I really enjoyed how they used the I am iron man phrase in relation to Tony’s identity. He says that in one of the first movies but he always says it as a boast or in arrogance. In the very last scene when he finally accepts his identity 100% he says I AM iron man: it’s an admission not a boast. It’s the acceptance of iron man rather than the show of iron man. And at that final moment he takes his cross and realizes what it meant the whole time to be iron man. His logos matched his physical body and then he dies.
@@mostlydead3261 No, the movie is the basic narrative of "opression" etc. Basically her character is that she is super special and super powerful, and the only reason she doesn't realize this is because she is fooled and kept at line by "the system". At the end of the movie she takes the shackles "the system" has put on them and she is abble to do everything that she wants to. If you haven't notice how this is similar to the narrative of oppresers and oppressed minorities
10:25 It's also worth noting that "I am Iron Man" in Iron Man 1 was itself a selfish act. He wanted the attention, and he knew living that life would worry Pepper. But in Endgame the selfishness of that statement is flipped, showing the growth of his character.
Thor's plot is basically there so he can transition to the Guardians of the Galaxy universe (because people loved his dynamic with the Guardians in the previous movie, as well as his comedic capacities in Ragnarok); for it to happen there needed to be someone else as king instead of him, so he had to regress in order for that to play out.
Totally agree that's the real reason but the writers should have found a better way to transition him. Maybe taking his people back into space and find a new planet/ kingdom. That could also be a refuge/haven for the Guardians...
Although there might be politics in it, the point is that Falcon is pure of heart like Steve. Bucky, who has powers, has a lot of blood on his hands and doesn't embody the same ideals.
I think it is the first video where I don't completely agree with Jonathan. The movie was not bad, but I couldn't enjoy it all the way through. There was 2 or 3 points where I just raised my eyebrows, and got completely out of the immersion. The first one was when Black Widow sacrificed herself. My initial problem was that I interpreted the scene in a way that it was one of those "female power" moments. Later I changed my mind, because I think I was too focused on the "masculine-feminine" symbolism, and now I think that scene wasn't about that.Well, it wasn't about that contrast mainly. But at that point, when she was bested by Clinton, and he managed to jumped off the cliff, BUT out of nowhere there she was grabbing him in the air, when he was mid-air, and he already made his choice... I don't know. I don't mind that Romanov sacrificed herself in the end, but the way it was carried out.... It really didn't felt right to me. I felt like she robbed him of choice. Like she was that tyrant partner who doesn't let his friend make any choice and bear any responsibility. The second time something felt off was the " cool female superheroes pose for a wallpaper" scene. Everybody was fighting, the world was ending, everyone was united for a single cause, there were no differences. But of course some had to emphasize that they are different, that they are capable and so on...It was just pure propaganda. My third problem with the film was Thor's arc. It was terrible! The conclusion was sooo infantilizing, so emasculating. We got a hero who was bettering himself through Thor 1-2-3. He was a strong, capable hero. Now the moral of his arc is "It's time to be who I am, rather than who I am supposed to be". Really? You were a god, the strongest avenger and now you're a fat, pathetic loser, whose teammates don't even let him use the infinity gauntlet, because he is such a wreck! Jesus, and you're fine with that? Really, that's you conclusion, that it is fine that way, because "that is who I am now..."??? It was an interesting journey of his, but the ending made it so sad to me. The scene with Valkyrie was a typical oediple mother-son scene, like: It's ok son, you don't need to grow up, you don't need to bear any responsibilities, you don't need to be a king. Now go and play with your friends on their spaceship, while mommy takes care of everything. It left a bitter taste in my mouth. Looking at the current era we live in and the popular narratives, I can only see these scenes as an attack on the masculine.
The main subliminal message in infinity war and endgame is that God is evil, The characteristics of God are given to the bad guy, Thanos. 1. Thanos is the most powerful person in the universe. (God is the most powerful being in the universe) 2. Thanos to bring order to the universe wants to destroy half the population. ( This is in reference to the good and the bad, God destroying sin/evil to bring order to the universe) 3. Thanos sacrificed his daughter to accomplish his goal ( God the Father gave his son Christ to accomplish His goal) 4. The language that was used by Thanos henchmen whenever they destroyed half the population of other worlds "rejoice" is also used in the Bible the book of revelation. (Again associating the bad guys and Thanos with God) The whole story of the two movies is really in reference to the Apocalypse story of the Bible, ( an powerful being coming to earth to destroy the bad, half of the equation) But the movie is gnostic and turns the story of Apocalypse upside down making God the bad guy.
