the poor?" sketch but without the "Of course we're not going to do it, I'm surprised you haven't just typed it in the computer on a lark" parts.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
0
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
Has the MCU ever clarified how Ultron got put into the staff in the first place?
I always kinda assumed it was something Thanos did as a trap or whatever, but if not him, then who?
It's explained in the movie. Ultron was a novel AI that Tony built using the Mind Stone casing as a basis (presumably whatever was in there had some mix of science and magic to make it work with the infinity stone)
Tony gave the Ultron AI a simple goal, "Peace in Our Time," and then Ultron concluded the only way to do this was by killing everything on the planet.
It's basically the Mitchell and Webb "Have you tried killing the poor?" sketch but without the "Of course we're not going to do it, I'm surprised you haven't just typed it in the computer on a lark" parts.
Tony didn’t give it the ‘peace in our time’ objective. They weren’t even at the ‘trying to implement it’ phase (as he says to Banner when everyone was pissed off, ‘were we even close to an interface yet?’).
Ultron got ‘peace in our time’ by scanning everything about the Avengers and landing on that conversation with Banner right before the party.
+4
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Has the MCU ever clarified how Ultron got put into the staff in the first place?
I always kinda assumed it was something Thanos did as a trap or whatever, but if not him, then who?
It's explained in the movie. Ultron was a novel AI that Tony built using the Mind Stone casing as a basis (presumably whatever was in there had some mix of science and magic to make it work with the infinity stone)
Tony gave the Ultron AI a simple goal, "Peace in Our Time," and then Ultron concluded the only way to do this was by killing everything on the planet.
It's basically the Mitchell and Webb "Have you tried killing the poor?" sketch but without the "Of course we're not going to do it, I'm surprised you haven't just typed it in the computer on a lark" parts.
Tony didn’t give it the ‘peace in our time’ objective. They weren’t even at the ‘trying to implement it’ phase (as he says to Banner when everyone was pissed off, ‘were we even close to an interface yet?’).
Ultron got ‘peace in our time’ by scanning everything about the Avengers and landing on that conversation with Banner right before the party.
Correct. I guess I should clarify that he gave Ultron the goal incidentally, like he is literally trying to figure out his purpose and the first thing he hears is the playback of "peace in our time"
Which, maybe Tony, don't invoke the spirit of the failed armistice before WWII when creating your super muderbot.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
+2
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Really, my only issue with that scene is Widow uses it as justification on why she's a "monster" when really they should have just had her echo the idea of a family being something she can't have either and leaving it at that.
She’s only using that as justification for being a monster if you ignore the previous 2 minutes of dialogue where she’s goes through everything else that was done to her and what she’s done.
My problem was, as I recall, they didn't actually do that. The progression of the scene was: Hulk talking about why he's a monster, culminating with why he can't have kids, then Widow trying to bond, because she can't have kids, either.
And progressing immediately to "I am a monster because I was sterilized" seemed pretty gross to me.
Even if I misremember that progression, Widow talking about how something done to her makes her an unfit person also squicked me out.
This is a societal issue for sure, but I still feel less than human sometimes because I can't have children. It's not a totally alien thought.
Really, my only issue with that scene is Widow uses it as justification on why she's a "monster" when really they should have just had her echo the idea of a family being something she can't have either and leaving it at that.
She’s only using that as justification for being a monster if you ignore the previous 2 minutes of dialogue where she’s goes through everything else that was done to her and what she’s done.
Nah, she's still adding it as a bullet point to the list, which is really fucked up considering sterility is something people have to deal with in the real world.
And I never took Ultron as directly being Thanos' minion. He's was a trap designed to cause a huge problem for anyone if they got ahold of the staff. Thanos would have also had to deal with the aftermath of it, but in theory the trap and whoever took the staff would have weakened each other to the point where Thanos would have rolled in and crushed them both.
Remember, Hydra was ALSO on the path to creating their own Ultron with the staff, so it wasn't just some weird random thing that the Avengers did.
+2
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
Nothing in Age of Ultron hints at Ultron being some kind of trap.
It’s a result of scanning the mind stone and finding its intelligence, and then trying to apply it to their own program.
