Captain America: Civil War

OP Tipping · Postby **OP Tipping** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 9:35 am UTC

I'm seriously in the tin for the MCU franchise, and thought very highly of The Avengers, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and Age of Ultron.

My opinion of Civil War is not as high as that of most of the reviewers. Some of the reviewers are lauding this as the best Marvel movie ever, whereas I consider that overall it is a bit of a step down from The Winter Soldier.

I appreciate what they've tried to do and that they have put it into the real world better, and the action scenes are off the chain. Somehow the dialog lacked a bit of depth, and perhaps didn't have as many memorable quotes as the other major entries in this franchise. The interpersonal relationships were not as engaging. Also, it is tough to make up for a lack of Fury, Hulk and Thor using characters they are still trying to establish.

DGMW: the movie is very good. In terms of what I enjoy in a movie, it was not quite up to previous peaks. That's all I am saying.

Some more spoily comments below:

Spoiler:

BTW, all the characters consistently pronounce Lagos as Lahgos. It's pronounced Laygos!

Edit: the cuts they used in the movie were not always identical to those in the trailer. In the trailer when Tony says, "So was I", it sounds tender and disappointed. In the film, a different take is used, in which he sounds fierce and vengeful.

Postby **Angua** » Sat Apr 30, 2016 8:35 pm UTC

I really enjoyed it.

Spoiler:

OP Tipping · Postby **OP Tipping** » Sun May 01, 2016 2:20 am UTC

It does seem I am in a small minority, with most commentators saying it is the best Marvel film ever. Oh well. Chacun à Son Goût.

I thought the mid-credit scenes were also a bit non-amazing.

Diadem · Postby **Diadem** » Thu May 05, 2016 12:38 pm UTC

I really, really loved this movie. It had a very good plot, awesome action scenes, a lot of humor. A good movie in every metric. Definitely one of the best Marvel movies to date, and in my personal opinion probably the best (or perhaps second best after Guardians of the Galaxy, but that's hard to compare because they are basically in a different genre).

The conflict between the two sides is done really, really well. You can really understand both sides, and even now I have no idea with which side I agree more. They managed to make it both political, and personal, upping the stakes and making the entire conflict much more dramatic. The villain is very low key in this movie. And that is a very good choice! The entire movie is about the conflict between team Captain America and team Iron Man. Spending a lot of runtime on the villain would just distract from that central conflict. What they did really, really well is that the villain is a catalyst for the conflict, but not the cause.

One thing I have to say is that I think this movie only works if you have seen the other related marvel movies. The movie doesn't bother introducing the characters, and frequently references to events from earlier movies. The entire central conflict of the movie won't be very engaging if you don't already love and care about the characters. At the very least you need to have seen Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron, and probably also The Avengers and the first Iron Man. Thor and Hulk aren't in the movie, so you don't need to have seen their movies.

Very minor spoiler (mostly already from the trailer) for a very minor complaint

Spoiler:

OP Tipping wrote:My opinion of Civil War is not as high as that of most of the reviewers. Some of the reviewers are lauding this as the best Marvel movie ever, whereas I consider that overall it is a bit of a step down from The Winter Soldier.

The title of "the best Marvel movie ever" will always be a contentious one, since they made a number of very good films. But a step down from The Winter Soldier? Are you serious?

I guess you're not the only one who liked The Winter Soldier... But why? That movie was mediocre at best. Definitely in the bottom half of the MCU. The action scenes were great, but the plot was stale and boring, a stitched together list of cliches and contrivances. There are 7 billion people on this planet, but the mysterious assassin turns out to be Captain America's long lost childhood friend. Are you fucking kidding me? And oh yeah, another plot twist. This is going to blow your mind! Wait for it! ... Everyone in shield is evil now! Wow! Amazing. But wait, no movie is complete without a woman falling for the male lead. Do we have any women in this movie? Only one? Well, put in some cheap romance. What do you mean, that completely wouldn't fit her character? Who cares? She's a woman, he's the male lead. Put in cheap romance.

I enjoyed that movie. The acting was good and like I said, the action scenes were awesome. But the plot simply had too many defects to make it anything but mediocre.

charliepanayi · Postby **charliepanayi** » Thu May 05, 2016 7:00 pm UTC

Huh? What 'cheap romance' in The Winter Soldier?

Prefanity · Postby **Prefanity** » Thu May 05, 2016 7:57 pm UTC

charliepanayi wrote:Huh? What 'cheap romance' in The Winter Soldier?