I just watched Endgame and came to the exact same conclusion. That conclusion (God is Evil), is embedded deep within the mythos of the MCU. Go watch Age of Ultron again and you will see the same subliminal message. Ultron seeks to wipe out humanity because of evil and it is the job of the heroes to stop him, it is a perfect inversion of the Flood narrative. This parallels the other major theme in the MCU, that human beings are "fine the way they are" and that a true hero must "become who they are." If we define God as the highest good to which we aim (ala Paul in Romans, being conformed to the image of His Son.) then the Christian life is one of daily struggles against an innately sinful human nature to be overcome by sacrificing the present for the future. In this inversion of the MCU, the highest good is evil, therefore judgement must be resisted.
I disagree. This is a simplistic way to look at things. Everybody who knows Marvel knows that Thanos is not the most powerful person in the universe - by far. He may thinks that he is a god - and Ebony Maw etc. also think that. But the heros know he is not. Thanos is a metaphor of how narcisism and pride can bring evil - and to defeat that there must be someone willing to sacrifice himself. To think the storytellers wanted him as God is to miss the most important point of these movies.
I think Thor in the Endgame was The Fool as the archetype. He is in the unknown but questions everything and is on the path of discovering and learning something. He has to ascend from not knowing himself or his place or his shadow
@ Hey guys, there is a great video on "The Distributist" channel which is about 2 years old called "Why GRRM will not finish Game of Thrones". It's a good analysis on what happened and why GRRM can't finish the story.
It must be seen as the remarkable feat of storytelling. Daeneris failed to integrate her shadow and her Animus destroyed her in the end. A most important message. /average Pageau fanboy
Thor saying he has to be who he wants and not what is supposed to be is meta, it means that Marvel Studio will make Thor what they want him to be, not what the actual books meant him to be, that will mean no JMS, Simonson, Stan Lee or Roy Thomas inspiration, and since they announed Love and Thunder, who is gonna appear, what thematic will take center stage, plus Tiaka, the director of Thor 3 and this upcoming movie, saying to fans "I'll ruin your mythos in a minute", it just confirms this. I want to adress another problem, Thor in Endgame, of course, angered me, not just because of what they've done, given than Fat Thor is sympathetic, but that, it has been done and done again, Thor 1, he has to learn humility and get past who he was in the beginning, Thor 2, he has to question what it means to be the future King and it leds to him refusing the throne, Thor 3, he is losing Asgard, getting a new look, being more comedic, and learning that this time, he won't refuse the throne, but also the enchanted Mallet, Infinity War comes, Thor is reconstructed this time, because in order of his Endgame and Thor 4 story to be effective, you can't deconstruct a already deconstructed Thor, you have to bring back the God, the Noble warrior, hence why he build Stormbreaker, and so Endgame is the 4th time Thor's character is questionning what it means to be Thor, being turned even more comedic, less "Godly" and having of the whole group the worst aftermath of the snap, in the sense he is introduce as a ridicule bitter drunk who is shouting at people on Fortnite, with the group refusing that he uses the gauntlet, with both Mjolnir and Stormbreaker he is unable to beat a Thanos without stones, where he defeat him with just Stormbreaker when the Titan was wearing the gauntlet, only to see Cap doing just fine with his weapon, and his arc ends with him giving the throne to Valkyrie, with now nothing unique since Cap used Mjolnir in the final battle and has Thor's power while wielding it, he is just a fat superpowered man that will team up with a disfonctional hero group from outer space, and in the next movie, his actual name will be used by someone else, little by little Thor got meanings taken from him. Keep in mind Thor is supposed to be a Aspirationnal character, and that he has been deconstructed in almost every MCU appearance, it is like "subverting" Superman in each movie he takes a major role. But of course Marvel Studio, now that they start to show their colours, couldn't let a litteral God being that almighty and epic (and might be why they went with the idea the "helped" the finger snap) so the whole purpose was to make him human, even tho they could have used Donald Blake, wich was once Thor's mortal self, who had his own life before his memory came back to him one day. Or use Hickman"s Ultimate version, in wich Ragnarok happened, and the Asgardians are reborn in mortal bodies, Thor is troubled by this new life, without Asgard nor immortality, how is life going to be now, especially that there are no prophecies for him anymore, and thus he will experience randomness for the first time of his life and will have to learn to live by the day, instead of waiting for the pre written epic conclusion of his life, and deal with the idea that when his time will come, there will be no rebirth.
I feel like the storytelling on Thor got messed up. At first he is a frat boy, then is humbled by being stripped of his divinity/powers. The second Thor, was forgettable. The third he has lost his mom, loses his dad and his homeland. But he accepts his responsibility. If losing all the people he cared about didn't cause him to give up, why does losing half the universe, of people he doesn't even know? It is almost like Thor is how society can't decide how to treat white people. White people are racist, but useful. etc. It just gets bounced around and treated a bit like a bobbing cork in the sea. I don't even know who Thor is.
