This has SPOILERS for all previous MCU films and includes discussions of leaks related to Avengers 4 (none of which literally spoil the film--despite all that's below we still know very little).
Before we delve into the speculation it's important to remember that the Russo's have worked hard to keep elements of the film secret, including fake or incomplete scripts, scenes shot that were never intended to be part of the story (witnessed in the Infinity War trailers), etc. Adding to this fact is that Infinity War and Avengers 4 were shot at the same time, meaning some leaks could be related to scenes for Infinity War that were cut. This means we have to take the information that follows with a grain of salt, although I'll argue there are some incontrovertible story-elements. Everything is sourced, empowering you to make your own judgement of the material.
The Story
In an
earlier post I discussed some of the speculation for the next Avengers film, but this is a much more detailed and comprehensive look at what little we know, as well as an exploration of various theories about what the film is about. I'm not interested in being genuinely spoiled about the film, but the speculation is a lot of fun.
Let's begin with the
official synopsis for the film:
A culmination of 22 interconnected films the fourth installment of the Avengers saga will draw audiences to witness the turning point of this epic journey. Our beloved heroes will truly understand how fragile this reality is and the sacrifices that must be made to uphold it.
This is remarkably vague. The elements that jump out are "sacrifices" (which most expect) and the fragility of reality. Does the latter reference the
Quantum Realm? It makes the most sense given
Ant-Man and the Wasp and its
connection to the upcoming
Captain Marvel. The speculation, explored below, is that the
Time Vortex (or vortices, cf
Ant-Man and the Wasp) is key and presumably the conduit for the expected time-travel.
The plot has to revolve around undoing what
Thanos did in
Infinity War (the loss of half of all life). I say
undo because the MCU can't continue the fiction that half of all life is dead--it's simply too divergent from reality to maintain and narratively would make no sense. This is also a story that requires a
happy ending. That ending must happen because
Infinity War has already given us a sad,
Empire Strikes Back-ending. I've seen a lot of lazy speculation that tends to ignore the latter element and predicts the deaths of many heroes--I'm not expecting that and we'll explore why below.
The question we're left with is
how the Avengers undo the Snapsure and that's what most of the speculation is about. It's collectively believed that only the Infinity Gauntlet (ie the power of all six infinity stones) can undo the damage, so the solution is either to use its power to undo it or go back in time and prevent its use in the first place (the latter requires time travel and adjusting the timeline).
Official Comments
What do we actually know about the story? Without a trailer not much, but a few comments have been made by the creative people involved. Joe Russo
said this about the film:
I don’t think there are any comics that correlate to it [my emphasis]. I think we’re in pretty fresh territory with Avengers 4. If anything, I think it’s interesting after to go back and look at some of the Marvel films and view them through a different lens. But I can’t think of any comics in particular that would have value
This denial of a comic source is something willfully ignored by every theorist I've seen or read, as all believe key plot elements will be lifted from various stories (usually
Infinity Gauntlet and
Avengers Forever). In the former
Thanos has the gauntlet taken from him and eventually
Adam Warlock undoes what was done--the storyline is heavily dependent on several characters who either don't exist in the MCU (
Mephisto) or aren't involved in it yet (like
Warlock)--it also requires the dropped plot of
Thanos being in love with
Lady Death.
Avengers Forever has a convoluted plot, but
Immortus is the antagonist and various heroes from different eras are gathered together through time to defeat him. The latter element--time travel--is the primary reason this story is invoked as possible inspiration.
I don't think Russo was lying about a lack of comic-inspiration for the plot, nor do I think he means
nothing in the film is borrowed from source material (just that none of the main plots are being adopted), but this should give pause to any theory that heavily borrows from a related comic plot.
While Russo's comments have been largely ignored (they are inconvenient for most theories), we've seen a little bit of discussion over what
Kevin Feige said about the film:
People always will jump to that [character death]. That’s not necessarily what we’re talking about. I talk a lot, because I’m a big-ass nerd, about Star Trek: The Next Generation, “All Good Things” [May, 1994]. That to me is one of the best series finales ever. That wasn’t about death. [Captain] Picard went and played poker with the crew, something he should have done a long time ago, right?
This is one of the most interesting comments about the film to date and no one has taken a deep dive over what it could mean. I'd take Feige's word "necessarily" to mean we're only going to get a few major deaths that stick (remember we need a happy ending)--there's really no other reason to temper that expectation (in the lead-up to
Infinity War the discussion from cast and crew was all about death).
As for the substance of the comment, Conrad thinks it means we'll get something akin to the ST:TNG episode where Picard is jumping through time, re-visiting events to resolve the catastrophe of the present which, unintentionally, he is responsible for. This idea of exploring the past is something the Russo's have mentioned "through a different lens" above. In this case that surely means solving the problem of the present via the past (directly or indirectly). If
Tony Stark is our Picard parallel (as seems appropriate), perhaps the lesson he learns is to be a team player (he already understands selfless sacrifice via his actions in
The Avengers), and to forgive both
Captain America and
Bucky for the death of his parents (the latter for the act, the former for hiding the truth). It's also possible that they'll borrow the TNG idea that
Iron Man caused the problem (through the fragmentation of the Avengers in
Civil War--while this has more or less been
stated by those involved, we don't know if its a theme of
Avengers 4, granting that
Tony has always been a character highly motivated by guilt).
The Russo's recently
released a photo meant to tease
Avengers 4 and people have seen a lot of things in it. The obvious elements are the four's--there are four A's created by various objects along with two sets of gaffer tape that are also arranged into groups of four. A clever person (via the link) notes that the machine on the left was seen in
Infinity War inside the Avengers Mansion--what it means is up in the air. Another believes it shows the title as being "Endgame", which I doubt since the title has been advertised as a mild spoiler and that title doesn't achieve that. Another person (via the link) notes that the bottle on the table looks like the containers
Ant-Man has when he gets trapped in the
Quantum Realm, and I concur with that. There is an extraneous X on the lefthand side that some think is a reference to the X-Men, but given that the sale isn't finalized that seems unlikely. The Italian word
mese ("month") appears on the ladder--the film comes out in April, the fourth month of the year and we have four A's--it's pretty straightforward what it means.
