So anyone can use infinite stones now? - Avengers: Endgame (2019) Discussion

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

Only beings of extraordinary strength can wield the infinity stones - or at least, do it and survive the experience. They never did say whether "extraordinary strength" meant physical endurance or strength of will. Or some combination of the two. And they've hinted that the stones have a will of their own. The soul stone requiring a sacrifice. The Red Skull saying that the space stone cast him out and banished him.

Comic books routinely set roughly defined rules for how things work and then stretch them - a lot. If we were talking about hard sci-fi you might be justified in nitpicking. But this is a fantasy tale of magic and super powers with a little actual science thrown in just for fun. It's Marvel. I think of this stuff as the modern equivalent of ancient Greek mythology. Similar type of themes and storytelling, updated for the technological age.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

At least in most Marvel movies they are trying to get their rules and logic straight. To answer your question, clearly physical strength is the main requirement to carry the stones. Thanos and Hulk are the only 2 people can directly contact the stones without getting affected (Hulk held time stone from ancient one), all others, even powerful people like ancient one and Dr Strange but not physically strong avoided direct contact. Ronan directly touched power stone and was OK, but from the look of it, it did take a toll on his body.

Clearly we are not talking about straight science here but I would have enjoyed it a lot better if they didn't have obvious holes in their rules and logic. Endgame I think is where all the stretching happens, not just that but all the time travels as well.

reply

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

They did imply in Guardians of the Galaxy, where the concept of infinity stones was first introduced, that regular people have wielded the stones but always died. The Collector said that one group believed they could join hands and share the power stone - and it apparently worked for a short time - but then they too were consumed.

The question of whether or not a regular shmuck could grab an infinity stone and do one thing with it before it kills them wasn't specifically addressed until this movie. I'd also point out that Thanos didn't hold all the stones in his hand. He used the gauntlet to focus and direct their energy. If he didn't need the gauntlet and could survive using the naked stones, he wouldn't have bothered to go and force the dwarves to make it for him.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

I think the gauntlet is to hold the stones. Otherwise you have to hold them in your hands all the time and what if they slip out.

It does make it more controllable in the movies, people can touch the gauntlet with stones and unaffected as long as they don't channel power of the stones.

But I would say you have to contain and control the power of stones in your body, that is unavoidable. Ronan put his stone on his staff but he has to contain and control it's power to use it. Clearly not any idiot with a staff can use the stone.

reply

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

I seem to recall people sacrificing themselves to use stones one time in the comics, but don't quote me on that. However since they're not killed instantly - it's slower and quite agonizing - they appear to have enough time. If they can stay focused through the pain.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

But all 6 stones? In Guardians of the Galaxy, the female slave of collector died without any harm to collector who she hated, if there was any chance she would have killed collector. Now we are talking about all 6 stones.

reply

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

She didn't have any previous knowledge of the stone. She was standing there listening to the Collector say how everyone who touched it died, so that's what she did. It was her "escape". She wasn't thinking beyond that. Maybe she assumed from his statement that only beings of extraordinary strength could wield it that she couldn't hope to control its power. Or maybe the explosion was her attempt to kill him which just didn't work right. Who knows?

Hawkeye held the soul stone in his hand and it didn't kill him. Maybe the power stone is particularly dangerous.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

I don't think you need that much knowledge, especially with power stone, also collector explained it. It is hard to say what she thought at that moment, but she could have killed herself in other ways, why the stone? Even it was suicide she would have killed collector if she could.

