Civil War What will be the ramifications of Civil War?

[BullMcGiveny]

What if the movie ends with Steve defeating the main villain, whoever they are, but the registration act passes. And Steve goes underground with those on his side and forms a Secret Avengers team that is similar to both the Civil War-era team and the Commander Rogers-era tea.

 

[fixxxer]

^

I like that idea with a bit of a tweak. I wouldn't want the climactic battle to involve a villain, but rather a good ol' Team Cap vs. Team Iron Man smack down.

At the end, the Superhuman Regulation Act passes, but Cap's ideological stance wins over the super human community, who flock to Cap and form the Secret Avengers. Stark and the government gains a victory, but ultimately a hollow one.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

An important factor is public perception.

If Cap manages to sway the super human community, but the bill passes, it means the public is likely standing with Iron Man. That's hardly a hollow victory.

There'll most likely be a main villain. Someone for Steve to prevail against, because he's loosing against Iron Man.

 

[MakeMinesMarvel]

Maybe put Cap in a new type of prison for supervillians that Tony/Hank create with the government. He can do cameos in other movies in prison for a wink to the fans and still be able to other things with his time as a actor. And then break him out for A:IW2

That way he doesn't have to die and his absence can be explained until A:IW2?

 

[Suzanne78]

Maybe put Cap in a new type of prison for supervillians that Tony/Hank create with the government. He can do cameos in other movies in prison for a wink to the fans and still be able to other things with his time as a actor. And then break him out for A:IW2

That way he doesn't have to die and his absence can be explained until A:IW2?

I like this!! And take away all his razors. Since, you know… Cap can use them as a weapon.

And then we get Bearded Steve Rogers.

#OneTrackMind

 

[cph9fa]

I like this!! And take away all his razors. Since, you know… Cap can use them as a weapon.

And then we get Bearded Steve Rogers.

#OneTrackMind

 

[fixxxer]

An important factor is public perception.

If Cap manages to sway the super human community, but the bill passes, it means the public is likely standing with Iron Man. That's hardly a hollow victory.

There'll most likely be a main villain. Someone for Steve to prevail against, because he's loosing against Iron Man.

I disagree. The public can often be manipulated by the government through fear and paranoia. The Civil War comic itself was essentially a repudiation of the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11. This isn't even necessarily limited to American politics/governance... governments and ruling classes have been pulling this trick from time immemorial.

The law passing, but the superhero community siding with Cap, while the general public is torn along lines of fear and liberty and confusion would absolutely be a hollow victory for Stark. Cap's unwavering moral compass and uncompromising stand that reflects his idealized America, the America that Cap stands for and constantly strives towards, is the real victory.

There will definitely be villains pulling strings and scheming in the background, but the film's central conflict should be the ideological impasse between Stark and Rogers. If that is cleanly resolved early and the third act devolves into "teaming up, defeating Supervillain X and saving the world", I think that would make for a lesser movie.

 

[Gusto]

I think whatever the act is, it'll definitely pour over into the rest of Phase Three (assuming it passes). It'd be cool to see Iron Man (or the government in general) approaching Wakanda or Strange during their solos. Would serve as the perfect link throughout just like Fury/SHIELD were in Phase One.

 

[Suzanne78]

Chris would rock it better

 

[InternetPeople]

My hopes for Civil War is that it follows some of the gun control debate we've been having here in the States. Should they be registered and controlled? Can they be properly controlled? Should there be restrictions? If these laws are passed, how will they be enforced?

If AOS is giving any hints about what will happen, there are going to be a lot more super-powered people running around unmonitored and uncontrolled. Tony would naturally want to create Ultron to handle some of these problems but when that effort fails, it will be up to the governments to protect their citizens by creating a registration act potentially undermining the rights and freedoms of super-powered individuals.

Civil War's biggest challenge will be to not portray heroes as uncompromising ideologues who base their beliefs in fallacious arguments that have no merit (both sides of the gun debate fall into this trap). Stark must make a compelling argument for the protection of the innocent while Cap must argue for individual rights. Neither of these argument are wholly right or wrong and so neither can the characters be portrayed that way.