Normally I wouldn't go down the rabbit hole any further, but since the Russo's said "look closely" at the photo I'll go over all the gaffer tape stuff: there are two arrangements of four (one on the wall that's at the center of the image and the other just to its right); then we have the X off to the left side and a V or A (without the central bar of the letter) or even an arrow or the Roman numeral "5" on the right of the foreground. Clockwise the groups of four: T, X, V/A, T; X, V/A, V/A, T. So that's a total of 4 V/A's, 3 X's, and 3 T's. It's no coincidence that the four A's are present (
Avengers 4). Via the link someone suggested the letters stand-in for locations, so that X=Xander, V=Vormir, T=Titan, and T=Taa (the home planet of
Galactus, which is another impossible idea due to the Fox-sale being incomplete). While the last suggestion can be thrown away, I think that person missed another possibility: A=Asgard. Frankly, while with the letters
could suggest locations, I think as references it's a little too vague.
Finally, I want to address
these comments from Mark Ruffalo
I don’t even know that they really know exactly [how the film will end]. Some of it is happening while we’re there. It’s pretty amazing. And we’ll shoot some stuff and a few days later come back and reshoot it ’cause we wanna take it in another direction. It’s a very living organism; even as we approach it being a locked picture, we’re still working on it.
I wouldn't take this too literally. I think there are tweaks happening (we have to keep in mind that Ruffalo is likely given fake scripts to prevent him from spoiling the movie), possibly to deal with the James Gunn situation for
Guardians of the Galaxy 3, but the core of the film is (I'm sure) locked in.
Time Travel
So why the omnipresent time travel speculation? Well if the comments from Russo and Feige aren't enough for you, it turns out we have more than that and speculation--beginning in November (of 2017) set photos began to leak indicating exactly that--showing the Battle of New York from the
Avengers that includes elements from the future.
The photos gave theorists three options: they represent B.A.R.F. images (Tony's tech to review the past as seen in
Captain America: Civil War), time travel, or alternate realities. Why these options? Because of the inclusion of
Ant-Man and an older
Tony Stark (it's impossible to be sure what era-
Hulk or
Cap are being depicted, but there are pics of era-appropriate
Thor and
Loki). We have evidence of other time periods occurring as well, but nothing that absolutely indicates they aren't flashbacks. The specific leaked images we've seen could take place before the end of the battle, but some are definitely
after Loki's defeat in
The Avengers (but prior to
Thor taking he and the
Space Stone back to Asgard).
When these photos first leaked I leaned towards the BARF explanation offered by the Russo's, largely because of all the potential pitfalls of time travel and confusion of alternative realities, but eventually (given the
Star Trek inspiration and what's dramatically appropriate) the time travel explanation seems to be a correct and major component of the film (how much benefit could you really derive from simply reviewing the past to defeat
Thanos when he still has the gauntlet?). There's also reason to think the picture of the BARF device was intentionally leaked to confuse the issue of what was happening (the image of it is from the last day of filming, January 11th, long after the original set leaks in November, so could be an intentional bluff by the Russo's to throw people off). Finally, we have
Tony Stark spotted with and without an
injury during these moments--nothing re-imagined by BARF technology could cause a wound.
Evangeline Lily and a fake description of Avengers 4 footage (you can read the real description
here), got
Charlie Schneider to believe the alternative realities idea. Lily had
said:
I did have this moment of realising, oh, wow, there’s a bit of a déjà vu for me with the Lost franchise. We are hitting that [Lost] season 4 space.
I've never seen
Lost, but season four apparently includes a lot of flash-forwards in time, which hadn't been a common element in the show previously. Lily's comments directly reference
time and since the Russo's have already
debunked alternate realities I think we have to reject that idea.
Bringing up
Schneider again just to refute something he's repeating: Charlie says that films with time travel were banned in China back in 2011 (ergo it can't be used in the movie). Charlie isn't big on research, so didn't bother looking into it--I did. At that time
Caleb Reading reported the ban was specifically for "
misrepresentation of historical figures in films and TV
shows, including in time travel movies" (
Quora confirmed this four years later), so it's not a ban on all movies that involve time travel. This took five seconds of research on Google, so as I've said before, you don't use Charlie for this kind of information.
Going back to the main point: if we accept that time travel is a component of the story, then what can we say about it? Fan theories, before
Infinity War came out, involved using the
Time Stone to resolve things, but now that
Thanos has all the Infinity Stones everyone is betting on the
Quantum Realm and with good reason: the
Time Vortex, which seems to be the only way
Ant-Man can escape that realm (where he's trapped at the end of his most recent film).
The general assumption is that the devices depicted in these shots are meant to keep those wearing them stable in time (or allow them to return to their own time--perhaps both), although I have seen a couple of people suggest they are like Tony's sunglasses for using BARF tech (I've mentioned above why I don't think that's the case). What puzzles me is why
Cap looks like the 2012
Cap when we've seen two
Tony's (2012 and current) as well as present-day
Scott Lang? The original
Tony could suggest this is not
Cap in disguise, but he also has the device above--why is that? Are they fetching the original
Steve Rogers? Or is that
Cap in retro-gear (we know from concept art he's shaved his beard in present-day)? There's even the remote possibility that current-day
Captain America has died (perhaps
Falcon or
Bucky taking over the shield), that he's on another mission, or that they've gone to get past-
Cap because they specifically need him. Without more information we're left to speculate in circles--in terms of the photo I think it's current-day
Cap (
Avengers 4 is about the coming together of the original crew, so that should include the mission back in time).
