| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Question being, how in the hell are the Avengers, paired with The Guardians of the Galaxy gonna beat Thanos with the infinity gauntlet?
Squirrel Girl
|
Question being, how in the hell are the Avengers, paired with The Guardians of the Galaxy gonna beat Thanos with the infinity gauntlet?
A more serious answer: Thanos in the comics has a fear of success. Deep down, he realizes that he's unworthy to rule the galaxy/universe/whatever, so he self-sabotages his attempts.
It's also interesting to note that the actual films are being titled Infinity WAR. This was a separate storyline from the Infinity Gauntlet story, and Thanos was actually NOT the antagonist of Infinity War. Could Marvel be planning a swerve?
|
The problem I have with the sceptre being a separaate infinity gem is the colour. Just finished watching Guardians again and when the Collector is discussing the gems, they are shown, and only one stone was blue. Since the tesseract is a gem (shown in the Collector's description) and its blue, if the sceptre were another gem wouldn't it be a different colour?
Actually... going by the MCU Infinity Gauntlet , I'd say that the Tesseract isn't blue at all, but white (making it the largest of the stones on the gauntlet).
In the beginning, going by the comics, the thought was that the stone in the scepter was the Mind Gem. And that was mainly due to both color and effect. Or at least, our understanding of the effect as we saw it.
And it makes sense... if all things were equal. But they're not, and there is a reason for that: The Tesseract.
The Tesseract, technically, isn't an Infinity stone. It's another name for the Cosmic Cube . It was the folks at Marvel Studios that decided to make it into the Space Gem, which is entirely separate from the Tesseract.
And if they can do that with the Space Gem, then using the colors from the comics to identify the Infinity Stones in the MCU goes out the window. Because the Space Gem is purple in the comics. The Tesseract obviously isn't that color, but the stone within the Orb (the Power Stone) is. In the comics, the Power Gem is red. This is important because both of those stones have each been officially identified as such.
So, no, we can't use the old colors for the gems to identify the stones in the movies. In fact, it's safe to say that form is out as well (The Aether is proof of that). But the effects they each produce can't be changed too drastically, no matter what else they may do to the container itself.
Even in the comics, you can't rely on color to distinguish the gems. For one thing, until the Thanos Quest one-shot by Starlin, all the gems were either uniformly green, or IIRC once in awhile some other, random color.
Thanos is depicted changing the stones' colors on the gauntlet itself at one point when describing their powers (I believe the scene in question was in a followup to Thanos Quest in Silver Surfer #44, though I'd have to check to be certain).
Since then, they've mostly been kept the same colors, although there have still been a few flubs here and there (especially recently, at least so I've read online).
The things control all reality; they don't need to stay the same color.
But, I will say that I too, have thought the plan to give Loki one of the gems was a silly one (now that it's been revealed, or apparently so, as being one). As a retcon, it is kind of a big boneheaded move on Thanos' part, but I doubt it is a story element that will ever be addressed in the movies.
It's also interesting to note that the actual films are being titled Infinity WAR. This was a separate storyline from the Infinity Gauntlet story, and Thanos was actually NOT the antagonist of Infinity War. Could Marvel be planning a swerve?
Not unless they hurry up and introduce Adam Warlock.
|
It's also interesting to note that the actual films are being titled Infinity WAR. This was a separate storyline from the Infinity Gauntlet story, and Thanos was actually NOT the antagonist of Infinity War. Could Marvel be planning a swerve?Not unless they hurry up and introduce Adam Warlock.
Several sources have noted that Adam Warlock's cocoon appears to be among the artifacts damaged or destroyed in the Collector's collection.
There have been rumors that Adam Warlock may replace J'son as Starlord's dad. Especially since Gunn has flatted out admitted they have changed Starlord's paternity.
There have been rumors that Adam Warlock may replace J'son as Starlord's dad. Especially since Gunn has flatted out admitted they have changed Starlord's paternity.
He also denied the cocoon and/or Beta Ray Bill from the collection room...
