Movies Marvel Cinematic Universe

[Husky_Khan]

If anything, the biggest problem that I see with Civil War is how obviously right Cap is, and how obiously wrong Tony is. It's why I think Winter Soldier is far and away the best MCU film, and Civil War is only pretty good.

Everything established in the preceding films makes it clear that Cap A) has incontrovertible personal obligations to always help Bucky (his closest friend, who always stood up for him, and who's been brainwashed and is as such absolutely not guilty of what he was made to do) and B) is certainly and unquestionably right about government oversight over super-powered persons or items being just too dangerous to allow. (Whereas on the other hand, Cap has demonstrated his moral character again and again, making him about the best judge of what's right in the entire setting.)

The powerful governmental oversight organisation that previously existed was actually a front for literal Nazis, and almost conquered the world. The new oversight attempt is spearheaded by General Ross, who is demonstrably a dangerous criminal (and it's frankly insane he's not in prison). This is a no-brainer. In the wake of the SHIELD-is-HYDRA reveal, the pro-regulation position is simply untenable to any reasonable person.

Which hurts Civil War, because it could only work if both sides did have about equally reasonable points, and that's just... not the case. But the film tries to make it seem like they do.

Yeah and it's something reflected in the Comics as well.

Needless to say, when watching Civil War I was so overwhelmingly for the anti-Reg side in the MCU setting and for Captain America's POV. The portrayal of Captain America in the MCU as a strong moral force that you can trust was set up very well in the MCU and that obviously played into Civil War as well. But being only one film, it only scraped the surface of what could've been really good issues to explore and we never really know what the 'regulations' that would've been imposed actually were.

This was an inverse of the comics where the Pro-Registration Side IMHO had far stronger points, but acted like a bunch of authoritarian 'tards because Marvel was continuing to descend in its moral messaging and decay mode (like recruiting supervillains to hunt down registration heroes) and forcing metahumans into training camps and government service, not mere 'registration' and even ending up killing dudes like Bill Foster/Goliath and other nonsense which resulted in Norman Osborn somehow ending up in charge of SHIELD/HAMMER and Barack Hussein Obama ultimately helping save the day and revoking the Superhuman Registration Act... *coughs*

But I digress...

 

[Skallagrim]

The US government is also... more than a little hypocritical to insist on reigning in superheroes, when it has a long history of doing the same bad or misguided things they accuse them of doing. In fact, we don't even have to look at what they did in the MCU, seeing as they pulled their fill of truly idiotic, selfish, and just plain evil crap in real life (Iraq War, Gulf of Tonkin, Operation Northwoods, et al), all of which I believe also happened in-universe.

Really, I'm not sure it would've hurt for Cap to point that all out when arguing for the Avengers' continued autonomy, though I suppose real-world audiences wouldn't have been as "receptive" if he made a big stink about it on-screen.

In-universe, we get lots of hints that the government has done even shadier stuff, particularly in relation to super-powered individuals...

I think Civil War and such was all about Stark trying to find a way to NOT be responsible for his actions.

It wasn't intended that way, but it does come across that way. It actually hurts his arc of becoming a better version of himself, instead of furthering it. Even his last attempt to "call out" Cap after he's beaten comes across as petty, and Cap's willingness to drop the shield and leave it there only illustrates that he values principles over a respected position.

The film is muddled like that.

Needless to say, when watching Civil War I was so overwhelmingly for the anti-Reg side in the MCU setting and for Captain America's POV. The portrayal of Captain America in the MCU as a strong moral force that you can trust was set up very well in the MCU and that obviously played into Civil War as well. But being only one film, it only scraped the surface of what could've been really good issues to explore and we never really know what the 'regulations' that would've been imposed actually were.

Yeah, a lot stronger points could have been made, perhaps by showing a lot more super-powered vigilantism with bad consequences. You could even have Ross -- fired from the military! -- as the head of a morally dubious PMC that employs super-powered individuals and does a lot of shafy things. Stuff like that.

Then, pro-registration would have obvious merit, but Cap would have equally obvious arguments against it (based on the events of Winter Soldier). And you could have Tony and Cap actually be reasonable and willing to work out a fair arrangement, but then the thing with Bucky crops up. And the fact that the Winter Soldier killed Tony's parents needs to be put into that much sooner, as a relatable personal motivation for Tony. (To counter Cap's personal motivation to protect his best friend.)

