Captain America: Civil War

[Tenzhi]

I got the sense that Stark was interested in Spidey because of Science.  The superheroic feats may have initially put Spidey on Stark's radar, but the science behind the webbing made him more than just another masked daredevil with inhuman strength.

[Arcana]

I got the sense that Stark was interested in Spidey because of Science.  The superheroic feats may have initially put Spidey on Stark's radar, but the science behind the webbing made him more than just another masked daredevil with inhuman strength.

No question.  The science made Peter someone like him, and therefore someone Tony might be able to relate to.  You also have to wonder if Peter being an orphan has something to do with it as well.

[hurple]

A lot of people have said variations on that, but I don't agree.  Sure, its a superhero movie, and it is an action movie, so of course things get turned up to eleven.  But the movie did show an honest attempt by Tony and Steve to talk it out.  They even come this close ---><--- before it all falls apart.  But at the end Steve felt that there was an exigent emergency that simply couldn't wait, and to their credit the fight isn't just random fighting: no one there has as their sole purpose fighting for the sake of fighting. 

Actually, I think the talking it out stuff stopped as soon as the gov't issued "shoot on sight" and "shoot to kill" orders on Bucky, without even attempting to arrest him instead.

If they had agreed to simply arrest him, take him into custody, then everything could have been avoided.

So, again, it's an argument in favor of Captain America's viewpoint.  In fact, as pointed out New York was almost nuked by the "world council" and SHIELD was taken over by Hydra, so neither of those were the fault of the Avengers, and in fact, they saved (potentially) millions of lives in those situations.  It was the "powers that be" that was the problem there. 

But, really, all that shows is that Steve Rogers is not a very good negotiator that none of that was ever mentioned.   

[doc7924]

The big draw in the comics was Steve and Tony were such close, good friends it was tough to see them fighting each other.

But in the movies I never really got the feeling they were the best of buddies like in the books.

Maybe its because we only saw them on screen together twice and each time they either argued for punched each other.

Of course could be a lot of adventures they have we just don't see in-between the films.

[Tenzhi]

Yet the impetus for all the fighting in the comics and the extremes it got taken to was way worse than the movie.  Except, perhaps, in that it more clearly made Tony (and, was it... Reed Richards, Namor, and Doctor Strange?) out to be the villain.

[Arcana]

If they had agreed to simply arrest him, take him into custody, then everything could have been avoided.

Well yes and no.  "They" was Ross and the government.  Tony had nothing to do with that.  So no amount of talking between Tony and Steve could have prevented that.  And even besides that, the ultimate trigger that broke things down was Steve discovering that Tony was

Spoiler for Hidden:

imprisoning Wanda because she refused to sign the Accords

which is a separate issue from Bucky.

So, again, it's an argument in favor of Captain America's viewpoint.  In fact, as pointed out New York was almost nuked by the "world council" and SHIELD was taken over by Hydra, so neither of those were the fault of the Avengers, and in fact, they saved (potentially) millions of lives in those situations.  It was the "powers that be" that was the problem there. 

But, really, all that shows is that Steve Rogers is not a very good negotiator that none of that was ever mentioned.   

As I mentioned, I think both sides did not present the strongest possible argument for their sides, but I think the germ of both positions is there (and real people don't always come up with the best arguments on the spot in real life either).  I think the strongest argument for both sides comes down to this:

Team Cap: The Avengers are here to protect people, not just from foreign or alien threats, but all threats, and that has often included the people in power.  You say we are the powerful people that the world needs to be protected from, but the biggest threats have come from people possessing more mundane but no less dangerous power.  SHIELD experimenting with the Tesseract in secret.  The World Council ordering a nuclear strike on US soil out of fear.  HYDRA infiltrating the government to build flying assassination engines.  The Avengers exists specifically *because* we now live in a world where some threats can't be resolved by normal means.  Signing the Accords is basically saying we'll play along in the very system we're supposed to be a check against.  What if the next big threat is something the Sokovia committee misjudges?  What if it is something they miss entirely?  What if it is something they are actively trying to do themselves?