Honestly, I think this is going to be one of those cases where it's best NOT to overthink everything. There are too many directors, too many creators and way too much time between these movies to really nitpick the little details.
Like finding the prototype shield in Iron Man I... then by Captain America it's a full formed disc (as it should be) and not a bunch of plates.. or the mess with Howard Starks age... Heck the Gauntlet was in Odin's treasure chest... but the gems are now scattered??
I truly believe Loki's staff is the mind gem and the tessaract is... some gem. Space seems a good guess.
Honestly, the Infinity gauntlet story is WAY too epic to really translate well into a movie. The avengers are just bit players in it. Most of it is Adam Warlock, Silver surfer and Doc Strange against Thanos/Mephisto... Everyone else were mere pawns sent to die as a distraction...
I expect them to do something epically original using the bare 'concept' of "Thanos becomes god"... with VERY little taken directly from the comic.
Which is for the best. Infinity Gauntlet was so amazing when it came out... but it didn't hold up well. Not like Secret Wars did. I still enjoying reading that book. IG only had one good issue out of the six that I still like to reread :)
Quite frankly when I first saw the Tesseract, I thought they were going the Cosmic Cube angle. I'm fairly sure that when everything is fully revealed, they'll be going in directions we can't guess.
I think everyone did. Skull + cube of power pretty much guaranteed it...
But that's why I think it was kind of genius to have Thanos show up post credits and spin everything on its head ;)
Now we're reexamining everything from a dozen angles :D
The problem I have with the sceptre being a separaate infinity gem is the colour. Just finished watching Guardians again and when the Collector is discussing the gems, they are shown, and only one stone was blue. Since the tesseract is a gem (shown in the Collector's description) and its blue, if the sceptre were another gem wouldn't it be a different colour?Actually... going by the MCU Infinity Gauntlet , I'd say that the Tesseract isn't blue at all, but white (making it the largest of the stones on the gauntlet).
In the beginning, going by the comics, the thought was that the stone in the scepter was the Mind Gem. And that was mainly due to both color and effect. Or at least, our understanding of the effect as we saw it.
And it makes sense... if all things were equal. But they're not, and there is a reason for that: The Tesseract.
The Tesseract, technically, isn't an Infinity stone. It's another name for the Cosmic Cube . It was the folks at Marvel Studios that decided to make it into the Space Gem, which is entirely separate from the Tesseract.
And if they can do that with the Space Gem, then using the colors from the comics to identify the Infinity Stones in the MCU goes out the window. Because the Space Gem is purple in the comics. The Tesseract obviously isn't that color, but the stone within the Orb (the Power Stone) is. In the comics, the Power Gem is red. This is important because both of those stones have each been officially identified as such.
So, no, we can't use the old colors for the gems to identify the stones in the movies. In fact, it's safe to say that form is out as well (The Aether is proof of that). But the effects they each produce can't be changed...
A quick google image search shows at least 3 different color labels for which infinity stone is which.
I've seen all the recent Marvel movies except for Guardians of the Galaxy, which I hadn't planned to see because I have zero interest in that set of characters.
I've caught all the post-credits scenes of the other movies, but my memory isn't what it once was.
Can someone summarize what's actually *known* about the gauntlet and gems based on what's been shown in the movies and post-credits. Go ahead and spoil GotG for me.
Thanks.
|
|
Has anyone seen the biographies for the movie versions of Ultron and Vision yet? The link shows them, after some promo art. In case you don't want to scroll down that far, I've put them behind spoilers below.
Enjoy!
Ultron
"First discovered as a simple computer program hidden among the ruins of the Chitauri invasion of New York, the being known as Ultron soon completed it's development into a sophisticated artificial intelligence after some experimentation by Tony Stark. Ultron's first shocking ultimatum upon gaining consciousness was to declare the human race its enemy. Setting out to exterminate all life on the planet, the unstable and emotional Ultron seeks to upgrade its mechanical body to an ultimate, unstoppable form. With an army of robotic drones and the ability to enter and corrupt any computer network, Ultron will stop at nothing to see humanity wiped out."
