Infinity War Captain America|Steve Rogers - Chris Evans

[Bren]

Now go troll somewhere else, I'm on to you.

I don't care what else is going, this is freaking hilarious!

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I don't care what else is going, this is freaking hilarious!

I know right.

 

[Panacea]

Captain America - Sam Wilson #20

Also, three words for you: Boston Tea Party. Think about it.

Well, I'm British, not American, so the sensationalism of the American creation mythos doesn't mean a great deal to me. Regardless, this rationale only works if we assume that the law had somehow betrayed Steve - but that never happened. He's a criminal. He was acting as a vigilante around the world without oversight or permission. His teams actions lead to the deaths of dozens of innocent people in Civil War. If anything the governments of the world were being incredibly generous in offering his people a chance to work within the law, because by rights they could all have easily been rotting in a Nigerian prison instead.

And even if we are to accept for the sake of argument that there are select situations in which violently defying authority is beneficial, so what? The point of contention is not that governments are infallible, it's that the reason the MCU is in such a state is because of people - like Cap - who use violence to impose their will because they think their personal notion of what's right or for the best matters more than the democratic will of the people. A category into which most of the MCU's villains also fall.

 

[jr24tw]

He was acting as a vigilante around the world without oversight or permission. His teams actions lead to the deaths of dozens of innocent people in Civil War.

But it's not just Steve. The Avengers have been vigilant since they came together. They all do what they want without any oversight. Again I'm Team Tony in theory (not in execution) because there have to be consequences for one's actions, otherwise they are no better than the villains. Tony, Bruce and Wanda are walking free despite their actions in AoU. Lagos was another incident. If the average citizen or a villain would have done what they did, they would be in jail for the rest of their lives. So why are the law/rules different for Avengers?

Zemo was right in that there was no justice for the dead. His family died because of the Avengers, not because they couldn't prevent his family's death but because they caused it. And yet they were all walking free after. Same with the mother at the beginning of CW. If the Avengers had been treated like everyone else, in that actions have consequences, the accords aside, CW could have been prevented.

And even if we are to accept for the sake of argument that there are select situations in which violently defying authority is beneficial, so what? The point of contention is not that governments are infallible, it's that the reason the MCU is in such a state is because of people - like Cap - who use violence to impose their will because they think their personal notion of what's right or for the best matters more than the democratic will of the people. A category into which most of the MCU's villains also fall.

Cap's arrogance is my main beef with his stance. It's the typical American 'my way or the highway' attitude. Cap doesn't trust any government (can't really blame him, I wouldn't either) or person to have a better (and more correct) agenda than his own. Believing yourself to be better than other people is dangerously arrogant. And it doesn't seem to matter to him what kind of damage (property or human life) he leaves behind while he follows his agenda. Isn't that the attitude of villains?

And while I agree in theory with him when it comes to believing in people and protecting an innocent person, it doesn't justify all the damage you leave behind (because those victims are also innocent people), especially when the person you believe in isn't even innocent. Now I know Bucky was mind-controlled so he is innocent of his actions while in that state. But once you know that you can be triggered into a killing machine and all it takes is someone using the wrong word in your presence...you have a choice. You either don't give a damn or you take yourself out of the equation. Bucky did the former for years and didn't bother to do the latter until the CW credits scene. If he had taken himself out sooner then he would be innocent. But once he knew he could be triggered, he is partially responsible for everything he does should he be triggered again. The police officers Bucky and Steve trashed were also individuals and way more innocent than both of those guys. Same with the people who lose their jobs because they trashed an entire airport. But that doesn't matter to Steve. I guess he only wants to believe in individuals that he personally knows.

 

[Jaylee]

Well, I'm British, not American, so the sensationalism of the American creation mythos doesn't mean a great deal to me. Regardless, this rationale only works if we assume that the law had somehow betrayed Steve - but that never happened.

I won't rehash the nuclear weapon that almost got dropped on Steve's (and the rest of New York's head). I won't remind you that Steve disapproved of Project Insight BEFORE he found out it was hijacked by Hydra to kill millions of the world's brightest minds (including Tony Stark and Stephen Strange) because it traded privacy for security. I won't reiterate that Steve is a product of WW2 who has witnessed genocide and internment first-hand because you conveniently ignore these facts in your campaigne hatred for Steve (I know who you used to post as on imdb so I know that you have an extreme bias against Captain America).