Cap and Natasha. I don't think their banter counts as a romance however. In defense of Winter Soldier, I'll say that it had far less exposition than Guardians did.

OP Tipping · Postby **OP Tipping** » Sat May 07, 2016 3:39 pm UTC

Yeah, there was no romance in Winter Soldier. There's a little bit of flirting.

As Banner and Rogers discuss in AoU:

Bruce Banner: No, Natasha, she...she likes to flirt.
Steve Rogers: I've seen her flirt, up close. This ain't that. Look, as maybe the world's leading authority on "waiting too long", don't. You both deserve a win.

Hey, BTW...

Is Coulson dead in the cinematic universe? I mean I know he's spoken to Fury in S.H.I.E.L.D, but the whole "brought back from the dead" thing destroyed the beauty of his death in The Avengers. To the best of my knowledge, no one has even hinted that he's still alive in the movies since The Avengers.

Basically, in my head, he has not been brought back to life in the M.C.U.

charliepanayi · Postby **charliepanayi** » Sat May 07, 2016 5:49 pm UTC

Events in the MCU have impinged on Agents of SHIELD, so I have to assume his resurrection is canon, but pretty irrelevant now to the MCU.

maybeagnostic · Postby **maybeagnostic** » Sun May 08, 2016 8:09 am UTC

I really enjoyed the movie. After a few days to mull it over, I think it is my second most favorite Marvel movie after Winter Soldier. Good as Tom Hiddleston is, I just prefer when the movies' central conflict has an element of internal struggle for the heroes rather than just being a straight up fight against a clearly bad guy.

Spoiler:

Diadem wrote:Very minor spoiler (mostly already from the trailer) for a very minor complaint

I totally agree. It's a small thing but the trailer's version was so much more powerful than the angry take that ramps up the conflict they ended up using in the movie.

Winter Soldier had some light flirting between Natasha and Steve but absolutely no love interest. Civil War had a love interest drop out of the blue midway through the movie that felt really out of place.

Spoiler:

Postby **Angua** » Sun May 08, 2016 8:24 am UTC

I didn't recognise her straight away but

Spoiler:

natraj · Postby **natraj** » Sun May 08, 2016 5:52 pm UTC

Spoiler:

maybeagnostic wrote: Ant Man and Spidey just showed up for the smack down and could have easily been fighting for either team; not that their inclusion wasn't fun or well done but it turned that fight from intense conflict to friendly brawl.

man, what movie were you watching? spidey's inclusion was so badly shoe-horned in it was the absolute cringe-worthiest part of the movie for me. i enjoyed this movie so much except i completely wished they had left him out entirely and just left him for his own movie, his whole intro scene was SO godawful. so so so bad. it was completely the worst part of the movie. also entirely nonsensical; it's already been established that they only have 36 hours to bring in bucky and cap and of everything that tony decides to do, he decides to go pick up some untrained HIGH SCHOOLER who he's never met? yeah, that's realistic -- not to mention entirely creepy, this is a literal child who he's bringing to an enormously dangerous potentially deadly battle. it was played as comic relief but was so horrifyingly... kidnapping? predatory? wtf? preying on his hero-worship to put him into enormous danger? the whole spidey thing was both jarring from a movie pov but also revolting.

also from the overarching series vantage i just don't care about yet another peter parker so there's that but that was really just a tiny side-note to how many other ways his part in this was just terribad. but it was kind of just a small bit of terrible in a movie that overall i liked quite a lot.

maybeagnostic wrote:Winter Soldier had some light flirting between Natasha and Steve but absolutely no love interest. Civil War had a love interest drop out of the blue midway through the movie that felt really out of place.[spoiler]Had we seen that blond chick before? I got that she's Peggy's niece and a CIA agent but I don't remember seeing her in the previous films. Was she one of the good SHIELD agents in Winter Soldier that took the CIA's offer and I just forgot she existed? Was there any setup for her and Cap before we got that "big payoff" kiss scene in this movie or was all of that supposed to have happened between movies? Anyway, I was mostly thinking of her as Peggy's niece so it didn't quite sit right with me.

