and always having to say something supposedly original and hopefully contrary. The thesis of this article in Deadspin is that Avengers Endgame suffers because it dives headfirst into the mythology and doesn’t pause or slow down for any non-fans watching. I’m just gonna say it: That’s just dumb.
(No spoilers for Endgame — it’s safe to keep reading.)
“The Mount Doom scene is well-staged but really makes no sense to someone who hasn’t watched the previous movies.”
“The Battle of Camlann is satisfying thematically, but what if you aren’t a full-blown fan of Arthurian legend? Why didn’t Mallory write for the people who’ve skipped the backstory?”
Any franchise risks becoming insular and unaccessible. Continuity can get tangled and collapse under its own weight. But come on. Some things are meant to pay off earlier work. Endgame is not a stand-alone film and makes not pretension to be one. Neither does any of its marketing. It’s not for people who’ve skipped the previous movies, and that’s OK. I follow Ebert’s philosophy: Judge a movie on whether it succeeds at what it sets out to be. Anything else is self-serving navel-gazing.