Civil War The Official Captain America: Civil War News & Speculation Thread - Part 8

[ImSGirl95]

http://heroichollywood.com/home-1/2...hot-their-scenes-in-captain-america-civil-war

Hope it's true! I would love to see what is Aunt May's opinion on having control over superheroes.

 

[TheVision]

Aunt May is an AILF

 

[TJByrum]

Uhh Ultron was nothing like the comics...it was all Whedon. If Ultron would have been more menacing and cominc accurate I think that could have HELPED, not hurt

That's not what I meant. I think the directors need to balance the comic-to-groundedness I'm these movies to be successful. It's why Falcon doesn't have his red tights; why wolverine doesn't wear yellow; it's why Hawkeye doesn't wear his mask; it's why cap doesn't have actual wings sticking out of his helmet.

In AOU, I don't think Whedon balanced that ratio.

 

[Son of Coul]

I wasn't happy with it either. Had Ultron remained Hank Pym's story they would have probably strung him up by his toenails but of course Stark gets to skate. Being Marvel's Golden Boy has it's advantages I guess.

I honestly think it moreso has to do with Whedon wanting a happier, wrapped-up ending, rather than something like TWS that was more bittersweet and open-ended. That's something people really don't bring up in regards to AOU I've noticed, that Whedon seems to have a very specific idea of what a superhero movie should be - played completely straight and operating on tried-and-true tropes, which is what made the first movie so sweet. But his desire to make a darker movie while upholding those principles sort of butted heads with each other.

The movie played out pretty close to the first one structurally & content-wise, but through a slightly dour filter in tone & look, so the (mostly) peppy nature of the scenes at the end felt unearned despite the attempt to sweep any substantial consequences under the rug. Sure, there's a roster shakeup, but it doesn't feel like that comes at the cost of any major issues from the original team members, with the exception of Banner. The mood of the Big Three's final scene is very chill, including for Thor, who casually talks about heading out to stop an impending apocalypse he's had nightmare visions of.

 

[TeeKay]

I think Stark and Steve's last scene in AoU just made me even more excited for Civil War. Ending on good terms makes it bitter sweet because we know where those two characters are headed next time we see them.

Its crazy that so many people were predicting CW since the first Avengers film.

 

[TheVision]

I expected there to be a clear rift between Cap and Steve at the end of AOU but there wasnt. So now Im even more intrigued about how that will happen in Civil War.

 

[BoredGuy]

I think Stark and Steve's last scene in AoU just made me even more excited for Civil War. Ending on good terms makes it bitter sweet because we know where those two characters are headed next time we see them.

Its crazy that so many people were predicting CW since the first Avengers film.

Yeah I think it was perceived by most around here to be kind of an inevitability
we know how much the Big Two love having heroes fight heroes, and Civil War was one of Marvel's top-selling events
Even those who hated the comic story acknowledge the dramatic potential of an idealogical split between two groups of Avengers

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I honestly think it moreso has to do with Whedon wanting a happier, wrapped-up ending, rather than something like TWS that was more bittersweet and open-ended. That's something people really don't bring up in regards to AOU I've noticed, that Whedon seems to have a very specific idea of what a superhero movie should be - played completely straight and operating on tried-and-true tropes, which is what made the first movie so sweet. But his desire to make a darker movie while upholding those principles sort of butted heads with each other.

The movie played out pretty close to the first one structurally & content-wise, but through a slightly dour filter in tone & look, so the (mostly) peppy nature of the scenes at the end felt unearned despite the attempt to sweep any substantial consequences under the rug. Sure, there's a roster shakeup, but it doesn't feel like that comes at the cost of any major issues from the original team members, with the exception of Banner. The mood of the Big Three's final scene is very chill, including for Thor, who casually talks about heading out to stop an impending apocalypse he's had nightmare visions of.

I try to not be too vocal in my criticism of Whedon around here because it riles up the fanboys something fierce but that's a good insight. In fact most of the problems I have with both Avengers movies are probably Joss-related. I'm a fan but not a huge one.

 

[BoredGuy]

Whedon's a fantastic writer
As a director tho, he could occasionally use some assistance
If, say, him and Drew Goddard or another one of his friendly creatives co-directed, his films might be a touch stronger in regards to pacing and editing

 

[TheVision]

Im actually glad AOU didnt try to just be a copy of A1. Its always better to come at things from a different angle in sequels even if its not 100% loved by everyone.

 

[MbJ]

Not It wasn't. It was totally made up by Whedon. The main problem with AOU was that the movie would just briefly touch on things and then expect the audience to just roll with it with little to no elaboration.

I don't think they meant the plot, I think they meant the tone.

