Should Civil War really be from Cap's perspective?

[Taarna]

One of the interesting things of Civil War was that it wasn't black and white, it was full of greys. With Marvel's "Event Story" being told as a Captain America film I feel that this conflict will be shown (primarily) as a good vs evil film. At the end of this movie, I feel that there should matters unresolved and the audience shouldn't think either side is totally right.

What do you guys think?

I'd rather see a Secret Wars two part movie.

Civil war is mostly about privacy, registration and having the hero's report to the government.

The movie will need some tricks to dupe the hero's into fighting each other.

The tricks could be mind control, Mystique impersonating a hero, or Doctor Strange's magic.

 

[3dman27]

mystique is unavailable to the MCU perhaps the chameleon would do as that would explain spidey's involvement in the story as he IS a spider-man villian

 

[Pecola1]

I do like the idea of spider man being the focus, but I HIGHLY doubt that will happen. Especially because they have already announced that it will be a captain america movie, as well as the storyline was written before they were even planning on having spider man. There is enough time to rescript some stuff and add in spiderman, but I don't think they would have enough time to rescript it all from spidermans perspective.

That being said, the movie is almost certainly going to be 'from captain america's perspective'. But that doesn't mean they are going to make all anti registration look like bad guys! I think plenty of times bad things have happened in the comics, and the MCU that were a hero's fault, and NO ONE blamed the hero. Iron Man thinks it's a good idea to have registration, and if that ends up backfiring, as the captain thinks will happen, then it IS NOT fully his fault. He was doing what he thought was best, even if he was blind.

(Kinda like how some people are talking about the U.S. President, some say he made no mistake, some say he made a mistake and it wasn't his fault because he didn't know, and some say he did know and he has made a mistake. On any given issue.)

I personally hope that IF they MUST kill Steve Rogers, Bucky along with others should help make sure that the Steve's legend lives on, and the idea of freedom, liberty, and the idea that those are more important than trying to make the world perfect. Either way it seems they will have to make it so that the registration act is not a good idea. Otherwise Cap's death is useless. His fighting would be seen as irrational, he would have been completely wrong to fight, and his death would have been in vain. We CAN'T have that happen. If he dies and then Stark decides against registration, then Starks fighting was in vain, and therefore it puts a little more 'fault' on Tony Stark. What they need to do is make the registration a bad idea, but make it seem more like the whole Hydra issue, it was all behind the scenes and was too hard for Stark to see it was a problem. Stark would have the same guilt on his shoulders that Nick Fury had, he feels slightly responsible, but he knows it wasn't really his fault. The fight for registration is successful, but when and if it backfires, Tony sees that all his work in fighting for registration has been dumped down the drain but has also been turned into something bad.

 

[Pecola1]

They could do Captain America: Civil War, then Iron Man: Civil War, then Avengers: Civil War, however I think the whole idea of freedom being needed, and the idea of superheros needing to be controlled HAS ALREADY been presented.

Captain America 2: Winter Soldier: Plotline is that shield got too much power, then turned evil, and they compromised freedom for security. This was clearly a mistake, and bad things happen because of it.
Avengers 2: Age of Ultron: Plotline is Stark exercises his freedom to try to build something to help the world, because there was no security keeping people from creating dangerous robots such as Ultron, it was a mistake, bad things happen.
Captain America 3: Civil War: Plotline shows the balance of freedom and security must be found.

The problem is I think from what I know now, combined with what I just stated, is that Age of Ultron, since it is a focus on Iron Man's mistake, maybe should have been Iron Man 4: Age of Ultron. Then Civil war would be Avengers: Civil War and they wouldn't necessarily have to focus on Captain too much.
It shouldn't be a problem that most of the Avengers and super heroes show up in Age of Ultron (if it were Iron Man 4) as Cap 3 also contained many other characters. (Though they could have used more.)

 

[MbJ]

Age of Ultron has a lot more stuff going on than Iron Man so there's no way it should have just been Iron Man 4. come on now, people.

 

[Pecola1]

Age of Ultron has a lot more stuff going on than Iron Man so there's no way it should have just been Iron Man 4. come on now, people.

I know the current movie with its current plot shouldn't be, but I'm saying it COULD HAVE been.
I fully agree that the idea of Ultron involves more than just Stark, but because he creates Ultron in this Universe, he is kinda the key focus when it comes to regret. Given that I made the claim that the main theme of the film is that Tony used his freedom to make Ultron, and if there were a Govt. program to stop him and question how safe it was, then he wouldn't have created a monster. That storyline could be (or could have been) focused more on Tony, and would fit the idea of doing a Captain America 2: Civil War, Iron Man 4: Civil War, Avengers 2: Civil War. (Obviously they wouldn't need to use those titles, as that's not what the were, but my point was that both the first 2 movies are build up to civil war.)

