After ‘Avengers: Endgame,’ What Happens Next? - The Ringer

Built on the foundation laid by the 21 films that came before it, Avengers: Endgame is a lovely coda for the original heroes of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. One of them nobly sacrifices himself for the fate of all living things in the universe. Another goes back in time to be with the love of his life. Another, who is now washed, jumps into a spaceship with his buddies, a raccoon and a talking tree. If the MCU was looking for a strong ending, well, they found it—and they didn’t even need any post-credits scenes. But the show does go on.

Just because we’ve (probably) seen the last of heroes like Captain America and Iron Man doesn’t mean the MCU is wrapping things up, or even slowing its pace, anytime soon. In a purely fiscal sense, Disney is making exceptional business off these franchises and will be quite content churning out additional Marvel films for the foreseeable future. And not all the MCU heroes have been hanging for as long as the ones who’ve been sharing the screen since the Obama administration.

But as far as tangible plans go, things are purposefully vague at the moment. Spider-Man: Far From Home, out in July, is confirmed to be the final installment of Marvel’s “Phase Three,” but beyond that there are only a handful of confirmations for sequels (Black Panther 2 and Doctor Strange 2) and the beginnings of brand new franchises (The Eternals), even if there are a lot of untitled MCU movies currently on the Disney calendar. Even the details for projects that are confirmed remain murky. With Endgame finally hitting theaters this weekend, Disney will likely disclose more details about Marvel’s future in the coming months. But where exactly does the MCU go from here? There are a handful of directions, and it’s worth dividing them into two sections: Earth and space.

In a literal sense, Earthbound and space characters are going to be very far apart from one another, but they also should be handling very different plot lines and antagonists—even if the MCU still doesn’t have a good grasp on superpowers. Beginning on Earth, let’s break down what could be in store for the MCU (and Disney+, with some of the characters who’ll return for television series) and which new heroes and franchises could appear in the 2020s before the next Avengers film.

Earth

Presumed Returning Characters: Falcon, Bucky Barnes, Black Panther, Bruce Banner, Black Widow (for her solo movie that is evidently a prequel), Spider-Man, Hawkeye, Ant-Man, the Wasp, Doctor Strange, Scarlet Witch, Shuri, Okoye, Wong, War Machine, Nick Fury

Newcomers: Shang-Chi

The Ringer Newsletter

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and European users agree to the data transfer policy.

Earth is still where most of the future Marvel action should take place, as evinced by the many heroes who are still alive and kicking (and probably have a mortgage somewhere on the planet) at the culmination of Endgame. It remains to be seen just how many heroes from MCU’s old guard will actually return, though. Given the events of Endgame, the Black Widow film should be a prequel of sorts, but it’s unclear if the characters getting their own series on Disney+—Bucky Barnes, Falcon, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch—will also return on the big screen. (Additionally, Vision is a costar for the Scarlet Witch series, and yet the paprika-enthused A.I. doesn’t come back at the end of the film, unless they’re saving that revelation for the show.)

Meanwhile, characters like War Machine and the Hulk don’t have a clear path to future MCU appearances, unless they’re intended to piggyback on another franchise—such as Hulk teaming up with Doctor Strange, for whatever reason, in Doctor Strange 2. But given that War Machine was Tony Stark’s bestie, and Don Cheadle is currently living it up on Showtime, perhaps the character’s time in the MCU has run its natural course. Less concerning should be the fates of Ant-Man and the Wasp, as both heroes have played well with audiences and critics through two films.

A Shang-Chi movie—the first Marvel movie with an Asian lead, following a martial arts expert—doesn’t have a release date, but now that they’ve locked down a director in Destin Daniel Cretton, it’s possible this movie could be ready to go in one of Marvel’s 2021 release slots. The character, who hasn’t been cast yet, could be one of the first new heroes introduced in the next “phase” of the MCU, depending how quickly the production process plays out.

But the biggest additions to the MCU are probably a little farther down the pipeline. Since Disney acquired most of 21st Century Fox, it’s also nabbed the rights to the X-Men. Nothing is confirmed, but it feels like an inevitability that the X-Men characters will be eased into the MCU. However, the next few years might serve as a grace period before a full-blown mutant reboot, considering 20th Century Fox still has Dark Phoenix and The New Mutants slated for later this year. And while the Fantastic Four are also a Fox property returning to Marvel, and haven’t had a big-screen adaptation since 2015, it probably doesn’t hurt to create a bit more of a buffer so that people forget the last iteration, which was so awful it temporarily tanked its director’s career.

Deadpool remains an enigmatic x factor. He’s technically part of the Disney family, but if the company finds the notion of cigarette inhalation in Steven Spielberg’s West Side Story remake to be scandalous, there isn’t a character further divided from the current Marvel ethos. If Disney intends to keep the Deadpool franchise and its R rating—the box office returns alone make for a compelling argument that they shouldn’t touch a damn thing with these films—there’s no way he can show up viscerally slicing dudes apart and tossing F bombs in an Avengers movie. We can say with near certainty that Deadpool will still exist under the Fox label; just don’t expect any crossover potential. (If he actually did, that could be the most ambitious crossover event in history.)

