wait virgo I wasn't actually serious about that -9/10
still 7/10
i mean, if this were any important to me
still 7/10
i mean, if this were any important to me
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Cil gave it a negative 9 though lol
Posts: 3728
Joined:
June 2011
7.5/10 had a good time. Some plot holes and wtf laziness, boring battle on Wakanda...but the humor was better than any previous Whedon Avengers. Great first half hour.
Oops sorry, my eyes just look for the ratings.£
Here's the thing... Thanos' reasoning is nonsense. Not sure if the screenwriters know the theory of evolution well. It would make sense of Thanos had the same motive as his comic book version, but he didn't. In the comics, he was a villain driven by subjective reasons. In the movie, his end goal is based on objective truth only he knows. And that objective truth being the knowledge that life as at its collapse, so he decided to cut half of the population to save life from overpopulation, but the populatіоn will regrow back.
The history of life on earth is one big proof that proves the fallacy of Thanos' "plan", because life thrived after it almost went completely extinct during Permian era. So it will thrive after a much lesser extinction. His reasoning should've been less based in logistics and more in line with the comic books, where he was a madman obsessed with Lady Death. There, his reasoning was personal, not objective.
Thanos' achievement is only temporary. He found how to get rid of the symptoms, not the disease. If all he did was a temporary measure, is his goal really that justifiable? I'd understand if he had no choice because the universe was on the bring of extinction and if he didn't do anything, everyone would die. Maybe screenwriters could've used Lady Death and give her some sort of end goal in which they threaten to end all life because the universe became to big and balance has to be restored, but Thanos offers Lady Death instead to kill only one half and he has to make it in time before all life gets killed. But hey, I'm not a screenwritter. So I should not be thinking of that.
The history of life on earth is one big proof that proves the fallacy of Thanos' "plan", because life thrived after it almost went completely extinct during Permian era. So it will thrive after a much lesser extinction. His reasoning should've been less based in logistics and more in line with the comic books, where he was a madman obsessed with Lady Death. There, his reasoning was personal, not objective.
Thanos' achievement is only temporary. He found how to get rid of the symptoms, not the disease. If all he did was a temporary measure, is his goal really that justifiable? I'd understand if he had no choice because the universe was on the bring of extinction and if he didn't do anything, everyone would die. Maybe screenwriters could've used Lady Death and give her some sort of end goal in which they threaten to end all life because the universe became to big and balance has to be restored, but Thanos offers Lady Death instead to kill only one half and he has to make it in time before all life gets killed. But hey, I'm not a screenwritter. So I should not be thinking of that.
https://contexts.org/articles/the-scarcity-fallacy/Batman's Batman wrote: ↑August 2nd, 2018, 11:27 amHere's the thing... Thanos' reasoning is nonsense. Not sure if the screenwriters know the theory of evolution well. It would make sense of Thanos had the same motive as his comic book version, but he didn't. In the comics, he was a villain driven by subjective reasons. In the movie, his end goal is based on objective truth only he knows. And that objective truth being the knowledge that life as at its collapse, so he decided to cut half of the population to save life from overpopulation, but the populatіоn will regrow back.
The history of life on earth is one big proof that proves the fallacy of Thanos' "plan", because life thrived after it almost went completely extinct during Permian era. So it will thrive after a much lesser extinction. His reasoning should've been less based in logistics and more in line with the comic books, where he was a madman obsessed with Lady Death. There, his reasoning was personal, not objective.
Thanos' achievement is only temporary. He found how to get rid of the symptoms, not the disease. If all he did was a temporary measure, is his goal really that justifiable? I'd understand if he had no choice because the universe was on the bring of extinction and if he didn't do anything, everyone would die. Maybe screenwriters could've used Lady Death and give her some sort of end goal in which they threaten to end all life because the universe became to big and balance has to be restored, but Thanos offers Lady Death instead to kill only one half and he has to make it in time before all life gets killed. But hey, I'm not a screenwritter. So I should not be thinking of that.
