Follow TV Tropes

Following

Headscratchers / Captain America: Civil War

Go To

    open/close all folders 

    Where did Black Widow go in the end? 
  • The last we see of her is that she's talking with Tony Stark. But after that...poof! What becomes of her after this?
  • In the run? She was gonna be arrested for electrocuting T'Challa.
    • As of the Infinity War promos, it looks like this was correct - she's a fugitive in Wakanda.

    Natasha's side 
  • Remember Natasha's speech at the end of Winter Soldier? About how superheroes cause a lot of trouble, but they always save the day in the end? Wouldn't it make more sense for her to be on Steve's side?
    • She's also all about redeeming herself and going on the straight-and-narrow to make up for her past, and made all her info public at the end. Plus the conflict isn't about not superheroing, but superheroing independently vs. under government supervision.
    • Not only that Natasha is both a realist and a pragmatist. She has probably anticipated the accords coming and was ready for them. As a spy the big picture and endgame is always forefront in her mind. What she did not anticipate was how much she and Steve would bond, or that Steve would stand against the government.
    • There were also rumors a while back that one character will be The Mole for the other team. It's up in the air for who that person might be, but Widow is a candidate.
    • Not a mole, but she does have a change of heart during the main Good vs. Good battle and allow Cap and Bucky to escape.
    • Possibly she'd been hoping all along that by working alongside Tony, she could eventually persuade him to talk to Cap rather than fight him by the time they'd tracked Rogers down. Persuading people by indirect methods is Natasha's specialty, after all.
    • In the early discussion of the Accords, her stance is once of pragmatism: It's better to take this deal now and keep one hand on the wheel, than reject them and get a worse deal down the line.
    • Overall this is a pretty good representation of the split that led to the Irish Civil War. A treaty was proposed that would give the Irish their own government but they'd still be part of the British Empire. A bunch of people opposed it because they wanted to be completely independent. Others - particularly one Michael Collins - argued that accepting it would be a stepping stone to complete freedom. Natasha seems to think that tensions between them and the government are so high right now that it's better to give in now and keep them happy, and then slowly win them over to their side later.
Advertisement:

    The Film's Title 
  • With so many characters jam packed into one movie, why is it called Captain America: Civil War? Wouldn't it make more sense to call the film Marvel Civil War?
    • Because at the forefront of the movie is Captain America and his place in the world. Captain America's actions and choices is what helped cause the conflict. The war is the result of him not being a good soldier and obeying orders, especially orders he doesn't agree with. It's a Captain America story, played on a world stage.
    • Based on the Trailer the downtime parts of the story are Cap and Falcon locating Bucky and uncovering a Hydra plan. The Anti-Reg heroes might be part of it too, but it's primarily a Captain America story. Iron Man is the antagonist and the other Pro Reg heroes are only going to show during fight scenes.
    • The film's main focus is still around what will be done about Bucky, which is very much part of Cap's character arc.
    • I imagine that they didn't want people to complain that Captain America wouldn't get his own Phase 3 movie, so they just named this one "Captain America: Civil War" to make them feel better. It's not a huge stretch, since Cap's relationship with Bucky basically starts the whole conflict.
    • 2016 marks the 75th anniversary of Captain America's comic debut. I bet that influenced the title.
    • Now that they film has been released, those concerns should be over. Yes, there are many characters around, but it's still a Captain America film, focused on Captain America.

    "So was I" 
  • Since when were Steve and Tony friends in this continuity? Basically every moment of their screen time, when they're not kicking Hydra/Chitauri/Ultron ass together, is them arguing back and forth and butting heads. At best, they've shown a grudging respect for each other and that when push comes to shove they can put aside their differences to work together. Even in the party scene in AOU, which was supposed to be the giant group-huggy feel-good time, they mostly interact with their assorted teammates and seemed to avoid each other as much as possible. Where is this friendship line even coming from?
    • ^People don't need to be buddy-buddy, or even overly-friendly, to be friends - sometimes respect + being on the same side are enough for that, even if by technicality.
    • Also as some people have pointed out Tony might think he has more of a friendship with Cap than he really does. He does after all have kind of an ego and is kind of jerk to the people that he is friends with. He might not really think friendship from years ago with a guy who since was a murderous assassin for decades who's victims included Tony's own parents, is worth going renegade and fighting him for and feel genuinely betrayed. We don't see Steve's response. Maybe he says he's not nearly close enough to Tony to turn on Bucky for him.
    • Rewatching The First Avenger, Bucky and Steve's friendship was a little vitriolic too, but in a friendly way. That's just how Steve bonds. He teased Sam and Peggy too.
      Bucky: Look, just don't do anything stupid before I get back.
      Steve: How can I? You're taking all the stupid with you?
      Bucky: (hugging Steve) You're a punk.
      Steve: Jerk.
    • Tony is also the sort of guy who bonds over vitriol. He regularly teases his friends and often mocks them. Between the two Avengers movies, we see him cracking jokes at Thor, Hawkeye, and Black Widow. He also playfully jabbed Banner to see if he'd Hulk-out (Banner seemingly being the Avenger who finds it the most endearing). In his own movies, Tony gives Rhodey and Pepper a hard time as often as he can. Oh, and let's not forget his relationship with Fury and Coulson. Steve is not treated any differently than any of his other friends.
    • What bothers some is not that their friendship was vitriolic, but that if Tony really was as good a friend to Steve as he claims he should have known better when it came to Bucky.
    • Friendship isn't about instantly accepting what one person says without any actual proof though. While it certainly isn't a problem to do that, to say that someone has to do that to be someone else's friend seems fairly ridiculous.
    • Tony, well, looks at everything with an egotistical eye. He is high on the scale of self pre-occupation, and probably sees more than there might actually be... then Cap goes and chooses Bucky over him, dismissing what Tony believes is the right thing to boot, and they both know Cap isn't the type of person who will yield. It doesn't take much to feel the perceived betrayal/hurt
    • He really is that self-absorbed in my eyes, and this scene clinches it. Even when he's pleading in the name of his and Steve's friendship, it feels more like he's upset that he's losing something. Even if I accept that he truly does consider himself Steve's friend and the whole Vitriolic Best Buds thing is what fuels the relationship, it still seems really weird and self-centered. The only thing I can figure is that he sees it as "this dude has been out of your life for 70 years, you owe your life/friendship/kindness to the people around you now", where Steve sees it as dealing with losing him for maybe 2-3 years during a horrible war. I'm hoping the movie will clarify it some more and maybe show them doing things as friends before it all goes to hell.
    • Which is what bothers people in the first place, Tony knows he's egotistical and narcissistic and doesn't do anything about it. He acts like he's justified in his egotism when he knows he isn't.
    • That's just his character; he's egotistical, narcissistic, and never changes/tones it down until he's forced to... and even when he does, he still acts like one at the core, still knowing that he is one throughout. We might not agree with it or like it, but from that point-of-view, Tony sincerely believes what he said ("So was I"), and that's what makes it heart-breaking.
    • Someone that willfully self-absorbed is scary, not heartbreaking.
    • Well, that's also where differences in opinion come in.
    • Don't forget that there is a sizable slash fandom out there: Steve/Tony was a carryover from the comics that has only been fueled by scenes from Avengers that could be interpreted as Belligerent Sexual Tension and Tony's nightmare from AoU that focused more on Steve than any of the others. And Steve/Bucky is the most popular slash ship in the MCU according to Fanlore. There's no rational way that the writers, actors, directors and producers don't know that, and so making the conflict about Bucky and Tony feeling like Steve is choosing between them might be, even if only fractionally, their way of egging on the slash fans with a plot that, for some, will feel like a subtextual Love Triangle.
    • Let's also not forget that Tony likely now knows that Howard and Maria were killed by the Winter Soldier. However much antipathy he had towards his father, he's still going to take that amiss, and Tony loved his mother very much. His ego doesn't even have to come into the equation for there to be a very legitimate feeling of betrayal on Tony's part that Cap would be trying to shield Bucky from being made to answer for their murder. Especially since Tony has every reason to think that Steve knows Bucky's kill list includes Tony's parents. I mean, wouldn't you be a little hurt and betrayed in Tony's shoes, even if the person in Steve's place was just a "work friend"?
    • We know the Avengers got back together sometime after the events of Winter Soldier to track down Loki's scepter and take down Hydra. According to Age of Ultron they had been doing that for months. That is the time frame where Steve and Tony started to become friends. While I agree that Age of Ultron did not do as much as it could done to show Tony and Steve had developed a closer bond/friendship there might be an argument that there were subtle clues to an improved relationship. Cap was annoyed with how Tony joked a lot during the mission in Avengers. During the Hydra raid at Tony made a joke about language thing, but Steve for the most part was fine with it and bemoaned how his slip of the tongue was going to haunt him. As someone else pointed out the fact that Steve used in Tony's nightmare vision to sell it over fellow Science Bro, Bruce, does make a statement. At the end of the film they had what might be considered a genuine friendship moment. Widow joked about them gazing into each other's eyes, which be a hint that they became closer during their time together as Avengers. Yes, it would have been nice for the last Avengers to have given them more screen time together not fighting or supporting each other more like Winter Soldier movie did Cap and Black Widow or the first Avengers did for Tony and Bruce, but it is what is.
    • To quote Whedon
      [snip] "It's the first thing I did when I got the Avengers [film] gig was write just scans of pages of arguments between Captain America and Iron Man, just sort of laying out who their characters were by how they couldn’t stand each other."
    • That reads he had no specific intentions of making the MCU versions of these characters close "friends".
    • It is entirely possible to still care deeply about someone you personally don't like being around. Plus, that's about The Avengers; Steve and Tony have had years to get to know one another better (and years for their underlying issues to start boiling over).
    • After seeing the movie, I can say that Tony, despite his usual mannerism, may have cared for Steve more than Steve cared for him. Tony constantly tried to get Steve to at least compromise, and to not use unnecessary force until the situation called for no alternatives. Even in the climatic fight, despite his rage for Steve keeping him in the dark about Howard and Maria's deaths, Tony first tried to just impede Steve from fighting without injuring him (first the leg cuffs, then causing a ceiling to collapse to block Steve), gradually using more force because Steve was so determined he kept coming back. Also notice that never during the movie Steve discussed about "friends" or "friendship" until that scene; Tony's "So was I" is, in some ways, a realization that yes, he considered Steve a friend and wasn't capable of admitting it even to himself.
    • I'd say you certainly see that Tony considered Steve to be his friend throughout the film. As mentioned above he really avoids using the maximum amount of force against Steve at numerous points, not only during their final fight, but at the airport as well. There, he argues with Steve, after having been ordered to bring him in, and seems fairly desperate about it, with his voice even cracking at one point. Steve himself doesn't seem any happier having to fight against Tony and ends the film apologizing to him for what's happened.
    • It should be noted that the line read is a lot different in the final film than in the trailer. In the trailer, he says it like he's heartbroken. In the film, he says it full of rage. It comes off less as a statement of fact and more as a contextual middle finger.
    • Looking back on it, especially in Age of Ultron, you can see that they've bonded somewhat as friends. Their good-natured ribbing of Thor at the end of the film ("elevator's not worthy,") almost seems like they planned it in advance, or just know enough about how the other thinks they can riff off each other easily. And in Tony's goodbye scene, there's some genuine affection. They may not be close friends, or best friends, or even really "outside-of-work" friends, but they like, respect, trust, and understand each other. Sounds like friendship to me.
    • Part of the frustration that makes Tony want to "punch him in those perfect teeth" is similar to what a lot of people feel in these polarized political times. How can someone you otherwise think is smart and kind-hearted believe something that is SO wrong? Steve feels the same way, he's just more patient and understanding about it. Tony's ego comes into play only because he IS so intelligent that he usually thinks automatically he's right. Even when he discovers that he may be wrong he can't dismiss his arguments completely and will try to view the new data with his original perspective; again, a problem many of us are having these days. Steve's faced with he can't think of a compromise, so he's had to "plant himself like a tree". When he starts to work on a compromise ("There will have to be safeguards") he finds that Tony AGAIN has withheld information from him in the spirit of "Tony knows best". My headscratcher is why he never said "Hey Tony, why don't you work out your guilt for making Ultron and getting all those people killed some other way?"
    • A bit of Fridge, but Tony considered himself to be Steve's friend, whether Steve felt the same way or not. It could less be Tony saying "You've chosen that friendship over this one and destroyed it" and more "I thought we were friends, I certainly felt like I was your friend, but I guess you never really cared, huh?" It doesn't have to be ego from Tony's perspective: it's quite possible (one could even say common) for one person to consider their relationship with someone else to be much more important than the other person does. Steve may just think of Tony as a good coworker and nice guy despite his faults, while Tony thinks of Steve as a really good person, everything Tony sometimes wishes he could be, and feel like Steve's his long-lost brother (especially with the way Howard always talked up Captain America).
    • As I was reading this folder, I was watching the scene where the team first started discussing the accords. Natasha notes that Tony isn't being his usual self and without missing a beat, Cap (correctly) identifies why Tony's acting weird. There's more to their relationship that we've seen as viewers of the movies. Does it suck that we don't see it all? Yeah. But there is evidence to suggest that they are indeed friends at this point.
    Steve: That's because he's already made up his mind.

    Rhodes status 
  • Is Rhodes still in the Air Force? Because if so wouldn't the Avengers already more or less be under US Government control, they wouldn't allow an active duty officer to go around getting into fights unless it was authorized first.
    • Unknown. In Age of Ultron he's hanging around in New York and later goes to help Fury get his Helicarrier back in the air and assists the Avengers as War Machine before joining up with the team at the end. He shouldn't be able to do any of that if he's on duty at his stationed base on the West Coast. In this film his War Machine armor is lacking the US AF markings he usually has too, suggesting he's out of the Air Force for the moment.
    • They still refer to him as a Colonel, but as mentioned the War Machine MK 3 lacks the Langley Air Force squadron marking that the mk 1 and 2 had (though it has an Air Force crest on it) which suggests he's on loan to the Avengers or some such and isn't part of Air Force at the moment.
    • The USAF has TDY (temporary duty) assignments which may have employees assigned away from their normal station for up to 6 months. Then again, Age of Ultron suggests that War Machine is a somewhat free-roaming force of his own- he showed up in Sokovia to support the SHIELD/Avengers operation, with no implication that the Air Force had sent him there. He appears to have dual status, working for the Air Force most of the time, working with the Avengers when they need him.
    • Very doubtful he's active duty. He's still called "colonel" because active or retired, officers are still entitled to be called by rank, so calling him by rank doesn't confirm duty status one way or the other. The lack of USAF insignia on the War Machine suit only indicates that this particular suit is not Air Force property. If he was on TDY, he'd be on active duty status, and freelancing would be strictly verboten and Rhodey would have been apprehended and stuffed in the deepest cell Leavenworth had. Given that his identity is now no longer a secret—at least in the film universe—and he's still roaming free, odds are good that he's retired.
      • Exactly. That, plus the below comment that his identity was never a secret makes it almost certain he's essentially retired from the USAF, especially because he as a person wouldn't be authorized to represent the US military when he's off heroing.
    • His identity as the pilot of the War Machine armor was never a secret, to the Air Force or the public in general. He was introduced by Justin Hammer as piloting the suit at the Stark Expo in Iron Man 2 and was later given a medal after helping Tony beat Ivan Vanko.

    General Ross 
  • I really don't have a problem with the accountability speech from the trailer except it's being delivered by General Ross! This guy operated with zero accountability in his pursuit of the Hulk to the point where he created a monster far more destructive than the Hulk ever was. He's the last person to be able to lecture someone on the subject. What idiot thought it was a good idea to put this asshole in charge!?
    • The Doylist answer is the directors/writers wanted Ross in the movie so The Incredible Hulk film from Phase 1 was more connected to the overall MCU. The reasoning in-universe seems to be that Ross realized he had the wrong approach and changed tactics from overwhelming military force to using political pressure to get his way.
    • Zero accountability? We don't know what happened to Ross in the years between TIH and CW.
    • He becomes Secretary of State, so nothing overtly negative happened to him.
    • To list the misdeeds he hasn't been shown to be held accountable for, he has:
      1. Used military personnel for a criminal manhunt, in violation of federal law.
      2. Sent military personnel into a friendly foreign nation (Which has an active extradition treaty with the US) to extract a fugitive without even trying to use standard channels, in violation of federal law and just about every known precept of diplomacy.
      3. Furthermore there appear to have never been any formal charges filed against Dr. Banner in the first place. The accident he was involved in was classified as just that: an accident. So were the deaths associated with it. He has used military personnel to personally harass a private citizen.
      4. Reactivating a super-soldier program that Congress had explicitly ordered him to stop, creating a monster who trashed a good chunk of Harlem.
    • In order:
      1. He might have gotten special permission, seeing as the NYPD is part of the force used in the New York City mission, he seemed to have clearance to operate stateside.
      2. There's a Brazilian soldier or police officer in the command vehicle with Ross, so he had some sort of official permission to be there.
      3. Ross states Banner stole military secrets, (which I suppose he did technically, by being a test subject for an army experiment and then not allowing the results to be collected) and was implicated in several deaths not connected to the initial accident. (some hunters, state troopers, and a Canadian Mountie)
      4. That's not stated in the theatrical release of the movie, and Blonsky only trashed Harlem after he had gone rogue, assaulted a superior, and had his body mutated even more. Ross didn't order that.
    • To counter
      1. You need a direct order from Congress or the President to override Posse Comitatus, neither of which he ever stated having.
      2. That's not how extradition works. With a proper, legal, extradition, the State Department talks to the local authorities, they arrest the fugitive, and then arrange for transportation to the US.
      3. By claiming Banner to be classified military data, he is essentially declaring him to be a slave of the government, in direct violation of the 13th Amendment and his officer's oath to uphold the Constitution.
      4. Ross was going against orders the moment he gave Blonsky the first injection.
    • To counter-counter
      1. Just because he never mentioned getting authorization doesn't mean he never received authorization. The film is unclear on that point. But it would be odd for the FBI and NYPD to publicly help the army conduct a manhunt on US soil unless it was cleared by the appropriate authorities.
      2. Even in the real world, the U.S. government has committed plenty of "extraordinary renditions", where we arrest people on foreign soil without going through the usual legal process. Is that unjust? Sure it is. But the question here is not whether Ross has ever broken the law or acted unjustly. The question is whether it's reasonable that he might escape punishment for whatever crimes he did commit. In the real world, the people who committed extraordinary rendition were never punished. It's not to hard to imagine that the MCU runs on similar logic. (Though maybe it would've been nice if one of the anti-reg heroes pointed this out, as one of their arguments.)
      3. Even with the 13th Amendment, people can be legally drafted into combat. The Supreme Court has upheld the idea that temporary drafts are not the same as slavery. And if people can be forced to serve in the military (or on juries, for that matter), it's not hard to imagine a law that forces them to participate in scientific research of some kind. Ross could argue that he has no intention of holding Banner forever; he just wants to run some tests and then Banner is free to go. The real world doesn't have a law to uphold that idea, but the MCU might have such a law. After all, they were crafting a super-serum back in the 1940s. Research is a big deal in the MCU. And then quite separately, we have the issue that Banner had been implicated in a number of unrelated deaths. Ross could have justified himself on that point alone.
      4. Was he? I forget how that worked. If you're right, then yeah, Ross should have been disciplined. And heck, maybe he was disciplined. But he happens to have connections or whatever, and in the end he still got a cushy job at the State Department. It would hardly be the first time that a government official screwed up big time and then just got shuffled around instead of facing real consequences. Heck, this might explain why he moved from the Defense Department to the State Department: The folks over at Defense were still pissed at him for disobeying orders.
    • Blonsky did that — after assaulting a superior officer and going against Ross's orders. Remember Ross said he'd pull Blonsky off if he got out of hand. Also Ross was publicly seen helping the Hulk stop the Abomination. Remember that the public does not see all we see or know all we know. All it would've taken was Ross calling in some favors to turn the story into, "It's all Blonsky's fault for taking a serum we were trying to contain and destroy," and Ross's career survives. It's not like Blonsky was in a position to dispute things.
    • Blonsky isn't, but Leonard Samson is, as is Banner for the period where he was an upstanding member of the Avengers, as is his pal Tony Stark and anyone else on the team Banner told his story to. Basically there is no damn good reason why Ross is not only a free man, but one of the most powerful men in the country. That is, unless something very bad is going on behind the scenes.
    • I would say its a combination of Ross having friends in high places (which was how he got the revised super soldier serum in the first place I think), people in government thinking he was right about the Hulk being the property of the government or the threat Banner posed justified in the actions/crimes he committed, Ross blaming Blonsky for how out of control things got, Hydra strings being pulled (they might see him as being useful tool in the future for creating chaos or containing the Hulk), and good old dislike of Stark (who has been unpopular with the U.S. government since he started doing the Iron Man thing) and Banner to take their word seriously, and some cover up. I'm sure Ross getting in this position and escaping punishment despite everything he did is going to be used to add fuel to why Cap doesn't think governments should have full control of the superhero crowd.
    • Also we all know this, but who in-universe knows all that he inadvertently caused with the Abomination and his rough tactics with Hulk (except Banner himself, who's not there)? Ross's reputation is solid, and nobody on the Avengers knows anything beyond he used to try to take in their friend when he ran around smashing stuff up.
    • Context is important for some of his more drastic decisions. His chasing of Banner may have been unofficially approved to keep the Hulk's existence a secret. He was also at least mindful the super soldier project could conceivably blow up in his face so tried to be cautious with deploying Blonsky (him becoming Abomination was due to Blonsky's own actions, not Ross's idea). Ross was acting in his capacity as a member of the US military and the bare bones of the situation did line up with sound reasoning so he could have avoided serious repercussions due to things just backfiring in his face, at least as far his involvement with Blonsky was concerned.
    • The President may just want Ross where he can keep an eye on him. As a normal general Ross could work more under the radar but as Secretary of State, especially with the reveal of HYDRA corruption in the American Government and taking into account his past actions, he would be watched very carefully.
    • Ross states in the film that he suffered a particularly life threatening heart attack, and surviving it granted him with "perspective." Perhaps he reflected on all of his borderline rogue actions and believed that pushing for the Sokovia Accords would help him atone for them.
    • Within the time-frame of the current administration, the Vice President was revealed to be working with AIM and the government was revealed to have HYDRA loyalists in it, including at least one multi-term Senator. The President was probably hard pressed to find qualified individuals who weren't compromised by evil conspiracies to fill a vacancy for Secretary of State. Ross is a well-respected General with a history of dealing with superheroes, something that would appeal to an administration in crisis mode.
    • I have the same basic issue with Ross making the speech, but the problem lies in the fact that we as viewers have no idea what kind of reprisal Ross suffered from the events of Incredible Hulk. Given that the stinger in that film sees him drinking in a bar when Tony Stark shows up, I always assumed that he'd suffered some kind of verbal dressing down if nothing else. Either way, I don't think it's right to assume that nothing happened to him just because we didn't see anything happen to him. Nearly a decade has passed without this guy showing up at all after all.

    Blaming who? 
  • According to the trailer the government is blaming the superheroes for the disasters in New York, Washington D.C. and Sokovia, but in NY the destruction was caused by the Chitauri Loki brought, the D.C. one was because HYDRA took a Helicarrier which inevitably would end in disaster, and the Sokovia one wouldn't have happened if Ultron didn't levitate the city. So why are they blaming the superheroes? how did they expected them to end? Did they expect them to just sit and watch while innocents were killed?
    • Loki (and Chitauri) specifically targeted Earth because it was important to Thor; HYDRA's threat was removed, but at the cost of Cap deliberately destroying SHIELD and the government's intelligence/surveillance network, with Bucky as Cap's best friend yet brainwashed only goes so far to excuse him; Ultron was created by Tony, who while affected by Wanda, has also turned hero. Indirectly, these attacks and issues all have their ties to the heroes, even if done by villain hands - it seems easiest to blame them, especially since they're in the here and now, and available, when they can't touch Loki; they're hunting down HYDRA + Bucky; and Ultron is dead.
    • People have no idea Stark created Ultron, that Wanda influenced him, or that the battle of New York was caused because of Loki's anger towards Thor. Plus the loss of SHIELD is likely not a price too high to save the life of potentially millions of people.
    • People may not know the full details, but they are still scared, and it's easy to spread such things via the Internet - SHIELD being unraveled is equal to the Army undergoing the same, which would result in a loss of safety, increases in fear/anger/blame, and so forth. By-and-large, this would increase overall with each incident, but they're not the ones blaming the heroes; the officials and politicians like Ross are, using the people's fear as fuel to do something about these events before anymore happen. Stopping Loki, taking down SHIELD, destroying the empty Sokovia, those were fairly-reasonable actions that would have prevented even more deaths... but something must still be done, and/or someone take the blame, in their reasoning.
    • Presumably much of the blame is also aimed at supervillains, not just heroes; however, with incidents like the Hulk trashing a major city and SHIELD going rogue due to infiltrators, it's getting harder for non-supers to trust the latter not to turn into and/or act like the former.
    • Unsurprising that the blame goes to the Avengers because its easier. In real life situations are complex and multi layered. But in the MCU like in real life people in general when answers quick and easy. They want someone to blame, they need someone to blame. They don't want a long story just something short and sweet they can focus on. Something to feel a sense of control. Alien Invasion ? Those Avengers did it. Helicarriers falling out of the sky? Avengers are the cause. Killer Robot? Yeah that time it was them. They want answers , clear and easy to understand so the media and the government hands then the Avengers. They accept it because it gives a face to their fear and uncertainty . Something the can understand to help them to process this new World of alien invasions and Thunder Gods.
    • Now that the movie has come out, it's clear that "blaming the superheroes" is inaccurate — the Sokovia Accords isn't about blaming the Avengers as much as assuaging people's fears that these superpowered individuals are running around and accountable to no-one. What's to stop Captain America and War Machine from deciding to chasing ISIS throughout sixteen different countries and playing cowboy cops along the way? Especially if office buildings full of people get killed as collateral damage?
    • One wonders why Cap didn't point out that they WERE working alongside a government agency to help them recover an artifact that was stolen from them when the invasion of NYC happened with zero forewarning and then kept said agency from NUKING NEW YORK CITY, which wouldn't have really done too much damage to the bulk of the Chitauri forces on the other side of the portal, though. Or how dropping the Helicarriers on Washington, DC was done without official government sanction because the government agency that normally works with Captain America, along with The World Security Council that oversees 'them', had been compromised by former Nazis almost since its inception and that without their actions, most of the people involved in the Sokovia Accords would probably have been sniped within fifteen minutes. Or that while Ultron was Tony and Wanda's fault, by the time the fight started, dropping Sokovia at that point became the only way to prevent a global extinction event. Or that the explosion that destroyed the Wakandan good will ambassadors was the tragic ending to a mission that prevented international terrorists from escaping with a bioweapon, then prevented them from releasing the bioweapon in public, and that the accident in question was to prevent a Rogue US soldier from detonating a suicide bomb in the middle of a crowded public area that would have resulted in probably at least as many deaths as what ended up happening. Or that Ross DID already lose the Hulk.
    • Cap decides to reject the accords and go rogue, so presumably he was at least thinking about this stuff even if he didn't say it all out loud. And remember, the accords don't state that the Avengers aren't allowed to save the world anymore; it's just that they have to be overseen by a U.N. panel. So for most of the objections you mentioned, the counterargument would be "Ok yeah, but how hard is it to do all that same stuff with a little more oversight?"
    • That's part of the drama of the story, both sides have excellent points. As for the individual incidents:
      1. Yes, the invasion of New York was prompted by SHIELD screwing around with the Tesseract, with the intent to make weapons to defend themselves from potential invasions. But what precipitated that was Thor and the Destroyer throwing down in Puento Antigue, New Mexico, which (assuming Fury wasn't exaggerating) more or less destroyed the town. Essentially, the Battle of New York is the culmination of a relatively minor set of Disaster Dominoes, illustrating that super-powered people and their fights are already getting out of control.
      2. Yes, Cap stopped HYDRA from assassinating millions of people and taking over the world. But he also unilaterally decided to disband SHIELD right along with it. Imagine if someone, in the process of stopping a couple of rogue Army officers from doing something nasty, decided to disband the entire US Army along with it. They wouldn't exactly get a medal for that. And there's still the fact that Cap making the Insight carriers blow each other up still caused a lot of collateral damage, granted less than if HYDRA had retained control, but still.
      3. Whether or not the general public knows Tony Stark deliberately created Ultron is up for debate (it hasn't been addressed, one way or the other, that I recall), but it's still his direct fault. Still, stopping him involved a small city-state pretty much literally being wiped off the map, with lots of casualties the Avengers just couldn't prevent. And the fact that Tony Stark created Ultron is less important than why he created him: Tony wanted to keep the entire world safe, wanted to make sure nothing could ever hurt Earth again. That kind of obsession never ends well, and oversight of the Avengers might force Tony to get some much-needed counseling for his PTSD (which Wanda amplified so he'd self-destruct).
      4. The one at the start of the film is the least forgivable. Cap takes a young and inexperienced woman, still figuring out her powers, essentially into a war zone. Yes, she saved Cap and a lot of people by trying to contain Crossbones' bomb, but her poor situational awareness led to the deaths of many others. Whether the death toll was greater or lesser than if she hadn't acted at all is up for debate, but ultimately irrelevant: Wanda fucked up royal. She may have acted with the intent to minimize casualties, but her actions did not accomplish that goal. Without proper training and education to be aware of her surroundings, the limits of her powers, and how to actually achieve the goal of minimal casualties, she had no business whatsoever even being on that mission. At least, from the perspective of an armchair quarterback.
    • The question the public seems to be asking is 'Does Might Equal Right?' - all they know is that several catastrophes happened and thousands of deaths were the result. From their perspective, the Avengers are supposed to stop this from happening. When there are still casualties and damages, the public wants someone to blame. The accord seems to give the illusion of safety at the very least.
      • The whole damn Sokovia Accords is a contrived mess. The United Nations has ZERO authority over autonomous citizens, enhanced or otherwise. Literally the ONLY Avengers they could possibly try to give orders to are Captain America (Member United States Army) and Natasha and Clint (Members of whatever secret squirrel organizations they work for.) Banner is a private citizen, and Thor is a bloody GOD. The United States has specifically attempted on no fewer than four occasions to get the Iron Man technology from Stark, and he refused to help them other than the creation of War Machine. (And you think he doesn't have a software disconnect for that suit?) The fact that Iron Man is in FAVOR of handing his autonomy away when he expressly refused to do so in his own movies shows how terribly contrived this situation actually is. On top of that, the trigger event was the bomb Scarlet Witch detonated next to an office building. Seems the UN somehow forgot she was trying to prevent it from being detonated in the middle of a friggin' MARKET with HUNDREDS of potential victims. Let's also not forget that the same organization trying to blame the Avengers for the damage caused by the Chitauri invasion ALSO TRIED TO NUKE MANHATTAN! None of it makes a lick of sense.
  • As pointed out above, the Accords are a mess, think a legal rush job, the point of them is for heroes to act with oversight, however as the winter soldier showed sometimes that oversight is corrupt, hence Caps' rebellion, also making THUNDERBOLT ROSS of all people basically in charge of it is a huge trip up, this is a dude who is actively known to have a particular hardon of hatred for "enchanced" individuals, even in the comics it is shown that while the principle of the subject is sound, people are and always will be extremely failable, not only that but the biggest no point is the fact that while many heroes would willingly register, bad guys would not and those who do would become superpowered thugs in goverment employ.
Advertisement:

    Why Spidey? 
  • Fan service and original comic aside, why would Stark involve a 15-year-old kid with wall crawling and web shooters in a brutal conflict between superpowered special forces personnel?
    • Proportional strength of a spider means a lot more than you might think- the kid can lift trucks. He's fast enough to dodge bullets occasionally with his spider-sense, and is probably a match for most of Cap's team, apart from Scarlet Witch. In a world with as few super humans as the MCU, having Spider-Man on side is a really good thing for Tony.
    • He also probably thinks Spidey would be a good example of what he thinks the accords can do. Molding a 15 year old in a cheap get up beating up cooks in alley's into a major hero with his and the governments backing.
    • Spider-Man has more physical skills than any Avenger and his superpowers also give the team a huge advantage, so it's pretty reasonable that Tony would want him on his team no matter how old he is.
    • Who says Stark even knows that Spidey is a high school kid? He may have only seen him in costume, and think he's just a grown man with a slight build and a young-sounding voice.
    • Considering the suit we saw is the one that was made by Tony, he had to know Peters exact measurements to make it. Even if visually with a costume Peter might pass for a small adult, there's no way that he would without it.
    • There's also the fact that, like most of the Avengers do in some way, Peter has Chronic Hero Syndrome. It's entirely possible he tried to sign up and Tony figures that as long as Spidey wants to get involved, it's best Tony do his best to keep him safe.note 
    • Even if they don't have time to go into all the backstory, I bet it'll be similar to Ultimate Spider-Man (both the comic and the cartoon). In those examples, Spidey starts off independent, but despite his well meaning nature, ends up causing a lot of property damage. However, since he's still well meaning (and stubborn enough that he'll continue doing what he's doing regardless of them trying to stop him), S.H.I.E.L.D. figures that, instead of shutting him down, they should offer to train him instead. In the movies, it would make sense of Tony to be the one to make this offer since he's so keen on over sight following the Ultron incident. Allowing Spider Man to continue being Spider Man is fine, so long as there's accountability and everything is done by the book.
    • In the movie it's explained that Spidey can withstand a lot of physical force. Coupled with his fast reflexes, he's unlikely to get hurt or killed if facing against the Winter Soldier or Captain America. Moreover, Stark never intended for Spidey to get involved with the actual fighting. Spidey was supposed to be working from the sidelines only.
    • He sees a lot of himself in the kid. Young orphan who can build impressive tech out of nothing, trying to do the right thing because he knows its on him when people die if he chooses to do nothing.
    • He is trying to capture Team Cap without hurting them any more than can be helped. Spidey's webbing was just too perfect a tool for that objective to pass up. As noted above, he wanted Spidey to stay out of harm's way and stick to long-range web-slinging. It didn't work out that way, and Tony is clearly bothered by the fact that Peter ended up getting injured.
    • Tony knows that Cap can't be overpowered in a physical fight. So he needs team members who can outsmart him and take him out with ranged attacks. Wanda is the only Avenger who could probably do that, but she's on Team Cap. Vision probably as well, but Tony might also want someone whose abilities Cap doesn't know - therefore the element of surprise.
    • Most importantly, Tony didn't see the situation escalating like it did. For all Tony knew, Steve and the Falcon ran off with Bucky Barnes. If cooler heads prevail, they might even avoid a fight altogether. But in case it does, Peter's role is clear: Only engage the guy guaranteed to go easy him, from a distance if you can. He didn't know Cap was assembling a team to go on a Mission he felt was vitally important. Now all of a sudden Cap has a force twice its original size and more than tripled in strength, and they're not backing down.