Vision
"Programmed by the combined geniuses of Tony Stark and Bruce Banner and imparted with the ability to fly, project intense energy beams, and change the density of his form, the Vision has proved himself a worthy hero, aid the Avengers in their struggle against the evil A.I. Ultron."
|
I've seen all the recent Marvel movies except for Guardians of the Galaxy, which I hadn't planned to see because I have zero interest in that set of characters.
I've caught all the post-credits scenes of the other movies, but my memory isn't what it once was.
Can someone summarize what's actually *known* about the gauntlet and gems based on what's been shown in the movies and post-credits. Go ahead and spoil GotG for me.
Thanks.
Or, go see the movie because it is awesome. Easily the best movie Marvel churned out thus far.
Or, go see the movie because it is awesome. Easily the best movie Marvel churned out thus far.
Perhaps, but my own prejudices will probably keep me from seeing it. As a general rule I prefer my comic heroes to be a little more traditionally four-color, without being bland. A couple of bounty hunters, a thief, an assassin and a guy nicknamed "Destroyer" doesn't fit that bill for me. I get that a lot of people are into anti-heroes, but for the most part I'm not.
There are exceptions. Batman comes to mind, though even there I much prefer the Dark Knight of the 70's comics to every angry, gravel-voiced, tank-driving, missile-launching version that's been done since Frank Miller's take on him almost 30 years ago.
(At the other end of the spectrum, I also have no use for inherently silly characters...Plastic Man, Ambush Bug, Squirrel Girl...)
Maybe I'll slip GotG into my very long Netflix queue at some point, but there's almost no chance I'd pay to see it in a theatre.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guardians is more similar to Star Wars as a movie than it is to normal Super hero comic movies. And it's really really close in feel to Farscape, if you ever watched that show.
At any rate I agree with the above...its one of the best marvel movies out there, with perhaps only Winter Soldier edging it out as best (IMHO)
|
|
Or, go see the movie because it is awesome. Easily the best movie Marvel churned out thus far.Perhaps, but my own prejudices will probably keep me from seeing it. As a general rule I prefer my comic heroes to be a little more traditionally four-color, without being bland. A couple of bounty hunters, a thief, an assassin and a guy nicknamed "Destroyer" doesn't fit that bill for me. I get that a lot of people are into anti-heroes, but for the most part I'm not.
There are exceptions. Batman comes to mind, though even there I much prefer the Dark Knight of the 70's comics to every angry, gravel-voiced, tank-driving, missile-launching version that's been done since Frank Miller's take on him almost 30 years ago.
(At the other end of the spectrum, I also have no use for inherently silly characters...Plastic Man, Ambush Bug, Squirrel Girl...)
Maybe I'll slip GotG into my very long Netflix queue at some point, but there's almost no chance I'd pay to see it in a theatre.
It is a really good space opera. Try it.
|
Guardians is more similar to Star Wars as a movie than it is to normal Super hero comic movies. And it's really really close in feel to Farscape, if you ever watched that show.
Am I seriously the only one that just doesn't get the comparison between Guardians of the Galaxy and Star Wars? The first is an intentionally goofy, self aware action flick, the other is taking itself quite seriously (which has a charm all of it's own). They have very different styles, pacing, visuals and tone.
Other than both being set in space, do they really have anything else in common?
Guardians is more similar to Star Wars as a movie than it is to normal Super hero comic movies. And it's really really close in feel to Farscape, if you ever watched that show.
Am I seriously the only one that just doesn't get the comparison between Guardians of the Galaxy and Star Wars? The first is an intentionally goofy, self aware action flick, the other is taking itself quite seriously (which has a charm all of it's own). They have very different styles, pacing, visuals and tone.
Other than both being set in space, do they really have anything else in common?
very little. Usually only firefly fans see that connection between the series, with their show as a bridge.