1. The big one is the "Fine, I'll do it myself" scene. IIRC, Marvel's post-credits scenes have always had something to tie into the main plot, not just being ads for the next film, but the Thanos scene is incredible out of place if he had nothing to do with it. Now, it could just be an outlier because they wanted to get Thanos in there since he's going to be the big bad of 3&4, but like I said, they hadn't done that before or since, really.
2. How clandestine Ultron's creation was. It literally refused to work until the moment no one as paying attention, and then it worked like magic. (Literally Tony and Bruce are flabbergasted at even HOW it worked given all the previous attempts failed and nothing had changed). Ultron also goes from zero to evil in basically less than a minute.
3. It's really REALLY weird that Thanos hands over one of his precious Infinity Stones (the only one he had even gotten at that point) to an Asgardian twerp with no claim to fame other than tricking the king of the Frost Giants into a trap. Thanos laying a trap helps retcon that into a not-stupid decision.
It's not some big concrete thing where that's the only possibly interpretation, but there's enough there that we can have a conversation about it.
+1
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
edited November 2020
To me, that’s making something up to make sense of Marvels bad editing of the film.
None of that is even hinted at in the films. People just wanted something more coherent than they got.
Worth remembering that Thanos gave his Infinity Stone to Loki because at that point they weren’t Infinity Stones. They became Infinity Stones when James Gunn wanted to use one in Guardians of the Galaxy, and they went and added the after credits scene about the Aether to an in production movie.
-Loki- on
+2
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
1. The big one is the "Fine, I'll do it myself" scene. IIRC, Marvel's post-credits scenes have always had something to tie into the main plot, not just being ads for the next film, but the Thanos scene is incredible out of place if he had nothing to do with it. Now, it could just be an outlier because they wanted to get Thanos in there since he's going to be the big bad of 3&4, but like I said, they hadn't done that before or since, really.
Ehhh... I mean, I don't know if that is necessarily true.
For example, this post-credit scene from Ant-Man has effectively nothing to do with the main film. It's a scene from an entirely separate movie!
It ties in with the aftermath of Scott's fight with Sam and Sam's subsequent search for Ant-Man for recruitment (As retold by Luis at the end of the film)
There was also a line in the trailers that appears to have been cut from the movie (Hank saying "I know a guy," which Falcon repeats in that scene) which would have made the thematic connection stronger, with Scott's reputation as a lawbreaker who does the right thing preceding him.
Thanos, by comparison, shows up out of nowhere having otherwise had no presence in the film up to that point.
0
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
That's because everything Thanos related in the MCU was slapdash poorly thought out content by committee that was excreted through a decade long game of telephone
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
edited November 2020
It's easy to forget (any many don't even realize) that until late phase 2, Marvel had no clue they were aiming for Infinity War. They were just doing phases of films.
When Thanos appeared at the end of The Avengers, that was a result of Joss Whedon saying to Kevin Feige 'We never revealed who was on that throne... how about we put Thanos up there?', and Feige went for it.
When James Gunn did the first Guardians, he wanted to use an Infinity Stone and have Thanos in the film. Until then, the Tesseract, Scepter and Aether were just macguffins that might have turned out to be something. They decided then to do Infinity War, and added the Collector scene to the end of Dark World which was already in production - James Gunn filmed it on his Knowhere set while filming Guardians).
So Ultron being some trap set by Thanos before giving the Scepter to Loki in Avengers couldn't have been planned, because they didn't even know they were going to have Thanos at the end credits scene, nor did they know they were doing Thanos as an overaching villain until Ultron was probably in pre-production, which is why he didn't show up outside of Avengers 1, Guardians 1 and then phase 3 films. Nor did Marvel do any leg work to make it actually seem like that's what happened, it was just a series of retcons that no one realised and which happened to line up well without any problems.
It's easy to forget (any many don't even realize) that until late phase 2, Marvel had no clue they were aiming for Infinity War. They were just doing phases of films.
When Thanos appeared at the end of The Avengers, that was a result of Joss Whedon saying to Kevin Feige 'We never revealed who was on that throne... how about we put Thanos up there?', and Feige went for it.
When James Gunn did the first Guardians, he wanted to use an Infinity Stone and have Thanos in the film. Until then, the Tesseract, Scepter and Aether were just macguffins that might have turned out to be something. They decided then to do Infinity War, and added the Collector scene to the end of Dark World which was already in production - James Gunn filmed it on his Knowhere set while filming Guardians).