Team Iron Man: Governments make mistakes, and sometimes horrible ones, but they are far more accountable to the people than the Avengers are.  We can't protect people if they don't trust us and whether it is true or not is irrelevant: the SHIELD documents caused the people to distrust us, Sokovia caused people to distrust us, Ghana caused people to distrust us.  If the governments of the world turn against us, we won't just be fighting the next Ultron or Loki we'll be fighting the governments of the world as well.  What happens if the next big threat is something we miss *because* no one trusts us enough to tell us?  What if the governments of the world stop trying to regulate us and start straight up prosecuting us for war crimes.

And maybe you think you can do better, but do you think *everyone* can do better?  What about every other super powered being that wants to play Avengers.  How can you say they need oversight if you're unwilling to accept it for yourself?  Do you want people to follow your example of defying the government and just doing whatever they want?

[hurple]

Well yes and no.  "They" was Ross and the government.  Tony had nothing to do with that.  So no amount of talking between Tony and Steve could have prevented that.  And even besides that, the ultimate trigger that broke things down was Steve discovering that Tony was

Spoiler for Hidden:

imprisoning Wanda because she refused to sign the Accords

which is a separate issue from Bucky.

Never said between Stark and Rogers.  Rogers, in fact, could have used the "shoot on sight" and "shoot to kill" orders being given before they determined his actual guilt, in retrospect since he was shown to be not guilty, as proof of the correctness of his arguments against UN oversight.  Like I said, he's not much of a negotiator. 

But, then, it's just a movie, and as usual, shortcuts are taken to get to the major set-piece (in this case the fight at the airport) so if Captain America has to look like a muscle-headed goof for that to happen, so be it.

[Arcana]

But, then, it's just a movie, and as usual, shortcuts are taken to get to the major set-piece (in this case the fight at the airport) so if Captain America has to look like a muscle-headed goof for that to happen, so be it.

Much is made (rightfully so) about Marvel expanding the genre: Winter Soldier is a spy-thriller, Avengers is an action adventure, Ant-Man is a heist movie.  If they want to take the long way everywhere, I guess they could.  We could have the legal police procedural Law and Order: Sokovia Accords deal with Cap challenging the legality of the arrest warrant for James Barnes.  C.S.I.V.I.S.I.O.N would be a forensic investigation drama dealing with the task of determining the identity of the bomber.  Den Sokovia Sorg would be a psychological drama dealing with the existential unfairness that life presents to people of conscience and the nature of brotherly love.

[hurple]

Much is made (rightfully so) about Marvel expanding the genre: Winter Soldier is a spy-thriller, Avengers is an action adventure, Ant-Man is a heist movie.  If they want to take the long way everywhere, I guess they could.  We could have the legal police procedural Law and Order: Sokovia Accords deal with Cap challenging the legality of the arrest warrant for James Barnes.  C.S.I.V.I.S.I.O.N would be a forensic investigation drama dealing with the task of determining the identity of the bomber.  Den Sokovia Sorg would be a psychological drama dealing with the existential unfairness that life presents to people of conscience and the nature of brotherly love.

If any superhero media project should be a CSI-type procedural, it should be The Flash.  Which means Marvel will do it first and better.  Ha!

[Inc42]

Sorry, was away for a few days and missed the replies.

So here's my thought, in the most spoiler-free version I can produce.

I agree with your entire post, and I want to point out how impressive it is that the movies are able to put so much thought and emotion into the characters considering they don't have the time to set it all up and explain it like it would have been in a show or the comics themselves. There has been some truly spectacular writing, acting, and directing here, pretty much across the board.

I did not mean to make it sound like the end was clumsy or rushed. I liked the end, I loved the whole movie, and it honestly may be my favorite in the series so far. I think that where the movie leaves us with where the characters are, how they have changed is exactly what should have happened.

