I wish that the writers of Infinity War had shifted the timeline of the moral crisis with Vision somewhat.

I think that introducing the idea that Wanda could destroy the Mind Stone and then have her refuse the option (even just as an emotional reflex) primed some of the audience against the decision to go to Wakanda. While I have talked extensively on the importance of this decision and why some extra consideration should be made, it’s always going to be really hard to hear the stakes are ‘half of all life’ and have sympathy for people debating the value of a single one.

Instead, I wish the writers had introduced the idea of extracting the Mind Stone to hide it first. Bruce could mention that he and Tony’s research in Age of Ultron showed no energy on Earth could destroy it; Steve could mention Wakanda having the tech to extract it.

Then, at Wakanda while Shuri is investigating, have Vision say exactly what he originally said in IW: he’s done some analyzing and figured out the type of energy Wanda’s power is could destroy the Stone.

Now the decision to destroy Vision stands on equal footing to the possibility of saving him. Now we have time to focus a bit on the Wakandans feelings (who, in the original movie do clearly support the idea of trying to save Vision but seem more passive in the decision), to more clearly establish they are on board with saving him.

It also would have strengthened the parallel between Thanos’ experience with his people and the Avengers with Vision. On Titan, the option to kill half of everyone wouldn’t have come before the various solutions they would have attempted to fix overpopulation. That would have been introduced later, only to be dismissed while prior solutions were still attempted.

The movie can continue exactly as before, but I think the audience would have had more time to process the choices, to sympathize and engage, instead of reflexively objecting to it.

orderchaoslove:

Can someone please clarify for me; at the beginning of Infinity War are Vision and Wanda staying at an apartment or a motel?? Because I thought it was an apartment but Sam mentions that they’ve been staying at motels. I personally thought Wanda was living apart from the other fugitives for some reason, or are Vision and Wanda staying at motels when they see each other???

I need answers, or at the very least, other people’s headcanons. Help me out?

It’s very likely a hotel. I remarked on it here that you can see luggage at the foot of the bed, a service cart in the bottom left, a service card and glass in front of the left window. The decor is very hotel like what with the generic landscape, the bland patterned wallpaper, the generic 90s lampshades, the small dining table in the middle of the “bedroom”.

Plus, the set designers would have gone nuts for the opportunity to flesh out a superhero love nest–remember how detailed Cap’s office in Civil War was? Most of the detail you can’t even see in the movie, but it’s loaded with little things. But they chose a very generic, impersonal look.

We don’t trade lives

elcorhamletlive:

feliciates:

sebstanmoviesandtv:

feliciates:

Jesus.

Just like people willfully misinterpreted Cap’s
edict that “Every time someone tries to WIN a war before it starts,
innocent people die” as being the same as ‘people trying to STOP a war
before it starts’ now everyone is doing the same thing with “We don’t trade lives.”

That doesn’t mean
people never die fighting evil. It doesn’t mean we don’t sacrifice
ourselves for the greater good. It means we don’t let one of our
teammates give up their life until we’ve exhausted all other options.

Bruce even spelled it out when Vision tried to make a parallel with Steve’s sacrifice. He points out that Steve didn’t have a CHOICE at that point in time.

Cap wanted to make sure before they killed the person Wanda loved that they exhausted all other options. What a monster and hypocrite that makes him!

I’m sure if Steve had let Vision die there in Scotland, now everyone would be pointing out that he didn’t even try, that Shuri or Bruce could have helped.

SIGH.

I sit here dumbfounded. I honestly do not understand people who vilify Steve. He’s not a perfect man but he’s a good one and he tries so hard to do what’s right. Maybe those who are so damn critical of him should step back and think about all he’s been through and how little time he’s had to process everything. I love him so much and I just…I cannot stand the leaps and bounds people make to try and put marks against his character. ffs

I’m straight up shocked by how people apparently really thought no one would bat an eye at the idea of sacrificing someone. Like… Were you all really sitting in the theaters thinking a group of heroes in a Disney movie would just go “oh yeah kill yourself vision, and please do it fast so it doesn’t inconvenience us further, thanks”? Like, what the actual fuck. Steve isn’t even the only one who objects to killing Vision – if you’re gonna blame him for that you need to blame Bruce, Natasha, and even T’Challa and Shuri. Or you can just accept that good people don’t jump at the opportunity of letting an innocent person die.

