Superhero movies often have a fairly binary perspective on morality. Though characters like Thanos may have ideals that resonate with some, it’s pretty clear that the vast majority of antagonists in those films are clearly in the wrong. may be changing that, as the new overarching antagonist Kang the Conqueror could have a valid point midway through the film.
A recurring theme in the MCU, especially since around, is sacrifice. The heroes lost against Thanos in that film because, as Captain America said, “we don’t trade lives.” Thanos, on the other hand, was willing to sacrifice others and potentially himself for his goals. Only Iron Man and Black Widow’s sacrifices made defeating the Mad Titan possible in the sequel,, as the Avengers wouldn’t have obtained the Soul Stone or pulled off their own snap without the two of them giving their lives.
In, Kang essentially tells Ant-Man/Scott Lang to sacrifice other timelines and worlds to stop “what’s coming” and save his daughter. The Conqueror wants revenge on those who exiled him, which he says would stop the coming danger — though unleashing him could lead to other timelines being wiped out. It turns out that the ones who exiled Kang, are Kang, as he was exiled by the menacing Council of Kangs that we see in the post-credits scene who are all raring to rip the multiverse a new one.
Scott and the rest of his crew follow the usual routine of ignoring these warnings — which is fair, since they’re coming from a megalomaniacal otherworldly tyrant — and proceed to defeat Kang and return home to relish in the hard-won peace they now have. It’s all fairly standard for a Marvel movie, as it seems everything is hunky-dory once more.
But this time, the movie ends a bit differently.
Read more on comingsoon.net