It was just before the end that I had a problem with. The final action scene of the movie, the part that officially drove Steve and Tony away from each other just when it all seemed like it was about to work out. I'm afraid that any more detail than that and I am drifting into spoiler territory, so...

Spoiler for Hidden:

My problem is specifically about Tony finding out Bucky killed his parents and Steve knowing and hiding it from him. I think this is a great piece of character development for them all around, but I don't like it's placement in the movie. We see Tony realize that the team had been manipulated, that Bucky was innocent of the UN attack, rush off to help (by himself for...reasons? I'm guessing he didnt want to admit he was wrong to the people that did choose to follow him like Vision, who could have kept up and gotten there just as fast as he did, maybe faster.) We see Tony, Steve, and Bucky fight alongside each other and then with barely a couple minutes having passed Tony is jerked in the other direction and goes into a murderous rage that put Black Panther's to shame.

THIS felt rushed. It felt out of place and overall unnecessary. Like I said, I feel like Tony finding out about Bucky killing his parents should have happened closer to the start of the movie, maybe something Ross shows him in private because Tony balks on joining a manhunt for Bucky after the bombing when there isnt enough evidence, something like that. Then in the scene where Steve almost signs the Accords and stops when he learns about Wanda, once he realizes Steve isn't going to sign Tony confronts him to see if he knew and Steve has to tell him he did. BOOM, lines drawn, and while the original issue of the Accords is still a major motivation, the underlying hate from Tony and guilt from Steve would have been interesting to see in the big confrontation.

Also, the more I think about it, the less okay I am with what they did to

Spoiler for Hidden:

Zemo. I'm not a huge Zemo fan or anything, but there is some GOOD story there, like creating the Masters of Evil, which would have been a great thing to see after Infinity War, or just the idea that a Nazi scientist Cap went up against pre-ice had a son who is just as bad/worse than he was, has a lot of sway with Hydra and so on.

In the movie he ends up being just some guy from an already poor country who in the space of a couple years somehow find the resources to hire some big league assassins and manipulate multiple governments, then take over a hidden soviet base. The Zemo from the comics, sure, this is an average Thursday night for him because he is a genius with extensive training and near unlimited resources, but just some guy from a third world country?

Mostly I wish they had not named him Zemo, to leave the option open for another movie to use the character in the future. The number of good villains they have the rights to doesnt seem high enough to just throw away some of the bigger names.

[Arcana]

Also, the more I think about it, the less okay I am with what they did to

Spoiler for Hidden:

Zemo. I'm not a huge Zemo fan or anything, but there is some GOOD story there, like creating the Masters of Evil, which would have been a great thing to see after Infinity War, or just the idea that a Nazi scientist Cap went up against pre-ice had a son who is just as bad/worse than he was, has a lot of sway with Hydra and so on.

In the movie he ends up being just some guy from an already poor country who in the space of a couple years somehow find the resources to hire some big league assassins and manipulate multiple governments, then take over a hidden soviet base. The Zemo from the comics, sure, this is an average Thursday night for him because he is a genius with extensive training and near unlimited resources, but just some guy from a third world country?

Mostly I wish they had not named him Zemo, to leave the option open for another movie to use the character in the future. The number of good villains they have the rights to doesnt seem high enough to just throw away some of the bigger names.

Can't reply without spoiler tag protection:

Spoiler for Hidden:

In the movie Zemo is said to be a former member of some Sokovian secret police agency.  I even think someone said "death squad."  He was already someone on par with the old Soviets running the Winter Soldier program and Hydra.  He didn't really do anything that a single person couldn't do.  First, he admitted spending a lot of time decrypting the leaked Hydra files that Romanov released at the end of Winter Soldier.  Those files probably clued him in to the fact that Howard Stark was assassinated by Hydra, as Zola implied in Captain America: The Winter Soldier.  Something probably suggested that the perpetrator was the Winter Soldier, but Zemo wanted proof.  He first tries to torture it out of the spy at the beginning of the film but when he convinces Zemo that he wouldn't break he decides to stage the bombing at the UN.  That also seems within his abilities.  He also replaces the psychologist assigned to interview the Winter Soldier so he can specifically ask him about the details of that 1991 mission.  Under command, Bucky probably told Zemo about the abandoned base which probably contained the original records of the Winter Soldier's various missions, which is all Zemo wanted.

