1)Your answer: "
just like they(Avengers) did with Gamora et al..." - is incorrect.
I provided the correct answer:
"Avengers did not do anything with Gamora. "Evil" Nebula did"
It matters a lot. It shows that you are vaguely familiar with the plot of the discussed movie. But you don't really know it in details.
2) This is a short description of the plot. Therefore it is relevant. While your assumption of "
writers make up stuff" is not really relevant to the plot itself.
3) I am not making an assumption. It's a fact. This movie is based on this theory:
4) Your theory is not relevant. Since the movie is not based on your theory.
5) The rest of your message is unrelated to the movie discussion. Why should I waste my time reading and answering?
So if you want to continue the discussion. This is your initial statement again:
"
The reason they didn't go back to the day they lost is because of daughters like Tonys'."
I am interested in reading your line of thoughts that makes you to write this^. But only if it based on the theory the movie uses and the movie plot. I am not interested in reading and discussing an unrelated information about dragons. This is topic about the "Avengers: Endgame" movie.
Sorry it took me so long to reply.
You keep going round and round and now you think some cool smilies is going to change something? You're funny. If I miss something I will readily admit it. As for your links, if you need others to converse for you then it does get tiresome. However, I will give you this one.
So far, any point that doesn't fit with what you are saying you either ignore or act like it has no bearing. Now you claim as if some time travel hypotheses is actually fact. Let's look at this further.
"4) Your theory is not relevant. Since the movie is not based on your theory."
That's my point. Neither is a theory. That's why academics have allowed hypotheses to be spouted off as a theory so someone can quote the creators of said hypotheses and say, "See this real! It's a theory!" It really does denigrate the actual theories that have been proven. But, academics do have egos. How dare you say it's not a theory!!!
What he is doing is hypothesizing, but that really doesn't sound as legitimate as hopping on to the backs of real proven theories and saying, "I'm a theory!"
But as you asked, according to him they could have all gone back and started over. That would be their new reality, their new timeline. everyone alive. That would be the movie we would have watched. For example, we didn't watch all the other timelines that were created just from them going back and screwing things over.
So they saved one timeline and doomed how many? Let's look in to that. Just the Avengers part.
Well, after they initially created extra timelines by getting the Stones, they then sent Cap back to create a stones throw more timelines. I gather the other timelines they created then tried and then those tried...
By the directors very definition of alternate realities the Avengers acts alone created an infinitely growing number of different timelines. If they had just gone back and changed it once then they would have been ahead. Only dooming one timeline with half. Now they doomed more than infinity will allow us to count. Such great people.
The fact that they broke their own rule with Cap...oh well.
To get to the crux of your question, Tony didn't want to lose what he loved. If they had started over, no daughter as she is today. She would've been different. Only reason. He just ignored the real ramifications (Infinite number of suffering realities) because that's what he does as Tony Stark when he really desires something. Except when he has an epiphany usually due to being bludgeoned (literally) in to reality.
If you look deeper at the original "theory" this movie is based on it is adapting to the stream of consciousness or life is thought approach. The proper way to deal with the present is a stream of consciousness. Not one of linear time but one of trillions (on earth) of omnipresent beings all being conscious at the same time. You can't go back in time because there is nothing there. You can't go back in time and change the present because there is no past. The world and all its souls have moved on.
If you could step away the world would leave you behind and you would possibly be sitting in an empty street devoid of all consciousness. Maybe just a rock. Maybe nothing. Makes a fella wonder if trees have a form of consciousness. But I digress.
As another example,
if you could step in to the future you would possibly be in nothing, until the conscious world rushed by. Don't blink. You might miss it. Then nothing. Or a rock again.
What the alternate reality hypotheses does is cheapens existence and removes the soul from the equation. It removes the self from the equation. An argument could be made that it breaks conservation laws if a soul and a true self were real. It also removes God. It is why Hawking was a proponent of it. An infinite amount of Gods...ya right, eh?
Finally, that one could go back once and instantly a whole new infinite universe would be created (a new timeline) is ridiculous. Where is all this mass and energy coming from.? All these super duper advanced big bangs are happening, no? These instant new realities that have to create such an infinite number of intricate beings and souls and thoughts and and and...in an instant.
You would think there would at least be a slight "pop", no?