Kawkeye held the stone with a glove, that did not count as direct contact. I think as long as there was no plot demand they were carefully avoiding breaking the rules they set.

reply

[–] chrisjdel (2714) 5 years ago

Comic book rules are always followed .. until they aren't. I don't think any character fully understands the infinity stones so that gives them a certain amount of wiggle room.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

Ancient one summoned Hulk before handed over time stone so Hulk not Banner held time stone, so I'd say they are all dangerous.

reply

[–] Randomalthor (12) 5 years ago

Another factor is what they were trying to do with the stones. Thanos was wiping out half the life in the entire universe. The Hulk was attempting to restore all those killed by Thanos. The second use of Thanos was to destroy the infinity stones themselves. All were feats of unimaginable power. Tony was only destroying Thanos and his army. A much smaller and localized feat.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

It still requires the power of all 6 stones, which Tony is simply incapable of wielding. In words of Thor:"Your bodies would crumble, as your minds collapsed into madness." and that is just his new hammer.

reply

[–] asom (6503) 5 years ago

The suit obviously grants him the extra strength.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

The suit has extra ordinary strength but not him.

reply

[–] asom (6503) 5 years ago

It doesn't matter. If only extraordinary strength is needed then iron man in the suit is a fit enough combination.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

I would have no problem if Jarvis using the suit to channel infinity stones and performed the snap, if that had been possible. Of course the suit will likely melt or burst into dusts afterwards.

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

Hi fc31, I am replying here to the deleted post to continue our discussion on Thanos's mentality in Endgame and why he seemed weak and stupid:

So I think you are forgetting one big thing. Thanos is insane. If you want to try to rationalize his mental state and choices in Endgame you have to do so for him in Infinity War as well. Eliminating half the population is not a rational objective and does not provide the benefits he believes it does, actually the evidence is to the contrary.

Thanos is absolute in his thinking, so he cannot be reasoned with. For example, you ask why he would destroy all 6 stones? Well because he didn't need them and did not want them used anymore, it is as simple as that. It is the same for why he was not concerned with overpopulation in the distant future, he was not thinking about that because he already accomplished what he wanted to.

His goal of preventing overpopulation is not supposed to be sympathetic. Overpopulation is a myth. When populations the amount of resource wasting increases. As populations increase both concern for resource use and technological innovations decrease resource waste. This is why on earth our population is at its highest between 7 to 8 billion people and yet the hunger and world wide starvation rates are at all time lows.

Yes resources are finite as Thanos points out but he came to an illogical conclusion. Population is not the problem, use or misuse of resources is. If there a given population has abundance the amount of waste increases.

So The point to this is, Thanos is and has always been insane. His mentality is just as forced, incoherent, and irrational in Infinity War as it was in Endgame. If you think he was great in Infinity war but not in Endgame, i think you simply allowed his charisma and commitment as a character to overestimate his intelligence and mental state. Don't get me wrong he is an impressive villain because of his charisma, but is insane and irrational.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

I don't think Thanos can be classified as insane or mentally ill, he was radical though, maybe with a god complex. But being radical has nothing to do with being stupid.

I think he was stupid because the plot demanded it. Infinity stones have to be all destroyed to trigger the time travel plot and only Thanos can destroy them. Because with all the stones Thanos was god like and invincible and the plot just can't continue, heroes can't win. They can still have a more sensible plot like stealing the gauntlet, but I think in writer's mind that is just not as interesting, heroic and epic as time travel, at least not as long.

So the writers have to make up a forced story in the beginning. And avengers just have to go on a suicide mission, how stupid were they to go against Thanos with infinity stones? Thanos can just snap his fingers and they will all be dead, but they went anyway? When Captain Marvel said:"Because before you did not have me". I was like how stupid was she? To be honest that looked much more like insanity. At least say something like:"Hey, we can steal the gauntlet first, we need an invisibility device".

And when they attacked, Thanos's armor was hanged outside but he was still wearing the gauntlet, why? Because they have to attack and kill a weak and defenseless Thanos and writers don't want the heroes to look bad.

I think that explains better why the story in the beginning was so forced and full of holes.

reply

[–] prometheus1816 (1051) 5 years ago

Thanos exterminated half of the universe. I'd say he looks bad all on his own. The Avengers were leveling out the ledger.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

But killing a defenseless person is neither epic nor heroic. To be honest, to me Thor did look a little bad when he cut off Thanos's head, at least that would not be something he can be proud of.