    Accords and Spider-Man 
  • How is it that Ross and his people okay with Tony recruiting a minor? Is there something in the Sokovia Accords that deal with underage superheroes?
    • Who says they know? Does Tony strike you as the kind of person who's going to tell Ross every detail about what he's doing?
    • Well that's probably the reason Aunt May isn't told. As Peter's legal guardian, she has the right to forbid Tony from taking her nephew anywhere.
    • Ross tells Tony off for "that shit you pulled at the airport." While he was clearly talking about the excessive property damage, he could have been including "recruiting a minor" or just "recruiting some new Gifted we've never heard of" as well.

    Rhodey's fall 
  • Why is Tony mad at Falcon when Vision is the one who accidentally shot Rhodey? Would it have been better if Vision had hit Falcon instead and most certainly caused Falcon's death due to the inadequate protection offered by Falcon's suit? Why wasn't Tony mad at Vision using deadly force?
    • Tony is already irrational. His anger is a way of absolving himself of any guilt for recruiting the guy who was using deadly force in the first place.
    • After the fall, Tony gives Vision a Death Glare and later chides him when they are the hospital. He doesn't exactly let him get off easy.
    • Nevertheless, one would expect more than "What the hell happened?" and a glare from a man who never shuts up. Maybe Tony's not mad at Vision and instead blames himself.
    • Could be he blames Wanda, as it seems her powers affected Vision's. Could explain why Tony doesn't help Wanda after he sees she's being kept inside an isolated cell. Later she's even seen in a straightjacket, though that might have nothing to do with Tony, as we don't even know if Tony knows about the straightjacket.
    • Tony's clearly redirecting his anger. Falcon broke off his escape and risked capture to try and save Rhodey. They whole situation that led to it is Tony's fault but he can't bring himself to admit it, so he blames others.
    • He doesn't blame Falcon. He's just so tired of the fight and agitated that he takes him out when he's just standing there. But at the prison he's nice enough and even tells him Rhodes's condition so he doesn't blame Falcon specifically for it.
    • Later , when he has a cooler head he doesn't blame Sam. But when cradling Rhodes's body, shooting at Sam who was not attacking but offering help and concordances. Then yes he blamed Sam. Come on, he shot the guy who was not resisting and not fleeing but offering help. So yes, at that moment he blamed Sam, and because of that in that moment he took it out on him. Later on , when he cooled down not so much. But at that moment he did and Sam, who did not have his wings in defensive formation got a chest full of repulser blast for it.
    • No, it doesn't look like Tony ever blames Falcon at all. During the scene you have him directly glaring at Vision. Falcon he just lashes out at because his friend was just hurt very badly and he simply doesn't want to here anything from anyone in that moment. Not all that different from people punching the walls in their house or throwing their cell phones when they're angry. They're not blaming the walls or the cell phone, they just need something to vent their anger against. Could even relate it to Loki in Dark World. After he learns about his mother's death he completely trashes his room. Why? Because he was angry at anything in his room? No, because he was just angry in general and needed to express himself.
    • If Vision had been on the mark, it wouldn't have caused Falcon's death — Tony's instruction is to hit Falcon's thrusters and "turn him into a glider." He still has wings that would let him direct and control his descent safely and — as we see in Winter Soldier — a parachute. He would've been fine after taking a glancing blow to his thrusters.
    • I think Tony shooting an undefended Sam in the chest is a clear indication he blames him. Tony did glare at Vision but Vision was just trying to help. How did Rhodey get into that position to be shot? Because Falcon was tailing them. Why was Falcon tailing them? Because he was trying to help Cap get away. Hence Tony not apologizing to Sam later on because to Tony he did nothing wrong. To Tony Sam was the cause , Tony is not the sort to be angry and one guy and take it out on another. He is direct in action and cause. He shot Sam because to him Sam choice to follow Cap lead to War machine plummeting out of the sky. He blamed Sam for his actions that lead ( as far as Tony was concerned ) to Rhodey's fall.
    • He shoots him because he's supposed to arrest Sam. That's also why he doesn't apologize later. He doesn't specifically blame Sam for Rhodes getting hurt though, he was just pissed off at the fight and dropped Sam when he stood down because he was tired of it. That doesn't mean he specifically blames Sam for Rhodes. If anything he'd blame Cap for starting the fight.
    • And since Sam was on Cap's team, it makes sense that he'd, initially at least, blame Sam as a proxy.
    • There's arresting and there is shooting a guy offering help who was not expecting to be blindsided. The point is if Falcon had not be pursuing War machine then Vision would not have been involved. To Tony if Falcon had not chosen the wrong side then Rhodey would not have been shot and fallen hundreds of feet from the air. Its obvious from the glare that Tony gave Falcon that he blamed him, hell he shot the guy who was not wearing heavy armor in the chest not to arrest him but because he was furious with him. That was personal, why? Because Tony blamed him and took it out on him.
    • I don't see why Falcon not wearing heavy armor keeps getting mentioned, given the blast Tony used clearly did not do him any real harm. It's like hating on Hulk for punching Thor in the first Avengers while they were teamed up in New York. No harm no foul, Falcon isn't even upset about the blast.
    • They're not referring to the blast from Tony, but the one he would have taken from Vision had it not missed him and hit Rhodey instead. Keeping in mind that despite insistence from others that the blast was only meant to disable Falcon enough to make him glide to the ground, they were all a good distance in the air and the blast in question was enough to completely disable Rhodey's tech and send him hurtling to the ground faster than either Tony or Sam could get to him, resulting in severe injuries. Sam did not have any protection similar to what the War Machine offered, and falling from that height would very well have killed him.
    • It "completely disabled Rhodey's tech" because it was a glancing blow that took out his arc reactor, leaving him in a completely un-aerodynamic shell that he had no control over. The same glancing blow, hitting Sam's thrusters, would have left his wings intact, allowing Sam to make a more controlled descent. Plus, as shown in Winter Soldier and pointed out above, Sam has a parachute.
    • Of course Falcon is not upset about the blast. 1) He was in a fight, he understands you get hurt in a fight 2) As a trained consular he knew that Tony was acting on instinct. That while at the time Tony blames him and acted out in anger . That was not truly personnel, the fact remains based on Tony's expression and power of his attack that sent Sam flying he did blame Sam. As shown with Bucky when Tony is enraged, when the target of his rage is in front of him he acts. He didn't speak to Sam at the time, he did not shoot Sam as he was fleeing or tell Sam he was under arrest. He shot Sam because he blamed Sam for Rhodey's fall.
    • Seemed clear that Tony's basically just saying "Shut up." Falcon was saying he's sorry for what just happened and Stark just isn't interested in hearing it right now. He doesn't want to have a discussion with mutual apologies and moralizing and whatever else was threatening to happen in this conversation Falcon was about to start. And considering the situation with him holding his best friend's mangled body in his arms, Tony is absolutely not in the mood, which he communicates succinctly to Falcon via minor repulsor blast. Note that we've seen those hand-blasts launch people multiple stories into the air and send them through solid concrete; Falcon did not take a full-power hit, just a little smack. I see it as the same as clocking someone in the jaw, to shut them up.
    • He probably does blame Falcon to an extent. Not because he thinks Sam should have just let himself get shot down because he probably would have handled it better than Rhodes, but just because the whole thing happened because Sam and Steve and the rest refused to cooperate with the law. Hence he blasts him, because sorry doesn't really cut it.
    • It was an irrational act done on impulse in a burst of emotion. It was also brilliant Foreshadowing about what would happen later with Steve and Bucky. Tony can be flippant, full of self doubt, snarky and unsure. But when enraged he acts with without hesitation or thought. Maybe he blamed Sam, maybe part of him blamed himself. All that is known is he struck out in rage. Tony has a rage in him when he feels personally hurt and he acted on it.

    Speed of the fall 
  • On that note, how could neither Tony nor Sam reach Rhodey before he hit the ground? He was hundreds of feet in the air, around equal elevation with Tony. True, Tony notices a little after he'd been shot, but Falcon was ALREADY falling at the time to dodge the shot, BEHIND Rhodey. Even accounting for the heavy metal suit, terminal velocity wouldn't be achieved instantly, and would only be maybe a little less than 200 mph if I'm thinking of the right numbers. Tony can BREAK THE SOUND BARRIER, and Falcon has been shown to be pretty fast too, pulling some crazy maneuvers that no doubt equate to a lot of g-forces. Yet in the 10-20 seconds it takes Rhodey to hit the ground, neither can reach him?
    • Agreed, I feel they could have made the scene more believable if they spaced the characters out more, perhaps have Tony way ahead in pursuit. I don't have as much of a problem with Falcon not keeping up, his jets are half of a suit along with the wings, he's more of a glider but Tony definitely should. As we see in IM1, his MKIII suit managed to catch up to a falling air force pilot. So yeah, the scene was good but it should've been executed better.
    • What makes it even worse is that is not the only time Tony has caught someone in free fall. He repeated the same stunt in Iron Man 3 as well with multiple targets. And in Avengers the MKVII caught up to Tony himself while he was free-falling, with much higher distance between Tony and the armor, within a smaller time frame as well since Tony fell from a much lower height than in this movie
      • It would seem the writers forgot that heavier objects do not in fact fall any faster than lighter ones.
    • I assumed that the Iron Man suit simply was not at full capacity. Tony has been fighting for a while, his suit might not run out of fuel but its at least taxed. Not to mention its heavily damaged, dozens of cars fell on it and Scott tore it apart from the inside. Its thrusters might not be at full capacity, hell, maybe the suit AI itself was compromised and couldn't give Tony the proper speed to catch his friend. As for Sam, his suit might not be built for that much speed, the speed that Tony regularly achieves would tear his skin off his face, for all we know Sam was going at his maximum speed, maybe even pushing past it in a desperate attempt to reach Rhodey.
    • One thing that also complicates matter is that Rhodey is falling while his body is horizontal, which would slow Rhodey down, not by much but when you consider that both Falcon and Tony are using thrusters and going almost vertical, they should of caught up, the only way it makes sense is if they were not all that high up, also of note is that Tony himself has fallen with an unpowered suit and seemed to be okay, which makes it seem the suits had some form of compensators to basically mean that falling would be negligable, they seem to zigzag on how durable the suits are, the only thing I can think of is that his spine is actually healing and he only needs the leg braces until that finishes.

    Vision and War Machine in the opening scene 
  • Cap, Wanda, Natasha, and Sam take on Crossbones and his mercs at the beginning. Where were Vision and War Machine. According to Age of Ultron, they are supposed to be members of the Avengers at this time. One would think Cap would bring them along as extra muscle.
    • Their original plan was to keep a low profile. But who knows about Vision. Maybe he's just floating in space? Throughout the movie he just appears when he feels like it and it's not made clear what he does in his spare time, or if he's even within communication distance. As for War Machine, it's unknown if he can work outside the U.S.
    • Vision and War Machine would cause too much collateral damage if they fought with their weapons, hence why they sent in a team that could easily be considered 'stealth'. Course nobody expected Crossbones' suicide vest...
    • Vision at least is very conspicuous.
      • I don't buy the low profile. Because if their goal is low profile, then why are both Falcon and Cap fully costumed? That's not conspicuous? Steve was hiding out in a room, why couldn't Vision? Why couldn't War Machine be watching from the rooftops like Falcon?
    • It's entirely possible that Vision and War Machine are dealing with some other mission in some other location. It's a big world, and sometimes you have to split the team to cover everything.
Advertisement:

    Hawkeye 
  • So why did Hawkeye decide to come out of retirement? He never answered Tony's question.
    • And did Black Widow know he was gonna appear? She didn't seem surprised and their brief fight was far from serious. Did Scarlet Witch interfere, knowing that Hawkeye was holding back because he wasn't in the best fighting shape or because he didn't wanna hurt Natasha, or because she knew their fight wasn't convincing?
    • Probably because he thought he owned it to Wanda, considering that her brother died saving him in Age of Ultron, so the least he could do to repay is to break her out of 'captivity' that Tony hold her in.
      • It seems like he joined up with Steve after being told about the other Winter Soldiers, and he freed Wanda either to prevent her being strung up as a scapegoat or because they needed another fighter.
    • This just a guess but Hawkeye was the one who pushed for Shield to give Natasha a chance to make up for her past crimes and let her sign up with them in the first place. He's probably willing to do the same to Wanda and Bucky and doesn't approve of the Accords not giving them a chance and making examples out of them. So when Cap told him he could stick it to the committee and prove Bucky's innocence he agreed to help him and brought Wanda so she could also show them she wasn't dangerous. Remember unlike the comics story Team Cap didn't join up deliberately to pick a fight with Tony. Their goal was to hit the Winter Soldier facility, take out the other Soldiers and arrest Zemo and prove Bucky's innocence (and also they thought Zemo had grander plans of unleashing the Soldiers on the world)
    • It could also simply be because Cap and the Avengers are his friends and would have gone out of his way to help them if they asked. A character's motivations don't always have to be rooted in pragmatism.
    • In the scene where Hawkeye comes to Avengers HQ to break Wanda out of house arrest what is he shooting at, with those 1st two arrows??
    • Clearly those two arrows were some sort of electricity attack arrows. If everything would have gone according to plan, Vision would have been outside, they would have escaped and arrows would have acted as a contingency distraction.

    Problems with those accords 
  • So the accords were apparently being discussed for one years following Ultron's rampage. At no point someone thought it would be a great idea to, you know, ask the avengers what they thought of it? Maybe negotiate stuff, remove things that are impossible to enforce, place exceptions in emergency cases, etc... Instead of dropping that door stopper and telling them to STFU and sign the thing already?
    • That's exactly what they do. The UN meeting is exactly supposed to further discuss the accords, maybe amend it where necessary. Cap and his side are completely unwilling to compromise at all, though, so they aren't up to even discussing it. And "placing exceptions in emergency cases" wouldn't work at all, really. The Avengers pretty much act only on emergencies already, so they would be always acting on exception. It would be pretty much the same as not having them sign anything at all.
    • Indeed? One would think it would have been much more efficient to spend the entire year working with the people most directly concerned by the accords rather than making last minute corrections. In truth, while Cap is indeed unwilling to negotiate, the other side attitude is shifty at best. Beside, Ross pretty much state out loud that those are the final draft, and the conference in Vienna is just a bit of ceremony before official application. He pretty much enter the avengers h.q. saying this how will be how things will be from now on, and if you're not happy with it just retire.
    • Tony may have had a hand in writing the accords. After being confronted about the red in his ledger, that they were too dangerous and needed oversight. The current accords may be the middle ground.
    • The whole point of The Accords is for the nations of the world to stand up to The Avengers and tell them "Hey, we're the people with the actual right to govern our nations and enforce the law and we're not tolerating your vigilantism anymore". Negotiating terms that The Avengers approve of would rather defeat that purpose.
    • It's hard to believe that in a YEAR since AoU nobody on any of the Avengers knew that was coming down the pike, so even if the UN wasn't willing to talk to the Avengers the second they got wind of this they should have gone proactive and maybe pulled back on some of their ops, that is a bigger headscratcher that nobody thought to include the Avengers...and that the Avengers were so completely blindsided by that doorstopper.
    • Even if they saw it coming, how could they “pull back on some of their ops?” The entire point of Cap’s argument is that the Sokovia Accords would prevent them from taking action when they need to. This means that he considers all of the operations they have pulled to be necessary. They can’t pull back because that would mean ignoring a dangerous situation that needs the Avengers to solve. Should they have let Crossbones steal a biological weapon because it would be more “pragmatic” to not do so much? It probably wouldn’t have mattered anyway because the events of Avengers, The Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron were enough to cause government action (that last one in particular, hence them being called the Sokovia Accords) so the damage was already done.
    • But if you recall from the opening segments, they were staking out a Police Station, not the CDC Building. Giving the idea that they had no idea the target was a Bio-Weapon. Per Cap's opening statements this was the first lead they have had (meaning Crossbones) so in theory is that they only knew that Crossbones was operating in the area...but no idea of his motives or his target till they rammed the CDC building. The UN's Po V would be that if the Avengers had worked with local governments and tried to get better intel on Crossbones movements they could have been better prepared, which given the outcome of that op...isn't an entirely unreasonable assumption.
    • The thing is as shown in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. time constraints may be a factor. When Hive threatened global decimation the team did not have time to assemble a case. Present the case to the proper authorities. Sort of the bureaucratic red tape and sign the proper forms. Have meetings explaining what had occurred and give a report on why they had to act. When a rules stickler and career military soldier like General Talbot helps your team commit treason in order to save the World then time is factor. For Cap , time was a factor. Unknown hostiles, lead by a dangerous super human who was a member of a fascist terrorist group. Does Cap have time to try to explain to the proper authorities , meet the right people. Answer the right questions and sign the right papers. Also after Captain America: The Winter Soldier the Avengers may make it a habit of trusting their own instincts . In the end the problem with the accords, are time constraints, trust in Governments who in the real World have a history of what is convenient over what is right.
    • That's kind of the point of the Accords - it's not their decision. When a terrorist group is plotting to do something in a foreign country, you don't grab your guns and roll into that country to stop them. You go through legal channels. Some countries will plan to handle things internally, and others will accept outside help. But Steve doesn't get to decide that something is worth the Avengers waltzing in and blowing up a city block or two. The Avengers are basically a stateless force - yeah, they're based in America, but they clearly don't answer to the American government. If Steve wants to get the authority to decide what is or isn't a situation the Avengers should respond to, then he should become part of the UN. But every country on the planet has the right to a reasonable expectation of sovereignty, to expect that some group of super-powered individuals who don't answer to anyone but themselves aren't going to show up and cause a ton of collateral damage. If someone wants to argue that there's a lot of bureaucracy - great, that's how the world works. But let's be real - even if they were to sign the Accords, when they got word of a developing situation, they'd deploy as far as they could and get authorization en route. The Quinjet clearly takes time to get from the compound to wherever the destination is, and even if there was a delay, they could orbit outside the country's borders until they got authorization. If that takes a while, well, that's not the Avengers' decision. Is the system perfect? No, but that's how things are.
    • The problem with the Accords on whose decision it is and what they will allow to occur for political convenience. Ironically while recruiting Spiderman , Peter said it best. The things the Avengers can do, the abilities they have and not to take action and allow the bad things to happen? That is what Cap was fighting for, the ability to act when action is needed. As a soldier Cap knows only that action is needed and as a person the moral certainty of it. The system is not perfect, it’s broken where money and politics control most outcomes. The Accords are flawed because it’s based on a flawed system and a bureaucracy that determines action, or inaction on a case by case basis.
    • And the point of the Accords is that the Avengers simply don't have the right to just do what they want. Who are they to determine what is 'right' and what is 'wrong'? What gives them the right to invade countries and act above the law? The system is not perfect, definitely, but it is still right to call the Avengers out on their self-righteousness.
    • However as seen in Avengers: Infinity War the theory that the Accords were created for checks and balances is easily debunked when the powers that be, decide to try to enforce their control instead of thinking of the bigger picture. As seen the Avengers have a good idea what their mission is, protect and defend. While the powers that be who define the accords are more concerned with control, over everything else. Over right or wrong, even with the World being at stake. Ross it's face and enforcer shows that the Accords are not for supervision but for control. The Avengers were able to put aside their previous conflict for the greater good. The Accords could not put aside their power games despite lives at stake. Which furthers Caps point. When it boils down to it, it’s not about politics or control, its about saving lives. To Steve the Avengers are about seeing something wrong, something that needs to be stopped in order to protect lives and acting on it. If the Accords could be fashioned more as a co-operative guide that enabled the UN to work with the Avengers, Cap could respect that. But he saw it for what it was, a leash held by the powerful who would use politics to determine wrong from right as long as it did not cause political embarrassment or problems. No matter the innocent lives cost.
    • Ross might be a dick, but he is just the 'face and enforcer' of the Accords in the US (where most of the stories take place). Like Rhodey said, all of the United Nations put their signature under the accords. We do not know how they do enforce this law in their respective countries. And like was said before, the Avengers simply do not have the right to just disrespect foreign borders and law. That said, the best solution (like so many times) probably lies somewhere in the middle. I'm actually fairly sure that at the end of all this, the Accords won't be abolished completely, but amended.
    • The thing is the Accords were never made about foreign borders it was always about control. It was always about control of the Avengers. If they were about compromise, about working within reason and respect of Sovereignty of other countries then Steve could have worked with that. Hell, the Avengers worked for years stopping massive threats to innocent lives and the UN didn't interfere until public outcry. Even then they didn't offer a real compromise or a working idea. They offered to tell the Avengers what is and what is not defined of a threat. If something is wrong, something so great a threat immediate and swift action needs to be taken. An out of context problem like HYDRA or Thanos. That's when the Avengers act. The Avengers operate only when needed, when its right to. Steve saw the Accords as a measure of control not a measure of accountability. Also Ross was assigned by agreement of the UN, as the watchdog of the accords. Not a diplomat, not a lawyer. A man known for using excessive force to handle superhuamn problems. Then Steve and his group wariness about its message is warranted. As pointed out before, its about those who actually have power in the UN who decide what is right or wrong as long as not politically problematic. Against a soldier who sees something coming that is very wrong and acting on it. Also I dont think the accords are long for the World after Infinity War as the global community would most likely prefer that sort of global catastrophe be stopped post haste from now on. Instead of debated and defined ad nauseam, delaying action as Ross proved would happen.
    • But once again, Ross is only one cog in the machine. Take Talbot for example, he was acting and explaining the necessity of the Accords far more reasonably. And 'control' in and on itself is not necessairly a bad thing either. And what is so bad about acting on public outcry? Tony Stark created Ultron, Wanda caused a severe amount of death and property damage (even BEFORE the accident with Rumlow, see what she did earlier with Hulk), just on top of my head. For the record: I'm not even talking from my own point of view here, I'm talking from the in-universe point of people simply object to a certain, powerful group of people acting without supervision. That is a legit complaint. Cap doesn't just get to stand up and say "I know best what's right, not any goverment!" That's not how this works. Are there problems on both sides? Absolutely. I'm just objecting towards the standpoint that the Accords are by definition a bad thing.
    • The main problem with the Accords, and why its considered by some a bad thing. Is not the UN aspect but the aspect of those in power, corrupt or otherwise who can define what is and what is not something that needs to be Avengers worthy. Let's be honest, corruption and agendas are a daily thing in the geopolitical landscape. Add to the fact the US was able to get General "use heavy ordnance on american soil, damn the collateral threat" to be it's main watchdog is a symptom of the problem. As for In-universe the Avengers operated for years globally without problems. Then collateral damage happened, suddenly everybody is concerned about borders and sovereignty. Which would be fine except its comes across more about saving face and definitely opportunistic. Do they consult the Avengers before writing them up? Do they give them options or explain necessity of the Accords? No they send their watchdog, a man as subtle as a hammer to tell them sign or retire. They tell the Avengers, Steve to trust a system he knows can be corrupted or brought off to make the right moral choice over the more convenient choice. They use words like property damage and accountability but we know thanks to Thanos the cost of when the Avengers dont act. What kind of property damage or collatoral damage Crossbones could have caused with that virus on the open market? What kind of damage Project Oversight had gone unchallenged and Steve went through all the red tape to get authority to take them on? The main problem with the Accords is not only trusting the UN, or those with power in the UN to make the right choice. But in a World where world ending threats happen on the fly, the Avengers are duty bound to respond. Collateral damage like property and death, are a cost of the reality of that particular World. A few versus the many is the hard math at play. If the UN could have given Steve a viable option to prevent that while allowing rapid response, he would have taken it. They didn't, and that is why he and the others chose what they did.
    • He didn't even ask for one, though. The way he stated his position, there was literally no version of the Accords that he would have agreed to.
    • Actually he was not willing to sign the first version of the Accords, after being the only Avenger seen reading them and having reservations based on that. He was willing to sign on AFTER Tony promised that they could modify it as needed meaning something that was reasonable and could work, after they brought Bucky in. Until he found out that Wanda was under house arrest.
    • Which really shouldn't have been a deal breaker. Accidental or not, she caused a huge explosion that cost innocent lives. Anybody would be under investigation after something like this. Which once again shows that, despite all the flaws, there was a point about lack of oversight and accountability. Good intentions aren't a pass on everything.
    • It was a deal breaker because it highlighted an issue. Tony once again made a unilateral decision for his friends and team mates. Like ULTRON with disastrous results and like the accords when he helped draft them and presented them to the team without them having a voice in their creation. He just had a team meeting, presented the accords and let a stranger tell them to sign or retire. To Steve a team mate went behind his back to decide for the team what compromises they should make. Tony locking down Wanda would have been another example of that, Tony deciding what is best for the Avengers and that lead to their impasse. Also Wanda did not cause a huge explosion, Wanda prevented a huge explosion taking out many lives leading to the death of a few. Steve saw a member of his team, make the right choice out of necessity and be hidden away for the comfort of those in power and others. Tony did it to keep her safe, yes. But also to appease the public and the UN as well. To Steve that was a compromise and his reaction was someone who knew that once you start doing that then other compromises , moral and otherwise would be expected as well.

    UN corruption 
  • Also, how is the UN less corruptible than SHIELD or the US government? That the activities of the avengers will be mandated by the UN does not mean the people in charge won't be mandated by HYDRA or mind controlled or whatever. It does mean however that the next villain better give us a really early warning so the administrative behemoth might start to think about what they want the avengers to do. Let us hope that Thanos is a real gentleman.
    • Isn't all of the above basically the anti-accord side's argument? Can it be a headscratcher when the question to the crux of the story itself?
    • I don't see why not. It sure is more interesting than the original comics storyline. And while it's indeed the anti-accord side argument, it worth pointing out that the pro-side don't offer much of a counter argument. Aside of sign or retire at last.
    • Same way the US government tries to prevent corrupt people from having to much power: checks and balances. A couple of countries can be corrupt. 117 countries that are ALL as evil as HYDRA is a bit harder to believe and they can try to keep each other in check. It's not a perfect system, but if you think it's so bad then you probably need to start criticizing it in real life then and not just in a superhero movie.
    • The problem is that the US government has a notorious history of failing to prevent corrupt people having too much power. Hence the tries part and not the mostly succeeds part. Now add that to a Global scale. Over a hundred different countries, some aligned with others. Others sharing common interests with others. Some having influence over others due to money and agreements. Getting to decide when and where to send a group of super powered individuals. Most important where NOT to send them. Its not about 117 countries being evil, its about politics. Its about doing what is needed vs doing what is wanted. Its about to the ability to help those who need helping vs being told it not permitted for being too sensitive or too embarrassing. Its about back room deals and compromises that allow horrors and crimes for the greater good and global stability. Its about about doing what is right vs not doing it right now , but maybe later when the focuses groups come back and it doesn't conflict with the interests of our allies.
    • I think the idea is that with more than 100 countries involved it would be harder to use The Avengers to enforce the will of any one set of interests. Comic Book Example: In the Ultimate Universe (may it rest in peace), the Ultimates (and other government super humans) were used to trigger regime changes in Iran and North Korea while a team known as The Liberators (super humans from nations in opposition to the U.S.) were used to invade America. In the MCU, the Sokovia Accords would have a strong chance of preventing such abuses, since no one nation would have complete control over the team.
    • The problem is that if you look at he UN in recent history, and it has had problems getting ANYTHING done because the mere FIFTEEN member Security Council cannot agree on anything. UN decisions are very much motivated by global politics, and you commonly see the US vetoing Russia and China's proposals and vice versa. Now you're asking a governing body of over a HUNDRED countries to try and agree on something? What if one nation vetoes the Avengers' deployment to another nation because it happens to be a rival? The UN today is rife with the very thing Cap fears, men giving agendas precedence over doing the right thing.
    • But then the same argument could be made for the anti-registration side as well. What's to stop a future incarnation of the Avengers from deciding to flex their muscles and remake the world in their image? Or maybe Cap gets a blow on the head and falls prey to With Great Power Comes Great Insanity? When Steve says "the safest hands are still our own," Tony should have snapped back, "Says who?"
      • If the Avengers turn evil, or if one country is willing to create an army of super humans to invade another, signatures on a document won't stop them. The Accords were just drafted to give the people the illusion that something is being done. All the Pro-Accords teams have on their side is the law, so like the the comics, it's really a debate of bad democracy and good anarchy/dictatorship.
    • And that's the brilliance of it. Both sides have their own points and pitfalls. The film never portrays Cap or Tony being explicitly wrong in their ways of thinking. It's just that in terms of the UN, Cap has perfectly justifiable reasons to be skeptical of it.
    • Steve's line about the "safest hands" also calls back to Stark himself circa Iron Man 2-era. The big difference is that Stark just no longer believes that.
    • Just a side note: It's never explained exactly how the oversight works. For instance, can any country veto any mission, or is there just a majority vote? Perhaps countries can only veto missions that involve their personal territory? Do the countries themselves even vote on day-to-day Avengers operations, or do they just establish a panel of like 10 people who get to decide everything? (The latter case makes more sense, since the panel would be able to meet quickly in emergency situations.) So it could be a bureaucratic nightmare, or it could be helpful and effective. Obviously the different heroes have different interpretations of the situation.
    • Its gets worse, in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. it has been revealed that not only do the The Avengers have to sign and register, but any and all unregistered enhanced have to submit themselves for identification and documentation. Fingerprints, power base, personnel history and details. Who you are, what you can do, your family, your friends, your blood type, where you live and where you work all taken down and stored in a Government database. Basically, if you're powered or enhanced in any way and want to be left alone, tough biscuit. You will be documented and put on a list. They tell you its a safe list but in the world of Snowden, security leaks and hacking you may have to take that with a pinch of salt. Not only that, who's to say that certain governments won't use this as leverage to ''volunteer'' the services of those on the list for the interests of their Country. Or terrorist groups who manage to learn the identity of those enhanced and those they love, using this to force them to act as super-powered weapons. Or people like the Watchdogs and those like them who want to kill those different use the list as a target data base.
    • This is even worse because Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. proves that the list is not safe in "Emancipation", the same episode that introduces the concept of the Sokovia Accords' registration. In the episode the Watchdogs, who hate all powered people and want to kill them, mention that they have an informant within the ATCU that got them a name of an Inhuman from this list and they intend to kill this person as an example. Granted this was a deliberate leak by Hive but the fact that the list could be so easily spilled means that will do nothing to protected the enhanced.
    • The list is never leaked, Hive just fakes the whole thing in order to set a trap.
      • While true a Senator later in the season came into power who did leak the list to the Watchdogs. Meaning the above example applies, the list can be accessed by the wrong people to hunt down gifted people. Even worse people in power, not even deep government access but Senators. Can access the list and use it. If people at that level can access it, smart people, hackers, or anyone skilled at data mining can access it as well.
    • Agents of SHIELD gets a threefer because that show reveals that the character played by Powers Boothe in the first Avengers movie, who was a member of the World Security Council and thus a representative of the United Nations, was in fact a leader of HYDRA. If these Accords had been passed before that came to light, the Avengers might have been working for HYDRA all over again.
    • Watch the film Eye in the Sky, which came out just after this and almost seems like an answer to the question of what the accords would entail. A mission to capture a terrorist for trial suddenly has to become an impromptu assassination when she is seen putting a suicide vest on. Because of all the channels they have to go through to make sure they're covered legally they end up killing a young girl in the collateral damage from the missile strike. Had they acted as soon as they saw the terrorist putting on the vest, the girl would have survived.