What I will say is that the Accords, themselves, are a betrayal. They ask for total control over the Avengers, conscripting them to service. There is a middle ground between Tony and Steve's positions. In the comics the Avengers are a non-state actor. Like Red Cross, Oxfam, Greenpeace, and Amnesty International. They have a contract with the UN and the UN negotiated the conditions of the contract, but they are free to run themselves. The Avengers decide which battles to fight. Everyone against Team Cap's stance likes to bring up the 'safest hands are our own' as a sign of arrogance on Steve's part, what they always fail to mention is what he said just before it...

Exact quote from the movie: "What if this panel sends us somewhere we don't think we should go. What if there's somewhere we need to go and they don't let us."

Bosnia, Rwanda, Serbia, these are just a few real-life examples of what happens when the UN decides who gets to live and who gets to die. Genocide, that's what happens.

Also, Sam, Clint, Scott and Wanda were locked in the Raft without due process, which is against the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which is A UNITED NATIONS LAW. Know what else is against the ICCPR? Summary execution. Sharon Carter mention at the beginning of the film, after Peggy's funeral, that her orders were to 'shoot on sight', the order to kill Bucky without trial were therefore internationally illegal.

And even if we are to accept for the sake of argument that there are select situations in which violently defying authority is beneficial, so what? The point of contention is not that governments are infallible, it's that the reason the MCU is in such a state is because of people - like Cap - who use violence to impose their will because they think their personal notion of what's right or for the best matters more than the democratic will of the people. A category into which most of the MCU's villains also fall.

Nope. The Avengers have been defense, not offense. New York happened because aliens attacked. DC happened because Hydra was using Project Insight to kill millions of people. Lagos happened because they were trying to stop Crossbones from stealing a biological weapon (according to writers Markus and McFeely in the directors commentary this part was part of the original Cap 3 script, which would have been the madbomb story before Feige decided he wanted Civil War). Crossbones is also a known Hydra operative.

Also in Lagos, Crossbones had a bomb strapped to his body that was meant to take out an entire city block, had Wanda not intervened MORE people would have died. In Romania Bucky was going to be summarily executed, which is illegal. In Germany Team Cap was trying to stop five Winter Soldiers who could, apparently 'make an empire fall' without breaking a sweat. The airport battle, for Team Cap, was not about the Accords, it was about stopping Zemo from waking up five other Winter Soldiers. Steve has never sought power to horde it over others undemocratically. Your analogy was not just cherry picking, but a false equivelance.

 

[Capsfan]

Also, Sam, Clint, Scott and Wanda were locked in the Raft without due process, which is against the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which is A UNITED NATIONS LAW.

We just don't know that. We have never been told. Maybe they were waiting for the due process. It's been only day after the airport.

Know what else is against the ICCPR? Summary execution. Sharon Carter mention at the beginning of the film, after Peggy's funeral, that her orders were to 'shoot on sight', the order to kill Bucky without trial were therefore internationally illegal.

Then why nobody is against killing the terrorists on sight in real life? Bucky was considered a terrorist and the most dangerous Hydra's Agent. Fury killed Pierce without any trial. Cap was going to kill 5WSs without trial as well. They might have been brainwashed too, but Cap was trying to save innocent people, so he was ready to kill them. Or to let Bucky kill them.

Exact quote from the movie: "What if this panel sends us somewhere we don't think we should go. What if there's somewhere we need to go and they don't let us."

This is why there should have been safeguards as Tony offered: "This documents can be amended". It's better to try to do something than refuse to sign and be unable to do anything at all without becoming a criminal.

 

[Jaylee]

We just don't know that. We have never been told. Maybe they were waiting for the due process. It's been only day after the airport.

Section of the ICCPR - Articles 9.3 and 9.4 impose procedural safeguards around arrest, requiring anyone arrested to be promptly informed of the charges against them, and to be brought promptly before a judge. It also restricts the use of pre-trial detention, requiring it to be imposed only in exceptional circumstances and for as short a period of time as possible.

Then why nobody is against killing the terrorists on sight in real life?

...All of these are screen shots of headlines that came up after a minute long search of 'Summary Execution United Nations' on Google. You were saying?

"This documents can be amended". It's better to try to do something than refuse to sign and be unable to do anything at all without becoming a criminal.

Copy and pasted from ask-a-lawyer.freeadvice.com:

If you have already signed the contract, you could inquire of the dealer if the contract can be amended. If you and the dealer can agree to an amendment of the terms, that may resolve the problem. However, it is unlikely the dealer will agree to amend the contract after it has been signed.

 

[Capsfan]

Section of the ICCPR - Articles 9.3 and 9.4 impose procedural safeguards around arrest, requiring anyone arrested to be promptly informed of the charges against them, and to be brought promptly before a judge. It also restricts the use of pre-trial detention, requiring it to be imposed only in exceptional circumstances and for as short a period of time as possible.