But alas, it has to be that way. The plot demanded Thanos to be disarmed and to tell them the fact that he had destroyed all the stones.

reply

[–] prometheus1816 (1051) 5 years ago

Don't expect me to cry any tears over Thanos' "defenselessness". He ordered the murder of whole civilizations even before his search for the stones. It was epic and heroic because Thanos deserved it. As for Thor, that look was not because he felt bad about it. It was because of the ease at which he was able to do it as if Thanos capitulated to it. Sorry not sorry for not feeling bad about a psychotic meglomaniac.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

Nobody felt sorry for Thanos, but attacking and killing Thanos when he was weak and defenseless was hardly epic or heroic. Especially when they made Thanos retarded, that was kind of insult to people died at his hands.

But like I said before to progress to time travel plot there was no other way.

reply

[–] prometheus1816 (1051) 5 years ago

Thanos attacked weak and defenseless civilizations. What did he do to Gamora's people? Nebula's? How about when he said to Nebula about "wasting good parts"? Still not sorry for loving his beheading and eventual dusting. I guess he wasn't quite "inevitable".

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

Yeah, that is what bad guys do. Does not mean avengers will look good doing the same. You don't have to feel sorry for Thanos being executed. But try to walk in Thor's shoes, he would have felt much better if he had killed Thanos in a real battle.

To be honest I think he felt much worse than he had shown, if he had killed Thanos in infinity wars, if he had just aimed at Thanos's head. He would have saved the universe, avenged his brother and his people and it would have been the most glorious moment of his life. But he failed and he probably blamed himself after that, and I think that was why HE executed Thanos (this time he aimed at head), and I am not surprised at all he became depressed, drunk and fat after that.

reply

[–] asom (6503) 5 years ago

I agree, felt not right for Thor to kill Thanos like that ...

reply

[–] prometheus1816 (1051) 5 years ago

It felt very right for Thanos to die in all timelines the ways he did both being beheaded and dusted.

reply

[–] asom (6503) 5 years ago

i think you misunderstood what i was saying.

reply

[–] prometheus1816 (1051) 5 years ago

The Avengers look a hell of a sight better than Thanos. The "real" battle was over. They got the advantage when they went to Thanos' planet. Watch the beginning of "Blade Runner 2049". The scene between Sapper Morton and Agent K was less fair because Sapper wasn't a threat. Thanos for as long as he drew breath would always be a threat. They did what they had to to remove that threat.

Thor didn't know in IW to "aim for the head". In EG he did because of what Thanos told him in IW. So Thor did that. Thor's reaction was not due to his killing Thanos there, it was due to his inability to do it in IW where it would have meant more in Thanos' ability to do the snap.

I hate Fat Thor with a read hot passion. The only part of EG that I hated more than the Cap Time Travel problem.

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

"I don't think Thanos can be classified as insane or mentally ill"

He was delusion and completely detached from reality. That is point I am trying to convinced. He believes in a reality, in which people would flourish, when half of the populations are removed and people are starving when populations are full. This is not the case. Gamorra's planet was not poverty stricken when Thanos came, at least it did not appear that way. It looked like a flourishing society. Killing half the population probably sent them into utter chaos. The movie proves he is wrong and delusionally so in Endgame after 5 years, the people of earth are not flourishing it is basically a ghost world. People Don't even know how to move on.

And his plan is crazy in the first place because he seems to think he only needs to eliminate half the population once. Like the populations will not grow again and all he is doing is delaying the inevitable.

In simple terms, he was always stupid; that was his character. Irrational but charismatic and convinced his reality was the ONLY reality that everyone had to accept.

"And avengers just have to go on a suicide mission"

Between Thor w/ Stormbreaker and Captain Marvel it would not have been a suicide mission. Thor alone almost killed him with all 6 stones by himself in endgame. And he would have killed Thanos if he had aimed for the head.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

I think if you have asked climate scientists of today on their view of overpopulation and associated climate change, many probably agree we are on the verge of no-returns. Of course their suggestions are not mass executions, but their concerns are about the same. The sentiment was echoed in many movies of recent years and the latest one was "Godzilla II: King of the Monsters". In that a scientist teamed with a terror group to use monsters called "titans" to kill I think at least about 80% of the population (people not in bunkers are unlikely to survive) to preserve the survival of humanity. Of course that is crazy, but that does not mean these people are insane.

