First it broke records for the biggest weekend gross of all time. Now, Infinity War is raising philosophical questions among fans online.
Infinity War sees Thanos warning Tony Stark of the dangers of overpopulation, using the Reality Stone to show the superhero billionaire what happened to his own world, Titan.
Whereas Ra's al Ghul in Batman Begins wanted to annihilate much of Gotham's population out of a belief that it had become morally corrupt, Thanos' bid to destroy half of the universe's population stems from a concern over overpopulation and scarcity. Having predicted his own planet's demise, Thanos sets out on a morally questionable - but perhaps morally justifiable - quest to protect the universe's future by giving it a huge kick in the swingers right now.
It's akin to utilitarianism, which judges the best course of action in a given situation as that which benefits the majority.
Twitter users were quick to jump into the conversation. Some thought that Thanos was on the right track with his decision that the best way to prevent the war, starvation and suffering that inevitably comes with scarcity and overpopulation is to kill half the attendees at the party.
Psychology Doc took a firmer stance in favour of Thanos' apocalyptic shenanigans, saying that he stood behind the villain just as he stood behind Killmonger in Black Panther.
Killmonger's ambitions were a little less utilitarian - he wanted to be king - but there you go.
Another took to body shaming the villain and mocking his appearance, which I think is a bit harsh given that he's thousands of years old and came here all the way from a Saturnian moon.
Others were less impressed with Thanos singular, one-track mind approach to life, suggesting he remained underdeveloped throughout the movie.