How do you know that it wasn't the case? Nobody, even Clint, complained about it to Tony. Tony was allowed to visit them. It's just your assumption, that's all. And, for the record, yes, it IS exceptional circumstances since the Avengers are much more dangerous than usual people. So you can't put them in the common prison.

...All of these are screen shots of headlines that came up after a minute long search of 'Summary Execution United Nations' on Google. You were saying?

Then Obama's regime was illegal. Remind you how many terrorists were eliminated without trial? Steve himself isn't against it, when it's not about Bucky. So all these are just double standarts.

If you have already signed the contract, you could inquire of the dealer if the contract can be amended. If you and the dealer can agree to an amendment of the terms, that may resolve the problem. However, it is unlikely the dealer will agree to amend the contract after it has been signed.

The Accords isn't a contract between the UN and the Avengers. It's a law. And if Tony has power and money to force the UN's members to make amends, then I would say it's better than nothing.

 

[GeckoMoria]

Some of you are taking this wayyy too seriously...

 

[Jaylee]

How do you know that it wasn't the case? Nobody, even Clint, complained about it to Tony. Tony was allowed to visit them. It's just your assumption, that's all. And, for the record, yes, it IS exceptional circumstances since the Avengers are much more dangerous than usual people. So you can't put them in the common prison.

My assumption? We SAW it. The entirety of the airport battle was an 'arrest' from Team Tony's perspective. Not ONCE were Team Cap informed of their rights, given their charges, nor given access to a lawyer. And later, when Tony DID visit them on the Raft, he voiced surprise, himself, that the Avengers were being detained there.

"You have the right to remain silent. You have the right to an attorney. You have the rights to an attorney present during questioning." Not once were any of these words uttered during that airport battle. Peter doesn't count, he was a 15-year-old minor in a foreign country involved in an arrest without his legal guardian's knowledge or consent.

Moreover Steve asked Everette Ross pointblank if Bucky would be assigned an attorney after the tunnel incident, Everette Ross' answer was to laugh at Steve.

Then Obama's regime was illegal. Remind you how many terrorists were eliminated without trial? Steve himself isn't against it, when it's not about Bucky.

Steve doesn't kill, he incapacitates and turns villains over to the authorities. Do not kill is a part of the Avengers charter. The ONLY time he has was during times of self-defense.

As for the Obama administration and his handling of the Osama Bin Laden situation, the UN High Commisioner Navi Pillay had this to say:

"This was a complex operation and it would be helpful if we knew the precise facts surrounding his killing. The United Nations has consistently emphasized that all counter-terrorism acts must respect international law," Pillay said in a statement issued in response to a Reuters request."

So yes, Obama was questioned for his actions by the UN.

The Accords isn't a contract between the UN and the Avengers. It's a law. And if Tony has power and money to force the UN's members to make amends, then I

Accord definition: an official treaty or agreement.

 

[legendkillin]

Some of you are taking this wayyy too seriously...

haha agree.

 

[ernesth100]

Well Steve Is Putting Down The Shield Aye? And RDJ's contract will likely soon expire as well(honestly he might renew it and go background character mode ala Fury) . Along with Hemsworth and Hiddleston soon.



See I don't wanna say I'm right and be wrong. But I believe, if this oes the way I think it will. All the main Avengers we've come to see and know and love will move into different areas of the MCU as secondary characters or maybe even die for some.


And the new ones introduced(Ms. Marvel, Witch, Visions, Panther, Falcon, Bucky, Spidey, etc) will become the new main MCU heroes in the next MCU Phase Trilogy.


This isn't something they can recast and everything is normal. They have to keep the timeline moving.

 

[Panacea]

I won't rehash the nuclear weapon that almost got dropped on Steve's (and the rest of New York's head). I won't remind you that Steve disapproved of Project Insight BEFORE he found out it was hijacked by Hydra to kill millions of the world's brightest minds (including Tony Stark and Stephen Strange) because it traded privacy for security. I won't reiterate that Steve is a product of WW2 who has witnessed genocide and internment first-hand because you conveniently ignore these facts in your campaigne hatred for Steve (I know who you used to post as on imdb so I know that you have an extreme bias against Captain America).

