Remove ads

Captain America: Civil War

Reader mode
Can I just say I'm really not getting hyped for this movie? Like even Spider-Man only managed to get an "oh that's cool" reaction out of me. Mainly because the whole idea doesn't make any damn sense. Going just by the trailers Captain America is mad because they want to lock up his lover after he was accused of terrorism and so a jealous Iron Man is sent in to stop him. There's also a reference to the Superhuman Registration Act, which makes no sense in context because not a single hero in the Avengers has a secret identity except maybe Ant-Man. All of them are public figures, and most are government employees. It makes no sense that Captain America would be at all against such a thing. In the comic book it was because he saw it as an invasion of privacy and a dangerous step toward tyranny. That motivation doesn't make sense in the much smaller more isolated Marvel movies. Hell even on the grounds of "let's see these superheroes hit each other" it fails to excite because much more exciting and interesting heroes are going to be doing just that in less than a week.
 
VolantRedX said:
There's also a reference to the Superhuman Registration Act, which makes no sense in context because not a single hero in the Avengers has a secret identity except maybe Ant-Man.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If you were actually following the trailers, that's litterally not what it says. Since there are next to no secret identities in the MCU, the Super Registration Act is instead about forcing heroes to work as agents of world governments. All comparisions to the comic book Super Registration Act are inaccurate to begin with since it is expanded to a global accord instead of being American law.

For clarity:


VolantRedX said:
Hell even on the grounds of "let's see these superheroes hit each other" it fails to excite because much more exciting and interesting heroes are going to be doing just that in less than a week.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
First, lol at bolded, at least in the purviews of the movies. Second, considering Civil War has been revealed earlier than BvS*, the "first!" argument is hilariously wrong.

*wait, sorry, that's actually inaccurate. Didn't stop the accusations of DC copying Marvel though.
 
Last edited:
all fictions said:
If you were actually following the trailers, that's litterally not what it says. Since there are next to no secret identities in the MCU, the Super Registration Act is instead about forcing heroes to work as agents of world governments. All comparisions to the comic book Super Registration Act are inaccurate to begin with since it is expanded to a global accord instead of being American law.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ok I must have missed that trailer.

all fictions said:
First, lol at bolded, at least in the purviews of the movies.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I personally don't like either Captain America and really don't like Iron Man in the movies. So to me seeing a pretty good Superman fight what seems like one of the better Batman is a lot more interesting than seeing those two fight over things I have very little understanding of.
 
VolantRedX said:
I personally don't like either Captain America and really don't like Iron Man in the movies. So to me seeing a pretty good Superman fight what seems like one of the better Batman is a lot more interesting than seeing those two fight over things I have very little understanding of.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's your opinion, and I respect that. But you have to understand that while Superman and Batman will always attract crowds, the average moviegoer had 4-5 movies in recent years to get invested in the characters of Captain America and Iron Man so I wouldn't bet on characters popularity to generate success for BvS (and seeing how the obscure Guardians of the Galaxy surpassed the Man of Steel, this is a risky gambit*).

You said the whole idea doesn't make any sense to you, but it does to me, and many other viewers as well, because we see the results of the continuity of the other movies, and why both sides have the points they do. In BvS, Batman wants to got fight Superman because Luthor goads him to. And then Wonder Woman shows up. And then Doomsday show up. It's a bit nonsensical and disjointed to me. I mean, I know ultimately Civil War is an excuse to have heroes fight each others, but at least there was a build up. BvS is a bit too sudden IMO, at least there should have been either a Wonder Woman or a new Batman movie (yes, even this soon after the Dark Knight trilogy) or heck move up Suicide Squad so it comes out before BvS.

It's not like I don't have my complaints about Civil War. I really want Marvel not to fuck this up, especially after Age of Ultron Weekend at Ultron's. I liked that movie, but the trailers really showed me a better one, where Ultron doesn't quip and is instead all threatening, where Ultron was attacking several cities throughout the world and not just Sokovia, and where the battle at the end wasn't a zerg rush like in the first Avengers movie. And the Hulk vs. Hulbuster fight should have been removed (and added in Civil War where it is appropriate). Less fanservicey fight/mind control whammy and more genocidal robots please.


Anthony Russo said:
It's going to challenge the way you feel about Tony Stark. It's going to challenge the way you feel about Steve Rogers. And when you walk out of the theater, nothing is going to be the same.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Is what I feel at the end of the movie. I want consequences to have been created and changing the status quo of the universe. I have some hope since it's the Russo brothers, but I don't want them to get crushed :(


*In fact, I hope Suicide Squad is a massive success thanks to the relative obscurity of the "protagonists" therein. At least one of the reason my DC-loathing little sister is willing to watch it is because Superman isn't in it and Batman has a limited presence.
 
