There are two instances within this decade, that I can recall, which pertain to predictability and emotional investment that have really stood out to me (not including Infinity War). The first I’ll refer to is Girl on The Train, the second being in Gravity (Gravity is my personal favorite movie, the former is…..not.)
For The Girl on The Train, I won’t get into the nitty gritty of the plot (partially because I barely remember it). I will say that I figured out the twist of the movie before the twist was actually revealed.
I’m not of the opinion that predicting a twist is the end-all-be-all for a mystery in any capacity. If I’m invested enough I’ll still care because I want to see if and how the characters figure it out.
But my response to Girl wasn’t one of investment in the characters. I didn’t say to myself “oh man Emily Blunt, are you gonna figure it out before it’s too late?”
My response was “please end this movie and get me the hell out of here.”
The Gravity moment is the Aningaaq scene; desperately looking for help via radio on the adrift Soyuz, she comes across an Eskimo named Aningaaq. They don’t speak the same language, but she manages to find comfort in speaking her mind with him as she confronts the (perceived) certainty of her death.
As she hears a baby cry, she reflects on the death of her own child, saying “I used to sing to my baby.
I hope I see her soon.”
She then lowers the oxygen levels so she can drift off slowly into death.
Even putting aside the set piece the marketing had advertised which hadn’t happened yet, I had an implicit understanding that the movie was not going to end in this way. Such understanding didn’t come out in cynicism, some sort of “well, she’s not going to die, so why should I care” mindset. It instead came out as “this can’t be happening. What are you doing? It can’t end like this.”
My reaction manifested itself pertaining to the emotional low that Stone was in and the need for her to make it out of this.
When I watch this movie today, as I have many times, it’s probably my favorite scene during the movie and I’ve cried many times watching it. My response isn’t “oh she’s going to make it out of this low and thus the low doesn’t matter”; it is the presence of the low that makes overcoming it all the more important.
These responses are not perfectly analogous to those felt by some during Infinity War; the point I’m trying to make is that implicit understanding of conflict-resolution in blockbusters doesn’t in and of itself negate emotional investment, while I also completely understand why people don’t care.
I’m just making the case for the “caring.”
Expectations in Storytelling
This piece is not going to change any minds for anyone who is emotionally indifferent to the ending of Infinity War in the sense it’s going to make you emotionally invest in it. I’m making a case for why emotional investment despite the knowledge of them coming back is valid.
“Why does the ending matter? Do you really think Black Panther is gonna stay dead after he started his 1.3 billion dollar franchise? You can’t fool me, Marvel!”
This is, without question, the single most repeated criticism of Infinity War last year. The ending is shitty and manipulative because they’re going to come back, there’s no “illusion of stakes” thanks to the Spider-Man: Far From Home trailer, and so on. Here are some articles reflecting such criticisms:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/avengers-infinity-war-ending-is-dumb_n_5ae201e5e4b04aa23f20d4a5
These mentalities bring about all sorts of different supposed issues. Some treat Infinity War as something disposable in the sense that the movie solely exists to set up Endgame. Others treat the ending of Infinity War as a priority in the sense that its only narrative significance resides in permanence, making Endgame little more than Marvel’s cowardly fine print.
My issue with both mindsets is that, in both cases, the narrative being told between the two films is being ignored.
For one, conflict is not irrelevant because of the presumption or understanding of resolution. I’ve been going through Star Trek: Deep Space 9 recently and I tried applying the “why does the conflict matter, we know it’s going to be resolved” mentality to almost every episode and in every single case it “worked.”
“Why does it matter that Quark and Odo crash landed on a planet? We know they’re gonna make it back to Deep Space 9. Why does it matter that Chief O’Brien is deemed guilty for a crime he didn’t commit? We know he’s going to make it back to Deep Space 9.”