Compared to TWS or something like Iron Man 1, AOU was very, unabashedly comic booky.

The freeze frame two-page spread of the Avengers leaping towards HYDRA. HYDRA being led by a hammy Nazi with a monocle, and who looks like Colonel Klink (compare Strucker to Pierce, who was more subdued and unassuming). HYDRA going from guys with machine guns in black military body armor to guys with laser guns and jet packs. The anime-style gag of Banner falling into Natasha's boobs. The brighter color palette (even the Quinjet goes to white and blue). The fantasy death scene with Cap's melodramatic last words towards Tony. The Infinity Gems. The whole WTF Thor subplot. The villain trying to destroy the world with a gravity device (seriously, that's straight out of a Saturday morning cartoon). Literally everything with the Vision.

That's neither good nor bad, necessarily. Most people liked the Vision (I certainly did). But I think it's definitely the most comic booky of the MCU films thus far, which I think is what they were getting at.

 

[TheVision]

A comic booky movie is something I wanted to see actually. But Ive always liked stylized, heightened kinds of cinema.

 

[TeeKay]

This is what comic booky is...

 

[craigdbfan]

AoU caught me off guard in that sense. It was a bit of sensory overload in the best way possible.

Although the characterization's (especially Captain America) all felt truncated and exaggerated as a way to summarize them for the uninitiated.

 

[ernesth100]

I'm wondering if they'll reference other heroes and future important players in the MCU. Possibly a reference to Stephen Strange, Carol Danvers, the Netflix Heroe, etc.

 

[DyeLorean]

I loved Age of Ultron precisely because of how it embraced the comic books in which the films are based on. I like that we can have a more 'serious' tone that works with Cap as in Winter Soldier, and also have a more 'loose' one in here, where we have all kinds of superheroes and superpowers and villains, I think it fits. When you try to apply too much seriousness to something what is supposed to be fun, you get the new Fantastic Four.

 

[First Avenger]

I loved Age of Ultron precisely because of how it embraced the comic books in which the films are based on. I like that we can have a more 'serious' tone that works with Cap as in Winter Soldier, and also have a more 'loose' one in here, where we have all kinds of superheroes and superpowers and villains, I think it fits. When you try to apply too much seriousness to something what is supposed to be fun, you get the new Fantastic Four.

Same here pal!

 

[CaptainWagner]

I honestly think it moreso has to do with Whedon wanting a happier, wrapped-up ending, rather than something like TWS that was more bittersweet and open-ended. That's something people really don't bring up in regards to AOU I've noticed, that Whedon seems to have a very specific idea of what a superhero movie should be - played completely straight and operating on tried-and-true tropes, which is what made the first movie so sweet. But his desire to make a darker movie while upholding those principles sort of butted heads with each other.

The movie played out pretty close to the first one structurally & content-wise, but through a slightly dour filter in tone & look, so the (mostly) peppy nature of the scenes at the end felt unearned despite the attempt to sweep any substantial consequences under the rug. Sure, there's a roster shakeup, but it doesn't feel like that comes at the cost of any major issues from the original team members, with the exception of Banner. The mood of the Big Three's final scene is very chill, including for Thor, who casually talks about heading out to stop an impending apocalypse he's had nightmare visions of.

These are very good points.

I expected there to be a clear rift between Cap and Steve at the end of AOU but there wasnt. So now Im even more intrigued about how that will happen in Civil War.

Same here.

 

[TalismanRing]

AOU showed that currently Steve & Tony had different ideas on super heroing, and were also in different stages of their lives regarding it and that was what was important to set up, not them having any personal animosity.

I have no issue at all with how they ended AOU on good terms. The one thing I really miss in both Avengers movies is that they don't develop a closer relationship so it could be something even nearing what they were to each other in the comics. That they were long time team mates and very close fiends in the comics is what made their actions in The Civil War so wrenching. So their being friendly at the end works better than their being enemies.

If Civil War isn't about friends as well as comrades on opposite sides then it isn't as powerful. This is an event that divided not only friends but family. Sue left Reed over this. It's why having Nat on the opposite side from Steve and Clint is more powerful. This isn't supposed to be about lining up with friends and and who likes who most but about taking a stand on different sides of ideology and politics.

Mackie at D23 described it as a fight in the family and that's what it should be.

 

[Loki882]

I wasn't happy with it either. Had Ultron remained Hank Pym's story they would have probably strung him up by his toenails but of course Stark gets to skate. Being Marvel's Golden Boy has it's advantages I guess.

