Next Screening? “Avengers: Endgame” anyone?

Whoa, three “Avengers” posts in the same day?

Must be “curtain call” time.

I’ve assiduously avoided all the “What Thanos might REALLY be up to” and “Who ‘really’ died and who’s coming back?” speculation.

Because, seriously, how’s that help one’s enjoyment of the movie?

The recent Marvel movies have hit the “replay” button so often that it’s hard to work up much fresh enthusiasm for the next installment of “The Never Ending Story.” But as “Endgame” promises “closure,” I’m looking forward to it. Finales to film series — trilogies, what have you — can give us that, if nothing else. And I get sentimental over them, almost as sentimental as the hardcore fans of a good series (“Transformers” dweebs, you’re on your own.).

And even if the damned “Endgame” is THREE HOURS long, even if, like “Pirates of the Caribbean,” it’s “the End” in name and actors-still-under-contract only, even if the directors aren’t ever going to earn comparisons to Lean, Hitchcock, Scorsese, Nolan, Bigelow or Whedon, we go in with our hearts full and our minds open.

So what if turning most of the cast to dust at the end of the last film meant, essentially, nothing? So what if they’ve jammed all these characters from the corners of this universe (“Guardians of the Galaxy” included) into it, and “servicing” them all means this movie will be twice as long as “Dunkirk” if not “Lawrence of Arabia,” (3:36), “Gandhi” (3:11) or “Gone with the Wind?” (3:58)

The idea that Downey, Evans, Johannson, Ruffalo etc might be freer to pick and choose whatever their hearts desire in future projects — big paydays they’ve invested, hopefully, and the fallback promise of fan conventions on into infinity —  is just icing on the cake.

Let’s hope that cake is a sweet one.

This entry was posted in Reviews, previews, profiles and movie news. Bookmark the permalink.