Also, Vision is making a false comparison, not just because of the
third option Steve didn’t have, but because Vision isn’t sacrificing
HIMSELF, he’s asking Wanda to sacrifice him. It’s more like if Steve
found out there’s a way to deactivate all those bombs, but he had to
blow up the building Peggy was in.

The point of the dilemma about Vision’s life was not to ultimately answer “Yes, turns out, one life IS worth trillions, who knew?”

The point is to show us how that decision changes when there’s a third option.

They don’t want to murder an innocent person because he happens to exist in the wrong way. They don’t want to make another innocent person murder him. And they don’t have to! They can extract the Mind Stone, have Wanda destroy it, and be True Heroes All Along. They can be noble, heroic, and be satisfied they did the morally correct thing.

You know, like Thanos’ people tried to do.

And that’s the point. The parallel between two situations in taking a third way out that means not having to commit a terrible act until it’s too late.

But there’s a catch here–Thanos has the power of inevitability on his side. He has the Time Stone. It wouldn’t have mattered if Wanda had or hadn’t. Whether Wanda did it earlier or later.

And that’s the thing, Thanos’ plan is short sighted. People will continue to populate, resources will continue to dwindle. That’s inevitable too.

So now or later, here or there, “destiny arrives”. Thanos is only delaying it—and he plays a cold numbers game to do so.

What separates him from the heroes isn’t that heroes aren’t willing to. Quill and Wanda both try. It’s that they’re willing to try something else first. Because destiny is always going to arrive one way or another—but they’re going to fight for something better.

Listen, I’m gonna talk about how Vision is a person and how much I Do Not Get how people have trouble accepting this.

This is a character who has like four separate scenes in Age of Ultron alone dedicated to establishing his personhood. The Avengers Tower scene to establish that the hammer really does judge worthiness, there’s Scarlet Witch reading him to establish his mind is definitely like a human being, we have Vision declaring himself an individual, we have Vision lifting the hammer and establishing Mjolnir has judged him a worthy person.

“BUT WAIT THERE’S THAT THING ABOUT HOW HE’S BASICALLY AN ELEVATOR, BASICALLY”

NO. You have bad narrative comprehension! Your English teacher failed you! Putting aside that Thor laughs dismissively at those comments, there is no point to Vision lifting Mjolnir if it has no meaning!

This is like watching Titanic and going “hey, but Rose DID just let Jack go! What the heck movie, she just said she wouldn’t!” Like, yeah, maybe I get if you completely missed everything related to character, narrative, or thematic resonance, that’s how you can interpret it… but for everyone else, Vision is worthy because he’s worthy.

Is it just a matter of looking at the smallest, most passing view of a character and making a decision based solely on that? Is this like watching Civil War and going “Hey, that Captain America guy isn’t pro-government anymore! But he’s called Captain America and that sounds pro-government to me! What the heck!” and having missed the last two movies that are explicitly about him defying government authority? So, like just looking at Vision and going “oh, android” and deciding that’s it, that’s the character, no further thinking needed.

And, hey, maybe Age of Ultron didn’t convince you. He’s too perfect, and he sounds just like JARVIS, so maybe he’s just following a set of protocols! “Okay,” say the writers, “How about a movie where he gets caught up in his emotions, makes mistakes, has regrets, and changes? That’s what real people do!”

“NO.” you say. “HE’S GOT LIKE PURPLE CIRCUITRY STUFF ON HIS FACE AND IT DOESN’T COUNT.”

“Really? Ok. Well, THIS movie is about how Vision starts off by deciding he doesn’t want to be loyal to any specific team, but the person he loves, thus defying any semblance of protocol loyalty to Tony. Only to make the choice to let his own actualized life be taken by the woman he loves to save trillions. Tragically being destroyed to do what he was created for (to protect life), by who he wanted to live for (his love, Wanda).”