And so on. But going further, I’m of the opinion that two of the previously mentioned mindsets (“Infinity War is bad because it’s just set-up” and “Infinity War is a ballsy ending that is ruined by the fact that it’s going to be ‘slithered out of’”), while I disagree with them, shed light on what these two stories at least strive to accomplish on a basic level, as both films utilize current expectations for their narratives.
Infinity War utilizes the “group” expectation (created by superhero films). Endgame is utilizing the “swan song” expectation (not created by superhero films but recently embraced by them through The Dark Knight Rises and Logan).
When it comes to expectation, I’m not against them for superhero movies anymore than I am against the expectation of Sherlock Holmes solving a mystery, or Laurie Strode facing off against Michael Myers. They exist. They’re there. And so an inherent dismissal of the basic expectations embraced by the writers and directors of Infinity War and Endgame makes no sense to me. I didn’t hear anyone who saw Logan saying none of it mattered because we knew it was Hugh Jackman’s last movie as the character and thus he was going to save the day in some redemptive way or another.
The presence of further MCU films after Endgame doesn’t negate any of this; just because I know Peter Parker is coming back and I know that this is Chris Evans’ last bout as Captain America doesn’t mean I’d simply be content with Chris Evans showing up before Far From Home and saying “hey guys, my contract was up so I won’t be playing Cap anymore, but don’t worry, we kicked Thanos’ ass, undid the snap, and that’s why Peter’s okay! Enjoy Spider-Man” in place of an actual movie.
I’m here to see them stick the landing.
Fulfilling Expectations Through Narrative
Expectations are, of course, not enough. Really, to say they’re “not enough” doesn’t even begin to establish how insufficient they are. It’s not even fair to call them a recipe; that would be the narrative.
As many have pointed out and the writers/directors themselves have attested to, Infinity War fulfills its culmination expectation by centering the narrative on Thanos, while highlighting a decade’s worth of characters. It’s this focus that gives the singular nature of each movie some sense of meaning; as opposed to most Part 1/Part 2 blockbusters (or at least Deathly Hallows, the only one I particularly care about), the existence of the two parts, at least thus far with Infinity War, doesn’t feel like the filmmakers saying “alright, we’ve done as much plot as we can for one movie, you’ll have to wait until next time for the rest.” Despite the obvious set-up for the conflict of Endgame (because, yes, there’s no way the characters are going to stay dead), there is a sense of conclusion to the this particular story. It’s a cliffhanger, but there’s no fade to white after Thanos’ snap with a “To be continued………” title card.
Thanos’ goal was completed. The culmination failed. Even the vast majority of the MCU roster couldn’t stop him. He won.
Allowing a sense of conclusion would appear to fall back on viewing Endgame as cowardly fine print, but it is this relative conclusion that opens up an opportunity for contrast and symmetry between the two halves. Infinity War is Thanos’ movie, Thanos’ snap; Endgame belongs to the Avengers. Thanos wins in Infinity War, placing the Avengers in a need for redemption in Endgame.
If you’re going to have two halves, they need to be individual, and they need duality. That Infinity War is telling its own story, which correlates with a second half is, frankly, what we should want from a two-parter.
Of course, in order for this to mean anything, there has to be a dramatic meaning in Infinity War and a thread between the two films that is notably present within Infinity War.
This is the most important element. It’s what gives Infinity War it’s singular nature while dramatically connecting it to its successor.
The initial dramatic meaning for the ending is simple; the effectiveness is in seeing the characters respond to what’s happening around them. The different dynamics between particular characters’ reactions is expressed through their relative emotions, and seeing them thrust into this situation which will motivate their later actions. This is powerful.
There’s also the correlation between the two films. This can be found in Doctor Strange, Tony, and the latter’s relationship with Steve Rogers, and I’ll establish later that the dramatic significance of the scene (what does it mean for the characters) is directly related to the narrative and understanding of conflict in the second film. I’m establishing here that, once more, Infinity War’s ending is not something to be slithered out of. The ending maintains significance to the characters because of Endgame.