So why go back in time in the first place? Time travel is a pain in the ass in storytelling--you have to worry about changing timelines along with the possibility that the audience will think all problems can just be fixed that way--so why are the Russo's using the device? I think it serves a couple of purposes: 1) pays off
Thanos's victory--he
can't be defeated without this, 2) allows reinterpretations of past events (adding some colour or change to past events and evolving and nuancing characters--on a much smaller scale we see this with
Ronan and
Korath in
Captain Marvel).
What about on a story level? What does time travel accomplish? The heroes already understand how
Thanos acquired the Stones--they also know
why he wanted them--so going into the past isn't going to provide them with any important information in those respects. Therefore going back in time is not for information gathering, but to
accomplish something. What the heroes will be trying to do is: 1) prevent
Thanos from assembling the Infinity Stones in the first place, and/or 2) to assemble them for the Avengers to use themselves (since in present-day there's no clear way to get them from him).
I think the latter idea, which has a lot of current parlance, makes little sense. Not only are none of the Avengers powerful enough to use the gauntlet (the collected
Guardians could barely hold the
Power Stone for a moment; the film's writers have also
implied that only beings of cosmic might like
Thanos could ever use it), but it's unlikely someone like
Cap would approve of them re-creating such a terrible weapon--if he was willing to die to hide the
Space Stone I doubt he'd be willing to re-create something much worse. The idea also fails on a story-level, as it would mean there's no critique or message about power--absolute power is just fine in the right hands (as opposed to the traditional message that there
are no right hands--something
Cap touches on in
Civil War). It would also mean there's no climactic final battle--
Thanos is simply snapped/blasted away. One of the reasons comicbook fans like this idea is that the Illuminati (the cabal of heroes who try to protect the earth) wind up having all the Stones for a time--I don't think the Russo's are concerned with either that detail or setting up that group when we're missing
Reed Richards (Fox),
Charles Xavier (Fox), and
Namor (Universal).
My guess is the goal is to
prevent Thanos from ever getting all the Stones (it would mean the
comments that the deaths in
Infinity War are real make much more sense--they
are real until the event is undone--
Thanos succeeds in that timeline and, at least according to
Doctor Strange, nearly all timelines). While this could theoretically be accomplished by hiding the Stones, it's not that dramatic and remains a half-measure--someone else could assemble them. Instead, I think the Avengers will gather most or all of the Stones to lure
Thanos into a final confrontation (for evidence of the latter, see below). We may, in fact, get a
Lord of the Rings scenario where, like the One Ring, they destroy the Stones to overcome the threat they represent.
There is another
potential wrinkle in what the plot could be: Kinda Culty (via the link) argues that
Thanos is currently back in time--that the final scene of him on Titan in
Infinity War is actually him
in the past (a notion backed by concept art that identifies the place and matches the Stones which light up when he portals away from
Thor to get there). This would mean the Avengers
have to travel back in time to stop him (not, I think, by confronting him there, but--again--by preventing him from successfully gathering the Stones in the first place). We'll need more evidence before accepting this theory, but it's something to keep in mind (it would fit either of the other two theories, since to either assemble the gauntlet
or prevent its assembling would require time travel).
Tracking the Stones in the Past
If we assume the Avengers are gathering the Stones (either to hide them, use them, destroy them, or use them as bait) and using time travel to do so, let's figure out how that would work and where the Stones are.
What's interesting about this image from
last summer is that
Gamora and
Nebula are in their original
Guardians of the Galaxy gear, while
Ant-Man and the
Wasp are in their current film garb (the latter pair were likely at the photo shoot because their movie was filming at the same time). More about that later, let's get back to tracking the Stones through the MCU (ignoring their locations in the ancient past since there's no evidence the heroes are going back that far):
- Space Stone: first appears in Captain America: The First Avenger in the 1940s, although removing it at this point would have large ramifications for both Howard Stark and S.H.I.E.L.D.. The next time we see the Stone is in the Avengers, matching the time period of the leaked set photos, for which we have the best evidence for time travel. The Stone, then, may not go with Thor to Asgard--as it stands Loki subsequently steals it from Asgard in Thor: Ragarok and then trades it for his brother's life in Infinity War
- Mind Stone: also pops-up in The Avengers as Thanos had retrieved it prior to the film; he gives it to Loki who takes it to Earth, but I don't believe it will be targeted here because Hydra later uses it to create Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver (end-credits of Captain America: The Winter Soldier) and then Tony uses it to create the Vision (Avengers: Age of Ultron), whom Thanos ultimately kills at the end of Infinity War; given how key it is to various Avengers I can't imagine it will be interfered with
- Reality Stone: infects Jane Foster in Thor: The Dark World and when that is resolved it is given to the Collector, from whom Thanos takes it after killing Loki in Infinity War. I suspect the Stone will be grabbed on its way to the Collector or from him directly, because I don't think Natalie Portman is involved in the film (I'm not sure what you could really revise about Dark World, although given that the writers of Avengers 4 also wrote that film I can imagine they would like to try and reshape it)
- Power Stone: the Macguffin of The Guardians of the Galaxy, which was stored on Morag before it was stolen by Starlord and winds up on Xandar at the end of that film (from whence Thanos retrieves it just before Infinity War opens); I'd guess they take it from Xandar to avoid interfering with the creation of the Guardians--this would also be an opportunity to introduce the long-rumoured Nova, but in such a crowded movie I don't think we'd see more than an Easter Egg for him
- Time Stone: a principal part of Doctor Strange, with the new Sorcerer Supreme hanging onto it after defeating Dormammu; he then surrenders it to Thanos to save Iron Man's life in Infinity War. Will they need to steal the Stone from Strange? I don't think so--it's possible the Ancient One gives it to them (see below), or it may not be needed as Strange possesses it until the moment he trades it (a scenario likely undone by the the time travel)
- Soul Stone: was on the Kree planet Vormir and at some point in the past Gamora found a map to it (prior to the events of Guardians of the Galaxy), which she destroyed; Thanos gains the Stone by killing Gamora in Infinity War, getting her to reveal the location by torturing Nebula; this sequence simply requires Nebula to avoid capture--perhaps convincing her past self to not do this is her arc in the film; alternatively, past-Gamora reveals the Stone to the Avengers and they regain themselves by making their own sacrifice (I've seen a lot of theories about Cap sacrificing himself at this point, but I think his mantra "we don't trade lives" in Infinity War crushes that theory--it's also pretty redundant for his character given his sacrifice in his first film)
From the above it looks like these are the prior films that could to be touched on are:
Avengers,
Thor: The Dark World,
Guardians of the Galaxy, and
Doctor Strange (albeit only the first seems to require much interaction with the parts of the film we've actually seen). A trip to Vormir would likely be the last thing they do, but do they actually need to acquire the
Soul Stone?
