10 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2021
    1. Given the MCU’s status as a self-perpetuating forever franchise, it’s admirable that Marvel is willing to draw its stories to a close — at least for some characters. But the MCU’s strength has rarely been in endings. The original Avengers’ rapturous finale is the exception, not the rule. These films’ gargantuan action sequences get all their flavor from the meaningful moments between them.

      The author concludes the article noting that the charm in MCU movies isn't from the action scenes or especially endings, but rather from the character intricacies found within main scenes. Is this something Scorsese would (somewhat) agree with? The first question is also paradoxical: MCU is a self-perpetuating forever franchise yet it closes stories for some characters.

    2. There were 20 other MCU movies between Iron Man and Endgame, and there was room enough for more material that explored these characters’ human sides rather than focusing on Infinity Stone collection, and serving as a temporary holding area for characters before routing them to a massive showdown

      The author questions the reality for the previously made criticism: Why do there have to be placeholder movies if they can be more about the characters themselves instead?

    3. It’s just hard to shake the feeling that some of Endgame’s predecessors existed primarily to goose anticipation for this latest astronomically grossing MCU event. (It’s an effective strategy for getting people to fill in their personal MCU blanks — in particular, Endgame cleverly makes Thor: The Dark World feel more essential than it ever was before.) Some fans claim that any lack of connectivity is the problem with, say, Age of Ultron, as compared to the newer Avengers movies: it isn’t smooth or assured enough in moving along the series’ master plot. Others will claim to have been waiting 11 years for Endgame.

      A third criticism of the way franchises commercialize movies: movies leading up to Endgame existed primarily for its anticipation.

    4. It would have been entertaining and novel to keep some extra company with the Avengers in the space between the big changes and the triumphant reunion — to see an Avengers sequel or two with more shawarma sit-downs, more casual house parties, more Thor / Hulk heart-to-hearts, and more peanut butter sandwiches. Less obsession over the Infinity Stones, and more characters. More world-saving, but less universe-dominating

      A second criticism of MCU: instead of throwing around the characters in massive fights and status quo changes, why not let the audience connect with the characters more?

    5. And some of the melancholy derives from the MCU’s series-wide tendency to rush past its best moments in pursuit of grand, crowd-pleasing crossover events. Those crossovers sometimes deemphasize what these movies do best. While the cinematic house style of the Marvel movies can become rote, Endgame shows how much life there is left in these characters’ relationships.

      A criticism of MCU that can be seen in Endgame but is present in the entire franchise: pursuing crowd-pleasing scenes. Here would be a good time to mention Scorsese's comment on MCU films being closer to theme parks.

    6. A lot of fans love Infinity War, but it’s a cluttered movie without a lot of breathing room. (The pace, after all, is breathless.) Endgame, on the other hand, takes a deep breath at the outset, rejoining its characters slowly. There’s more reflection, stronger acting from the talented ensemble, and more memorable shot compositions than directors Joe and Anthony Russo usually manage. Amid the downbeat aftermath of the snap, there’s also the pleasure of watching the movie reassemble the original Avengers: Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, the Hulk, Black Widow, and Hawkeye, with a manageable handful of newer recruits like Ant-Man, Nebula, and Captain Marvel. The pared-down ensemble has more screen time, and less superpowered flexing. Even when the movie starts getting nuttier, with its time travel and magical stones, it’s less action-packed and more character-driven than its predecessor

      Here, the author explains why he chose Endgame over Infinity War:

      • Movie improvements: "There's more reflection, ..."
      • Endgame undoes the plot of Infinity War: "watching the movie reassemble the original Avengers..."
    7. Its gargantuan crossover event folds in the Guardians of the Galaxy, previously lurking bad guy Thanos, and the Black Panther ensemble, among others. These aren’t just new or alternate Avengers. Infinity War and Endgame both count basically the entire universe as Avengers.

      The author further argues that the two Avengers movies, including Endgame, involve the entire Marvel comic universe, thus establishing Endgame as the culmination of the franchise.

    8. Endgame’s use of time travel is a definitive case of self-referentialism, but it’s also a wonderfully comic book-y conceit, and it allows for satisfying riffs on past MCU sequences — both famous and not. As good time-travel stories tend to do, it hits some poignant notes about the scarcity of time and the bittersweet nature of nostalgia. And those notes apply to the MCU itself, in a metatextual way, as well

      This is another case of why Avengers: Endgame is the culmination of the MCU franchise:

      • It's "comic book-y"
      • Being a time-travel story, it's based on other movies in the franchise.
    9. Part of the movie’s long, winding story involves the core Avengers (who survived the apocalyptic population-halving “snap” at the end of Avengers: Infinity War) circling back to crucial moments in MCU history. Over the course of 22 films, the MCU has become increasingly insular, complicated, and self-involved. The story that began in 2008 with Iron Man, which was at least vaguely grounded in real-world concerns about arms trafficking and global politics, is now principally concerned with splitting up and recombining its impressive roster of characters.

      History behind the movie franchise:

      • How it began
      • How it has changed over time "is now principally..."
      • How these all add up: "Part of the movie's..."
    10. At three hours long, Avengers: Endgame is a lot of movie, which means it has a lot of room for the things fans love about the Marvel Cinematic Universe — as well as the things some critics find frustrating about it

      Introducing the media and your talking points:

      • Distinguishing feature: "At three hours long..."
      • Name of movie/media
      • What does this unique trait mean to you: "it has a lot of room..."