Doctor Strange’s Objective Assertion and Subjective Reflection
We’ll get Doctor Strange out of the way first. His work is the most obvious, but I’m bringing it up to appropriately set up the discussion for Tony.
There are four key scenes in Infinity War that correlate with the dramatic set up for Endgame. They are;
A. His confrontation with Tony before they go to Titan, where he asserts that if it comes down to it that he’ll let Stark and Parker die when it comes to the fate of the time stone and universe.
B. Looking in the future and learning of the 14,000,604 ways they lose and the 1 way they win.
C. Specifically giving up the time stone to save Tony from Thanos.
B. The last words before his death, where he tells Tony “there was no other way.”
The first scene is an objective assertion of a theoretical scenario. “If this has to happen, I will do this.” It’s in a tense scene with Tony, at a point in the film where they’re not exactly buddy-buddy.
It’s easy to say you’ll let someone die to save the universe when you think they’re being an arrogant dick. It’s less easy when you look into the future and know that death awaits him.
(And yes, this is under the presupposition that Tony and/or Cap are going to die in Endgame)
It’s what makes Strange’s horror as he gives up the time stone and his last words to Tony all the more effective, because in the latter scenario he’s not cowardly falling back on the promise he made to Tony; he’s overcoming his newfound friendship with (and respect for) Stark and putting him on a path that’s going to lead him to death.
Rather than contrasting Infinity War’s theme of people giving up loved ones for the sake of the universe, the scene affirms it.
This is what gives the final line of the movie the dramatic relevance to Endgame. When he says “there was no other way” he’s not speaking of the current horror with genocide, he’s speaking of a horror that awaits.
(So, clearly, the filmmakers must have something in mind dramatically if they’re telegraphing the fact that the genocide will be undone as much as they did when they literally had one of the characters tell us it’s going to be undone)
Tony’s Personal Wants and the Greater Good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEIexwwiKKU&t=4s
https://youtu.be/dFomwoVngOI?t=109
Infinity War functions, among many things, as a feature length expansion of the seed planted in the opening scene of Iron Man. The former opens with Tony embracing his personal wants, drinking some liquor and reminiscing about his sexual escapades. It concludes with him being surrounded by death and violence, bringing him up close and personal with the violence he’s been profiting from. This plants the seed for his use of technology to fight all this, and his giving up of personal wants for a greater good.
Infinity War establishes a similar dichotomy, but in a manner that shows growth. But a stunted growth. It’s not dissimilar to Tony’s justification of why he’s allowed to embrace his hedonism at the beginning; “I’m making technology for the good guys, therefore I can embrace my wants.”
It’s a growth that reflects a desire to deny the need for the growth. His denial of hedonistic desires like drinking and sleeping around with maxim models has been replaced with doing right by Pepper, wanting to start a family, and so on.
“I’ve saved the world a bunch of times, my technology is as good as it’ll ever be, and my personal want is more mature than it was before, therefore I can embrace my wants.”
Infinity War working as a feature length extension of the opening scene of Iron Man goes further. It’s not just Tony that’s evolved; it’s the scope of the cinematic universe itself. We’ve gone from the first scene of the cinematic universe to the culmination itself. It’s part of why Tony feels content with being able to settle down with Pepper; it’s not just his technology that’s evolved drastically, it’s the presence of other heroes.
And despite all this, they still lose this battle.
Tony’s the best man he can be, his technology is the best he can be, and he still ends up where he was when he started this journey.
It’s why he’s in denial throughout his final scene on Titan.
“Steady Quill.”
“You’re alright.”
It’s his way of saying “This can’t be happening.
I’m the best me I can be, my technology is the best it can be.
This can’t be happening.”
It could be argued that this is all fine and dandy, but ending Infinity War as a singular story without a Part 2 would have been better because it would have been a tragic reversal. Having him lose permanently in this scene would have only complimented the set-up established by the Iron Man scene. This is a fine thing to argue, but, as I will establish, I don’t think it negates what is being accomplished dramatically with the set-up of the part 2, because with that context in mind.