    World wealthiest drug smuggler 
  • What was Howard Stark even doing with those five super-soldier juice IV bags in the trunk of his car? There is a throwaway line from Maria saying they must stop by the pentagon before going to Miami, and that tell us a fat lot of nothing. Wasn't someone or something more qualified for the job? Like a military convoy armed to the teeth? Hank Pym?
    • Pym had already retired and told S.H.I.E.L.D. to go fuck itself by the time Howard died. He's not going to be them any favors for old time's sake.
    • In The Winter Soldier, Arnim Zola implies that the reason Howard and Maria were killed is because they know about HYDRA's existence within S.H.I.E.L.D. Maybe the super-soldier blood bags that Howard was transporting is HYDRA's second attempt to create their own Super Soldier just like Red Skull decades ago. Howard happened to found out about it, and by having no idea of how far Hydra's influence goes (remember that in the present, during The Avengers, even Tony's high-tech hacking device cannot tell him about Hydra or who is affiliated with it), he cannot trust anyone to do the job so he decides to take care of the super soldier blood bags himself in secret. Alas, HYDRA found out about it and sent The Winter Soldier to finish him and his wife off...
    • That about sums it up. Except it's more likely that Stark himself, after a lifetime's work, had finally recreated the Super Serum, but couldn't trust anyone else to transport it to what he thought was his one reliable connection at the Pentagon. Trouble is, his connection was actually Hydra in deep cover. To preserve that cover, the Soldier was sent in to steal the serum before it could be delivered. Since nobody else knew of the serum, the Hydra agent at the Pentagon preserves his cover, and Hydra gets five new super soldiers.

    Winter Soldier 
  • I understand if Agents of Shield didn't use them since the Russos have said they haven't kept up with the show but if Hydra had five more Winter Soldiers since early 90s, why have they not been brought out? Why didn't Pierce use them since they were apparently better than Bucky or Strucker use them against the Avengers. I understand if hey could not be controlled but from what Bucky mentioned, they were used on at least 1 mission and the flashback did show them brought back if they got out of control. I would accept it in Agents of Shield, they say that it was a cell of Hydra who was exclusively using them, and was only being lent Bucky (which the others did not not know about) and the other Hydra cells had trouble trying to find year base. I am just wondering is all.
    • I think you pretty much answered your own question. The Death Squad could only be controlled so far as to point them at a target and say kill everything. In short, they are the sledgehammer to the Winter Soldiers scalpel. Plus Pierce is an old fashioned guy who prefers to be in control and may have preferred the Winter Soldier to a Death Squad he's not so sure about. Apart from that yes I would say it's a issue of compartmentalization. For all the Russian Commanders loyalty to HYDRA in death he IS in hiding in Cleveland. He was probably demoralized by the loss of Piece and the Winter Soldier and too scared to find other HYDRA cells. So the other cells didn't have access to the info, access codes or control codes for the Soldiers. Plus the cells were not above hiding important shit from each other. Remember Whitehall lifelong attempts to understand Inhumans while Malick and others knew the truth and kept it from him because they didn't like him and didn't believe in his methods? I wouldn't be surprised if the Soldiers where hidden to keep other HYDRA members using them in a coup of HYDRA itself.
    • I got the impression they were never used. Since they were volunteers and Hydra's top guys before, they didn't need brainwashing to follow Hydra's goals, but the serum enhanced their violent and destructive tendencies, and they became monsters - hence Bucky having to protect his handler in there with them. It would be too much trouble and destroying the skills they were chosen for to do the whole Bucky memory wipe and trigger implants treatment. They froze them rather than destroy them in case they could use them later - maybe with improvements from Whitehalls experiments with the Faustus machine on inhumans, which they either didn't know about (hydra definitely works in isolated cells), or just doesn't work on super soldiers without the deep conditioning and memory wipes Bucky had. I don't think they were brainwashed at all - if they had triggers, Karpov would have used them to shut the other soldiers down rather than ordering Bucky to get him out of there.

    Karpov 
  • When Zemo found him he seemed to be living in an apartment, was he retired or something? Why wasn't he working with HYDRA right now, if he was not arrested and in retirement why didn't Strucker have him brought back since they would need the help against the Avengers. I am just wondering since I don't think they explain it.
    • It's possible that Strucker was part of a different cell of HYDRA and had no means to contact Karpov. Given how Karpov acted when Zemo knocked on his door ('no police'), I'd guess that he was on the run after Project Insight was foiled and SHIELD's secrets were made public. If Strucker did know about him, he likely didn't know about the other Winter Soldiers or he'd have called Karpov in just for the opportunity to set those five loose against the Avengers. So it was likely either Strucker didn't know about Karpov/didn't know how to contact him, or he did know but didn't think Karpov could contribute anything useful. ]
    • Considering that the other Winter Soldiers could not be controlled, Strucker may have considered the project a failure and just didn't bother with it.

    No Communication Kills 
  • So Steve never told Tony about what he found out in Zola's bunker about HYDRA being responsible for his parents' deaths? He had opportunities where he could have talked about it, especially when they and the others were breaking the last remnants of HYDRA before and during Age of Ultron. I don't think he could've talked Tony out of trying to kill Bucky regardless, but why did he never pull Tony aside and tell him what he'd found out?
    • I assumed that he didn't think it would have helped Tony at all. Since Tony had lived all his life thinking it was a car accident, such revelation might not have helped things out. Not to mention, Tony has a habit of blaming others so he might have blamed Steve about not defeating Hydra.
    • I strongly disagree. I've been in Tony and Steve places at roughly the same time of my life, basically telling my father to fuck off before his death, and then deciding if would be a great idea to try and hide the true cause of his death from my half-brothers. Needless to say, it was a complete bust. Tony obviously hate himself for being a vicious little shit when he was younger, and being absolutely unable to change it. Remember his father recording from Iron Man 2? I'm impressed he didn't immediately start crying. But, he is a grown man, and deserve to know the truth, as it's part of the healing process. I'm sorry Steve, you're many things, but not a psychologist. You could have organized a small reunion with Tony. Pepper, Rhodes and Banner could have been here to help him through. Then tell him the truth. Howard was a dead man before he even left for that trip. Yes, Bucky was holding the gun, but HYDRA pulled the trigger. Bucky has been literally buried alive within his own mind for more then half a century. Mind controlled and manipulated, with literally no way to fight back. Was Hawkeye blamed for the people he killed under Loki orders? Is Banner blamed for the Hulk actions? 'My Would the event of Age of Ultron happened if Wanda had not fucked around in Tony's brain?''. Tony would be angry at first, but he would eventually cool down. And then, have him check in with a real psychiatrist. But instead, freaking Captain America act like the dirtiest coward, convincing himself that the truth wouldn't help. Really? The ultimate paragon of virtue decide to lie by omission?
    • Considering how badly and completely the events of Avengers screwed up Tony, I'm not sure Tony would have just dealt with it and went to psychiatrist. After all, his PTSD didn't even get him to go there. Hawkeye may not have been blamed for his actions, but we do know and see that Banner is internationally target for manhunt, he hates himself over Hulk killing people and was damn depressed because of his actions when brainwashed. Well, Tony did have the Ultron Program in development already before getting the Scepter and he seemed quite okay with not telling anyone but Banner about it.
    • In his letter to Tony, Cap even acknowledges that keeping the knowledge from Tony was not the correct decision. However, he was motivated both to try and protect Tony, as well as not have to shoulder the burden of having to tell him. He genuinely thought he could just let the knowledge quietly die out without ever having to reveal it.
    • I'm not even sure why he thought it would be bad. It wasn't to protect Bucky, because Steve didn't find out until Tony did that he was their killer. He just knew it was Hydra. Why wouldn't he tell Tony it was Hydra when they were going up against Hydra?
    • I'm still a bit confused on that. Steve learned from Zola it was Hydra. He never specifically stated it was the Winter soldier. When Tony urges Steve to stop lying, Steve reluctantly say he knew it was him. Did he find out between the movies? Then again, it's heavily implied Zemo knew from the start the content of the report he was seeking. Since he would have gotten that knowledge from the Hydra files Natasha leaked out on the Internet..........it mean the truth about Howard and Maria Stark "accident" has been floating around the net for at least two years. That Tony didn't find out on his own is actually fairly impressive.
    • Steve suspected Bucky killed Tony's parents because Zola heavily suggested so in TWS: he was talking about "incidents" happening and he shows them images of Bucky's metal arm and Bucky in sniping position before a picture of Howard Stark. Also, the "truth" about the accidents was not in the files released by Natasha. What Zemo found was a list of various mission reports from Bucky's time as the Winter Soldier, including one from December 1991. However, the list didn't specify what the assignments were, which is why he had to find the Hydra agent and then get to Bucky himself to confirm his suspicions. Tony didn't find out on his own because he most likely didn't look into those files as he had no interest in them - none of them really overtly talked about his parents; Zemo had to dig and research to make the connection.
    • That's not quite correct. Steve told Tony that he knew HYDRA killed his parents, but didn't know it was the Winter Soldier that actually did the deed.
    • I think it was a combination of things. Tony doesn't handle trauma well and is known to act impulsively. Iron Man 3 when Happy was nearly killed Tony challenged a known terrorist on the news and gave him his home address. Steve may or may not have known if Bucky killed Howard and Maria, but he might have feared he did given how Winter Soldier was sent to kill Fury. Steve probably never dug too deep to see if Bucky killed Howard or not, but if he could have thought telling Tony could have lead him to looking more closely at the released Hydra/SHIELD files to find the answer. If Tony did find out Bucky was responsible Steve feared Tony would go after Bucky to try to kill him. Steve made a bad call. He might have had the best intentions in mind, but went about it the wrong way. It is easy for friends to withhold bad news thinking it is for their friend's best interest, but failing to realize they could cause more harm by keeping information.
    • That's my take as well. Zemo's plan was completely hinged on Steve not telling Tony about Howard and Maria's murder, or even him telling them about Bucky and asking ALL of the Avengers (not just Sam) to help. IF he did and IF that lead to further digging into those encrypted files then Zemo's plan was toast as the Avengers would have found the Hydra Agent, found the red trigger book and maybe even found Bucky and got him help before things went to heck in AoU.

    Cap and Bucky's innocence 
  • If Captain America was so sure of Bucky's innocence, then why didn't he ask Bucky to quietly surrender to him minutes before the police went breaking into his apartment? If nothing else, Bucky running just would prove that he was guilty. Instead, Rogers goes "non-lethal" on a bunch of police officers as if being hit in the head but a man as strong as him wouldn't carry lasting harm... I have to agree with Rhodes, Steve did become a criminal when he did what he did.
    • Bucky wasn't exactly in the best state of mind and the police were ordered to shoot to kill. Bucky might have been unable to comply and the police might not be willing to spare him based on Cap's word.
    • The police being ordered to shoot on sight I believe is more on the matter of shooting to kill if being threatened, and not to eliminate the threat before trying to surrender, otherwise, why didn't the police gave Bucky a headshot after he was surrendered and arrested? Because even with an order of shooting on sight, it's preferable to have him arrested for interrogation as it happened. If anything, the U.N or whoever organization was that had custody of Bucky showed a lot of empathy, going to the extent of contacting a psychologist to make sure he was answering for his own actions...
    • True, but given that Bucky hadn't fully regained his humanity and was overly paranoid, he probably wouldn't have just surrendered at first and would have provoked the police into shooting. The fact that the police in question were German - the very people he'd been fighting a war against the last time his mind was wholly his own - probably didn't help.
    • I thought Cap believed Bucky was responsible at first, but chalked it up to the brainwashing. He goes to Bucky and asks him to turn himself in, Bucky refuses and when the police arrives fights his way out. Cap then decides to fight off the cops (who now can justify any lethal actions they use) and Panther in order to help out Bucky. It's only after Bucky is captured that he, Falcon, and Agent 13 decide the evidence is too convenient for it to be just Bucky being brainwashed.

    Scarlet Witch's telepathy 
  • The big six vs six battle would have been far shorter if she had remembered her illusions. Her powers have already been shown to go through vibranium so everyone in the pro-registration side, sans Vision, could've been knocked out by her; yet they had Wanda rely exclusively on her telekinesis. It could've been shown that Vision has the power to dispel her illusions after she tried (or something like that) to keep the battle going, but she didn't even try.
    • Her telepathy requires contact. Her telekinesis works at range. All of the Pro-Reg Avengers know her powers and wouldn't let her close enough to use the former.
    • There was a scene in Age of Ultron where she was shown using her powers from a distance to warn the Sokovians to evacuate. The new team just wanted to downplay the telepathic powers as much as possible without actually retconning them out, so they're never used or mentioned. Strictly speaking there's no explanation for why she isn't using it.
    • I interpreted that scene as her forcing them to. All of them go dead eyed, drop everything, and walk out calmly. Unless she can control minds on a mass scale, there's no way they'd react that calmly to a telepathic message warning them of their destruction.
    • Precisely, she's able to bend many people to her will at a distance. OP here, I actually don't mind if they decide to forget about those powers for drama's sake either (they are story breaker powers); but it bears mention that they, well, did forget.
    • It was the wrong situation to be using her telepathy. On the ship in Age of Ultron she was using stealth to distract the minds of the Avengers, and had back-up from Quicksilver when Hawkeye resisted. Back in Sokovia when she did her part to evacuate the people Wanda wasn't under any threat at that moment. At the airport battle in Civil War she's got six individuals to help contend with, all with different abilities and fighting styles who would probably resist mind control. Her telekinesis requires intense concentration anyway, as shown War Machine broke that concentration when she tried to stop the rubble falling over the entrance to the hangar.
    • We already know they wouldn't "probably resist" her mind control, she already used it against some of them. In Klaue's ship she put them all (except Hawkeye and including Thor) out of commission without really having to concentrate; literally just a movement of her hand for each of them. Just one example, during the airport battle, where she could've used her telepathy but didn't is when Hawkeye distracted Iron Man so she could attack him. But instead of hypnotizing him she went for telekinesis (it actually bears questioning why she didn't just grab Iron Man himself and slammed him around like a rag doll instead of throwing cars at him, but that's a different matter entirely). As for War Machine's attack, that's an odd example, what she's doing at that exact moment does require continuous concentration because it was a continuous task; she doesn't need that much concentration for grabbing someone and throwing them away, like she did with Black Widow. That one she did outright nonchalantly, before chewing out Clint for going easy.
    • Also Wanda is trying to maintain her Heel–Face Turn after the events in Sokovia, including the fact that her Mind Rape of Tony led to him creating Ultron and indirectly to her brother dying. She probably hasn't been using telepathy for fear of We Are Not Going Through That Again with the other Avengers, given she easily tore them apart in Age of Ultron and nearly got her home country destroyed as a result. Plus she's trying to build the fragile trust that came with her Heel–Face Turn, and Mind Rape would destroy any trust even on Captain America's side. Tony doesn't blame her for what she did to his mind, but he's already kept her under house arrest for using her less squicky powers; if she's going to rebel against him, she may as well not remind him of what happened the first time.
    • There's "pulling punches" and then there's "forcing your friends to experience their greatest fears or regrets as their reality". Besides which, there are unlikely to have been many opportunities to fine tune those abilities: using them on her teammates would be unacceptably risky while using them on enemy combatants would be a level of cruel and unusual that Cap wouldn't take lightly.
    • Even though everyone is fighting, it's clear that they're pulling punches and not going all out like it's a real fight; nobody (except Black Panther) really wanted anyone to get seriously hurt. Even when she chides Hawkeye for pulling punches against Black Widow, you'll notice that she merely threw Black Widow into a structure, rater than destroying her with telekinesis. Wanda's game breaking powers would probably have ended the battle swiftly, but after the events of Age of Ultron, using her telepathy powers to reach into her friends' minds would be a gross invasion of privacy and almost seen as a dirty trick, and would almost certainly ruin her relationship with the pro-reg side. Remember, Wanda desperately wants these people NOT to be afraid of her - psychically torturing them in what isn't a life-or-death fight would certainly go against this goal.
    • All of that would be valid as far as her not wanting to use telepathy if we had been shown that she can only use it as Mind Rape. In Sokovia, the people she was controlling in order to leave didn't seem to be suffering. She could have done that to the Pro-Reg side to keep them immobile. As for controlling their minds is an invasion of privacy that would have made the pro-reg side hate her, I'm pretty sure War Machine would have preferred being unable to move while Captain's team escaped than what happened to him. Plus, Wanda herself said that she couldn't control others' fear, only hers. As far as she was concerned, she could have excused herself by saying that controlling them was the best course of action for everyone involved (except the audience, who would have missed out on the battle sequence).
      • Fair point, but you could also argue that Sokovia was more of a desperate situation; otherwise those people would die. Plus we don't really see the aftermath of what happened to those people, so we can't be certain. At the airport, no one, including Wanda, is going all out (except Black Panther), and no one predicted what happened to War Machine. It's also worth noting that a lot of time has elapsed from Age of Ultron, so Wanda may have had time to consider the nature and morality of her powers.
      • Except we've already seen her using her telepathy explicitly for combat and those people, the Avengers, eventually recovered. After dealing with Zemo, she could've simply explained that attacking their minds was better than beating each other into a pulp. That said, I would accept her simply refusing to use those powers against other heroes on the basis of morality if the movie had. But there isn't even a throw-away line considering the possibility (like Hulk's absence got acknowledged) following with she rejecting it as too horrible. Hell, they could've have had her saying "I don't want another Ultron" and that would have been enough.
    • Perhaps It Only Works Once? Anyone who gets hit with mind control can resist being hit with it again. If you'll remember in Age of Ultron, Wanda only used mind control on each Avenger once... except Hawkeye, who stops her. This might mean that he could resist her because he was mind-controlled before. By the same source of power (the Mind Stone), no less. Of course, that still begs the question why she didn't try it on Black Panther, War Machine, or Spider-Man... perhaps their full-body covering suits protected them? No one mind-controlled in Age of Ultron was fully covered.
    • Hawkeye didn't actually resist, he stopped her before she had the chance to try it on him. As for "covered people resisting", her powers have gone through vibranium before (like by ripping Ultron's "heart" out). Hell, she completely dominated a creature made entirely of vibranium (and wielding the Mind Stone) in this very same movie. That said, I would accept It Only Works Once if she had at least tried. But she had a clear chance to try it on, at least, Stark but didn't.
  • Speaking of Wanda's telepathy, why does no one suggest using her to confirm Bucky's guilt or innocence?
    • Because that amounts to just taking Wanda's word for it. For all anyone knows, she's just putting on a little light show and saying whatever Cap wants her to say.
  • Considering the last time she used her telepathy willy nilly lead to Ultron, mass destruction and death in her hometown. As well as the death of her brother she felt half a city away. It is more likely that Wanda own reluctance to use her telepathy is that she can refuses to use it after it caused so much trauma last time.
    • Actually, the very last time we saw her telepathy was when she made the Sokovians around her calmly evacuate. That's what she could've done with the Pro-Accords side.

    "Sergeant Barnes?" 
  • Yes, he was bloody, beaten, and probably semi-conscious at best, but why didn't Howard Stark appear to be surprised at all to see a man who should have been dead for the last 50 years? He seems so nonchalant about the fact that Bucky is not only alive, but has barely aged a day in half a century. He doesn't even mutter a "You're alive..." or something of that nature before The Winter Soldier kills him.
    • He probably just didn't realize it was him. If someone, anyone, who died fifty years ago just happened to cross your path, would you honestly believe it was that person, even if you knew them?
    • His first (and only) words toward him are "Sergeant Barnes?", which seemingly implies that he thought it was actually Bucky and not just someone who looks like him.
    • Well, he was semi-conscious, so he may have just been confused and didn't understand what he was seeing.
    • Yeah I'd say he was just too banged up to do anything but mutter his name. Alternatively he thought he was already dead and his dead friend from long ago showed up to take him to Heaven. I doubt Howard was a religious man so this probably added to his confusion.
    • He did have a reaction. It was not "nonchalance", it was disbelief mixed with being in shock from the accident. He did NOT expect Bucky to be there and he may have emoted more appropriately had Bucky not caved in his face.
    • Bigger question: Why does he call him "Sergeant Barnes?" Howard was never overly formal. He worked with Bucky and the other Howling Commandos for years. Even if he wasn't as close to Bucky as he was to Steve, why address him by rank and last name, instead of "Bucky?" or "Barnes?"
    • Bucky was recruited later, when they were already in full gear about taking out HYDRA. He wouldn't know Bucky quite as well as Steve and probably wasn't on a first name basis with him.

    Cap more crucial than Cassie? 
  • I know Scott is a fanboy of Captain America and the Avengers, but he's also a felon on probation who just spent one entire movie trying to reform himself and be there for his daughter. It's sheer luck that Paxton came around and gave him a second chance, but why throw that second chance away, even if it's Captain America asking for help?
    • Well, part of what Scott was doing in Ant-Man was ensuring the world Cassie would grow up in was a better, safer one (by destroying the Yellowjacket technology). If Scott truly feel the Sokovia Accords are immoral or dangerous, it's perfectly in character for him to take a moral stand that will both make the world better for his little girl (and innocents like her) and land his ass right back in jail.
    • Yeah, he definitely doesn't want the Pym Particles to be controlled by any government; having experienced what can happen if that technology falls into the wrong hands he's willing to fight outside the law to prevent that from happening. Hank Pym did tell him he wanted to keep the technology away from the Starks, and he's probably worried that if he doesn't fight now someone will come and seize it from him later on the orders of the government.
    • Also much like Hawkeye he didn't sign on with the intention of getting into a punch out with Ironman and friends (thought they were prepared for that), but to go to Siberia, stop Zemo from unleashing the soldiers and leave him gift wrapped for Ironman as proof that Bucky was innocent and the Accords committee were so incompetent the let him play them like fools as proof the Accords wouldn't work. Then they'd presumably be pardoned for their actions, the Accords would be withdrawn and even if they didn't Scott's identity is actually unknown to most so he could have helped them as Ant-possibilityman and then gone home, with Tony and Ross non the wiser. Unfortunately things didn't go as planned and Scott got arrested and exposed. And it was all for nothing because Zemo just wanted to trick the Avengers into fighting and didn't want to send the soldiers against the world. But Scott saw it as something worth risking it for, and with a possibility that if all went well he'd be able to stay out of trouble.
    • There's also the fact that as stated in his own film, Scott wants to be the hero that Cassie believes he is, and he is already plenty heroic on his own. How could he justify himself being a hero to Cassie if he turned down Captain Motherfucking America, the greatest superhero of all time, when he asked him for help?
    • Between his shrinking powers and his jailbreak skills, Scott was the member of Cap's team who seemed the most likely to get away clean if things went wrong. Nobody knew his identity until then except Falcon, who was on the same side and whom he trusted not to give up Scott's real name in the aftermath, whatever the outcome. He just hadn't reckoned on getting knocked silly and captured before he could shrink down to bug-size and vanish.
    • It's possible that Sam laid out the risks for Scott, and the latter might have actually discussed things with Hank, Hope, and his family. For one, I doubt Hank lets Scott take the Ant-Man suit out of secure storage for personal use, and as reckless as Scott is, he'd know better than to sneak off with it —there's absolutely no way Scott would ever get within eyesight of Hank, Hope, or the suit for the rest of his life if he took it without permission (especially for such a risky job). For another, Paxton knows Scott is a noble and devout father (if roguish), and if he knows Captain America personally asked for Scott's help, it's not much of a stretch to see Paxton and Maggie letting him go with a basic, "Go make Cassie proud."
    • Scott didn't tell Hope or Hank beforehand, as revealed in the Ant-Man sequel, so more likely the first three are correct.

    Extremis 
  • The last scene of the film has Tony helping Rhodey with his physio, and it's stated that Tony is building prosthetics/aids for Rhodey to walk with to deal with his spinal damage. But why doesn't Tony just use the Extremis formula he refined to heal Rhodey? It let him close up the giant hole in his chest, surely it could at least speed up Rhodey's recovery?
    • It could be that whatever substance that is used is in short supply. If not, the whole world would have been saved from such medical conditions.
    • On a similar note, what about Helen Cho? She was able to heal Hawkeye's wound in AoU, which was implied to be fairly serious, it's implied that the reason she survived Ultron blasting her for messing with the cradle was by using her own tech to heal, she made an entire body for Vision... surely she could help with Rhodey's recovery? A replacement vertebrae, assistance with damaged nerves, or something?
    • Tony wrote the original formula for Extremis, but never explicitly refined the process, aside from removing it from Pepper - but because inability to regulate means death, neither Tony nor Rhodes would risk that until it's stabilized, since even the first ten seconds can make someone blow up (i.e. there wouldn't be enough time to remove it if Rhodey couldn't regulate). Also, where was it stated that removing shrapnel from Tony's chest used Extremis? It looked far more like extremely-precise surgery, allowing them to delicately take the shrapnel out before it flew up to a magnet, and little more.
    • Helen Cho's technology could replace damaged tissue, and it made a body with Ultron's help, but there's no indication she can just replace an entire spine, bones, etc. The technology is probably still in development.
    • Regenerating organ and muscle tissue is relatively easy. Nerve tissue is significantly harder to replicate. Plus the Vision was created using vibranium, something that's extremely difficult to acquire.
      • We saw someone grow back an entire arm in the Extremis video Tony watches. Chances are both he and Rhodes are still iffy on the technology, since the woman who created it is dead and Extremis users nearly killed the both of them a few times.
    • Tony's the kind of guy that puts the most trust in his own technology. He's probably using Rhodes as a test case (with permission, of course) for a new walking assistance rig that he plans on releasing to the general public. He doesn't trust extremis enough to release that under any circumstances.
    • It may be a mix of the above - Tony and Rhodey don't quite trust Extremis, and they may be using the exoskeleton Rhodey's wearing for PT or a stop-gap measure until they can make sure Extremis is 100% safe.

    Spider-Man's identity 
  • How did Tony figure out Peter Parker was Spider-Man? Perhaps it'll be explained during the web head's upcoming solo movie, but given that Parker has always been notorious for keeping his identity a highly-guarded secret- even from other superheroes- it's a little odd that he didn't freak out in the slightest. And yeah Tony had the YouTube videos, but as Peter himself pointed out, that could be anyone/special effects.

    Why is Thor considered "missing"? 
  • When Ross mentions that the Avengers don't know where Hulk and Thor are, why did no one mention that they know exactly where he is? He's in Asgard. An alien going back to his home planet isn't somebody that the Avengers "lost".
    • They don't want Ross to know where he is. Simple as that.
    • Either way, it's not like the US Government actually knows where Asgard is or how to get there, so Thor might as well be MIA.
    • Yeah Thor's out of contact. They can't get in touch with him while he's up there, so until he feels like returning to Earth Thor's gone. Maybe if things were really bad one of the Avenger's could yell at the sky for Heimdall and he'd actually open the Bifrost and bring them to Asgard to see Thor, but that's a big if, and Ross certainly wouldn't know that. That being said it's rather presumptuous and arrogant of Ross to think he and the US government have a right to know where Thor is at all times.
    • Thing is, the fact Thor can just pop up, cause a ton of collateral damage, then disappear back to Asgard means he's basically untouchable and can't be held accountable for his actions, making him a perfect example of how superheroes are above the law. You can argue that if he's going to operate on American soil the government has a legitimate interest in knowing where he is and making sure he's available to answer for his actions.
      • As the Prince of Asgard, Thor has diplomatic immunity, so the fact that he can just disappear back home at any time doesn't really change anything. It's no different than how Black Panther, as King of Wakanda, is not subject to arrest or prosecution by other nations. Plus since he's not a resident of Earth, Earth laws may not apply to him.
      • Not arrest or prosecution, but he could be declared a persona non grata and kicked out. If he refused, use of force to physically expel him would be a possibility.
      • I don't think the US or any government officially recognizes Asgard as existing. Though they are probably aware of the fact that a prison would hold Thor for precisely as long as he felt like being polite.
    • Plus the fact that "pop up, cause a ton of collateral damage, then disappear back to Asgard" is a rough summary of Thor's solo movies, from a government perspective.

    Couldn't you just break the accords? 
  • Wouldn't it be possible to accept the accords for now, then break them if and when the situation requires it? Sure there would be penalties for breaking the law, which might inhibit their ability to act/break it again in future, but wouldn't we only want people to break the law in situations so dire that accepting the legal consequences for breaking it is the lesser of the two evils?
    • In that case, Steve and the others might as well not sign the accords at all. Signing them and then breaking them also means the governments who united to draft the accords would come down even harder on them. Steve might also be concerned with exactly how the governments involved plan to enforce the accords: Tony puts Wanda under what is house arrest in all but name. Signing the accords might just mean being locked in a Gilded Cage and only let out when the U.N. committee decides the Avengers are needed (in the scene where Steve and Tony talk with the two pens, Steve does seem to consider signing until Tony mentions how Wanda is being treated). It's not possible to break the accords if you're locked in a location until it's decided that you're needed, and that leads into Steve's concern that the committee appointed might misjudge a situation and let the Avengers act too late, resulting in far more deaths than if the Avengers were free to act of their own accord.
    • Tony was saying something along these lines. "Just sign now, we'll amend them later." But in addition to Steve's reasons to distrust government oversight in general, he's not the type to sign something knowing he intends to break it. Sure, if the situation comes up he'll break the rules to do the right thing, but he won't agree to a rule he has no intention of obeying.
    • Tony does this by the end of the movie, and almost certainly never had any intention of obeying them.

    Biological weapon 
  • Did they ever explain what that biological weapon was that Rumlow/Crossbones tried to steal in the beginning of the movie?
    • No. For the most part, it wasn't important. It was just some random deadly virus.
    • If Rumlow is still part of HYDRA, then they must be shopping around for whatever biological weaponizable materials they can find, considering their interest in the Pym Particle in Ant-Man.