Or, go see the movie because it is awesome. Easily the best movie Marvel churned out thus far.Perhaps, but my own prejudices will probably keep me from seeing it. As a general rule I prefer my comic heroes to be a little more traditionally four-color, without being bland. A couple of bounty hunters, a thief, an assassin and a guy nicknamed "Destroyer" doesn't fit that bill for me. I get that a lot of people are into anti-heroes, but for the most part I'm not.
There are exceptions. Batman comes to mind, though even there I much prefer the Dark Knight of the 70's comics to every angry, gravel-voiced, tank-driving, missile-launching version that's been done since Frank Miller's take on him almost 30 years ago.
(At the other end of the spectrum, I also have no use for inherently silly characters...Plastic Man, Ambush Bug, Squirrel Girl...)
Maybe I'll slip GotG into my very long Netflix queue at some point, but there's almost no chance I'd pay to see it in a theatre.
Sounds like we have similar tastes in heroes. I won't say Guardians was the BEST Marvel movie. I've liked a lot of them.
However, with the new 'combined universe' concept... I really see them as different chapters in the same book. I'd hate to miss even one.
I went into this movie not caring at all about talking raccoons or space operas.... and left happy because it was a solid and funny movie. In fact, if I had known more about the characters, then I may have been annoyed at their portrayal, but this time ignorance was bliss ^_^
Add in that this is the FIRST one to REALLY be about the Infinity Gauntlet.... and there was a lot of exposition that I recommend catching up on.
Or, go see the movie because it is awesome. Easily the best movie Marvel churned out thus far.Perhaps, but my own prejudices will probably keep me from seeing it. As a general rule I prefer my comic heroes to be a little more traditionally four-color, without being bland. A couple of bounty hunters, a thief, an assassin and a guy nicknamed "Destroyer" doesn't fit that bill for me. I get that a lot of people are into anti-heroes, but for the most part I'm not.
There are exceptions. Batman comes to mind, though even there I much prefer the Dark Knight of the 70's comics to every angry, gravel-voiced, tank-driving, missile-launching version that's been done since Frank Miller's take on him almost 30 years ago.
(At the other end of the spectrum, I also have no use for inherently silly characters...Plastic Man, Ambush Bug, Squirrel Girl...)
Maybe I'll slip GotG into my very long Netflix queue at some point, but there's almost no chance I'd pay to see it in a theatre.
go go bat shark repellent!
Guardians is more similar to Star Wars as a movie than it is to normal Super hero comic movies. And it's really really close in feel to Farscape, if you ever watched that show.
Am I seriously the only one that just doesn't get the comparison between Guardians of the Galaxy and Star Wars? The first is an intentionally goofy, self aware action flick, the other is taking itself quite seriously (which has a charm all of it's own). They have very different styles, pacing, visuals and tone.
Other than both being set in space, do they really have anything else in common?
Actually I mostly used Star Wars because it's the most visible live action Space Opera useful as a point of comparison. It's certainly more similar to Star Wars than it is to Star Trek for instance.
Like I said, if I was going to go with any comparison, I would go with Farscape, which has a more similar "ragtag band of escaped convicts forced to work together who have little in common, and are thrust into galactic events". Right down to having a strong comic element, a pop culture spewing human, and prominent non-humanoid characters not merely played for cute effect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guardians is more similar to Star Wars as a movie than it is to normal Super hero comic movies. And it's really really close in feel to Farscape, if you ever watched that show.
Am I seriously the only one that just doesn't get the comparison between Guardians of the Galaxy and Star Wars? The first is an intentionally goofy, self aware action flick, the other is taking itself quite seriously (which has a charm all of it's own). They have very different styles, pacing, visuals and tone.
Other than both being set in space, do they really have anything else in common?
Which is which though? ;)
Star wars has it's own intentionally goofy, self aware action flick moments. and lots of them.... Raccoons vs Ewoks? Groot vs. R2 and 3po?
Mostly though, Guardians is about a ragtag group of misfits and outcasts who step up and save the universe when nobody else can... It's a movie about a group of unique personalities with little else in common and the chemistry between them.
