hopscotchee: scarlett johansson score: 66.5 rating: PG-13 time: 181 minutes
obviously, obviously, how can you watch avengers: infinity war and just skip over avengers: endgame?? you can't - that's crazy and doesn't make sense (not to mention super sad). you should really treat this as a two part movie for the best watching experience. all around, this movie is very entertaining, and a true salute and tribute to the 10 years of epicness and effort put into the mcu (marvel cinematic universe). however, fair warning, depending on your level of attachment to the journey, it may leave your tea a little stirred. . .
honestly, this left our tea a little stirred. we go back and forth on this movie a lot. on one side, this was a thrill-packed movie, with some really great scenes that gave you the cinematic feels for an intense action movie. the cinematography really played to this, especially at the beginning. incorporating hues of blue and teals set the mood and signified how the characters were feeling defeated, picking you back up from the end of infinity war, adequately. this also, beautifully, contrasted as the movie progress, and feelings changed, during the fever of the action. the contrast was specifically seen during, another great cinematography moment, the (spoiler) fight at the demolished avengers building with vibrant red tints. playing with these colors really supported the hype of the movie. another thing that the film did well at was paying homage to the o.g. movies, by (spoiler) cleverly going back in time to previous iconic scenes from the mcu, making this film feel like a proper finale for part of the franchise. although, on the other side, this awesome concept began to lack toward the end of the story, liberally jumping at times and leaving sizable questions for the viewers.
one of the biggest stretches made was (spoiler) the fact that iron man was able to snap his fingers. we understand, that iron man is one of marvel's prized heroes, and everyone was fine with his manly tag-line "i am iron man" - although it was a bit of a rip off from batman, may we add - but how can we believe he has the will-power to snap, when he's just a mortal man in man-made machinery. sorry, tony. in avengers: infinity war, it took thanos a lot of strength to snap things out of proportion, and in this movie, it also took the hulk, who, just facts alone, is physically more adept than iron man to take care of the job (alone by his strength and resilience to gamma radiation), a dramatically excessive amount of time to bring everyone home. so this jump that now iron man can easily do it, let alone easily steal the stones (which by the way, if they could do that, why did anyone think about that in infinity war), is highly unbelievable. we understand that (spoiler), he died, and trust us, tears were shed and the five steps of grief were completed, however, again, this doesn't even begin to make sense.
but a bigger question that resulted in high controversy was 'what was hawk-eye's purpose?' yes, he got the soul stone and a fancy, new mohawk, but (spoiler) at the cost of black widow's life - like, why? for one, black widow was grieving in that heartbreaking scene where (spoiler) she becomes tear-eyed, while eating captain america's peanut butter sandwich yet she still remained responsible and productive for the team, while, on the other hand, our buddy, clint became a revenge-seeking assassin (because that sounds like the hero who should've survived). natasha was an assassin in her past, but her character evolved and grew past that - hawk-eye, though, had no character redemption, serving little purpose, as always, proving himself to be the least beneficial member of the team. (let's not forget about quicksilver). now, this doesn't fall on actor, jeremy renner, but this does fall on the screenwriters. if you wanted to bring hawk-eye back from his self imposed house arrest that opted him out of the solidarity in avengers: infinity war, maybe bring him back through the time travel elements (like when they go to the battle in new york from the first avengers movie in 2012, which he was in). more importantly, you can't murder off black widow, the one and only original female avenger, when there needs to be more female representation in hollywood blockbusters in general - especially when you just killed off gamora!! why do only women have to fall off the cliff in vormir? without any of our usual leading females, this movie began to overwhelm itself with masculinity. and that 43 second female-team-up at the end doesn't cut it, marvel. give us the plate, not the napkin. it's not gonna make up for natasha.
also, this movie was clearly just to clean up the debates made in captain america: civil war, making sure that they pleased all audiences, (captain america fans and iron man fans) who they had divided. as well, it was obvious that they wanted to honorably conclude both of the men's storylines, giving them an equally heroic conclusion and retirement plan.
with this said, it is still a good movie to watch, whether you are satisfied with the ending or not. it is a captivating watch for those who have been with the franchise from the start and rewards you with several teases to upcoming excitements in the mcu's future. and on a positive note: happy hogan will get you all the cheeseburgers you want.
-- thanks, scar jo xo