And at this point I can’t even pretend to get into the head of someone who thinks this isn’t enough. Is it like a shipping thing? Is making Vision just a robot like the Wanda/Vision equivalent of making Pepper Potts an abusive shrew so Tony can hook up with whoever? Is it because he wielded Mjolnir, and some people want that big ‘Oooo’ moment to count for their fave instead? Like we have three different movies that are really damaged narratively by refusing to accept Vision as a person. Why even watch these movies? Why even consume any kind of speculative fiction if you only want to accept stuff specifically within your sphere of existence?

I Don’t Get It.

But, it doesn’t really matter. The writers, directors, crew, actors, and everyone else with a say in it make the decisions about this, and they decided to tell a story of a God of Thunder who finds him worthy to defend Earth. Of a war hero who would sacrifice his life to defend him. Of a hardened ex-Russian spy who is deeply struck by his death. Of a woman who loves him till the moment she dies.

And if you insist on believing that this stuff doesn’t count, that Vision’s personhood doesn’t qualify or matter to the narrative, well, that’s your choice. But I gotta say–you’re really missing out.

In Age of Ultron, Wanda’s arc was about doing something wrong when she thinks it’s for something right.

In Civil War, Wanda’s arc was about doing something right, and still having it go wrong.

In Infinity War, Wanda’s arc is about having to do something wrong, when doing it is the right thing.

magistrate-of-mediocrity:

those-celestial-bodies:

Okay, quick theory.

The writers have said that those dead are going to stay dead. I think probably they’re trying to to word things carefully so that what they really mean is: “Characters who are ACTUALLY dead at the end will stay dead”, and we’ll learn that the dusted Avengers are still alive, so they were never technically lying. But it did get me thinking.

So if they do really mean the dusted Avengers are for sure dead and will stay dead, while also accepting there’s no possible way they are permanently killing off Spidey, Black Panther, and Strange there’s really only one solution I can think of:

What if, in an alternate universe, the Avengers that got turned to ash in our reality are the ones that survived, and those that lived got turned to ash?

And, ultimately, the way to “fix” what happened is to merge the two realities? That would mean the “original” Avengers we knew are dead and stay dead, but we still have these characters going forward.

But that leaves Vision in limbo.

It does; Vision’s fate isn’t going to end up falling under the same umbrella. If we’re going with the parallel reality, then he’s dead in both, since Thanos would have needed the Mind Stone (and the writers will think it’s cheap to have him conveniently never killed).

Maybe more importantly, so is Shuri (assuming she’s alive in ours)*, Tony, and Bruce–the people who have the capability to fix him. So if Vision’s fate is to get fixed by them or a combination thereof, it’s going to happen in the main universe–so if the rumors of a 5 year time skip are true, it means that they haven’t seen each other in that time.

There’s also the possibility that Vision consciousness is in the Mind Stone, but that seems less likely if we are dealing with a scenario where there are two Mind Stones, and so, two Visions. Or maybe not. Get it, Wanda.

* Actually that’s an interesting plot thread–what if Shuri and Bruce (and maybe Tony too) are necessary to rebuild Vision? So if Shuri did get dusted in the main universe, it makes it impossible to rebuild him until the two are merged. They were, after all, very careful to remind the audience that Bruce also had a hand in Vision’s creation. Therefore, just as Vision’s death represents the death/division of half the universe, his resurrection would represent the life/unification of them both.

Okay, quick theory.

The writers have said that those dead are going to stay dead. I think probably they’re trying to to word things carefully so that what they really mean is: “Characters who are ACTUALLY dead at the end will stay dead”, and we’ll learn that the dusted Avengers are still alive, so they were never technically lying. But it did get me thinking.

So if they do really mean the dusted Avengers are for sure dead and will stay dead, while also accepting there’s no possible way they are permanently killing off Spidey, Black Panther, and Strange there’s really only one solution I can think of:

What if, in an alternate universe, the Avengers that got turned to ash in our reality are the ones that survived, and those that lived got turned to ash?

And, ultimately, the way to “fix” what happened is to merge the two realities? That would mean the “original” Avengers we knew are dead and stay dead, but we still have these characters going forward.

