The box-office total of all Star Wars movies may be close to half a billion dollars, but it won't be the greatest space opera ever. The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) grossed more. (Ten billion dollars and still counting.) Fans aren't holding their breath on Phase Four of MCU. It will happen.
Jim Starlin's "The Infinity Gauntlet", which first came out in 1991, was the space epic that Marvel Studios had been building for a decade. You must be a comic geek to see those telling scenes, which would last for several seconds. For instance, the post-end credit scenes of "Guardian of the Galaxy" showed Howard the Duck mocking the Collector. Viewers may not have paid attention to what was behind him. It was a broken cocoon. Josh Whedon, who directed "The Avengers" and "Avengers: Age of Ultron", revealed (during an interview) that it contained Adam Warlock. Before you start asking questions, it will be best to know what made "The Infinity Gauntlet" one of the best Marvel issues. If not one of the best, then a must read. Hold your breath:
Thanos is not a supervillain. Josh Brolin, who would play Thanos, appeared in "Guardians of the Galaxy" and "Avengers: Age of Ultron". His screen appearance may have lasted several minutes, but his menacing appearance terrified moviegoers. Starlin depicted a complicated figure in "The Infinity Gauntlet". Thanos wanted omnipotence, and he achieved it. But love inspired him. Starlin wasn't suggesting Shakespeare, as past issues revealed Thanos's mortal life. The illustrations of George Pérez and Ron Lim showed flaws, which readers could relate instantly. And the mighty Thanos could be manipulated. Absolute power can corrupt anyone and those who seek it makes themselves vulnerable to those who want to exploit it for their own needs. This would lead to another startling revelation.
This space saga was more of a clash of the egos. Superheroes must uphold the greater good, but they have egos. It could be an unpleasant sight if it would be left unchecked. "The Infinity Gauntlet" was an intergalactic version of "Lords of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring", and these heroes didn't come together to save the universe. For instance, Wolverine was called because he was the fiercest mutant. And he won't hesitate to kill anyone. Let's not forget their villains, who could break this fragile alliance due to their divisive nature. (If you don't have a clue, then you might have forgotten Doctor Doom.) It would be fun to watch, but it was fifteen minutes of fame for most of them.
Here's a thought for the day. Much have been written about despotism, and its ill effects. On the other hand, philosophers like Aristotle favored it. (He would approve the way Alexander the Great conquered most parts of the ancient world.) Starlin presented a similar case in "The Infinity Gauntlet", where Thanos was somehow erratic in how he handled (absolute) power. Would a cosmic despot do better? This could be a never-ending argument.
No one is less important than the others. Whedon hasn't bared the details of "Avengers: Infinity War - Part 1" and "Avengers: Infinity War - Part 2", but the audience would expect the demise of Thanos. Starlin thought of a different ending, where the great battle was followed with contemplation. The good guys won't exist without their enemies. This was the way the universe should be. Agree or disagree?
The experience would be repeated until the lesson was learned. Thanos had three chances of achieving omnipotence. Would he be wiser after his third attempt? Better look for a copy of Starlin's epic series.