    Timeline Issues 
  • Probably a minor quibble - but they seemed to ignore the fact that the MCU timeline has only been on Real Time since Phase 2, by having Vision state that Tony outed himself as Iron Man 'eight years ago' referencing how this film was released 8 years after Iron Man. But as far as in-universe chronology is concerned, Iron Man occurred 6 months before Iron Man 2 (which happened more or less simultaneously with Thor and The Incredible Hulk, release dates and release order notwithstanding), which occurred a year before The Avengers which was set in 2012 (it was earlier in the same year as Iron Man 3 which was clearly set in December 2012)...which means that Iron Man was set in 2010 at earliest (not 2008). Another timeline related error - Ross claims that the Avengers have been operating independently for three years (i.e. since 2013). However, The Avengers were first formed in 2012, and immediately disbanded after the invasion was over. The earliest they could have gotten back together to start dealing with HYDRA was 2014 (after the events of The Winter Soldier). And the current incarnation of the Avengers has only been around since 2015.
    • While I can’t answer all of that, at the very least I don’t think the Avengers needed to truly be acting as one over the course of three years. It doesn’t matter if they were technically disbanded, after The Avengers completely destroyed The Masquerade, they all became major public figures and thus any incident one of them took part in was considered as being an action taken by the force known as the Avengers. Remember, Ross showed the events of The Winter Soldier as part of the montage of events that led to the Sokovia Accords and that only involved two of the, at the time, Avengers. There probably have also been other adventures the Avengers have taken part in that we haven’t seen (at the very least we know that the Avengers got together to hunt down Loki’s Staff and that was almost certainly more than the one raid at the beginning of Age of Ultron) they just weren’t as large-scale as the ones in the movies. Basically the Avengers have still been “operating” for three years since it’s about the superheroes within the Avengers acting without supervision, not the team itself.
    • And if you want to get technical, the events of The Winter Soldier were done by Cap, Falcon and Black Widow - three Avengers working outside SHIELD. Sam didn't become an official Avenger until some time later, but it's still enough people involved to not count it as an isolated incident.

    Overcomplicated 
  • Why couldn't the main villain just send Tony an email? If I'm understanding right, his whole plan was to get Cap and Tony fighting by showing Tony proof that his parents were killed by Bucky. It seems obvious that he had to have known about it before he set his plan into motion—bombing the UN and infiltrating German law enforcement at the highest level isn't exactly something you do on a whim. So presumably he had some sort of proof that the operation happened, who was targeted, and who did the killing. If that's the case, why does he need to get Cap, Bucky, and Tony to the bunker?
    • Even more to the point, Tony hasn't had his AI at work decrypting and sorting through the publicly available HYDRA data since the events of Winter Soldier? It's implied at the beginning of Age of Ultron that the Avengers have been fighting HYDRA for a while, yet some random schmo manages to find a very specific piece of information that all of Tony's resources managed to miss? He's not (as far as we know) involved with HYDRA at all, so there's no way he could have just known it was there to look for it. Was it in the book with Bucky's command phrase? But then why not just mail the book to Stark?
    • Tony probably isn't trying to find out who killed his parents. His opening scene in the movie suggests that he's trying to put his past behind him. We also don't know if Tony even has an intelligent AI to sort out his business anymore after what happened with Ultron. As for Zemo, he got lucky. He wasn't looking for info on the Winter Soldier, he was looking for anything related to the Starks. He's also a tactical genius, so he probably had at least an inkling as to where he should look. There are no mission reports in the book. It's why he has to trigger Bucky's brainwashing to get the location of the HYDRA facility, where he can access certain archives.
    • Maybe part of it is getting everyone in the same place before he shows Tony the video, so he'll beat up on Bucky and force Cap to intervene, but that doesn't explain why he couldn't give Tony the information after releasing Bucky (or just after starting the manhunt for him) without having to go all the way to Russia—and it definitely doesn't explain why Zemo has the information while Tony does not.
    • He revealed the information when he did because he doesn't want Tony to have a chance to cool off. If Tony has to put any sort of effort into finding Bucky, he'll have time to think on it. By waiting until they're all together, he makes sure Tony acts on his rage immediately. As for not having the information right away, it's certainly possible the camera was on a closed system and they just took the tape. Zemo would need to reach the facility to get the tape.
    • His goal isn't to cause Tony pain (though it is a bonus), it's to split up the Avengers, by alienating Tony and Steve from each other. He needed adequate proof for it to work. He can't just send an email saying "Oh hai this guy Bucky killed your parents" since Tony would confront Steve, and they would have presumably been able to talk it out. He knew about the Winter Soldier, but didn't have the needed proof and for that he needs to gain access to the place where the other Winter Soldiers are being kept, along with archives which contain the video. Bombing the UN and infiltrating a law enforcement building isn't what a normal person would do, but Zemo needs to do both to gain access to Bucky. Also, he's depressed and probably a little insane. He doesn't need to get Cap, Bucky and Tony to the HYDRA bunker. He was probably aware that Cap and Bucky would be coming for him, but his own fate was irrelevant. Tony being present was just a bonus. He could've sent the video to Tony even if Tony wasn't present and the damage would be done.
    • There are an awful lot of what if's that go unusually right for Zemo. How does he know Cap never told Tony all along and his big reveal is met with a laugh and "Yeah I knew that years ago pal"? What happens if Tony actually succeeded in arresting them at the airport? What happens if Tony never stopped Cap at the airport at all and Cap showed up with Sam Clint Wanda and Scott backing him up where as Tony has no idea where they are or how to find them? What happens if Cap couldn't save Bucky and the UN police killed him? Or Panther killed him? What happens if Bucky wasn't able to escape from the UN Compound and/or he does but Cap isn't able to go after him? What happens if Thor shows up who can easily break up the fights? His plan required a few too many random things to go right.
    • One could argue that even if his plans wouldn't have gone the way they did, he still would have succeeded. At the start of the movie, Tony still tells the tale of his parents car crash, instead of telling how they had been murdered. And since Hydra's resurrection was public knowledge, he would have no reason not to tell it if he knew. If Bucky would have died by either police or Panther, Cap would likely not want be an Avenger anymore and that would tear the team apart. If the whole team is captured, the Avengers are disbanded. Zemo has no reason to expect Thor to come out of the sky to deal things, not to mention that we don't know which side he would be on. I'd say Zemo respected the skills that Cap and Bucky have enough to make those plans that required Bucky to escape and Cap to at least get away from the airport.
    • I don't think we're supposed to assume that Zemo knew that Cap knew about Hydra killing the Starks, since he's never made that fact public, and the only other Avenger present for that reveal was Black Widow (who is good at compartmentalizing, and probably didn't tell Tony for the same reason that Steve didn't). If we assume that A) Zemo needed to get to the Siberian compound in order to locate the physical evidence (as well as execute the five other Winter Soldiers), i.e. the tape, and B) his plan initially would have been to send it to Tony, instead of all of them catching up to him, Zemo's scheme looks a lot less fortuitous. Either way Zemo's plan made sense and would have worked based on the information he had. The problem with the final part of the movie was that the writing didn't make this clear, turning what would have been a cool gambit into a coincidence that just worked in Zemo's favor. As for Tony not finding the thread that would have led him to Karpov... do you have any idea just how much red tape and paperwork there would have been in all of S.H.I.E.L.D.'s secure files? Not to mention, between the last two films, the Avengers were all busy going after Hydra for Loki's Scepter. Tony had better things to do than dig up archived S.H.I.E.L.D. files, especially if he didn't know that his parents' death would be in there somewhere.

    Origin of the video 
  • Where did the videotape even come from? The assassination happened on a dark forested road with no people or buildings in sight, and it was specifically planned for there to be "no witnesses." So why is there a perfectly-angled "security camera" video of it? What was the purpose of installing a camera to monitor that ten-foot stretch of road? Further, why would HYDRA have kept the tape? Where did Zemo get it from?
    • For that matter, why did Bucky destroy the camera itself AFTER committing the murder, and not before? Not only does that ensure that the act is on tape, but to get rid of the footage, one would have to destroy the tape that contains the footage, not the camera (which the writers seemingly know, since Bucky shoots the camera but the footage is still perfectly intact).
    • Assuming the camera was wired to a remote location, there could be potentially no way of tracing the feed to wherever the recorder (and therefore the tape) is. And even in 1991, video cameras could be very unobtrusive- it looks as though this one was mounted in the trees. It seems as if Bucky spotted it during his final sweep of the area. After all, if you're on an assassination mission, generally the first thing you'd do would not be "check for hidden cameras". "Hidden enemies", yes, but probably not cameras. As for why the camera was there in the first place- probably HYDRA had strategically-placed cameras along ALL of Howard Stark's routes to and from his home, so they knew his routine and location at all times. Would this take a monumental number of cameras? Yes. Is HYDRA a very dedicated organization prepared to go to that kind of effort? Yes.
    • If it was a HYDRA camera, why wouldn't Bucky be told that it's there and that he doesn't have to worry about it?
    • It's just a camera. It's expendable and not really relevant to his mission anyway, so not worth mentioning.
    • There's a chain-link fence next to the camera, making it probable Bucky just happened to crash Howard by a business or something. Bad luck is all.
    • I'm wondering why The Winter Soldier went to the trouble of making it look like a car accident (at least, by dragging Howard Stark back into the car), then put a bullet in a security camera. Maybe Hydra had arranged for some of its agents in SHIELD to be responsible for the investigation into the apparent death of someone that has close links with them?
    • The car was on fire. If the bodies were badly burned, the autopsies could be inconclusive.
    • Putting this here, since it's not discussed on YMMV: Wouldn't the video have made more sense (and, IMHO, been more shocking and effective) if it had been from an "unknown person's" POV — from a camera in the "attacker's" goggles — and the last frames were a closeup of Maria begging the "attacker" not to kill her, and THEN we see the metal hand and arm.
    • To the above: It might not be practical for Hydra to give their Winter Soldiers a pair of goggles with a camera in it. Bucky seems good enough at what he does that when he reports a person as dead, they stay that way (except Nick Fury), so there's really no need for verification via video. Also, it would probably take more than seeing that the killer has a metal arm to implicate Bucky. A metal arm doesn't necessarily mean it was him. Seeing his face, however, is almost 100% undeniable— it would also be intrinsically impossible to see his face if we saw the murders from a first-person perspective.

    Archived video 
  • Another question about the video: why did HYDRA decide to keep it in the first place? In Winter Soldier it's made clear that that the Winter Soldier's whole existence is a huge secret, to the point that even people like the former KGB agent Natasha are not sure whether he's real. Why, then, would HYDRA have held on to a videotape that proves his existence? What if that tape got into the wrong hands? Why didn't they destroy it immediately after the Winter Soldier discovered it?
    • Fridge Brilliance: HYDRA was planning to use the stolen serum to endow five more of their assassins with super-soldier powers. Up until then, Bucky was their top enhanced assassin. Why wouldn't they arrange to record his attack on the Starks, so as to use the video as part of the new five-assassin team's training regimen? They probably planted cameras at the kill-site and inside the Starks' vehicle in advance, so they could capture every detail of how a super-powered asset carries out a hit. Even the closing image of Bucky shooting the camera makes sense, as it'd be a standard precaution the new team would need to emulate on future missions: a valuable lesson that's more than worth the price of one camera.

    Shooting them 
  • If Zemo hates Tony and the Avengers so much, why not just shoot them? He is a smart guy, he could have just killed Tony, Steve, Falcon, and Natasha when he was in disguise. If he can get close to Bucky, he can get close to the Avengers, and kill them. Of course Thor and Hulk would be difficult to eliminate, but Tony, Falcon, Steve, and Black Widow would be out of his way. Doesn't he hate Tony the most?
    • For Zemo, he feels like he's suffered a Fate Worse than Death after his family perished in Sokovia during the events of Avengers: Age of Ultron. He wants the Avengers not only to die, but to feel the emotional torment of knowing that they killed each other. Additionally, there's the chance that even if the Avengers don't kill one another, they'll still be psychologically ravaged (applies as well if only some of the Avengers die— the surviving members will be torn apart emotionally from the inner conflict). He also seems to only have it out for Cap and Iron Man, or at least them more than the others— Bucky is just a necessary pawn. And a final point: it's probably not that easy to "just shoot" the Avengers. They're all likely very good at not being caught by surprise, at least to the extent that they're just walking around and suddenly take a slug to the brain. Killing the Avengers probably requires either near-invincibility, a ton of firepower, or a lot of planning/intelligence. Zemo only has access to the latter. The only other way to take them out would probably be to simply drop a huge bomb wherever they are, which could still possibly not kill them (and might not be possible for a number of reasons, including their ability to see sneak-attacks coming), and would also cause the deaths of innocent people, and that would make Zemo a hypocrite.
      • Zemo is already a hypocrite. He blew up the UN building at the Sokovia Accords signing and killed dozens of innocents, including T'Challa's father. He later murdered an innocent psychiatrist just to get to Bucky.
    • Also, the Avengers were in a UN building (which would be on high alert after the bombing) and presumably planned to go straight back to the Avengers facility. Impersonating a random psychiatrist is in all likelihood much easier than impersonating UN security personnel, getting to the Avengers (most of whom were in the same room), and somehow drawing a gun and killing them all before Zemo got riddled with bullet holes.
    • Not to mention, if he assassinates the Avengers, he turns them into martyrs and would definitely unite the surviving Avengers against him. As he said in the film, external attacks against the Avengers won't work because they'll eventually rebuild and come back stronger. Destroy them from within and they will be fractured forever.
      • Exactly. The Netflix heroes, the agents of shield, the inhumans, Adlanteans, various aliens, they could all take the Avengers' place if they were killed by an enemy, but Zemo's plan would not just kill the foremost symbol of superheroism and meta-humans, but would greatly discredit them.
    • Also Zemo says he at least thought about just outright attacking them but figured it was impossible for him. If Loki and Ultron couldn't do it with their armies no way a regular soldier could.
    • He's also not exactly in his right mind. He doesn't want them dead. He wants them destroyed. He wants to hurt them, and turning them against each other is the best way to do so. His rationale is that they're too powerful to fight head-on - so they must be outsmarted. And outsmarting someone is far more satisfying than overpowering them.
    • It's not easy to shoot the Avengers! They've all got lighting-fast reflexes (even the ones that don't officially have powers). As soon as you go for your gun, you'll get kicked in the face or something. Just look at what happened to all those henchmen in the beginning.

    About that car crash 
  • Why would someone as wealthy and influential as Howard Stark drive something as low rent as a Cadillac Fleetwood? The 90's weren't exactly the stone ages, there were a lot of cars available for someone of his wealth, like Mercedes Benzes, Range Rovers, BM Ws, etc. All of these cars and more would have been better than a boxy American Luxury car. However, even if we ignore that, he's a big government contractor (and member of SHIELD's security council-thing), as well as a very rich man. Shouldn't he have chauffeur or a security detail of some sort?
    • Zola implies that Howard Stark was killed because he learned about HYDRA's infiltration of SHIELD. In addition, Tony's memories seemed to indicate that Howard was going to make a stop at the Pentagon or some other important place. Most likely he was trying to travel as low profile as possible to get the serum to safe place away from HYDRA's hands, and he didn't know who he could trust. Unfortunately, HYDRA knew more than he thought they did.
    • In Real Life, it's common for VIP's, the wealthy, celebs and those who are security conscious to buy and use "common" cars and trucks. Outside the US an American car attracts the wrong kind of attention. In the US (and yes even Europe), a flashy expensive car sticks out. Howard wanted to be as low key as possible. In The '70s and The '80s, Washington DC still had high crime rates. From people who want to get into a wreck for insurance fraud to car thieves and just plain ole' terrorists. Howard thought he had a "cover" and was blending in. Alas, HYDRA was one step ahead, the car may have even be registered at SHIELD headquarters so they knew the make, model and license plate.
    • Also, while the 90-91 Fleetwood isn't exactly state of the art, it was at the time the most luxurious American car available. Maybe Howard is a Buy-American kind of guy? As to not having a driver, Tony is at least as wealthy as his father, and does his own driving. It's worth noting also that the big American luxury sedans were common vehicles for VIPs because their body-on-frame design made it relatively easy to up-armor them (though Howard's car seemed to be stock).

    Murdered Starks 
  • Furthermore, how did nobody know that the Starks were murdered? There was video evidence of the crash, and even if that was removed by HYDRA (or Obadiah Stane) Maria Stark was manually strangled by Bucky. Even the most incompetent Medical Examiner in the world would know that such wounds did not come from a simple car crash, especially considering that the most Lincolns came with Passenger side airbags since the late 80's, which rule out any possibility of an accidental death from the crash.
    • You're saying HYDRA, which has infiltrated the largest and most powerful intelligence agency on the planet, couldn't doctor an autopsy report?
    • The car was on fire. If the bodies were badly burned, the autopsies could be inconclusive. (This was a quarter century ago, not the CSI we know now.)
    • The movie cuts away right after Bucky has his hand around Maria's neck. For all we know, he could have snapped or crushed her neck. A broken neck or suffocation from a crushed windpipe wouldn't be out of the ordinary in a car crash.
    • Both their injuries are something you would expect to see in a fatal car accident. Maria likely had a broken neck and Howard had severe blunt force trauma to the head.

    Stark's anger 
  • And about that video: Why did Tony Stark get so angry over the video footage? He says that he's angry at Bucky because he killed his mom, and the movie clearly shows that he's angry because Bucky crushed his mom's windpipe, but how did that show up in the video? The camera was over 40 feet away, in very low definition, with the fire and the car itself obscuring most of the passenger side of the car. How the hell did Tony see anything other than The Winter Soldier standing next to the car for a minute of so? He should still be mad, but there's no way that he could have seen the whole event.
    • Did Tony ever say that he knew Bucky strangled his mother? He saw Winter Soldier crash the car and kill his father brutally. It's not hard to put two and two together.
    • You can audibly hear Maria Stark calling out for Howard during the moment as well as the fact Howard crawls out of the car telling Bucky to help his wife, and then after Howard is killed we see Bucky walk over to the passenger side of the car to which he does something that ultimately quietens Maria. The film footage likely would have shown Bucky at least walking to the other side of the car, so it's not a stretch for Tony to work out Bucky also murdered his mother.
      • The video didn't have audio. While Stark starts to watch the video the camera shifts to Bucky, who's clearly looking discomforted. It then shifts to color and audio scenes of the murder. We're seeing Bucky's MEMORIES, from his perspective. All Tony saw was Bucky caving in his father's face and then moving around to his mother's side. That's plenty enough, though. If he knew that his father recognized Bucky as a friend before he killed him, well, I doubt Bucky would have gotten far before being sliced into bits by a laser.
    • Even if Tony's mother had died on the "accident", and not by having her windpipes smashed, the crash was caused by the Winter Soldier, deliberately as a murder attempt. The blood is figuratively on his hands regardless of literal cause of death.
      • Indeed. The Winter Soldier clearly killed her. Whether it was by causing the crash or with his hands afterwards is just a detail.

    Scarlet Witch's Accident 
  • Wanda actively contains the energy from an exploding grenade, holds it (with difficulty) and redirects it into a building, which sets on fire. What's stopping her from containing/redirecting those flames? I imagine her being tired, afraid, inexperienced, acting on reflex, or just being too shocked to react quickly could've all been factors in her inaction, but wouldn't at least paint a better image for the news cameras to see Scarlet Witch attempting to put out the fire she'd set? Is there any technical reason I missed that prevented her from lassoing those flames?
    • At that point she was probably too shocked and too afraid to use her powers again after a foul up like that.
    • Fun fact! When you've just accidentally murdered a dozen people, you're not thinking about your public image or instantly calculating the best use if your abilities and resources. What you're doing is staring in horror at the fact you just accidentally murdered a dozen people three seconds ago.
      • Fun fact! She didn't murder anyone. She saved the hundreds of people who were in the marketplace.
    • She may have also been, at least subconsciously, afraid that she might make things even worse than they already were (if she tries to fix it).
    • On another note, why did she push him into the building to begin with? Why not push him straight up into the air where there would be no people and she could control the explosion to make sure no flames or debris came down?
    • She did try to push him straight up into the air, but her powers and concentration were strained to the point she couldn't hold him long enough to get him a safe distance away. She's clearly struggling to control the detonation as much as she is.
    • From the government's perspective, it's a neat summation of the entire problem with the Avengers. Captain America decided to take a young, inexperienced woman, still learning her powers, into effectively a war zone, and her poor situational awareness got people killed. If she had been better trained for such eventualities, she would have been able to move the bomb somewhere completely harmless. Instead, she was only thinking about saving Cap's life, not paying attention to where the bomb would go off, and overestimating her ability to contain the explosion itself and avoid collateral damage. In short, she screwed up, and it's Cap's fault for not making sure she was ready for a mission like this.

    Rumlow/Crossbones's Employer 
  • Who was he working for? He says Bucky, but this could just be a taunt.
    • This was something that was never resolved. Rumlow only brought up the subject of Bucky in order to distract Cap, nothing more.
    • It's implied Rumlow has split off from HYDRA and has simply been performing independent terrorist attacks with the intention of drawing out the Avengers (specifically Cap). This is why he had the suicide vest on hand; he was prepared to perform a Taking You with Me from the beginning.
    • I was left with the impression that Rumlow's buyer was Zemo posing as Bucky, since his whole plan revolved around making people think Bucky had gone villainous again.

    Why not bring up London? 
  • Thunderbolt Ross shows the Avengers footage of the collateral damage from New York, Washington DC, and Sokovia. Fair enough. Shouldn't he also be bringing up that time a giant spaceship crashed into Greenwich?
    • That's on Thor. Thor is both a royal and extraterrestrial. Different rules apply.
    • Actually, they imply that, had Thor been on Earth, he would be held accountable for his acts too (they count him as missing not just "chilling back in his home planet", and blame the Avengers for "losing" him). But since he's not on Earth, there's no point in showing the consequences of his lone actions in that clip.
    • Which is probably why they also aren't shown clips of South Africa, since Banner isn't there.
    • Actually, that probably has more to do with not having any good camera footage of the Wakanda incident. Because one of the clips he shows of New York involves people being injured by debris directly left by the Hulk.
    • There may also be some difficulties with trying to hold Thor accountable, even aside from his sheer power and ability to just pop in and out whenever he wants. Most importantly, he's not a foreign national — he's an alien, and (sort of) crown prince of a major galactic power at that. If T'Challa can get out reprisals, Thor certainly can.
    • The focus on the collateral damage was more on human casualties. It is possible that Malekith's brief incursion on earth, while mildly destructive, didn't actually kill anybody.
    • Or perhaps the man doing the exposition does not like the British, and allowed himself to ignore that part. After all, with the other three events the point is already taken.
    • And if they took the matter to court, this could be argued as an isolated incident. Thor acted on his own and his help - Jane, Selvig, Darcy and Ian - were all civilians. The report was specifically about the Avengers as a team.
    • Ross also didn't finish his presentation; Cap told him "that's enough" and Ross stopped the video. London and South Africa may have been coming up. But more importantly, the point had already been made. Did you want to spend more time watching clips of previous movies, or get on with the story?
    • Considering he's confronting the Avengers as a group, Ross was throwing the collateral damage they caused as a team at them. If he wanted to confront them individually, he could have brought up the Stark weapons the Ten Rings were using, or the freaking building Cap leveled with a crashing Helicarrier that almost certainly had SHIELD personnel in it, or most of Harlem as casualties.

    Is Black Panther enhanced? 
  • Does he have super strength and amazing agility like Steve? The way he moves in the movie, I can't tell whether he's a superhuman or a human in an advanced, high tech suit.
    • It's a high-tech suit, made entirely of vibranium. This gives him a ton of resilience (enough to shrug off a hail of bullets), as well as a lot of cutting power with his claws. Take that away, and he's "just" a really athletic, but otherwise normal human being.
    • There may be more to his physical prowess without the suit than just "really athletic." When he's fighting Bucky in the UN building, Bucky goes up two flights of stairs, and appears to be going up two stairs with each step. T'Challa doesn't give chase at that point until Bucky has made it up the first set of stairs, and he somehow beats Bucky to the spot. Bucky was skipping steps and had a head start of one full flight, and T'Challa suddenly caught up with him. Incidentally, it isn't shown on-screen how T'Challa got up there. Just that he did.
    • In the comics at least, he's definitely enhanced. Just going off the MCU, it would seem he has to be enhanced (and it is implied) even if it's not outright stated. At the least he obviously is capable of feats past what any other normal human has demonstrated, and can keep up with enhanced humans more than the other Badass Normals. For a definitive answer, we'll just have to wait until Black Panther comes out.
    • Note that T'Challa outruns super humans like Captain America and the Winter Soldier, and actual cars and motorbikes. He is enhanced, but enhanced to the comic book character level, not to a Superman level.
    • During Bucky's break out in Berlin, T'Challa put Bucky's metal arm in a grip for a few seconds and leaves Bucky momentarily stunned. I would say that qualifies as enhanced. If you didn't know to my knowledge T'Challa in the comics has mutations/mystical enhancements from Wakanda magical rituals as well as the suit. How much of that they will keep will be clear in his solo film.
    • He was able to fight the Winter Soldier on a fairly equal level when Zemo first triggered him. T'Challa didn't have his suit on then and still fought the Winter Soldier, so T'Challa is definitely enhanced in some way.
    • So, to sum up, it's quite heavily implied that there is at least something up with T'challa, especially during the UN fight (and some interviews), where he can trap Bucky's metal arm in a lock for a few seconds (that freaks Bucky out a bit and is the biggest indicator that he's stronger than he looks), send him flying with a single roundhouse kick, and ascend two flights of stairs in the time it takes to walk up one.
    • Teaser material from Black Panther (2018) makes it pretty much explicit. T'Challa's got superhuman abilities thanks to some Wakandan chemical compounds.
    • And now that the movie's out, we know that not only is T'Challa very much enhanced, but that he was actually holding back plenty of other technological advantages he could have used, had he not been intent on 1) killing Barnes with nothing but his basic Panther suit and claws, and 2) keeping up The Masquerade by not employing Wakandan hyper-tech around outsiders.

    Stark's car? 
  • Could anybody please identify the make and model of Howard's car in the movie? Somehow it didn't seem like the car a millionaire like him would drive in the '90s.
    • Answered above.

    International perspective 
  • It seems as if the big problem here was that there is a small band of American superpowered people, going around the world causing trouble. Problem is, that's not really the case, and there are super-powered individuals all around the world, and any of them can have the potential for a big disaster. Wouldn't it have been far more simple to give the ATCU an international jurisdiction, and expand their scope to all super-powered individuals and not just the Inhumans?
    • The ATCU, through SHIELD, already has international jurisdiction. The problem is the Avengers are the most powerful and most visible group and they have no allegiance or oversight except to themselves.
    • Also, the Avengers are the only group of superheroes (as far as we know) that is actually... superheroing. SHIELD-ATCU is more like a military group, and HYDRA is a covert terrorist organization, but the Avengers are a group solely composed of superheroes going around the world basically doing whatever they want.
    • The problem with that logic is that the Avengers are the only super-hero group in the world, yes, but that can easily change at any moment. For example, Daisy may finally gather her "secret warriors" and decide that their Inhuman heritage takes priority over shield, another group of Inhumans may do that as well, or a group of Avengers may leave the group and start the "West Coast Avengers", or something like that. And Then What? All the UN will have to discuss new "Sokovia Accords" for the new groups?
    • Yes? Because that's how the world works: You deal with the problem that exists now, then if another problem arises, you amend what you did before. They're reacting to an issue that's visible, not trying to predict everything that might happen.
    • Agents of SHIELD covers this. Registration is a provision of the Accords, the Avengers are just the big ticket item.
    • It isn't stated in the film that the Accords only apply to the Avengers. They're likely a larger framework to deal with the Avengers now, and any other super-powered individuals or groups that come to international attention in the future. The focus is on the Avengers because, well, it is, but there's nothing stating that there aren't provisions for non-Avengers supers existing now or in the future. Heck, it's likely there's a list of sanctions for governments who use super-powered people, with or without their consent, to attack others.
    • As noted above, the Avengers are the current big-ticket item. One reason the powers that be were eager to get them signed up in a big showcase ceremony was to create a bandwagon effect that would make it easier to get all the other superpowered individuals on board.
    • It's also hinted that many countries (the Avengers had to be hunting HYDRA somewhere before they hit their supposed last outpost in Sokovia at the start of Age of Ultron) are sick of a group of super-powered individuals with no oversight and led by an American who wears a flag on his head rolling into their territory without any discussion or forewarning and blowing shit up, which is why the Accords were so quickly a big thing. One would think that if Germany has terrorists on their own soil, they'd want their own police forces or military to handle it, not have Iron Man fly in and level half a city block. The Accords are also meant to prevent future problems as well as discussed above, with the registration aspect aimed at preventing the scenario where a new team that's not the Avengers showing up or the Avengers rebranding themselves to get around the Accords.

    Cap's upper strength limit 
  • While in the comics, Captain America was enhanced only up to "peak human", MCU's Cap is very obviously superhuman. Even in his first movie he's able to hoist a large motorcycle overhead along with several women on it, and if Schmidt's own strength is any indication, he could punch through metal armor. But even if he's bracing his legs against a landing platform, keeping a helicopter from taking off almost entirely through upper-body strength is far beyond those earlier feats, and he's now taking repulser blasts to the chest with less recovery time than an Asgardian. Just how strong is this incarnation of Cap?
    • WHAT?!? Did you expect a mere helicopter or a trivial blast to stand against the power and might of AMERICA?
    • Two things. First Captain America of Universe 616 is peak human. The MCU clearly takes most of its cues from the Ultimates Universe where Cap is clearly superhuman. "Low" super but super nonetheless. How strong is Captain America in this incarnation? I'd say he's probably roughly as strong as Spider-Man, able to lift probably couple tons.
    • I think that's going a bit too far. Cap seems to be about as strong as, if not a bit weaker, than Bucky, who is clearly shown to be nowhere near as strong as Spidey.
    • It should be noted that "peak human" even in the MCU is vastly above what a normal human is capable of. Falcon takes a kick from Spider-Man (one strong enough to break right through glass) and is seemingly no worse for wear.
    • That has a lot to do with Made of Iron which is common enough in works of fiction.
    • The problem with the helicopter scene is less about strength, and more about weight. Pulling an helicopter like that would just make him take off alongside it. It's a Rule of Cool scene, no logic, real world or fictional, explains it.
    • Actually, that scene makes perfect sense. Both Cap and Bucky are shown to be much heavier than normal humans, even if they still have Super Strength even proportional to their greater-than-normal weight. Bucky bends metal railings just by hanging off of them; and keep in mind the helicopter had literally just started. It gets harder for Cap to stop the copter as as it generates more lift, which is why he has to grab the rail.
    • Bucky doesn't bend metal railing "just by hanging off of them"; he bends them because he caught one with his robotic arm after falling five or six stories. Momentum plus mass plus robot arm is what bent it, not just his weight, in the same way that a car traveling 60 mph will do more damage when it crashes into something than a car traveling at 5 mph, regardless of how heavy it is.
    • They can't be much heavier. The VW Beetle carried the two of them just fine without dragging on the pavement, and they don't seem to weigh all that much to other regular vehicles/people. The railing ripped loose because of the force of Bucky's mass * acceleration, multiplied by the height of his drop, rather than his weight alone. Even if Cap himself weighed as much as five people, that's still within that type of helicopter's cargo limit and he should've been pulled right off the ground, not dragged along the pad to a convenient handhold.
      • If they were heavier than normal humans, neither of them would be able to swim. They'd be so dense they'd sink to the bottom like a chimpanzee does, and Bucky couldn't have saved Cap at the end of Winter Soldier.
    • Also "peak human" is debatable, as there are strongmen in the world who can drag frigging trains. Cap's strength is ludicrous, yes, but it's not that strange if compared to other "peak humans". The fact that he's not ripped like a bodybuilder on steroids however is the issue instead.
    • He's not ripped?! You're joking, right?
    • You also forgot that Iron Man knocked out Cap with a single repulser shot during the middle of the fight. Him being unable to replicate that with multiple ones near the end is one of the many inconsistencies this movie has.
  • Also, thinking that the peak human term in comics is close to normal real life humans is a fallacy, since even supposedly ordinary humans in comics have done things that would require superhuman strength, like Hawkeye flipping a car with one hand. As for comic Cap, he has effortlessly carried away bikes, pulled a helicopter out of the air (yeah I know, makes no sense from a physics standpoint) , stopping cold a speeding car with teen Bucky's help and catches a falling tree. That's for raw strength, for striking you need no more than Steve in civilian clothes beating the crap out of this robot or punching a berserk Wolverine through a car roof or kicking through an armored door. Heck, Steve without the benefit of the Super Soldier Serum hit a guy using a shotgun as a club hard enough to dent the metal box he hit. I seriously doubt MCU Cap has done anything that comic Cap can't replicate, or in some occasions hasn't already done.

