Civil War The Civil War "ANYTHING GOES" Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK - NO SPOILER TAGS REQ.! - Part 3

[Shikamaru]

The Justice League is actually UN-sanctioned in most versions, including the comics. There was also an episode of Young Justice where they couldn't step into a country because it wasn't part of the UN.

IMO,the problem with Team Vap is they still view the film through "superhero goggles". Once you factor out the fact he's a superhero and the main character of the story, I don't think he'd coem off as sympathetic. Imagine if they remade the skeleton of the film but with a random squad of army soldiers instead. I don't think the response would have been as 50/50.

You see but back to Cap's point, that's all well and dandy but it'd only be a matter of time before the UN Panel began coordinating missions for them to carry out not for the greater good but to fulfill their own personal agendas.

It goes from carrying out missions for the greater good to carrying out missions for the greater good...for me. And going by the Accords, the Avengers wouldn't have a say in the matter.

To the average MCU citizen, on what grounds can Cap claim he's carrying out missions for the greater good?Everything Cap argued about the Accords could be applied to him. Wylie has a point that he expects the world to trust him while he refuses to trust others.

No one in the real world can go around playing vigilante and not have any accountability so I don't see why Cap should.

 

[LostSon88]

But the problem is that this is how the film portrays it.

The film's "exploration" of this concept is a single line about the good old days. Simply not enough for that type of bond. You cannot just rely on the few scenes they had in previous films to satisfy this character element. As is so often said around here, the film must stand on its own.

Except that MARVEL recently said that they're no longer going to approach their films that way. They see these films now as serials and basically stated that they're no longer going to cater to the 'virgin viewers' that walk into a MARVEL film completely green.

So it sounds as if they're now going to expect the fans to have knowledge of these characters and their history prior to seeing the films.

From that context, I don't need them to elaborate on their relationship any further. I've gotten the gist of it from TFA and WS.

 

[terry78]

Honestly, if the Avengers existed in our world and you knew they were running around to various countries and damage happened, regardless of how cool they looked, or what they did to justify I am almost certain most people would be giving some side eye regarding them. We do that with every military/law enforcement outfit we have now.

 

[MadVillainy]

Honestly, if the Avengers existed in our world and you knew they were running around to various countries and damage happened, regardless of how cool they looked, or what they did to justify I am almost certain most people would be giving some side eye regarding them. We do that with every military/law enforcement outfit we have now.

Indeed

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

If anything, Cap could do a better job of coordinating with the local authorities and keeping them informed.

Lagos would've gone much differently had Cap given the local government a heads up. They probably would've been able to help out had they known what was going on.

That's where the arrogance comes in, hence Rhodey's comment to Cap at HQ.

I agree with that. But then again his reasoning probably was, if they know we're here they won't act? It's quite complicated on both sides. I mean the U.S. didn't warn Pakistan when they finished off Osama and we seem to be cool with that.

 

[The Guard]

Except that MARVEL recently said that they're no longer going to approach their films that way. They see these films now as serials and basically stated that they're no longer going to cater to the 'virgin viewers' that walk into a MARVEL film completely green.

So it sounds as if they're now going to expect the fans to have knowledge of these characters and their history prior to seeing the films.

From that context, I don't need them to elaborate on their relationship any further. I've gotten the gist of it from TFA and WS.

Then what's their CURRENT relationship?

Because for most of the film, it's Bucky standing around quietly.

I'm not advocating for a retread of their history.

This is my point. Within the context of THIS film, their relationship is not explored. Cap makes all the decisions, and Bucky is a plot device.

What does Bucky want now, aside from not to be killed? What drives him?

He's barely a character in these films.

 

[Spider-Fan]

You see but back to Cap's point, that's all well and dandy but it'd only be a matter of time before the UN Panel began coordinating missions for them to carry out not for the greater good but to fulfill their own personal agendas.

It goes from carrying out missions for the greater good to carrying out missions for the greater good...for me. And going by the Accords, the Avengers wouldn't have a say in the matter.