... yes, cap actually asked her out before when she was living across the hall from him? and she was undercover then pretending to be his neighbor and said she couldn't go out on a date with him because she "had work" (i.e. she was a s.h.i.e.l.d. agent posted to spy on him so it would be a conflict of interest, but he didn't know that at the time, and then all the stuff happened with nick cage and shooting and everyone getting attacked and then they didn't see each other for a long time!)

but cap HAD in fact asked her on a date long before and she told him she couldn't date him then (when she was undercover) -- that was why the line about that kiss being "late". since the first time he did in fact ask her on a date circumstances meant that she couldn't say yes. but that didn't happen out of the blue? he'd asked her out before and she turned him down (but presumably would have said yes if she weren't working.)

Weeks · Postby **Weeks** » Sun May 08, 2016 6:26 pm UTC

I don't think it was "the best Marvel movie yet", but still pretty good, especially the second half, and most notably the action scenes. I thought the writing was about what you'd expect, a lot like Winter Soldier, just what it needed to be.

Spoiler:

Not much to say except go watch it if you haven't. It was pleasantly long and enjoyable throughout.

Prefanity · Postby **Prefanity** » Mon May 09, 2016 12:15 am UTC

maybeagnostic wrote:
Spoiler:
The conflict between Steve and Tony was very well set up. A few of the other heroes seemed to join teams on random. Falcon and War Machine are semi-sidekicks anyway so whatever but I am not sure why Vision chose a side at all let alone how he picked Iron Man's team other than they were setting up a conflict between him and Wanda. Ant Man and Spidey just showed up for the smack down and could have easily been fighting for either team; not that their inclusion wasn't fun or well done but it turned that fight from intense conflict to friendly brawl.

Spoiler:

maybeagnostic · Postby **maybeagnostic** » Mon May 09, 2016 7:04 am UTC

natraj, about the inclusion of Spidey:

Spoiler:

Prefanity, those are some good points but they weren't really touched upon in the movie. It isn't worse off for skipping them, I suppose.

Izawwlgood · Postby **Izawwlgood** » Mon May 09, 2016 11:40 am UTC

Captain America: The Next Story was pretty great. I'm glad that we're FINALLY, after about 15 years, FINALLY, at the point where we no longer have to give every characters backstory. We all know who Spiderman is. We all know who even fucking Ant Man is. Lets just dispense with the 'My cable isn't working!' foreplay and get straight to the Superhero mashup porn.

The geopolicial icing was fine, no one really cares, and I'm glad that Wakanda is getting some face time, and that Black Panther was pretty badass. Still think Black Widow needs her own film (seriously... ANT MAN...)

Spidey was excellently handled. Ultimately, this was about as good as you can hope for from a hero flick, and I felt it was pretty enjoyable, if a little heavy on the 'Chris Evans flexes his jaw and biceps while we mull over how superheroes affect the world but for some reason still are only able to punch their way out of problems'.

Prefanity · Postby **Prefanity** » Mon May 09, 2016 6:59 pm UTC

maybeagnostic wrote:Prefanity, those are some good points but they weren't really touched upon in the movie. It isn't worse off for skipping them, I suppose.

The movie may not give either character's motivation much time, but it's not like they were left on the cutting room floor. Peter talks about doing the right thing with Stark, and—building on characterization from his solo movie—Lang says "Pym was right; never trust a Stark" in the Raft.

rmsgrey · Postby **rmsgrey** » Tue May 10, 2016 8:07 pm UTC

Stark knew Spidey was good - there's a comment in the bedroom about how impressive he is (that just sounds so wrong...) - and wasn't planning for a fair fight. Spidey was there as a trump card. I get the feeling he's someone Stark's known about for a while, and been keeping as an ace in the hole while waiting for him to get old enough to be signed up as a regular. I also get the feeling Spidey could have enlisted on either side depending on who approached him first.

Vision did make a valid point about the presence of super heroes provoking the emergence of super villains with the attendant collateral damage involved in stopping them.

natraj · Postby **natraj** » Tue May 10, 2016 8:26 pm UTC

my point wasn't whether or not spidey has the actual physical capability to take on those people; it's obvious he does. my point was the morality of bringing an actual child into that situation. both in terms of danger and in terms of legality and the mess he could get spidey into with international law now that they're in the middle of an enormous international diplomatic fiasco and presumably spidey CERTAINLY has not and legally cannot (since he is a minor whose legal guardian does not know about his powers!) sign the sokovia accords. so he's 100% for sure put spidey in both danger and an enormous international diplomatic legal shitstorm. "old enough"? he's in freaking high school and his guardian was not consulted. that entire sequence was... not okay.

and vision's statement was that lots of superpowered people had emerged since the avengers had been on scene -- presumably (given that they exist in the same universe of agents of s.h.i.e.l.d., jessica jones. luke cage, upcoming iron fist, et al) we can 100% assume this means both superheroes and supervillains alike. there is no question that there were actual adult superfolk stark could have called on instead of engaging in literal kidnapping.