    Why can't the actor be in the Iron Man suit most of the time? 
  • There are times I can tell when Robert Downey Jr's head is pasted on a stunt double. If you look closely at the scene where he is holding an injured Rhodes, Tony's head looks awkward. I can understand Hollywood using stunt doubles for dangerous stunts, but Iron Man is just sitting there with his wounded friend. They could have just put Robert in the suit. What is their reason for this?
    • Most likely because the armor is only made to fit the stuntman, and the crew didn't want to pay to have a second suit made just for RDJ.
    • There IS no on set Iron Man suit. It's all CGI pasted onto a mocap suit just like the Hulk. They made a real actual Iron Man suit once, the MK3 for Iron Man, and RDJ even wore it but it was so cumbersome and impossible to move in it was only used for shots when Ironman was just standing there and it was CGI most of the time. The Ironman suit with the helmet retracted effect doesn't quite look so well done in this film because it's a new thing their doing so they presumably haven't worked out the kinks to pasting RDJ's head onto a CGI headless suit I guess. But there's no stuntman wearing a suit. It's all CGI.
    • So following that information, if the face looks off then it's the rendering of the green screen or whatever creating the suit. If Robert isn't on set for some reason, then there might be a budget issue. Like any job, if someone is in the place of work then they have to be paid for it. And in a movie, someone is only contracted for a set amount of work - which is what the budget is for. If you need to bring them in for extra time, that's more money to be added to the budget. And when someone's salary is in the millions, that's usually a lot. So doubles and CGI are more cost effective.

    Tony "Stank"? 
  • How does Stan the Mailman not know who Tony Stark is? Tony is Iron Man, publicly funds the Avengers, and is the CEO of one of the largest megacorps in the MCU. Getting his name wrong is like not knowing who Steve Jobs or Bill Gates is.
    • Stan the Mailman is also really, really old. An elderly person forgetting even a famous person's name is not at all remarkable.
    • Just because a person is famous shouldn't mean that you should take for granted that everybody should know them.
    • It's also a Running Gag that Stan Lee's cameo characters are clueless.
    • It really is addressed to "Tony Stank". Steve has a sense of humor and this is a little, friendly, side dig.
    • Or, artistic ability aside, Cap just has bad handwriting.
    • Would Steve have learned cursive in school? A cursive r can sometimes look like an n, and if the mailman doesn't have the best eyesight it's an easy mistake to make.
    • Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 hints that all the Stan Lee cameos may actually be just one guy. Meaning that Stan the Mailman almost certainly did that just to troll Tony.

    Something odd when T'Challa fights Bucky while in civilian clothes 
  • I don't know if I'm crazy and it's just me, but during the fight segment in the movie where T'Challa fights Bucky while in civilian clothes, I noticed something that seemed... odd. He placed his father's ring on his right hand. During the fight scene where Bucky escapes, he fights with T'Challa. There is a moment during their fight where T'Challa grabs Bucky's metal arm one handed and uses his free right hand (with the ring on it) to... point it at Bucky's hand? He is pointing his fingers of his right hand at Bucky's metal hand (as if he's using telepathy or something) and it appears that Bucky's hand is fighting his control, because for a few moments, his metal fingers are doing almost the same gesture. It is tough to explain, but it seemed so off to me, and I've seen the movie twice so there's SOMETHING going on there.
    • I even double checked, during this moment, there is a distinctive electronic whirring sound coming from Bucky's arm. Yes his arm make's a sound almost anytime he is applying real force with it, but this whole moment is focused on that one instant of T'Challa using the force on his hand.
    • T'Challa is not "pointing" at Bucky. He is gripping the wrist of Bucky's metal arm with his left hand while pressing down on back of Bucky's arm near the shoulder using his right forearm. It is a grip designed to push Bucky's body down while using your grip on his wrist to rotate and pull the hand up and back, leaving people in great pain and discomfort (Yes it probably wouldn't hurt for Bucky but a grip is a grip). The grip holds for a moment and Bucky gives an Oh, Crap! look when T'Challa seems to hold him down briefly, showing T'Challa has Super Strength even out of costume. But Bucky is quickly able to rotate his arm properly and T'Challa decides screw it and punches him again.
    • There ewas the hum, and a surprised look on both their faces. It seemed that the ring was reacting to the the arm in some way, that they were almost being repelled as if by same-pole magnets. Perhaps T'Chaka's ring is Vibranium, and some of the components of Bucky's arm are as well, and the two repel each other like magnetic fields. It doesn't happen with Cap's shield and Panther's claws because the Vibranium was fully processed and forged, while the ring seems to be "wrought Vibranium" and whatever's in Bucky's arm may not have been processed correctly by HYDRA.
    • The hum was Bucky's arm — like it always does when he's using more force. Let's please not turn this into another round of "Tony resisted Loki's scepter because of Tesseract energy mumbo-jumbo." There's no indication the ring is anything other than a ring — it looked like he took it from his father, so it's probably more about the kingship than anything else — and Bucky's arm isn't Vibranium at all. If it was, Tony wouldn't have been able to destroy it.
    • As stated a few points above, that probably wasn't T'Challa's ring at all - it's pretty obvious he's just got Bucky in an armlock, and the hum and slight finger jiggle is just Bucky struggling to get free, which is what we're supposed to notice. It's just that the way T'Challa held the armlock meant that his right hand, and by extension, his ring, was in perfect view of the camera, and even worse, was in the centre frame and foreground of Bucky's reaction shot, accidentally drawing attention to it instead of the struggle.

    Bucky's memory 
  • So wait, after Bucky's rampage caused by Zemo, when Steve has him (in the scene where he proves he remembers his past), he asks something along the lines of "What did I do this time?" about the whole fight. However, close to the end he tells Tony that he "remember[s] all of [those he killed while controlled]". So what is it, does he or doesn't he remember after the brainwashing wears off?
    • Maybe the older memory blanks are coming back since he's been free, not having his brain fried and body frozen solid everyday. He had to be writing something down in those notebooks. But his memories are blank just after he snaps out of the trance? Also he was knocked out pretty bad so mundane shock and concussion could be the cause of that loss of memory.
    • Perhaps he never had to be wiped until his confrontations with Steve? Or as said above, the faces are coming back after he's had time to process his memories. Brainwashing isn't necessarily erasing memories; it's just implanting new ones to confuse the mind.
    • Alternately, he's not saying that he remembers the events of his kills, but that he's haunted by the knowledge that he's killed so many people who didn't deserve to die. He can certainly think back to all those times he was unfrozen, and feel bad for his victims, even if his recollection of their names and faces is lost to him. In fact, Bucky may honor them by forcing himself to feel bad for them as a penance, rather than making excuses for himself.
    • Remember the context. Iron Man has just learned that the Winter Soldier had killed his parents and, going for blood, asked violently if he even remembers them. Perhaps he does not, but saying "No, I don't remember any of the things from that video" would simply enrage him even more.

    Cap’s magnetic gloves 
  • In Age of Ultron Captain America had an electromagnet attached to his gloves that let him automatically retrieve his shield when he threw it. Why doesn’t he still have it? There are multiple occasions were he is separated from his shield and has to run and get it (the ones I remember are during the initial fight with Crossbones and when he drops it down the shaft during the fight with Iron Man at the end). Neither of those situations had the shield so far away that the magnet logically shouldn’t work (even the falling shield in the final battle could have been saved if he activated the magnet quickly) and at the very least it would have let him automatically get it in hand if he did need to get very close to it instead of needing to physically pick it up. Why would he abandon something so useful?
    • In the comics, he got rid of it because it upset the throwing balance of his shield.

    Being wanted fugitives 
  • I'm assuming Cap and the others are going to continue fighting crime, but only in secret (similar to A-Team). Problem is, their costumes will give them away, so how are they going to fight bad guys without alerting Ross? They would also have to avoid news vans and reporters. Why not change their costumes? Cap can be "Super Guy", and Falcon can be "Eagle". Would Ross still find out it's them? Superheroes and villains can have similar powers. I'm pretty sure there are other heroes out there that have artificial bird wings, super strength, shrinking ability, etc.
    • Unless they stored their equipment at the Raft, they don't have anything to fight with. Of course, since all of them are most likely in Wakanda, they can make new wings, bows and shield, but not the Ant-Man suit.
    • This is not Earth-616. There are not that many superheroes in the MCU. It is extremely unlikely that the fugitives could continue to fight crime without being identified, especially today when everybody has cameras.
    • The problem is not really that those guys are fugitive felons. The problem is that they use superpowers without oversight. So let's say that a new super group appears, composed by Super Guy, Eagle, Green Arrow, Atom and the Silver Sorceress, all of them completely unrelated to the fugitive Avengers. The options are still the same: register, submit to the Accords, or be captured and sent to the Raft. If they happen to be the fugitives, so much the better for Ross, but if they aren't, they are still subject to the rules.
    • Cap and Bucky have already shown that normal troops are a joke to them. With Tony refusing to stop them no one can do anything to stop them.
    • Well there's some great material for another movie. We'll just have to wait and see.
    • The biggest problem with the Avengers was that they could pop-up anywhere, cause a lot of trouble, and then vanish as quickly as they arrived, anywhere on the world. Without access to the Avengers' resources (which came from the now defunct SHIELD and Tony Stark), there won't be much of that sort of activity going on with Steve's team. At most, they can fight street-level crime, much harder to track down and less damaging, or wait for Tony to call them for help (which will definitely be the case in the next Avengers movie).

    Agent 13's bloodline 
  • It's confirmed during the funeral scene that Sharon/Agent 13 is Sharon Carter, niece (or great-niece, more likely) of Peggy. Problem is, it's clearly stated in Agent Carter (and confirmed in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.) that Peggy had only one sibling, her brother Michael, who was KOA. Sure, Sharon could be related through Peggy's husband, presumably Daniel, but then she would have a different last name. She openly said she didn't want people to know about her relationship to Peggy, so it seems unlikely she would have taken the name Carter by choice. So what are we missing? (Or was this a planned thread for the now non-existent Season 3 of Agent Carter?)
    • Its an unresolved plot from Season 2 of Agent Carter that would have been covered in Season 3. A file, that was supposed to be used to discredit Peggy, was located confirming War Crimes committed by a "So E Agent M. Carter" the problem was the events of the file occurred during The First Avenger when Peggy was already with the SSR so its highly unlikely she did it. At the end of Season 2 Jack Thompson is shot and the file recovered by the shooter. Common Fan theory that the shooter was the very much alive Michael Carter.
    • And we never saw Michael die. All we ever see in the flashback is the police coming to Peggy's house to give her the news.
    • Or her brother got a woman pregnant prior to dying and Peggy was simply unaware. It's not exactly far fetched.
    • For simplicity, Michael Carter might have had a wife and son before his passing(?). Agent Carter never said one way or another whether Peggy and their mother were the only immediately family Michael had.
    • If they happened to be related through Peggy's husband, there's no reason it would be unlikely for Sharon to take Peggy's last name considering it's fairly common, thus doesn't immediately connect her to Peggy and she clearly has a lot of respect and admiration. Plus, she said that to Steve who would have quickly thought there might be connection between the two. And just because she doesn't want people to think they are related, it seems to be more about her career and accomplished being her own, instead of her being known simply as Peggy Carter's niece.
    • If she's related through Peggy's husband, perhaps her original last name could still be Carter through marriage to someone unrelated to Peggy. Carter is a fairly common surname.
    • Sharon could also have only very recently had her surname legally changed (from Sousa?) to Carter as a tribute to her aunt, before Peggy died and now that Sharon has pretty much established herself on her own.

    Zemo's cell 
  • Black Panther stopped Zemo from killing himself so that he could answer for his crimes. So why does he end up in Bucky's electrified glass cell where he could easily make any number of suicide attempts?
    • How? He was completely restrained and if he tried anything he would be shocked unconscious.
    • Well for one, he's in a position to electrocute himself to the point of blacking out whenever he wants. That alone should do a lot of damage to his body.
    • You seriously suggesting that the cell just automatically zaps him and kills him if the wants it? As in, the guys watching him from the cameras don't have any control over it?
    • Any type of stun device is potentially fatal, no matter how low the setting is. For all we know it could just take one shock for his heart to stop. If not, Zemo could easily shock himself repeatedly to try to induce cardiac arrest. The point I'm trying to make is why is there instead of a normal suicide watch jail cell?
    • There's no indication that the zapping happens automatically. There's probably a guy somewhere with a button, who zaps Zemo when the need arises. If he realizes that Zemo is getting too many zaps, he'll just stop zapping him.
    • The reason Bucky's cell is electrified is because he was The Winter Soldier. Zemo's cell doesn't need that same kind of security. Perhaps it's not as high-security. Of course the meta reason is probably because it's more practical to use the same set rather than waste time and money constructing a new one for the sake of one shot.
    • It looks to be the same place that Bucky's cell was brought into. As in, the most secure place they could find. If their security isn't there to watch a man who broke up the Avengers and made everyone chase their tail, I don't know why they even work here. And even if they didn't watch him all the time, I highly doubt they couldn't deactivate the zapping.
    • I'm wondering why the government put Zemo in Bucky's cell at all, other than plain spite. The cell makes sense for Bucky, an enhanced human who could simply brute force his way out of normal restraints. Zemo is just a normal human, there's no call for such elaborate measures to hold him. Sure, his special ops training might mean he'd have knowledge of lock-picking and other escape skills, which would justify additional precautions, but completely immobilizing him inside an electrified box meant to hold super humans seems like sheer overkill.

    Bucky's Programming 
  • Why couldn't they just ask Wanda for help? In Avengers: Age of Ultron, Wanda has been able to implant thoughts in the Avengers' heads and was able to dig into their subconsciousness(es?). Why couldn't she just implant ideas into Bucky's head in order to nullify HYDRA's programming instead of having him go into cryo?
    • Inducing hallucinations doesn't mean she can deprogram decades of mental programming, and there's no logic suggesting that "implanting ideas" would nullify that programming.
    • Besides, there's a solid chance it could just make things worse. What if Wanda accidentally flipped the switch while poking around in Bucky's brain (assuming she can even do that)? All we've seen Wanda do is traumatize people, so it's not a good idea to have her try and fix Bucky's head on the slight possibility that MAYBE she'll do some good this time.
    • Considering that Wanda put a serious whammy on five out of the six Avengers, maybe they're not in a huge hurry to let her go poking around in someone else's noggin?

    Finding Cap at the airport 
  • After Bucky tells Cap about the secret Hydra kill team, there's a scene with Black Panther and Natasha. Panther asks if she knows where to find Cap. She replies "No, but I know someone who does." Soon afterwards we see Cap and his team at an airport, and then Tony shows up with Natasha and Panther and the rest of his crew. But wait...how did Tony find Cap? Did Natasha lead the way? If so, how? Who was the "someone" she referenced, who would be able to help them find Cap? It feels like there's a deleted scene here.
    • It's more that Tony correctly predicted where Cap and his team would go. After all, if they wanted to secure passage out of Germany, they would need an aircraft, and the easiest place to find one would be at the airport.
    • What, so there's only one airport in all of Germany? Heck, how does Tony know that Cap even plans on leaving? At that point, Cap still hasn't told him about the base in Siberia. So for all he knows, Cap just plans to hang around in Germany for awhile.
    • It's not that there's one airport. It's that there's one airport in reasonable driving distance from the prison he took Bucky from. Cap could drive further, but he'd be more likely to be caught. As for why he'd head for an airport, Cap is currently harboring a fugitive. The first thing he's going to do is get out of the country.
    • The scene switch after Nat was talking to Black Panther shows Sharon giving Cap his and Falcon's gear that the CIA took custody of. My impression was that Nat knew Sharon was sweet on Cap and would be willing to smuggle out the gear to help him, Nat may have already figured out that it was Sharon who spilled the intel to Steve on locating Bucky in the first place. So simply place a tracker on Sharon...or say Cap's Shield...and BOOM you know where he is. Even if Nat didn't suspect Sharon, the Falcon's gear is Stark Tech therefore Tony should be able to track it.

    Aunt May's Age 
  • Why does Tony make such a big deal about Aunt May not looking "old enough to be a aunt" as he puts it. While it's true that this portrayal is younger than previous incarnations, the actress was about 50 at the time of filming and in fact a few months older than Robert Downy Jr. That's a perfectly reasonable age to be a aunt of a teenager.
    • You missed the joke. The point is Marisa Tomei is way more attractive than he would have expected.
    • Plus it's Tony being Tony and shamelessly flirting with a woman to get what he wants.
    • It's also a meta-joke about the Spider-Man films, as in each reboot she gets younger and more attractive. Compare Rosemary Harris to Sally Field (a good 19 years younger) to now Tomei.

    Quinjet needs no keys 
  • When Cap's team is at the airport, they were planning to leave via helicopter, right? And then Tony nixes that plan? So then they go for the quinjet. That's Tony's quinjet, right? Because I don't think there's just a random quinjet sitting around in an airport for no reason; it's not like these things are common. And I don't see how Steve has one of his own, either. So this quinjet belongs to Tony, and in fact that's what carried Tony's non-flying allies to the airport. The whole fight scene revolves around getting to the quinjet so we can get to Siberia so we can save the world. But wait, once Cap and Bucky are aboard, how do they fly the dang thing? Doesn't the jet need keys or something? Doesn't it, idk, use facial recognition or whatever to verify that an authorized person is the pilot? Doesn't Tony have remote access (because he has access to all his stuff) which allows him to shut it down remotely? Stealing the quinjet should be impossible.
    • People say this a lot, but fact of the matter is most hi-tech jets and vehicles don't have keys or security protection, with the idea being it's possible you might need that in the air within seconds and the quicker it starts up the better, meanwhile most security forces are capable of repelling anyone who would want to steal it. Tony could have security features installed, but he apparently doesn't since even Ultron with his ability to interface shut down by Vision was able to manually fly the jet in Age of Ultron. And while maybe Tony should have been inspired to secure it because of that, there's also the opposite problem. That they need the Quinjet in the air but the only person able to get to it isn't someone that can bypass the security lock like a civilian or something. Tony clearly is more worried about the second possibility than the first, which leaves it at risk for theft, but there's no perfect solution.
    • He should still install a remote shut-off switch that he can activate from inside his suit. That would enable a civilian to fly the quinjet in an emergency, but it would also allow him to shut the thing down in case of attempted theft. Heck, there are real-life cars that have remote shut-off switches for precisely this reason.
    • This gets even more mind boggling when one realizes that in Agents of SHIELD the Quinjets can be operated REMOTELY, this was a plot point in seasons 1 and 3 of the show Victoria Hand takes control of the Bus in Season 1 post the HYDRA reveal, and Lincoln dies in a remote quinjet in Season 3 after disabling the manual controls. There's no reason why Tony wouldn't have such a safe guard in the Quinjets, especially after Hulk took off in AoU. There is no logical reason why Tony should not have been able to remotely lock out the manual pilot controls, seal the doors and set the auto pilot to take Steve and Bucky to the Avengers Compound, the Raft or anywhere else he wanted. I mean Steve is good, but a technical master he's not he'd have a hard time overriding the controls with Tony and FRIDAY monitoring the quinjet.
    • That's a SHIELD Quinjet — the Avengers model may well not have that feature. Or maybe, having been working directly with the Avengers' Quinjets in general and Tony specifically, Steve was aware of the function and disable it. As you pointed out, a remote control option opens you up to someone else hijacking your ship and, like with the Bus, putting you somewhere you can be shot at. Tony wouldn't want to build in that kind of vulnerability.
    • Most aircraft, even advanced ones, don't need keys. There's maybe a key to the door, probably one to the hangar, but generally turning on aircraft is a matter of a few switches and button presses. Knowing Tony, there's probably some sort of facial recognition or biometric security or something on there, but Tony probably hasn't had the chance to - or didn't want to have to - remove Steve from the list of authorized users.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if not for the Accords 
  • Zemo's stated goal is to make the Avengers implode, not just to ruin the friendship between Tony and Steve. However, it's also clear that he started planning all this way before the Lagos incident happened and the Sokovian Accords were brought to the table. What if the Accords had never happened? In that case the Avengers could've captured Bucky under their own authority, and they would've had the chance to investigate whether he was really guilty, with no internal conflict between them making them highly suspicious of each other. If Zemo had still managed to find the video with Howard and Maria Stark, showing that to Tony might've broken the friendship between him and Steve, but it wouldn't have broken the Avengers.
    • As indicated by the name, the Sokovia Accords began after the Sokovia incident. Lagos didn't need to happen for the Accords to be ratified.
    • It's not quite clear whether that's the case. They could simply be named that because Sokovia was named as the most obvious example of why the UN thinks they're needed, not because they started preparing them immediately after Ultron's attack. If the process had already begun a year ago, the Avengers would have known about it, because such negotiations within the UN are public. But it doesn't even matter when exactly the process began... The Avengers were only informed about it after the Lagos incident, which means Zemo didn't know about it either, and yet his plan was already well underway then. It's quite a Contrived Coincidence the Accords happen just as his plan needs them. What would he have done without them?
    • How could Zemo not have known about the Accords? Everything we've seen from him in the film is that he is ruthlessly cunning and intelligent, and he's most likely spent the last couple of years trying to find any chink in the Avengers' armor.
    • The questions is not whether Zemo knows, the question is whether he knew about them before he set his plan in motion. When the Avengers learn about the Accords, Zemo's plan is already underway. It seems highly unlikely Zemo would have known about the Accords before the Avengers did; decision-making in the United Nations is not secret, and surely Tony Stark has an eye on any committee papers that would involve the Avengers. So the headscratcher is, what would Zemo have done if the Accords would not have happened at such a perfect time regarding his plan?
    • The Accords were probably just a happy coincidence for Zemo that he was happy to use. As Loki and Scarlet Witch had demonstrated, it actually doesn't take much to get the Avengers gnawing at each others' necks. His end goal was always to find a way to fracture the Avengers, and the existence of the Accords most likely just accelerated his plan. His end goal was always to get Cap, Bucky, and Tony into the same room and spring the tape on them. The means of how to accomplish that are more or less irrelevant.
    • What makes you think the negotiations were public? That may be how the U.N. usually works, but there's no reason why the nations involved couldn't just talk to each other privately outside the formal U.N. process. That's probably what they did, and then they only formally went to the U.N. once everything had already been settled behind the scenes. How did Zemo know about it? He's an intelligence officer; he probably wiretapped some diplomatic cables or something.
    • Heck, whatever might be left of Sokovia's government might have employed him in monitoring the Accords' negotiations. They're called the Sokovia Accords, after all: presumably somebody spoke up for the city-state's grievances during those discussions.
    • The events shown by Ross are not recent, they took place in a period of time. It is quite possible that Zemo and the woman that talked early are not lone examples, but that there is a large number of people resentful of the collateral damage caused by the Avengers. If that the case, the Accords would not be much of a surprise: regardless of the when and how, something like that would inevitably happen sooner or later.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if he didn't know about Bucky 
  • Zemo's plan hinges on the fact that Cap has such deep friendship with Bucky that he would do anything to protect him. But how does Zemo know Cap cares about him so deeply? The HYDRA files Natasha released to the internet may have revealed the Winter Soldier's true identity to Zemo (though it seems a lot of information about the Winter Soldier was too classified to be within those files, since they didn't include details on his missions, and Zemo had to question Bucky himself about that). And after learning his identity, Zemo could've found out that Bucky served under Cap in the Howling Commandos (though the official records would show Bucky joined the Commandos only shortly before he died, which would lead one to assume Cap didn't have the chance to bond with him as deeply as with the other Commandos)... But it still doesn't mean Zemo could just assume Cap is so close to Bucky he will sacrifice everything for him. The only person alive who could've told Zemo about their friendship was Peggy Carter, and it seems unlikely she would've revealed such confidential details about the Winter Soldier and Cap to some random stranger, not to mention that Winter Solider showed she had Alzheimers and her condition had probably gotten worse by the time Zemo put his plan into motion, which would have been after Age of Ultron.
    • We see in Winter Soldier that it's public knowledge — through the exhibit on Cap and the Howling Commandos — that Bucky and Cap had been life-long friends long before either of them served in World War II. Zemo could've found it on Wikipedia.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if Bucky doesn't talk to Cap 
  • Zemo's plan also doesn't work if the Winter Soldier and Cap don't have the chance to talk, and Bucky can't tell Steve he's innocent. At the end of Winter Soldier, Bucky was barely out of his brainwashing, so before he swears his innocence there's no reason for Steve to assume he couldn't have been used again to bomb the United Nations meeting. But what if the cops or the Avengers would've caught Bucky first, and Cap, being an illegal vigilante at the time, wouldn't have had the opportunity to talk with him? Or what if the cops had managed to shoot Bucky dead, which they intended to do? There's no way Zemo could've had known that Sharon Carter would give Cap the lead that allows him to find Bucky first. I guess Zemo could've also made Bucky state his innocence when he interrogated him under his false identity, but again, he couldn't have known Cap was allowed to listen to their conversation.
    • Zemo was counting on Cap to protect Bucky. Plus he probably figured that Bucky would be too powerful to be stopped by a bunch of regular cops. Really, the only thing Zemo probably DIDN'T take into account was Black Panther's interference, since Bucky would have most likely gotten away if it weren't for him.
    • How can Zemo count on Cap to protect Bucky? How can he predict Cap will find him before the cops do? He can't know that Sharon Carter will give Cap a lead on his location, and even with the lead Cap arrives there only minutes before the SWAT team does.
    • Because as we've seen so far, the Avengers have had very good intelligence gathering capabilities, being able to regularly track down international terrorists fairly easily. With his foreknowledge, Zemo could very well count on the Avengers or at least Cap to intervene so that Bucky is taken alive.
      • Heck, if Cap isn't getting anywhere in his efforts to find Bucky, Zemo could always arrange to leave him a hint or two.
    • Why does Zemo need Cap and Bucky to talk? Cap already knows that Bucky has been mind controlled in the past. So if Bucky didn't blow up the U.N. building, then Cap wants to protect Bucky because Bucky is innocent. And if Bucky did blow up the U,N. building, Cap still wants to protect him because obviously he was just mind-controlled into doing it, and Cap wants to arrange for Bucky to be cured rather than executed. Regardless, Cap winds up protecting Bucky and Tony winds up attacking him. If Bucky had died, well, that would've messed up Zemo's plan. But there would still be a lot of distrust between Cap and Tony in that case, which would still be a partial victory for Zemo.
  • His plan also doesn't work if Bucky gets away after Zemo talks to him in his cell. If Steve had been late and Bucky had escaped, they would have had no idea what Zemo was supposedly after.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if someone else found the Siberian base first 
  • It seems Zemo found out about the location of the HYDRA base with the other Winter Soldiers from the HYDRA files leaked to the net. However, it's been two years since those files were released. Are we really to assume that Phil Coulson's SHIELD, the Russian government, Tony Stark, or any of the other multiple authorities who would be extremely interested in the content of the HYDRA files hasn't yet managed to decrypt them, but this one solitary guy has? For all Zemo knows, that Siberian base and all of its contents have already been ransacked long ago.
    • Well, if Karpov would have told Zemo what he wanted to know, most of the movie's plot wouldn't have happened. And didn't Zemo ask Bucky for the location of the base?
    • Zemo asked about the Winter Soldier's mission in 1991, to get confirmation that he was the one who killed the Starks. We don't see him asking about the base, but his knowledge of it and of the other Winter Soldiers must've come from the leaked HYDRA files anyway, because otherwise he wouldn't even know to ask about such things. It's not like Bucky had the time to explain the entire history of the Winter Soldier project in the short time Zemo was with him.
    • Well, the thing is that it is heavily implied Zemo was part of or was affiliated with HYDRA at some point, so he would know exactly what he's looking for and have a better idea of how to decrypt HYDRA files. For everybody else, they'd have to sift through MASSIVE amounts of files. For example, the data released in the Wikileaks and Snowden scandals were unencrypted, but sheer amount of data meant it took years for people to really analyze everything. The HYDRA database leak would dwarf all of those combined.
    • How exactly is it implied that Zemo was affiliated with HYDRA, I can't remember anything like that being hinted in the movie? Sure, he was Sokovian and worked in the Sokovian Army, but there's no evidence that everyone in the country or in its armed forces was aware of HYDRA. Remember, HYDRA has a secret base in Sokovia; in order to keep such an operation a secret, the amount of people who know about it has to be limited. If everyone in the Sokovian army knows about the base, the risk of someone spilling the beans would be too high.
    • Because HYDRA was practically running the country by the time the Avengers came to shut them down, as seen by them being able to operate in a massive castle complex without anybody in the city asking any questions. Also, it's implied Zemo knows about or was at least affiliated with HYDRA when he interrogates the Soviet officer, telling him that he has "experience" dealing with HYDRA or at least decrypting their codes.
    • Zemo did not learn about the HYDRA base from the HYDRA files on the internet. The internet files just led him to the agent in Cleveland, and even then I'm sure they didn't say "this guy is in Cleveland". They probably just gave him a few bread crumbs to follow and he eventually figured it out and tracked the guy down. He also knew, from the files, that the guy dealt with the Winter Soldier, and that there was a mission of some kind in 1991. Zemo surmised that the mission was the assassination of the Starks, but he needed more proof before he could get Tony to attack Steve and Bucky. So he went to the guy in Cleveland, killed him when he wouldn't talk, and took the Winter Solider codebook that the guy had hidden in his house. The next part of his plan involved getting close to Bucky, mind-controlling him and asking him questions. That's when he learned the location of the HYDRA base; it was so secret that it wasn't even in the files. The only way to find it was to interrogate a guy who had personally been there before.
    • Zemo said that Hydra deserved to fall. He was not a member of Hydra. But, considering his previous job, it's not surprising that he knows a lot about Hydra.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if Tony doesn't go to Siberia 
  • Once Zemo releases Bucky, he can be pretty sure that Cap and his Avengers will try to follow him to Siberia. But there's no way he could've known Tony will also get there. What would Zemo have done if Cap and Bucky (and possibly some of the others in Cap's team, if they'd not been captured) would've followed him to the Winter Soldier, but Tony didn't decide to follow them (or couldn't manage to track them)? Sure, Zemo's hiding behind a rocket-proof glass, but once he tries to get out of the base (and he has to, otherwise he can't deliver the video to Tony), it'd be pretty easy for Cap and his team to capture him. After that they could either destroy the video, or give Tony the chance to calm down before showing it to him.
    • That's why he deliberately allows the housekeeper to find the psychiatrist's corpse as well as the evidence showing that Bucky is innocent. That information, either through intelligence sources or through Cap's side, was eventually going to find its way to Tony.
    • That information will tell Tony Bucky is innocent, but it won't lead him to Siberia. For Zemo's plan to work, he has to get there almost immediately after Cap and Bucky (and there's no way Zemo can predict the exact time of Cap and Bucky' arrival). If Tony arrives there just a couple of hours later because of some delay or other (if, for example, it takes some time for him to convince Sam that he truly believes Bucky is innocent and isn't just bluffing in order to get Sam to reveal the info on Siberia), Cap and Bucky have enough time to capture Zemo and confiscate the video tape. In short, Zemo's plan depends on perfect timing, even though there's no way he can control the variables that affect the arrival times of Cap and Bucky or Tony.
    • And he can count on Tony arriving before or shortly after Cap because he has clear motivations for doing so. Tony needs to stop Cap before the UN steps in, so naturally he's going to chase down every lead. By knowing Bucky is innocent, that gives him the ammo he needs to convince someone from Cap's side (Falcon) to tell him where Cap was going. Or, Tony could have swallowed his pride, approached Cap, and agreed to go to Siberia with him to stop the Winter Soldiers. Either way Zemo succeeds in getting Cap and Tony into the base.
    • Zemo would have had to be counting on Captain America recruiting allies telling them about the base and them but not Cap or Bucky getting caught and them being in a position where Tony could ask them later. Basically he'd have to be counting on the entire Airport fight going down exactly as it did, which is impossible. If everyone had gotten away, then even when Tony finds out Bucky was set up he's got no clue where Cap went, nobody to ask, meanwhile Cap's arriving at the base with a full Avengers team, and Scarlet Witch and Giant-man smashing the rocket shields apart to get to him. If Cap or Bucky gets caught and a different combination of Avengers show up at Siberia instead, his video is worthless, because Tony either won't have Bucky within arms reach or won't have Cap to set him off by telling him he knew all along. Heck if any other players show up it could ruin everything, as Rhodes or Peter could talk sense into Tony, and Vision or Wanda could restrain him easily unless everyone but Cap and Bucky get caught, and everyone else on Ironman's team is either injured or had to leave for whatever reason like what happened in the movie. And he couldn't possibly have counted on all that.
    • Presumably, Zemo had a backup plan: If anything went wrong, he'd just email the footage to Tony. He probably used a satellite phone to upload a digital copy of the tape before any of the heroes even arrived in Siberia, and he set it up so the remote server would automatically email Tony in 24 hours or whatever. That probably wouldn't lead to the big fight scene between Tony and Steve and Bucky, but it could still inspire Tony to end his friendship with Steve, and then Steve would remain a fugitive, and then the end result is that the Avengers have been split up even if they're not literally killing each other. So yes, Zemo got lucky, but if he hadn't been lucky then his plan still would have been fairly successful.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if Steve was honest 
  • The whole plot also falls apart if Steve HAD told Tony about his parent's murders. He may have not had confirmation that it was Bucky who did it...but he DID know/had very heavy suspicion they were murdered. It was a very common fan theory that Steve did tell Tony about the murders, even if he omitted Bucky's role in the act. This movie shows that he didn't tell anybody about the Stark Murders, and only Sam about Bucky which blew up in Steve's face...big time.
    • Zemo could very well have known that Steve didn't tell Tony because Tony has publicly stated that he believes his parents were killed in an accidental car crash. Steve's reasons for not telling Tony don't matter at that point because Zemo can just use the fact that Steven never told Tony against him.
    • The Deaths of the Starks were front page news (shown by Zola in The Winter Soldier and in the intro/flashback of the 2008 Iron Man) Tony had no need or reason to publicly declare that his parents died in a car wreck in 1991 the world already knew, and had no reason to re-state that fact between the events of Winter Soldier and Civil War. The info about the murders came out in 2014 (to Steve only...maybe Nat as well). It's possible that Howard's role in the founding of SHIELD was not public knowledge after all even Tony didn't know that about his dad until Iron Man 2 where Fury told him. So Tony had no idea his parents were actually murdered until Zemo showed the tape and Steve revealed that he already knew and kept the truth from him.
    • Why should Zemo assume that Cap knows about this at all? He only knows because Zola spoke too much. If he didn't he would have been in the dark about all this as anyone else.
      • Even if Steve didn't already know about circumstances of the Starks' death beforehand, Zemo most likely figured he would still try to protect Bucky since he knows his friend was brainwashed, which would still cause the fight between him and Tony. It was just a fortunate coincidence for Zemo that Steve did know and didn't tell Tony, further dividing them.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if Steve and Bucky didn't take a detour for donuts 
  • So the final act of his plan is this: Tony needs to be standing beside Bucky while the video plays. If he sent Tony the video while Bucky was elsewhere, he may have had time to calm down while searching for Bucky. If he had arrived late, Cap and Bucky might have been able to capture Zemo before Tony's arrival, and Tony would never have seen the video at all. But here's the issue: Steve and Bucky steal the quinjet and fly directly to Siberia. Tony couldn't catch up to the quinjet even as it was taking off, presumably its cruising speed is much faster. Tony has enough time to grab Rhodey, take him in for a CT scan, have everyone detained, visit the prison, talk to Falcon about captain's whereabouts, and then fly to Siberia using the Iron Man suit. And then he arrives mere minutes after Steve and Bucky do.
    • Presumably Steve and Bucky would have had to make occasional stops to refuel the Quinjet, since it's a LONG way from Germany to Siberia. Not to mention, they probably couldn't fly a straight line there in order to avoid air defenses and hostile planes.
    • The Quinjet was able to fly from Sokovia to the US non stop so it likely uses a similar high tech power source that keep the Iron Man suits from needing to refuel very often. Plus it's not like Cap could stop at a secret Avengers fuel depot, because that would be an obvious place to wait in ambush for him. As for going a roundabout way to avoid detection, maybe, but Age of Ultron showed that with stealth engaged even Tony couldn't track the Quinjet and that's how they lost track of Hulk.
    • Maybe after they lost track of the Hulk, Tony did some upgrades on the stealth mode, allowing him to track it while no one else could. Given that as it's already been mentioned, there are no "keys" to the Quinjet, it would put them at a huge handicap if someone was to get a hold of one of them and go around flying and destroying property in stealth mode, so Tony would have had to improve the system. Thus, they had to do some detours or the like to make it harder for Tony to track them in time.
    • Even if the Quinjet didn't make stops, Cap and Bucky are trying to get there low-profile, almost certainly subsonic (do we have any idea on how fast the Quinjet even can go?). Tony's not following the same rules, and as soon as he got the location (either from FRIDAY or if Falcon had the coordinates memorized) he could go full throttle the whole way there.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if he didn't see arbitrary connections 
  • I can accept that Zemo would be capable of studying all of the Avengers carefully and knowing personal details, but the specifics of his plans would require him to make connections between things that don't really have connections. First off, how would he have guessed that Hydra killed the Starks (and that they as a secret organization would have footage or proof of doing such a thing)? Even if for some reason he connected Hydra to their deaths, how would he have known that Barnes/Winter Solder was responsible and (again) that there would be proof? Also how could he know exactly how to leverage the Starks' deaths to break apart the team. I mean essentially if Tony learns about his parents' deaths while the other avengers are around, even the pro-accords gang, they likely would have held him off from acting on impulse until he cooled off. If anyone else found out that information first and told Stark, it wouldn't have had the same effect. The final rift in the team depends on this random piece of information which Zemo seems to have got by guessing there to be connections where there shouldn't be. The movie would have made more sense if he just took advantage of the Accords alone rather than manipulating Bucky and trying to use the Starks' death as fuel for a fire that was already burning.

