Thanos' arm was badly burnt after the first snap and completely unusable after the second (much worse than Hulk with one snap). Meanwhile Hulk was still swinging that arm around in the big final battle.
You seem to be fine with him having a crisp arm "for a bit", but then just arbitrarily decide how long that should be. No one else has been shown to fully recover from using all 6 stones to snap, so why is a week/a month/a year too long? If he recovers from the damage partway through the next movie he's in, that still solidifies him as having the most impressive healing factor we've seen.
MCU? previous fights? Thor and hulk are also A LOT underpowered compared to comic versions
But he use the stones to destroy the stones, that pulse of energy is what made his arm fucked up, it was too much, after the first snap he was in better shape than hulk
the dudes who wrote the movie said it is forever, is bullshit, and yes for a bit, it should not last long, because is motherfucking hulkYou seem to be fine with him having a crisp arm "for a bit", but then just arbitrarily decide how long that should be. No one else has been shown to fully recover from using all 6 stones to snap, so why is a week/a month/a year too long? If he recovers from the damage partway through the next movie he's in, that still solidifies him as having the most impressive healing factor we've seen.
So is Thanos... so it works out
He really wasn't. The first snap fucked him up. Watch Infinity War again.But he use the stones to destroy the stones, that pulse of energy is what made his arm fucked up, it was too much, after the first snap he was in better shape than hulk
I have a feeling Winter Blossom did not pay attention at all throughout the MCU if s/he's missing the most basic bitch story telling and backstory about why the characters are the way they are. Like not even getting why Hulk refused to come out during Infinity War. Or dumb shit like why Vision wasn't as powerful in that movie as well.
Like I'm sure if Bruce explained it to a 5 year old, he would still miss it. Don't know why people are even replying him.
Just don't reply to me. Please. If you can help it.
not much, since again, thanos without the stones seemed stronger than thanos with stones.
one may think it was the giant fucking electric bugaloo empowered axe deep into his chest, but sure i guess.He really wasn't. The first snap fucked him up. Watch Infinity War again.
Last edited by Syegfryed; 2021-04-26 at 11:43 PM.
No, that's simply wrong. Presumably Thanos used the Time Stone to heal the chest wound from Stormbreaker (since the wound and damage to the armor is completely gone), but the damage he sustained from doing the snap wasn't reversed. In the final scene of Infinity War he was limping and stumbling, the only damage visible being what the one snap did to him. He doesn't do the second snap to destroy the stones until later and the damage is even more extensive after that, his arm completely withered and unusable.
Meanwhile Hulk is sprinting into battle (after helping to save those trapped under the rubble of the Avengers compound). He might have been more affected by putting on the gauntlet (because unlike Thanos who added the stones one by one, Hulk was taking them all at once), but after one snap he was in FAR better shape than Thanos.
Thanos is canonically stronger and more resilient than Hulk, in the MCU.
This is just wrong, on every stage.It is hulk, the best healing factor in the universe marvel, sure, let him have a crisp army for a bit, but later, especially in Tony funeral, it should be healed already. Hulk was done rly dirty in the Mcu and is nothing like his movie with norton.
Hulk's healing factor isn't firmly established in the MCU. The closest they really get to talking about it, if I recall, is an offhand comment by Banner that he tried to kill himself and "the other guy" spat the bullet out, and that's not necessarily healing, the change could've happened as he pulled the trigger and the bullet might have just rattled around in his mouth.
Also, the movie with Ed Norton is literally the same character, the same way Rhodie is played by Don Cheadle and is the same as the character in the first Iron Man film. Both roles were re-cast. The Ed Norton film is literally the 2nd film in the MCU.
You seem to be confusing stuff from the comics, particularly Earth-616, with the character that exists in Earth-199999. And that's not how Marvel has ever worked, since inventing their multiverse concept. They're separate takes on the same base concept and pretty much every detail could change between universes, particularly power levels.
- - - Updated - - -
The series has consistently presented the damage the Stones inflict on the user being the inviolable price you pay for the power they provide. Same way you can't throw Gamora or Natasha off a cliff to get the Soul Stone and then just snap your fingers and bring them back. The Stones set a price, and the Stones don't allow that price to be shrugged off by anything.
And you can't tell me that a set of Stones that could literally unmake Hulk, cure Banner completely, make Banner never have existed, or anything else you can imagine, don't have the capacity to leave Hulk with permanent damage.
in the movies? maybe, pretty sure i heard an interview saying hulk was stronger, but thanos fought more inteligent, thats why hw won the first fight
in the 2008 movie Bruce jump from a helicopter breaking his bones, in thor ragnarok he also jump from the spacehsip in bifrost breaking his bones, and both times hulk emerged unharmed, so yeah, that is healing factor., hulk dos have the best healing factor in the comics, last i checked, and if they are bringging a weak ass hulk the elast they could do was to bring the healing factor.This is just wrong, on every stage.