Thanos has no way of knowing the location if he's not told and having five of six Stones is more than enough to draw him to them (he also can't retrieve it without
Gamora). Indeed, if they can time travel without the
Time Stone it isn't that necessary either. I mentioned above that I don't believe the heroes are going to use the Stones (other than the one in
Vision's head), so I think it will be a Stoneless
Thanos versus those assembled (see below).
The above is
Tony Stark dressed as a SHIELD agent of the
Avengers-era (2012). My guess is what's intended is a kind of heist--otherwise what's the point of the disguise? Heists are dramatic--is that what we'll be seeing throughout? With the Avengers stealing the
Space Stone prior to it going to Asgard, the
Power Stone from Xandar, the
Reality Stone from either Asgard or the
Collector, and the
Time Stone from the sorcerers? I actually don't think so--at least not comprehensively.
Infinity War was described as a heist film and I don't think the Russo's would repeat that theme in the sequel. The writers also won't want to lose the stakes of earlier films, so I expect minimal interference with events of the past. To demonstrate the potential problems of going through the rabbit hole of willy nilly time travel:
- The Guardians don't become a team without the Power Stone
- Scarlett Witch, Quicksilver, and Vision aren't created/get their powers without the Mind Stone
- Dormammu isn't defeated without the Time Stone (killing all life on earth)
- The overall butterfly effect of making changes to the experiences of the various characters
Minimal effect also echoes the ST:TNG episode that serves as inspiration. One consideration about this idea is: what does it mean for the deaths that occurred in
Infinity War? Everyone agrees those snapped out of existence will return, but what about the others? If the time travel element is as described, why not go back to before those deaths and prevent them? There must be a mechanism that restricts what can be done as I don't doubt that
some deaths are permanent. The deaths need to have some sort of impact as well, otherwise they will seem cheap (I have no idea how that will be achieved).
Debunked Theories
I wanted to go over a few theories that have come up just to debunk them before we get to the two plausible scenarios.
Reddit Theory #1
CBR has thrown up a Reddit theory that summarizes as fellows:
Doctor Strange knows what happens in the future…he knew that Thanos had to snap his fingers at that exact right time and under all these certain conditions for them to win. He’s setting up Captain Marvel’s return to Earth. I believe he’ll appear in the CM [Captain Marvel] movie and tell Fury it is vital for him to carry around with him the pager to contact Captain Marvel.
While there are no obvious red flags, Kevin Feige has already said
Strange won't appear in
Captain Marvel and on a basic logic level it's completely unnecessary:
Fury can have the pager for the simple reason that he was given it due to the events of
Captain Marvel--he doesn't need to know what
Thanos did to understand that something has gone horribly wrong. I think part of what motivates this theory is that fans want a direct payoff for the reference to
Doctor Strange in
Captain America: The Winter Soldier, but it's clear from the context of that scene that the names
Jasper Sitwell gives are simply people who represent actual and potential threats to Hydra (via
Zola's algorithm), rather than some sort of secret knowledge of the future. There's also a lot less dramatic tension if
Strange knows what will happen in such an absolute sense--instead I think he knows the only way forward is 1)
Thanos wins, 2)
Tony survives, 3) those things happen in the way that they did in the film for potential success. I'm sure beyond that there are plenty of variables which could fail, but that this set-up was the only one with the possibility of success.
An earlier
theory (about undoing the events that cause
Civil War--see below) got a bit of a
boost as the Russo's said that the split from that film is part of the reason why
Thanos was able to win in
Infinity War. What is the theory? To stop
Thanos by stopping
Civil War--prevent the events that lead to the Avengers breaking up so that they
aren't separated when
Thanos comes for the stones. This would involve at least three major changes:
- Prevent Loki from taking over in Asgard (Thor: The Dark World) - this would mean Odin isn't banished, Hela isn't freed (to destroy Mjolnir and cause Asgard's destruction), with Thor having to spend years running around the Nine Realms to sort out what was wrong (which might also prevent Thanos from getting the gauntlet made by Eitri)
- Cap tells Tony that Bucky killed his parents (Winter Soldier) - the pair would have time process their grief long before Tony's guilt for creating Ultron has him support the Sokovia Accords, causing the Avengers to breakup
- Banner makes peace with the Hulk so he doesn't leave Earth (Age of Ultron)
The idea has some pretty big problems (lost character development--it would remove the changes Taika Waititi and Chris Hemsworth want in order to move the
Thor-franchise forward). It could also take the stakes away from the consequences of the earlier movies. That's the potential pitfall with time travel: avoiding confusion and making its impact felt in a way that feels earned. I think instead what's being referenced are the
wounds of
Civil War that will be healed.
Reddit Theory #2
Another
theory by a supposed insider, dynamites itself by including the X-Men in the post-credit scene (it also reads like fanfiction fueled by the comics anyway).