    Zemo's plan wouldn't work if Tony had simply forgiven Bucky 
  • Yes, Tony was suffering from guilt and incredible stress, was losing the support and respect of the people he cared about one-by-one, had his best friend crippled right in front of him less than a day ago, and then had the mother of all emotional bombs dropped on his head. That would have been the breaking point for a good many people. Nevertheless, people throughout history have proven capable of remaining rational and resolute even in the face of emotional devastation. Tony in particular has showcased the ability to remain focused and functional even under horrific circumstances. You can never reliably force someone to totally "lose it" on cue, yet Zemo was utterly depending on Tony doing just that with near surgical precision.
    • Yeah, and? The plan also wouldn't have worked if Cap had told Tony earlier. Or if Tony had found out another way. Or if Tony had slipped and fallen in the shower and knocked himself out of commission. Any plan is going to have elements of it that you can't control, which is why they're called plans and not "absolute certainties." And, point of fact — Tony's response to someone wounding their friend was, "Hey! Bloodthirsty, murderous, international terrorist! Come at me bro!" Tony, quite simply, is not someone you'd expect to be rational and forgiving about the people he cares about being harmed. It's like saying, "The plan wouldn't work if Cap had killed Bucky." It's just not something you would expect from the character anyway.
    • "Oh, I see, you killed my parents, but were mind controlled. No problem, pal. Those things happen. Try to stay yourself the next time". Honestly, did you expect Tony to react to the reveal that way? Do you expect anyone to react to a similar reveal that way?
    • Actually, yes. At the risk of sounding cold and aloof, people truly are capable of beating down their outrage to do the right thing (or at least refrain from doing the wrong thing) no matter how vindicated that rage may be. Tony has proven to have exceptional willpower prior to now, and while I fully sympathize with his desire to go on a rampage that reaction was far from inevitable.
    • While some people may react that way, given Tony's previous history of reacting when his loved ones are harmed, it seems like a fair assumption that Tony specifically would not react in that particular way. Zemo mentioned that he studied the Avengers in preparation for his plan and certainly he would come across records of the time Tony publicly challenged a terrorist and gave him his address after his friend was put into a coma by a bombing.
    • Honestly, one would expect him direct his rage against the smug sociopath who was exploiting his emotional turmoil in order to use him like a tool (Zemo), rather than vent it all at the obviously remorseful and unwilling participant (Bucky).
    • That's speaking hypothetically from the comfort of behind a computer, detached from the actual situation. You don't know how you'd react in a situation you've never experienced. The whole, "Well, I would have acted perfectly in this situation" argument is not a valid argument at all.
    • You're right; It's Easy to be Brave From Behind a Castle Wall. Yet while others most have would have likely lost control in that a situation, I'm not Tony Stark. The guy has showcased phenomenal determination, willpower, and drive even in the midst of crisis throughout five movies. As hard as it may have been, if anyone could have retained their reasoning, it would have been him. But as pointed out above, Tony has a history of reacting poorly towards his friends and family being harmed, so this may be a case of willingly choosing to give into rage, rather than being overpowered by it.
    • Tony has a terrible history of retaining his reasoning or his temper. Iron Man 2 is two hours of him acting unreasonable because he's dying. Iron Man 3 is two hours of him acting unreasonable because of his PTSD and his friend being injured. In Avengers, he immediately attacks Thor instead of talking things out. In Age of Ultron, his response to having the Vision's creation interrupted is to start a fight. So just where are you getting the idea that Tony would show any kind of restraint whatsoever when confronted with his parents' murderer?
    • We're getting off of the original topic, but to answer you're question, you're confusing restraint and reasoning as the exact same thing. Reasoning isn't determined by what actions you take, but by the clarity and awareness with which you chose those actions. In Iron Man 1 he builds a state-of-the-art weapon "In a cave! With a bunch of scraps!" while mortally wounded, in intense pain, and hounded by men who would kill him without hesitation. Later on he's utterly nonchalant about slipping into cardiac arrest, and later still refuses to panic after Stane betrays him, maintaining the prescience of mind to zero in on the obsolete arc reactor. In 2, he creates a new element by following some extremely obscure breadcrumbs while suffering from painful, debilitating poison, with only hours left to live, and resolves a major crisis in the same afternoon. In 3, he takes down half a dozen hired killers plus a few super-powered individuals with improvised weapons in spite of intense PSTD. In Avengers 1, he hijacks a nuke and flies into vacuum in open defiance of self-preservation, and repairs a Helicarrier while under fire. Needless to say, but few people could have operated under those circumstances without being blinded/disabled by fear, shock, panic, anger, or despair. Remember that this guy isn't a solider, government agent, Norse war god, android, or the Hulk; he's a civilian with no training, special upbringing, or powers to help him to cope with what's going on around him. Sorry about going on a tangent there. Short version; Impulsiveness and rationality are not mutually exclusive.
    • All the above of which are perhaps reasons why the movie goes out of its way to show that Tony's parents are a sore spot that he's never effectively or reasonably been able to deal with. Heck he made a digital reenactment of the last time he saw them alive just to try to confront the issue! One could say that as rational as he can be in trying circumstances, his parents are the one matter he hasn't been able to be rational about.
  • It may be of interest of the OP that this point became an Ascended Meme at How Captain America: Civil War should have ended.

    Sokovians speak English? 
  • This is a minor detail, but it still bugs me. Any time some other language than English is spoken in the movie, there's no Translation Convention, and we get subtitles instead... Except when Zemo is listening to his wife's final voicemail message, which is spoken in English. What's up with that?
    • English is a fairly common second language in many foreign countries. Plus, since Zemo was a high ranking special forces officer, it would stand to reason that his family would be well off enough to afford a decent education. Not to mention, Sokovia appears to have been largely controlled by HYDRA, which is a primarily English-speaking entity, so they could have been encouraging Sokovians to transition to English which would fit into their plans for a unified world order.
    • Second language education is mandatory all throughout Europe and especially in small countries it is quite common that large parts of the population speak a world language rather fluently, simply to be able to communicate with everyone else.
    • Even is Zemo and his family speak perfect English-as-second-language, why would she use it in a private voicemail message to her husband?
    • If she wanted the message to be private and there were other (Sokovian-speaking) people in earshot, switching to a different language they both knew would make sense. Even if the message wasn't particularly sensitive, she might have just not liked having anybody else hear it.
    • Zemo would likely speak English because English tends to be the de facto lingua franca for any sort of international military operation. While its a stretch that he would speak it perfectly, its still possible.
      • Well, the actor is German, so what we hear is actually his second language.
    • For all we know, Zemo's wife grew up someplace where English was the primary language, and she only moved to Sokovia later in life. Perhaps Zemo made a point of speaking to her in English, because that was the language she was most comfortable with.

    The Raft 
  • In the end, how did Cap know the location his teammates were being kept in? And how did he manage to free them seemingly all on his lonesome? Yes, he is Captain America and likely would be able to take down all guards... but wouldn't a prison for such dangerous people have security measures beside them, like doors only Hulk could break through? And wouldn't the guards shoot him... in close range... while he has neither shield nor body armor? Him just showing up like this comes off somewhat Deus ex Machina-ish. On a related note, how did they manage to suppress Scarlet Witch's powers? Did they just pump her full of tranquilizers?
    • The Raft doesn't seem to be a completely unknown facility. When Tony arrives there, he expresses distaste that the Avengers were put there specifically, implying he knows about it. Also, Cap has Black Widow on his side. As for how? What, you assume he just walked in the front door in full view of everyone? He's smarter than that. Scarlet Witch is wearing some kind of collar that's glowing and beeping, which might suppress her powers, and she always makes gestures to direct her powers, which is what the straitjacket is for.
    • Indeed, it's likely that Rogers himself has been to the Raft before, to deliver captured enhanced villains to the facility. The Avengers have presumably had other encounters with supers before, that didn't rate a whole movie, and as team leader Steve is the one who'd shoulder the responsibility for handing over such captives.
    • Its highly doubtful that the Raft is 100% self sufficient, it would need deliveries of food/supplies and staff rotations on a regular basis, either Black Panther or Nat would be able to help Steve work out when and where the deliveries came from, he gets on one of those cargo planes/boats and gets a ride in, now if Steve was successful in K Oing all the guards, preventing a lockdown or launch of the plane that got him there, then getting the gang out of the cells would be almost cake walk. The hard part would be getting off the Raft itself, and hoping that Ross didn't scramble back up to get there. Steve is quite lucky that Tony decided to put Ross on hold there.
    • He's got Black Panther on his side. Black Panther controls the entire Wakandan army, including their version of the CIA. And he's probably got Nat on his side too. So after a few weeks or months of planning, they found a way to deactivate the alarms or whatever. Just because Cap is the only guy we see at the end doesn't mean he's working alone. He could have all sorts of help offscreen.

    Bucky's (lack of) mask 
  • When HYDRA sent Bucky to assassinate Starks they didn't bother to put that mask he had in Winter Soldier on him (or take any means to conceal his identity). Bucky wasn't exactly acting subtle: he simply crashed their car and finished them off. So... why not have him masked? Regardless of how good he is or how meticulously HYDRA planned this hit, you'd think a mask would be standard for him unless he needs to blend in, which is obviously not the case here. Just in case, say, a hidden camera. Did they just want to screw with Howard in his last moments (assuming he wouldn't die from the crash)?
    • It's possible the mask was a new thing for when they realized they were sending Captain America's best friend against Captain America, and wasn't standard issue for all his missions.
    • Probably the above. By '91, the only people who would be all that familiar with Bucky, to the point of recognizing him, would be Howard Stark, Peggy Carter, and potentially any of the still living Commandos. Some people might think he vaguely resembles Sgt. Barnes from the Captain America newsreels, but its doubtful that any of them would assume that he's the Winter Solider.
    • The mask would still be helpful to prevent unnecessary complications at future missions. Say, the tape winds up at SHIELD. Nobody there actually thinks he is Sgt. Barnes, who somehow survived and hasn't aged a bit after 50 years, even if some do note the resemblance. Then, a couple of years later, HYDRA winds up needing Winter Soldier once again, only this time they need him somewhere in a large city. And he can't walk across the street without risking that someone recognizes him as 'That guy who killed the Starks couple'.
    • You're really, seriously overestimating the level of surveillance available. You think any intelligence community is watching entire cities (that they don't know are about to be the location of an attack) for a specific face (that they don't know will be deployed) and can recognize it from early-90s, super-grainy nighttime video?
      • Yes, actually, I do, as that was a MAJOR PLOT ARC OF Winter Soldier. To wit: SHIELD, as controlled by HYDRA, had the intelligence capability to not only surveil millions of people, but also to direct lethal force against them if they stepped out of line.
    • Also this might be the same in the MCU, but the comics used it to Winter Soldiers advantage that this same guy was seen unaging in many assassinations through the years, leaving further confusion as who he was and if he was real (it might dismissed as coincidence if this same 30 something year old was seen looking the same in 1960 as he was in 1991)
    • The attack was done in the countryside, in a remote location with no witnesses. Why bother with a mask? The only one who would see the Winter Soldier doing it were the Starks, who were about to die anyway.
    • Normally, the Winter Soldier stays masked because that's what he's told to do. In this particular case, his HYDRA handlers - who knew that Howard Stark had known Bucky Barnes - probably told him to leave the mask off, because if Stark recognized him, it would leave the man startled and vulnerable, hence unable to flee or activate whatever security devices the Starks' vehicle might've been equipped with.

    Taking Spider-Man abroad 
  • How did Tony Stark took Spider-Man to Germany? He's still a minor. Passport or no passport, he still needs the explicit written authorization of his legal guardian, aunt May. And they made an issue of not telling her (but even if they did, only a Bumbling Mom would allow a children under her care to leave the country with a stranger, even if that stranger is Tony Stark).
    • Didn't Stark tell Aunt May that Peter won one of his scholarships, and didn't he say it includes a trip to Germany with him? It wasn't just "leave the country with a stranger," it's "head to Germany with Tony Stark on a prestigious scholarship/grant opportunity that could have him set for life." She'd be stupid not to let him go.
    • Doesn't it technically count as kidnapping? He transports Peter, a minor, to a foreign country many, many miles away, while lying to his guardian, Aunt May, about the intention of the trip. While she might have approved of a trip motivated by bettering Peter's future possibilities, she might not have approved of the inclusion of her nephew in a physical conflict involving multiple enhanced individuals.
    • The weird part is Tony even asking about a passport, really. He probably didn't use the usual, legal procedure to get Spidey to Germany, they probably just used a Quinjet, and the fact that they're an UN-mandated team allowed them to avoid any problem this could cause. It raises all kinds of questions, though. Did Spider-Man sign the accords (or rather, could he even sign, given his age)? If not, then he's as much of a rogue hero as Captain America, even if he's fighting on Tony's side.
    • Even if they need to get Spidey to Germany ASAP, if he has a passport they can send him home on a regular flight and not tie up a Quinjet.
    • Hm. Fight for the pro-reg side, and get detained in the Raft as a rogue anti-reg hero. That would be the typical "Spider-Man luck".
    • I just figured Tony and Peter flew to Germany on Stark's private jet, and the passport question was Tony joking around. And given Peter's status as a minor and non-Avenger, I imagine Tony would take extra precautions (if only out of guilt or fear) to make sure Peter got home safely before the adults get swept up by Ross's folks.

    Drafting the Accords 
  • Why were none of the Avengers informed of the Accords until they were completed and about to be formally ratified? Since the whole point of that treaty is to put constraints on maybe a dozen people, wouldn't it have made sense to get their input on the issue before saying "sign it or else"? That way they could have learned of the concerns the anti-Accords side had with the treaty as currently written and seen if there was any way to resolve some of those issues before the signing.
    • In real life, the UN would never negotiate such accords without asking the opinion of those involved, or without even informing them at all. In the comic book version of Civil War, before the Superhuman Registration Act was put into power, there were lengthy committee hearings preparing for it, and representatives of the superhero community were allowed to voice their grievances to the committee.
    • The Comic Book also involved S.H.I.E.L.D. trying to arrest Captain America for violating the act...before it was even passed. The writers weren't really consistent regarding the niceness of the government.
    • You're forgetting that the U.N. has been super nice thus far. Here's this team of super-powered people crossing international borders whenever they damn well please, conducting police/paramilitary operations without any authorization from anybody. That is normally not ok!! So after several years of being super-tolerant, now suddenly the pendulum is swinging the other way and the U.N. is getting super-pushy, i.e. "Let's arrange this entire Accord system in secret and then make the Avengers sign it. We have to show them who's boss!". Look at this this way: The world has come close to destruction several times by this point, and people are freaking out. It's not that hard to imagine a sudden irrational swing between "Let's let the Avengers do whatever they want because only they can save us" and "Let's put restrictions on the Avengers right now so they don't get all cocky and accidentally blow up the world somehow." I mean, Tony invented Ultron, right? And Ultron nearly genocided the entire human race. So really, it's amazing that the U.N. isn't being more pushy. It's amazing that Tony even has the chance to sign these Accords and continue his superhero career, rather than getting thrown in prison for "Reckless Endangerment of the Human Race" or something.
    • Tony appears to have had some hand in it — given that he funds the Avengers, he was probably considered their representative during those proceedings.
    • The other thing to consider is look at it from a world order perspective. The Westphalian order holds that only states - IE, the government and bodies empowered by it to perform its will - are the only ones which may legitimately wield force. Mercenaries, the Catholic Church, local tribal leaders who live within states but are not part of its power structure, and so on are illegitimate. The thing is, superpowers and private individuals who can get their hands on super tech is essentially a death knell for that idea. Many governments were freaking out about it so they want to get a lid on it, but the Avengers were able to cut themselves loose from the WSC with SHIELD's downfall and operated independently. Remember, they were originally put together by SHIELD so in a sense were a sanctioned force then, but afterwards that ran out even if it was the WSC that let the cat out of the bag. So now, many governments were probably worried about it and the Accords gave the ones with agendas (what was that Steve said about the Accords?) a chance to try and put the Avengers in a bind where they'd have to submit into the Westphalian world order of a monopoly of force, or become the ones to fire the first shot to justify shutting them down. That's probably what the three days was - to put the Avengers into an untenable position where they'd submit to oversight or be the ones to declare war... wait, no, just brand themselves criminals as the Westphalian world order holds that only states may legitimately declare war. Then the ones with agendas just took advantage of those who wanted to keep a check on the Avengers in case they strayed too far and men like T'Chaka who meant well to be the public face to further put the Avengers into an unholdable position that would force them to sign. Which all of course just makes the Accords even more dubious than they were before, since they were ultimately an ultimatum, not an effort to fix something that could not persist.

    Bucky Barnes and the Avengers - European Tour 2016 
  • Can someone please recap where Buck and the rest went in Europe? (This isn't a mystery; it's just that somewhere between Bucharest, Vienna and the German special forces I lost track.)
    • Opening mission happened in Nigeria, bombing happened in Vienna, Bucky was hiding in Bucharest, they were brought to Berlin and they battled in an airport at Schkeuditz, the confrontation with Zemo was in Siberia.
    • That clears that up, thanks, but it raises the question of why German special forces are operating in Romania. Probably more of a Handwave than a Headscratcher, because I guess that in the movie universe the countries of the Accord are using the best available forces for the job. Also, for the story to work we don't need to see the legal arrangements allowing allow one country's military forces to operate in another country. I also guess that the story uses 'German special forces' as elite mooks, so that the characters are shown having a slightly tough time getting through them, while still feeling obliged not to use lethal force.

    Captain America's strength/fighting ability relative to Iron Man and other supers 
  • One wonders a little about how Captain America goes from being entirely outmatched by Loki, to being more or less even in a one-on-one melee fight with Iron Man (Iron Man being shown to be a little weaker than Thor but still strong enough to hold out against him physically, as well as catch and throw minivans). Certainly some of it can be attributed to several years of extra experience on Steve's part, but that wouldn't actually make him physically stronger or less prone to being Punched Across the Room by a hit that should be strong enough to do so. I'm also aware that Stark uses a different suit in each film, but I don't see anything to suggest their capabilities are so dramatically different by such an order of magnitude.
    • Tony was fighting in a damaged suit with a broken arm. Not only did Cap take out the thrusters, Bucky had begun to damage the arc reactor with his hand before Iron Man blew it off. Tony is also deliberately holding back the whole time to not kill Cap so he's not using his projectiles and probably pulling his punches. Plus, Loki might be weak for an Asgardian, but Asgardians are still stronger than humans. There's definitely a Power Creep with Cap since TWS, though. Better workout routine?
    • Well, my takeaway from The Avengers was that Loki, a relatively weak Asgardian, was still noticeably stronger than Cap. Iron Man, meanwhile, is strong enough to hold out physically against Thor, one of the strongest Asgardians. The rest of that explanation makes sense, though.
    • He wasn't really holding his own. He was tossing Thor about yes, but Thor wasn't even remotely hurt by any of this, where as the Ironman suit was quickly accumulating damage (like the scene where they're struggling against each other, and while Tony is forcing Thor's hands in place the Iron Man gauntlet's are starting to break). And this was done with a 200 percent overcharge from a Mjolnir bolt which isn't the standard power output.
    • Well, yeah, Thor was clearly stronger, but Iron Man was still strong enough to at least temporarily stand his ground against him physically, whereas Loki was just straight-up juggling Cap.
    • Actually Tony was't strong enough to stand up to Thor. At the end of the fight his suit was basically wrecked. Even Tony's best attacks only managed to only to pissed Thor off. The only reason he lasted so long was him avoiding a prolonged fight thanks to Cap. As for the Loki and Cap fight it was an even fight and Cap most likely was focused on keeping Loki focused on him and away from the civilians.
    • Yes, Iron Man wasn't strong enough to stand up to Thor for long and was basically an annoyance. But his suit was not wrecked, just damaged. It got wrecked after the helicarrier incident and but it still was operational. And you consider the Thor vs Iron Man fight uneven but the Loki vs Cap even? Especially when Cap was only barely able to hurt Loki once while his attacks where completely ignored otherwise and Loki was taking zero effort in smacking Cap around, while in the Thor vs Iron Man fight while outmatched Iron Man was clearly strong enough to hurt Thor and was much more of an annoyance towards Thor than Cap was to Loki. And ""keeping Loki focused on him"" argument is weak since the civilians had already cleared out of the area and it was just the two of them left.
    • Iron man didn't hurt Thor only annoy him. Captain America fight with Loki does not provide data on his ability as the fight didn't finish and no one came out on top. Another factor is experience, compare the fighting style of WW2 Captain America to one who has extra training thanks to SHIELD and his years as an Avenger. Then you see that Cap Power Base is formidable thanks to his strength and skill set.
    • Now this is crossing into Flame War and YMMV territory. Iron Man's attacks were definitely having more of an effect of Thor than Cap's attacks did on Loki, even before Thor's lightning supercharged him. Now arguments can be made that Cap would do better against Loki from how he improved in the later movies, but as it is, in the Avengers movie, Iron Man looked much better against Thor than Cap did against Loki. And what the hell is Power Base?
    • In cinematic terms, Joss Weadon actually apologized for making Cap too weak in Avengers. His far more impressive feats in his second film were a result of that, to show just how good he really is. And he's still clearly not up to Iron Man's level, just look at how many advantages he had in the final fight. Iron Man's suit got damaged early on, it's a close quarters fight, Iron Man is reluctant to hurt Cap, it's two on one... he still only barely wins.
    • And remember, in "The Avengers", Cap had just been thawed out. It was literally his first mission since 70 years of suspended animation. It's probably safe to say he hadn't fully "warmed up" yet.
    • Personally, I can understand Steve managing to keep up with Tony, even damage him with his shield. But the fact that Steve was punching Tony and it was actually doing damage was nonsensical. That suit can take tank shells. Steve's hand should have been a bag of broken bones. I can see him outmaneuvering Tony, but other than his shield I can't see him doing any damage (much like Blonsky vs. the Hulk).
    • Hmm, putting my own two cents in, didn't Cap have that magnetic glove that allowed him to recall his shield? Perhaps the strong magnets were doing internal damage to circuits and delicate machinery inside the suit, whereas only the shield had enough strength to outright damage the outer shells?

    "We are seriously understaffed." Says who? 
  • At the point in which Tony and Widow are planning to bring in Cap, Team Cap is made up of Cap, Falcon, and Bucky. Assuming Cap and Falcon get their gear back, the three of them are still no match for Iron Man and War Machine, never mind Vision. At that point in time they had no idea Hawkeye and Wanda would be joining Team Cap, let alone Ant-Man (whose giant form is the secret weapon in Cap and Bucky's successful escape). Were Spider-Man and Black Panther REALLY needed, from their knowledge and point of view?
    • Black Panther was coming whether they wanted him or not. Spider-Man was brought specifically to non-lethally disable Cap's team. If it had just been the three Tony knew about, Spider-Man could probably have webbed them all up by himself, and definitely with help from the rest of Tony's team.
    • Indeed, the addition of Spider-Man was probably Stark's plan for making the confrontation non-lethal. He may also have intended for Spidey to web up Black Panther if necessary, in case T'Challa tried to make good on his pledge to kill Bucky outright even after the Winter Soldier had been incapacitated. (Remember, Stark hadn't actually wanted Barnes dead until he watched Zemo's video; he just wanted him back in prison.)