Space

Presumed Returning Characters: the Guardians of the Galaxy, Nebula, Thor, Valkyrie, Captain Marvel, my man KORG!

Newcomers: the Eternals (TBD, could begin on Earth)

With James Gunn officially back in the director’s chair for Guardians 3, the movie is going ahead as planned—albeit with a later release date, since the filmmaker has to get through his Suicide Squad reboot first. But when the Guardians franchise returns, it could feature a couple new members. At this point, Nebula—who was a surprising standout in Endgame—is basically part of the crew. But last we saw, they’ve also got Thor.

A lot can change between now and whenever the Guardians 3 production gets going, but Endgame does tease the prospect of Thor joining the Guardians for their next intergalactic adventure. (Whether that also means Chris Hemsworth will continue to put on a fatsuit and embody “The Dude” remains to be seen, but if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.) Hemsworth has been at this since 2011 and has undeniably earned his Marvel retirement. But holy hell, Fat Thor and the Guardians for an entire movie? You could not inject that into my veins any faster.

While Valkyrie is currently chilling on “New Asgard” somewhere on Earth—a quaint coastal spot that seems to be the same place where Aquaman slammed IPAs in Justice League—a return to the cosmos seems likely. Tessa Thompson has been vocal about a future Valkyrie–Captain Marvel team-up (and potential ’ship), and were that the case, a space adventure seems most likely—if only because Carol Danvers is so preposterously strong it’s hard to imagine her facing any serious existential threats on Earth. Since Thor essentially passes the Asgardian ruler torch to Valkyrie in Endgame, she could be the one handling any Thor-esque plot lines about the Asgardians moving further, were the MCU so inclined.

And finally, there’s The Eternals. Last year, it was announced that breakout indie director Chloé Zhao will direct the film, which focuses on an offshoot of humans (called Eternals, though they are not immortal—might as well call them the Oxymorons!) who were experimented on and imbued with abilities by powerful beings called Celestials. The cast so far includes Angelina Jolie, Kumail Nanjiani, and Dong-seok Ma. Because little else is known about the film, it’s unclear if The Eternals will begin on Earth before moving on to more psychedelic adventures in the cosmos or keep things grounded for the time being. This is pertinent since the MCU has slowly begun to lean toward more cosmic story lines (the Guardians films, Captain Marvel, Thor: Ragnarok, basically everything with Thanos in Infinity War), and The Eternals could become an ideal extension for intergalactic hijinks.

---

The questions surrounding the future of the MCU won’t be unanswered for long. The release of Endgame, and trying to keep all the Thanos-related plot lines under lock and key, was the only remaining barrier to Marvel clarity. But this short period of rampant speculation points to a couple things: The MCU can pretty much pursue projects about whatever the heck it wants, from Hawkeye slinging arrows on Disney+ to the Guardians exploring space with Fat Thor—and fans will probably eat up every bit of it.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.theringer.com/movies/2019/4/27/18518183/avengers-endgame-whats-next

2019-04-27 11:00:00Z
52780274514077

Catalyte CEO on using AI to hire unlikely techies, and going public - Business Insider

Jacob Hsu, CEO of Catalyte.Catalyte

• Catalyte is a Baltimore tech company which identifies unlikely potential software developers using AI, regardless of their social or educational backgrounds.
• Catalyte has trained up fast-food workers, truck drivers and construction workers and, on a case-by-case basis, even ex-felons. Some go on to work at big tech firms.
• The company says its revenues have increased seven-fold over a two-year period, from $10m to over $70m.
• Speaking to Business Insider, CEO Jacob Hsu says the company is "seriously considering" going public, adding that it will be "well-positioned" for an IPO in the next twelve months.
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

What do you think when you hear the words 'software developer'?

The cliché is someone who's a lifelong nerd or brogrammer type, almost inevitably male, and who has done a stint at Facebook, Google, or another major tech firm. They probably have a computer science or engineering qualification under their belt, and maybe went to an elite university.

Jacob Hsu is familiar with the pattern. Hsu is CEO of Catalyte, an IT services company, having joined in 2017. Headquartered in Baltimore, Catalyte manages software and digital transformation projects for clients such as Nike, making it much like any other IT services and consulting firm.

But Catalyte has an unusual approach to hiring teams of software engineers, which the company says results in a much more diverse workforce. To recruit trainee engineers, it uses an algorithm which does not factor in anything to do with applicants' social or educational backgrounds.

When Hsu first joined, he was sceptical that an algorithm could really result in diverse hiring.

"When I was just about to join, I thought the hiring process just can't work – I thought it must be impossible," he tells Business Insider.