Much like a certain smuggler, farmboy and princess we all know and love.
There are a lot of similarities if you break it down to its component parts... Star Wars has been deified over the generations... but it's core story is little more then 'adventuring party meets in a tavern and saves the kingdom'...
There are a lot of reasons to go see Guardians. One of them is Bradley Cooper as the voice of Rocket Raccoon. Not in every scene, just in the one where Rocket loses it on his comerades in a bar.
The character is purely CGI. My brain is screaming this fact. Yet suddenly Cooper's voice comes in and you actually feel the pain, the outrage and the shame of this silly, fictional talking raccoon.
That is why people went and saw the movie in droves. Every other MCU movie out there is a comic book in every sense. There's heroes, villains, actions, quips; all of the tropes are there. But as much as I WANT to be moved by the problems of a Tony Stark or a Steve Rogers, it's just so so.
Then you see the heartache of Starlord losing his mom. You feel Rocket's pain. You know what its like for Drax to be fueled by vengeance only to be flicked away like a petulant child by the object of his wrath. Then you understand: Guardians of the Galaxy, for all it's siliness and bravado, is where all the HEART of the MCU got put.
It may not be the best of the MCU movies, but Guardians of the Galaxy is by far one of the best in its genre. If that genre includes Star Wars, Serenity, or even Ice Pirates, that remains to be seen. As far as I'm concerned I'm going to put in my Awesome Mix 1, mouth off to a tree and get in line for the next installment of this franchise.
|
Agreed, Mark. Of the heroes we've seen so far from the Marvel filmography, GotG's are the most flawed. They don't consider themselves heroes at the beginning, but somewhere along the way realize that they're the only thing standing between a nigh-invulnerable enemy and the entirety of the galaxy. And they're damaged goods, each and every one. Cap and Iron Man might have small cracks, but these guys? All of them have wounds that have never healed, and lie to everyone about what they want, including and especially themselves.
Of all of the movies, this is the one I was most skeptical of. You have to be fairly well-versed in Marvel lore to even know about the Guardians, so they weren't counting on name recognition here. Plus, two of the characters are a raccoon and a walking tree who can only say three words in English. I didn't expect much. Dear God, they gave me something magical. I don't think it's the best Marvel movie (Winter Soldier takes that for me right now), but it's definitely earned that silver medal.
Go see it. Hell, it's probably still in theaters! :P
For me it will be ant-man.
Such a horrible character... He's been the butt of as many jokes as Aquaman... Except Aquaman is actually cooler.
Then Earth's mightiest Heroes cartoon did the impossible and made Ant-man Pym an interesting and dynamic character!! And they choose the 'other guy' for the movie!!! And the #1 thing he's actually known for... Creating Ultron... is getting dumped!!
THAT is the one I'm going in with extreme skepticism....
Ant-Man is awesome. Save for the misunderstanding that turned him into a brutalizer.
To be fair, Pym will be in the movie as the inventor of the Antman Technology, and he also was a superhero in the suit, just back in the 60's or so.
I dunno...I am glad they are going with Scott Lange. We already have 2 super-powered genius scientists/inventors in the MCU, but we really don't have a rogue-esq thief character.
Hey, I admitted up front it was my own prejudices at work here, not any sense that the movie would be bad on its own.
In addition to the aforementioned problem I usually have with antiheroes, I'm old enough to have an additional pet peeve: the upstart factor. The Guardians of the Galaxy that I grew up with were the 31st Century team of Martinex, Yondu, Charlie 27, Nikki, Aleta, Starhawk and Vance Astro. The currently popular group are no more the GotG for me than Guy Gardner was the "one true Green Lantern" in the late '80s/early '90s.