Exactly. Committees have agendas. Political parties have agendas. If you let the Avengers become slaves to the UN, who is to say the UN won't have them go off and over throw other countries they don't like or something like that without any good reason. Political institutions, like the UN, are well known for corruption. The Avengers would no doubt become some perverse idea under them. In fact, it happens within the movie itself.

 

[Wylie Times]

But what would be the middle ground exactly?

As I've said numerous times, the middle ground is for the UN to have a degree of oversight an the power to hold The Avengers accountable for their actions.

A liaison could be assigned to make sure things run as smoothly as possible.

This is pretty much the set up they had in the comics for some time.

Natasha at the end also did switch sides

Actually there's nothing to indicate that she changed her stance on the Accords. She just acknowledged that Steve wouldn't stop and urged Tony to stop chasing after him.

and Tony IMO has sort of been the reason for everything bad that's ever happened to the Avengers hasn't he? Everything they've technically fought has been because of him.

The only thing the Avengers have fought against that was Tony's fault is Ultron.

Tony had nothing to do with Loki and the Alien Invasion, Hydra reverse engineering Chitari weapons, or Crossbones' attack in Lagos.

but if the United Nations asks them to do something that they don't believe is right what do they do?

Being a vigilante isn't a civil right. If they didn't want to do something the UN asked them do they could have just refused and retired.

I understand that's not your argument, but as far as the film goes. I think it was either all or nothing.

If it were all or nothing Tony wouldn't have been able to keep Steve and Sam out of jail the first time, nor would he have been able to talk Ross into letting HIM bring Steve in. The only reason Cap's team ended up in jail was because Steve kept escalating things.

Because at the end of the day Bucky did whatever he did because he was under control of governments. Obviously they wouldn't torture and brainwash the Avengers but hey we thought Shield was pretty safe.

In the film they were going to send Bucky to psychiatric facility in the U.S.

"I was brainwashed" doesn't mean you just get a free pass and get to go about your merry way. He didn't deserve to be jailed or executed, but he damn sure needed to be under psychiatric care.

But look at the Justice League for example. They have no oversight whatsoever. They discuss as a team what should and should not be done and then if the consequences are severe, they intervene.

There have literally been dozens upon dozens of stories about the Justice League overreaching with their power and the governments of the world demanding more oversight of the team. The organization Checkmate exist specifically too make sure teams like the Justice League don't get out of control.

 

[Wylie Times]

Exactly. Committees have agendas. Political parties have agendas. If you let the Avengers become slaves to the UN, who is to say the UN won't have them go off and over throw other countries they don't like or something like that without any good reason. Political institutions, like the UN, are well known for corruption. The Avengers would no doubt become some perverse idea under them. In fact, it happens within the movie itself.

Whose to say the Avengers wouldn't become some perverse idea under Steve Rogers leadership? What if he decides all on his own that they need to invade some country because they're a possible threat the world?

You can't just look at the issue from Steve's perspective. As I keep saying his concerns are valid, but the answer isn't to just allowed the Avengers to do whatever they want. Steve pretty much argues that the Avengers should be above the law and above reproach.

And it has to be noted that they're not being forced to sign the Accords. They don't have to be Avengers. Being a vigilante isn't a civil rights issue.

 

[Wylie Times]

Then what's their CURRENT relationship?

Because for most of the film, it's Bucky standing around quietly.

I'm not advocating for a retread of their history.

This is my point. Within the context of THIS film, their relationship is not explored. Cap makes all the decisions, and Bucky is a plot device.

What does Bucky want now, aside from not to be killed? What drives him?

He's barely a character in these films.

The film clearly shows that Bucky has suffered severe mental trauma. As things progress and as he spends more time with Steve we see more of his actual personality (and memories) come to the surface.

 

[The Guard]

Now, when you say "actual personality"...

 

[Charlatan]

Exactly. Committees have agendas. Political parties have agendas. If you let the Avengers become slaves to the UN, who is to say the UN won't have them go off and over throw other countries they don't like or something like that without any good reason. Political institutions, like the UN, are well known for corruption. The Avengers would no doubt become some perverse idea under them. In fact, it happens within the movie itself.

you can't exactly have a rogue element out there acting in sovereign territory without clearance either.

