Marvel Cinematic Universe

The only people who claim the film was on Cap's side are overrating to certain fans in real life.

Tony needs to have a talk with Yon-Rogg.

Wait i thought Peter Quill was the biggest MCU villain in the franchise.

Or maybe the resident JJ of Tv Tropes, Hansome Rob, convinced me that Starlord is an evil douche.

Or maybe i'm just rambling

Uni cat

It is much better balanced than the comics. The idea of oversight is good, but there are many issues with the execution and having Ross as its mouthpiece basically ensures they won't be satisfied. Notably, in Infinity War the Earth team are breaking the accords and obeying them would have at best slowed them down.

Edited by HalfFaust on Mar 24th 2019 at 1:24:42 AM

I always sided with Steve on the accords but I strongly sympathized with Tony.

Every accusation by the GOP is ALWAYS a confession.

Also on both sides have a point, but ultimately siding with Cap, because at the end, while I understand Tony's pain and Bucky's feelings on the matter, I just find both on the wrong.

What is also interesting about the vid is how it reads the scene between Tony and Peter. See, I always read it as Tony recruiting Peter partly because he is so similar to Cap, kind of like a replacement. But this vid points out that Tony is shortly narrowing his eyes when Peter explains his perspective on responsibility and reads it as Tony realizing that Peter is actually closer to Cap than him philosophically speaking, and hence he has to trick him into fighting for him in Germany. Which is kind of true...and maybe part of the reason why Tony is keeping watch from afar in Homecoming. Because he feels guilty.

But then, feeling guilty is kind of Tony's default state which is kind of funny because in other adaptations that is more Peter's role….

Edited by Swanpride on Mar 24th 2019 at 1:43:18 AM

No. Quill is just an idiot. He did far more good for the universe before his single fuck up undid all that, along with my respect for him.

Tony, I still like enough to be only half serious when I take a shot at him (I still say Ultron is not totally his fault).

Which is ironic since Tony has screwed up more and more frequently, but Quill's actions had far greater consequences.

One Strip! One Strip!

The video isn't saying that the Pro or Anti-Accords side is right or wrong, they are saying that Captain America is right and Iron Man is wrong, because Captain America actually examines and thinks through his beliefs, while all of Iron Man's beliefs come from a reactionary negative headspace.

Or, in other words: Steve is doing this because he believes in individual liberty. Tony is doing this because he feels guilty.

I can agree with this.

So yeah, they should all beat up Stark when he gets back. Seems logical to me.

One Strip! One Strip!

I mean, I totally think that Rogers and Stark should rewrite the Sokovia Accords (because there still needs to be some oversight) and then get that approved, but first I think they should, you know, hug it out.

The end of Siege in the comics actually had a solution to the Civil War problem — they appointed Steve Rogers as "Top Cop of the World" (yes, sounds silly, I know), so he would basically be the oversight. Of course, everything trusting in Captain America would also come to bite them in the ass when, uh, [flips through notes] a sentient Cosmic Cube rewrote his backstory so that he had been raised and trained by Hydra and tried to take over the world while the real Captain America's memories were stuck inside the Cosmic Cube which eventually reformed them into a new body and both Captains fought against one another in a weird Secret Empire crossover.

So there's that.

Edited by alliterator on Mar 24th 2019 at 4:16:30 AM

Or they could scrap the accords all together

New theme music also a box

My main take away from the Civil War movie is that they didn't need to make anyone a fascist to make the conflict plausible. Comics tried twice and apparently failed both times (haven't actually read Civil War 2, but I heard it made Carol even more of a crazy authoritarian than Tony in the original).

So, you know, that is a good thing. But, yeah, I don't think the movie presented either side too terribly. There are still some weird stuff, like Tony recruiting a teenager apparently just to make number, but at least he recognized that was a stupid thing to do.

I kind of wish I could see the other version of the film, where Tony recruits Ant-Man and the Wasp, while Steve gets Sharon Carter. I mean, yes, this would kind of make Tony's side overpowered, but still, it would also give Sharon Carter something to do in the film.

Watched Ben Chinapen's CACW video. It's neat and has me thinking.

Self-serious autistic metalhead who goes by any pronouns. (avvie template source)

Tony recruits Spider-Man because his webshooters are a way to stop the other Avengers without hurting them. I thought that is obvious. (and to make the toy box battle more fun, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work in the story. It isn't strictly necessary, but it still adds to it).

Instead of appointing one person as top superhero guy and hoping nothing contrived and comic booky happens in a world that has something contrived and comic booky happen every week, maybe they could have a superhero council

The Avengers elect someone, the X Men elect someone, the government appoints someone, the evil Marvel citizens elect someone, insert other voting blocks as appropriate

And then the council can discuss stuff instead of superheroes punching each other. Like an Illuminati where it’s not a secret society

Illuminatedati

Forever liveblogging the Avengers

Spider-Man appereance in CW is, let's be honest here, pure fanservice.