    Wanda's under house arrest? Unforgivable! 
  • Wanda's sentiment is understandable, as she's a young girl dealing with insecurity, but even the mature adults treated it like a crime. Heck, Cap's decision to not sign the accords was finalized by her treatment, and Hawkeye acted like he was busting her out of prison, even though parents do the exact same thing under far less serious circumstances all the time! To top it off, was Wanda truly suffering from the house arrest that badly? Did she have a social life outside of the avengers? She was trapped in a mansion, not some dingy trailer or a hole in the wall. It all makes her new-found confidence seem more like a petty temper tantrum.
    • The point was that even if she was held in house arrest in a fantastic compound, it was house arrest. Tony tried to justify it with saying what you just said. But she couldn't leave the place if she wanted to, like when she wanted to go to buy something. It's not okay to lock your teammates up without telling them or talking to them about it.
    • Not being able to buy pizza justifies going rogue?
    • No, not being able to be free justifies going rogue.
    • It was pretty obvious that the house arrest wasn't punishment, nor was it remotely permanent. Wanda was under house arrest because her face was in the media for inadvertently killing a bunch of civilians. Just walking down the sidewalk could have very well incited a riot. She was just there until the media hoopla died down. It was straight up the responsible thing to do, much like how Iron Man shouldn't get drunk and party while wearing his suit.
    • How exactly could she have used that freedom. As stated above, we see no indication that she has a social life outside of the Avengers. While freedom is a strong principle that shouldn't be taken lightly, did she plow Vision through more than a dozen stories on principle alone?
    • How about the fact that she was being held house arrest without anyone telling her and that said arrest was done by the very person who is to fault for the death of her parents? Even she wasn't going to do much outside of the compound, it's a basic right a person should have. Not being able to go anywhere is quite harsh. Not to mention, it's not clear that people would even recognize her. Put on civilian clothes and ta-da, problem solved. At least it worked for Tony, Steve and Natasha. And I think that it was more about slowing Vision down, so far no-one has been able to actually hurt him.
    • The concept of Wanda being under house arrest after her accident is quite sound. She messed up, people got killed by her hand, in any other law enforcement group it's pretty much SOP that if you mess up you get benched till reviews are done and reports are made and precautions are taken to insure it never happens again. Logically it should have been STEVE to tell Wanda that she was benched for the time being till things cool off and she gets better training/testing whatever, not Tony doing behind everybody's back. Tony also brought up a good point in the blow-up at Berlin, Wanda is NOT a US Citizen and in theory the US Government (read Ross) could very easily have her Visa/Passport revoked and Wanda detained/deported and heaven only knows what else he could have done to her. And while Wanda could have handled herself if anybody DID give her crap if she moved around in public, all it would have taken was one more screw up and there would be no way to save her from Ross. Tony had the right idea in keeping her under house arrest, but just handled it badly...Steve gets the side eye because he believe she should only get a hug and a few comforting words because "She's just a Kid!"
      • It may be SOP to bench someone, but I doubt it's SOP to arrest them or confine them to quarters. Maybe confine them to base, if there's a bunch of protesters outside the gates (which wasn't established). Plenty of cops shooting unarmed people in the back who went home to their families that night. Also, worst that Ross could do would be to convince an immigration judge to deport her (which would be like intentionally losing a nuke in this case, so no WAY he's going to do that) or have her extradited to Nigeria for her crimes there. Even no citizens have the same rights as American citizens when they're in this country, other than the right to vote and run for office.
    • I don't think this was supposed to be a unforgivable moment or that we're even all suppose to side with Wanda and Steve. The Russo brothers did say in the past interviews that their goal was to make the conflict more gray and give both sides valid points. The comic tried to do that, but ended up making Iron Man and pro side actions so extreme that all the valid points they brought up got overlooked by fans and painted them as the villains. The movie avoided that and as a result we have people who view Steve's actions as right and Tony's as wrong or visa versa. Personally I see Wanda's house arrest as a perfect example of both sides having fair points and flaws in it. Steve is clearly upset because he feels the action is too extreme. Wanda's actions cost people's lives, but what was ignored was that she limited the loss of life from what it would have been had Crossbones been allowed to explode in the center of a market place. No doubt his own guilt on putting Wanda in that position probably played a part in it. Steve feels Wanda's punishment and the way people are treating her is wrong. Now Tony put Wanda under house arrest because people's anger over the incident, all the things people ignored before (like Wanda living in the U.S. without a visa) are going to be hit hard and used as an excuse to lock her up. Tony found a compromise to keep Wanda safe and with her new family by keeping her confined to the compound, while appease people and governments that something is being done. It is a reasonable compromise. From there we are up to decide who we agree with more. Neither side is clearly supposed to be 100% right or wrong. If you feel Steve and Wanda were being unreasonable that is fine. It is also fine if people think Tony handled the situation wrong or that Wanda has every reason to be upset.
    • While talking to Steve, Tony says that Wanda is "contained", as if she was a criminal or weapon, which is what pissed off Steve more than anything else. When Hawkeye went to "rescue" her, she was hesitant until vision started beating up on Clint, and after she attacks him it became beyond the point of no return. She was completely understanding on why she was kept there, but being under house arrest and not being talked to about it before hand left her upset and hurt over the incident.
    • You can agree with Tony's goals all you want and a lot of the characters probably would have but it is not the goals that is the problem but the methods. No justification can be made for detaining someone without their knowledge or consent and claim benevolent intentions. Tony still tends to fall back into bad habits and this is one of them. Just like with with Ultron, he goes behind his team's back and acts surprised when they are pissed about it. He just can't understand how to be a team player and thinks he needs to micromanage every problem. If he had told everyone his viewpoint, including Wanda, and put it to a vote or discussion, then compromise might have been met that would have worked and made everyone happy. As stated his goals were sound. But he didn't bother cause he might not have gotten his way, which is the only right way. Doesn't really sound like someone really respects the nature of oversight and compromise.
    • A Gilded Cage is still a cage: Unless one would be willing to live one's entire life confined to a single place, even if that place has all commodities one wants, (and if that's the case then one has bigger problems than merely the issue of being confined), and specially if the reason for the containment is because one did the best that could be done in a terrible situation, then one should be able to see Wanda's point. As usual, it's a matter of putting oneself in their shoes and Wanda's POV is far, far more understandable than Stark's, IMO.
      • It's more understandable that you break out of the place that is keeping you from being charged with a war crime? Tony does explain his actions to Steve - "they don't grant visas to weapons of mass destruction!" Wanda's a contentious character to say the least, especially considering she joined the Avengers despite gladly working with HYDRA before, but she's also an adult, despite Steve repeatedly referring to her as a kid. And considering that she caused an international incident (which can partially be blamed on Steve and Natasha for taking her on a live-fire mission when she clearly was still in training and couldn't control her powers) she should be well aware of the fact that her actions are going to have consequences. She stays in the compound, she doesn't get strung up in an international court. She leaves, hey, guess what, she becomes an international fugitive with no papers or resources. Yes, it's a Gilded Cage, although she's not technically even under house arrest - Tony asked her to keep her there until he could douse the media fires. But that cage isn't just keeping her in - it's also keeping a lot of very angry diplomats and world leaders out. Tony is doing damage control, trying to keep the Avengers at least on the board, if limited in the ways they can move, and keeping them from making a bad situation worse. After all, if they keep sending Wanda on missions, she might, I don't know, be involved in half an airport in Berlin getting destroyed.

    I'm not going to kill anyone."'' How? 
  • Bucky promised to make his escape 100% non-lethal. Yet the force you need to apply to render someone unconscious is pretty harsh regardless. Not only is it near impossible to safely and reliably cold-clock someone in the midst of a brutal melee, but different people have a wide range of resilience and tolerance towards blunt trauma. If you resolve to punch your way out of trouble there is no way you can ensure that no one will be permanently injured.
    • Did Bucky actually agree on not killing anyone? I remember Steve saying that he shouldn't kill, but I don't remember Bucky actually agreeing.
    • Bucky's the one who says he's not going to kill anyone.
    • This is just a willing suspension of disbelief you have to accept. Yes superheroes can somehow control their punches to the point where just punching some guys and throwing them around will never ever kill or seriously injure them, unless they specifically try to or use a blatantly lethal weapon. It can't be done in the real world, but this is a movie.
    • That was just Bucky's intention. He will not kill anyone on purpose, and will avoid deadly attacks if he has other alternatives. In fact, during that action sequence Bucky is largely trying to escape, and fights to get his enemies out of his way, not to completely defeat them.

    How dare you treat us like criminals! 
  • Tony gets a lot of flack from Cap's allies after they're imprisoned on the raft in the aftermath of the airport battle. But as Tony himself pointed out they broke the law. Whatever their reasons or motivations, they willingly aided and abetted an international fugitive. What did they think was going to happen after it was over? Did they just assume there would be no consequences for their actions? And yes, Tony did spell this out to them a moment later, but he shouldn't have needed to; the other heroes were intelligent, capable individuals who really should have acknowledged it from the get-go.
    • It's the other way around. Tony couldn't believe his friends were put in the Raft, because it's a prison for criminals. Hawkeye somewhat mockingly points out that they are criminals, what did Tony expect?
    • Got it; missed the sarcasm there. Still, Hawkeye is implying that their predicament was largely Tony's fault, and Pym outright states that you should "Never trust a Stark", even though it was their own choice to become international fugitives. They must have known that by aiding Bucky their incarceration would be pretty much inevitable; even if Iron Man hadn't brought them in, every first-world nation on the planet would have been on their tail (The D.P.R. in Bucharest succeeded in finding and capturing Steve, Sam, Bucky, and T'Challa all in one go in spite of numerous setbacks, proving that conventional armed forces were capable of dealing with them). How was Tony responsible for their own choices?
    • They're not blaming Tony for their choices. They're blaming Tony for creating the situation that the Accords are, and for the situation that Cap was put in.
    • They're blaming Tony for fully supporting a situation where refusing to sign your freedom to operate away and going after a major criminal without a bunch of Government paper pusher's say so makes them criminals despite all the saving they've done. They know why they're there. The point is they believe it's a stupid law that makes anyone not willing to tow the political line a criminal worthy of being locked away indefinitely in sea Alcatraz. And they're turning on Tony for supporting this.
    • The first time watching, I assumed they had been incarcerated for allowing the prime suspect in the murder of a world leader to evade arrest, which has been a serious crime well before the Avengers even existed. Then again, the Avengers have pretty much ignored almost every other law before then; perhaps they could have gotten away with aiding an international fugitive prior to the accords, and that law is only starting to apply to them now?
    • In the case of Scott, he was warned of the risk before the fight, and openly dismissed it. He said he has already been a fugitive before. The thing that he did not realize is that the stakes were now higher. Helping an international fugitive, and running away from a small local prison, are not the same type of crime, and the response will not be the same. Also, remember his fanboyism over Captain America. He must have thought that, even if he was captured, it would be totally worth it.
    • "Never trust a Stark" is probably a catch-phrase of sorts of Hank Pym, considering his long-standing dislike for Howard.
    • They're mad because even after Cap told Tony what was really going on, that Bucky actually wasn't responsible, and they were going after Zemo, Tony refused to listen and helped the government arrest them.

    "I know that road" 
  • Unless I misheard him, Tony says something to this effect when he sees the footage of the Starks' deaths. Wait what? You recognize a nondescript, forested road? That suggests that Tony had seen the footage before, but that wouldn't make sense. What would case Tony to say something like this?
    • It's simply a road that's near his home. How could he have seen to footage before, that makes no sense.
    • He recognized the road where his parents were found dead after their "accident." He would have seen the photos from the accident report and probably visited the site more than once. There's no need for the road to have been near his home (though admittedly there's no reason it couldn't have been near his home, either).
    • The tape was dated. Combine that with the road and Tony's going to connect the dots very quickly.

    Why didn't Cap just lie? 
  • Tony watches a VHS tape of his parents being murdered by someone who happens to be in the room next to him, and said tape was offered to him by someone who clearly doesn't like him. Even if for someone so impulsive that can't seem like just a coincidence, especially if the tape belongs to an organization that secretly murdered his parents (why would they basically incriminate themselves?). Couldn't someone have suggested that the tape was altered for the sole purpose of making them fight each other?
    • Because Cap doesn't want to lie to Tony about it. He's honest, even if he didn't tell Tony about it before. It's one thing to not mention anything and another thing to flat out lie about something that he knows, or at least highly suspects, is true. I don't think that it would have been plausible for Zemo to go through that trouble just to show them an altered tape. Not to mention it most likely was on a tape, considering how old it was.
    • And he's a terrible liar. Not talking period, he can do, but there was no way he could have effectively lied to Tony about that being fake, especially given the reaction of Bucky.
    • As mentioned above that's just the kind of guy Cap is. He's honest to a fault. It's the same reason he didn't just sign the Accords to shut everyone up with the intention to just go behind their back whenever he feels like it. If he's gonna commit to something like that he's gonna mean it. He tried to deflect the question with a half truth "Well I didn't know for sure it was him" (but he clearly put the dots together) but couldn't outright lie to Tony's face about it.
    • Steve starts to try to lie to Tony, but Tony cuts him off, telling him to not bullshit him. Steve's not the kind of person who can look a man in the face and tell him a blatant lie, not without it being obvious.

    Wanda's decision to become a fugitive 
  • Wanda was pissed about being put under house arrest without pretense. Fully understandable. This becomes her primary motivation for going rogue. But if her freedom meant so much for her, then why did she indulge in criminal activity that would guarantee her imprisonment? She wasn't just breaking curfew to go on a bar run, she was chucking cars left and right at a major airport, in open support of an international fugitive! If her desire for freedom and her indignation at her imprisonment were what compelled her to go rogue, then why did she trade house arrest for real arrest?
    • When people break the law, they're not thinking, "I'm going to get arrested." Or they think getting arrested is a risk worth taking. She didn't "trade house arrest for a real arrest," she traded house arrest for helping out a friend who needed her for a cause she believed was worth it.
    • Wanda's primary motivation for going rogue wasn't because of her house arrest. Remember Clint had to convince her to leave first of all, which wouldn't be necessary if Wanda wanted to leave. What was keeping Wanda at the compound was her own guilt for the lives she unintentionally took in her last mission and the realization that people fear and hate her for what she can do. Clint convinced her to let that go and try to make up for her mistakes/failures. Wanda helped Steve, because she thinks it is the right thing to help her friend when he needs her help. That is also why Wanda willingly agreed to stay behind (and get captured) to buy Steve and Bucky time to chase after Zemo.

    Were Hawkeye and Scarlet Witch trying to kill Tony? 
  • The part where Hawkeye caused a bunch of cars to fly out of a building and hit Tony looks dangerous as heck. Did he know Tony can survive that? For a guy who has respect for Tony, it sure looks like he's trying to kill him. I understand Hawkeye having to fight a comrade to help another comrade, but I wouldn't go as far as to drop vehicles on my friend's head, armor or not.
    • First of all, it was Wanda who dropped all the cars on Tony. Second of all, they're all Avengers and have all seen in other in combat multiple times. It can be safely assumed that all of the regular Avengers are perfectly aware of just how much punishment everyone can take.
    • Hawkeye knows for a fact that Iron Man's armor has survived being swallowed by a Leviathan and then blasting his way out of its gut. He knows that it's survived being at ground zero when Sokovia exploded. A handful of cars is nothing compared to that.
    • Funnily enough, the cars falling on him slowed him down more than the other two. Funny how that works
    • Not really. The Leviathan swallowed him whole, so there was no risk of getting chewed up. And wasn't Tony not actually on Novi Grad when it blew up?
    • If Wanda had wanted to kill Tony, she would have grabbed him and slammed him into the ground over and over until he stopped moving; throwing cars at him is paltry compared to what she could've done to him. That she didn't do that or, for that matter, that she didn't use her telekinesis or her telepathy to keep the entire pro-Accords side immobile is probably the biggest plothole in the airport fight.
    • We're talking about Hawkeye, who detonated two exploding arrows in Black Panther's face without knowing if they would blow the man's head off, and Scarlet Witch, who flattened Black Widow and chastised Hawkeye for "pulling his punches" when fighting his best friend. Clearly causing injuries to coworkers is not a concern.

    Bucky's normal arm strength 
  • Its pretty clear Bucky's normal arm and by extension the rest of the body has some degree of super strength, as shown by him hoisting up Black Panther by the neck during the highway chase, but did it make sense for him to overpower Iron Man so decisively despite Iron Man having a leverage advantage in the final fight?
    • Bucky's strength comes from Soviet/Hydra super-soldier serum plus training plus cybernetics while his brief combat advantage over Iron Man comes from being a skilled and dirty fighter plus cumulative damage to Iron Man's armor. All handwaves of course, but that's how the writers end the story with a stand up fight instead of a beat down.
    • Yeah, but sometimes things go beyond a handwave. Like here where he grappples with Iron Man, or here, where Iron man can't even budge his arm. You can see clearly in both these pics where Iron man has grabbed his normal arm but if he cannot even budge it Bucky must be hilariously stronger than Iron Man
    • We don't have a very clear idea of how much the suits increase Tony's physical prowess. Sure, he does quite a few feats of strength that go way beyond what a human being (specially one that isn't actually very strong) should be able to do, but the suits' main assets have always been their weapons.
    • He has caught a falling car, and bench-pressed its rear side (while low on power) punched people through walls, pulled people through concrete, shoved his head through concrete, send a car skidding with a shove of his foot, dented steel doors and kicked them off hinges. The suits strength and weapons are equally assets imo.
    • It's also a mechanical suit, not something that gives him innate super strength like Hulk or Thor. It's got super strength if the thrusters and pistons are firing in the right direction, but get at the right angle and it might not work. Bucky's not grappling with him head on like Thor did in Avengers, he went from the side and forces the wrist upwards at at angle where none of the parts that generate force can push against him.
    • I serious doubt that's the case. Especially in the second gif where Tony has grabbed Bucky near the elbow, he would have no problem using his strength to push forward

    Why call the villain Zemo? 
  • Movie Zemo and the comic Zemo don't seem to have anything in common. Why call him Zemo if his backstory is completely different? They could have just called the guy Bob Smith. The idea that an ordinary, powerless man is able to manipulate the supers from the shadows is already interesting. He could have been a made-up character, and the film would still be fun and interesting to watch.
    • Because Zemo's a Captain America villain and they want to use a hero's villains in their movies.
    • Publicity stunt? I wholeheartedly agree he shouldn't have been called Zemo and be a In Name Only version.
    • Probably because they still wanted to use Baron Zemo, but re-imagined him give him a more personal connection to their story, while adapting what they felt were the most important traits of the character; his You Killed My Father-vendetta against Captain America, his anti-villain role, and his strategic intelligence. They lost everything else they didn't like or felt was unneeded, which is pretty much the norm for MCU movies. It is also important to remember that Zemo survives the film; there are most likely plans to have Zemo return and embrace more of the traditional elements of the character. One complaint about MCU villains was they don't have enough time to be fleshed out, so perhaps Zemo is meant as a solution to that by spreading out his appearances and evolving the character. I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere down the line we see Zemo becoming a swordsman and acquiring a version of his comic costume.
    • Also this version of Zemo could also be counted as a more updated version of the character. Retaining the characters intelligence and planning ability. While leaving behind the more convoluted backstory and motivation.

    How does oversight help the problem of civilian casualties? 
  • The accords are ostensibly to limit the Avengers' power, thereby preventing civilian casualties like the ones in Lagos and DC and New York. Okay, fine, I can get behind that. ....but nothing about the accords actually *does* that. Even if everyone signed and agreed to UN control (all problems with that aside), imagine that tomorrow, the UN says, "Go out and defeat ISIS." The UN making that decision (rather than Steve) does nothing to limit casualties. It's still the same Avengers with the same fighting style. And imagine if there *are* a lot of civilian casualties - would they stick the Avengers in the Raft for collateral damage? Not even current UN regulations (to which the US is not a signatory, by the way) make collateral damage in and of itself a crime. How do the accords accomplish anything?
    • It was probably to assuage the public. Maybe.
    • Technically, the problem isn't the civilian casualties, it's civilian casualties caused by an extra-national group that answers to no one. If a cop accidentally kills a civilian in the process of taking down a murderer, that's bad. But it's worse if it's some random vigilante who does it. The cop has superiors who can look over the situation, decide if he was at fault, and if he needs to be punished. Likewise, he has superiors who sent him in in the first place. The vigilante doesn't.
    • They could order the Avengers to attend training sessions where they would (hopefully) learn to fight more efficiently, thus preventing some of the civilian casualties. They could get conventional forces to evacuate civilians whenever the Avengers deal with a nearby supervillian. They could order the Avengers to stay out of a situation where the civilian death toll would be too high. ("Wait till the bad guy leaves city limits, and then take him down.")
    • Essentially the accords are just a formality. There is now public outrage over the amount of destruction the Avengers have caused, and the UN wants to look like it's doing something as damage control. If the Avengers were under their control, if a situation arose where they could potentially be needed, they would have to go through a lot of channels to make sure they're covered legally in case of casualties. People at the top would have to approve sending them out.

    Ross's Role 
  • Where exactly does Ross fit into the Accords? He says that the Avengers will operate under the supervision of a United Nations panel, but he's the one who seems to be calling the shots.
    • Maybe he's just the head of the UN panel. Or Since the Avengers are based in the US, Ross as Secretary or State is the one that has to watch over them and give them their orders.
    • I got the feeling that since Avengers operate within the U.S. that Ross was the go between until they found a UN agent to be Avengers liaison.

    Vision's Math 
  • At one point the Vision says that the correlation between the increase in super humans and disastrous events imply a causation... except that one of the basic rules you learn when studying statistics or experimental studies is that correlation does not automatically imply causation. For all the Vision - or anyone else who came to that conclusion - knows, the disastrous events could be leading to more people revealing that they are super humans in an act to try to prevent/mitigate said situations, or a third variable could be causing an increase in both. Or they could have literally no influence on each other at all. Why would the Vision not know something so basic? Why would Tony, who surely knows this, or one of the other characters, not mention this?
    • Watch the scene again, his exact words were "...there may be a causality. Our very strength invites challenge, challenge incites conflict, and conflict breeds catastrophe." He neither said nor implied that there was a causal link (that was Steve putting words in his mouth), he clearly understands that correlation does not imply causation, and he at least provides a plausible explanation by which there could be cause and effect relationship between the two.
    • Remember that Vision is still a one year old creature, still struggling to understand the world around him. Math is a hard science (perhaps "The" hard science), it works with a limited number of rules and there are no external factors that influence the outcome, so he can easily master them. But the interpretation of the statistical data (such as the existence of causality or lack thereof) is a social science, not so precise, and he won't master it so quickly. However, it still counts as an educated guess, it is still a legitimate point for the conversation, even if not 100% certain.
    • He only says that there "may" be a causality. He's not certain about it.

    Does this premise seem flimsy to anyone else? 
  • It seems like the world was content to accept collateral damage from the Avengers'... eh, avenging, until the king of Wakanda steps up and throws a massive fit because 11 of his countrymen were killed in the latest collateral bundle. Eleven. Maybe I'm being callous, but cry me a river. Yeah, I get that your country is tiny and all and your population maybe hits five digits if even, but you chose to step on the playground. You knew dodgeball happens on the playground, so you shouldn't get to whine when the ball hits you.
    • Actually, it seemed clear that a lot of countries were getting more and more worrisome with the Avengers' actions; you don't get 140+ countries to support the Accords just because eleven people of one country were killed. After Age of Ultron, every country out there is wondering if they're going to be next, and Nigeria just showed that it doesn't have to be a flashy high-profile incident to drop a half-dozen super beings on your doorstep. The king of Wakanda simply became the spokesman for the international drive behind the Accords because they were the latest victims — their Vibranium was the catalyst for Ultron's plans and their countrymen were among the casualties of the Nigeria explosion.
    • How did they choose to step on the playground? Wakanda didn't send soldiers into an active superpowered battle, they sent aid workers and the battle found them so to speak. And Seeing as Ross plays a big part in the Accords, and the above comment, I took it more as this was the final act that pushed the world to demand oversight.
    • Truth be told, it's mainly politics looking for someone to blame for all the death and destruction. The Avengers are the perfect scapegoats, since they were involved in all four of the events that Ross points out. Of course, like most politicians, they're quick to blame the Avengers while not really acknowledging that not only were the Avengers not responsible for any of those attacks (the only one that could really be blamed on an Avenger is Ultron, and even then, it's not like Tony intentionally programmed Ultron to be genocidal), but that they were only reason the death toll and destruction wasn't worse! For New York, it's not like the Chitauri were just going to stop murdering civilians if the Avengers just asked nicely (not to mention, the government's first reaction was to nuke the city, which definitely would've killed way more people). In Washington, HYDRA was seconds away from murdering seven hundred thousand people on the Eastern Seaboard, with their end goal being the deaths of 20 million people. Ultron's endgame was the death of the entire human race, and it's not like the Avengers just decided to blow up the city with all the people still on it. Hell, they went out of their way to save everyone still in the city, whereas the governments would've probably just nuked it outright if they had the chance. As for Nigeria, while it's easy to blame Wanda for the death of dozens of people, but when you look at the crowd of people in the bazaar and how big the explosion was, you realize that Wanda likely also saved hundreds of lives with her actions. Short version, the governments are mostly ignoring the good the Avengers have done while focusing on the negative aspects of their conflicts, but that's politics and public perception for you.
      • Actually the Hulk attack in Johannesburg is a pretty good argument for the Avengers needing oversight given it was caused by Wanda who while not an Avenger at the time, is one currently.
    • Truth be told you shouldn't NEED a reason to have the Avengers under some sort of official oversight. Which would be easy if S.H.I.E.L.D. officially existed in this universe. No country on Earth would actually let the Avengers just do what they want. When you start a country literally the first rule is that you have a monopoly on legal violence on your soil. Cap's argument about 'what if they don't send us in?' is actually a bit scary in context. I can't find a way to translate that into anything but he'd ignore the wishes of a sovereign government if he thought it was the right thing to do. Which he immediately does. Worse and the movie mostly glosses over this the Avengers are effectively an American military Super Unit. I've heard that other countries don't always love how Americans impose their will around the globe.
      • Yes, Cap is saying that he would ignore the wishes of a sovereign government if he thought it was the right thing to do. But in his defense, sometimes sovereign governments do bad things. Sometimes they even get infiltrated by HYDRA or whatever. Also, the Avengers are not "an American military Super Unit." Yes, they're based in America, and yes, they have incredible power, but they don't actually take orders from the Defense Department. They choose all their own missions for themselves, which really makes them a Super Vigilante Group. Now, is it true that other countries will be mad at them regardless? Of course! That's why they drafted the Accords.
      • The problem with the Accords isn't that it provides oversight, if that's all that it was Steve and likely everybody else would have signed it without a problem. The issue is that the Accords give the UN the power to control whether the Avengers and likely others can be superheroes AT ALL. The Avengers are a crack team of superheroes specifically created for and regularly come into situations where it hits the fan so badly that some collateral damage is nothing compared to what would happen if the Avengers did nothing and they are the only ones who can do anything, just like the whole situation the movie starts with. The whole point of the Avengers is that they are the ones who come in when there isn't any time to wait for a bunch of politicians who can't even tie their shoes without having a several hour long debate or firepower and skill to deal with the problem in any other fashion. If the Accords were signed by all the Avengers they would be effectively destroying themselves and likely the world in the process by defeating the whole point of the group, and eventually the world would be destroyed because of one time the UN wouldn't let the Avengers act.
      • The whole idea of "Cap knows best" only work because in superhero movies the heroes are always right all the time and the official authorities like governments and police are dumb-dumbs. Look at the Avengers: they knew the Chitauri will be invading if Loki succeeds and yet did not even try to put the National Guard, the police, the Army or ANYONE on alert about it (even though normal guns are clearly effective against them as showcased by Black Widow). Oh yes, Ultron would have wiped out everyone on Earth if not stopped but if they had oversight, maybe someone higher up would have stopped its creation in its tracks or at the very least limited the scope of the experiment. The problem with these movies is that for them to justify the superheroes they need to make it so that punching people in colorful costumes is the only logical choice - no matter how illogical it is when you actually think about it.
      • You've got it backwards though, the heroes aren't right because they're heroes but rather they are heroes because they are right. Other superhumans exist in this setting and we get to see how many of them choose to use their power for selfish and destructive reasons, The Avengers are our protagonists precisely because they could do the same but choose to spend their time stopping these villains instead. When the next Thanos strolls into town what exactly do you expect any mundane government to do in response? Which honestly raises the bigger issue of the premise in this movie, what are the consequences even supposed to be if they don't agree? Yes, they are a stateless figthting force but that's because in spite of their size they are essentially more powerful than any state. The discussion of the Accords is only on the table because the Avengers are nice enough people to humor government authority, but if they did happen to decide that supervillainy (or at least superneutrality with intermittent acts of vigilante heroism to protect their own interests) would be less of a hassle there's realistically nothing anyone could do to stop them.
      • Sure there is. They're not invulnerable — with one or two exceptions (most of whom are not present in this movie), they're all susceptible to things like bullets and explosions. Captain America is tough, but not bullet- or explosion-proof. Tony is a normal, baseline human. Scarlet Witch can only defend by actively using her abilities. Do you think Cap would spend half this movie running then have to hide out in Wakanda if no mundane forces were a threat to him?

    Wanda's punishment 
  • Wanda is imprisoned under house arrest for accidentally killing several people (and undoubtedly saving dozens more), yet she was able to join the Avengers after intentionally unleashing the Hulk on Johannesburg? And causing who knows how many casualties there?
    • She wasn't officially under house arrest. Tony told Vision to keep her there until things settle down. Legally, Wanda was never touched until she was arrested after the airport fight. It wasn't about punishing her, but making sure a tense situation didn't get worse.
    • Does the public know that she had influenced Hulk that time? It could have been easily understood as "Hulk is on a rampage, period". It isn't as if going in such rampages was to be an unexpected behavior from him.
    • Does it matter if the world knows? The Avengers know, and they let her join them with no punishment for her crimes with HYDRA/Ultron.
    • It seems like the creators of this film intentionally ignored almost everything about the character from the movie where she was introduced: no mention of her brother or her being Sokovian, no more telepathic powers, and especially no mention of the morally questionable things she and her brother did in the first half of the last movie. Continuity in the MCU seems to be done in Broad Strokes, especially when the creative teams change.
    • You could Hand Wave it, though, by saying that the last movie never made it clear that they intentionally unleashed the Hulk (it was offscreen, and the scene was so confusing we never really knew what they did to him or why) and Tony Stark wouldn't care to have her actions known because then his own crimes against humanity would also be known. It's not a very good explanation, but it's more than the new team is ever going to give us.
    • In fact, that would actually make a lot of sense. When Wanda unleashed her telepathy on the rest of the Avengers, they were all dazed and powerless to actually do anything else. Presumably, when she went after Banner, she thought the same thing would happen (though Ultron probably knew otherwise). As shown in both earlier and later parts of the movie, the Maximoff siblings would rather avoid innocent casualties, and when Banner confronts her about it later, she does seem genuinely remorseful about unleashing the Hulk. Granted, we don't actually see her explaining all this, but it was probably cut out of the film for pacing reasons.
    • The fact that she's Sokovian and thus doesn't have the protections of a US citizen in America is mentioned.
    • The way Age of Ultron played out Wanda and Pietro were seen as misguided kids by the team that some of them (Cap and Hawkeye) were trying to get them to see the error of their ways. When the twins fought alongside the team and were willing to sacrifices their lives to fix their mistakes it was enough for them. Wanda was given a second chance by joining the Avengers and working toward atonement. This similar to what Clint did for Natasha in the MCU. As for this film intentionally ignoring Age of Ultron with Wanda I think it was a case of not being able to dive in depth with Wanda in this film and the fact that a year in universe for the characters. Wanda not mentioning her brother in this film could be a sign of her overcoming her grief. Her not using her telepathy could be her pulling her punches. Mentioning her action in Age of Ultron wasn't really necessary. Wanda already felt bad for mistake in Civil War. Bringing up her hand in the Ultron incident wasn't necessary for the story or her character arc.
    • What exactly does punishing her accomplish? If anything, joining the Avengers is a good way of making her atone for what she's done. She's put to work using her powers to help others. So being part of the team keeps her off the street and ensures that she's not using her powers against anyone - only to help.
    • While they don't directly mention Wanda is from Sokovia or Quicksilver's death, there are references to it. Her reaction when Sokovia is brought up, for example, plus the presence of a bunch of pictures in her room of Pietro show that much.
    • The Government in the MCU is in the habit of recruiting defectors all the time e.g. all those HYDRA scientists who almost certainly contributed to the deaths of countless innocent people. The Avengers doing that for Wanda isn't really much different. She's powerful enough to be a valuable asset to the team, especially since she helped mop the floor with Ultron. And considering the Avengers were about to be placed under the control of the UN due to the Sokovia accords (assuming some time passed between the actual Battle of Sokovia and the scene where we see Cap calling the new team together), The Avengers might have been encouraged to take her on by a government looking to get the incredibly powerful Scarlet Witch under their thumb. And she did get a proper redemption arc. It was in Age of Ultron: She started as a straight-up antagonist, developed into an Anti-Villain when we learned her motives, then became a full-on hero when she realized she had messed up, felt bad about it, and helped fix it, saving innocents in the process. Her Naïve Newcomer qualities are due to the fact that she's A) relatively new to the whole "hero" thing and B) still learning how The Avengers operate. If her seeming Incorruptible Pure Pureness bothers you, think of it as her trying too hard, acting the part of the hero she wants to be.
    • We're making the assumption that Wanda intentionally released the Hulk on Johannesburg, but really it's just the writers looking for an excuse to have a Hulk rampage. As mentioned above, it can be argued that Wanda didn't actually want to unleash the Hulk, but even if she did, why would she send him to a city that's miles away, instead of, oh I don't know, siccing him on the mostly catatonic Avengers? You could say "to distract Tony" but I think trying to stop Hulk from killing his teammates would keep him plenty distracted as well. And from what we've seen of her character before and after, she clearly doesn't want innocent people to get hurt which was why she and her brother abandoned Ultron. So yeah, we can chalk the inconsistency to the writing in Age of Ultron.

    Zemo killing all winter soldiers  
  • Seriously, what was the point on Zemo to murder all the winter soldiers and just keep Bucky alive, wouldn't letting all the winter soldiers alive and do their job have made his evil plans more efficient? Or at least what was the necessity to do it? It's not that the rest of the soldiers were blocking his plans, right?
    • He explains that he thinks they're abhorrent and he didn't want them to "do their job." Having a bunch of unstable, uncontrollable killing machines would not have in any way helped anything Zemo was doing in this movie, and he considered them an abomination. He explains this in the movie.
    • The meta example is to prevent him from looking too sympathetic. He casually murders about five defenseless people, victims of the same brainwashing Bucky was. He is the villain of the film after all.
    • Highly unlikely it was anything to do with Meta. As Zemo said himself he wants to punish the Avengers in a way that they cannot defend themselves against. Physical threats they can beat, so the soldiers where of no use to him they where only a lure. He intended to break their hearts, their connections with one another. He did not need the soldiers for that , only a video. As seen in the movie while capable of multiple murderers in his quest for vengeance Zemo remained a practical and efficient intelligence operative throughout. Also as a victim of enhanced humans in combat he may inclined to put down superhuman berserkers before they go on a rampage and kill others.
    • You're forgetting that the other Winter Soldiers were all uncontrollable; that's why HYDRA froze them instead of sending them out on missions. If Zemo woke them up, they'd just go crazy and kill him. So really, in addition to his general anti-Metahuman feelings, killing the other Soldiers was an act of preemptive self-defense.
    • His only evil plan was to make the Avengers turn on each other. He did that by making Bucky the point of contention, by making Steve go against the Accords out of his loyalty to his friend on the one thing that would drive them both to ignore all the consequences - HYDRA having five more of the Winter Soldier. Frankly, if Tony hadn't asked Sam what they were up to and then shown up, his whole plan would have fallen apart, but he never intended to use the Winter Soldiers at all. In his eyes, destroying the other Winter Soldiers would probably prevent more catastrophes like the one that killed his family.