To wrap up Civil War in one movie is to not fully explore the concept of superhero registration and how each character deals with it. Civil War is great for driving a wedge between heroes and creating conflict where there otherwise would not be.

 

[BullMcGiveny]

I disagree. The public can often be manipulated by the government through fear and paranoia. The Civil War comic itself was essentially a repudiation of the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11. This isn't even necessarily limited to American politics/governance... governments and ruling classes have been pulling this trick from time immemorial.

The law passing, but the superhero community siding with Cap, while the general public is torn along lines of fear and liberty and confusion would absolutely be a hollow victory for Stark. Cap's unwavering moral compass and uncompromising stand that reflects his idealized America, the America that Cap stands for and constantly strives towards, is the real victory.

There will definitely be villains pulling strings and scheming in the background, but the film's central conflict should be the ideological impasse between Stark and Rogers. If that is cleanly resolved early and the third act devolves into "teaming up, defeating Supervillain X and saving the world", I think that would make for a lesser movie.

I agree with the bolded statement, which is why I count the public giving into fear as a defeat for Steve. Because Cap is for the people, not just superpeople.

A story needs a villain. An actual villain to do bad things. There's no chance that'll be Iron Man. There's no chance they'll end the movie with Tony being unlikable.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I like the idea that Steve ends up in a severe coma at the end of Civil War, only to return in Infinity War part 2. I'll be disappointed if Steve dies in Civil War instead of sacrificing himself to stop Thanos.

 

[Dark Raven]

What if, instead of Civil War being about secret identities, one of the ramifications of CW is that more super powered people start operating underground and adopting secret identities so that they don't have to register and people won't know who they are?

So secret identities could be the result of the war instead of the cause of it in the MCU, since there aren't really any at the moment.

 

[meanmc]

Too many fans have embraced the "dark and gritty" cliche. Some not only want Steve to die, they want the films to divert from the comics by having him stay dead. I find the lust for Cap's blood annoying. He probably will die in IW1, which would be fine if it served the larger story. But killing Captain America just because it happened in the comics, to make way for an inferior replacement or in a misguided quest for a darker tone would be a mistake.

Hmm, i can just speak for myself...

I think, it is no failure to include Cap dying, if it is also in the comic!
Especially, because we have the Winter Soldier to take over...

Therefore - i do not have to see heroes dying, but i think, it fits great in the whole story...
Marvel teased this also in Cap 1 and 2...

And this would give the whole MCU a big push! And some refreshing, and two big moments - Cap dying, Cap returning!

 

[Loki882]

I disagree. The public can often be manipulated by the government through fear and paranoia. The Civil War comic itself was essentially a repudiation of the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11. This isn't even necessarily limited to American politics/governance... governments and ruling classes have been pulling this trick from time immemorial.

The law passing, but the superhero community siding with Cap, while the general public is torn along lines of fear and liberty and confusion would absolutely be a hollow victory for Stark. Cap's unwavering moral compass and uncompromising stand that reflects his idealized America, the America that Cap stands for and constantly strives towards, is the real victory.

There will definitely be villains pulling strings and scheming in the background, but the film's central conflict should be the ideological impasse between Stark and Rogers. If that is cleanly resolved early and the third act devolves into "teaming up, defeating Supervillain X and saving the world", I think that would make for a lesser movie.

That only applies if you think that his actual argument is right. And as I've said before, Tony actually had the better argument imo. Marvel had to write him as a mustache-twirling fascist just to try and make Cap seem right. Cap's argument was, kind of stupid actually.

 

[MbJ]

That only applies if you think that his actual argument is right. And as I've said before, Tony actually had the better argument imo. Marvel had to write him as a mustache-twirling fascist just to try and make Cap seem right. Cap's argument was, kind of stupid actually.