 

[gildedmuse]

I know this is going to sound strange, but I actually think an Avengers: Civil War movie would be a bad idea, and not just because of the poor execution of the storyline in the comics.

The MCU's Civil War could never be the sage of the comics. The first problem is obviously size - the MCU is tiny compared to it's 616 counterpart. Even if you waited a few phases to fill up the ranks, comics and movies are very different mediums. Imagine Game Of Thrones as a film, it just wouldn't work the same way. In a lot of ways with only two and a half hours, a film is closer to a novella than a book series: you need to have a clear and tight story, there isn't room for every character to get a digression from the main plot to see how every individual is effected in detail.

With that in mind, I think even an Avengers centered story would risk either coming off less as a country at war with itself and more of a inner club house skirmish, you know? If you're keeping the plot on the Avengers than you expect all those characters to have some impact on the story which actually takes away from how big the problem can seem. To put it another way - didn't the SHIELD of TWS feel bigger than in the first Avengers? Because in the Avengers movie you have so many "main characters" you actually have less time for side characters. You end up spending so much time just on the team's squabbling that you have to cut back on how many lesser heroes you can show. You can either give a good chunk of time to each Avenger or give glances and flashes of time to three times as many minor supers. By making it Cap's film you're less beholden to creating a true ensemble piece which can actually help to make the effects of Registration or whatever feel bigger.

It also helps to avoid a situation where you're making an Avengers movie that comes off as an Iron Man & Captain America style film. Like I said, since this is a single movie and not a series with individual character issues you have to tight it up and give someone focus, and the obvious candidates would be Tony and Steve. If you try and keep it to the Avengers the story comes off as nothing more than a domestic - a team fight with no major impact outside of these guys. If you decided, well, since Tony and Steve are the focus we'll just treat the rest of the team as background characters so we can bring in more minor and background characters to fill out the story... Well, people already complain about the first movie coming off as Iron Man and Friends.

I think making it a straight up Cap film really is a smart move. It gives you a nice center, a POV character and doesn't limit the scope to the team or else risk treating them as background characters. At the same time, nothing about it being a Cap movie dictates that the opposing side has to be treated as the bad guys. Main characters aren't always in the right - they're not even always the protagonist of their own stories. Which isn't to say Steve won't be - he is Captain America, of course he is a hero - but there are plenty of stories where the main character isn't in every way perfect. I think being a Captain America film is less restricting than a lot of people seem to assume, where as by declaring it an Avengers or all out Marvel film could actually create more problems when it comes to things like pacing and screen time and size.

 

[Pecola1]

I see what you mean. I think I agree with you. I guess my main problem is actually quite similar to yours: it's a lot of stuff in one movie. Focusing on one character fixes that... but...
I saw another point that you may have made by accident...
What if...
and this is gonna sound crazy...
They turned Avengers/Civil War into a high budget TV series, allowing a longer story, more in depth characters and the hype would also be drawn out throughout however long it aired.
Specifically with Civil War. They could do it like the comics did, (if I remember it right) the TV show would come on every week, then there could be a couple of movies released within the whole series. The TV show could focus on many characters in depth. (Even though there aren't NEAR as many characters as were in the Comics) The TV show would show Caps side and Iron Mans side. Then there could be a Spiderman movie for instance, released mid season. This Spiderman movie could show from spideys view, coming into the fight joining sides, switching sides, etc. The TV series would continue after the film was released, but now spidey will be included. Otherwise they could introduce spiderman in an episode. Anyhow, the movies that came out would focus on one particular character, and not necessarily JUST on the war but it would show that the war is going on during the movie.

It's a really rough idea, and can easily be critiqued to work better. It would probably end up drawing out the civil war longer than it needs to be... but it would allow for a closer analysis of why each character chose the side they did. The TV series would switch from Iron Man to Captain America either every other week or during each episode. In the end it would probably cost so much, and take so much more time, that it might not be worth it, but the idea at least would be kinda cool.
(This could be just civil war, or the TV series would show different avengers films each season. Perhaps this would work even better for the Infinity gems...)

 

[Green Goblin]

Personally, I think due to the massive story, there should be Captain America Civil War then Iron Man Civil War, but if they did that Iron Man would have to come first seeing Captain Americas death ends Civil War.

Would they really kill off Cap in his own flick?

 

[Steamteck]

The less it's like the comic, the better the movie will be.

Hopefully they can take something terrible and make it good. I have a fair amount of confidence. Only IM3 has severely disappointed me so far. ( I really hate that film though)


I didn't care for the Winter Soldier at all in the comics though and the movie was great.

 

[hoy-small-fry]

Would they really kill off Cap in his own flick?

Don't see why not, its an ending of sorts. Although I'm against killing him for the sake of "well it happened in the comics"