Nothing he does appears to be outside the realm of a hardened spy with no compunctions about killing people to achieve his ends.

As to wasting the character, in the movie Zemo is specifically identified as Helmut Zemo, and Helmut Zemo was the second Baron Zemo in the comics.  While he does create the Masters of Evil his origin story in the comics is that he blames Captain America for his father's death and wants revenge.  That's actually the core of the Civil War iteration of Zemo.  The actual comic book version of Zemo is unlikely to ever have a place in the MCU given things like the fact that Zola is dead, so introducing him as this iteration seems reasonable to me.  Particularly as Zemo doesn't die, which means the door is open for him to return as a baddie down the road.

[FatherXmas]

Well this will need a spoiler tag.

Spoiler for Hidden:

The thing I've seen most reviewers have a problem with is the camera at the crash scene.  I believe that the location of the crash is set up ahead of time and the camera was put there to document the success of the mission.

One an adjacent point, why did Howard have super soldier like serum?  Or was that Kree fluid, early Tahiti drug?  Really doesn't matter since at the end of the day it was just a MacGuffin.

I also agree that Zemo didn't do anything that Black Widow couldn't do in terms of spycraft and psychological manipulation.

[hurple]

Well this will need a spoiler tag.

Spoiler for Hidden:

The thing I've seen most reviewers have a problem with is the camera at the crash scene.  I believe that the location of the crash is set up ahead of time and the camera was put there to document the success of the mission.

One an adjacent point, why did Howard have super soldier like serum?  Or was that Kree fluid, early Tahiti drug?  Really doesn't matter since at the end of the day it was just a MacGuffin.

I also agree that Zemo didn't do anything that Black Widow couldn't do in terms of spycraft and psychological manipulation.

I think the "villian" Zemo was just a MacGuffin himself.  It was all to lead up to the airport scene.  That was the money shot, and everything else was filler.

Good filler, mind you...

Very very good filler...

But, I am taking an educated guess here, that the screenwriter(s) were told they wanted:

• A fight between all the Marvel movie heroes (+ Spider-Man but - Hulk and Thor (for some reason))
• Intro Black Panther
• Resolve the Bucky hanging threads
• Split the Avengers into two camps

So, they wrote what we got.  A very good script with some pretty deft handling of the mandates such that very little feels forced or shoe-horned in.   A very impressive job all-around. 

Much better than DC's attempt.  And I hate to say that as a lifelong DC fan and not a Marvel fan.  But it is what it is.

[Arcana]

Well this will need a spoiler tag.

Spoiler for Hidden:

The thing I've seen most reviewers have a problem with is the camera at the crash scene.  I believe that the location of the crash is set up ahead of time and the camera was put there to document the success of the mission.

One an adjacent point, why did Howard have super soldier like serum?  Or was that Kree fluid, early Tahiti drug?  Really doesn't matter since at the end of the day it was just a MacGuffin.

Spoiler for Hidden:

I agree about the camera, except it is also possible it is a drone intended to follow and document the Winter Soldier's mission.  I say that because if my memory is remembering correctly, the video contained more than one camera angle.

As to the super soldier serum, it has been established that lots of people were trying to recreate it, including Howard Stark, for decades.  It is entirely possible that the great irony of Howard Stark's death is that Captain America indirectly causes it when Stark gets close enough to a viable serum that Hydra decides it is worth stealing from him.  In the early memory scene Howard says he is going to Washington, maybe the trip was related to his serum work.  I suspect he was heading to the Triskelion with it.  The Triskelion was established in Ant-Man to be the headquarters of SHIELD by 1989.