If we are talking about Gamora's planet, Thanos was saying "Going to bed hungry, scrounging for scraps. Your planet was on the brink of collapse. I'm the one who stopped that. Do you know what's happened since then? The children born have known nothing but full bellies and clear skies. It's a paradise". Gamora replied:"Because you murdered half the planet".

You can see Gamora agreed and confirmed just about everything Thanos said. Thanos was not delusional, he tested his methods on planets he thought needed saving, observed afterwards and were happy with the results.

To be honest I think many climate scientists would probably have agreed as well that the environment of Earth would recover if population were dramatically reduced. Of course I am not suggesting we should all become Eco-terrorists, but terrorists are radicals and extremists, that does not necessarily mean they are clinically insane, stupid or delusional.

Of course there are other solutions to environmental problems of Earth. Billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk spent heavily on space travel and colonization of Mars, what do you think they are doing? When time comes I think their families and people who could afford it will ensure the survival of humanity.

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

Okay you are moving the goal posts on me here. and I am not getting into a political debate. Thanos was not trying to prevent or do anything with pollution levels or concerned with overpopulation having an impact on climate change. His intended goal was made perfectly clear, resources were finite and too many people would use too many resources.

"You can see Gamora agreed and confirmed just about everything Thanos said. "

Because she was a little girl when he took her, she didn't know any better. The flashback clearly shows a prosperous civilization underneath the rubble created by Thanos's attack. Gamora as a child was not wearing rags. Thanos believes what he is saying is true, but it does not mean it is the actual reality. He believes things that are not real.

"To be honest I think many climate scientists would probably have agreed as well that the environment of Earth would recover if population were dramatically reduced."

That is some pretty sick thinking. Population level does not seem to be the problem, levels of concern from the governments and people seems to be the problem. This is why developed nations even with large populations are reducing there pollution and emission numbers while developing nations, such as India and China, are increasing. Reducing the population might slow down the level of pollution for a short time until the populations grew again, but then the likely levels of development would slow or cease, leading to greater pollution. More evidence that Thanos's goal is just not based in any evidence or reality.

"terrorists are radicals and extremists, that does not necessarily mean they are clinically insane, stupid or delusional."

I would make the argument that to become that extreme or radical in an ideology you have either been manipulated (or drugged or both) by someone or people much smarter than you or you were insane or delusional (likely narcissistic) to begin with. Rational people do not go to the extremes.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

Because she was a little girl when he took her, she didn't know any better.

Now you are just in denial. You really think Gamora did not know what happened to her planet, but somehow you do?

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

A child is not going to remember the specifics of their childhood, she was taken by Thanos and manipulated her whole life to believe in his cause. The evidence of the state of her planet is in the flashback, they appear to be a prosperous people. That is dependent of course on the reliability of the details of her flashback. She might remember things better than they actually were, the film does not give us any reason though to think her flashback was not accurate.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

Rational people do not go to the extremes.

Of course they do.

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

If they have gone to an extreme they are no longer rational. Provide evidence to the contrary.

reply

[–] Goliard (1413) 5 years ago

This is a FASCINATING discussion.

You seem to be defining "rational" as something inherently middle-ground. While I get what you're saying, it seems to be a (fairly) limited way of thinking.
Some people don't believe in abortion. Full stop. To the extreme: it should just never, ever happen. Are they somehow "irrational?"
I never eat meat, or drink alcohol. At all. That's the most extreme length I could think of to go to, in an attempt to live as long and healthy a life as possible. Is this "irrational"?
The big bomb: Pick a religion. . .any religion. This is the DEFINITION of "going to an extreme." You don't even need to key on fundamentalist Christians, or extreme jihadists, or Crusaders. . .you can really look at Any religion, and easily see a pretty rigidly defined set of rules for "here's the Only way to ensure salvation." Is religion inherently "irrational?"
Note that I don't have the answers to any of these questions. Just fuel for the discussion. . .