ConMan · Postby **ConMan** » Tue May 10, 2016 11:26 pm UTC

Prefanity wrote:
Spoiler:
There is no way Scott Lang would have fought on Stark's side. Not after getting a heaping dose of Stark-related hate from Hank Pym in Antman. Spider-Man makes total sense on Stark's side too, given the whole "with great power..." thing.

Spoiler:

Carlington · Postby **Carlington** » Wed May 11, 2016 2:01 am UTC

ConMan wrote:
Prefanity wrote:
Spoiler:
There is no way Scott Lang would have fought on Stark's side. Not after getting a heaping dose of Stark-related hate from Hank Pym in Antman. Spider-Man makes total sense on Stark's side too, given the whole "with great power..." thing.

Spoiler:
But that's not what that line is about. "With great power" is about the fact that if something bad is going to happen, and you have the ability to stop it, then you have a responsibility to try. It stems from Peter choosing to not stop the guy who would later kill Uncle Ben because it wasn't his problem (I know the line originates from Uncle Ben, but the gravitas of it comes from that event). And Peter says almost exactly what I said, and you can see Tony feeling conflicted at that because it's much closer to Steve's position than his own.

I've never read the Civil War arc of the comics, but I seem to remember seeing somewhere that one of the big turning points of the event was Spider-man choosing what side he belonged to, and maybe even switching from Tony's to Steve's? So I thought that might actually be a point in the film, and it would have maybe added a little more purpose to his inclusion.

Spoiler:

maybeagnostic · Postby **maybeagnostic** » Wed May 11, 2016 7:24 am UTC

natraj wrote:he's in freaking high school and his guardian was not consulted. that entire sequence was... not okay.

That's why you are meant to see the recruitment scene and ensuing confrontation as light-hearted action comedy. If its the equivalent of his older friends taking him to an amusement park, it is a lot less sinister.

natraj wrote:and vision's statement was that lots of superpowered people had emerged since the avengers had been on scene...

I've seen that line of reasoning in comic book movies a few times now and it never made a lick of sense to me. It's not like having the Avengers around is causing anyone to suddenly develop superpowers. It is just a meta argument about how writing stories about superheroes necessarily demands putting their counterparts in power and aims for them to fight but that's not how the world works (neither the real one nor even theirs).

Now Ultron and Vision are a good argument for why Tony Stark shouldn't be allowed to do whatever he likes but that hardly applies to all heroes everywhere. Agent of SHIELD's Inhuman storyline could have been perfect motivation for the movie but the cinematic universe absolutely ignores that show's existence.

Chen · Postby **Chen** » Wed May 11, 2016 11:38 am UTC

maybeagnostic wrote:Now Ultron and Vision are a good argument for why Tony Stark shouldn't be allowed to do whatever he likes but that hardly applies to all heroes everywhere. Agent of SHIELD's Inhuman storyline could have been perfect motivation for the movie but the cinematic universe absolutely ignores that show's existence.

It's more that SHIELD is acting in secret without the knowledge of the Avengers (only Nick Fury really seems to know about them). The show definitely acknowledges the cinematic universe. Yesterday's episode started with talking about how Coulson will be needing to register his Inhumans due to the accords.

maybeagnostic · Postby **maybeagnostic** » Wed May 11, 2016 1:01 pm UTC

But that's the point. In the show Inhumans are no secret and even the fact that there is an environmental reason for more of them to be popping up all over the world is widely known. Even without any specifics about Coulson's little team, that was a good setup for the accords that was not even hinted at in the movies.

Izawwlgood · Postby **Izawwlgood** » Wed May 11, 2016 1:39 pm UTC

@natraj - I think you're being kind of silly to be pointing out that Spiderman is a child, given everything that has always existed about the character. Stark wanted another team member. Spiderman can catch SUVs and has been fighting crime in NYC for [PeriodOfTime]. Throwing him into a confrontation with a bunch of superheroes is pretty par for the course here. Duping his 'guardian' is pretty much par for the course. This is not new or unique to super hero interactions, and besides, Spiderman himself is basically one big exercise in 'teenager duping his guardian'. Hell, Vision is younger than Spiderman, no one's bitching about his immaturity or bizarro legal standing as a synthetic alien crystal.

natraj wrote:there is no question that there were actual adult superfolk stark could have called on instead of engaging in literal kidnapping.