Last edited:
all fictions said:
That's your opinion, and I respect that. But you have to understand that while Superman and Batman will always attract crowds, the average moviegoer had 4-5 movies in recent years to get invested in the characters of Captain America and Iron Man so I wouldn't bet on characters popularity to generate success for BvS (and seeing how the obscure Guardians of the Galaxy surpassed the Man of Steel, this is a risky gambit*).

You said the whole idea doesn't make any sense to you, but it does to me, and many other viewers as well, because we see the results of the continuity of the other movies, and why both sides have the points they do. In BvS, Batman wants to got fight Superman because Luthor goads him to. And then Wonder Woman shows up. And then Doomsday show up. It's a bit nonsensical and disjointed to me. I mean, I know ultimately Civil War is an excuse to have heroes fight each others, but at least there was a build up. BvS is a bit too sudden IMO, at least there should have been either a Wonder Woman or a new Batman movie (yes, even this soon after the Dark Knight trilogy) or heck move up Suicide Squad so it comes out before BvS.

It's not like I don't have my complaints about Civil War. I really want Marvel not to fuck this up, especially after Age of Ultron Weekend at Ultron's. I liked that movie, but the trailers really showed me a better one, where Ultron doesn't quip and is instead all threatening, where Ultron was attacking several cities throughout the world and not just Sokovia, and where the battle at the end wasn't a zerg rush like in the first Avengers movie. And the Hulk vs. Hulbuster fight should have been removed (and added in Civil War where it is appropriate). Less fanservicey fight/mind control whammy and more genocidal robots please.



Is what I feel at the end of the movie. I want consequences to have been created and changing the status quo of the universe. I have some hope since it's the Russo brothers, but I don't want them to get crushed :(


*In fact, I hope Suicide Squad is a massive success thanks to the relative obscurity of the "protagonists" therein. At least one of the reason my DC-loathing little sister is willing to watch it is because Superman isn't in it and Batman has a limited presence.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Except the previous movies make this one make even less sense. Up until now Tony was always the one resistant to government control while Cap worked with Shield. Why are they now on the opposite side of that?
 
VolantRedX said:
Except the previous movies make this one make even less sense. Up until now Tony was always the one resistant to government control while Cap worked with Shield. Why are they now on the opposite side of that?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Because of Age of Ultron and Winter Solider. Tony saw what happens when they work without oversight when he built a murder bot and had his worst fears almost realized, whereas in Winter Soldier Steve got the opposite lesson where the upper echelons supposed to provide oversight were shown to be untrustworthy.
 
Old Spice Guy said:
Because of Age of Ultron and Winter Solider. Tony saw what happens when they work without oversight when he built a murder bot and had his worst fears almost realized, whereas in Winter Soldier Steve got the opposite lesson where the upper echelons supposed to provide oversight were shown to be untrustworthy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not to mention that Tony thinks he saw a vision of everyone he knows dying except for him.
Everything he's doing is trying to avert that future that might not even happen.
And if I know my death based vision tropes, he's probably just making it more and more likely to actually happen.
 
Tony did a massive 180 turn. The iron man movies were about Tony bitterly fighting government efforts at oversight. Hope there is some good character development behind this than just lol I changed my mind.
 
galahad said:
Tony did a massive 180 turn. The iron man movies were about Tony bitterly fighting government efforts at oversight. Hope there is some good character development behind this than just lol I changed my mind.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I figured it was "when I tried to make Ultron in secret, everything went to shit. We need people keeping track of us."
 
galahad said:
Tony did a massive 180 turn. The iron man movies were about Tony bitterly fighting government efforts at oversight. Hope there is some good character development behind this than just lol I changed my mind.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

But he didn't? Age of Ultron was his character development. He built a murder bot and nearly realized his worst fear of killing all his friends. Add to that his arrogance it's perfectly IC for him to believe that no-one can be trusted with unrestrained power because if he can't...

Goddamn Ninjas:ninja:
 
galahad said:
Tony did a massive 180 turn. The iron man movies were about Tony bitterly fighting government efforts at oversight. Hope there is some good character development behind this than just lol I changed my mind.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I didn't see much of Tony going against government beyond the "privatize world peace", and even then he ended up giving a suit to the US Army.

But really, it all stems from his PTSD, it started an overcompulsive desire for control. First all the armors he built in the third movie. Then it was the Iron Legion, followed by Ultron. All to protect ("put a suit of armor around the world") and keep safe. Really, putting himself into the hands of a higher authority than him after his failures to assuage his fears was the next step.
 
Last edited:
all fictions said:
I didn't see much of Tony going against government beyond the "privatize world peace", and even then he ended up giving a suit to the US Army.

