Shuri has/had potential, I just wish she hadn't been so great right from the get go, she needed room to grow and to be mentored and expand as a character. They just had to show how uber she was from day 1, despite being what 16-18?

She could have been the next Ironman if they played it just a bit better and smarter.

 

Marvel would’ve been accused of mansplaining if they tried to have Tony/banner mentor her

 

To be fair, one could actually argue that she is notably underpowered compared to her comic book version(s).

 

Would you have preferred if she were more like Tony Stark, who in his very first movie managed to build an arc reactor in a cave, with a box of scraps?

Why is perfectly ok for men to be instantly accepted as uber-geniuses, but women need time to be "mentored" in order to be "believable"? Would any of you honestly say a word if Shuri's character were male but otherwise identical? And are you guys really going to ignore the fact that Shuri:

1. Lives in Wakanda, the most advanced country on Earth, which would certainly include a high quality education system.

2. Is a princess of Wakanda, which would make sure she'd get the absolute best education from said advanced country and education system.

3. Is only actually shown being an uber-genius in one field and one field only: vibranium, that super-rare magical element no one else on Earth has much of but Wakandans brush their teeth with and base their entire advanced civilization around. She made design changes for Black Panther's suit (vibranium) and thought of an idea about Vision (who is made of vibranium) faster than Bruce (who presumably doesn't know much about vibranium). That's it. It's not like she designed a new suit for Tony or came up with a cure for Bruce, she just acted smart in the one area she has every reason to be an expert in.

Now, I personally don't care all that much for Shuri, she's ok but never quite made an impact on me. But reading some of the anti-Shuri nonsense on here is slowly turning into a fan of hers out of spite for said junk.

 

Stark ran a multi-billion dollar business and was much older than Shuri when we got to see him first. Stark, while admittedly a genius, also grew a lot until Endgame. His first suit was nothing compared to the nanotech suit we see in IW/Endgame.

Shuri is much younger than Stark. She also talks down to Banner in their first meeting in IW. Banner's emasculation remains a central part of how a lot of people here view Shuri. Tbh I have no issues with her being a genius, or being smarter than Stark/Banner. However, when you're introducing someone smarter than the bunch of people you've been using to define "smart" all these movies, a more sympathetic introduction wouldn't have hurt.

 

Love how criticism of Shuri’s character is instantly “you’re sexist.” Which literally proves the point of my original statement

Jon and GK explained the rest better than I could.

 

Bringing her in at the eleventh hour of the franchise and introducing her as a super genius by shitting on the established characters that everyone likes has a lot to do with it. Its like when a flagging sitcom brings in a new character to boost ratings and their schtick is clowning on the existing characters (usually making them stupid in ways they weren't previously) and being right all the time. It never goes over well.

 

I was considering your question and the answer is yes because I realized that for many fans Shuri is basically a Wesley Crusher of MCU. She needs to earn her place for them to accept her as a genius kid.

 

Consider the scene where Stark meets Banner. They play off each other, they build their hypothesis together, and they (sort of) show respect for each other through that. Compare that to "Why didn't you do thing?"

Yes, Stark starts by showing off, but he's answering a question, and there's conversation, rather than lecture.



I enjoyed Endgame. Loved Cap picking up the hammer (although don't get why he then became a lightning wizard), Parker's return, and the instant kill on Thanos. Also, I liked how Captain Marvel's now been set up as their giant smack-stick, but she's busy. It gives them a chance to have her be there, or not, for any future films. Also, it felt like every (main) character got to actually do something, they weren't generally just there for the ride.

I loved everyone turning up for the final battle. I'm a sucker for "All the forces of good ride out for victory or death", and having every character turn back up for that was nice. Not sure why it was limited to the Wakandan army, but I suppose it avoids any potential political concerns by having the Gurkha, USNSeals, or PLASOF turn up too. Sure, it might not have made sense for Mantis or Shuri to be on the battlefield, but at the same time, there wasn't a high command at the back, there wasn't time for a big plan, it was just time for everyone to wrestle in the mud.

It might have helped that I watched Civil and Infinity War earlier that day. Not sure I'm going to see it in cinema again though.

 

So, based on excitement fueled recollections, and not having seen a lot of the films in a few years, my current rankings.

1. Endgame.
2. Ragnarok.
3. Civil War.
4. Winter Soldier.
5. Iron Man 3.
6. Infinity War.
7. Spider-Man
8. GotG 1.
9. Iron Man 1.
10. Dr Strange.
11. Captain Marvel.
12. Black Panther.
13. Thor 1
14. Avengers Assemble.
15. Ant-Man 1
16. Ant-Man and the Wasp.
17. Captain America 1
18. The Incredible Hulk.
19. GotG 2.
20. Age of Ultron.
21. Iron Man 2.
22. Thor 2.

Pretty solid on the top five and the bottom three, but honestly the others could shift around relatively easily depending on my mood when I reconsidered.

 

Longer thoughts on Endgame. Kind of a word salad, but it's been hard to distill my feelings on this movie I love into sharp, coherent thoughts:

Endgame was epic, in every sense of the word, and amazing for it. And as for why it is epic - it is because Marvel gave the story the set up it needed and deserved, so that there is history behind every character, weight behind every action, and significance in every choice.