But he didn't. He picked Spiderman, for reasons of Plot. Welcome to the Marvel universe!

rmsgrey · Postby **rmsgrey** » Fri May 13, 2016 3:31 pm UTC

maybeagnostic wrote:
natraj wrote:he's in freaking high school and his guardian was not consulted. that entire sequence was... not okay.
That's why you are meant to see the recruitment scene and ensuing confrontation as light-hearted action comedy. If its the equivalent of his older friends taking him to an amusement park, it is a lot less sinister.

For most of the participants at the airport, the fight wasn't serious - Wanda even calls Natasha and Clint out for not taking it seriously at one point - both sides co-operate in setting up the fight somewhere clear of civilians, and the only person out for blood is T'Challa. That's not to say that the consequences (both notional and actual) weren't deadly serious - with the future of the Winter Soldier program at stake, not to mention the question of whether the Sokovia Accords are actually enforceable. And, of course, what happened at the end of the fight.

Sure, Peter would have been safer at home doing his homework, but he'd have been in more danger at home fighting crime, so Tony could argue (and probably would if it came to it) that he actually made Peter safer by putting him in a more controlled hazardous environment...

KnightExemplar · Postby **KnightExemplar** » Sun May 15, 2016 3:33 pm UTC

The movie was awful and made a mockery of the Civil War comic series. Tony Stark needed to build Robo-Thor to kill someone important (maybe Giant Man / Ant-Man) in an ill-conceived notion, and then refuse to apologize for it, and Black Widow needed to kill Captain America because plot. Peter Parker needed to reveal his secret identity too, I mean, that's part of the Sokovia Accords and part of fighting on Iron Man's side.

/Sarcasm

Thank goodness this movie was completely, and utterly different than the comic books. Yeah, the whole "Spiderman Secret Identity / Contradiction with the Sokovia Accords (aka: Superhero Registration Act 2.0)" thing is arguably a plot hole. But some things are better left not done. It really was awful in the comics how that was handled.

Normally, I nerd-rage when things deviate from the source material. I couldn't be any prouder that this movie decided to take its own path.

sardia · Postby **sardia** » Sun May 15, 2016 4:03 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:The movie was awful and made a mockery of the Civil War comic series. Tony Stark needed to build Robo-Thor to kill someone important (maybe Giant Man / Ant-Man) in an ill-conceived notion, and then refuse to apologize for it, and Black Widow needed to kill Captain America because plot. Peter Parker needed to reveal his secret identity too, I mean, that's part of the Sokovia Accords and part of fighting on Iron Man's side.

/Sarcasm

Thank goodness this movie was completely, and utterly different than the comic books. Yeah, the whole "Spiderman Secret Identity / Contradiction with the Sokovia Accords (aka: Superhero Registration Act 2.0)" thing is arguably a plot hole. But some things are better left not done. It really was awful in the comics how that was handled.

Normally, I nerd-rage when things deviate from the source material. I couldn't be any prouder that this movie decided to take its own path.

Civil war aside, why would you want something to follow the source material? Comics are very hit and miss, so it's best to take the choice bits, and ditch the rest. Like following extremis arc in Iron man 3 would have been an awful idea.

KnightExemplar · Postby **KnightExemplar** » Sun May 15, 2016 4:24 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Civil war aside, why would you want something to follow the source material? Comics are very hit and miss, so it's best to take the choice bits, and ditch the rest. Like following extremis arc in Iron man 3 would have been an awful idea.

Yeah, but almost nothing from the Civil War arc seemed to have been followed. The entirety of the plot was basically redone from the ground up. Sorkovia Accords were the closest tie-in that I noticed... having some superficial parallels to the Superhuman Registration Act. But... not really. (Spiderman didn't need to reveal his identity to work with Tony Stark).

Also, while Iron Man 3 had elements from the Extremis arc... the movie wasn't called "Iron Man: Extremis". Generally speaking, when you take the exact title from a Comic Book, there's a soft-promise to actually follow the plot of that comic.