So Ultron being some trap set by Thanos before giving the Scepter to Loki in Avengers couldn't have been planned, because they didn't even know they were going to have Thanos at the end credits scene, nor did they know they were doing Thanos as an overaching villain until Ultron was probably in pre-production, which is why he didn't show up outside of Avengers 1, Guardians 1 and then phase 3 films. Nor did Marvel do any leg work to make it actually seem like that's what happened, it was just a series of retcons that no one realised.
I'm not saying they planned it back during the Avengers (in fact I specifically mentioned it would have been a retcon).
I'm saying that Age of Ultron, as presented, implies it. Much like how it retconned the staff itself as being an infinity stone.
Undead Scottsman on
+1
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited November 2020
Well also by the end of phase 2 they realized they were printing money and decided to try to plan things out a bit more instead of fly by the seats of their pants.
EDIT: And while the Tesseract being the space stone was a big retcon (it's...it's the cosmic cube guys, that's what it is) the staff macguffin from Avengers 1 being the mindstone was the easiest allez-oop retcon in the films.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
+2
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
It's easy to forget (any many don't even realize) that until late phase 2, Marvel had no clue they were aiming for Infinity War. They were just doing phases of films.
When Thanos appeared at the end of The Avengers, that was a result of Joss Whedon saying to Kevin Feige 'We never revealed who was on that throne... how about we put Thanos up there?', and Feige went for it.
When James Gunn did the first Guardians, he wanted to use an Infinity Stone and have Thanos in the film. Until then, the Tesseract, Scepter and Aether were just macguffins that might have turned out to be something. They decided then to do Infinity War, and added the Collector scene to the end of Dark World which was already in production - James Gunn filmed it on his Knowhere set while filming Guardians).
So Ultron being some trap set by Thanos before giving the Scepter to Loki in Avengers couldn't have been planned, because they didn't even know they were going to have Thanos at the end credits scene, nor did they know they were doing Thanos as an overaching villain until Ultron was probably in pre-production, which is why he didn't show up outside of Avengers 1, Guardians 1 and then phase 3 films. Nor did Marvel do any leg work to make it actually seem like that's what happened, it was just a series of retcons that no one realised.
I'm not saying they planned it back during the Avengers (in fact I specifically mentioned it would have been a retcon).
I'm saying that Age of Ultron, as presented, implies it. Much like how it retconned the staff itself as being an infinity stone.
And I don’t see it. It’s pretty fresh in my memory, and it was just a part of the film that needed more time and wasn’t edited well. Like much of the film.
The ‘it was a trap’ theory is just trying to make that badly edited scene make sense.
-Loki- on
+1
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
But anyway, Captain Marvel knocked off too. A bit early, since I haven't finished Phase 2 yet, but the missus wanted to watch it, and now I can watch Infinity War and Endgame back to back.
The 90's stuff is really in your face, huh?
+3
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Yeah, I wasn't a big fan of how VERY CLEARLY they wanted you to know it was the 90s. Some of the stuff wasn't bad, but a lot of it was beating the viewer over the head with a 90s bat.
However, I've been rewatching the MCU movies in order of the timeline and Captain Marvel feels sooooo much better when put in beside Phase 1 stuff. It basically is a Phase 1 movie, with the added difference of knowing the Infinity Stones are a thing. The beeper makes actual sense later on, we get Fury involved as more than just stinger/loose tie-in material, and they get to take advantage of the MCU being much more established and thus can take some extra chances.
About the only part that sticks out is the stinger where Danvers is showing up after Infinity War, as that is obviously some twenty years off in the MCU timeline.
It's easy to forget (any many don't even realize) that until late phase 2, Marvel had no clue they were aiming for Infinity War. They were just doing phases of films.
When Thanos appeared at the end of The Avengers, that was a result of Joss Whedon saying to Kevin Feige 'We never revealed who was on that throne... how about we put Thanos up there?', and Feige went for it.
When James Gunn did the first Guardians, he wanted to use an Infinity Stone and have Thanos in the film. Until then, the Tesseract, Scepter and Aether were just macguffins that might have turned out to be something. They decided then to do Infinity War, and added the Collector scene to the end of Dark World which was already in production - James Gunn filmed it on his Knowhere set while filming Guardians).
