Captain America: Civil War (with SPOILERS!) Discussion and Whatever Thread

So how exactly did the Accords go unnoticed by the Avengers? Forget the UN telling them or not, political actions like these would have been discussed in meetings for years and be legally obligated to be open to the public. Even if the US media didn't report it much, the international media would have been really focused on it.

I mean, I could see Steve not watching the news much given he seems to care more about popcultural flotsam and is typically portrayed as being out of touch with the modern world for the most part but surely the others would have noticed rising sentiment against the Avengers

I'd say the real fulcrum of hypocrisy was not so much Steve's attitude toward the Accords, but to the general public in conjunction. Same goes for superheroes as a whole, really. It's one thing to maintain that there are certain matters best left out of the hands, and ideally out of sight of society at large - it's iffy, but it more or less works if you run a benevolent Men in Black-style organization and don't want to bother most people with the myriad threats to their existence.

Conversely, if you find government institutions to be corrupt, and have sufficient resources to withstand their initial wrath, it's perfectly justifiable to go public with what you know, so at least people would know you can be trusted, and a more grassroots form of resistance can be established.

However, shunning both the government and the people at the same time is the epitome of conceited self-aggrandizing, as you basically present yourself as the lone martyr against the world, protecting people from themselves for their own good... amidst mounting casualties and collateral damage. Kinda reminds me of how The Matrix protagonists where compared to fanatical terrorists, including a whole scene trying to justify their attitude that anyone not with them is almost automatically against them. At least they had a better dress sense.

That and the fact that they really were fighting against a machine manipulating the public.

But yeah, you've got a point. It isn't even just Steve's attitude towards the Accords that's an issue, it's how he opposes them and why.

edited 2nd Jul '17 7:47:41 AM by windleopard

And if you're going to do that... you'd better have the chops to back it up.

I'd say Neo doing his Superman thing in broad daylight would've served as ample evidence that something ain't right with the world, getting public attention that way... though that's where the other bit about most people being physically unable to handle the truth comes into play. Still, it's a much better handwave than anything the Avengers have demonstrated so far, from Tony hogging Iron tech and experimenting on alien artefacts, to Steve trying to be a one-man global peacekeeping corps.

Isn't that basically exactly what Steve did and was repeatedly presented as justified in?

Dopants: He meant what he said and he said what he meant, a Ninety is faithful 100%.

Yeah.

Indiana ain't a fan of the anti-reg side to say the least.

Eh? I said Bruce and Tony. As in Bruce Banner is a terrible friend to Tony Stark, and Tony Stark is a slightly less terrible friend to Bruce Banner.

"It is very easy to be kind; the difficulty lies in being just."

Ah, right. Well, might as well toss Steve "I hid who killed your parents" Rogers into the list of people to defriend on Facebook. If anything, Bruce and Tony had much more cordial relationship in the films proper. Have to admire the suicidal overconfidence of a guy who is introduced to the Hulk, and the next thing he does is zap him with a shock prod. And give him a ride home after the action is over. And come to him for advice after another crisis. Really, the whole great big friendship conflict between Steve and Tony would've worked rather better if there was a great big friendship between them up to that point, as they clearly had better chemistry with Nat and Bruce, respectively.

All those two ever did was trade insults and sarcasm, with the exchanges ending in Stark's favour more often than not.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

Funny thing I consider that the weaker part of the whole thing since it reduce whatever point into Tony shouting "MY PARENT ARE DEAAAAAAAAAAAAD!!" like the meme(really, change batman for tony and work like a charm) making the whole accords into a divorce agrement

In fact indiana, when I see Zemo I haft expect him to said "and this is cheaters!"

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"

That and Chris Hansen when he's putting the moves on a girl barely a fraction of his age. Same goes for Thor, by the way.

Speaking of which, it counts as rather interesting foreshadowing way back in AOU, that not even Steve could lift the hammer. He was slipping even then. Sure, Tony is an egotistical jerk and Banner has some anger issues to work out, but when mister purity and goodness only barely budges a literal moral judgment device, one might start wondering exactly what's going on in his head.

Cap's age is debatable. He's been biologically and psychologically 32 because despite being technically 99 years old. Sharon Carter's actress is 32. They're basically the same-age.

Cap's situation is more comparable to that of a time-traveler than someone like THE MIGHTY THOR.

"All you Fascists bound to lose."

Am I the only one who sees it as troubling to use lifting Mjilnor to judge someone's morality? I mean, the current owner is a shameless blood knight who almost started a war over a minor slight and nearly killed his future team mates over an easily avoidable misunderstanding. How high can its standard be?

As I understand, it judges "worthiness" by the standard of a culture of warrior gods, not how nice you are.

Dopants: He meant what he said and he said what he meant, a Ninety is faithful 100%.

He stopped being a shameless blood knight a while ago.

The hammer's judgement seems to be more situational at any rate (i.e Thor is only able to lift it when he sacrifices himself, Vision is only able to do it when he's trying to convince them of his righteousness), so the circumstances are probably part of it. Trying to lift the hammer as a dumb party game throws all off.

"All you Fascists bound to lose."

I always felt it was a problematic choice to have the hammer leave its spot in the New Mexico desert to resurrect a near death Thor. It placed the emphasis ON the situation rather than the person. It dilutes the entire meaning of "if he be worthy" and makes the concept that only Thor can use Mjolnir into a joke rather than a reflection of his character.

Thor's behaviour in Avengers and Age of Ultron say he has in fact not stopped being a blood knight.

He enjoys a good scuffle, but nowadays he's more of a Boisterous Bruiser than a Blood Knight. He's not wantonly causing civil wars to satisfy his thirst for the mangled corpses of his opponents anymore.

"All you Fascists bound to lose."

Too high for the rest of the (male) Avengers; that's what's worrisome here. The world is supposed to be protected by people apparently suffering from the moral version of being Too Incompetent to Operate a Blanket. I realize most bigwig writers have no better idea of entertainment than pretty people barking at each other, but there are certain genres where that sort of thing is more likely to detract from the story than add to it. And in-universe, it presents the characters as dangerously immature given the kind of firepower they sport. Though being considered as immature by said firepower should really take the cake.

The Avengers are a liability because they can't lift a divine hammer?

"All you Fascists bound to lose."

That's at the bottom of the list of the reasons why, really.

Dopants: He meant what he said and he said what he meant, a Ninety is faithful 100%.

Pretty much. When the apparent standard is "not being a completely self-centered jerkass", and they can't even meet that, they really might wanna reconsider their life choices.

edited 7th Jul '17 12:05:16 PM by indiana404

Where did you get that the hammer's standards are so low? Thor gets it because he does a messianic sacrifice, not because he stopped being a dick.

"All you Fascists bound to lose."

I dunno, at that point in the overall story, everyone had made a messianic sacrifice, including Tony and Banner (in TIH). It would indeed be interesting just what the hammer's standards are, particularly as historical vikings and their gods can't quite be used as reference for the Asgardians.