-Vader
so he's a villain or something?Batman's Batman wrote: ↑August 2nd, 2018, 11:27 amHere's the thing... Thanos' reasoning is nonsense. Not sure if the screenwriters know the theory of evolution well. It would make sense of Thanos had the same motive as his comic book version, but he didn't. In the comics, he was a villain driven by subjective reasons. In the movie, his end goal is based on objective truth only he knows. And that objective truth being the knowledge that life as at its collapse, so he decided to cut half of the population to save life from overpopulation, but the populatіоn will regrow back.
The history of life on earth is one big proof that proves the fallacy of Thanos' "plan", because life thrived after it almost went completely extinct during Permian era. So it will thrive after a much lesser extinction. His reasoning should've been less based in logistics and more in line with the comic books, where he was a madman obsessed with Lady Death. There, his reasoning was personal, not objective.
Thanos' achievement is only temporary. He found how to get rid of the symptoms, not the disease. If all he did was a temporary measure, is his goal really that justifiable? I'd understand if he had no choice because the universe was on the bring of extinction and if he didn't do anything, everyone would die. Maybe screenwriters could've used Lady Death and give her some sort of end goal in which they threaten to end all life because the universe became to big and balance has to be restored, but Thanos offers Lady Death instead to kill only one half and he has to make it in time before all life gets killed. But hey, I'm not a screenwritter. So I should not be thinking of that.
Cilogy wrote: ↑August 2nd, 2018, 12:38 pmso he's a villain or something?Batman's Batman wrote: ↑August 2nd, 2018, 11:27 amHere's the thing... Thanos' reasoning is nonsense. Not sure if the screenwriters know the theory of evolution well. It would make sense of Thanos had the same motive as his comic book version, but he didn't. In the comics, he was a villain driven by subjective reasons. In the movie, his end goal is based on objective truth only he knows. And that objective truth being the knowledge that life as at its collapse, so he decided to cut half of the population to save life from overpopulation, but the populatіоn will regrow back.
The history of life on earth is one big proof that proves the fallacy of Thanos' "plan", because life thrived after it almost went completely extinct during Permian era. So it will thrive after a much lesser extinction. His reasoning should've been less based in logistics and more in line with the comic books, where he was a madman obsessed with Lady Death. There, his reasoning was personal, not objective.
Thanos' achievement is only temporary. He found how to get rid of the symptoms, not the disease. If all he did was a temporary measure, is his goal really that justifiable? I'd understand if he had no choice because the universe was on the bring of extinction and if he didn't do anything, everyone would die. Maybe screenwriters could've used Lady Death and give her some sort of end goal in which they threaten to end all life because the universe became to big and balance has to be restored, but Thanos offers Lady Death instead to kill only one half and he has to make it in time before all life gets killed. But hey, I'm not a screenwritter. So I should not be thinking of that.
Posts: 55632
Joined:
May 2010
This movie was such a fluff of the season... I’m sorry, month. Who is still talking about it, analysing it, writing thought provoking articles about it? And yet Lindsay Ellis did a wonderful video recently on GotG.
There's an interesting conversation to be had regarding the virtue ethics of Infinity War vs the virtue ethics seen in Fallout, and another conversation to be had regarding to what degree does Infinity War work as an actual piece of storytelling and drama vs something else entirely. Infinity War is borderline a new kind of storytelling movies haven't really had at this level before.
It's structured more like a season or series finale than a movie, for example. Everyone makes a brief if notable contribution before "getting on with plotting and action until the season cliffhanger.
Am I the one to move that convo forward? If I had the time, but I don't. Life can be unfair that way.
So here we are.
-Vader
It's structured more like a season or series finale than a movie, for example. Everyone makes a brief if notable contribution before "getting on with plotting and action until the season cliffhanger.
Am I the one to move that convo forward? If I had the time, but I don't. Life can be unfair that way.
So here we are.
-Vader