4Chan Theory
Why do we care about a
4Chan rumour? It's being heavily covered (
eg) because the same poster got some of
Infinity War's elements correct (I'm less impressed by his accuracy than Conrad is). This is the poster's version of the movie:
- Iron Man reassembles the Avengers and decides to build his own Infinity Gauntlet to undo what Thanos did. They recruit Ant-Man to help them travel through time and space using the Quantum Realm to retrieve the Infinity Stones from different time periods. Thanos finds out about their plans and becomes hellbent on stopping them
- The movie revolves around the relationship between Captain America and Iron Man
- At one point, Captain America and Thor fight Thanos. Timeline alterations have restored Mjolnir, and Cap wields it against Thanos to allow the others to escape, and is killed holding Thanos off
- At one point, Hawkeye must protect the unfinished Stark Gauntlet from Thanos' minions. He plays an "instrumental" role in Thanos' defeat
- Thor's subplot centers on him assembling an army to challenge Thanos. Captain Marvel joins him
- Hulk's subplot centers on Banner and Hulk finally merging to become Professor Hulk. He is the one that ultimately wields the Stark Gauntlet against Thanos, losing his arm in the process
- Nebula's subplot centers on her efforts to redeem herself. At one point, she fights her murderous past self
- Several MCU movies are revisited and retconned (probably not permanently), such as the Avengers retrieving the Power Stone creating a timeline where the Guardians of the Galaxy never came together
- There's a pivotal scene between Doctor Strange and a fully CGI character being shot on a secret location, with a skeleton crew, and takes up a relatively sizeable portion of the budget.
- Only two of the original Avengers [are] meant to survive the movie. Cap dies.
- The title was Avengers: Infinity Gauntlet at one point, but it might be changed after Zoe Saldana accidentally leaked it [this happened back in April, 2017]
Is the basic premise plausible? Yes.
Eitri has the mould for the glove for one thing, so making another one
is possible (or you could say
Stark makes his own)--certainly the power of a gauntlet is the simplest way to undo its work, although
Stark himself (as a human) could never actually use an Infinity Stone. "Professor Hulk" refers to a
Hulk with the intelligence of Banner--I'm accustomed to him being called the grey Hulk and when I was actively reading comics he went by "Mr. Fixit" (beginning in 1986). Leaked art for the film seems to confirm this (or something like it). As I've noted above, however, the assembly of the gauntlet doesn't leave much room for a dramatic ending--there's drama in assembling it, to be sure, but no dramatic tension once it has been--
Thanos is merely snapped away. What are the other flaws of the summary? Let's go through them:
- As mentioned Stark can't actually wield the Infinity Gauntlet--Peter Quill, who is half-celestial, could only hold a single stone temporarily and then only with help--this doesn't mean he couldn't build one for someone like Thor or Captain Marvel, but that's not how the post presents things--while the writer talks about the Hulk ultimately using it, it's not presented as having been the plan (nor is the Hulk anywhere near as powerful as Thanos--as demonstrated in Infinity War)
- There's very little Captain Marvel material here and even though Avengers 4 is meant to wrap-up the previous phases of the MCU, I expect her to have a more significant role (the same amount of screen time as Black Panther in Civil War along with that level of impact, which isn't apparent here)
- I'm less certain that so many (four) of the original Avengers will perish (remember we need our happy ending). Black Widow has to survive for her own movie (I hope the rumours that it takes place in the past are wrong), and there will be a fourth Thor movie; Feige's comments about death not being the only kind of consequence should serve as a caution
- The Strange scene is difficult to parse as is; attached to it is the possibility that Kaecilius will be back as well, which could suggest it's part of whatever Mark Ruffalo and Tilda Swinton were doing (see below), but there's really no making sense of it as is
- Bringing back Mjolnir only to destroy it again is redundant; I also don't think someone as important as Cap dies except during the climax
- The summary is missing the big scene Sebastian Stan and Scarlett Johansson mention below
- The plot doesn't reflect on the key point of the Star Trek episode mentioned above: in it Captain Picard learns an important lesson about himself, about truly being part of the team--there's no learning or character change above, just fighting with most of the team dying
I think most of this is educated guesses (spawning it's own
variant--with a
Reddit mirror), although it's not as flawed as some of the Spider-Man
sequel rumours.
Theories Still Standing
Using the Infinity Gauntlet Theory
Many assume that whatever happens, in the end one of the Avengers will use the gauntlet (Charlie brings this up continually,
eg, but he's one of many), but I'm not convinced. As I mentioned in an
earlier post: who can use the gauntlet? The snap nearly killed
Thanos and none of the heroes are as strong as he is (the film's writers said the heroes would have been disappointed to find out removing his gauntlet
wouldn't prevent them from losing).
Putting that aside, maybe
Stark is clever enough to get around that, so what are the other problems? For one we lose all the drama of the final confrontation, as once they have the gauntlet
Thanos ceases to be a threat. This fight is the culmination of ten years of the MCU--it's also a comicbook-inspired film that requires a big action sequence--an Avenger snapping their fingers not only eliminates that possibility, but it also duplicates the ending of
Infinity War.
Finally, creating their own gauntlet has been done before in the comics, and therefore seems to fail the Russo-test above (of repeating a story element we've seen in the comics--
Doctor Doom has had his own, for just one example).
Preventing the Snapture
This is my prevailing theory. I think the story is twofold: preventing the gauntlet from ever being assembled (again, making sense of the
comments we've had from the writers that the deaths in
Infinity War are real), as well as scattering (even destroying) the Stones. I think it's instructive that both
Captain Marvel and
Ant-Man and the Wasp happen prior to the events of
Infinity War, and that
Spider-Man: Far from Home is immediately after
Avengers 4, such that nothing significant happens between the two Avengers films outside of their own events. The thrust of
Avengers 4 will be to return to the past to prevent
Thanos from gathering the Stones and then defeat him in the present of
Infinity War. This impacts the timeline the least (no one wants the chaos of the Fox films)--all the events of all the pre-
Infinity War films remain intact (as they do in the
Star Trek episode that influenced the story) and only the one event--the
Thanos victory--is changed, as he's denied the gauntlet and the snap. I suspect the cost--the price to pay for this change--are a few deaths (if
no one is dead then there's no price paid for what's happened and no stakes to the story, but see below).
