[ SECRET POST #4504 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4504 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #645.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I was left wanting for the others. I was left wanting for everyone who wasn't Tony and maybe Natasha. Everyone else got shafted. Steve and Thor especially.

[(Anonymous)]

Maybe the reason they didn't wrap up Thor's story (and hell, maybe even Steve's) is because he's clearly going to be in more movies?

[kaijinscendre]

Well, Thor will at least be in more movies. Steve at least got good screen time even if some of it was wildly OOC. Natasha though....:(

[(Anonymous)]

Natasha is still getting her own movie.

[(Anonymous)]

Is that confirmed??

[kaijinscendre]

But it will be (presumably) a prequel. If it is, I can't see getting invested in her character because we know how it ends. Also, in the movie she was still completely shafted.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes it's been confirmed and casted but will probably be a prequel and scarjo is producing it read trades (Hollywood reporter, deadline , on it and scarjo is producing it and picked the director

[(Anonymous)]

Thor got some story, but he was as much wildly OOC as Steve. Natasha's story, at least, made sense for her character.

[sparklywalls]

I have seen all the arguments for why it was done but I still can't get over how sour it feels that the story of the only female original (MCU) Avenger ended that way.

[(Anonymous)]

Okay, in your opinion, how is Nat's ending fundamentally different than Tony's? (besides Nat not getting an on-screen funeral, which I agree was a misstep.)

[sparklywalls]

For me it's just that I felt like she was a notable absentee from the final battle. Like I said, I get why they did what they did. I just didn't really like it because I quite like Nat (I know it's not particularly popular in this fandom given her actress) and yeah they had that pretty cool all-female shot in the final battle. But Nat not being there made me feel a little sad.

And full disclosure: I've never really liked Renner's Hawkeye so that is probably colouring my perception as well.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, okay, I get that, actually. I mean, for the most part I really liked Nat's role in Endgame. But I like Nat too, and a big part of me does wish it had gone differently, for her. I'm gonna miss her in whatever movies come next.

I like Hawkeye well enough, but I also hold the very common opinion that he's easily one of the most forgettable and expendable of the big characters. Personally, I'm of the opinion that the reason Nat was the one to go* was because the writers knew we all thought it was obviously going to be Hawkeye (because he's way more narratively expendable than she is). For that reason, I have to appreciate their choice to have it be her, because it was the more impactful, pull-no-punches choice. But it's still a total bummer, too.

*or was it purely that Scarjo wanted out and they were making the best of it? I haven't looked up whether Scarjo wanted out, so I have no idea.