Thor passing on the torch to Valkrey didn't upset me much because they're old comrades in arms, and because she's actually incredibly competant. It's solely because of her competence that I think it makes sense that she lead the Asguardians, but that's the only reason. She has the neccesary qualities to actually lead her people.
She's not competent, she's got plot armour. As far as "necessary qualities to lead", she's arrogant, petty, selfish, irresponsible immature, and has shown zero maturity. How is she capable of leading? She's not even charismatic. She's like Thor was in the first movie before he learned his lesson. The point of Thor's ENTIRE arc was for him to take his spirit and competence as a warrior, and learn the maturity, humility, responsibility, care and wisdom necessary to go from a warrior to a king. Like, the first movie literally was "you're unworthy, you have to go to earth, go through purgatory/the underworld to learn your lesson and re-emerge worthy". That was the WHOLE point, and then they magically retconned it and said "no, this immature fuck valkyrie is a better leader than Thor is, despite acting exactly like Thor did at the beginning of the first movie".
32:00 this is the reason why I can't enjoy movies and most of art right now, I can't it not because it "empowers" women (the females in my family are much more successful than men, and it's admirable, since I'm from a third world country, and you can expect some idiots talking down women here), there's a reason why, I can't figure it out yet, but it is for some reason, incorrect. Those things, like seen in Moana, are done to divide our society, nothing else.
I quite agree. It comes from a place of revolutionary and destructive intentions. Even if they are not formulated like that by the creators, the ideology is not defined by them they just manifest it.
It's not empowering the feminine, it's destroying the feminine. A conquering force is destroying the masculine through taboo against it while destroying the feminine by making it masculine. We know it's a conquering force because that's what conquering forces have done 100% of the time in the history of conquering.
Thank you Mr. Pageau! This has explained to me why we need Jesus's sacrifice as atonement for our sin. I feel like my mind has been upgraded after listening.
Endgame was horrible and ruined the main characters:They turned Hulk into Shreck;They turned Thor into the Big Labowski;They turned Capt America into Carl from "UP".Tony should have been forced to choose between going back in time and undoing Thanos' snap and losing his daughter (as she would never have existed) Now that would be a real hard choice. Thor became fat and sloppy, he should at least have shaken out of his funk and started training a-la "Rocky" style. Capt A staying back in time was him giving up and taking the cowards way out-where was he during all the other conflicts and hardships? hiding in the shadows? Not like Capt A. Hawkeye should have been the one to sacrifice himself after all he already lost everything. It didn't make any sense for black widow to do it. Hulk was just stupid. Just when Marvel fixed him and he was awesome, they turned ruined him. He became a literal joke.
Please do Jordan Peele's movie "Us" (: I just watched it and I was full of questions about the symbolism. I think it is a great story about the integration of the shadow.
The Thanos you are talking about in the last movie was not the Thanos that had to go through any of the processes or history to gain the infinity stones. The "convincing Thanos" was executed by the "heroes" - which is out of character for heroes imo. I know it is probably just a plot hole, but bringing back half of the universe's population after 5 years (I think it was), should ironically prove Thanos' point as now there won't be the necessary resources.
If Marvel manages the future movies well, that point will be the source of new villains. And the trauma of people who moved on not wanting to accept people who re-materialized.
How unease does it make you feel when you hear that Disney is toying with the concepts of "sacrifice" for the greater good? 30yrs ago wouldn't of been too bad, but now......
Captain America had to learn to not just be an ideal, but be human. Tony had to learn how to let go of his humanity to embody his ideal. Never thought of it that way.
More of an aquaintance tbh, but regardless, I try not to get myself into a social bubble too much. He didn't exclude me either for my beliefs, so why burn the bridge on my end?
@@storytellers1 This was a joke. I have plenty of friends who disagree with me on fundamental stuff, or at least I would if they themselves were as tolerant as they claim to be. Maybe it wasn't the best comment to make exclusive of context, but it was a joke.
I think Thomas missed the mark a bit. The death of iron man is not really a statement about technology, but instead the correct way to be an individual in the face of Thanos. He accepts his limitations and dies as Iron Man, which is all he could ever be. Instead of Thanos's attempt to have the world for himself. The promotion of Thor's friend into leadership and his advice from his mother to relinquish his social obligations, is Thor's move into the outlaw world after having explored himself reflecting on the failures of his ego. The King Lesbian is in charge now.