So Ultron being some trap set by Thanos before giving the Scepter to Loki in Avengers couldn't have been planned, because they didn't even know they were going to have Thanos at the end credits scene, nor did they know they were doing Thanos as an overaching villain until Ultron was probably in pre-production, which is why he didn't show up outside of Avengers 1, Guardians 1 and then phase 3 films. Nor did Marvel do any leg work to make it actually seem like that's what happened, it was just a series of retcons that no one realised.
I'm not saying they planned it back during the Avengers (in fact I specifically mentioned it would have been a retcon).
I'm saying that Age of Ultron, as presented, implies it. Much like how it retconned the staff itself as being an infinity stone.
And I don’t see it. It’s pretty fresh in my memory, and it was just a part of the film that needed more time and wasn’t edited well. Like much of the film.
The ‘it was a trap’ theory is just trying to make that badly edited scene make sense.
Yes, I know, you expressed that opinion already.
I was clarifying my own opinions that I felt you had incorrectly interpreted.
0
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Speaking of watching the MCU in chronological order, somebody needs to do a crazy-ass supercut of the Infinity Saga where everything is put in chronological order, including the Coulson one-shots and stingers. I think it would actually be pretty interesting to keep seeing pieces of Endgame spliced in here and there, but when you get to the point of the actual Endgame film it just has everybody go into the portal for the stones and (almost) everybody immediately comes right back out instead of showing all their various pieces.
That'd be a long-ass movie, though. 22 movies that run something like 2 hours each plus stingers and one-shots is a loooot of runtime.
+1
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
edited November 2020
Considering the ‘I’m the furthest from home I’ve ever been’ cut of Lord of the Rings, I’m sure someone will do it.
-Loki- on
+7
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Ultron is just a really weird movie within the Avengers trilogy. Avengers 1 has the 'get the team together' plot lines and sets up Thanos as the big enemy pulling Loki's strings. We don't know that the staff and the tesseract are infinity stones, but it all holds together with the overall Infinity War plot. Infinity War and Endgame bring everything together for two big showdowns and closing out the whole infinity stone storyline. AoU though... it's got a homicidal robot looking to wipe out humanity and a whole bunch of random scenes squished in there to something something infinity stones? Of all the MCU movies, it's the one that screams 'we don't know where we're going with this' the loudest. It doesn't really tie into the first movie and does little to setup or even be relevant (other than creating Vision) for IW. Sure it has the Avengers team from the A1, but it wanders off into fighting Hydra and Stark (yet again) creating a homicidal enemy, even though I'd think the biggest thing to come out of the A1 is the expanded threat of extraterrestrial invasion. Not just the retail level threat from the first Thor movie, but the possibility of a big-ass army showing up on your doorstep.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
0
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
Actually, Thors vision in the pool is fairly accurate of what happened in Ragnorok, with Heimdall telling him he will lead them to their doom. Tough to say if they had Ragnorok planned at all then though.
But anyway, Captain Marvel knocked off too. A bit early, since I haven't finished Phase 2 yet, but the missus wanted to watch it, and now I can watch Infinity War and Endgame back to back.
The 90's stuff is really in your face, huh?
I was actually kind of a fan of the 90s stuff being in your face because if I somehow ended up back in the 90s? Yeah, I would know almost immediately because the 90s would very much be in my face and it would be incredibly recognizable to me.
Like kinda in the same way that if I saw someone wearing jncos I'd immediately know I just fucking traveled through time :P
Posts
I am pretty sure she was referring to herself as a monster via all the 'red in her ledger'
She’s only using that as justification for being a monster if you ignore the previous 2 minutes of dialogue where she’s goes through everything else that was done to her and what she’s done.
My problem was, as I recall, they didn't actually do that. The progression of the scene was: Hulk talking about why he's a monster, culminating with why he can't have kids, then Widow trying to bond, because she can't have kids, either.
And progressing immediately to "I am a monster because I was sterilized" seemed pretty gross to me.
Even if I misremember that progression, Widow talking about how something done to her makes her an unfit person also squicked me out.