Character Deaths
The speculation about who will die hinges largely on actor contracts rather than story requirements, with most assuming
Cap will die or be sacrificed so
Tony can use the gauntlet (following that theory above). I've mentioned
Cap's mantra "we don't trade lives" numerous times, which largely invalidates this idea, but thematically it would also be a poor decision because he's
already done this kind of sacrifice in
Captain America: The First Avenger--and was willing to do so for
Bucky in the two Cap films that follow it. Chris Evans' contract situation (which I discuss
here) is nowhere near the rhetoric from Robert Downey back in
2013, but neither Marvel nor Disney would simply throw away a box office titan like Evans due to a contract dispute/Evans wanting to put down the shield for awhile.
Cap's death means a bittersweet ending and this film will ultimately be happy. Evans may want a break--he may change his mind and want to come back--so financially what's the point of killing him?
I've thought that if there is a personal sacrifice it will be
Iron Man because it has far more pathos. Think about the conversation between
Tony and
Fury in
Age of Ultron--that the Avengers died because of him, but he lived. That's not what happened in
Infinity War, but if there's foreshadowing that's pretty clear. His words to
Spider-Man in
Homecoming, about
Tony wanting
Peter to be better than he is, gain that
Uncle Ben pathos if he dies (it's an idea I suggested back in
April and has some backing from a
4Chan leak about the
Spider-Man sequel). My idea is that
Tony would carry on as an AI, thus meaning Downey could carry on, but with that said, Feige's comments about not being focused on death makes this difficult to swallow. His death would negate the foreshadowing of a life with
Pepper Potts, make the film bittersweet, and
Tony himself has
also been prepared to sacrifice himself (in
The Avengers).
When I talked about death's in my
Infinity War speculation article my focus was on those whose character arcs had nowhere left to go (like
Hawkeye or
Nebula) and/or actors who were getting older (
War Machine,
Hulk, and
Iron Man--all 50+). Zoe Saldana (
Gamora) is locked-in to about 500
Avatar sequels, so her death in
Infinity War is more likely to be permanent (despite many clamouring that she's in the
Soul Stone, see below). Let me repeat,
Avengers 4 will have a
happy ending, so predictions of doom and gloom are missing the point.
What I do think we'll see as a result of the film is a changing of the guard for the Avengers--most of the original crew, even if they all survive, are going to fade into the background. While there are plans for an as-yet unannounced
Thor 4 and an announced
Black Widow, the rest of the original characters (plus
War Machine) may well fade away to cameos in future events. Of the actors (Downey, Ruffalo, Renner, Cheadle, and Evans) only Evans is still in his prime to continue to lead films and as I mentioned above I'm positive Disney will backup a dump truck filled with cash for him to stay or return at some stage (whether he takes on the Downey-like supporting roles or gets another film for himself).
Other Story Elements
The various actors have made a lot of comments before and after Infinity War that seem to be about the sequel. Let's go through them:
- Several actors referenced being in a scene much larger than the airport battle in Civil War--Sebastian Stan mentioned it included Hank Pym, Janet Van Dyne, and Nick Fury; Scarlett Johansson said there were thirty-two heroes together (an oddly specific number); Anthony Mackie said there was a scene with everyone (specifically only mentioning Tom Holland and Dave Bautista); there's a Reddit claim that Chris Pratt and Zoe Saldana also confirmed an "everyone" scene, but there's no link for confirmation
The biggest
Infinity War shot was in Wakanda and that featured just nine heroes together (three less than the
Civil War fight):
Captain America,
Falcon,
War Machine,
Bucky,
Black Widow,
Black Panther,
Hulk,
M'Baku and
Okoye--they were later joined by
Groot,
Thor,
Rocket,
Vision, and
Scarlett Witch, but there was no group shot or epic united struggle (the original nine didn't fight together either--they fought alone or in small groups--the seven heroes on Titan are actually involved in the biggest collective fight that we saw).This makes it clear the scene being referenced is from
Avengers 4--presumably at its climax; it also demands the question of
why? If it's a fight only
Thanos demands this kind of response. Is it a funeral? A marriage? It's hard to say, but the scene must be pivotal to have so many involved (there must be a reason they've foreshadowed marriage between
Tony and
Pepper in both
Spider-Man: Homecoming and
Infinity War).
A number of relationships were teased in the lead-up to
Infinity War:
- Rocket with Hulk
- Doctor Strange helping Iron Man and Cap's relationship (this should be taken with a grain of salt as the comment was made before the filming of Infinity War in 2016)
- Vin Diesel's comment in Mark Ruffalo's illicit video from the 10th anniversary MCU photo shoot where he talks about the Hulk and Groot fighting together (assuming this isn't just Diesel's hyperbole)
None of these things have happened as we didn't see these characters interact at all in
Infinity War. Of the three the first seems the most likely to occur, but all are worth keeping in mind. It makes sense that
Rocket would gel with
Hulk given his relationship with
Groot--that connection could lead into Diesel's comment about he and the
Hulk if it actually has substance.