Stark's death is still human sacrifice. Let me explain why. in the days of old, sacrifice meant that you have to give the *most valuable thing you possess* to the pagan god you beseech for help. What is that? Your life. So every sacrifice should be (ideally) self-sacrifice to the pagan gods. Everything else than giving your life is less worthy. It is only in Christianity, that God sees our souls, and we can replace ourselves with the next best thing we have: Abel give his most valuable sheep, Melchizedek gave the best wine and bread he had. The pagans saw that self-sacrifice was not viable, so they did what? They sacrificed the most precious thing they had, their *firstborn* to moloch and other pagan gods, the Bible writes about his extensively. Tony Stark does the ideal pagan sacrifice: sacrificing himself. One might say: what about Christians who died fighting, like the Death charge of the heroes of Saint Elmo and Szigetvar? The answer is that their lives was already in God's hand, because at the Mass, Christ sacrifices himself for our sins, and his sacrifice makes us a spotless sacrifice (you also have to confess your sins, that is a prerequisite), and the believers become pure sacrifices to God. Tony Stark is but a mere shadow of the true Sacrifice. He dies for what? Consumer culture? Coca cola and Macdonalds? So that things would go as they have gone so far? Faggot rmarriage, normalizing of pedophilia, etc? Stomach-churning. Only the Mass has the true Sacrifice.
I think you're right in that Thor's arc is not over, but he's come so far: He's struggled to "become worthy" for all these movies. It isn't about 'being great" or "earning your father's love" or "being a king" or "being the God of Thunder". He's become like us: human. And yet, he finds he is still worthy, and rejoices that others are worthy too.
Thor's story isn't done yet that's probably why it's confusing. "Be who you are instead of who you are supposed to be" could also be a call for him to integrate himself instead of being split.
If Iron Man didn't die at the end the movie, and by extension the whole MCU storyline, would have sucked. That's how important sacrifice is in these stories.
Well the captain America giving falcon his shield has been comic book Canon for years, but I understand that those who don't read the comics wouldn't get it... Though I would have loved it if it went to Bucky instead (he also gets the shield in the comics, so no conflict there)
I have to disagree with the analysis of the change in Thanos. The Funhaus movie podcast made a really interesting point that the change in his behaviour was because he had seen his previous plan fail, as those that survived the snap wouldn't understand and accept his reasoning, and would always keep trying to undo his work, rather than move on and try to rebuild. I think by "grateful" he meant "grateful for the sacrifices he had to make". As for him ordering firing on his own troops, his goal was to wipe out all life in the universe and start again, with no one but him remembering what was lost. Knowing that Nebula betrayed him, he couldn't trust any of them to keep alive after he got the stones anyway, so with the stakes that high, and the troops all going to die as a part of his plan, it's more of a desperate strategy, rather than a selfish one.
No you missed the entire point. Thanos forcefully sacrificed others to save some. Tony, Natasha and others willingly sacrificed themselves to save others. Thanos is an egoist who wants others to pay for his goals. The Avengers took the cost upon themselves.
I abandoned my interest in the MCU movies after Civil War, and haven't seen one since. I saw them doing to Marvel movies what they did to Star Wars, and what they did to Marvel Comics. But this review made me excited to sit down and give Infinity War and Endgame a chance. While it looks like they're still going down Woke Street, the deeper plot you pointed to is very redeeming. Thanks.
I thought that Thanos wiping out all life (other than his faithful Black Order) to create a grateful universe might have been done to draw parallels with Yahweh and the flood.
I really enjoyed how they used the I am iron man phrase in relation to Tony’s identity. He says that in one of the first movies but he always says it as a boast or in arrogance. In the very last scene when he finally accepts his identity 100% he says I AM iron man: it’s an admission not a boast. It’s the acceptance of iron man rather than the show of iron man. And at that final moment he takes his cross and realizes what it meant the whole time to be iron man. His logos matched his physical body and then he dies.
Captain Marvel only made the money it did because it was sandwiched between infinity war and endgame. Would not have done nearly as well without that.
Was she integrated tho?
@@mostlydead3261 No, the movie is the basic narrative of "opression" etc. Basically her character is that she is super special and super powerful, and the only reason she doesn't realize this is because she is fooled and kept at line by "the system". At the end of the movie she takes the shackles "the system" has put on them and she is abble to do everything that she wants to.
If you haven't notice how this is similar to the narrative of oppresers and oppressed minorities
10:25 It's also worth noting that "I am Iron Man" in Iron Man 1 was itself a selfish act. He wanted the attention, and he knew living that life would worry Pepper.
But in Endgame the selfishness of that statement is flipped, showing the growth of his character.
I saw a parallel between Thor and Job, how he has lose everything...
Be who you are not who you're supposed to be=do what thou wilt.