Take that moment where Captain America picked up Mjollnir and smashed Thanos with it. The whole cinema cheered, and I know it fucking thrilled me too - and the reason that moment was such a singular distillation of epicness was because Marvel spent the past two dozen movies establishing just how fucking impossible such a thing was, and yet, in the end, when the chips were down, and when the world needed it most, Steve Rogers proved himself worthy, as man and hero and symbol, and lifted that which cannot be lifted, to hurt that which cannot be hurt.

And then, later, when Tony and Thor had fallen, and Cap stood, alone against Thanos and his army, one man against the darkness - he stood, despite his injuries and despite his being outnumbered a gajillion to one and despite the fact that he was definitely going to lose - because the world needed him to, and because failure here would literally mean, the Death of All Living Things. And then BAM, the portals open, and it turns out that Cap doesn't stand alone. That scene sent fucking shivers down my spine, because it really felt epic; it really felt like the whole world had turned out to fight Thanos; it really felt like all the forces of good had come to give their all against the world's greatest evil in this ultimate showdown of ultimate destiny. And the reason for this is simple. These Avengers, these Guardians, these Asgardians, these Wakandans, these Sorcerers - you've seen the world through their eyes, you know them, you care for them; and that's an emotional weight that can't be faked - it has to be earned, as Marvel did, by bringing you through two dozen movies and half a lifetime's worth of stories. And so, when they finally ASSEMBLE, it cannot and will not feel like just a million faceless mooks come together, but a whole wide world's worth of people, in their vast and incomprehensible individuality, united to stop the Once and Future Omnicidal Murderer.

And, at the end of the day, the essential story of Endgame is time travelling to put right what went wrong, and reverse the deaths of half the universe - but such a story would never a million years have any weight without the emotional significance of the characters we know and love turned to dust before our eyes. It is precisely because we - like Cap, Tony, Thor, Natasha etc - have seen half the world fucking snapped out of existence, that we feel this great gaping hole in the moral fabric of the world, this burning need to do something - even something as truly desperate as travel back through time itself.

Tldr: Marvel earned the right to craft the epic tale that is Endgame, by building the emotional and thematic groundwork for it over these long years.

 

That's the reading I took from it. Not just able to swing the hammer, but possess the powers of Thor.

 

Just an ancillary thought on Cap's ending - it is established that, once you've been 'dislodged' from your own time, you don't need the platform to travel again. Tony and Steve jump directly from 2012 to 1970. The platform is just an anchor. So, in theory at least, Cap could have done his galivanting and stone returning, then swung by to see Peggy, decided to stay for a few decades, and then, once she was gone, instead of jumping back to his 'anchor point', he just triggered another jump to a spot a few feet away.

...

Or not. It solves one problem by replacing it with another, making no sense in a completely different way, though it's still a beautiful moment and I won't apologise for loving it.

Though, as I think on it, it makes slightly more sense if we accept that Cap lived out his life in an alternate timeline with Peggy and stole his shield from that reality to give to Sam when he jumped back... except then he should have popped up on the anchor platform. Shouldn't he?

You know what? Fuck it. Still a beautiful moment.

Anyway, since we're doing this:

1) Endgame
2) Winter Soldier
3) Civil War
4) Iron Man
5) Avengers

The remainder varies, though Thor The Dark World is a pretty solid last place.

 

I don't understand this notion that Brie Larson is a wooden actor. Have y'all not seen her other movies?

Also...how did Shuri emasculate the Hulk? If that little scene with Vision as emasculation, then I doubt your masculinity in the first place. She answered a question he couldn't, and was a smart aleck about it, like teenagers often are. I don't get it.

 

The problem is that Thor's entire character arc in Ragnarok was that the hammer is not the source of his powers, he is.

 

Yes, because of that whole "God of Thunder" thing he has going. Other people worthy of wielding it have the power of Thor.

 

Do the other movies matter when she's wooden as Captain Marvel? It's much like Hayden Christiansen as Anakin Skywalker; the man's at worst a pretty good actor, but his performance in Star Wars was various flavors of awful. Same thing goes for Larsen; if she acts like a brick with a face as Captain Marvel, she's gonna get called on it, regardless of whether or not she's decent in other movies (which, from what little I remember of her other work, is broadly true).

Also re: Shuri: From what I've heard, she walks in and begins pointing out "obvious" solutions that everyone else missed. Which is basically the writer showcasing how brilliant she is specifically by making the other established smart people dumber than her, and so folks that like the other established smart people bristle at it. Emasculation is certainly the wrong word for it, but trying to make one character look good at the expense of other, well-liked characters rarely plays well with the wider audience (see: Wesley Crusher), and that effect appears to be in full force for Shuri here.

 

Re Larsen; her other movies don’t matter. Her role in this one lacked charm. That may have been the character she was given to play and, if so, she did that well, but don’t demand I like a character who’s defining feature in the movie is “I’m so much more powerful than all of you and earth doesn’t really matter to me.”