- Tom Holland mentioned that Doctor Strange talks about the Quantum Realm at length--this could be cut dialogue from Infinity War, but if not it must be from the upcoming film (given that both are snapped it's unclear when this could occur)
Valkyrie will appear (in what context I'm not sure, but she survived the Snapture so is available to help--it makes the most sense in the context of whatever
Thor is doing)
- It's possible Frigga will appear (the rumour is because her stylist was near the filming and posting an image with the hashtag Infinity War); if so this is almost certainly during time travel or a trip to Hell itself
- Hela will appear (see the Ruffalo comment below, plus some Redditors who claim to have seen her around the filming)
- Aaron-Taylor Johnson (Quicksilver) was rumoured to have been spotted on the set by a British tabloid--their report is based on a Spanish blog that no longer exists, so as evidence it's almost completely meaningless
- The same tabloid provided rumours of a World War Two flashback--the tabloid's source is a very ambiguous Instagram photo posted by Hayley Atwell (Peggy Carter) that easily could have been from the set of Christopher Robin; however, an image of 1940s filming adds more substance to the idea (despite Atwell saying "Not that I know of" when asked if she was in the film)
- Howard Stark scenes were shot (likely in connection with what follows below)
- There was a casting call for extras for scenes from the 1960s (it's difficult to understand the context of this one, as none of the characters have a strong connection to that era--it might be Howard Stark-related)
- There was a casting call for extras for the 1970s (hippy women specifically, which makes the scene a bit hard to place--Hank Pym possibly, but for what purpose--perhaps both this and the 60s scene are part of a montage?)
We had rumours that
Yondu and the Ancient One would return; these initially came from a Disney promotional display, which is ambiguous at best, but the latter idea was backed up by the always talkative Ruffalo (
Hulk) who said he enjoyed working with both Tilda Swinton and
Cate Blanchett (
Hela)--the Swinton reference seemingly can only be from
Avengers 4;
Yondu remains a possibility given that we're almost certainly seeing the Guardians characters in the past
There were comments by Frank Grillo (
Crossbones) who hinted his character will
return despite having been blown up in
Civil War- Loki's return: a now-deleted Redittor had posted he was pretty sure that the God of Mischief would be vital in helping the Avengers time travel in the film; while it's now clear that Ant-Man is actually going to be key for time travel, the idea of Loki returning in some fashion has been given fuel by the announcement of a Loki-series on the Disney streaming service (this could be prequel material, but we can't know that for sure)
The weirdest rumour is about
Harley Keener (from
Iron Man 3)--the link is from IMDB, but the actual source of it is the actor being in Atlanta (where
Avengers 4 was filming) at the time (something revealed by his Instagram)
The 1940s scene is likely a flashback--I don't think its about retrieving the
Space Stone, since taking it then causes all sorts of problems with the MCU's timeline as mentioned above. Claims on Reddit suggest only
Steve Rogers and
Bucky are involved and if that's the case I'd put my money on a flashback.
It's difficult to understand how the
Ancient One is involved--fetching the
Time Stone would threaten defeating
Dormammu. One theory I've seen is that they encounter the
Ancient One during the return to New York in 2012 (or, at least, prior to the events of
Doctor Strange), although for what purpose remains a mystery.
Crossbone's return makes sense via time travel, but I have a hard time believing precious screen time will be wasted on
Harley Keener (the events of
Iron Man 3 are among those most studiously ignored in the MCU, and what possibly payoff could there be?)--the actor being in Atlanta doesn't necessitate him being in the film (perhaps he was there for the 10th anniversary gathering, although I don't recall him being in the photo).
Soul World
One of the most common theories is that those who were killed by the snap, along with
Gamora, are within the
Soul Stone--sometimes this gets referred to as the Soul World or Soul Realm. This idea is straight out of the comics, but comments from Joe Russo have seemingly
busted the idea:
And that moment when he [Thanos] clicks his fingers [it] sends him into this ethereal plane inside of the Soul Stone where as part of his quote unquote hero’s journey in the film, he has one last moment to convey a sense of guilt about what he’s done. It illustrates what a complicated character he is. So, to clarify, it’s a spiritual representation of her [my emphasis--it's also the exact phrasing used again in the commentary track] and obviously that’s something that the Soul Stone has power to do. But really it’s there to illustrate his pain and his guilt. I wouldn’t read much more into it [my emphasis] beyond that.
The important element, to my mind, is his final comment: not reading too much into it. Those who cling to this idea reference the Russo's saying "of course it is [Soul World]" in the
Infinity War commentary, but the laughter of the writers to that comment is a clue. The comicbook idea of a mini-reality where all (or some) of the souls dwell fails the test because that plot is straight out of the comics (see Russo's comments above)--it also doesn't have a place in the kind of storytelling we're expecting from
Avengers 4 (it's complicated and yet another thing the movie has to explain). In the comics it's where
Adam Warlock dwells, but he's not part of the movie and his origin is already different via
Guardians of the Galaxy 2. While we all believe the snapped heroes will return, it will not be via the
Soul Stone--my guess is the event will simply be undone such that the snapped people didn't die in the first place (so there's no need for a repository of souls). This parallel's the solution in the
Star Trek: The Next Generation episode that inspired the story, as none of the crew other than Captain Picard is aware of the disaster that's been averted (so perhaps only those involved with fixing the problem will remember that it happened).
Sundry Pieces
The Russo's confirmed that
Scott Lang surviving the Snapsure is simply a matter of
luck rather than protection offered by being in the
Quantum Realm.
What motivates
Hawkeye and
Ant-Man to go against government restrictions and renege on their deal with
General Ross (mentioned in
Infinity War)? As it turns out the latter doesn't have too--he serves his time in his own film (this might be true for
Clint as well). As I'd anticipated the writers have made it personal for
Scott--the
Wasp (who
isn't in the film much; some of that may be in
flashbacks--excluding re-shoots she was on set for less than two weeks), along with
Hank Pym and
Janet Van Dyne, who were all snapped in the post-credit scene of
Ant-Man and the Wasp. I suspect
Hawkeye's family has been snapped as well to give him added stakes. What I'm not clear on is how an older
Cassie Lang (assuming the
rumour of her casting is correct) is involved--is there a glimpse into the future? I'll talk about that more below.