Thor's plot is basically there so he can transition to the Guardians of the Galaxy universe (because people loved his dynamic with the Guardians in the previous movie, as well as his comedic capacities in Ragnarok); for it to happen there needed to be someone else as king instead of him, so he had to regress in order for that to play out.
Totally agree that's the real reason but the writers should have found a better way to transition him. Maybe taking his people back into space and find a new planet/ kingdom. That could also be a refuge/haven for the Guardians...
Although there might be politics in it, the point is that Falcon is pure of heart like Steve. Bucky, who has powers, has a lot of blood on his hands and doesn't embody the same ideals.
Spider-Man: Far From Home roughly shares the same plot as The Lion King. I think they got the symbolism right in that super hero movie.
I thought the same thing
Yes, it's a similar structure.
So cool to understand the story on another level through this
I think it is the first video where I don't completely agree with Jonathan. The movie was not bad, but I couldn't enjoy it all the way through. There was 2 or 3 points where I just raised my eyebrows, and got completely out of the immersion.
The first one was when Black Widow sacrificed herself. My initial problem was that I interpreted the scene in a way that it was one of those "female power" moments. Later I changed my mind, because I think I was too focused on the "masculine-feminine" symbolism, and now I think that scene wasn't about that.Well, it wasn't about that contrast mainly. But at that point, when she was bested by Clinton, and he managed to jumped off the cliff, BUT out of nowhere there she was grabbing him in the air, when he was mid-air, and he already made his choice... I don't know. I don't mind that Romanov sacrificed herself in the end, but the way it was carried out.... It really didn't felt right to me. I felt like she robbed him of choice. Like she was that tyrant partner who doesn't let his friend make any choice and bear any responsibility.
The second time something felt off was the " cool female superheroes pose for a wallpaper" scene. Everybody was fighting, the world was ending, everyone was united for a single cause, there were no differences. But of course some had to emphasize that they are different, that they are capable and so on...It was just pure propaganda.
My third problem with the film was Thor's arc. It was terrible! The conclusion was sooo infantilizing, so emasculating. We got a hero who was bettering himself through Thor 1-2-3. He was a strong, capable hero. Now the moral of his arc is "It's time to be who I am, rather than who I am supposed to be". Really? You were a god, the strongest avenger and now you're a fat, pathetic loser, whose teammates don't even let him use the infinity gauntlet, because he is such a wreck! Jesus, and you're fine with that? Really, that's you conclusion, that it is fine that way, because "that is who I am now..."??? It was an interesting journey of his, but the ending made it so sad to me. The scene with Valkyrie was a typical oediple mother-son scene, like: It's ok son, you don't need to grow up, you don't need to bear any responsibilities, you don't need to be a king. Now go and play with your friends on their spaceship, while mommy takes care of everything. It left a bitter taste in my mouth.
Looking at the current era we live in and the popular narratives, I can only see these scenes as an attack on the masculine.
@@AnoNymous-ph4cd I see what you mean. I agree with you
this is perfect, they really miss this.
The main subliminal message in infinity war and endgame is that God is evil,
The characteristics of God are given to the bad guy, Thanos.
1. Thanos is the most powerful person in the universe. (God is the most powerful being in the universe)
2. Thanos to bring order to the universe wants to destroy half the population. ( This is in reference to the good and the bad, God destroying sin/evil to bring order to the universe)
3. Thanos sacrificed his daughter to accomplish his goal ( God the Father gave his son Christ to accomplish His goal)
4. The language that was used by Thanos henchmen whenever they destroyed half the population of other worlds "rejoice" is also used in the Bible the book of revelation. (Again associating the bad guys and Thanos with God)
The whole story of the two movies is really in reference to the Apocalypse story of the Bible, ( an powerful being coming to earth to destroy the bad, half of the equation)
But the movie is gnostic and turns the story of Apocalypse upside down making God the bad guy.
I just watched Endgame and came to the exact same conclusion. That conclusion (God is Evil), is embedded deep within the mythos of the MCU. Go watch Age of Ultron again and you will see the same subliminal message. Ultron seeks to wipe out humanity because of evil and it is the job of the heroes to stop him, it is a perfect inversion of the Flood narrative.
This parallels the other major theme in the MCU, that human beings are "fine the way they are" and that a true hero must "become who they are." If we define God as the highest good to which we aim (ala Paul in Romans, being conformed to the image of His Son.) then the Christian life is one of daily struggles against an innately sinful human nature to be overcome by sacrificing the present for the future. In this inversion of the MCU, the highest good is evil, therefore judgement must be resisted.
If the movie is subliminally saying that god is evil, then what the movie is really saying is that the devil is god.
Hollywood is messed up!