That would work.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

On the other hand, Stark is also literally the only Avenger who has *ever* shown the slightest care about 1) collateral damage, 2) actually compensating innocent bystanders for the damage the Avengers, 3) common sense.

1. Really...? There's no evidence of Captain America, the Scarlet Witch or others caring about collateral damage?
2. Umm...who's got money to do that? Oh wait, that ultra-billionaire. So...the money means nothing to him. Which makes that noble 'sacrifice'...not really remarkable. Does anyone here really thing that Cap wouldn't get involved in helping...like he supposedly started to do in the aftermath, but is NEVER shown.
3. I...well, I can't frankly believe you're making this claim at all.

 

[Husky_Khan]

On the other hand, Stark is also literally the only Avenger who has *ever* shown the slightest care about 1) collateral damage, 2) actually compensating innocent bystanders for the damage the Avengers, 3) common sense.

(Remember, with Ultron about to drop the city and *no options*, Captain America literally said they were morally obligated to NOT save the rest of the world if they couldn't save everyone in the city, because "that wasn't good enough".)

Captain America actually said "I'm not leaving this rock with one civilian on it." after Natasha challenges him on the math of everyone up here versus everyone down there.

Slight difference from him literally saying: "We are morally obligated to not save the rest of the world if we can't save everyone in the city because that isn't good enough."

He also says it immediately after Tony Stark offers his first plan, which is blowing up the city.

Soonafter the SHIELD Helicarrier arrives.

It's also clear that Captain America is LYING because apparently civilians did die during said Battle of Sokovia. So maybe we can bring up Steve Rogers' BLATANT HYPOCRISY next.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Ehhh. None of the Avengers were even aware the Helicarrier was functional, so Steve's insisting that they HAVE TO find another option really came off to me as petty self-righteousness. What, like if he berates Tony hard enough he'll just *magically* come up with a better alternative that he was withholding for some reason?

 

[Husky_Khan]

Ehhh. None of the Avengers were even aware the Helicarrier was functional, so Steve's insisting that they HAVE TO find another option really came off to me as petty self-righteousness. What, like if he berates Tony hard enough he'll just *magically* come up with a better alternative that he was withholding for some reason?

He wanted to find a better solution than blowing up Sokovia but the dialogue implied that Captain America and Black Widow seemed resigned to the idea if they couldn't save the civilians that they themselves (as in Captain America and Black Widow at the very least) wouldn't "escape" and leave the civilians behind to die.

At no point did Captain America state... lets just wait twenty minutes for a solution and wait for a solution for it to be either the world or Sokovia. The whole chain of dialogue occurred in the same conversation, within a minute of each other.

 

[Skallagrim]

He wanted to find a better solution than blowing up Sokovia but the dialogue implied that Captain America and Black Widow seemed resigned to the idea if they couldn't save the civilians that they themselves (as in Captain America and Black Widow at the very least) wouldn't "escape" and leave the civilians behind to die.

At no point did Captain America state... lets just wait twenty minutes for a solution and wait for a solution for it to be either the world or Sokovia. The whole chain of dialogue occurred in the same conversation, within a minute of each other.

You're arguing with someone who consistenly relies on insane troll logic and stubborn contrarianism. Reasoned arguments will not work here.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

It's also clear that Captain America is LYING because apparently civilians did die during said Battle of Sokovia. So maybe we can bring up Steve Rogers' BLATANT HYPOCRISY next.

Umm..we have no context for that. We only know that some Sokovians died. We don't know if it was before, during, or after the battle.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Well there's also the case that in Agents of SHIELD Season Two that one of the main storylines in the latter half of the season was that Agent Coulson had found a new SHIELD Helicarrier and was in contact with Maria Hill and bringing it out of mothball. So it's possible they knew of the re-emergence of SHIELD and the resources they might've had. But I didn't bring it up because while canon... no one who watches the movies would really give af.

Umm..we have no context for that. We only know that some Sokovians died. We don't know if it was before, during, or after the battle.

Unless Captain America personally witnessed every civilian being evacuated from the floating island of Sokovia and confirmed they were dead as opposed to merely unconscious or something or maybe trapped in a basement rubble or hiding in a closet he could've very well left civilians to die on Sokovia while leaving himself, thus contradicting his high minded moral ideals. WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING!