Conrad (who broke
The Eternals story) has the following rumour about
Avengers 4 that touches on
Hawkeye's story:
In the post-credits scene of Avengers: Infinity War, Nick Fury and Maria Hill are tracking the extraterrestrial signals being detected in Wakanda. Now neither Fury nor Hill knows about Thanos coming to Earth. But Fury does know about another extraterrestrial threat in the Skrulls due to him being around Carol Danvers in the 90s when she was dealing with them [in the upcoming Captain Marvel]. That’s why he sends the signal to Captain Marvel, because he believed the Skrulls were finally invading Earth. This then ties into Avengers 4 and Hawkeye’s role in the story. The rumor is that he’s working as Ronin in Tokyo and hunting down Yakuza (apparently with Black Widow), who are actually Skrulls. The casting notice for these extras apparently said they needed to be comfortable wearing a facial prosthetic, which would definitely point to them being Skrulls if true.
It sounds like the primary evidence for this rumour is the casting call associated with prosthetics, so while i'ts plausible it doesn't sound like it's a major part of the story (simply background for what
Clint has been doing).
Jim Starlin said he gets
more credits in
Avengers 4 (something he backpedaled
afterwards); if true it means another of his creations will appear. The
speculation is that it will be
Thanos' grandfather
Kronos--it would certainly help tease out an
Eternals movie (see below), although like
Nova above adding new characters might over complicate the film.
The Five-Year Gap
Another
rumour floating around is that there will be a five-year jump from the end of
Infinity War to its sequel (Conrad loves this idea so much it colours all his speculation). This idea primarily comes from something Gwyneth Paltrow said (see below), hair changes for lead actors, and the apparent
casting of a 16-year old
Cassie Lang (Scott's daughter):
In the five years after the events of Infinity War, Tony Stark (and possibly others) are now agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.. He and Scott Lang use some kind of technology that Hank Pym has developed in order to travel back in time in an attempt to defeat Thanos in the past. [The idea is Tony Stark will be married with a child and have to give up that life in order to save the trillions killed by Thanos.]
Pym didn't develop a time travel device in
Ant-Man and the Wasp, although he did build a ship that could enter and leave the
Quantum Realm. This concept would echo
Avengers Forever and we already know the danger of mimicking comicbook plots when it comes to theories. It's also hard to connect the idea to the second
Spider-Man film (coming out in the immediate aftermath) unless the resolution puts them back in the normal timeline--and why would
Nick Fury summon
Captain Marvel if it was going to take her five years to respond (the only answer is she came sooner and accomplished nothing, which seems unlikely)? This idea also runs against the MCU's normal routine of movies happening in real time (ergo, a year later--only
Guardians of the Galaxy 2 fully bucked this trend). And what, on a storytelling level, is gained by a time jump in terms of the narrative?
I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of Paltrow's comments (effectively debunked
here), as she clearly means it has been ten years since the first
Iron Man (2008), rather than ten years since the first
Avengers (2012).
Conrad, following classic
confirmation bias, has made a fuss over an alleged post that he believes is both
authentic (no denials as yet) and claims backs-up the time gap, basing it on
Steve Rogers lack of beard,
Black Widow's changed hair colour, and
Hulk's suit. Shaving a beard and dying hair doesn't require five years (nor, indeed, does
Hulk putting on a suit).
As for the
Cassie Lang casting: if it's true, it doesn't require a time jump in that sense--perhaps
Ant-Man flashes forward briefly without the big set-up Conrad proposes.
Conclusions
These are the elements I think we can feel certain about:
- The film will feature time travel (the only absolute certainty is to time period at the end of the first Avengers film, but it could be more dynamic than that)
- The Quantum Realm will be the method used to revisit events in the past
- The film will see Tony Stark and Steve Rogers fix their friendship and the Avengers re-assemble
- There will be a large battle against Thanos without any Infinity Stones where he's defeated (and likely killed, given how the MCU handles their villains)--again, thematically there's not much point in repeating a battle we saw in Infinity War when he has the Stones
- Only a few characters will die (I've long thought Hawkeye was going to be excised since he's such an ephemeral character, but he's hardly the only candidate)
- All the snapped characters will all be brought back to life and those brought back will all survive (otherwise their resurrections are meaningless)
What I think is likely:
- The film's timeline begins and ends a year or so after the events of Infinity War (no five-year gap--that doesn't mean no flash-forwards, but those aren't 'current day' for the film)
- Time travel will be used to ensure that Thanos is denied the Stones
- On a meta-level the Hulk is the most obvious candidate to die because of Universal's involvement with the character along with Ruffalo's age (51)
Despite all the leaks we don't actually know very much concretely about the plot--how do the Avengers rally together? Does
General Ross arrest them after the events of
Infinity War? How is
Captain Marvel integrated into the team? How much time travel will we get? What's the purpose of the flashbacks (if they are flashbacks)? What is current-day
Thor's arc in the film (he hasn't been spotted in the time travel photos)? There are huge amounts of plot we simply can't guess at until we get a trailer.
Iron Man dying is the most evocative thing they could do, but it's not
necessary. One interesting comment made by the Russo's in the
Infinity War commentary (during Stark's fight with
Thanos) is that the armour
Iron Man uses in that movie is the best he'll ever make--it might be a throwaway comment, but it could imply he won't be around to make something better after
Avengers 4 (it also means
current claims about him having a better suit in
Avengers 4 have to be taken with a grain of salt).
Notes
A fairly comprehensive archive of leaks and speculation can be found via these Reddit threads:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MarvelStudiosSpoilers/comments/8jmgd0/compilation_of_avengers_4_filming_details/
https://www.reddit.com/r/MarvelStudiosSpoilers/comments/92z9rz/comprehensive_compilation_of_a4_rumors_leaks_and/
https://www.reddit.com/r/MarvelStudiosSpoilers/comments/92zb8r/comprehensive_compilation_of_a4_rumors_leaks_and/
This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)