But really, it all stems from his PTSD, it started an overcompulsive desire for control. First all the armors he built in the third movie. Then it was the Iron Legion, followed by Ultron. All to protect ("put a suit of armor around the world") and keep safe. Really, putting himself into the hands of a higher authority than him after his failures to assuage his fears was the next step.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But because he's the Avenger who's contributing most to the regulation he feels he's the one in charge of regulation in a way and that it's his idea.
 
SHIELD showing up to save day might have helped too. The Avengers were unable to evacuate the civilians and thousands killed if the helicarrier had not arrived. It proved the muggles were not entirely useless and corrupt. The event showed limits of the Avengers. They were literally godlike warriors but there is only a few of them and while they kill the bad guys they can't save so many lives at once without help. That I imagine represent major shift in thinking. Going from winning battles and crushing foes to saving people. The Avengers originally convened as a MAD option. If they could not defend the earth they would Avenge it.
 
Last edited:
Auks said:
So, was thinking about the numbers listed in the videos for the various fights:

Avengers: 74
Winter Soldier: 23
Age of Ultron: 177

So yeah, these are clearly too low to be the total casualties for the Invasion/events of the Winter Soldier/Ultron's attack. I'm pretty sure more then 23 people were killed on screen in Winter Soldier.

So, trying to make sense of this here, I can see two scenarios- either they're the number of dead in thousands, or they're the collateral damage casualties caused directly/indirectly by the heroes.

I could believe the Invasion of New York killed 74,000 people, and that the Flying city thing had a death toll over a hundred thousand, but I'm unsure about the fall of shield killing 23,000 people. Most of the Helicarrier wreckage seemed to fall into the Potomac, and given the footprint of the wreckage and the population density of the DC area, I don't think it'd kill that many.

So what I'm thinking is that the numbers are the Avengers collateral damage. That skiff Hawkeye shot down that crashed into a bus. That dude who got crushed when Hulk threw a piece of rubble. Look at the way Falcoln and Scarlet Witch flinch- like someone just pointed out where they had done something terrible. For Scarlet Witch, that's easy to justify- she arguably started everything by mindfucking Tony- but Falcon didn't do anything like that.

So yeah, I don't think those are the casualty count and costs of the entire event, I think they're the damage the Avengers personally caused. Just a theory.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think I read that the casualty numbers actually add up to a number relating to an Avengers issue where Baron Zemo is trying to destroy the Avengers. Read it somewhere on one of the Marvel SB threads.
EDIT: The actual number of the issue is 274, not 214, but that could be due to someone fudging the numbers.
 
Last edited:
Cyrus 21 said:
I think I read that the casualty numbers actually add up to a number relating to an Avengers issue where Baron Zemo is trying to destroy the Avengers. Read it somewhere on one of the Marvel SB threads.
EDIT: The actual number of the issue is 274, not 214, but that could be due to someone fudging the numbers.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The first page of Avengers #274 has the words DIVIDED... WE FALL at the top. And yes, it has Baron Zemo setting the Avengers against one another.
 
DanielJH2112 said:
I'm curious how they're going to approach Zemo's outfit. MCU movies have been pretty faithful to the comics overall, but... well...

Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I demand a completely faithful recreation of the costume for this movie, or else I will complain from all eight of my Twitter accounts and encourage all of my followers (two of which are my pets) not to see the film.
 
all fictions said:
For clarity:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Anyone else find it hilarious that the comics used the explanation that the SRA was way too complex to be released, and yet the Sokovokia Accords are like a paragraph long?

all fictions said:
You said the whole idea doesn't make any sense to you, but it does to me, and many other viewers as well, because we see the results of the continuity of the other movies, and why both sides have the points they do. In BvS, Batman wants to got fight Superman because Luthor goads him to. And then Wonder Woman shows up. And then Doomsday show up. It's a bit nonsensical and disjointed to me. I mean, I know ultimately Civil War is an excuse to have heroes fight each others, but at least there was a build up. BvS is a bit too sudden IMO, at least there should have been either a Wonder Woman or a new Batman movie (yes, even this soon after the Dark Knight trilogy) or heck move up Suicide Squad so it comes out before BvS.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You know, say what you will about comics civil war, but at least it ended with one of the heroes losing, and not just teaming up to fight a bad CGI cave troll.
 
tankdrop24 said:
Anyone else find it hilarious that the comics used the explanation that the SRA was way too complex to be released, and yet the Sokovokia Accords are like a paragraph long?


You know, say what you will about comics civil war, but at least it ended with one of the heroes losing, and not just teaming up to fight a bad CGI cave troll.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah who wants to see heroes fight monsters. I for one love watching Captain America being led away in cuffs a broken man. That's what comics are about.
 
VolantRedX said:
Yeah who wants to see heroes fight monsters. I for one love watching Captain America being led away in cuffs a broken man. That's what comics are about.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes, having an actually payoff for all the build up is far nicer than the plot just getting derailed at the last second.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top