Board Thread:Theories/@comment-44086949-20191210042805/@comment-25933225-20200509170149

I thought it was a recent thread because someone brought it back and there was only four messages.

The end you brought with people actually going back in time to change stuff will factually be a crappy ending. That would litterally destroy what Isayama wants to do, going back in time to change the events would litterally take off all of the weight, the meaning events had. Especially as it's a fixed timeline. What would have been the point of making such a story if the end is just them going back in time to nullify "bad" things that happened ? What would have been the lesson there ? AoT is supposed to have a grey morality and is there to show how crual war can be. What would be the point of that if the end is just a crappy ending where everyone lives happily ? In what world would you call that "good writing" ?

And I don't care about Marvel, I've never been fond on superheroes so I don't care about it at all, but what I've heard about friends of mine that love this universe is that the time travel stuff just felt weird. And from what I know, just using time travel to change events, making many characters survive just takes off all of the weight the ending where half of the world dies had. They probably had such an ending in head even before the one where everyone/2 dies, so they'd have a movie with an end that'll make sure everyone talks about the movie, and time travel thing is just there to ensure they still can use the characters later. So, from what I can tell, the time travel in Avengers is just a cheap way to ensure future movies featuring many of the characters.

And none of your "consistent facts" supports a non-fixed timeline. It's even the contrary, every consistent facts supports a fixed timeline. Eventually, some of your "consistent facts" could support an actual time travel, but certainly not the non-fixed timeline.