Marvel's golden boy, HAH! They've been doing everything possible to ruin his character in the comics for YEARS now. Oh and post-comic CW, EVERYTHING bad that happened in the MU was Tony's fault (regardless of if it actually was or not). And CW was COMPLETELY his fault apparently. Hank Pym, got off pretty much scott free. Reed Richards, the only "consequences" he suffered were that his wife was annoyed with him for awhile. Tony, he became the most despised/wanted man in the MU and then got beaten into a coma by Norman Osborn.

If anything Cap is "Marvel's golden boy." They're constantly pushing how he the "bestest best ever." He ALWAYS right, he's ALWAYS on the right side, he can NEVER be wrong about ANYTHING, and they've even been dragging other character/heroes through the mud just to make him look good. Honestly Marvel's depiction of Cap post-CW has constantly approached Gary Stu-status. To the extent that I've gone from being a fan of his, to actually kind of disliking him (because I'm so freaking tired of it).

 

[TeeKay]

Marvel's golden boy, HAH! They've been doing everything possible to ruin his character in the comics for YEARS now. Oh and post-comic CW, EVERYTHING bad that happened in the MU was Tony's fault (regardless of if it actually was or not). And CW was COMPLETELY his fault apparently. Hank Pym, got off pretty much scott free. Reed Richards, the only "consequences" he suffered were that his wife was annoyed with him for awhile. Tony, he became the most despised/wanted man in the MU and then got beaten into a coma by Norman Osborn.

If anything Cap is "Marvel's golden boy." They're constantly pushing how he the "bestest best ever." He ALWAYS right, he's ALWAYS on the right side, he can NEVER be wrong about ANYTHING, and they've even been dragging other character/heroes through the mud just to make him look good. Honestly Marvel's depiction of Cap post-CW has constantly approached Gary Stu-status. To the extent that I've gone from being a fan of his, to actually kind of disliking him (because I'm so freaking tired of it).

I think Whiskey meant MCU Tony Stark not the one in the comics.

 

[RedRose]

I don't mind a fun lighthearted film (loved Ant-Man) but for whatever reason, AoU fell short to me. It was too much clobbered together. It felt like some over anxious geek wrote and directed it. . No but seriously. I think it helps to have co-collaborators, whether it's a separation between writer/director, 2 writers, whatever. I saw the movie twice and at this point I don't really want to see it ever again. :/

 

[TalismanRing]

The MCU does not equal the comics. And I think the MCU has treated and written Tony and Steve much better than their comic counterparts for the last decade.

Tony's been a mess and a on and off villain in the comics but Steve characterization from CW on has been martyr and plot device than Goldenboy. They've put him through the wringer. He's been murdered, replaced by Bucky Cap, then wandering in time, then back for a short while before losing 12 years in Dimenion Z, then Sharon shoots his child in the throat while rescuing him, then he comes back, get's his mind wiped by Tony and Friends, is de-serumed and an old man, loses being Cap to Sam (twice in less than a decade is ridiculous), his son comes back and he gets to watch him be murdered again, then the world ends with him and Tony at each others throats dying. (and I won't even get into what just happened to him in 1872). Even when 616 settles down again he's reportedly still going to be 95 years old and looking it and w/o his own book. That's some real Goldenboy treatment.

 

[Ninjablade]

I have no issue at all with how they ended AOU on good terms. The one thing I really miss in both Avengers movies is that they don't develop a closer relationship so it could be something even nearing what they were to each other in the comics. That they were long time team mates and very close fiends in the comics is what made their actions in The Civil War so wrenching. So their being friendly at the end works better than their being enemies.

If Civil War isn't about friends as well as comrades on opposite sides then it isn't as powerful. This is an event that divided not only friends but family. Sue left Reed over this. It's why having Nat on the opposite side from Steve and Clint is more powerful. This isn't supposed to be about lining up with friends and and who likes who most but about taking a stand on different sides of ideology and politics.

Mackie at D23 described it as a fight in the family and that's what it should be.

I agree. I think they should have developed Steve and Tony's friendship a little bit more. It's like watching two friends fight, it doesn't matter who side you agree with more, you don't want someone to win because then their friendship is ruined. You just want them to make up. I don't want to be able to root for a single side and then be happy that they win or sad if they loose, because then it has lost some of the emotional kick.

It's what made Steve and Bucky's fight so emotional because you don't want to watch them fight because of their long lasting friendship, so it's a little heart wrenching seeing them go at it.

 

[Ninjablade]

I don't mind a fun lighthearted film (loved Ant-Man) but for whatever reason, AoU fell short to me. It was too much clobbered together. It felt like some over anxious geek wrote and directed it. . No but seriously. I think it helps to have co-collaborators, whether it's a separation between writer/director, 2 writers, whatever. I saw the movie twice and at this point I don't really want to see it ever again. :/

Same here. Was a little bored once the third act came rolling around my second time though.