Carlington · Postby **Carlington** » Mon May 16, 2016 1:14 am UTC

You mean like they did with Age of Ultron, right? Just about the only thing that matched there was the basic premise of Ultron attempting to take over the world. It's been outright stated by the people in charge of the MCU more than once that storylines won't be lifted from the comics. Elements and bits and pieces of the comics might be taken to build new stories with, but the MCU is its own entity and is to be taken separately.

KnightExemplar · Postby **KnightExemplar** » Mon May 16, 2016 4:35 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:You mean like they did with Age of Ultron, right?

Maybe, I didn't read that comic so naturally I have no opinion of it :-)

Civil War on the other hand, is something I read and followed closely.

sardia · Postby **sardia** » Tue May 17, 2016 3:53 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
Carlington wrote:You mean like they did with Age of Ultron, right?

Maybe, I didn't read that comic so naturally I have no opinion of it Civil War on the other hand, is something I read and followed closely.

But comic civil war was widely panned =.= You kept reading it despite where it was going?

Tyndmyr · Postby **Tyndmyr** » Tue May 17, 2016 3:09 pm UTC

I read it thoroughly as well. It had good parts. The kernel of a good idea shining through in spots, marred by poor execution in many.

I am pretty happy with the adaptation. It's definitely not the same thing, but that's absolutely fine.

Chen · Postby **Chen** » Thu May 19, 2016 12:00 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:For most of the participants at the airport, the fight wasn't serious - Wanda even calls Natasha and Clint out for not taking it seriously at one point - both sides co-operate in setting up the fight somewhere clear of civilians, and the only person out for blood is T'Challa. That's not to say that the consequences (both notional and actual) weren't deadly serious - with the future of the Winter Soldier program at stake, not to mention the question of whether the Sokovia Accords are actually enforceable. And, of course, what happened at the end of the fight.

Team Cap seemed far more willing to do severe damage at the airport. Wanda was throwing people around she had never seen/met before. She threw Black Panther at a ridiculous clip through one of those moving corridor things. That could easily have killed someone if the guy was like Ant Man (normal human in a non-protective suit). Hawkeye too shooting arrows at Black Panther's head, though that was late in the fight so it's possible he knew the suit was sufficiently armored. Ant Man at the end was probably the worst though. Him stepping on people would easily have killed them and he was actively trying. Part of that of course is that the teamups were ridiculous mismatches and that everyone went to fight their "equals" and even then Team Cap tended to be losing until a stronger member of the team stepped in (Wanda generally). The scene ended up working pretty well but there's a lot of fridge logic there. Like what the hell was Vision doing for 90% of the fight? Nothing, because he's ridiculously stronger than everyone except Wanda and we already had a Vision/Wanda face off.

Still overall enjoyable movie.

Spoiler:

Izawwlgood · Postby **Izawwlgood** » Thu May 19, 2016 12:14 pm UTC

The whole blaming Wanda for the bombing thing was spun extremely poorly. 12 people died in the buildings...but I'd say dozens more would died would have died if the blast went off on the ground no?

I also thought this was handled poorly, and to boot, I felt like the ire generated here was completely overshadowed by the fact that they recovered a biological weapon of mass destruction.

"Yes, we're very sorry that 12 people died here, and you're right, we do need to do better. Speaking of 'doing better', you know that it took a garbage truck and a dozen dudes with gun to steal that biological weapon, right? Maybe beef up your security, so we don't have to 'do better next time'?"

I think it was mostly because the 12 people who died were Wakandans, who despite being 'the good guys', are also quite xenophobic and quick to anger.

rmsgrey · Postby **rmsgrey** » Thu May 19, 2016 3:40 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:
The whole blaming Wanda for the bombing thing was spun extremely poorly. 12 people died in the buildings...but I'd say dozens more would died would have died if the blast went off on the ground no?
I also thought this was handled poorly, and to boot, I felt like the ire generated here was completely overshadowed by the fact that they recovered a biological weapon of mass destruction.

"Yes, we're very sorry that 12 people died here, and you're right, we do need to do better. Speaking of 'doing better', you know that it took a garbage truck and a dozen dudes with gun to steal that biological weapon, right? Maybe beef up your security, so we don't have to 'do better next time'?"

I think it was mostly because the 12 people who died were Wakandans, who despite being 'the good guys', are also quite xenophobic and quick to anger.