Software engineering is a notoriously male-dominated field. In 2017, just 26% of professional computing occupations in the U.S. workforce were held by women, according to the National Center for Women & Information Technology.  In 2018, the hiring programme HackerRank surveyed 14,000 software developers around the world, of whom only 2,000 were women.

But Hsu's experience at Catalyte was different.

"The moment I walked through the door, it hit me. Nearly a third of the programmers [at Catalyte] were African American. A third of the programmers were women. It was like nothing I'd ever seen."

Catalyte offers a two-year intensive training course in software development. When trainees have finished the course, the idea is that they will be competent enough to work as full-time software developers — whether for Catalyte and its clients or anywhere else.

The company's recruitment algorithm selects people for the training course, but applicants don't know they're being assessed by an algorithm. Instead, the application process is disguised as a traditional test.

As offbeat as Catalyte might sound, the company says it has grown seven-fold in two years, with its revenue growing from $10m to over $70 million.

Graduates of the programme work for companies including Microsoft, Amazon, and Paypal, and go from an average salary of $25,000 before to an average of $85,000 within 24 months of finishing.

"One-third of our software developers have no more than a high-school education"

In Catalyte's Baltimore office (which is also its headquarters), 28% of the office's software developers are African American. The African American population of Baltimore is 29%. The thinking is that Catalyte's local software teams should reflect the cities they work in.

"One of our programme graduates is an African-American lady who spent 16 years as a public school science teacher," Hsu said. "At one of the schools she taught at, she was asked to teach basic coding, which she had no prior experience of. She realised she had an aptitude for it, and that's what got her interested in our programme. But she said she would have dropped out of our programme were it not for the focus on teamwork."

Hsu believes the misconception that software development is solitary can put women off entering the industry.Maskot/Getty

Indeed, Hsu thinks the teamwork required by modern software development is also the reason why Catalyte takes on more female developers. "People often ask me about diversity in tech. I think the reason you see fewer women in software development is because it's viewed as a solitary activity.

"But modern software development is a team sport. The teams pull each other through. It's like going through the army. Nine out of ten people who undergo our training programme stay on permanently. But if they didn't have a peer group around them, they wouldn't survive our training. If I enrolled on our training programme now, I don't think I'd make it through."

Hsu claims the training is so thorough that clients assume teams of relative novices are old pros.

"When Michael [Rosenbaum, Catalyte's founder] was first establishing Catalyte, a company asked a Catalyte team to build some software for them, almost as a Hail Mary, " Hsu explains. "The team built it so efficiently that the company assumed they were ex-Navy Seals with college degrees. But our staff had worked at Taco Bell, or as Park Rangers, or as high-school teachers."

There are unlikely techies peppered throughout the company, he added.

"Our current director of training operations joined us eight years ago as a trainee software developer. Before joining us, he spent 20 years as a roofing contractor, but lost everything in the recession, including his house. The leadership skills he learned as a roofing contractor make his work at Catalyte easier.

"One-third of the developers we train have no more than a high-school education. We re-employ truck drivers, fast-food workers, architects – you name it."

On its site, Catalyte says it won't recruit people with felonies but Hsu said the company makes some exceptions.

"We have even hired people with criminal backgrounds. Usually, it's difficult to hire people with felonies, but we have done so on a case-by-case basis," he said.

How does an algorithm spot an unlikely but promising techie?

At a time when tech firms seem to be having trouble hiring diversely, how does Catalyte pull it off?

Hsu explained: "We put out ads stating that we're looking for trainee software developers who will ultimately go on to work for major companies, but we make it clear that no prior experience of software development is necessary."

According to one Fast Company profile, Catalyte posts job ads to Craigslist, a classifieds site more commonly used to find stuff like furniture on the cheap than to find a high-paying software job. Most engineers look in more conventional places for new gigs, like Stack Overflow.

Hsu continued: "In the test, there's a math section, an essay section, and a values section. But it's not about assessing your answers to those sections. You can score 100% on them and still fail to be selected for our programme.

Catalyte's recruitment algorithm takes into account 500 factors when assessing applicants.BII

"What we're really assessing is things like your keystroke data, how fast you move your eyes, how you interact with the interface, how many tabs you've got open in your browser ... there are around 500 different factors like this that the algorithm detects and takes into account when assessing candidates.

Essentially, he said, the algorithm assesses how people's minds work. "Software development is about finding the right information quickly, and changing your thinking on the basis of new information." On that basis, Catalyte tweaks its techie-finding algorithm constantly.

"What we do isn't charity"

This might all sound very noble, but it probably means very little to most software development businesses unless it actually gets results. Are Catalyte's software development teams really as good as teams assembled using traditional hiring methods? For Hsu, the answer is that they're better – significantly better, in fact.

"What we do isn't charity," he said. "Our unconventional software teams are outperforming traditional software, development teams. Our teams are ramping up in one to two sprints, not three to four. On average, our teams are three times as productive as traditional, tier one software development teams.