I disagree. This is a simplistic way to look at things. Everybody who knows Marvel knows that Thanos is not the most powerful person in the universe - by far. He may thinks that he is a god - and Ebony Maw etc. also think that. But the heros know he is not.
Thanos is a metaphor of how narcisism and pride can bring evil - and to defeat that there must be someone willing to sacrifice himself. To think the storytellers wanted him as God is to miss the most important point of these movies.
Finally. Someone who gets it. Add to the Thanos = Jesus a little Ultron = Noah and see where it leads.
I think Thor in the Endgame was The Fool as the archetype. He is in the unknown but questions everything and is on the path of discovering and learning something. He has to ascend from not knowing himself or his place or his shadow
16:35 Although Thor didn't fight himself, it's worth remembering that his mother also decided to rather die than change the future.
@Jonathan Pageau
Please do the disaster that is - *Game Of Thrones*
@ Hey guys, there is a great video on "The Distributist" channel which is about 2 years old called "Why GRRM will not finish Game of Thrones". It's a good analysis on what happened and why GRRM can't finish the story.
It must be seen as the remarkable feat of storytelling. Daeneris failed to integrate her shadow and her Animus destroyed her in the end. A most important message.
/average Pageau fanboy
Thor saying he has to be who he wants and not what is supposed to be is meta, it means that Marvel Studio will make Thor what they want him to be, not what the actual books meant him to be, that will mean no JMS, Simonson, Stan Lee or Roy Thomas inspiration, and since they announed Love and Thunder, who is gonna appear, what thematic will take center stage, plus Tiaka, the director of Thor 3 and this upcoming movie, saying to fans "I'll ruin your mythos in a minute", it just confirms this.
I want to adress another problem, Thor in Endgame, of course, angered me, not just because of what they've done, given than Fat Thor is sympathetic, but that, it has been done and done again, Thor 1, he has to learn humility and get past who he was in the beginning, Thor 2, he has to question what it means to be the future King and it leds to him refusing the throne, Thor 3, he is losing Asgard, getting a new look, being more comedic, and learning that this time, he won't refuse the throne, but also the enchanted Mallet, Infinity War comes, Thor is reconstructed this time, because in order of his Endgame and Thor 4 story to be effective, you can't deconstruct a already deconstructed Thor, you have to bring back the God, the Noble warrior, hence why he build Stormbreaker, and so Endgame is the 4th time Thor's character is questionning what it means to be Thor, being turned even more comedic, less "Godly" and having of the whole group the worst aftermath of the snap, in the sense he is introduce as a ridicule bitter drunk who is shouting at people on Fortnite, with the group refusing that he uses the gauntlet, with both Mjolnir and Stormbreaker he is unable to beat a Thanos without stones, where he defeat him with just Stormbreaker when the Titan was wearing the gauntlet, only to see Cap doing just fine with his weapon, and his arc ends with him giving the throne to Valkyrie, with now nothing unique since Cap used Mjolnir in the final battle and has Thor's power while wielding it, he is just a fat superpowered man that will team up with a disfonctional hero group from outer space, and in the next movie, his actual name will be used by someone else, little by little Thor got meanings taken from him. Keep in mind Thor is supposed to be a Aspirationnal character, and that he has been deconstructed in almost every MCU appearance, it is like "subverting" Superman in each movie he takes a major role.
But of course Marvel Studio, now that they start to show their colours, couldn't let a litteral God being that almighty and epic (and might be why they went with the idea the "helped" the finger snap) so the whole purpose was to make him human, even tho they could have used Donald Blake, wich was once Thor's mortal self, who had his own life before his memory came back to him one day. Or use Hickman"s Ultimate version, in wich Ragnarok happened, and the Asgardians are reborn in mortal bodies, Thor is troubled by this new life, without Asgard nor immortality, how is life going to be now, especially that there are no prophecies for him anymore, and thus he will experience randomness for the first time of his life and will have to learn to live by the day, instead of waiting for the pre written epic conclusion of his life, and deal with the idea that when his time will come, there will be no rebirth.
A better hero movie to go over is “Glass” by M Night Shyamalan
I see theosis here
19:45 On technology, it's interesting that Stark went from using his tech to kill innocents to using it to save the universe.
Thor sitting on the couch drinking beer being a gamer having lost all purpose in life seems to be a well deserved jab at men of European descent tbh.
I feel like the storytelling on Thor got messed up. At first he is a frat boy, then is humbled by being stripped of his divinity/powers. The second Thor, was forgettable. The third he has lost his mom, loses his dad and his homeland. But he accepts his responsibility. If losing all the people he cared about didn't cause him to give up, why does losing half the universe, of people he doesn't even know? It is almost like Thor is how society can't decide how to treat white people. White people are racist, but useful. etc. It just gets bounced around and treated a bit like a bobbing cork in the sea. I don't even know who Thor is.