I think, much like Archie Duke shooting an ostrich because he was hungry, Lagos wasn't the cause of the Sokovia Accords; merely the excuse for acting on the existing feelings. The Sokovia Accords aren't about 12 Wakandans dying; they're not even about Sokovia getting demolished. They're about people having realised that there is a group taking orders from no-one but themselves, not being held accountable by anyone, operating internationally with occasional lapses in judgement.

Yes, Lagos could have been spun much better, but it wouldn't have addressed the real problem.

Chen · Postby **Chen** » Thu May 19, 2016 4:18 pm UTC

Oh I agree it wouldn't have changed the Accords (they didn't build that giant floating prison in a day), but you'd think they would have had some PR spin the fact that that bomb would have leveled a marketplace had it just gone off. And the whole bio weapons being stolen by heavily armed terrorists didn't seem to be mentioned at all.

Tyndmyr · Postby **Tyndmyr** » Thu May 19, 2016 5:10 pm UTC

Chen wrote:Oh I agree it wouldn't have changed the Accords (they didn't build that giant floating prison in a day), but you'd think they would have had some PR spin the fact that that bomb would have leveled a marketplace had it just gone off. And the whole bio weapons being stolen by heavily armed terrorists didn't seem to be mentioned at all.

And the accords had been worked on for months, mentioned at the beginning. So, clearly an already ongoing movement. And one that was at least partially hidden from the Avengers. Because *Stark* expresses surprise at seeing the Raft.

It's a government power grab that happens to take advantage of an unfortunate accident.

And yknow, I'm okay with that. Adds a lot of realism.

Chen · Postby **Chen** » Thu May 19, 2016 5:22 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:And the accords had been worked on for months, mentioned at the beginning. So, clearly an already ongoing movement. And one that was at least partially hidden from the Avengers. Because *Stark* expresses surprise at seeing the Raft.

It's a government power grab that happens to take advantage of an unfortunate accident.

And yknow, I'm okay with that. Adds a lot of realism.

True it is realistic for the government to use that as an excuse. And even the media to run with the worst case story. I'm just surprised no one INSIDE the Avengers brought it up. Like telling Wanda "it wasn't your fault" is a nice platitude, but telling her "far more people would have died if the bomb had just gone off" seems like a really easy thing to say that might make her at least feel a BIT better. Stark putting her under house arrest instead of just talking to her and convincing her its the better PR move was ridiculous too. She was already feeling terrible about it, I'm pretty sure you could easily have convinced her to do it on her own rather than doing it for her.

Tyndmyr · Postby **Tyndmyr** » Thu May 19, 2016 6:35 pm UTC

I think that's what Cap was trying to tell her, with "you save as many people as you can. Some days, that doesn't mean everybody. If you can't find a way to live with that, you eventually save nobody". He's telling her that she DID save people, and that she'll continue to do so. It's a very positive message, situation considered.

Stark is all wrapped up in politics, not people, I think. He means well, but he's so busy doing what he sees as politically necessary that he doesn't ask people, first. It's a failing, to be sure, but it's a very human one. Particularly for someone with Stark's ego.

cphite · Postby **cphite** » Thu May 19, 2016 6:49 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:And the accords had been worked on for months, mentioned at the beginning. So, clearly an already ongoing movement. And one that was at least partially hidden from the Avengers. Because *Stark* expresses surprise at seeing the Raft.

It's a government power grab that happens to take advantage of an unfortunate accident.

And yknow, I'm okay with that. Adds a lot of realism.

True it is realistic for the government to use that as an excuse. And even the media to run with the worst case story. I'm just surprised no one INSIDE the Avengers brought it up. Like telling Wanda "it wasn't your fault" is a nice platitude, but telling her "far more people would have died if the bomb had just gone off" seems like a really easy thing to say that might make her at least feel a BIT better. Stark putting her under house arrest instead of just talking to her and convincing her its the better PR move was ridiculous too. She was already feeling terrible about it, I'm pretty sure you could easily have convinced her to do it on her own rather than doing it for her.

Exactly right... it was kind of silly that not one Avenger stepped up and pointed out that, had they not been there at all, a gang of clearly violent terrorists would have gained possession of a terrible biological weapon; and had Wanda not hurled the bomb into the air, instead of 12 people dying in a building you would have had potentially dozens more dying on the street.

It would have also been worth mentioned that previously, by operating outside of the law, the Avengers literally saved the entire planet and that, in the process of doing so, prevented the "proper" authorities from nuking New York City.

Who is online