Road To Endgame: 'Avengers: Infinity War' Is A Gargantuan Unravelling Of Marvel's Strengths And Flaws

(Welcome to Road to Endgame, where we revisit the first 22 movies of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and ask, "How did we get here?" In Part One of our two-part look at Avengers: Infinity War: how Thanos and the Infinity Stones rewrite our favourite heroes.)Avengers: Infinity War stormed through the 2018 blockbuster landscape, one-upping the industry-wide shift in tone, scale and narrative priorities Marvel had ushered in over a decade. The film combined eight existing franchises to deliver the first half of a humungous finale; the result was on-screen enormity, matched by an inevitable $2 billion box-office haul. The sequel, Avengers: Endgame, is sure to surpass it.The Marvel Cinematic Universe has its roots in military propaganda; the U.S. Department of Defense subsidized (and thus, had screenplay approval over) Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Captain Marvel. And though Avengers: Infinity War didn't need to run its script by the Pentagon (as far as we know), it falls back on the series' paradoxical framing of heroism, as a result of its military-funded predecessors. However, this unprecedented crossover event could not have succeeded, or even existed, without a decade of narrative investment. The film takes full advantage of this — albeit to mixed results.For better or worse, Avengers: Infinity War is a culmination of everything the Marvel Cinematic Universe stands for.

The undoing of developments in prior films begins in the very first scene. The Asgardian refugees — whom Thor (Chris Hemsworth) had saved by destroying his own kingdom in Thor: Ragnarok — are attacked, as is the fate of many refugee ship in the real world. Fun as the film may be in parts, it's not a bright and happy story.The massacre of his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston), his friend Heimdall (Idris Elba) and half the remaining Asgardians sends Thor tumbling toward regress. His eye-patch was no doubt a cool new look, and one that aligned him with his father's mythical wisdom, but replacing it with a mechanical eye serves a dual purpose. It marks Thor as a victim of Thanos — Gamora (Zoe Saldana), Nebula (Karen Gillan) and Thanos' other children have similar robotic distinctions — and it represents a return to the reckless, pre-Ragnarok Thor, as does acquiring a new hammer.Thor had spent his last five appearances outgrowing his arrogant, vengeful warmongering. Here, he's forced to return to that juvenile state. By the end of the film, he's so hellbent on not just killing Thanos, but looking him in the eye and making him suffer — a revenge mission, rather than an act of universe-saving altruism — that the few seconds between wounding Thanos and potentially killing him are enough to turn the tide.Rather than doing the deed, Thor stops to gloat, and taunts the Mad Titan. During this interval, Thanos snaps his fingers and wipes out half the universe. Thor's moment of catharsis leads to catastrophe.

Avengers: Infinity War is a structural oddity. In the process of balancing dozens of characters, some, like Steve Rogers/Captain America, get the short end of the stick. Rogers doesn't show up until 40 minutes in, and there's little clarity as to what he, the Falcon (Anthony Mackie) and Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) have even been doing these last few years. We're yet to see any real emotional fallout from Captain America: Civil War, and there's a good half hour of the film during which Rogers & co. don't re-appear at all.And yet, Rogers' presence here is thematically vital — especially to Thanos, despite the two barely colliding. While discussing whether or not The Vision should sacrifice himself, Rogers vocalizes the team's (and thus, the film's) mission statement, even in the face of extinction: "We don't trade lives."This uncompromising through-line has, thus far, been the Avengers' core. But it's a belief they're finally forced to go back on thanks to Thanos, that too in ways that don't afford them an equivalent payoff. They do finally trade lives, but they lose regardless. In fact, Thanos' readiness to trade lives, in contrast to the Avengers', is what makes him their perfect foil. Though Captain America sticking to his guns is a source of little conflict; the Avengers eventually trading lives is something he never challenges, nor something that challenges him, since these decisions are made when he isn't around. One wonders what might have been, had Rogers and Thanos been allowed to exchange words and perspectives, rather than punches.Thanos' plan involves wiping out half of all life (all sentient life, one assumes), thus enacting a Neo-Malthusian population control, taken to the extreme. To do this, Thanos must first sacrifice that which he loves most — his daughter Gamora — in order to attain the Soul Stone. "A soul for a soul," he's told by the Stone's keepr (a returning Red Skull), though the soul Thanos sacrifices here is implicitly his own.(This is also the only time in the series other than Doctor Strange where an Infinity Stones feels thematically tied to character.)Whether or not Thanos' scheme will technically work (there are numerous logistical arguments against it; I would argue it doesn't matter), his willingness to detach himself from empathy is what separates him from the Avengers. Where Ultron had no empathy to begin with, Thanos actively battles his more humane impulses, in order to act in a manner he calls heroic.He forces the Avengers to do the same.Like Killmonger before him, the abstract extremes of Thanos are a perfect fit for the story. Though there's an unevenness to his philosophy that doesn't quite work in the context of his literal actions. He believes in achieving universal balance at a 50/50 rate, but who he kills, and when, and why, don't seem to align. For instance, he murders 300 dwarves on Nidavellir and leaves only Eitri (Peter Dinklage), which raises questions about his dedication to his own objective. The film never dramatizes or even mentions this contradiction.Though, one might argue that 300 is a mere statistical glitch in the grand scheme of his plan; a "necessary" cruelty. As benevolent as Thanos thinks he is, he cuts off Eitri's hands to ensure no other Infinity Gauntlets are made, evoking the widely-told myth about Mughal ruler Shah Jahan who, after construction of the Taj Mahal in the 1600s, was said to have amputated the hands of 20,000 labourers who built it. (The reality was likely a simple understanding that they wouldn't work for other emperors, but the barbarous folktale makes for a more sensational, more egomaniacal story).In fleshing out Thanos' methods, the film has ample opportunity to use the limitless visual potential of the Infinity Stones, but it often flubs this as well. The abilities and limitations of each Stone are ill-defined, as is which one is being used in a given moment (unless you like to pause the film and make colour-coded charts). This leads to confused action beats where the drama is unclear.When Thanos is first attacked by the Guardians, he dices Drax (Dave Bautista) and mangles Mantis (Pom Klementieff), reducing them to dozens of pieces. These moments seem horrifying; for the first time in the series, we witness heroes be physically butchered! Though rather than clarifying the effects of the Reality Stone or how Thanos choses to wield it, the film leaves us to discover that Drax and Mantis are safe and sound, but not until after major story beats involving Quill and GamoraIn a given scene, there's little delineating who Thanos would or would not kill using these lethal, all-powerful Stones. Certain characters understandably must be kept alive for the climax, but the dramatic stakes in the interim lack a sense of precision for a villain so otherwise precise.  That said, from the moment Thanos is introduced, he comes off as formidable. He goes toe-to-toe with the Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) in an exchange of punches — a grounded, un-fantastical introduction that helps establish Thanos' physical might — and he defeats the Hulk with ease. This sparks Bruce Banner's own character regression wherein, after finally accepting the Hulk in Thor: Ragnarok, he can no longer summon his big green friend.Though once Banner arrives on Earth, his scenes whizz by in a manner that prevents any serious reflection. The downside to Thanos existing to undo character arcs is that sometimes, the drama feels clunkily and artificially delayed. Banner's arc, for instance, is left incomplete. There's little payoff to him being unable to summon the Hulk beyond comedy, and he barely exchanges two words with Natasha Romanoff, the woman he was in love with when he departed Earth in Avengers: Age of Ultron.When the Hulk arrived in New York in The Avengers, it was so his story could culminate through action. When he and the others arrive in Wakanda in Avengers: Infinity War, most of their stories are in stasis, and they remain this way throughout the final battle.