Skip to main content

marvel - Why didn't this character die even though they shot this person in Avengers: Endgame?


Rest assured, my question is entirely Endgame spoiler-free unless you hover over the hidden quotes. Probably best not to read on.


Background:




Time travel is fickle, and Endgame's plot is centered entirely around it. Conventional time travel has a golden rule: change the past and you change the future. I am aware of what is said at the start of the film: (quoting Banner/Stark? from memory) "whatever happens in the past the future remains the same". This may explain how reality remains OK even after the un-snap with the vanished half suddenly coming back 5 years later, as the future goes on normally as if the vanished had really vanished for the last 5 years and only reappeared again without having to fill in the 5 year time gap.



My inquiry:



This begs the question, however: How is Nebula still alive and kicking at the end of the movie, after she kills (literally shooting a hole through) her past self? Logically speaking, shouldn't killing her own past self erase her from existence, completely, in the future?




Answer



The "answer" (or at least the theory upon which the answer to your query is based) is in the scene you first quoted. Based upon my one viewing of the movie (spoilers, of course):




After Stark posits this theory that the Avengers' actions in the past would not change their collective present, the other characters in the room run through a plethora of movies that instead relied on your "golden rule." In those movies, the characters' actions in the past altered their present. At the end of this rapid-fire listing of movies, Ant Man says something like, "so Back to the Future was all bullshit?" The movie then moves forward without further analysis, having laid the groundwork exposition that the past cannot be changed. The implication of all this is that, even though present-Nebula shot past-Nebula, that act did not change present-Nebula's present condition. (For what it's worth, all but one of the other events in the movie appear to conform to the theory. The one that I think may not follow the rule (SERIOUSLY, this is a SPOILER from the end of the movie, so STOP READING NOW if you don't want to spoil it!): Captain America appears at the end as an old man, having gone back in time and apparently spending a lifetime with Peggy Carter. This could have altered her timeline, unless you accept that she was actually married to Cap in the original timeline. This is a possibility as past movies did not reveal the identity of her husband. If so, I would concede this follows the in-movie rule; otherwise, it would be (TV Trope warning) New Rules as the Plot Demands.)



The theory and the result of the event in your second spoiler-block does seem to defy logic. However, it is based upon one widely accepted theory concerning the potential impact of the plan they were discussing in the movie. See, for example (warning: hovering over the following link will reveal a spoiler), Prof. Miller's essay in The Philosophers' Magazine, June 25, 2017


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.
Post a Comment
Read more

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...
Post a Comment
Read more

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...
Post a Comment
Read more

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...
Post a Comment
Read more