"We're picking extraordinary people like needles from a haystack."

Read more: Catalyte Bolsters Growth Trajectory with Two Executive Hires

These extraordinary people are not all from Silicon Valley, either. In fact, within the US, they're not collectively from anywhere in particular, which reinforces Hsu's fundamental belief: that talent is not concentrated in the major cities.

"We're proving that you can build software developments teams anywhere because talent is evenly distributed across society. We're starting up software teams side-by-side with our clients in places like Cincinnati, South Carolina, Ohio… we can generate proximity [to clients] on-demand."

"People often ask me 'why is your HQ in Baltimore?'," Hsu added. "It's to prove a point. We're proving that software development careers need not be confined to degree-holders in San Francisco.

Hsu says the company's HQ is in Baltimore "to prove a point" that software development need not be confined to Silicon Valley.Sean Pavone/Shutterstock

He continued: "People imagine all software developers are math nerds with four-year degrees. That's not true. They're more like self-taught musicians who have practiced. Whereas other companies have a preconception of what a successful person looks like, and find people to fit that preconception.

"We've been fast and quiet in terms of growth. Our rivals didn't see it coming, But they're catching on to what we're doing, now."

Hsu thinks Catalyte could go public within 12 months

Where does Hsu see Catalyte in ten years' time, given its seven-fold growth in the last two?

Hsu suggests an IPO within the next year.

"We're seriously considering going public," he says. "In the next twelve months, I think we'll be well-positioned to do so. That's very real.

"Our ultimate strategy is to blow up pedigree. We want to be like the 'Harry Potter' sorting hat of careers, where we take people regardless of background and assess their suitability for other jobs.

"Software development is just the first profession we're applying our algorithms to. We want to branch out to other professions, too."

Of course, whether Catatlyte achieves its goals remains to be seen, but it's already attracted at least one big-name backer.

In 2018, Catalyte was one of the first companies that billionaire AOL co-founder Steve Case invested in as part of his $150 million 'Rise of Rest' fund, which invests in promising seed-stage companies located outside Silicon Valley, New York City, and Boston.

Catalyte's approach to recruitment is a breath of fresh air in an industry dominated by white men. If and when it does go public, it'll be hoping new shareholders share its appetite for diversity.  

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.businessinsider.com/catalyte-ai-software-engineers-profile-ipo-2019-4

2019-04-27 07:01:08Z
CAIiEJoEPYWcPNmW4pxItuNET34qLQgEKiUIACIbd3d3LmJ1c2luZXNzaW5zaWRlci5jb20vc2FpKgQICjAMMJD-CQ

Does Queen Elizabeth Approve of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Going to Africa? - The Cheat Sheet

It’s an exciting time for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. After getting married less than a year ago, they are all set to welcome their first child any day now, and they just moved into a new home in the countryside town of Windsor, England. Not only that, but the news recently broke that it is now possible that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are going to be spending some time in Africa for a short time. Their lives have been such a wonderful whirlwind lately that fans are barely able to keep up.

So, we have to wonder, does Harry’s grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, approve of Prince Harry and his wife going to Africa?

Africa is a special place for Harry and Meghan

Africa is special to the royal couple in more ways than one. Extremely early on in their relationship, before it was even announced to the world they were together, Meghan and Harry spent a few days in Botswana getting to know each other. It was there they realized that they truly connected and wanted to be a couple.

Not only that but the massive diamond that Meghan sports on her ring finger was sourced from Botswana as well. It is said that Harry truly loves Africa, and spent some time there as a way of escaping from the public eye immediately after the death of his mother, Princess Diana. 

Is the move definite?

At this point, Buckingham Palace has only confirmed the possibility of the Duke and Duchess going to Africa. Nothing is set in stone, and no concrete plans have been made.

It is always an exciting time when members of the royal family take on new duties, responsibilities, and adventures, and this possible trip would certainly be no exception.

What is the reason for the move?

For those wondering why a short move is being considered in the first place, it is said to be because they are planning to build upon their work for one of the Commonwealth countries. Harry and Meghan are president and vice-president, respectively, for Queen Elizabeth’s Commonwealth trust.

There has been some speculation that the reason for the move is due to tension between the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, but this is nothing more than a rumor.

What are the pros and cons of the move?

If Harry and Meghan were to move to Africa even for a short while, we may not see as much of them as we would like to. This means that we likely wouldn’t see much of the royal baby, either.

However, the main advantage is that they would be spreading their work to a place that truly needs them there, and would be delighted to have them. Also, it is wonderful to see the members of the royal family branching out in their duties and going above and beyond as to what is expected.

Does Queen Elizabeth approve?

She certainly does. Queen Elizabeth has a special bond with her grandson Harry and knows that he is always intent on doing what is best for the people around the world.

The queen also realizes that the dynamic of the royal family is currently evolving and changing, and that family members are becoming much more modern than they have been known for in the past. Chances are, she fully supports the move to Africa and will do her part to encourage the couple to do what is right for them. 