Hulk's healing factor isn't firmly established in the MCU. The closest they really get to talking about it, if I recall, is an offhand comment by Banner that he tried to kill himself and "the other guy" spat the bullet out, and that's not necessarily healing, the change could've happened as he pulled the trigger and the bullet might have just rattled around in his mouth.
The ed norton movie had a hulk ten times better than this one who is more like a giant gorila, it was a hulk who got stronger the more he got angrier, it had the sonic clap and the shockwaves by punching the ground, it was beauftiful.Also, the movie with Ed Norton is literally the same character, the same way Rhodie is played by Don Cheadle and is the same as the character in the first Iron Man film. Both roles were re-cast. The Ed Norton film is literally the 2nd film in the MCU.
if you are telling me is the "same" they downgraded the shit out of him.
- - - Updated - - -
he already had the power stone with him
I was always under the impression that the Hulk's will to survive, his rage at any violent action towards him, makes him Hulk out and basically shrug off any potential damage. IE, when Bruce Banner puts a gun in his mouth and pulls the trigger, the Hulk rages out and the bullet does nothing but bounce around in his mouth - not that he shoots himself in the brain and then somehow heals.
Had written these thoughts elsewhere, so not going to retype it all. The show as a whole was really engaging, but had issues. Why? Because despite having 6 episodes of 45 minutes each (shave off 5 minutes for credits), it tried to put too much plot in with not enough time. Throw in even another 2 episodes and pace things out evenly, the series works fine. My biggest complaints were - Bucky's trauma wasn't dealt with properly, John's trauma wasn't explored properly, and Karli's arc was highly annoying. Annoying, you say? Yep, because she deserved more as the antagonist of the series. She more or less just devolves into misguided terrorist by the end of it, regardless of whether Sam dislikes labels or not. And a more nuanced portrayal would've elevated the series to another level. And that last line sums up the plot. Lacking nuance. Also, too many Super Soldiers.
But when you're dealing with 'big ideas' like repatriating millions and post traumatic stress disorder, you NEED more nuance. Doing surface level service to such concepts is what lets the show down. It lacked the balls to fully commit. In that respect, Wandavision dealt with grief/loss - its central themes - far better. Thematically I can see what Falcon and Winter Soldier was trying to do. It asks good questions of how the world treats its heroes, and how even the identity of a hero is dependent on what people visualise a hero as, which generally ties into the racial identities of all hero/god symbols across human history. It's all about identity, and the struggle for it. And the secondary theme could be dealing with being wronged by the very world that asks you to 'save' it. Sam, Bucky, John, Sharon, Enfys Nest are all trying to find their identity and place in the world. And by extension, Sam, Bucky, John, Sharon, Enfys and Isiah have all been wronged. All of them (bar Enfys) have been treated as disposable heroes. Even Zemo has been wronged, though it's a stretch to say he tried to save anyone but his own family. So yeah, there's good thematic elements at play.
I guess is that they'll learn from this. I'm glad they're looking at a Captain America film for Sam's character. That said, it'll be waste unless they can have the same level of emotional heft to his character that Steve had. And I don't care if Bucky's name isn't in the title of the film, he needs to be a main player in the story and not just a weapon. I liked him in the show, but his journey did shrift for the more 'fun' elements of the series, to the point that he sometimes became comic relief. All in all? It's a solid 7/10. I think they did very well by the characters, but the plot struggled. The MCU as a whole hasn't really done political content well. And that's okay. But maybe it needs to play to its strengths, and not overcommit to a theme or plot that it can't fully deliver on. I hope there is a Season 2, but I want more character, less big plot, less super soldiers and more nuance. NUANCE.
Last edited by DingDongKing; 2021-04-27 at 10:39 AM.
I'd like to know that as well, though - I heard the director of the series is up for a season 2, but I don't think the series will get a second season (nor will Wandavision) because they're meant to be mini-series anyway, no?
I wonder what Cap4 will revolve around, think it might be just a little painful to see the lack of Chris Evans in a Cap movie, and what would it even mean for other characters like Bucky. His ("villain") arc more or less ended in Civil War, and I'm not sure if a Cap movie would be the place to explore Bucky's new beginnings as well.
edit: I also agree with poster above in that the show felt a little short, even though overall running time was similar to Wandavision's. And it's not the usual 'ah I wish it was longer' of a good movie/series, but more of a 'I wish the show had dissected the themes portrayed even further'. Sometimes it felt slightly shallow.
Last edited by Illusions; 2021-04-27 at 10:42 AM.