Keep in mind this is a guy who regularly cripples and maims GSG-9 Operators for petty personal reasons. His hypocrisy towards his own ideals knows no limits. 😏

 

[The Whispering Monk]

WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING!

this is my point.

Keep in mind this is a guy who regularly cripples and maims GSG-9 Operators for petty personal reasons. His hypocrisy towards his own ideals knows no limits. 😏

Well, frankly, he can kill them in a single punch. This is restrained use of Cap's strength. I also wouldn't call Cap's reasons petty...personal surely.

 

[Husky_Khan]

this is my point.

Well, frankly, he can kill them in a single punch. This is restrained use of Cap's strength. I also wouldn't call Cap's reasons petty...personal surely.

I need to add more sarcasm identifiers to my posts.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

If anything, the biggest problem that I see with Civil War is how obviously right Cap is, and how obiously wrong Tony is. It's why I think Winter Soldier is far and away the best MCU film, and Civil War is only pretty good.

Everything established in the preceding films makes it clear that Cap A) has incontrovertible personal obligations to always help Bucky (his closest friend, who always stood up for him, and who's been brainwashed and is as such absolutely not guilty of what he was made to do) and B) is certainly and unquestionably right about government oversight over super-powered persons or items being just too dangerous to allow. (Whereas on the other hand, Cap has demonstrated his moral character again and again, making him about the best judge of what's right in the entire setting.)

The powerful governmental oversight organisation that previously existed was actually a front for literal Nazis, and almost conquered the world. The new oversight attempt is spearheaded by General Ross, who is demonstrably a dangerous criminal (and it's frankly insane he's not in prison). This is a no-brainer. In the wake of the SHIELD-is-HYDRA reveal, the pro-regulation position is simply untenable to any reasonable person.

Which hurts Civil War, because it could only work if both sides did have about equally reasonable points, and that's just... not the case. But the film tries to make it seem like they do.

Except that what actually happens in Civil War, and Winter Soldier, and Avengers, and Age of Ultron is all about Cap proving that 1) he isn't right about basically jack shit, 2) he has zero understanding of how to do anything, 3) he is a massive hypocrite, and 4) Tony is generally right.

Avengers: Despite just waking up, Steve seems to think that he is the hot shit who should be in charge. He actively degrades and verbally abuses his teammate from the very start.

Winter Soldier: Cap decides unilaterally to upload the database of the worlds premier intelligence agency to the public, unencrypted, to destroy said agency with zero actual jurisdiction or legal authority or apparent concern for collateral damage, and to drop three aircraft carriers on DC without even attempting to do anything less drastic. Literally one phone call to Tony and basically that entire movie is resolved without the whole shit fest

Age of Ultron: Cap explicitly authorized Ultron but when it went bad decided that all of the blame was on Tony, tried to kill Tony, and then actively supported and defended a mind raping terrorist who unleashed the Hulk on a city.

Civil War: Cap decided that he had the right to invade sovereign nations on the grounds that he is Captain America and he knows best. He, the supposed leader of the Avengers, apparently knew nothing about the Accords until they were dropped before him despite the fact that they were a UN authored treaty that more than a hundred nations supported. You can't make any legitimate claim about Cap having specific issues with the Accords because he rejected them before reading them, he was opposed to the very concept of accountability. Then you have his argument that the Accords would keep the Avengers from reacting to a clear and present threat; really, you think that Tony Stark of all people would let some words on paper stop him from acting if the situation was actually serious? Governments have agendas? Well so does Cap, to save a wanted Hydra assassin and to hell with everything else.

In the comic books, Cap is generally in the right in the Civil War. But in the MCU? His position has literally zero redeeming features or credible justifications.

 

[Skallagrim]

Except that what actually happens in Civil War, and Winter Soldier, and Avengers, and Age of Ultron is all about Cap proving that 1) he isn't right about basically jack shit, 2) he has zero understanding of how to do anything, 3) he is a massive hypocrite, and 4) Tony is generally right.

Avengers: Despite just waking up, Steve seems to think that he is the hot shit who should be in charge. He actively degrades and verbally abuses his teammate from the very start.

Winter Soldier: Cap decides unilaterally to upload the database of the worlds premier intelligence agency to the public, unencrypted, to destroy said agency with zero actual jurisdiction or legal authority or apparent concern for collateral damage, and to drop three aircraft carriers on DC without even attempting to do anything less drastic. Literally one phone call to Tony and basically that entire movie is resolved without the whole shit fest

Age of Ultron: Cap explicitly authorized Ultron but when it went bad decided that all of the blame was on Tony, tried to kill Tony, and then actively supported and defended a mind raping terrorist who unleashed the Hulk on a city.