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

Part of what I define as rational thinking is the actions or behaviors the person in question exhibits. Because almost anything can be rationalized to some degree, the actual actions a person takes based on their beliefs is the only way to fully determine if they are rational or not.

In the case of Thanos his thinking was irrational specifically because he came to the conclusion half of all living things needed to be eliminated and he acted on it.

For example the case of abortion you bring up, even an extreme position can be rationalized. For example, the rape exception can be rationalized away by saying that the fetus did not perform the crime and is cannot be killed without proper due process. This is especially true if the person views a fetus as a person deserving of equal rights to an newborn infant. An example of irrational thinking would be more like, 'abortion should never be performed ever, therefor all abortion providers, clinics and maybe even patients should be destroyed'. And then acting on that conclusion.

I do not agree at all that going to any religious belief is irrational or extreme because nothing of what is known of physical origins nor impact of any spiritual realm or lack there of is conclusive. Therefore everyone that believes anything (even science) would be holding an irrational belief and the the word 'irrational' loses all meaning.

And that is the last i will say on that topic. This is not something i wish to discuss on a movie discussion board.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

Also in infinity wars I think Thor's new hammer caught Thanos by surprise, the fact he wasn't able to block stormbreaker. I don't think he will make that mistake again. Thanos can leave the battle field anytime he wants through teleportation, snap his fingers and kill everyone remotely, how are you going to stop that? Tell me again your strategy of attack.

If you are not insane or delusional then tell me the realistic chance of survival of our heroes if Thanos still has all the stones.

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

A good question would be why did he not just snap away all the avengers in the first place? Or after. His obsession with doing a random half of the population with no consideration to which individuals to keep and which to 'dust' adds to the irrationality of his objective. He was never a logical or rational thinker, but it seems that you have some sympathy to the idea of overpopulation being a realistic concern, and even sympathetic to the idea it should be reduces. So when the character who had a goal you had sympathy for began to show their true colors of being completely irrational you took it as a change in character, I took it as a the full revelation of his mental state.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

So your answer is he was stupid and he would not use the stones against avengers. There is no point to continue this discussion if you are simply in denial.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

STFU get a life and get out of your mother's basement.

And please get laid.

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

I am what they call the 1% and I did not come from money. I retired at 41 about 5 years ago, and you?

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I'm Richard Branson I'm a billionaire and I can be anyone i want online too...and you?

reply

[–] fc31 (4537) 5 years ago

What a moron. I guess you are on my ignore list too, bye bye

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Oh no, I'm sooo hurt by that.

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

No, it is your answer that seems to be only "he was stupid". I am making the argument he was so obsessed with following his plan specifically his way and took no outliers into consideration was an example of him being an irrational character. So him doing irrational things, such as destroying all the stones and not being concerned with getting ambushed after he completed his mission, were not out of character.

reply

[–] Nicolai (138) 5 years ago

https://www.quora.com/How-intelligent-is-Thanos-MCU

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

I get that they were going for making him seem smart but the execution was just not there. Or perhaps he was just so smart it drove him insane and to megalomania in which he was unable to accept anything but the reality he had created in his mind. Perhaps I am using "stupid" and "irrationally" too interchangeably, but the point is Thanos was not of sound mind.

reply

[–] Nicolai (138) 5 years ago

Well yes, he is pretty insane. Doubling all resources would do the same thing as killing half the population. Sortoff.. He is smart though

reply

[–] arflexit (2376) 5 years ago

Lol good point, if he had the infinity stones why not just make resources infinite?

reply

[–] movienchill31 (222) 4 years ago

Let's not forget that Dr. Strange already SAW this ending in his 14,000,000 endings. So he already knew it would be Iron Man who saved the world, but Tony would die from it. It's safe to assume that his suit enabled him to handle the stones, but at the same time it was powerful enough and he died because of it. Otherwise he would have died way before the snap.

reply