Yeah, the Russos say one thing, and the writers say another thing about the time travel. But while they disagree on that seems they both agree on this. https://bgr.com/2019/04/30/avengers-...rica-iron-man/

So a bunch of men being sad is the equivalent of what Tony got? They are being ridiculous. Truth is, they probably didn't think about it.

I know right plus they said Clint is a family man, so he get pass by being alive, but umm what about Tony?!??! He's a family man too??? So for Clint, it's tragedy?? But not for Tony?!?!

I hate how they act like she didn't need one on screen.. It still bullshyt.. I don't care..

Probably didn't, and they also both agree about Tony's ending. I think their reason, why it had to be him, is ridiculous. I also think the part about we shouldn't feel too sad or angry about his ending is ridiculous as well cause what about his Wife&Kid who's now a Widow&Fatherless?

It had to be Tony because he's the hero who started all of this, so as much as I hate that he's gone because of this, it makes totally sense that he was the one. Not because he was freaking closer, ffs.

Regarding the new timeline Steve created, the Russos explained on an interview that Steve had to use a Pym Particle to jump from his new timeline to the one we see in the movie, so that was why he was able to be at the bench at the end.

Tbh I don't really hate Steve's ending, he has never been able to fully move on from his past, so I think it's nice that for once in his life he made a selfish decision in order to find happiness. Yes, it's very OOC for him to make such a selfish move, but he knew that nothing would change in the past, so to me it makes sense. And I personally love that he had his happy ending, I just wish Tony had the same chance... Because for Tony, he already had it and then lost it by saving everyone.

Overall the time travelling thing makes sense to me too, although I agree that it was very confusing at first. But after seeing the movie for a 2nd time and also reading articles about it, I don't think they did a terrible job with it.

Thanks for letting me know about that. I do wish they could have showed it somewhere that he used that in the movie at the end.

Yes, me too. You know things aren't 100% clear when you have to read articles to understand what happened.

I know, right? They should have to explain things like this. It should be clear in the movie.

Yeah no one has been able to give me an accurate answer so far as to how this all works. 2014 Thanos is killed in 2023, therefore not able to return to 2018 to wipe 50% of the population. I'm sorry but I am not buying "Alternate reality" as an answer. That doesn't explain anything.

Time travel is always confusing because there are no specific rules we can apply when analyzing it, it doesn't mean that it was badly written, the whole aspect of them not changing their timeline but instead creating parallel realities made sense. Sometimes you need to watch a movie that has time travel twice to fully get it.

That wasn't the 2018 Thanos. They said several times in the movie that you can't change the future by changing the past. The Ancient One and Banner explained the aspect of creating alternative timelines in the roof scene.

They went to 2014 of THEIR past and Thanos followed them to 2023. What Thanos exactly from what "timeline" did the original stones snap? Saying "you cant change the future by altering the past" doesn't make it true, also if it did... then why return the stones? if they were taken from the past and it doesn't change the future... why put them back at all? I'm sorry the time travel in this film is a complete mess. I still don't buy "alternate timelines" as an explanation.