Civil War: Cap decided that he had the right to invade sovereign nations on the grounds that he is Captain America and he knows best. He, the supposed leader of the Avengers, apparently knew nothing about the Accords until they were dropped before him despite the fact that they were a UN authored treaty that more than a hundred nations supported. You can't make any legitimate claim about Cap having specific issues with the Accords because he rejected them before reading them, he was opposed to the very concept of accountability. Then you have his argument that the Accords would keep the Avengers from reacting to a clear and present threat; really, you think that Tony Stark of all people would let some words on paper stop him from acting if the situation was actually serious? Governments have agendas? Well so does Cap, to save a wanted Hydra assassin and to hell with everything else.

In the comic books, Cap is generally in the right in the Civil War. But in the MCU? His position has literally zero redeeming features or credible justifications.

It's amazing that you can communicate with us from a parallel universe where things happened like that! Many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics confirmed!


...More seriously: you're either being ridiculously disingenuous, or your memory isn't that good and you're conflating your personal recollection of events with what was actually on screen. I'll assume it's the latter, but it's still a pretty bad look. It does look pretty suspicious, though, that when you accuse Cap of... uh... being a whistleblower (like that's a bad thing), you strategically leave out that the organisation in question was completely taken over by Nazis, and that this was possible precisely because of all the secrecy. And that several Congressmen and Senators were among said Nazis. And that it's unclear whether all (or even most) have been unmasked. And that because of this, radical transparency is pretty much the only option....

You also rather dubiously frame Cap in Avengers as "just waking up" instead of, you know, "having actual leadership experience in World War II" -- as opposed to Tony, who is (at least at the start of the film) actually still a consultant, because he was deemed too unreliable at the end of his previous film. Also, you call Cap verbally abusive, when Tony's insane attitude goes unmentioned. ("Oh, hi character who is so afraid of himself he hid away from society... I'm a HUGE fan of how you turn into an uncontrollable monster!") Especially to someone from the 1940s, Tony comes across like an infantile psychopath with a sadistic streak. That's not fully true, but Tony -- not Cap -- is the one with the abrasive and bullying attitude. Cap says at much repeatedly: "I don't like bullies". Cap isn't quite right about Tony, but Tony coming across as a huge jerk and this setting off Steve's "I-hate-bullies" instinct is an actual plot point in the film. You trying to twist that around as if Cap is the bully here is, uh... pretty warped.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Keep in mind this is a guy who regularly cripples and maims GSG-9 Operators for petty personal reasons. His hypocrisy towards his own ideals knows no limits. 😏

To be fair he didn't do it for funsies, but he was *absolutely* aiding and abetting a most wanted international terrorist. Steve's involvement in that fight was really weird -- he was trying to prevent Bucky from *outright killing* any of the GSG-9, but he was *also* trying to help Bucky escape because of he felt that his personal relationship with Bucky literally outweighed the law.

Calling the GSG-9 "mooks" is really burying the lede because mooks are criminals. GSG-9 are law enforcement officers who are carrying out their *rightful* duty without any issue of corruption or injustice; Steve just...thinks his best buddy forever deserves to be above the law.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Calling the GSG-9 "mooks" is really burying the lede because mooks are criminals. GSG-9 are law enforcement officers who are carrying out their *rightful* duty without any issue of corruption or injustice; Steve just...thinks his best buddy forever deserves to be above the law.

Mooks arent defined just as criminals. It's a term used to describe the insignificant mob of adversaries that oppose the protagonists. That's how I'm using it and I feel it's self evident.

As to the rest of your point as I said earlier.

No one fucking cares? Mooks are Mooks. I remember seeing Tomorrow Never Dies and James Bond chucked a security guard into a printing press crushing him to death, then made a quip about how they print anything these days while reams of newspaper streaked with blood was being discharged beneath him. Pretty sure that was wrong and worthy of consequences as well. So was Jason Bourne helping "cripple and maim dozens" of cops across four or five films. I'm sure one could go on but ultimately... who gives af outside of interesting trivia to discuss regarding tropes or whatever.

If we're going to bring up Mooks getting beat up as an example of how an entire film franchise is "wrong" then apply it equally.