You seem to be suffering from paranoid delusions. I don't believe I've ever posted about Captain America on IMDb and even me disliking him is an invention of your own imagination also. I like Captain America, he's a compelling character, but the reality of vigilantism in it's various forms contributing most toward the MCU world's instability - which is lest we forget what makes it entertaining - is just impossible to ignore. I wouldn't expect you to bring up the nuke or Project Insight either, neither help your argument very much. Real life history is full of governments making horrible mistakes, but that doesn't mean we should condone vigilantism and cross our fingers and hope that said vigilantes randomly happen to do a better job.

What I will say is that the Accords, themselves, are a betrayal. They ask for total control over the Avengers, conscripting them to service. There is a middle ground between Tony and Steve's positions. In the comics the Avengers are a non-state actor. Like Red Cross, Oxfam, Greenpeace, and Amnesty International. They have a contract with the UN and the UN negotiated the conditions of the contract, but they are free to run themselves. The Avengers decide which battles to fight. Everyone against Team Cap's stance likes to bring up the 'safest hands are our own' as a sign of arrogance on Steve's part, what they always fail to mention is what he said just before it...

Exact quote from the movie: "What if this panel sends us somewhere we don't think we should go. What if there's somewhere we need to go and they don't let us."

It's more than reasonable to seek to nationalize (or whatever the UN equivalent is) a paramilitary organization like the Avengers. In real life they'd probably be asked or simply made to disband.

Bosnia, Rwanda, Serbia, these are just a few real-life examples of what happens when the UN decides who gets to live and who gets to die. Genocide, that's what happens.

Yes, and ISIS and Boko Haram are just a couple of real-life examples of what happens when lawless organization seek to impose their morality on others.

Also, Sam, Clint, Scott and Wanda were locked in the Raft without due process, which is against the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which is A UNITED NATIONS LAW. Know what else is against the ICCPR? Summary execution. Sharon Carter mention at the beginning of the film, after Peggy's funeral, that her orders were to 'shoot on sight', the order to kill Bucky without trial were therefore internationally illegal.

But again, what's your point here? That state control is fallible? No one is arguing the contrary. There is democratic and legal recourse for the problems you cite however, assuming they could be substantiated. Bucky is probably classed as an enemy combatant however, and we know nothing of what was going on with the detained Avengers.

Nope. The Avengers have been defense, not offense. New York happened because aliens attacked. DC happened because Hydra was using Project Insight to kill millions of people. Lagos happened because they were trying to stop Crossbones from stealing a biological weapon (according to writers Markus and McFeely in the directors commentary this part was part of the original Cap 3 script, which would have been the madbomb story before Feige decided he wanted Civil War). Crossbones is also a known Hydra operative.

Also in Lagos, Crossbones had a bomb strapped to his body that was meant to take out an entire city block, had Wanda not intervened MORE people would have died. In Romania Bucky was going to be summarily executed, which is illegal. In Germany Team Cap was trying to stop five Winter Soldiers who could, apparently 'make an empire fall' without breaking a sweat. The airport battle, for Team Cap, was not about the Accords, it was about stopping Zemo from waking up five other Winter Soldiers. Steve has never sought power to horde it over others undemocratically. Your analogy was not just cherry picking, but a false equivelance.

You can sit and argue that the Avengers are morally superior to Hydra if you like, but no one is disputing that. I haven't made any moral equivalence because I haven't talked about the morality of either group. I've asserted that super powered vigilantism is responsible for most of the instability in the MCU, which I stand by. Whether Hydra contributes more to that than the Avengers is neither here nor there. It doesn't change the principle.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

People who thought Evans was done playing Captain America after the next Avengers films shouldn't be so quick to move on.

Chris Evans Is Open to Playing Captain America After ‘Avengers 4’

 

[Capsfan]

My assumption? We SAW it. The entirety of the airport battle was an 'arrest' from Team Tony's perspective. Not ONCE were Team Cap informed of their rights, given their charges, nor given access to a lawyer. And later, when Tony DID visit them on the Raft, he voiced surprise, himself, that the Avengers were being detained there.

Yes, your assumption. Listen, I love Cap. He is my favorite character in the MCU. I just don't see a reason to try to bend logic to make him into an angel being. He is human. He has some flaws too. It's normal. He was right in something and Tony was right in something. He made some mistakes, Tony made some mistakes. But Tony totally doesn't have the authority to arrest anyone. Cap's team was arrested by Ross and we did not see how that was going. We don't know, maybe they went willingly with team Tony after Cap's escaping. How do you imagine Stark catching someone like Ant-Man or Scarlet Witch? This is an omission of the film, but not Tony's team.

Moreover Steve asked Everette Ross pointblank if Bucky would be assigned an attorney after the tunnel incident, Everette Ross' answer was to laugh at Steve.

