Captain Marvel

So getting back to our discussion, I completely disagree with that. Because, firstly, the Spiderman is just a kid, and everyone knows he is not a serious hero yet. He is not even a part of Avengers team yet. So it is not embarrassing if his work is not world class. The same goes with the ant man which is a side character in the Avengers. But still, when he is considered to cooperate with the team, his abilities are reconsidered by the storyline, like scaling him to a very huge size to become powerful.
So I'm saying that firstly, they weren't the main characters and not real Avengers, so that people get upset when they see they are not that powerful. Secondly their powers got rescaled to match the team.
But in the Captain Marvel's case, she simply destroyed the portrait that people had in their minds about how Avengers are the most powerful heros of the world, and making them -just as you said- some small heroes in a small scale crisis. And the worst thing is that this happens in a movie named "Avengers ". I mean I wouldn't be that upset if the space ship destroying scenes and those narsistic quotes of Captain Marvel about how her own work is much more important than Avengers had happened in her own movie. But it all happens in the concluding movie of Avengers series.

The point being that a crisis being on a smaller scale does not make it less valid or interesting. I don't think it's narcissistic to acknowledge that the entire universe suffered the snap and Captain Marvel is the only one with the power to fly around checking on every affected world - the whole idea of a team like the Avengers is to acknowledge how their different strengths can cover for each other's weaknesses and that is simply the best use for Captain Marvel under the circumstances. Instead, most of the movie is still about the Avengers pulling off the time heist without her, so her power is mostly irrelevant in the movie anyway (especially when she shows up at the end and the most consequential stuff is still being done by Avenger dudes likes Captain America or Iron Man). As a result, I don't really care if she's that much more powerful than the Avengers because Endgame is still first and foremost a film about the Avengers doing stuff and she spends much of it on the sidelines.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

I have a couple quibbles with this view.

First, the Avengers are still "The Earth's Mightiest Heroes", as advertised. Captain Marvel is more of a cosmic level power, and doesn't normally reside on the Earth. Her power is more on a level with Thanos or Dark Phoenix.

Think of her as just a sort of scaling up to a wider lens in the universe, with the entire power scale of the heroes on Earth falling somewhere in the middle of the larger scale. With this perspective, it's a little silly to think that the most power heroes on Earth would automatically be the most powerful heroes in the entire universe. But I get the idea that you aren't so much upset that she exists, but that she was introduced into The Avengers Trilogy (or quadrilogy, or whatever you want to call it) specifically.

I do think you have a good point in that she does throw a wrench in the gears when she was injected into the trilogy in the way that she was, serving as almost a Deus Ex Machina foil for Thanos - just when it seems like there is nothing that can stop him, along some this uber-powerful character to tip the scales. But...that's been going on in comics for ages, on both the DC and Marvel side. It's certainly not something new in this instance. I would also point out that in the end, she was sort of a red herring, because:



For the record, as an epic set piece, the ship destroying scene is pretty bad ass. Just the type of thing I paid to see in the final movie of the cycle.

__________________

Thank you for your reply. I was personally satisfied by the latest reply of @Iroquois that he said they worked as a team and working on a smaller scale on earth does not mean that it is less important.

However, about the quote that avengers are mightiest of earth and Captain Marvel is on the universal scale, I still have to argue about that. And I don't mean that it is not true based on the story. Yes, we both accept that she is on the scale of universal titans and simply invincible. But that is the exact thing that will ruin the "Avengers" in their concluding movie. It's just like a header on the top of the movie that says, "you see all these powerful avengers that you used to admire! They are just tiny creatures compared to the universal hero Captain Marvel which you didn't really know much about and is not part of the team". I mean I wouldn't mind it if her character in MCU was introduced after the retirement of the avengers, to avoid an implicit comparison between their strength. I even liked how badass she was in her own movie as a solo hero.

You see, I think the DC has handled this situation much better. When there is Superman, you don't see batman. When there is batman you don't see superman. But when they have a movie together like "Batman vs. Superman" you can actually see that Batman can also beat superman and is not like a tiny useless creature in front of an invincible supreme being.

But, in the end, the fact that you both mentioned that she still had to work as a team and had her piece of the credit, and the fact that work was done mainly by the avengers themselves are satisfying. I guess I might not be that upset about her presence in Avengers: End game anymore.