Protagonists beating the shit out of law enforcement due to mistaken identity is like a common trope in dozens of movies. Singling it out in Civil War is just aberrant.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

He wanted to find a better solution than blowing up Sokovia but the dialogue implied that Captain America and Black Widow seemed resigned to the idea if they couldn't save the civilians that they themselves (as in Captain America and Black Widow at the very least) wouldn't "escape" and leave the civilians behind to die.

If you're going to give Cap and Black Widow credit for that, you have to give Tony credit too. He was literally the *first one* to say that they'd have to make the sacrifice because there weren't other options on the table.

Protagonists beating the shit out of law enforcement due to mistaken identity is like a common trope in dozens of movies. Singling it out in Civil War is just aberrant.

It's standard behavior for an antihero or an edgy dark hero. It's very non-standard behavior for Captain America, which I would argue is kind of the entire point of that scene -- Steve is normally a "lawful good" paladin and in any other situation would be the first to condemn anyone who raised a hand against the lawful authorities, but he places his loyalty to Bucky above everything.

I would argue that this is the key moment where Steve goes from a purely heroic paladin to a fallen paladin, and I'm *not* arguing that this is an act of pure evil -- I'm saying this is a *huge* break point for him, and that I feel the significance is spoiled by the way the movie goes on to frame Civil War as "Steve vs Tony" as opposed to "lawful authority versus fallen Steve".

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Like seriously, if it was *anyone* but Bucky, Steve would *absolutely* insist that they have to turn themselves in to the authorities, not raise a hand against the police, and prove their innocence in court afterwards, and he would *absolutely* condemn anyone who went on the run because that's a criminal act *regardless* of factual innocence.

Steve is Captain America; he believes with absolute sincerity in Truth, Justice, and the American Way, and that means placing almost as absolute of trust in the American justice system. It is for Bucky and *only* for Bucky that he decides the rules go out the window because he cannot "risk" the slightest possibility of his one and only BFF being subject to criminal punishment.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

Steve is Captain America; he believes with absolute sincerity in Truth, Justice, and the American Way, and that means placing almost as absolute of trust in the American justice system.

Except where he has sufficient evidence to believe that the system has been perverted to render an innocent man guilty.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

Steve Rogers will always stand up to a bully no matter how strong or many that bully may be.

The government's mistake was believing Captain America's patriotism outweighed his sense of morality.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

Steve Rogers will always stand up to a bully no matter how strong or many that bully may be.

The government's mistake was believing Captain America's patriotism outweighed his sense of morality.

Except that Steve Rogers is a bully.

He was a bully before he got the serum, if one so weak that no one really cared. And he was a bully after he got the serum.

Seriously, there is zero legitimate argument in favor of Cap's position in MCU Civil War. He is, literally, demanding that the nations of the world grant him leave to enter their territory without permission, kill their citizens without their leave, wreck their property without their leave, and act as judge, jury, and executioner with the only justification being "I'm Captain America".

The Accords may well have been filled with all manner of objectionable content and a horrid idea as constituted but CAP NEVER READ THEM before making his claim so any theoretical objectionable content has zero bearing on his decision making process.

The fall of Shield, at least with that you can argue time pressure, an emergency situation, and trust issues. Although, again, a phone call to Tony would have solved a ton of problems.

But his rejection of the Accords and nominal position in Civil War? None of that applied, it was straight up Cap deciding on the basis of his own power that he is above the law and does not need to have any respect for the governments of the world or the people that put them in power.

And what does Cap proceed to spend the entire rest of that movie doing? Proving the other sides point. He goes off fights law enforcement to stop his friend (the questionably sane Hydra assassin and super soldier who video evidence has shown bombed the UN and in the process killed the king of a nation) from being arrested. In the process he wrecks an apartment building, destroys a helicopter, and destroys several cars that are at the time being driven by civilians.

Then, after being detained (not even arrested) for all of that he decides to disappear with his assassin budy, recruit several enhanced, and wreck an airport in the process of resisting arrest.

Not content with all of that, he then proceeds to break into the prison where the terrorists from the previous incident were being held and engage in a large scale prison break before fleeing to a non-extradition nation.

Civil War Cap is criminally, and civilly, liable for billions in damages, multiple felony offenses in multiple nations, and just basically a list of crimes long enough that in the real world they would get the US willing to drop a JDAM on their ass.