The weird post credits addition of Thanos saying he'd do it himself after Ultron failed would imply that he's, consciously or not, working for him. Since he came from Loki's sceptre, which came from Thanos, that all makes sense IMO - he's a failsafe trap in the event Loki lost.
But then that scene seemed to get thrown in the trash / doesn't make sense with Infinity War, so...
Thanos saying "Fine, I'll do it myself" only makes sense as a teaser to Avengers 3/4 and not connected to anything in Ultron at all.
Like yeah, the juxtaposition of it at the end of the movie seems to imply that he's saying that based on the movie itself but it makes zero sense for him to do so contextually.
Remember: Ultron wanted to glass the planet.
It's not even about what she did or had done to her- it's about how she was OK with it at the time. She WAS a monster. Not because she can't have kids now, that's just a consequence of her mistakes.
He also wanted to make permanent use of the Mind Stone.
If he was Thanos’ lackey, he’d not have built it into his visions head.
I always kinda assumed it was something Thanos did as a trap or whatever, but if not him, then who?
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Stark scans the mind stone and finds the AI inside it. Then tries to copy it with banners help for his defunct Ultron project.
So it’s less Ultron being in the staff, and more Stark trying to apply the mind stones intelligence to Ultron.
The intelligence wasn’t a trap, it’s the mind of the mind stone.
At least that’s how I read that scene.
IIRC, Ultron was the combination of some sort of sentience within the Mind stone, and whatever Stark and Banner were already working on. That same sentience also made up part of Vision, so I don't think it was so much that there was a trap contained in the Mind stone but that when it "woke up" it got out of hand and went crazy.
Do... Re... Mi... So... Fa.... Do... Re.... Do...
Forget it...
You can still hit a lot of the same character beats, you can even have it be a buddy movie with Banner and you could have Ultron scale up as a villain.
Would also have been fun to have a clone escape narrowly at the end with Ultron's final scene in Avengers being a call back except Vision is still waiting there for him.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
It's explained in the movie. Ultron was a novel AI that Tony built using the Mind Stone casing as a basis (presumably whatever was in there had some mix of science and magic to make it work with the infinity stone)
Tony gave the Ultron AI a simple goal, "Peace in Our Time," and then Ultron concluded the only way to do this was by killing everything on the planet.
It's basically the Mitchell and Webb "Have you tried killing the poor?" sketch but without the "Of course we're not going to do it, I'm surprised you haven't just typed it in the computer on a lark" parts.
Tony didn’t give it the ‘peace in our time’ objective. They weren’t even at the ‘trying to implement it’ phase (as he says to Banner when everyone was pissed off, ‘were we even close to an interface yet?’).
Ultron got ‘peace in our time’ by scanning everything about the Avengers and landing on that conversation with Banner right before the party.
Correct. I guess I should clarify that he gave Ultron the goal incidentally, like he is literally trying to figure out his purpose and the first thing he hears is the playback of "peace in our time"
Which, maybe Tony, don't invoke the spirit of the failed armistice before WWII when creating your super muderbot.
This is a societal issue for sure, but I still feel less than human sometimes because I can't have children. It's not a totally alien thought.
Nah, she's still adding it as a bullet point to the list, which is really fucked up considering sterility is something people have to deal with in the real world.
And I never took Ultron as directly being Thanos' minion. He's was a trap designed to cause a huge problem for anyone if they got ahold of the staff. Thanos would have also had to deal with the aftermath of it, but in theory the trap and whoever took the staff would have weakened each other to the point where Thanos would have rolled in and crushed them both.
Remember, Hydra was ALSO on the path to creating their own Ultron with the staff, so it wasn't just some weird random thing that the Avengers did.
It’s a result of scanning the mind stone and finding its intelligence, and then trying to apply it to their own program.
1. The big one is the "Fine, I'll do it myself" scene. IIRC, Marvel's post-credits scenes have always had something to tie into the main plot, not just being ads for the next film, but the Thanos scene is incredible out of place if he had nothing to do with it. Now, it could just be an outlier because they wanted to get Thanos in there since he's going to be the big bad of 3&4, but like I said, they hadn't done that before or since, really.
2. How clandestine Ultron's creation was. It literally refused to work until the moment no one as paying attention, and then it worked like magic. (Literally Tony and Bruce are flabbergasted at even HOW it worked given all the previous attempts failed and nothing had changed). Ultron also goes from zero to evil in basically less than a minute.