When I saw that ending,one of my theories was that Thanos would have created another reality (like Wanda does on the comics) and on it Wanda would have the babies. By beaking the reality, she would lose them. Basically House of M except it would not be Wanda’s doing.

@anon
So what are your theories for avengers 4 and how Wanda will play out in it?

Anons, these questions are related so I’m tying them together.

Yes, I’ve had that exact thought! I think we have two points that support that:

I don’t believe the dusted Avengers are going to just stay gone until the movie’s end.

Parallel universes have been brought up in Doctor Strange, and he’s one of the dusted Avengers.
On the flip side, I’m pretty sure the writers have specifically said ‘no alternate universes’, but I can’t find the interview.

Like I said here, if they want to bring in Tommy and Billy, now is basically their one shot.

Okay,
so I’m well aware I’m viewing this through the lens of what I want to
see. My theories are coming back to her being important, but that could
easily be projection. And we know so little about it, all of our
theories are basically just us soft writing the script from whole cloth
(or scraps of cloth anyway).

BUT! If we’re going to be theorizing, I say let’s shamelessly tailor that script. What else do we have to do?

So, what could alternate universe Wanda with babies include?

Amnesia. If they’re looking to replicate Diassambled/HoM, a Wanda who
doesn’t remember her history is probably the closest we’ll get to a
Wanda who is unable to differentiate realities.
In the comics, the
Stones don’t work outside of their home universe. Her power was
connected to the Mind Stone. She may be now be powerless.
Or so we
think. One of the things the original twins were meant to represent was a
Wanda’s powers grown to unprecedented levels. Perhaps
her power lies with her children.
This could still mean Wanda loses her regular powers–thus prepping her for an apprenticeship to Doctor Strange.
If Wanda has to lose her kids, then I suspect the writers will want
Wanda being the key to connecting the universe so that she has agency in
this loss. Sacrificing what she loves most (again).
Post-credits stinger of a kid who’s referred to as “Billy” in the last second.
We just got confirmation A4 is not called Infinity Gauntlet. Could it
be Disassembled? I’ve heard that tossed around for a long time, but with
the end of IW it takes on a new meaning, with many of the Avengers
being literally disassembled.

I have a theory (that I concocted because I just saw infinity war and my soul is decimated and I really really want Vision and Wanda to have their happy ending) and maybe I could get some help on this? So we know there was a casting call for baby twins in avengers 4. Depending on the timeline between IW and 4, does this mean Wanda would have been/will be pregnant in either movie? Maybe just hopeful guessing but I mean maybe?

Ngl, I’ve been rubbing my hands over that idea muttering “my precious, my precious” since I saw that casting call, and now especially with IW ending. Okay, points in favor:

There was a casting call for twins.
There are somewhat credible rumors that a 16-year-old has been cast as Cassie Lang, specifically for Avengers 4. That’s 5-6 years older than the 10-year-old who played her in Ant-Man. Since Mar’Vell will be joining the MCU in Captain Marvel, and Hawkeye is going to have some solo adventures in Avengers 4 (Kate?) we may very well be primed for the Young Avengers.
And if we are primed for them, this is pretty much their only chance to bring in Tommy and Billy with anything close to resembling their comic book heritage.

Counterpoints:

The casting call was only for two days and went out very shortly before the role was needed and for a pretty small pay rate, and for young actors twins are often cast so that they can film around labor law constraints. This implies this is a very small role, which if Wanda’s got babies that’s going to be majorly important to her arc.
The casting call was for 2-year-olds, not 5-year-olds. If we’re talking about a time skip, the years don’t add up.
They could just bring in Wiccan and Speed with no connection to Wanda and/or Vision.

But those counterpoints are dependent on the idea the casting call was the only actors being cast for the twins. But realistically, they would had their casting director find suitable actors–I’ll point out we had no idea who the actress for young Gamora was until about a month before the movie, and that’s because she told us herself. So we wouldn’t realistically be clued into the Minimoffs until we got a trailer for them.

But–be careful what we wish for. The point in bringing Billy and Tommy in is so we can have Wiccan and Speed, and we can’t have them without the age up. Which means if we get the boys, then we’re going to lose the boys too. Poor Wanda…