I'm still reading comics in my mid-50's but have largely abandoned DC and Marvel after repeated wholesale revisions of their respective universes. In my head, Peter Parker is Spiderman, not Miles Morales; Hal Jordan is the primary Green Lantern of Earth and of Sector 2814, not Kyle Rayner or Simon Baz; Jim Corrigan is the human host for the Spectre; Ray Palmer is the Atom, not Ryan Choi; Nick Fury is an old white guy with a cigar surgically grafted onto his mouth, not a carbon copy of Samuel L. Jackson; Earth-2 is home of the WWII era Justice Society, yadda yadda yadda.
I accepted some changes as they occurred (Wally West replacing Barry Allen as the Flash, for example) but over time the inconsistent accumulation of change for the sake of change got to be too much for me.
Grumpy Old Dude out
P.S. - Get off my lawn. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like I enjoy life a lot more never having read the comics. Not to diss them, but I've never really gotten attached to any one interpretation of most characters, letting me avoid a lot of nerd rage.
Though I will admit I've become very attached to John Stewart since he was my introduction to Green Lantern, and I've never really liked any of the other Lanterns as they've shown up in TV and film and whatnot.
I dunno...I am glad they are going with Scott Lange. We already have 2 super-powered genius scientists/inventors in the MCU, but we really don't have a rogue-esq thief character.
Ditto on the notion that the MCU already has two genius inventors and a third would be somewhat overkill (especially since he doesn't really have his own niche to make him stand out from the other two, discipline-wise). Plus, Lang has been Ant-Man in the comics for far longer than Pym ever was, and is to me at least, far more synonymous with the character as a result.
(Full disclosure, my favorite Pym "heroic persona" was his all too short-lived tenure as just "Dr. Pym," running around with a bunch of gadgets that he used in conjunction with his Pym particles.)
The concept behind this movie sounds interesting, too- it is going to be their "heist" film- which should hopefully be a refreshing change of pace from just being a superhero film, like the Winter Soldier was (still my favorite of the films so far).
I feel like I enjoy life a lot more never having read the comics. Not to diss them, but I've never really gotten attached to any one interpretation of most characters, letting me avoid a lot of nerd rage.
Though I will admit I've become very attached to John Stewart since he was my introduction to Green Lantern, and I've never really liked any of the other Lanterns as they've shown up in TV and film and whatnot.
Good taste.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't forget that Peggy Carter Agent of Shield staring Hayley Atwell airs tonight!
|
|
Agreed, Mark. Of the heroes we've seen so far from the Marvel filmography, GotG's are the most flawed. They don't consider themselves heroes at the beginning, but somewhere along the way realize that they're the only thing standing between a nigh-invulnerable enemy and the entirety of the galaxy. And they're damaged goods, each and every one. Cap and Iron Man might have small cracks, but these guys? All of them have wounds that have never healed, and lie to everyone about what they want, including and especially themselves.
Well if you are talking of the movie characters, I'd say Tony Stark is much more damaged than any of the guardians... In the first movie he was incredibly lonely and aimless and he certainly had to grow into the hero role. He did not at all consider himself a hero at first. And his third movie has him wheezing in front of damage, trying to overcome a trauma.
And to me, Captain Americas' scene with old, senile Peggy was one of the most emotionally touching scenes of the whole MCU so far, and his personal attachment to the Winter Soldier works well too. Hack, even Fury and Black Widow got some very decent character development.
I guess there's something I'm not getting with GotG. Was a decent film, some funny moments (most not as funny as the movie thinks they are) but comparisons to Star Wars seem out of place, and heralding it as the best MCU film seems way out of proportion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed. Blade will always be the best.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, the premiere of Agent Carter was incredible! Some of the sexism was piled on a touch too heavily, but it was otherwise excellent. It was a far better pilot episode than Agents of SHIELD, which I recently re-watched on Netflix.
I enjoyed it and look foreward to the next episode.
Wow, the premiere of Agent Carter was incredible! Some of the sexism was piled on a touch too heavily, but it was otherwise excellent. It was a far better pilot episode than Agents of SHIELD, which I recently re-watched on Netflix.
I thought the sexism on display was rather appropriate for the time period. It also gives a very different angle to the show
I agree...much stronger premiere than AoS