How Avengers: Endgame Ruined Thanos and Destroyed His Complex Character

In “Avengers: Infinity War,” the character of Thanos, played by Josh Brolin, was Marvel’s most intriguing antagonist. He was a multifaceted villain with a dark, yet consistent environmental agenda. The movie skillfully crafted his character to evoke sympathy as a tragic figure, where his drastic measures were driven by genuine worries about universal resource depletion. However, in “Avengers: Endgame,” the portrayal of Thanos was weakened due to inconsistencies with the logic behind his grand scheme. Instead of depicting him as a misguided extremist, the film presented him as an inept villain who failed to grasp fundamental biological concepts.

Infinity War Worked By Making Thanos Debatable

In “Infinity War,” Thanos positions himself as the lone entity prepared to take drastic actions to halt resource exhaustion across the universe. His beliefs align with Thomas Malthus’s population theory, positing that growth in population will always surpass production of resources. The narrative underscores this idea through his dialogues with Gamora (Zoë Saldaña), where he describes how her home planet flourished following his intervention. Thanos illustrates the success of his methods by displaying tangible proof of his skewed perspective. After capturing planets and eradicating half their populations, he reveals thriving civilizations with ample resources, children free from hunger, and ecosystems healing from overexploitation. His warped sense of accomplishment is fueled by the measurable outcomes that, in his reasoning, validate genocide.

In this depiction, the character emerged as a villain whose appalling actions were driven by a consistent internal reasoning. His belief that half of all conscious life needed to be wiped out to save resources made him a tragic figure, willing to be universally despised to prevent what he saw as an impending catastrophe. The careful selection of his initial plan – targeting only sentient beings while conserving the natural resources they utilized – revealed a calculated strategy for his misguided crusade. And then came the turning point, Endgame…

Endgame Botched Thanos’ Evil Brilliancy

In the time leap of five years in Endgame, it’s clear that Thanos really did decimate half of every living being. Instead of signs of recovery as his plan suggested, a bleak and dying Earth emerges, with gloomy skies, motionless oceans, and silent landscapes painting a picture of desolation that contradicts Thanos’ aim to preserve life by cutting down consumption. Essentially, the Snap stands out as a significant inconsistency in two otherwise smart (if unrealistic) Marvel films.

In simpler terms, a massive extinction event like ‘The Snap’ doesn’t fit with our scientific knowledge about how Earth’s ecosystem works. Our planet’s biosphere is a complex network where everything is connected. If 50% of species were to disappear suddenly, it could lead to disastrous chain reactions. For instance, reducing atmospheric oxygen production would follow the loss of half of all plants. Decimating phytoplankton populations in our oceans would disrupt marine food chains. And if half of all pollinating insects vanished, global agriculture would suffer greatly beyond the damage from losing half of all crops.

To put it simply, while many are discussing the devastating effects of Thanos’ Snap in ‘Endgame’, there’s a logical inconsistency in the storyline. If Thanos had merely decreased the number of sentient beings, Earth’s ecosystems would have started healing during those five years. This is supported by real-life examples, such as the temporary decrease in human activity due to global lockdowns for COVID-19 leading to improvements in air quality, wildlife populations, and water systems. However, Thanos’ so-called solution of destroying resources actually hastens the environmental collapse he aimed to prevent.

In simpler terms, let’s discuss the logical flaws in Thanos’ plan, as depicted in the movie “Endgame.” Unlike his initial strategy on Gamora’s planet where only people were reduced but resources remained, Thanos’ universal decimation doesn’t make sense because it leaves the ratio of consumers to supplies unchanged. Instead of doubling resources per survivor, he maintains the same number of people for the same amount of food sources. This inconsistency makes Thanos appear more like a madman rather than a calculated extremist. It also raises questions about his understanding of resource distribution and management.

In “Endgame,” the visuals after the Snap effectively portray Thanos’ destructive impact, but they might have instead sparked a deeper, thought-provoking ethical discussion. The film avoids delving into complex issues like overpopulation, resource allocation, and ecological ethics by depicting Thanos’ plan as self-destructive. A more sophisticated narrative could have made Thanos a captivating adversary, critiquing his methods not through plot holes but by presenting well-reasoned arguments that expose the faults in his approach.

truthfully speaking, Thanos’ character in the MCU highlights a recurring pattern in how they develop antagonists. Generally, the franchise excels at creating villains with relatable motives – like Killmonger fighting for justice or Vulture driven by economic woes. Yet, the Marvel universe tends to oversimplify these complex characters towards the end, making their evil intentions crystal clear. In Thanos’ case, his shift from a nuanced eco-terrorist to an indiscriminate killer is a troubling departure from intricate character development. Instead of challenging viewers with ethically murky situations about resources and sacrifice, Endgame chooses easier resolutions that unfortunately rob Thanos of the potential to be Marvel’s most intellectually stimulating villain.

Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame are available for streaming on Disney+.

2025-01-24 19:39

Infinity War Worked By Making Thanos Debatable

Endgame Botched Thanos’ Evil Brilliancy

Read More