    Tony removing memories? 
  • This is driving my crazy. I remember Tony mentioning at the start that his "memory machine" (for lack of a better name) could be used to remove or manipulate traumatic memories from an individual, but at no point is this ever brought up again or even alluded to for the possibility of fixing Bucky's emotional trauma.
    • He never has a chance to do it. Tony never knew about Bucky before until by the time Civil War took place, so he has no particular interest in the guy. After the Bucharest skirmish, Tony was going to send Bucky to an asylum in USA so maybe he could try to fix his memories later. But Zemo's plan ruins all that. By the time of the finale where Zemo revealed what Bucky did to Tony's parents, it's all over.
    • That's not actually what the machine does. It just uses your memories to construct a scenario that you can manipulate. It's a super high-tech therapy session. Tony even pointed out that it's laughably impractical, and no one in their right mind would have ever backed it. So using this thing on Bucky would help, but it's far from a magic fix.
      • Notably, the machine hasn't even fixed Tony's trauma (at least not completely). He still freaks out at the climax and tries to kill Bucky, despite the fact that Bucky was brainwashed and Tony was shown to know it. He even tries to kill Cap, just for being on Bucky's side!

    Why didn't Vision just shoot the Quinjet? 
  • I'm crediting this idea to Civil War's HISHE. The scene where Steve and Bucky are running toward the parking Quinjet in a hangar, Vision could've just shoot the Quinjet instead of destroying the Control Tower to unsuccessfully obstruct Steve and Bucky's path, causing unnecessary collateral damage in the process. So, why didn't Vision do that in the movie?
    • Because those things are expensive.
    • And the Control Tower isn't?
    • In comparison, no. I doubt the tower has all the hyper-high tech elements contained in a quinjet.
    • It's still unnecessary collateral damage, and an uncharacteristic display from Team Iron Man given their stance on the Sokovia Accords. Quinjets can be easily replaced given Tony's wealth. Plus, destroying the Quinjet completely ensures that Steve and Bucky won't be going anywhere. Sure, it's Team Iron Man's Quinjet, so it means they're gonna stuck there at the airport, too. But given that the remaining of Team Cap was transported to The Raft without further incident despite Steve and Bucky having stole their Quinjet, I'd say destroying the Quinjet is a better than destroying the tower. But then again, if it was the case, we wouldn't have the climatic Siberia part. Still doesn't excuse the fact that it was a better tactical move, though.
    • I have a theory: Vision didn't blow up the Quinjet because Natasha was near it at the time and he didn't want her to get caught in the explosion. Considering that she confronts Cap and Bucky after they get into the hanger, she had to have been close to the Quinjet beforehand. Maybe she volunteered to guard it and lock it down (while actually making sure that it was unlocked and available for Cap to use), and when Vision saw Cap and Bucky, he attempted to block their way in because he didn't think she'd be a match for both of them. This not only explains why Vision didn't just destroy the Quinjet, but it also explains why Cap and Bucky were able to take it at all.
    • Hmm, interesting theory. Perhaps that's how it turned out in the movie. One has to wonder, though, how a highly advanced craft such as the Quinjet cannot be locked down remotely, especially this new version that was designed by Tony himself. And there might also be a more safer way to ensure that Steve and Bucky cannot get to or make use of the Quinjet. Maybe disabling the wings or the landing gears would do the job.
    • Perhaps Vision was more emotionally compromised than we realized. I know we're led to believe his emotions for Wanda were what let him to attack Sam without much thought, but what if his emotions were effecting his judgement during the battle? He didn't even need to necessarily destroy a tower. He could have shot at the ground to slow Steve and Bucky long enough for either Black Panther or himself to catch up to them. Attacking the tower seemed like a hasty decision made on spur of the moment rather than calculated one.
    • Maybe it has something to do with the Mind Stone on Vision's head? Scarlet Witch using her powers on it to disable Vision in the scene where Hawkeye rescues her from the Avengers Compound might also have something to do with it.
    • Or Vision simply didn't want to shoot the Quinjet and risk killing everybody inside. Both sides have been holding back to avoid killing each other the entire fight, which is the only reason why Team Cap really had a chance in the first place.
    • Except there's nobody inside the Quinjet at the time. Everybody else was fighting and Cap and Bucky were at a fairly far enough distance. The only one who was near the Quinjet was Black Widow, and I'm sure she's capable of getting at a safe distance in time when the thing explodes.
    • The thing is Vision has an analytical mind. Hence his speech in the beginning of the movie breaking down the current situation regarding the SHRA in mathematical terms. To a computer it would be more efficient to create a wall to prevent access to the Quinjet. Then destroy the Quinjet and possibly surrounding areas when the Quinjet explodes. A controlled explosion versus an uncontrolled one. Not only would that he be reluctant to destroy a start of the art high tech transport with multiple capabilities versus a radar tower. Efficiency , cost and practicality.

    How did Cap know that Bucky killed The Starks? 
  • In Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Zola shows Steve the newspaper articles about Howard and Maria's "accident", but nothing he sees there indicates that Bucky was responsible for it. Yet, when he and Tony see the video for the first time, he doesn't seem surprised and he doesn't deny it when Tony asks if he knew. When did he find that out? Was he just assuming? If so, then why? Theoretically, any HYDRA agent could have been behind that. And if you're going to say Bucky told him, why didn't that merit a scene in the film? The fact that Steve kept this a secret from Tony becomes a major plot point during the climax, so knowing how he found out about it is kind of important.
    • Yes, "theoretically" any HYDRA agent could have done it. But Bucky was HYDRA's #1 go-to guy, their chief assassin, and the Starks would've been high-priority targets warranting using him. It's really not a stretch for Cap to have figured it out on his own.
      • Pretty much. In the months between the events in Winter Soldier and Civil War, Cap has been basically doing two things: tearing down HYDRA and tracking Bucky. It's safe to assume that at some point he managed to come up with the info.
      • Alternatively, Cap may have known enough to figure out that Bucky did it, but didn't want to put two and two together because he didn't want to face up to it.
    • This is probably why he says, "I didn't know he was the one to do it." He didn't have any actual proof that Bucky did do it, so he was technically the telling the truth. However, given how the Winter Soldier carried out many assassinations, he probably realized that it was more likely than not that he did do it.
    • Steve Rogers is fairly honest. Also while he knew Bucky did important jobs for Hydra. he showed no indication during Civil War that he suspected Bucky in the Stark's death. He most likely believed and thought their deaths was on some random hit squad. After all it was a killing done on some back roads. A routine job for a hit squad. If he had known what they were carrying when they were murdered. Due to its importance he would have suspected Bucky straight away, but he did not. So based on the information he had at the time he did not know Bucky killed them.
    • It's entirely possible that Bucky told Steve himself when he was explaining about the other Winter Soldiers, or at least gave Steve enough information to realize that Bucky was involved. "They were juiced up with the same stuff that made us, and I got it for the program by murdering Tony's parents."

    Spider-Man on Tony's team 
  • Ever since I watched the film, I was constantly bugged by the fact that Spider-Man was on Tony's team because the Accords would negatively affect him. The U.N. would choose who he helps, and it would compromise his Secret Identity, making those he cares about, like Aunt May, vulnerable to attacks from those who would (putting it lightly) wish him harm "The heart, Osborn! First, we attack his heart."
    • Tony only asked Peter help him out on this one mission, not to sign the Accords and give up his identity (unlike the comics). Peter most likely was only told that they were trying to bring Bucky back into custody and bring Cap in before Ross makes good on his threat to approve of the use of lethal force to bring in Steve (dead or alive). It is doubtful Peter even got to read the Accords or was even forced to sign. In the case of the movies the Accords were only supposed to be about folding the Avengers into the UN. We have yet to see how that will impact non-Avenger heroes who fight street crime.
    • Spider-Man supports the idea of the Accords, and it's not unlikely that he would sign them if given the chance. He said it himself: "When you can do the things that I can, but you don't... and then the bad things happen... they happen because of you". In fact, "With great power comes great responsibility" is his life motto.
    • Even though it would negatively impact him by forcing him to choose who he helps and leaving a blind spot in the form of Aunt May. If he has to go wherever he's told to, she might become suspicious considering he's not where he's supposed to be.
    • Well, if Spider-Man was focused on "looking out for number 1", he would still be a Lucha Libre wrestler getting high rewards.
    • Who said he was "looking out for number 1?"
    • In fairness to Tony if he had to recruit Peter he would likely take steps ensure May's safety to prevent her from being in danger because of the Accords. Few people would probably only be in the know how of Peter's secret identity to keep some pissed of criminal from getting payback by attacking May. He would likely move May and Peter to a better place with top of the line security and if he wants to keep May in the dark he'll do under guise of some Stark Industry grant, which isn't far off considering Tony just made up grant to fund a bunch of college kids' dream projects in this film. With a sells pitch like that it would probably entice Peter to sign the Accords. That is pretty much how Tony got Peter to join him in the comics.
      • Under those circumstances there is no real reason to keep May in the dark either. The general excuse is roughly "if you knew, people would find out you knew and you'd be in danger." Of course it never works but that is the rationale. In this setting she'd have top of the line security. Also it's unlikely their identities would be public which might in the long term make Aunt May safer. Instead of Spiderman working on his own in New York and developing intimate relationships with his rogues they would send different heroes at different times. The UN Counsel or whatever group would officially order the heroes out would gather enemies. Attacking Aunt May would at best be about as effective as kidnapping a Navy SEA Ls wife.
    • There's little, if any, suggestion that Peter knows or has given any thought about what the Accords mean. When you're 15, you're typically not too passionate about UN affairs. As far as Peter knows, this is just his big break to impress Tony and get all the benefits that implies whilst doing some good in the process.
      • Precisely, the only way Spider-Man being on Tony's side makes any sense is if he's just an innocent dupe who knows jack about the Accords and is just being thrown into a battle he wouldn't otherwise care about because he was manipulated and lied to. The Accords aren't simply oversight, but give the UN the power to prevent the Avengers and likely any other superhero from doing ANYTHING if the UN didn't want them to. A girl could be getting raped and murdered across the street from the Avengers compound and unless the UN gave it's go ahead not a single one of the Avengers or any other superhero could do anything about it. Peter in any continuity would fight to his death to prevent such a thing as the Accords from happening for the precise reason he's a superhero in the first place.
    • Homecoming confirms that Spider-Man really had no idea what the Accords were all about, he was there just because his idol, Tony Stark, asked him for help.

    Punching vs. strangling 
  • Why, after going through the trouble of killing Howard Stark by punching him in the face repeatedly and putting him back in his car (no doubt to make it look like his death was due to blunt trauma from the crash), did the Winter Soldier kill Maria by strangling her? Surely any competent coroner would see the bruising on her neck and conclude that she was strangled to death.
    • Well, SHIELD probably investigated. And who controlled SHIELD? They just need to make it look close enough. Which also explains why no one mentioned the conveniently-shot camera a few feet away with the missing recording.
    • He presumably broke her neck, and maybe smashed her head against the dashboard too, to make it look proper. With HYDRA controlling SHIELD, they would have altered the records and reports to make it look like she died in the accident. She was already suffering enough injuries that she couldn't move while the Winter Soldier was beating Howard to death, so it would have been easy to ignore the strangulation bruises.
    • In any case, any competent investigation would have found foul play - cars rarely sverve off a road without a cause, aaaand with a bullet hole in the drivers window.

    "To see it fail, so spectacularly?" 
  • Uh... Zemo didn't fail. Never mind that it could be argued he didn't fail even from what the audience knows. But certainly he did not as far as Everett Ross knows. As per Zemo's confirmation to Black Panther (who, remember, is anyone in the movie's only source for what Zemo's plan was), he just wanted to see the Avengers "tear each other apart". And they did, with disastrous results. At the time of this conversation, we have one Avenger with a broken back, and three more imprisoned. Captain America is in hiding, his reputation in tatters and a pretty iconic symbol - his shield - is in government custody. The only Avengers left standing from this whole mess are Tony and Vision, and Tony's pretty much a psychological wreck. Zemo got *exactly* what he wanted. It's not some subtle point that Ross could have any plausible way to miss. There is no reason for him to plausibly think Zemo failed.
    • Nobody died as a result of his plan however. While the audience knows they'll all make up sooner or later from Ross's position he may believe (mostly correctly one might add because the Avengers don't REALLY succeed on their awesome teamwork so much as overwhelming awesome) that when a new threat arrives you release the three from prison, call up Stark and vision and dump them into the scenario.
    • Assuming that all Ross knew about his end goal was for the Avengers to "tear each other apart," he probably assumed that by tearing each other apart, Zemo meant for them to kill each other, just as the Avengers' other enemies wanted to kill them. Since they're still alive, Ross thinks his plan failed. Zemo however had a different interpretation of those words, hence why he responded, "Did it though?" to Ross's statement.
    • This is the whole point of the ensuing dialogue, to be fair. Although Ross probably isn't overly interested in Zemo's motives or the personal dramas of the former members of the Avengers and is just focussing on the broader perspective of: the Accords are holding up —> a bunch of superheroes have signed on to it —> the ones who haven't have been arrested or neutralised in some fashion, meaning they're unlikely to cause trouble for a while —> Win for Ross!

    Not bringing backup. 
  • Why didn't Scott bring the ants with him? They would have been helpful for disabling almost any foe at the Airport Battle and would have allowed him a clean getaway even after exhausting himself from going giant.
    • Presumably Hawkeye's van is not the best place for storing and transporting Pym's large colony of various ants. Pym had a whole special set up for them. He could have brought maybe a handful but would that small a number really have made that big a difference?
    • Or perhaps he simply does not want to risk what happened with Antony to happen again. Alas, poor ant...
    • Presumably he was also told he wasn't the only person being brought in for this mission - so he assumed physical enhanced humans would be enough help without the ants.

    We All Live In Germanika 
  • So why was the police operation taking place in Bucharest, Romania handled by GSG-9 (Grenzschutzgruppe 9), an elite German SWAT team? Surely, Romania ought to field special response units of their own (as any Hitman fan could attest) - with the likes of SPIR and the Jandarmeria coming to mind - before letting a random other European country's forces take it on for no apparent reason. Is this merely a case of Elites Are More Glamorous (which the GSG-9 certainly is), or was the scene actually meant to be set in Germany at first, but was outsourced to Romania at the last moment, for some reason?
    • Movie's crew got a better deal for German weaponry.
      • It also lets them show some more flashy Audi cars.
    • Was it actually specified that GSG-9 was the unit sent to attack Bucky?
    • It's never specified what unit they belong to, but they are German. They have German flags on their uniforms, so the question still stands.
    • The scenes were actually filmed in Berlin.
      • Actually, their uniforms were also marked with POLIZEI, which means 'police'. There are only four kinds of German police special forces: One the GSG-9 (which belongs to the federal police and is considered one of the finest anti-terror forces in the world), the SEK (Spezialeinsatzkommando, run-of-the-mill SWAT teams that every state police has), the BFE+ (which was only founded in 2015 to buff up Germany's readiness for domestic terrorism) and the ZUZ (Zentrale Unterstützungsgruppe Zoll, aka the armed response of German customs). So it's safe to assume that GSG-9 is the most viable and prominent possibility.
      • Further narrowed down if you look at their (German) license plates: They read BP for Bundespolizei (=federal police), so the GSG-9 is the only real contender (BFE+ are only reinforcements for the GSG-9). By the way, the ZUZ, as part of customs services, would not have POLIZEI on their jackets, but more correctly ZOLL (means customs).
      • What narrows it down even further is the fact that the flags on their uniforms are German, rather than those of any single German states (thus ruling out any SEK units, who wouldn't typically be deployed on any foreign missions anyway).
  • Germany is definitely not 'a random other European country' but the lead player within the EU, so it is absolutely plausible that they play a special role in a joint operation. Agent 13 specifically mentions that the counterterrorism task force is headquartered in Berlin, so it seems like the Germans are in charge right from the beginning of the operations. Yet if you look closely during the chase scenes, there are in fact Romanian police cars seen in the background, aiding in the operation. And lastly, the EU is a supranational governing body, so cooperation between agencies - even transnational - is fairly common (and much less complicated than for example in the U.S.).

    In the Trunk 
  • Why is Howard Stark just keeping the super serum in the trunk of his car? Even if his reasoning is that his hands are the safest for it, he's putting his family at a pretty big risk by keeping it that close to his person, especially if he insists bringing his wife along when he drives the car it's in. Can he not keep it hidden somewhere farther away from his home and personal property?
    • It's obvious that he was on his way to deliver it to SHIELD when he was ambushed. He mentions that he's flying off somewhere important during Tony's own flashback in the BARF.

    When You Gotta Go 
  • This might be a completely silly question, but what the heck did Rumlow mean when he was quoting Bucky, "Tell Rogers 'when you gotta go, you gotta go'"? It was my understanding that "when you gotta go you gotta go" was a reference to having to pee. So what does it mean in this context? That the Winter Soldier wanted Steve to know that he had to use the bathroom?
    • Rumlow was obviously referencing death, considering he was about to commit suicide. When it's time to die, you have to die.

    "No Witnesses" 
  • So when Bucky is sent to retrieve the super soldier serum that Howard now inexplicably has, he is given the order of "no witnesses," which leads to him killing the Starks. Yet, he lets the entire thing get recorded. Why? Ignoring the camera just being there because plot, wouldn't that lead to more witnesses? And I don't buy the camera belonging to Hydra, because if it did, then why did Bucky shoot it after his deed? And why does he shoot it when he's also in full view and his face is visible? Wouldn't it be smarter to take out the camera from the shadows first, then make his move on the Starks?
    • He confiscated the tape afterwards. That's why Zemo had to track down the Siberian Hydra base to get it.

    Why doesn't Ross mention the incident with Hulk in Africa? 
  • I think the most damning piece of evidence against the Avengers would be the Africa incident. It was a pure demonstration of what out of control Avengers are like and Ross doesn't even mention it? The incident where members of the Avengers were completely at fault? It's Ross! One of the most famous adversaries of the Hulk and he's not going to mention the piece of evidence that not only involves him but would also make his argument that much stronger?
    • Ross is only bringing up events that caused a lot of damage and involved the current roster of Avengers, Banner caused the damage and he isn't there.
    • Neither is Thor, and yet he used footage of Malekith's armada.
    • It's probably because the incident involves the Hulk. Bringing up the Hulk going on a rampage isn't gonna reflect too nicely on Ross. "Didn't the Hulk rampage through Africa that one time?" "Didn't you illegally inject a guy with super soldier serum who turned into an even bigger monster and rampaged through Harlem?" If Ross points out an incident that (as far as he knows) the Hulk is solely responsible for rather than the Avengers as a unit (note they try to stop the Hulk) then his own credibility gets shot as he set into motion a chain of events that resulted in a nearly identical situation. Ross getting called out on his previous lacks in oversight would shift the conversation to being about how even working within the system can result in the same levels of collateral damage if some jerk at the top has a personal agenda- which is what the anti-reg side is arguing. So it's much safer to point to events in which the Avengers are more directly at fault for their negligence, and there is no want for examples of that.

    Why does Steve get all the flak for not telling Tony his parents were assassinated by HYDRA? 
  • Natasha also knew and also didn't tell him. She is right there when Steve learns about Hydra killing Tony's parents. Yet this never figures into the plot at all. Granted she wasn't there when the revelation was made to Tony but it seems an odd oversight.
    • Natasha wasn't there. She'd already ran off after letting Cap escape and didn't appear again. He'd likely be just as pissed at her, but she was already out of the movie by then.
      • Which she shouldn't be. It's a mistake for the narrative to focus only on Steve for that conflict and ignore the fact that Natasha also knew.
      • I meant out-of-universe flak as well. None of the discussions above mention the fact that Natasha knew.
      • She's a spy, and puts secrecy of information above friendship. Keeping a detail such as this is perfectly in-character for her. That's why nobody, in or out of universe, calls her for doing what defines her. Captain America is different, he would be supposed to share this info, so he gets called when it turns out he didn't.
    • And Tony is a bit closer to Steve than he is to Natasha. They barely interact outside of Avenger stuff, whereas there's that grudging friendship-rivalry between Tony and Steve.
    • It wasn't relevant in-story. Natasha is currently in hiding somewhere, and Steve is standing in front of Tony protecting the friend who he just learned is his parents' killer. Only Steve knows that Natasha knows, and there's no reason for him to reveal that to Tony in this scene.

    Hawkeye's super marksmanship 
  • The scenes off of which this entry is based have almost, if not literally, zero relevance to Hawkeye's actual character in the MCU, even in potential future films. They were really nothing more than offhand gags that were just thrown in with no impact on the plot. But for the sake of curiosity, let's pretend it's not totally irrelevant. In Captain America: Civil War, Hawkeye comments that he "played 18" and "shot 18" on a golf course, implying that he scored a hole in one on every hole. He also casually throws multiple darts at a dartboard at his safe house in Avengers: Age of Ultron, all of which hit the bullseye at the same time. Both are obvious references to his superhuman aiming skills and how they translate to other activities. If, however, Hawkeye is an super marksman as an archer, why would he be the same in any other context, especially as a golfer? Swinging a golf club is totally different from aiming and firing a bow. If this actually does apply to Hawkeye, and he really is almost unfailingly accurate with anything that requires aiming, why doesn't he use weapons that would allow him to still use his super marksmanship, but with superior firepower, such as a gun or even a crossbow? He has a background as an archer, yes, but that doesn't mean he has to limit himself to a medieval weapon when he's fighting gods and aliens.
    • He prefers the bow for the utility of it, specifically his implausible trick arrows (you can't put a USB that infects a computer with a virus on a bullet). Clint has regular guns and has used them in the Avengers films (like when he shoots out the glass floor Quicksilver is standing on to trap him in AoU) but isn't carrying one here, probably because he's fighting friends he doesn't really want to kill.
    • Also MCU Hawkeye is inspired in many ways by Hawkeye from the Ultimate Universe. Ultimate Hawkeye was shown to have pinpoint accuracy regardless of weaponry (Like Bullseye) instead of being just an archer.
  • The golf thing has always bugged me. Even the absolute best aiming skills in the universe wouldn't make him able to hit the ball farther than the longest long-ball hitters in the world. Any real golf course has holes that are longer than it is possible to hit a golf ball. And even if his impossibly good aim made him able to make such perfect contact that he can hit the ball further than should be physically possible, how does perfect aiming skill allow him to hit things that he can't see. Even the mini (executive) golf course near where I work has holes where you cannot even see the green from the tee blocks.
    • Hawkeye has been making smartassed remarks from his first lines in Thor. He was kidding. Hell, chances are the golf remark was just something Tony made up to be snarky and Hawkeye's never even played the sport, but fired the quip back as Snark-to-Snark Combat.

    Algebra 
  • Why would somebody with Peter Parker's engineering skills be taking algebra? To be able to do the things he's done, his mathematical education would have to be way past algebra.
    • Isn't Algebra part of normal school education? He is in school, so maybe it's a class he has to take. I mean he took Woodshop as well and it's doubtful that's by choice.

    Tony and the angry mother 
  • I'm surprised no one has brought this up. Remember the scene where an angry mother approaches Tony? Shouldn't Tony have bodyguards with him at all times? How is this woman able to get close to him like that, or even be alone with him for that matter? What if she was packing a gun? I know he's Iron Man, but still.
    • Tony has always been a bit of a reckless kind of guy who does not care much for bodyguards. He spent more time mocking Happy then anything while he worked for him and never seemed to get a replacement, while he lacks any sort of defenses around his house. So such behavior is completely in character. At that specific time he was also in a moment of emotional distress and rushed away before any security could get to him. As for the woman, well Tony had the same thought about a gun and stopped her from reaching into her purse. The scene is meant to show how he is losing it but it was a pretty reasonable conclusion from Tony considering the woman’s hostility.

    Is your arm hurt or not? 
  • Tony has his arm in a sling at the Raft but the injury he supposedly obtained doesn't hamper him at all for the final fight and it's never mentioned again. Sure, the bit at the end with Falcon could be anywhere up to months later, but we later see him in Homecoming (presumably just after he got back to New York) with no arm sling.
    • Considering he went there knowing he got tricked by Zemo that was likely just deception for Ross to keep him from thinking he was going to make an independent movements of his own, by showing up in a helicopter with his arm in a sling rather than use the Iron Man armor suggests his wounded and can't do anything. When Ross predictably refuses to listen and Tony gets what he needs to know he flies out of range, then takes off the sling and gets into the Iron Man suit and sure enough Ross doesn't catch on or send anyone to follow him (but this doesn't fool Panther). Note that he just happens to bring a gadget that shorts out the speakers with him in case he needed to talk to the group privately. Tony like expected just how that would go down at the Raft.
    • The injury was real since his suit altered him but it doesn’t hamper him becomes his armor responses to his mental commands and provides movement his arm. It probably also has on board medical systems to minimize further damage and inhibit pain.
    • His arm probably wasn't broken or sprained, only strained but functional. The sling was so that he could rest it until it felt better, not because it was useless; sure, using it to fight probably ensured it'd hurt a lot worse once the adrenaline wore off, but Tony wasn't thinking ahead at the moment. By the time he appears in Homecoming, his arm is closer to normal and he's scarfed down some aspirin.

    Blaming Bucky 
  • I'm sorry, why is everyone's first suspicion that the person who planted the bomb looks like Bucky, especially given they can only see part of his face, from a good distance away? Why do the police automatically assume that Bucky is the culprit, without apparently even attempting to investigate and see if it was anyone else?
    • Facial recognition seems to have been involved plus Bucky was probably already on a most wanted list since he was HYDRA’s No. 1 assassin for 60+ years. A lot of old grudges probably still existed.
  • It was heavily implied the UN is both sick and tired of superhumans causing problems and also afraid that the Avengers are basically making them look bad for not being able to deal with them themselves. Bucky's basically being made an example of. They want to take out the Winter Soldier with regular police and security to prove to themselves they don't need the Avengers or any other super human help and because he's the Winter Soldier it's not like they're gonna get any flack for killing him publically even if they're wrong because you could strangle someone with a list of all the various crimes and acts of terror he's done throughout the decades. Nobody but Steve Rogers would miss him sadly.

    Fooling facial recognition 
  • On a related note, how did Zemo get facial prosthetics that were convincing enough to trick facial recognition technology into thinking he was Bucky?
    • Practice makes perfect. Make-up artists get their equipment from somewhere, and Zemo must have practised until he was able to make a good replica of Bucky's face.
    • Didn't they mention they found one of those face-imitating web masks Natasha used in Cap 2 in Zemo's car?
      • It was mentioned to simply be a wig and facial prosthetics. It wasn't implied to to anything more advanced than that.

    Impersonating the psychiatrist 
  • How did Zemo get away with pretending to be the psychiatrist who was to interview Bucky? Wouldn't the government officials know what the psychiatrist looked like or ask for an ID? Wouldn't they only allow someone with the proper security clearance to see Bucky? Multiple re-watches suggest he probably just had some fake paperwork, maybe a fake passport and a UN ID card or something, but NOTHING MORE COMPLEX THAN THAT. This movie takes place after Winter Soldier revealed just some of the advanced ways in which to confirm or conceal identities this universe has; Fingerprint, biometric, DNA and retinal scans to confirm ID, holographic meshes you can wear over your face to FAKE ID etc.This movies opens with Cap and co. chasing down some outlying Hydra agents meaning...there are outlying Hydra agents who pose a threat to decent people. Its only logical that the CIA or whomever is running things would have strenuous and lengthy processes for identifying any new visitors to their base, particularly the one guy who is going to have the most important conversation with Bucky that anyone has ever had. But from the look of it, all Zemo did was make a fake passport. He didn't change the original doctors personnel files to add his own photos, because Tony is able to see the real pictures later on without any trouble.Presumably he didn't change anything else in the file like fingerprints or biometric scans as it would surely be mentioned. This coalition of international intelligence agencies who are only 3 years removed from learning HYDRA had infiltrated every corner of the world over 70 years and apparently the dude at the door...just checked Zemo's passport and waved him through. No checking of databases. No scans or more involved identity checks. Apparently no one at this base bothered to learn with the original doctor looked like. No one was sent to meet him at the airport. No one just had a file photo of the man on hand. A link to his facebook profile. Nothing. Nothing. A random stranger turned up at the base, flashed some fake papers and was allowed access to the Winter Soldier.
    • Two options: 1) they don't keep psychiatrists on staff and have to request one from somewhere else. Zemo arrives pretending to be the one they called in, with the necessary fake ID, credentials and other documentation - getting his clearance from whoever was behind the desk. 2) It's a big government building, so not everyone knows everyone who works there. This guy shows up claiming to be the psychiatrist called in, with the necessary to back it up, and they let him in. Maybe they would have realised the fakery after a while, but by that time Bucky had gone rogue and they had more pressing issues to take care of.
    • Or maybe in the chaos of the event, they didn't request a psychiatrist, Zemo showed up claiming he was sent for and each person assumed someone else put in the call for one and didn't question it on account of the situation.
    • It was mentioned that the psychiatrist, Dr. Boussard was dispatched by the UN, when the Task Force requested one. Maybe Zemo used his name to get in.
    • Having just re-watched the scene, Zemo says "the UN sent me" to Bucky when he's already in the room (presumably for the benefit of the officials watching on CCTV). If you think about it when he's brought in, the first order of business would be to question him and then bring a psychiatrist in - so I'm leaning more towards none being ordered yet and Zemo just jumping the gun pretending. He'd have been found out with a quick fact check but he just wanted to be in the room long enough to activate the sleeper triggers.
    • F.R.I.D.A.Y. mentions that the Task Force requested a psychiatrist as soon as Bucky was captured and that Boussard was sent by the UN within the hour. Zemo intercepted him as he was on his way.

    Avengers Support Staff 
  • At the end of Age Of Ultron we see that the Avengers have hired a fairly large support team. Techs, soldiers. Fury and Hill coordinating, Cho and Selvig on science. Then in Civil War it's down to just the heroes. Not even Hill/Cho like in AoU, where did they go?
    • They're working out of other locations, or on other projects, or maybe they're just on call for the Avengers. Cho has her lab in Korea, and Selvig had some sort of a teaching position in Age of Ultron.

     The death by sink scene 
  • Why doesn't Karpov wait until Zemo leaves the room and try to lift his head up (upside down sit-up)? Just keep lifting your head up and shout for help.
    • He was living in a secluded house in Cleveland and seemed to have isolated himself on purpose, as any Retired Monster terrorist group agent would. He wouldn't have found much help and probably wouldn't have wanted any. Besides, he sounded like a fanatic and made the conscious choice to die.

     UN bombing 
  • I admit that in a universe with loads of superbaddies, you can't protect an UN meeting, even if it has "Please terrorize me!" painted on it in ten foot letters, even in-universe. But a car bomb? How lame is that?

    Nick Fury 
  • Given that he was the one who put together the Avengers in the first place and was very invested in seeing the Initiative succeed, where was Nick Fury during the whole debate about the Avengers' oversight and their subsequent battles? In Age of Ultron, he was freely running the helicarrier and communicating with the Avengers.
    • As seen in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., Fury hasn't had an official leadership position in S.H.I.E.L.D. after the events of Winter Soldier. He got that helicarrier in Age of Ultron because S.H.I.E.L.D. co-operated with him, but he does not have the authority to be involved in governmental decision-making anymore.


Top

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:

/

Media sources:

/

Report