We know that Harry and Meghan absolutely love Africa, and we would be ecstatic to see them spend time in a place that is so special. 

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/does-queen-elizabeth-approve-of-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-going-to-africa.html/

2019-04-27 06:40:26Z
52780277028933

Avengers: Endgame's twists and ending -- we have spoiler-filled questions - CNET

We've got so many questions!

Marvel Studios

Calling Avengers: Endgame a dense movie is like saying Tony Stark has a fascination with metalworking. In other words, it's a massive understatement.

As the culmination of 22 films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Endgame has the unenviable task of wrapping up a decade's worth of story and character arcs and, of course, addressing that massive cliff-hanger at the end of Infinity War.

For the most part, it succeeds, offering fans -- especially hard-core fans who've obsessed over the MCU films -- a satisfying conclusion. That it can serve so many different functions and work as an entertaining blockbuster in its own right is a testament to the vision of Marvel Studios and the skill of Endgame directors Anthony and Joe Russo.

But it's not perfect. And after a bit of reflection, you might scratch your head at the implications of some of Endgame's twists.

If you haven't watched the film, STOP READING NOW. This is your spoiler warning.

Seriously, back away now.

Here are the biggest questions we have after Endgame:

What's the deal with Hawkeye's new getup?

Let's start with an easy one before we really go down the rabbit hole. 

Comics fans will recognize Clint Barton's switch from Hawkeye to Ronin, but the movie didn't fully explain the need for the new identity and costume. I get that losing your family is traumatic, but does it justify a hero costume makeover -- not to mention a full-sleeve tattoo? And where the heck did he get those new weapons and gear? He doesn't have the support of SHIELD anymore, so is he independently wealthy like Bruce Wayne?

It seems Hawkeye is a victim of the limited character development he's had in the past. Endgame makes it up to him, but there's a little too much at once.

At least he looks cool though.

Now playing: Watch this: Avengers: Endgame is a thrilling sequel to every MCU...

3:14

What about those five years?

Early in Endgame the story jumps ahead five years, showing the survivors living with the fallout of what's been called "The Decimation." When the Avengers save the day, everyone returns to the present, five years after the crisis. It's a bold decision that ensures the MCU remains scarred by Thanos' infamous snap.

But the five-year gap leads to a lot of questions. What about the people who died in those five years? And as fellow CNET editor Mike Sorrentino pointed out, what if someone moved on in life and remarried in that period? That would make for an awkward reunion.

On top of that, can humanity even rebuild from becoming a postapocalyptic society? It's hard to see everyone going back to the way things were, though that seemed to be the implication when we saw Peter Parker returning to school.

Speaking of which...

How will Phase 4 address the time jump?

The trailers for Spider-Man: Far From Home -- the final movie in the MCU's Phase 3 -- hint at Peter Parker and friends on a fun international romp through Europe. Should we assume they were all affected by The Snap but are now continuing their education five years later like nothing happened? Has international tourism just picked up where it left off? How will Far From Home address the time jump?

The ramifications are even more serious with Black Panther, whose sequel will likely be part of Phase 4. Wakanda lost its king, and his sister, for five years. What happened? Did someone else take over? And does T'Challa automatically regain the throne after his return?

One of the final scenes had T'Challa overlooking his kingdom alongside Queen Ramanda and Shuri. But that glosses over some serious constitutional questions about how things operated while he was gone.

Now playing: Watch this: The best moment from every Marvel Cinematic Universe...

4:23

What about the history of the MCU?

Any time you employ time travel in a story, you're going to open cracks in logic. The Russo brothers admirably tried to button up the leaks by having Captain America return the stones to their various places in the timeline -- but that doesn't fix everything.

For instance...

Are there two Captain Americas now?

We have the original Steve Rogers frozen in ice until he woke up in the 21st century MCU, as we saw in the movies. But now there's a second, older Steve Rogers hanging out in Peggy Carter's home in the intervening years. It's a stretch to imagine Captain America staying hidden all that time.

Where the heck is Loki?

During the Back to the Future-style trip back to the events of the original Avengers movie, Scott Lang and Tony Stark's attempt to nab the Space Stone backfires, allowing the freshly apprehended Loki to nab the gem and disappear.

Ultimately, did Loki's escape change his fate at the hands of Thanos in Infinity War? It's plausible, given reports that Disney Plus is working on an original show based on the character.

But if that's true, then wouldn't it have affected the events of Thor: The Dark World, also revisited in Endgame? But during Thor's own time-jaunt we briefly see Loki in a cell, so the timeline wasn't altered.

How are Nebula and Gamora alive?

When Present Good Nebula shoots Past Evil Nebula, shouldn't Present Good Nebula cease to exist, like the photograph in Back to the Future? Alternatively, if it did happen to Past Evil Nebula, then Present Good Nebula should remember it, and in turn that memory would've been downloaded so Past Evil Nebula would see the hit coming.