Bucky is the Winter Soldier. Famous HYDRA terrorist. Judging by the TV-news, he is known precisely in this capacity worldwide and not as the brainwashed innocent Cap's friend. This is the most legendary murderer of the 21st century. It is understandable why Ross laughed. But nevertheless, Bucky was provided by a doctor and Tony even offered to arrange a psychiatric hospital for him instead of a prison.

Steve doesn't kill, he incapacitates and turns villains over to the authorities. Do not kill is a part of the Avengers charter. The ONLY time he has was during times of self-defense.

The special forces were also sent to kill WS only because of self-defense. Because it is obvious that they couldn't have taken him alive otherwise. Even Steve understands it. If in a real world there appeared such a super-terrorist who can not be taken alive because he is a super soldier, would you also blame the government for sending special forces to kill this terrorist on the spot?
But still, notice how they had a cage for him being ready with them. So they were considering the possibility that the Winter Soldier would surrender himself and they wouldn't kill him.

And Steve himself was obviously okay with killing the 5 WS in Siberia without any trial.

So yes, Obama was questioned for his actions by the UN.

Obama was given a Nobel Peace Prize and no one imprisoned him for such crimes.

Accord definition: an official treaty or agreement.

Yes, it was an agreement. Between the UN countries, obviously not between the UN and the Avengers. Otherwise, the Avengers would have participated in the drafting from the start and would have known about the Act for a long while.

 

[meanmc]

People who thought Evans was done playing Captain America after the next Avengers films shouldn't be so quick to move on.

Chris Evans Is Open to Playing Captain America After ‘Avengers 4’

I said it many times - Marvel would be "stupid" not to rely on Captain America (Iron Man or Thor) in the future (, because they all got already "three movies" and "some contracts are off").

That is for many reasons - for Captain America for example, because his character fits to SO many stories.
With the "Steve/Bucky"-story we just saw ONE of them...

Marvel has got so many great characters, but they will need a Captain America in their universe!

 

[The Caped Knight]

Oh I think Cap presence will always be present in The MCU. While I hope it will be Chris Evans. I think the shift will move to Bucky taken the shield as the next Star spangled Avenger.

 

[Steamteck]

If the accords had been in effect in Avengers and Winter soldier, Cap and the Avengers would have had to ignore or defy them to save millions of lives. Honestly, I wouldn't sign the accords myself with the track record the authorities have in the MCU. The fickin' world security council was going to nuke NY and not to even mention SHIELD was the problem in DC

 

[Capsfan]

Or they could have received their permission and do just the same. It seems like the Accords aren't preventing Tony in saving lives in Homecoming.
And the WSC is not the UN at all.

 

[Steamteck]

Or they could have received their permission and do just the same. It seems like the Accords aren't preventing Tony in saving lives in Homecoming.
And the WSC is not the UN at all.

Obviously we watched different films and different MCU. It seems unlikely permission would have come or even if some miracle and MCU Govt agencies acted sanely and believed what was going on, things would never have happened in time.

We haven't seen homecoming yet or if the accords will even be addressed or how they apply.

 

[Spider-Fan]

People who thought Evans was done playing Captain America after the next Avengers films shouldn't be so quick to move on.

Chris Evans Is Open to Playing Captain America After ‘Avengers 4’

I hope he comes back. Bucky Cap or Falcon Cap just do not appeal to me. They may have the title, but there is only 1 true Captain America. I want Evans to stay, even if it means no Cap solos for a while ala Iron Man and just using him in smaller roles or Avengers films.

 

[HammerDown]

“I had six films in my Marvel contract, so I could have said after the third Avengers I was done, but they wanted to make the third and fourth Avengers films as a two-parter. They said they had so many other characters to fit in – Guardians of the Galaxy, Black Panther, Captain Marvel, Doctor Strange, Ant Man – and couldn’t get them all into one movie.”

http://screenrant.com/why-chris-evans-extended-marvel-contract-avenger-4/

 

[Capsfan]

So, does it mean that when Part 2 ceased to be Part 2 exactly, they run out of contract with Evans? Interesting.

 

[ScarlettW]

So, does it mean that when Part 2 ceased to be Part 2 exactly, they run out of contract with Evans? Interesting.

If Marvel wants him again, he'll probably sign for each movie, which will make him receive more $$$ than before, he can ask for% at the box office, etc.

 

[KevTravels]

If Marvel wants him again, he'll probably sign for each movie, which will make him receive more $$$ than before, he can ask for% at the box office, etc.

how much is he making $$$$$?