[Arcana]

I think the "villian" Zemo was just a MacGuffin himself.  It was all to lead up to the airport scene.  That was the money shot, and everything else was filler.

Good filler, mind you...

Very very good filler...

But, I am taking an educated guess here, that the screenwriter(s) were told they wanted:

• A fight between all the Marvel movie heroes (+ Spider-Man but - Hulk and Thor (for some reason))
• Intro Black Panther
• Resolve the Bucky hanging threads
• Split the Avengers into two camps

So, they wrote what we got.  A very good script with some pretty deft handling of the mandates such that very little feels forced or shoe-horned in.   A very impressive job all-around. 

Much better than DC's attempt.  And I hate to say that as a lifelong DC fan and not a Marvel fan.  But it is what it is.

In interviews the Russos have stated that they worked directly with the screenwriters (Chris Markus and Stephen McFeely) to produce the story in a very collaborative way.  They had previously worked together on The Winter Soldier in a similar fashion.  Also, my understanding is that the movie we saw went through a lot of radical variations before settling on the final one, many of which the Russos said didn't work for them at all.  But from what I've read they did not have any specific editorial mandates regarding most of what we got on screen.  It seems to have been the Russos' idea themselves to run with the idea of the Civil War concept and it was they that pitched it to Marvel not vice versa.  It seems to have also been their idea to integrate Spiderman into the movie: they claim that they worked him into a version of the script before they knew the rights to the character were even going to be available as a long shot.  I suspect the primary editorial mandate to the Russos was to work in Black Panther.

Interestingly, the Russos have stated in interviews that the inspiration for them to consider the Civil War concept was when they heard that Warner was going to be basing their next movie on the Batman vs Superman fight from TDKR.  That's what made them think that the logical progression of the Captain America story was to have him face off against other superheroes, and they wanted to portray a superhero on superhero fight in the MCU.  From there, the idea grew organically that Cap, the guy who started off telling Tony that they were soldiers and should follow orders was disillusioned by the events of the Avengers and Winter Soldier into thinking that blindly following orders was wrong, and Tony the radical maverick that refused to share his technology with the government because he distrusted them was now traumatized into believing that no one person should bear the power and responsibilities the Avengers took upon themselves.  They've basically switched roles and felt strongly enough about it to fight over it.  That was sort of the core of the movie they tried to story around, according to them.

I don't see Zemo as a MacGuffin.  Zemo has a firm backstory, a comprehensible motive, he takes agency in the story, and he is critical to the ending of the movie *both* for Cap and Tony, and for Black Panther as well.  And they didn't need him to get to the Airport scene: his story actually orbits around and passes through the main story until the ending of the movie.  He's not there to simply set off the big fight and then be discarded.

[eabrace]

but - Hulk and Thor (for some reason)

That one's easy to explain.

From a story standpoint, Thor's got enough to deal with back home right now.  And Banner just wants to hide for a while.  (Though, I believe I've heard some rumblings that Hulk might show up in Ragnarok.)

From a writing view, it's pretty easy to imagine Thor and Hulk ending up on the same side of the argument presented in Civil War.  Thor's obvious.  He's going to go where he wants when he wants.  He's a god.  Good luck trying to control him.  And there's no way Banner's going to allow the government to have any sort of authority to use the Hulk as a weapon.  You place Thor and Hulk on the same side of that argument, and suddenly the movie's over in about 5 minutes.

[hurple]

That one's easy to explain.

From a story standpoint, Thor's got enough to deal with back home right now.  And Banner just wants to hide for a while.  (Though, I believe I've heard some rumblings that Hulk might show up in Ragnarok.)

From a writing view, it's pretty easy to imagine Thor and Hulk ending up on the same side of the argument presented in Civil War.  Thor's obvious.  He's going to go where he wants when he wants.  He's a god.  Good luck trying to control him.  And there's no way Banner's going to allow the government to have any sort of authority to use the Hulk as a weapon.  You place Thor and Hulk on the same side of that argument, and suddenly the movie's over in about 5 minutes.