THANK you!! someone who didnt like Fat Thor
Thor passing on the torch to Valkrey didn't upset me much because they're old comrades in arms, and because she's actually incredibly competant.
It's solely because of her competence that I think it makes sense that she lead the Asguardians, but that's the only reason. She has the neccesary qualities to actually lead her people.
She's not competent, she's got plot armour.
As far as "necessary qualities to lead", she's arrogant, petty, selfish, irresponsible immature, and has shown zero maturity. How is she capable of leading? She's not even charismatic.
She's like Thor was in the first movie before he learned his lesson.
The point of Thor's ENTIRE arc was for him to take his spirit and competence as a warrior, and learn the maturity, humility, responsibility, care and wisdom necessary to go from a warrior to a king. Like, the first movie literally was "you're unworthy, you have to go to earth, go through purgatory/the underworld to learn your lesson and re-emerge worthy". That was the WHOLE point, and then they magically retconned it and said "no, this immature fuck valkyrie is a better leader than Thor is, despite acting exactly like Thor did at the beginning of the first movie".
32:00 this is the reason why I can't enjoy movies and most of art right now, I can't it not because it "empowers" women (the females in my family are much more successful than men, and it's admirable, since I'm from a third world country, and you can expect some idiots talking down women here), there's a reason why, I can't figure it out yet, but it is for some reason, incorrect.
Those things, like seen in Moana, are done to divide our society, nothing else.
I quite agree. It comes from a place of revolutionary and destructive intentions. Even if they are not formulated like that by the creators, the ideology is not defined by them they just manifest it.
Would never watch an all female power movie, never
It's not empowering the feminine, it's destroying the feminine. A conquering force is destroying the masculine through taboo against it while destroying the feminine by making it masculine.
We know it's a conquering force because that's what conquering forces have done 100% of the time in the history of conquering.
Would like to see an analysis of Captain Marvel
Thank you Mr. Pageau! This has explained to me why we need Jesus's sacrifice as atonement for our sin. I feel like my mind has been upgraded after listening.
As a mom of 3 boys, the Thor story arch with his mom made me weep in the theater. I'm excited to see his continuation with starlord!!
Why are the infinity stones, gems? It seems so obvious that they SHOULD be gems, but I'm sure why? Is there an archetypal or symbolic reality in that?
Endgame was horrible and ruined the main characters:They turned Hulk into Shreck;They turned Thor into the Big Labowski;They turned Capt America into Carl from "UP".Tony should have been forced to choose between going back in time and undoing Thanos' snap and losing his daughter (as she would never have existed) Now that would be a real hard choice. Thor became fat and sloppy, he should at least have shaken out of his funk and started training a-la "Rocky" style. Capt A staying back in time was him giving up and taking the cowards way out-where was he during all the other conflicts and hardships? hiding in the shadows? Not like Capt A. Hawkeye should have been the one to sacrifice himself after all he already lost everything. It didn't make any sense for black widow to do it. Hulk was just stupid. Just when Marvel fixed him and he was awesome, they turned ruined him. He became a literal joke.
How do you feel about this analysis of the Marvel Movies ruclips.net/video/qbCbyf16iYc/видео.html
Anyone know the name of the music at the intro , its really good.
Rimsky-Korsakov "Russian Easter Overture"
@@rbjmartin aw thx mate . much obliged
I’m confused. No clips of Endgame?
Please do Jordan Peele's movie "Us" (:
I just watched it and I was full of questions about the symbolism. I think it is a great story about the integration of the shadow.
What is the symbolism of Jordan Peele's name? Is he peeling out the layers of ego that hide the secret of river Jordan??
The Thanos you are talking about in the last movie was not the Thanos that had to go through any of the processes or history to gain the infinity stones. The "convincing Thanos" was executed by the "heroes" - which is out of character for heroes imo.
I know it is probably just a plot hole, but bringing back half of the universe's population after 5 years (I think it was), should ironically prove Thanos' point as now there won't be the necessary resources.
If Marvel manages the future movies well, that point will be the source of new villains. And the trauma of people who moved on not wanting to accept people who re-materialized.
Jonathan, as soon as I started watching Endgame, I knew you were going to do this very video!
Thanks Jonathan
Aztec football
How unease does it make you feel when you hear that Disney is toying with the concepts of "sacrifice" for the greater good?
30yrs ago wouldn't of been too bad, but now......
Captain America had to learn to not just be an ideal, but be human. Tony had to learn how to let go of his humanity to embody his ideal. Never thought of it that way.
Why would you be friends with someone who falls for that kind of pandering?
