That explanation, and the stated limits that require it, contradict what was in the movie itself.

I think there are two distinct issues here, but with everyone calling both of them “spoilers” the language is warping things.

Yes. This.

Two big questions that I have that didn’t get on your list...

Yes, and on top of that he’s the ONLY random grieving character with dialog. I can see the narrative tactic of “we only one no-name person to represent all the non-superhero people who are still grieving over The Snap” but to do that the filmmakers should react to interviews with a completely downplayed “so one…

“Tokenism” That’s the word I was looking for. Thank you.

I guess the up-side is that when some malcontent privileged conservative screams “social justice warrior!” over normal diversity in characters, we now have this scene to point to and say “no, you see THERE’s the example of ham-fisted forced ‘representation’ just to make a point”.

No no, you’ve got it wrong. You see it’s all tied together. The mother and the doctor got together and decided to execute the baby at the local synagogue using an AR-15.

I see a big difference with Harley.

“If they worked in your business, you’d fire them.”

Let’s keep something big in mind here...

Please tell me there is video of conservatives burning their Yankees gear.

That’s the beauty of it. No eight year old will accidentally stumble on the code while kicking your butt.

This should have been a one player stick with the ability to link up a second one over the USB ports.  Sell two at $140 each.

Because they don’t have to release anything in order to get a couple thousand words of hype.

The only difficulty in applying those examples is that you’ve got 3 people not famous prior to taking their stage names. 

What is the cut and dry journalism standard for referring to people who have changed names?

Is there really a FB alternative?

As a friend of mine is fond of saying,

20% more XP when you spend 40% of your gameplay face-down is just not a good bargain.