There is a moral to Infinity War (2018), and it’s terrible

watchmebitch:

Now that the “no spoilers” window for Infinity War has closed, and the Russo Brothers have been giving interviews and insight into the direction they took with the film, it’s become impossible to ignore that, when interpreted as a single-part story, Infinity War teaches a singular and definite lesson.

Sitting through Infinity War (twice) in theaters, something really unsettled me each time around. I thought, the first time, that it might just be that I hadn’t been prepared by any measure for a Thanos-centric film – that I was knocked off balance by the fact that IW was not a Guardians story or an Avengers story but definitely, unquestionably a Thanos story. But then I went and saw it again and started to give it a bit more thought.

According to word of (Marvel/the Russos) god, Infinity War should be considered its own standalone film – not part one of a two-part saga. Additionally, it’s been confirmed by both WOG and obvious clues throughout the film itself that Thanos should be read as the protagonist, and that the main story is his “hero’s journey” to collect the stones and achieve his goals. 

Often, in these kinds of stories – ones which center around a single protagonist and track their journey to accomplish a mission in spite of the antagonist(s) attempts to stop them – the protagonist succeeds because of some innate characteristic of theirs, whereas the antagonist(s) fail because they, on the contrary, are lacking in that way. Voldemort’s ultimate downfall is that he, unlike Harry and his friends, is unable to feel love. Gaston doesn’t ‘get the girl’ because he is vain and selfish, but the Beast does because he could overcome those things. Steve Rogers becomes Captain America because, above all else, he is a good man, whereas Johann Schmidt is a terrible person and thus becomes monstrous.

Our Avengers, in this movie, are placed in the role of antagonist – their purpose is to stop Thanos from gathering the Infinity Stones, whether by claiming them for themselves or even destroying them so no one can have them. But, because of their collective deep failings in character, they are unable to realize that purpose, and our protagonist succeeds.

But what are those deep failings in character? Why do the antagonists fail at every time?

Well, because of their compassion, and valuation of petty human life, of course!

It sounds crazy, but follow this logic with me:

• In the movie’s establishing scene, Loki gives up the space stone to save his brother’s life. If he had not done so, he could certainly have used the stone to flee, but he valued Thor’s safety over their mission.
• Wanda refuses to kill Vision as a practical measure to stop Thanos. She does this because she loves him and, in at least some measure, values that love over her other goals (her career, let’s say). Ultimately, when it becomes an imminent matter of life and death, she does try to kill him, but by that point she’s hesitated and the film teaches us that such hesitation is too little, too late.
• Similarly, Peter Quill hesitates in killing Gamora, even though he, also, knows how important it is to his their collective goals. He does this because he loves her and, by the time he is able to work up the nerve, it’s too little, too late. Again, his conviction had to have been unflinching and unhesitating in order for him to succeed.
• In a later instance, Gamora herself hedges, choosing the well-being of her sister over her mission to keep the Soul Stone’s location secret from Thanos. If she had only been willing to watch her sister suffer or die, she might have accomplished her goal.
• Similarly, Dr. Strange gives up the time stone in order to save Tony’s life. I’m aware that this will be the most controversial bullet point, but the reality is, regardless of the theory that he did so because it was required by the “14 million universe” foresight, the writers made a strategic choice to have him sacrifice the stone for another of the antagonists in a movie where all four stones that the antagonists can actively impact are sacrificed in such a way.

At every turn, as we follow Thanos’s journey as the protagonist, we see the antagonists fail because of their insufficient will, and their prioritizing of other human people over their larger goals. Contrast this to Thanos’s sacrificing Gamora for the soul stone – he listens to her last words, sheds a single tear, and promptly chucks his “favorite” daughter, a person who the movie tells us is his dearest love, off a cliff. Because he is willing to do that – disregard what he loves most in the world up to and including literally murdering them – he succeeds in his goals. He gathers all of the infinity stones and ends the movie aware that he had to sacrifice everything, but apparently content with that choice.

Let’s put aside for a moment that his ultimate mission was to kill trillions of people. That’s circumstantial. In my humble opinion, this would be a terrible moral even for a movie where Thanos’s mission was to win a tennis tournament, where no murder was involved and where all of the characters were totally mundane.

What infinity war teaches us, in short, is that if you want to achieve your goals – especially some sort of life mission or long-term career aspirations – you must be willing to sacrifice everything. You must be willing to throw family off a cliff under the bus, to value your goals over even the people who are most dear to you, and to choose ruthless ambition over love. If you aren’t able to do that, forget about succeeding. Forget about your happy ending. Infinity War tells us, “Pick one, asshole: meaningful human relationships and empathy, or success.”

Call me crazy, but I think that’s pretty terrible.