 

[LostSon88]

you can't exactly have a rogue element out there acting in sovereign territory without clearance either.

Cap needs to admit that they'll need some form of oversight. He may have the best intentions but to suggest that he knows what's best for the world is as Rhodey mentioned, ridiculously arrogant.

Stark needs to admit that giving the UN/Govt. total control over the Avengers is wrong as well.

There's a middle ground to be found there. Both sides are simply too stubborn to see it.

 

[terry78]

The issue is, and I think they handled it well, is that most people think any type of concession on their part will lead to a slippery slope. I hear it all the time, that giving in a little means that later they'll constantly want more.

 

[Shikamaru]

Exactly. Committees have agendas. Political parties have agendas. If you let the Avengers become slaves to the UN, who is to say the UN won't have them go off and over throw other countries they don't like or something like that without any good reason. Political institutions, like the UN, are well known for corruption. The Avengers would no doubt become some perverse idea under them. In fact, it happens within the movie itself.

Just out of curiosity, do you apply that same reasoning to authority figures in the real world? I'm talking police, military, etc.

Does the fact that major systemic issues exist within those institutions justify people taking the law in their own hands? Vigilantism still isn't a civil right anywhere in the developed world, why would the Avengers be an exception?

There's also the current political climate you have to take in account. Right now there's great debate over whether Western powers should to go around playing world police. The opinions we see expressed in the film about the Avengers are the exact same opinions the rest of the world has towards the West, particularly the US. I know everyone's beliefs differ but if people can agree someone like Cheney can't go around invading whichever nation he pleases, how is Cap any different? Besides the fact it's a superhero film and Cap's "the good guy".

Hell, compare the Lagos situation with Trayvon Martin's. A nightwatcher operating in his own neighborhood still had to face trials due to his story looking suspicious. Wanda can travel wherever she wants with no VISA, not let other countries know of her entrance, cause an incident like that in public and still not go to trial? Would that be tolerable in any place resembling the real world?

As for it "happening within the movie itself", what were really the chances the psychiatrist assigned to evaluate Bucky was part of HYDRA? Of course it could happen (and did happen), but does that justify Buck being able to run loose with no proper evaluation because Steve believes he's good again? Again, would we apply that same standard to real-life law enforcements?

 

[Wylie Times]

Cap needs to admit that they'll need some form of oversight. He may have the best intentions but to suggest that he knows what's best for the world is as Rhodey mentioned, ridiculously arrogant.

Stark needs to admit that giving the UN/Govt. total control over the Avengers is wrong as well.

There's a middle ground to be found there. Both sides are simply too stubborn to see it.

Tony didn't want to give then total control. He just knew they need oversight and knew that the Accords were going to happen with or without them. He had the same stance as Widow, which was if they were directly involved they could make changes and put safeguard in place.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Just out of curiosity, do you apply that same reasoning to authority figures in the real world? I'm talking police, military, etc.

Does the fact that major systemic issues exist within those institutions justify people taking the law in their own hands? Vigilantism still isn't a civil right anywhere in the developed world, why would the Avengers be an exception?

There's also the current political climate you have to take in account. Right now there's great debate over whether Western powers should to go around playing world police. The opinions we see expressed in the film about the Avengers are the exact same opinions the rest of the world has towards the West, particularly the US. I know everyone's beliefs differ but if people can agree someone like Cheney can't go around invading whichever nation he pleases, how is Cap any different? Besides the fact it's a superhero film and Cap's "the good guy".

Hell, compare the Lagos situation with Trayvon Martin's. A nightwatcher operating in his own neighborhood still had to face trials due to his story looking suspicious. Wanda can travel wherever she wants with no VISA, not let other countries know of her entrance, cause an incident like that in public and still not go to trial? Would that be tolerable in any place resembling the real world?

