Hey, “Avengers: Endgame” is in theaters now, and as you can imagine, spoilers abound. We’ve already written our spoiler-free review, but now it’s time to get into some of the nitty-gritty and the impact that ‘Endgame’ will have on the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Suffice it to say, please don’t read this piece if you haven’t seen “Avengers Endgame.” That’s hopefully obvious. Don’t do it, thanks. *Spoilers forthcoming.*
“Avengers: Endgame” is upon us. After a box office opening that destroyed records, Marvel Studios has once again proven that this is just the Avengers world, and we happen to be part of it. But when you have a film seen by millions upon millions of people, grossing $1.2 billion in such a short amount of time, there are likely going to be questions. Thankfully, writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely are here to try to answer them.
Speaking to the New York Times, the duo that has written numerous Marvel Cinematic Universe films explained why they made the shocking choices they did, what they could have done if they zigged instead of zagged, and why the ending that made fans openly weep was chosen.
But before they discussed the spoiler-y ending, Markus and McFeely talked about the beginning, and why the folks that survived Thanos’ snap in ‘Infinity War’ were chosen.
“We knew we wanted to see Cap and Tony dealing with the aftermath so that you could really see them suffer, quite frankly,” said Markus. “And that’s why Cap and Natasha are relatively minimal in the first movie, because all they’d be doing is punching. We knew that they had a lot of story in the second movie, and there were other people who would have much more story in the first movie, like the Guardians.”
Of course, one of the most shocking elements of ‘Endgame’ is the five-year time-jump. Much of the film takes place five years in the future, where the death of half of the universe has led to some startling changes to the Avengers. And according to Markus/McFeely, this was all in the cards dating back as far as 2015.
“Chris and I wrote a master document while we were shooting ‘Civil War,’ and one of the things we were interested in exploring is, remember the What If comics?” said McFeely. “Well, this is our what if. If you lost, Thor becomes fat. Natasha becomes a shut-in. Steve becomes depressed. Tony gets on with his life. Hulk is a superhero.”
Markus added, “There was a time when Banner became Smart Hulk in [‘Infinity War’]. It was a lot of fun, but it came at the wrong moment. It was an up, right when everyone else was down.”
“It happened in Wakanda,” McFeely continued. “His arc was designed like, I’m not getting along with the Hulk, the Hulk won’t come out. And then they compromise and become Smart Hulk.”
This time-jump and the destruction of the Infinity Stones created a massive issue for the Avengers. How the hell do they fix everything? Well, that’s where time travel comes into play. And when time travel was decided as a plot point, the folks at Marvel had to come up with a way that felt scientifically accurate, but didn’t adhere to the classic time travel movie tropes.
McFeely said, “It was by necessity. If you have six MacGuffins and every time you go back it changes something, you’ve got Biff’s casino, exponentially. So we just couldn’t do that. We had physicists come in — more than one — who said, basically, ‘Back to the Future’ is [wrong].”
READ MORE: ‘Avengers: Endgame’ 12 Of The Big Questions Answered
With the Infinity Stones in play, there was a thought by some fans that this film would lead into the new version of the X-Men, as the Disney/Fox deal was finished last month. Alas, that wasn’t the case, and it wasn’t just a legal issue, even though McFeely admits that was the primary factor. But as Markus described, it just didn’t feel right either.
“They still have an “X-Men” movie [“Dark Phoenix,” due in June],” he said. “You can’t reboot them before they’re done. ‘Sorry to completely screw you.’”
And without the X-Men or any other distractions, the ending of ‘Endgame’ could focus on what people cared about most — the characters. Specifically, the ending of the film could focus on the aftermath of three of them, Black Widow, Captain America, and Iron Man, either retiring or dying.
“Her journey, in our minds, had come to an end if she could get the Avengers back,” said McFeely about Black Widow’s early demise. “She comes from such an abusive, terrible, mind-control background, so when she gets to Vormir and she has a chance to get the family back, that’s a thing she would trade for. The toughest thing for us was we were always worried that people weren’t going to have time to be sad enough. The stakes are still out there and they haven’t solved the problem. But we lost a big character — a female character — how do we honor it? We have this male lens and it’s a lot of guys being sad that a woman died.”
READ MORE: ‘Avengers: Endgame’ May Give The ‘Black Widow’ Solo Film Some Unexpected Layers
Markus added, “Tony gets a funeral. Natasha doesn’t. That’s partly because Tony’s this massive public figure and she’s been a cipher the whole time. It wasn’t necessarily honest to the character to give her a funeral.”
Though he doesn’t die at the end of the film, Captain America’s story comes to its natural conclusion in ‘Endgame.’ A conclusion that was inevitable.
“From the very first outline, we knew he was going to get his dance,” said McFeely. “He’s postponed a life in order to fulfill his duty. That’s why I didn’t think we were ever going to kill him. Because that’s not the arc. The arc is, I finally get to put my shield down because I’ve earned that.”
You should check out the full interview over at the New York Times, as the writers cover much, much more than what we highlight. It’s well worth the read.
“Avengers: Endgame” is in theaters now.