And don't get us started on how there's now an alternate version of Gamora.

Did Infinity War even happen?

Thanos and his crew jumped ahead from 2013 (during the original Guardians of the Galaxy) to the present, and are defeated. So past-Thanos couldn't have manipulated the events that led to Infinity War. If he never gathered the stones, Tony couldn't have undone the snap, which didn't even happen anyway.  

And now my head hurts...

Can the gauntlet revive Thanos?

Don't forget, the gauntlet is still around.

Did Captain America reconnect with the Red Skull?

Remember, Cap went back in time to return all of the Infinity Stones, right? If he returned the soul stone to Vormir, wouldn't he have run into the Red Skull? Granted, Red Skull was likely freed from his burden of watching over the stone, but it's not like he has a ship to take him off planet. 

That would be a heck of an awkward reunion. 

Would Tony Stark back his brain up?

He's done it in the comics. Or maybe I'm still in denial about losing Robert Downey Jr. Let's hope the Avengers don't pluck a teenage Tony from earlier in the timeline either... that's happened too.

Is Black Widow really dead?

This is one death that seems permanent, as it completes Natasha Romanov's arc as a loner spy who found a family worth sacrificing herself for. As she said in Avengers, "I've got red in my ledger, I'd like to wipe it out." Consider it wiped.

But there's the persistent buzz that Black Widow will star in her own film. Sure, it could be a prequel, but this is a comic book universe, and deaths are all too easily reversed. In fact, of all the people left supposedly dead at the end of Endgame, three -- Black Widow, Loki and the Vision -- are all headlining future MCU movies and TV shows.

Where's Vision?

With WandaVision coming to the Disney Plus streaming service, there was a chance that Vision would return. But aside from a passing reference at the end by Wanda, Vision was nowhere to be found. The show could be a prequel to Infinity War, but in that movie Shuri was working on separating Vision from his Infinity Stone -- could he be resurrected without it?

Is Hulk's consciousness gone?

Bruce Banner and the Hulk have merged into "Professor Hulk." It seems Bruce is more in control, presumably submerging the Hulk personality we last saw in Thor: Ragnarok. How did that even happen? It's a pretty big deal to just explain away as happening offscreen.

Does Thor ever eat a salad?

Big Belly Thor is the best Thor.

CNET's Iyaz Akhtar, Michael Sorrentino and Sean Keane contributed to this story.

First published at 5 a.m. PT.
Updated at 6:30 a.m. PT: Clarifies Spider-Man: Far From Home's placement in the timeline.
Updated at 11:24 a.m. PT: Adds an additional question about the Red Skull.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.cnet.com/news/avengers-endgames-twists-and-ending-we-have-spoiler-filled-questions/

2019-04-26 18:24:00Z
52780274514077

Avengers: Endgame has no postcredits scene, but there is a minor audio stinger - CNET

Avengers: Endgame is now in theaters worldwide and runs a tight three hours and one minute. If your bladder is microscopic (like mine) you're probably going to need to beeline for the bathroom as soon as the credits start to roll. So do you need to stick around through the credits for an end-credits scene?

Nope. You're free and clear to run out, as there's no mid- or postcredits scene. Despite the MCU tradition of postcredit scenes, Endgame is a true finale. The postcredit scenes either set up the next MCU film, link the films together or even add a bit of humorous color to the world. But Endgame isn't giving away anything for Phase 4 yet. 

Now playing: Watch this: Avengers: Endgame is a thrilling sequel to every MCU...

3:14

But also, there's kind of a teaser?

Unlike other MCU films, there isn't a traditional end scene to Endgame, but there is a minor sort-of-maybe-"we're still debating it" audio stinger. After the crawling credits finish, the Marvel logo appears and an audio teaser plays. It sounds a bit like clanking? Really, it just seems like a way to show fans the Marvel Cinematic Universe will return. 

It could be metal on metal, someone blacksmithing, someone just banging something, or maybe just an accident we all hear now. (I thought it sounded a bit like a bell but I also really had to pee.)

Reddit user OxideCyanide makes a case for it being the sound of Iron Man building his suit in the first film. 

None of our viewing party could figure out exactly what the audio stinger was, but some of us have some off-the-wall guesses (we floated that it may be a Secret Wars teaser or an obscure X-Men one). We're inclined to go with Reddit on this one and it makes the most sense in the context of the movie.

I'd recommend staying for the initial part of the credits, which serve as a beautiful homage to all of the (many) Avengers, but especially the original six, as much of the marketing has done. So even if you don't stay for the audio stinger, at least wait till the rolling credits to leave.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.cnet.com/news/avengers-endgame-no-postcredits-end-credits-scene-but-there-is-an-audio-stinger/

2019-04-26 16:32:00Z
CAIiEHw89zIEjndhF3Du9JpFhisqEwgEKgwIACoFCAow4GowoAgwkRo

Thanos will snap away your Google search results - TechCrunch

Go to Google (don’t worry, I’ll wait). Type in “Thanos.” Click the little cartoon Infinity Gauntlet on the right side. Now sit back in horror as Evil Space Grimace snaps half of your search results into dust in the wind.