More of an aquaintance tbh, but regardless, I try not to get myself into a social bubble too much. He didn't exclude me either for my beliefs, so why burn the bridge on my end?
@@storytellers1 This was a joke. I have plenty of friends who disagree with me on fundamental stuff, or at least I would if they themselves were as tolerant as they claim to be. Maybe it wasn't the best comment to make exclusive of context, but it was a joke.
@@cuthbertsboots5733 a joke? more like a decieving comment. where is the fun?
What they did to Thor was critical race theory nonsense and you know it
I think Thomas missed the mark a bit. The death of iron man is not really a statement about technology, but instead the correct way to be an individual in the face of Thanos. He accepts his limitations and dies as Iron Man, which is all he could ever be. Instead of Thanos's attempt to have the world for himself.
The promotion of Thor's friend into leadership and his advice from his mother to relinquish his social obligations, is Thor's move into the outlaw world after having explored himself reflecting on the failures of his ego. The King Lesbian is in charge now.
Stark's death is still human sacrifice. Let me explain why.
in the days of old, sacrifice meant that you have to give the *most valuable thing you possess* to the pagan god you beseech for help. What is that? Your life. So every sacrifice should be (ideally) self-sacrifice to the pagan gods.
Everything else than giving your life is less worthy.
It is only in Christianity, that God sees our souls, and we can replace ourselves with the next best thing we have: Abel give his most valuable sheep, Melchizedek gave the best wine and bread he had.
The pagans saw that self-sacrifice was not viable, so they did what? They sacrificed the most precious thing they had, their *firstborn* to moloch and other pagan gods, the Bible writes about his extensively.
Tony Stark does the ideal pagan sacrifice: sacrificing himself.
One might say: what about Christians who died fighting, like the Death charge of the heroes of Saint Elmo and Szigetvar? The answer is that their lives was already in God's hand, because at the Mass, Christ sacrifices himself for our sins, and his sacrifice makes us a spotless sacrifice (you also have to confess your sins, that is a prerequisite), and the believers become pure sacrifices to God.
Tony Stark is but a mere shadow of the true Sacrifice. He dies for what? Consumer culture? Coca cola and Macdonalds? So that things would go as they have gone so far? Faggot rmarriage, normalizing of pedophilia, etc? Stomach-churning.
Only the Mass has the true Sacrifice.
I think you're right in that Thor's arc is not over, but he's come so far: He's struggled to "become worthy" for all these movies. It isn't about 'being great" or "earning your father's love" or "being a king" or "being the God of Thunder". He's become like us: human. And yet, he finds he is still worthy, and rejoices that others are worthy too.
Thor's story isn't done yet that's probably why it's confusing. "Be who you are instead of who you are supposed to be" could also be a call for him to integrate himself instead of being split.
That ideal is pretty stupid though
If Iron Man didn't die at the end the movie, and by extension the whole MCU storyline, would have sucked. That's how important sacrifice is in these stories.
Well the captain America giving falcon his shield has been comic book Canon for years, but I understand that those who don't read the comics wouldn't get it... Though I would have loved it if it went to Bucky instead (he also gets the shield in the comics, so no conflict there)
I have to disagree with the analysis of the change in Thanos. The Funhaus movie podcast made a really interesting point that the change in his behaviour was because he had seen his previous plan fail, as those that survived the snap wouldn't understand and accept his reasoning, and would always keep trying to undo his work, rather than move on and try to rebuild. I think by "grateful" he meant "grateful for the sacrifices he had to make".
As for him ordering firing on his own troops, his goal was to wipe out all life in the universe and start again, with no one but him remembering what was lost. Knowing that Nebula betrayed him, he couldn't trust any of them to keep alive after he got the stones anyway, so with the stakes that high, and the troops all going to die as a part of his plan, it's more of a desperate strategy, rather than a selfish one.
So Tony and the avengers end up doing to Thanos what Thanos did to us.
No you missed the entire point. Thanos forcefully sacrificed others to save some.
Tony, Natasha and others willingly sacrificed themselves to save others.
Thanos is an egoist who wants others to pay for his goals. The Avengers took the cost upon themselves.
I abandoned my interest in the MCU movies after Civil War, and haven't seen one since. I saw them doing to Marvel movies what they did to Star Wars, and what they did to Marvel Comics. But this review made me excited to sit down and give Infinity War and Endgame a chance. While it looks like they're still going down Woke Street, the deeper plot you pointed to is very redeeming. Thanks.
Last
falcon > bucky for captain america
I thought that Thanos wiping out all life (other than his faithful Black Order) to create a grateful universe might have been done to draw parallels with Yahweh and the flood.
More like Armageddon
Endgame was garbage.
I think Solo is on Netflix. More star wars than 7&8.