Good fanservice that adds to the movie, maybe, but fanservice nonetheless, the movie would've barely changed if he wasn't there beyond the airport battle.

Sure. But it still improves the movie.

I think that there would the need for some sort of rulebook as well as some sort of oversight committee which can look into the actions of the Avengers and have options to reign them in if they stop over the line. Similar to how the police and the military has their rules, but created specifically for the Avengers.

Kind of like The Ultimates (2015), only it's "deciding the rules" instead of "solving the toughest problems."

@Hail Muffins- It's really funny to me how the Doyleist motivation was so clearly "one team has an Ant-Man, so the other team needs to have a Spider-Man.

I guess my overall two cents is that the movie deliberately leaves things vague in a way that allows the audience to take either side and kind of fudges things in both directions. For example, the movie kind of fudges over the seriousness of Wanda's crimes in AOU, which leans toward Team Cap, but it also makes it so that there was no official sanction for her being on the team, which leans toward Team Iron Man. For what it's worth, I think that fudging over her crimes is probably a good decision overall, because I think her actions in AOU demonstrate that it's a lot harder to do a villain redemption story over a single movie as opposed to ongoing comics. And it's also complicated by how in AOU Whedon halfway seemed to want Wanda and Pietro to be young kids.

More broadly, it's hard to objectively argue with the idea of the Accords, although of course it's deliberately pretty vague what's in them. I'm not sure if we can conclude that they were written to be draconian, but the way Zemo gets treated by the Rosses doesn't really give me the sense that their whole shop was operating in line with the U.S. Constitution let alone the Geneva Convention. And really, any side that has Thunderbolt Ross on it as kind of doing to be the bad guy side by default.

Moreover, I think it's pretty obvious that as a Captain America movie the movie is going to be more sympathetic to Steve than an Avengers movie would be. And needless to say, given the way that Joss Whedon tended to use Tony as a mouthpiece and present Steve as a somewhat knight templarish loser, he would have definitely made a pretty different story.

My last thought is that I think the one thing that kind of frustrates me with pro-Tony arguments is that in a legal sense it's actually pretty clear that Bucky should get off for his crimes, since he had no mens rea (evil intent) even though he had actus reas (evil actions). Which is not of course to say he actually would get off (I'm not sure any court has actually believed "sleepwalking" or "hypnosis" defenses, even though Bucky has a really good one). And that doesn't get into things like the extent to which he's viewed as a danger "on the ground" (because of Zemo) or Tony's very justified anger at learning Bucky killed his parents.

But from a legal standpoint, Bucky should get off. And it also rather annoys me when people refer to him as being a Nazi, as if he was actually consciously/consensually doing any of his actions as the Winter Soldier.

Edit - Tl; dr Team Iron Man is Right But Repulsive. Team Cap is Wrong But Wromantic.

Edited by Hodor2 on Mar 24th 2019 at 7:50:35 AM

I had an idea of an alternate MCU timeline where post-AOU, Wanda would have been recruited for the Thunderbolts instead of the Avengers, since, well, she was a villain. This would give her some measure of consequences for her AOU actions and also provide her with redemption for those actions, as being a part of a redemption-seeking villain team would, of course, lead them to saving people.

Of course, it could also be stated that the Avengers is a redemption-seeking team, as the Black Widow herself has stated she has done so many bad things in the past. Which really makes me want to see a scene where Natasha and Wanda bond, especially since they were the only two women on the team, too.

There was a little bit in their dialogue during in the opening mission that implied Natasha was training Wanda on how to be a spy just like her. It would've been neat to see more of their dynamic.

Ooh, I like that idea.

It's funny, I really could see that working, especially because Hawkeye did at one point lead the Thunderbolts and had an interest (mirrored in the movie) of villain rehabilitation.

On the other hand though, when Hawkeye did lead that team in the comics, he refused to allow Abner Jenkins on the team, because despite his completely sincere and permanent Heel–Face Turn, Abner had murdered a guy like five minutes before joining Zemo's Thunderbolts.

Of course, MCU!Hawkeye is not a Technical Pacifist like comics!Hawkeye frequently has been. And comics!Hawkeye gets along well with Black Widow, who killed a lot of people before her Heel–Face Turn, so who knows...

Edited by Hodor2 on Mar 24th 2019 at 8:06:43 AM

I wish the the “New Avengers” has gotten to do something onscreen besides fail. I mean, obviously fitting in another Avengers movie in between Ultron and Civil War would have been stupidly expensive and overexposed the story they were setting up for what is ultimately a side-adventure, but still... that’s a lot of characters who we know were in the same space that we never got to see interact with each other.

"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.