Call it an Easter egg or Snap Engine Optimization. It’s a fun little promotion for the last movie that needs any promoting at this point, having just sailed past $60 million for the biggest-ever Thursday preview.

And just like Avengers: Endgame, the animation lasts for a while. The results disappear with an accompanying sound effect as the pages scrolls up and down, reliving the cliff hanger ending from the previous film. 

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/26/thanos-will-snap-away-your-google-search-results/

2019-04-26 16:07:28Z
52780277713038

Why So Many Of Us Believed Taylor Swift Was Coming Out - BuzzFeed News

For years — years! — we’d gathered every clue.

Kissgate. All those rainbows! Swapped lyrics featuring female pronouns. Lyrics that just seem really gay. The cats. The donations to LGBT causes. That performance with Hayley Kiyoko. Today, April 26th, the day of Taylor Swift’s long-awaited announcement, is literally lesbian visibility day.

I can’t claim to be nearly as much of a #Gaylor diehard as the true champions who’ve dedicated themselves to combing every last social media post, every public appearance, every exchange — however brief or seemingly insignificant — for evidence of Taylor’s queerness (and/or evidence of a romantic relationship with her sometimes-bff Karlie Kloss). But there’s always been a deep, deep part of me that suspected one of the century’s biggest pop stars, as maniacally loved as she is deeply loathed the world over, plays (at least some of the time) for the girl’s team.

But particularly in the last few days, I’ve lost my head completely. I wouldn’t even call myself a Taylor fan, but I became a full-on #Gaylor truther, yelling at all of my colleagues that, surely, this famous lady was going to come out — as bi, as gay, as something. Jill Gutowitz’s investigations at Vulture had me hooked. The mural Taylor commissioned, revealed in Nashville yesterday, could not look more like the wings Karlie wore at the Victoria Secret show in 2013 — the year both she and Taylor walked in the show. Why would Taylor change some lyrics to “her” this week, of all weeks? Why???

I can’t help but suspect that Taylor, for her part, seemed to know that a dramatic countdown to a Big Midnight Announcement is exactly what her long-suffering queer fans have always wanted: a formalized hunt for The Truth. It’s almost as if she’s wanted to encourage the celesbian rumor-mill. Taylor has been leaving clues for weeks as to what her announcement might entail, which means that, for Kaylor shippers, the past month has felt like Christmas. She even got a whole bunch of gays to watch her interview with Robin Roberts during, of all things, the NFL draft, a feat of enormous power if there ever was one.

Today I’m feeling like reporter Mary Emily O’Hara, who tweeted, “Taylor Swift is hardly the first straight girl I let lead me on.” Clearly, we should have known better. If only we’d heeded the skepticism of another reporter, Trish Bendix, who offered us a helpful reminder that it was just a short time ago a bunch of us got fooled into thinking a mysterious, major announcement from Kendall Jenner would be her coming out moment, though it turned out to be the biggest not-news news of our time: she’d signed on as a Proactiv sponsor. It’s hard, in retrospect, to think we’d all been fooled into believing, as my friend Ellen put it, that “Taylor’s orientation is anything other than ‘capitalism’.”

Even though Taylor made the straightest gay music video of all time without actually coming out, it seems like the #Gaylor conspiracists haven’t given up hope yet. I doubt they ever will. And why would they?

Set aside, for the moment, the argument that public figures coming out is good for the community: openly gay and bisexual people can serve as It Gets Better-style role models for all the many LGBT people out there who aren’t able to be open in their own lives quite yet. And the more openly queer people there are, the less stigma we’ll all face.

But besides all that: queer celebrity gossip is fun!

(Of course, there’s a difference between friendly questioning about somebody powerful and viciously outing vulnerable, private citizens. Even shipping famous same-sex couples can go off the rails. That’s not the kind of queer gossip I’m talking about. Mostly, I mean shooting the shit with my friends.)

Whenever I’ve been with a bunch of lesbians and the topic of Taylor’s rumored queerness comes up, somebody will inevitably joke that they’d happily trade her in for Rachel Weisz or Cate Blanchett instead. (All of those people today, hearing Taylor didn’t actually come out, are feeling quite relieved indeed.) We argue about whether or not she broke Karlie’s heart, whether she really dated Dianna Agron.

Celesbian gossip, like all celebrity gossip, isn’t really about the celebrities. It’s about us, about what we value — in ourselves and in one another. It’s about what we want in our partners and friends and communities. Do we have a responsibility to come out? What makes a good queer, a progressive queer, a hot queer, a likable queer? What kind of language do we use to define who we are? How important is our sexual orientation to the way we structure our lives? Why do we put some queer people on pedestals and not others? What do we want a queer-friendly world to look like?

