Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
Okay, to those people who go in the spoiler threat in order to ask questions: If you want only certain information, feel free to pm me. I'll try to answer without ruining the movie for you.
Also, something occurred to me last night: I always wondered what the deal with the "Fine, I'll do it myself" was since Thanos didn't really have any influence on what happened with Ultron. But then I realized that Thor was about to bring the sceptre to Asgard (meaning Loki), but ended up leaving the Infinity Stone with Vision. What if Thanos was waiting for Thor to remove it from earth? What if Loki is still working for him (or at least Thanos thinks he does).
Maybe that'll be a part of Infinity War?
Also, Indie Wire apparently feels that CW isn't as good as people say it is.
What say you?
I have a couple of issues with the review...I address the non-spoilery ones first. One, the quote it mentions to be by Cap is actually not said by him but by another character and originates from yet another character. Two, it basically claims that the battle of New York is the only good action sequence in the MCU. Which I can't agree with. I recently did a ranking of the best action scenes in the MCU and while the Battle of New York won by a mile when it came to Phase 1, if I had ranked it against Phase 2 I am not even sure if I would have put it in the top three. I certainly wouldn't have ranked it higher than the Action scenes in The Winter Soldier. When it comes to Civil war, I would have cut some of the action a little bit shorter, but not by much. But I am an odd-ball in this regard. I think most people will love the airport fight the most, but I felt more attached to another fight. Either way, a don't agree with anything the review said about the fight other than the lack of wide-shots in some (not all) of them, which I actually see as one of the strength.
Now, concerning the villain I think that he is exactly the right kind of villain for this story which should not be about some villain but about the conflict itself. Some would say that the story didn't need the villain in the first place and yes, I think you could have written the story without him, but you wouldn't have been able to have the same ending if you did. Which would have been a shame.
Also, the reviewer didn't really understand what the conflict in Civil war is about. It is a little bit more complicated than he claims it to be.
edited 28th Apr '16 2:49:55 AM by Swanpride
http://www.crunchyroll.com/anime-news/2016/04/28/fairy-tail-author-provides-illustration-for-japanese-captain-america-civil-war-release
fairy tail creator made.CW art
edited 28th Apr '16 9:14:55 AM by FictionWriterKing
IGN review was actually pretty reasonable even if I may not agree with it in the end. Indiewire guy is entitled to his opinion but a lot of it sounds like petty potshotting rather than actually reviewing and apparently he's liked movies most people thought were bad so it's not like you have to put much stock in his opinion if you don't want to. People are never going to come to a 100% consensus.
I'm not a rabid fangirl so people not liking a thing I do isn't going to make me mad at them unless they're being douchey about it (which frankly the Indiewire guy is close to doing, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt), to bring back the whole John Campea thing.
edited 28th Apr '16 9:23:32 AM by AlleyOop
Yeah...if someone doesn't like the MCU or this particular movie, fine, you don't have to. But don't act all high and mighty and try to basically tell me that I like it because I am stupid and want easy answers. The opposite is the case.
Concerning IGN, they don't tend to go into the high numbers for their ratings, so everything above a 7,5 is pretty good for them. Though the reviewer apparently missed that the so called coincidences were carefully engineered.
edited 28th Apr '16 9:31:23 AM by Swanpride
“Remember: when people tell you something’s wrong or doesn’t work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.” - Neil Gaiman on criticism. My issue with ing's review is that it complains about stuff the reviewer personally wanted as if he had exceptions not fulfilled. These aren't basic stuff storytelling thrives on: plot structure, characterization, dialogue etc. Instead it's oh there's moral philosophy within the conflict bah boring, where's the escapism? DOJ already did that and so did many other superhero movies bah tedious. Oh Tony stark isn't joking around bah he's boring. It's the stuff like this
edited 28th Apr '16 9:37:41 AM by FictionWriterKing
Well I guess you could say that this movie is the empire strikes back of the MCU (hell, it more or less hints as much), so it might not be surprising that some people have trouble to deal with the result. The IGN review complains about the lack of clear answers, but that's exactly what I liked the most about the movie. It is designed to be controversial. (Hell, I am currently in a heated discussion in the spoiler threat not about the quality of the movie, but about the actions of the characters and who was justified and who wasn't).
Jim is more let down from anvilis dropping repeatability. The fact it "address the issue of collateral damage" seemed to annoy him as he gnerleinzed this conflict with the entire genre. He wanted more fun, which would have to be less "addressing heroes' moral culpability or echo real world concerns" in a hamfistef way and more "escapism". Apparently the genres has now taken a serious turn due to this film and DOJ. He wants to go back to the funner times w/e that means. Then he took off points cuz Zemo was in the background more than foreground as if he thought the villain should be primary. w/o it's weird to me
edited 28th Apr '16 9:58:24 AM by FictionWriterKing
I just hope that these "carefully orchestrated" things ACTUALLY come across as clever, and not "we want you to think that the baddie is brilliant, but actually his plan only works if the heroes are too clueless and stupid to realize that they're being played." Because I've seen A LOT of that in films, and it's annoying. "Convoluted" does not equal "brilliant."
Yeah one of the few things I like about IGN is that a 7-7.9 Isnt considered MEDIOCRE but good. But that doesn't excuse their ignorance.
![]()
Sounds like he doesn't like change... Just like the Dhakari King.
edited 28th Apr '16 10:30:04 AM by DarthSion
Cut off one head 2 more shall take it's place! Hail Hydra
5 Zemo always plays gambits no matter what medium hes presented through. here i would say is the most cunning version because he isnt over top and a lot of stuff igniting conflict is based on what the heroes already have done rather than his own actions. also the heroes are way too self aware of the world around them to not notice when something is off. they're so obsessed with fighting evil its a kinda natural instinct now. does zemo's plan work because the heroes suddenly act stupid? im gonna say no and why the movie explains!
note: a key fact about villains - ". It’s more acceptable for villains to rely on contrivance (when something just happens to happen for no particular reason). “Good thing those miniguns were lying around!” When the villain gets a lucky break, that’s dramatic. How will the hero respond? When the hero gets a lucky break, that’s usually bad writing. Your readers want the hero to save himself, not rely on corny deus ex machinas." - http://www.superheronation.com/
. when a hero's intelligence becomes dumbed down for one of those contrivances then fuck. good thing Bob is now a blind moron
edited 28th Apr '16 11:12:06 AM by FictionWriterKing
Okay. On the subject of Iron Man 4... I had more than come to peace with never getting another Iron Man movie. No more Tony Stark at all would be a bit tough to deal with, but with him showing up in Civil War and Infinity War and now Spider-Man it felt like he was being used in fantastic ways in conjunction with the rest of the MCU.
Plus how do you top Iron Man Three ending in a setpiece where Tony Stark jumps between a bunch of different Iron Man suits as he fights the bad guy? That feels like the pinnacle, there. (sidenote: that movie is the reaction to the fact that Downey does little work for these films. That's true when he's in the full suit, but that's rarely the situation in IM 3 and that's part of what makes it great). Plus the end of the movie is such a strong, self-actualizing moment for him. In Ultron he's moved on to worrying about his legacy, and Homecoming could see that legacy becoming Peter Parker, in a way.
If they do a fourth Iron Man movie I hope that they throw in one or two of the other heroes in order to prop up his supporting cast a little bit. One of the reason why the Captain America movies work so well is that he always has a great supporting cast. But the ones surrounding Iron Man are all a little bit one-note, even when they are likable.

Rotten Tomatoes updated the critical consensus.