The Civil War Rages On
This “I can still have what I want and do the right thing” mindset of Tony’s only becomes more pronounced when you compare him with his Civil War counterpart.
Both he and Cap end their first movies with a presumed sacrificial act. They both survive this act, but between the two of them, only one of them gave up something. Tony started his relationship with Pepper, Steve had to say good-bye to a relationship with Peggy. The absoluteness of this sacrifice, that he actually gave something up (something Tony has yet to do for the entire MCU) is what serves as the foundation for their differences. Steve is an absolute throughout the MCU; his moral foundation and ideals remain consistent.
Tony, on the other hand, doesn’t take time to think, he just reacts. His stance in the six years between Iron Man 2 and Civil War has shifted from one end of a spectrum to another. It’s indicative of how he feels about everything;
“A bad thing happened, I must do whatever my emotions tell me to do in this moment.”
I think this lack of an absolute sacrifice on Stark’s part is what influences this. Because he’s never had to give something up the way Steve has, he’s always trying to run from that possible loss. Every time something bad happens, he needs to find the quickest, easiest, and “best” way to stop the bad thing because there’s always the possibility of him actually having to give up something. Conversely, the presence of an absolute sacrifice on Cap’s part matured him. He already gave something up, so he’s not motivated by the fear of having to give it up again; he’s only motivated by doing the right thing.
This is what makes the final battle in Civil War so effective thematically. Tony’s all about satisfying his current lust for revenge, whereas Cap is trying to protect his innocent friend. Worth noting is that Cap doesn’t let his desire to protect his friend evolve into a lust for revenge; he’s only trying to cripple Tony’s suit so he can’t kill Bucky. He’s not angry at Tony. He’s sympathetic, and still wants to do the right thing here. It’s not bias, it’s being just.
The dramatic significance of this is that Endgame will be able to use the relationship between the two men as a means of resolving Tony’s desire to have his cake and eat it too. It can do this in one of three ways:
1. The two make amends with Cap sacrificing himself and Tony appreciating the sacrifice by giving up a life as Iron Man and spending his life with Pepper, acknowledging the life Cap gave up and doing right by Pepper.
2. Cap sacrifices himself and Tony acknowledges that he’s been a sacrificial character the whole time and, also, sacrifices himself. This is another means of acknowledging the man Cap was the whole time.
3. Tony sacrifices himself so that Cap can live the life he never had the chance to. (This can be either through the time stone ending that was rumored last year to reconcile with Peggy or starting a relationship with Sharon Carter).
Tony’s Choice
I’ve heard it argued that Tony’s death has been telegraphed too hard for him to actually die in Endgame. Thanos almost killing him in Infinity War, him waiting to die in midst of space in the trailer, etc.
If Tony dies, what I think this telegraphing means is that death is not something that is going to just happen to Tony.
He’s not going to be killed, he’s not going to just die because he ran out of food and water.
It’s going to be a choice he has to make.
He’s going to have to actively make the choice to give up his life.
It’s gonna be him, or Cap.
What All This Means
So with all this in mind, what does the ending of Infinity War accomplish dramatically?
It’s a call to arms.
Tony is watching his friends and his protege die; he’s watching his worst fears brought to life. And as he watches this, he’s reminded of the horror that awaits him.
It’s the universes way of telling him to “put up or shut up.”
He still has a conflict and choice that await him. Whether it’s Cap or Tony that dies, at least one of them is going to die, and it’s a choice these characters have to make, and nothing, not the Far From Home trailer, not Chadwick Boseman’s contract with Marvel, nor Scott Derrickson directing Doctor Strange 2 can do a thing to take away from that.
They can’t answer the question of how the characters are going to get out of this.
Only Endgame can.
And I can’t wait to see how it answers them.
devilsadvocritic 