3. It's really REALLY weird that Thanos hands over one of his precious Infinity Stones (the only one he had even gotten at that point) to an Asgardian twerp with no claim to fame other than tricking the king of the Frost Giants into a trap. Thanos laying a trap helps retcon that into a not-stupid decision.
It's not some big concrete thing where that's the only possibly interpretation, but there's enough there that we can have a conversation about it.
None of that is even hinted at in the films. People just wanted something more coherent than they got.
Worth remembering that Thanos gave his Infinity Stone to Loki because at that point they weren’t Infinity Stones. They became Infinity Stones when James Gunn wanted to use one in Guardians of the Galaxy, and they went and added the after credits scene about the Aether to an in production movie.
Ehhh... I mean, I don't know if that is necessarily true.
For example, this post-credit scene from Ant-Man has effectively nothing to do with the main film. It's a scene from an entirely separate movie!
All the post-credits scenes do is serve as build-up/advertisements for the next "episode" of the MCU.
Thanos saying he'll do it himself, to me, is nothing more than reminding audiences that he is the ultimate long-term bad-guy of the MCU.
There was also a line in the trailers that appears to have been cut from the movie (Hank saying "I know a guy," which Falcon repeats in that scene) which would have made the thematic connection stronger, with Scott's reputation as a lawbreaker who does the right thing preceding him.
Thanos, by comparison, shows up out of nowhere having otherwise had no presence in the film up to that point.
When Thanos appeared at the end of The Avengers, that was a result of Joss Whedon saying to Kevin Feige 'We never revealed who was on that throne... how about we put Thanos up there?', and Feige went for it.
When James Gunn did the first Guardians, he wanted to use an Infinity Stone and have Thanos in the film. Until then, the Tesseract, Scepter and Aether were just macguffins that might have turned out to be something. They decided then to do Infinity War, and added the Collector scene to the end of Dark World which was already in production - James Gunn filmed it on his Knowhere set while filming Guardians).
So Ultron being some trap set by Thanos before giving the Scepter to Loki in Avengers couldn't have been planned, because they didn't even know they were going to have Thanos at the end credits scene, nor did they know they were doing Thanos as an overaching villain until Ultron was probably in pre-production, which is why he didn't show up outside of Avengers 1, Guardians 1 and then phase 3 films. Nor did Marvel do any leg work to make it actually seem like that's what happened, it was just a series of retcons that no one realised and which happened to line up well without any problems.
I'm not saying they planned it back during the Avengers (in fact I specifically mentioned it would have been a retcon).
I'm saying that Age of Ultron, as presented, implies it. Much like how it retconned the staff itself as being an infinity stone.
EDIT: And while the Tesseract being the space stone was a big retcon (it's...it's the cosmic cube guys, that's what it is) the staff macguffin from Avengers 1 being the mindstone was the easiest allez-oop retcon in the films.
And I don’t see it. It’s pretty fresh in my memory, and it was just a part of the film that needed more time and wasn’t edited well. Like much of the film.
The ‘it was a trap’ theory is just trying to make that badly edited scene make sense.
The 90's stuff is really in your face, huh?
However, I've been rewatching the MCU movies in order of the timeline and Captain Marvel feels sooooo much better when put in beside Phase 1 stuff. It basically is a Phase 1 movie, with the added difference of knowing the Infinity Stones are a thing. The beeper makes actual sense later on, we get Fury involved as more than just stinger/loose tie-in material, and they get to take advantage of the MCU being much more established and thus can take some extra chances.
About the only part that sticks out is the stinger where Danvers is showing up after Infinity War, as that is obviously some twenty years off in the MCU timeline.
Yes, I know, you expressed that opinion already.
I was clarifying my own opinions that I felt you had incorrectly interpreted.
That'd be a long-ass movie, though. 22 movies that run something like 2 hours each plus stingers and one-shots is a loooot of runtime.
I was actually kind of a fan of the 90s stuff being in your face because if I somehow ended up back in the 90s? Yeah, I would know almost immediately because the 90s would very much be in my face and it would be incredibly recognizable to me.
Like kinda in the same way that if I saw someone wearing jncos I'd immediately know I just fucking traveled through time :P