Re Shuri: Shuri didn’t just answer a question like a smart Alec teenager, she actively demeaned Banners intelligence and it makes the story requires he look dumb so she can look smart. It’s bad storytelling and unearned. It’s not just that she’s being arrogant; it’s that the universe and movie justifies her arrogance despite not being earned.

Edit: Ninjaed lol. What Agayek said.

 

I actually saw the movie on the first day but wanted to let some time pass to achieve a little clarity on my opinions. Whether they're formed out of impulsive reactions or whether they have genuine feelings behind them...

There's no doubt that I'm completely satisfied with this ending to a series spanning over a decade. Fully entertained and completely at peace. Its all good.
Having said that, the final Lord of the Rings movie will still be my most coveted (there's more than the simple movie factor working here tbh) ending to a multi-year series. With Harry Potter being the worst; I didn't even watch any of the HP movies after the fourth one.

The one lasting feeling I'm left with is how RDJ carried the whole series. That ending solidified how heavy both his presence was and his absence is going to be. Honestly, I'm not even sure I will watch any further MCU movies in the Big Screen anymore. I'm frankly not anticipating/looking forward to any of them anymore, apart from Black Widow. It is absolutely surprising and yet justified how much I personally valued RDJ's presence in the series.

And with that out of the way, I'm left with a lot of nitpicks. With emphasis on the point that they are nitpicks at this point in time and nothing more.

The main being Time travel. I'm beginning to hate this plot device right from J K Rowling using it to this movie as well. I've seen Time Travel as Plot tool used competently. But they went full on Blizzard (Wow:BfA) with the Nostalgia wank (But I realize I might be among very very few people who feel this way). I'm hoping that the "fuck-ups" are way to make more movies/series in the future, but meh.

Another nitpick, and I had this mainly with Infinity war as well... is the absence of nukes. Or rather how every stand off seems to be some variation of "The Battle of Five Armies" from Lord of the Rings. In the first Avengers movie, they were ready to nuke New York over the Chitauri Invasion (I see this as precedent). And yet here we are where not even a few jets are deployed to counter a full Space Invasion which actually entered via the earth's atmosphere. Second, on the same vein, why are there alien substitutes for orcs, trolls, Giants and Treants, when I'm expecting a space battle? They seem to have big ass machines but those machine lack Long range weaponry? The Wakandans seem to have forgotten to develop Armored weaponry all together...
Honestly, that Rain Fire moment for Thanos was the saving grace here.

And it seems to me that Captain Marvel is an incredible lost opportunity. That superhero could've been written incredibly well. But it seems more and more like they messed up her timing and positioning in the larger MCU. Both the stand alone movie and her role in the Avengers feel like they've been shoehorned in unnecessarily. If the character would have been completely removed from the EndGame, I feel as though it would hardly make 3% qualitative difference. Think about it. Even that Women's Charge (TM) would have had a greater impact if the charge was lead by Pepper Potts wearing the suit.

On that note, the Wanda moment was incredibly satisfying to watch. Not the least because it coupled with my previous nitpick. Thats how you actually make a super-heroine. At that moment Wanda was more powerful that Thor, Captain America and Iron Man combined. And it was beautiful.

I'm honestly not that disappointed over the 2014 Thanos characterization. For two reasons. One the 2019 Thanos had a very satisfying ending. And two, its a superhero movie. I expect the Villains to have somewhat straightforward motivations. And it was still better than Voldemort's motivations. Or whatshisname Villain from Black Panther.

I'm ambivalent about Fat!Thor. It made for some good entertainment and insight into Thor's mind, but it also undid a lot of what I absolutely liked in Ragnarok. And I've always disliked Quail and his guardians claptrap. The fact that I've to go watch Guardians now to get a dose of Thor leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Although I like the Raccoon and the tree.

That's it with the nitpicks I think.


Someone brought up Shuri earlier in the thread and asked a curious question on whether 'We would love it if she was more like Tony Stark'?
That got me thinking. Here's the thing: you're comparing Shuri to the wrong character. Tony Stark is neither 16-18 nor is he a novice at what he's doing. Nor is he anywhere near the Character Spectrum Shuri is on.

There actually is a male parallel, that could be used as a template for Shuri.
And that is Peter Parker.
Peter Parker is also a Genius. He's also in a very similar age group. He doesn't have access to the Plot Armor Metal(TM), and yet he's still managed to innovate some incredible things.

But he's mentored by Tony Stark.
Almost everyone interested in the MCU loves what they've achieved with the current version of Spider-man.
And the relationship between Tony and Peter enriches the MCU in an unprecedented way. It was in fact the motivation for Tony to go back in Time.
Now imagine a Shuri that was even remotely developed like this. The mentor figure need not/should not be male. It can even be Jane Foster if you want to go the purely Science route. It can be Natasha if you want to go the Super Hero route. It can be a plethora of characters from the comics.
I would love a Shuri character honestly developed this way. If you want one of the side roles to supersede the character traits of one of the most established and beloved main characters, give them some background.



As for Rating the movies....

1) Ragnarok
2) Avengers
3) Captain America
4) Iron Man

Everything below that is a mess, with the caveat that Black Panther is placed Last in that mess.