Agreed.  My absolute biggest complaint about the film (other than the odd camera thing for the Winter Soldier segment commented on above) is how they *literally* bring in Ant-Man, Spider-Man, Hawkeye, etc, JUST for the airport fight.  I mean they even have Ant-Man brought to the site in a freakin' minivan.  It's a bit obvious of a "we want everyone to fight" moment. 

But, they do justify it, mostly, in a storyline sense, so it'a a minor quibble. 

It just *feels* like a classic "we want this scene so build the movie around it"

It's a real testament to the screenwriters and filmmakers that they pulled it off.  Those guys just guaranteed themselves a long career in Hollywood.

[Arcana]

It's a real testament to the screenwriters and filmmakers that they pulled it off.  Those guys just guaranteed themselves a long career in Hollywood.

Well, if nothing else they will be busy until 2019, since they were handed Infinity War Part One and Two (although they've said they are renaming them because they aren't really a two part movie: almost everyone pretty much expects them now to be called Avengers: Infinity Gauntlet and Avengers: Infinity War or something similar).

Unlike Joss Whedon who admitted to extreme exhaustion after the first Avengers movie and admitted that played a role in some of the mistakes in Age of Ultron, the Russo brothers seem pretty jazzed in general about working on these films and still seem to be excited to be working on Infinity War.  I think that matters a great deal to their success so far.

[Arcana]

That one's easy to explain.

From a story standpoint, Thor's got enough to deal with back home right now.  And Banner just wants to hide for a while.  (Though, I believe I've heard some rumblings that Hulk might show up in Ragnarok.)

From a writing view, it's pretty easy to imagine Thor and Hulk ending up on the same side of the argument presented in Civil War.  Thor's obvious.  He's going to go where he wants when he wants.  He's a god.  Good luck trying to control him.  And there's no way Banner's going to allow the government to have any sort of authority to use the Hulk as a weapon.  You place Thor and Hulk on the same side of that argument, and suddenly the movie's over in about 5 minutes.

I think the Russos flat out stated that you can't have Thor or the Hulk in a fight like this because whoever's on the other side of the Hulk is just going to lose.

But I think beyond the fact that you might assume that Thor and the Hulk would be on Team Cap, there's also another narrative problem in that Thor and the Hulk wouldn't be fighting for the same stakes as the others.  Banner might be on Team Cap but the Hulk is always on Team Hulk.  And Thor is a god that lives on another world.  He didn't ask for permission when he came back to Earth to retrieve the Tesseract, he didn't ask for permission to attack the Dark Elves in Thor: The Dark World.  The Sokovia Accords don't mean the same thing to him as it does to people like Stark and Rogers.  Thor already answers to a higher power than anyone on Earth (to him).  If Odin orders him to go to Earth and do something, I don't think Ban Ki-Moon can really override that order.

But really, this was not even a problem that the Russos needed to deal with.  Age of Ultron preempted that problem by sending both of them away.  It was less that the Russos needed a reason to keep them away, they would have had to invent a reason to bring them back.  There was no good reason to do that, so they could simply leave those characters on the sidelines.

[hurple]

Well, if nothing else they will be busy until 2019, since they were handed Infinity War Part One and Two (although they've said they are renaming them because they aren't really a two part movie: almost everyone pretty much expects them now to be called Avengers: Infinity Gauntlet and Avengers: Infinity War or something similar).

Unlike Joss Whedon who admitted to extreme exhaustion after the first Avengers movie and admitted that played a role in some of the mistakes in Age of Ultron, the Russo brothers seem pretty jazzed in general about working on these films and still seem to be excited to be working on Infinity War.  I think that matters a great deal to their success so far.

At least one of them is not Vince Russo.  He's an ass.  Ha!