As for it "happening within the movie itself", what were really the chances the psychiatrist assigned to evaluate Bucky was part of HYDRA? Of course it could happen (and did happen), but does that justify Buck being able to run loose with no proper evaluation because Steve believes he's good again? Again, would we apply that same standard to real-life law enforcements?

When people screw up, absolutelu there needs to be accountabilty. Steve accepts what his actions mean for himself. He doesnt argue he violates the accords once he does it. Steve does much wrong in the movie, yes. But fundamentally, you cannot give another organization power over you and think said power will be limited over time. In this case, the accords wanted an innocent man, and there was no time to get anything altered.

Tony didn't want to give then total control. He just knew they need oversight and knew that the Accords were going to happen with or without them. He had the same stance as Widow, which was if they were directly involved they could make changes and put safeguard in place.

Middle ground i agree is ideal, but do you think once the sign the accords that the UN will alter then like Tony wants? People dont give up power. They should have held out and got the document altered first. That is how it should have been handled in the first place.

 

[Fumardude]

Can someone fill me in on black panthers ring??
And what did crossbones mean when he said "i dont work like that no more" when black widow stung him?

Btw best CBM ever imo
My personal favs..
1.Empire Strikes Back/A New Hope
2.Civil War
3.The Dark Knight
4.Indiana Jones & the last Crusade
5.The Mask
6.Space Jam
7.Dirty Harry
8.Guardians of the Galaxy
9.Taxi Driver
10.GoldeneyeO7

Honorable mentions: The Matrix, Bone Tomahawk, Spider-Man 2, Gran Torino, Avengers, License to KillO7 & John Wick

 

[Wylie Times]

Middle ground i agree is ideal, but do you think once the sign the accords that the UN will alter then like Tony wants? People dont give up power. They should have held out and got the document altered first. That is how it should have been handled in the first place.

Hold out in what way? The Accords were going to be ratified with or without them. They could have involved themselves in the process. T'Chaka wanted Steve to be there and her refused.

As I pointed out earlier we had already seen that Tony was making inroads to ensure the Accords weren't stacked against them. He was able to keep Steve and Sam out of Jail, ensure Bucky was sent to psychiatric facility in the U.S, and later he convinced Ross to let Tony and his team bring in Steve, Sam, and Bucky instead of a military unit being sent in.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Do you know the one person that would have made perfect sense in here but was not in the film? Nick Fury. He was shown to be working at the New Avengers compound at the end of AoU but when a big time crisis struck in CW, he was nowhere to be found. I would have found it interesting to see how he would dealt with the inner turmoil of the team.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Hold out in what way? The Accords were going to be ratified with or without them. They could have involved themselves in the process. T'Chaka wanted Steve to be there and her refused.

As I pointed out earlier we had already seen that Tony was making inroads to ensure the Accords weren't stacked against them. He was able to keep Steve and Sam out of Jail, ensure Bucky was sent to psychiatric facility in the U.S, and later he convinced Ross to let Tony and his team bring in Steve, Sam, and Bucky instead of a military unit being sent in.

Hold out meaning dont sign on the dotted line until both parties agreed. Like every decent union negotiation ever, there should have been mediation and changes before anyone signed an imperfect arrangement

 

[Wylie Times]

Hold out meaning dont sign on the dotted line until both parties agreed. Like every decent union negotiation ever, there should have been mediation and changes before anyone signed an imperfect arrangement

That certainly would have worked out better than Steve's (Don't sign and do whatever I want) or Tony's (sign and hope to change things from the inside) approach.

 

[Spider-Fan]

That certainly would have worked out better than Steve's (Don't sign and do whatever I want) or Tony's (sign and hope to change things from the inside) approach.

I agree, and that is where both parties were wrong. That is how i think it should have been handled day 1

 

[Silver Surfer]

So are the Secret Avengers in Wakanda now? And how does that play out when the Black Panther solo movie hits? Unless it's a prequel...

 

[Webfoot Hero]

So are the Secret Avengers in Wakanda now? And how does that play out when the Black Panther solo movie hits? Unless it's a prequel...

They didn't really say how the Secret Avengers will be operating so that's TBD.