Celesbian gossip is also sort of soothing, because it can mirror the way a lot of us feel in our daily lives, trying to suss out whether or not our crushes might return our feelings. We’re all living in real-life versions of that famous discussion in season one of the L Word, when everybody’s trying to help Dana figure out if her new love interest is gay: Did you look at her fingernails? Did you look at her shoes? What is gay life, after all, if not an endless hunt for other gay people.

This time around, I found it quietly remarkable it is that, leading up to her grand announcement, we could even speculate about Taylor’s sexual orientation so widely and loudly at all. Just a few short years ago, indicating that a celebrity might be gay or bisexual on social media, in the press, or any other kind of public platform could get you accused of “outing” them without their permission. For a million years, it seems, Kristen Stewart was openly holding hands with her girlfriends but still getting “gal pal”d and straight-washed in the tabloids. Only when Kristen “officially” came out were we, the public, then given permission to name what we’d already been seeing with our own eyes.

In the leadup to Taylor’s announcement, when rumors she’d be coming out began to furiously fly, the mainstream media and the gay press alike have published pieces openly speculating about whether or not her Big Reveal would be queer-related. My Twitter feed had been talking about nothing else all day. Perhaps, finally, wondering whether or not someone might be gay or bi doesn’t have to be treated like we’re poking at some shameful secret. (OK, a couple people on twitter did accuse me of outing her when I said I wish Taylor would go ahead and come out already — I don’t stay up til midnight for just any woman! — but they were in the minority this time.) It’s simultaneously a big deal when somebody comes out and not that big of a deal at all. As the meme goes: “Some people are gay, Steven.”

I really thought Taylor was coming out this time. I really did! Now, there’s a big part of me — the grouchy and cynical part — which feels like the rollout for Taylor’s new song and video was a calculated attempt to queerbait us all before she turned on her glittery heels and announced that “ME!” would be… the soundtrack to more of the NFL draft. But there’s another part of me that has to grudgingly respect how she whipped a bunch of full-grown gays who “don’t really care about Taylor Swift” into such a frenzy. Taylor is nothing if not an excellent businesswoman.

Because of this sort of stunt and many others, I wouldn’t say that Taylor has ever been my favorite celebrity about whom to speculate (if you’d like to trade queer celeb gossip: DM me). Still, I’ve always enjoyed floating my half-baked #Gaylor theories to an unsuspecting group of people because, to most, Taylor has always just seemed so…. Hetero. And that’s not (only) because she’s very feminine, though straight people in particular seem to never learn that gays come in all kinds of packages. She’s also a famous serial dater of a whole bunch of famous men. Taylor, the ex of Joe Jonas and John Mayer and Jake Gyllenhaal? She couldn’t possibly be anything but straight!

For my entire adult life, I’ve been astonished at people’s inability to consider that, just maybe, a famous person — even one who’s famously dated men and seems way too uncool to be queer — could actually be gay or bisexual.

I’ve known Kristen Stewart was queer, for example, since I saw her play an adorable little 12-year-old baby dyke in one of the movies that spurred my sexual awakening, Catch That Kid (2004); her character, Maddy, convinces two different boys she’s in love with them so they’ll do her bidding, even though she doesn’t actually care about either of them. (Gay rights!)

Of course I couldn’t really know. But I knew, you know? That’s just how it works sometimes — a kind of spiritual gaydar. Even when Kristen Stewart became one half of what was, at the time, the most famous straight couple in the world — she dated her Twilight co-star Robert Pattinson, in case you’d forgotten — I knew. I knew it in my gay-ass bones. But I’d get frustrated with my (mostly straight) friends during that period and long afterwards who not only refused to believe my theory, but refused to even entertain the possibility that the pretty, morose actor who played Bella Swan might actually be a homo.

Of course, nobody should believe every wacky celeb conspiracy theory that flies across their feed. Not even the ones I pedal! But maybe it's worth examining our reasons for believing some celebrity theories more than others.

Before some famous women actually did come out (in whatever complicated form) and vindicated me, I’d mention my suspicions — about Kristen, or Demi Lovato, or Taylor Swift, or Ellen Page (seriously, Ellen Page) — and receive a remarkable amount of pushback. These days I’ll mostly get an “Eh, I don’t buy it” when I get too tin-hatty, but even in the year 2019, I can still hear something like: “Of course she isn’t GAY. Why would you even THINK that? And even if she was, why would it even MATTER in the FIRST place???”

Today, as everybody dissects Taylor’s video for still more clues — and as others judge those people for caring a little too much about what a celebrity chooses to do in private — I’m still gonna root for the believers. It feels hokey to say so, but coming out does still matter. Whatever the hell that looks like anymore. ●

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/shannonkeating/taylor-swift-bisexual-coming-out-rumors-celesbian-gossip

2019-04-26 15:49:00Z
52780276989576