Cap's argument was flimsy but the issue was that Tony's argument ultimately breaks the suspension of disbelief too much. It was impossible for most people to side with Tony because Tony and his cronies essentially opposed tropes that are inherent to superheroes as a genre.

Yeah, in the real world it would make sense for there to be government oversight and for superheroes to be conscripted for police or military use. But that's not why people read superhero comics or watch the movies. They don't want to see Batman as a boring super-cop on Gordon's payroll or Wolverine as super-civil servant, they want dudes in costumes fighting supervillains, not acting like a bunch of government stooges.

Superheroes are built on so many accepted contrivances that once you start pulling on that "Well shouldn't they have to answer to the government and expose their identities?" string, the entire concept and genre begins to unravel.

 

[Shikamaru]

^ Essentially this.

Much like comedy, superheroes are at their best when they're subversive. Tony's stance, despite being fine for the real world, goes completely against that.

 

[fixxxer]

That only applies if you think that his actual argument is right. And as I've said before, Tony actually had the better argument imo. Marvel had to write him as a mustache-twirling fascist just to try and make Cap seem right. Cap's argument was, kind of stupid actually.

It's not all that clear cut. There's a lot more to unpack here than merely whose argument is right. Which is one of the reasons I'm actually more excited (with a pinch of nervousness... because the degree of difficulty is high) about Civil War than anything else on the Marvel slate.

If the law were even handed and implemented in an above board manner, then yes, superhero regulation would be the way to go. However, the government (in the MCU) has been proven to be anything but rational, intelligent and even handed.

I'm speculating a little, but I think the government here will basically attempt to use a tragedy (likely Ulton) as a pretext to pass the SHRA, and use the SHRA itself as a pretext to essentially use superheroes as government sanctioned weapons. I can see why Stark would go along with the law itself... he'll be racked with guilt over the Ultron debacle, and thus might overlook the potential for the law's misuse.

So, while I see your argument about the correctness of the law in terms of its intent, I hope you can see my (and by proxy, Cap's ) argument about its possible (probable?) subversion in terms of its spirit.

What we do agree on, though, is that they need to make Stark's position come off as a lot more nuanced and a lot less fascist.

 

[TalismanRing]

Yeah, in the real world it would make sense for there to be government oversight and for superheroes to be conscripted for police or military use. But that's not why people read superhero comics or watch the movies. .

It would make sense for the gov't from the gov't point of view to force people to work for them and weaponize them but it wouldn't make it right. We don't even have the draft in the US any more in times of war.

They were on firmer ground with registration since in many ways that would be like registering weapons, though there were concerns of secret identities coming out and endangering lives and families. They might even push it into regulation or needs for training etc. But conscription?

Conscription certainly isn't some kind slam dunk issue that can only be opposed using flimsy superhero logic and expectation.

Tony in IM didn't even want his suits in the hands of the gov't. By the same logic of making those with special physical abilities under the gov't thumb and used as weapons why would Tony or others like him be exempt? Ergo as a super genius isn't he an asset that the gov't should be able to use at will as a weapon? Why can't they force him to make weapons for the gov't?

In the MCU, one gathers that the AOU changes Tony's mind about having too much power outside of sanctioned hands and no doubt his guilt drives him to overcompensate. I could see him agree with parts of the law and not by others. It might be like in the comics where at first he sees it as compromise or there will be even more draconian measures taken by the gov't.

Considering the way Steve Rogers is written in the comics and the MCU it wouldn't make any character sense for him to support this law especially not after the events in TWS.

 

[Dasher10]

Avengers split up into two teams. Neither have public trust. Marvel is still going to save Chris Evans for Infinity War 2.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

I have been thinking for a while that Civil War can't possibly be about registration and on the same note, it doesnt have to be. Currently, I'm thinking that it has to be something that the audience can understand both points of view. And no kind of government control would really fit the MCU as it stands now. So I think it will be something completely separate:

Stark and Hill are interested in starting a new peace-keeping organization, this time centered around proactive extraterrestrial security, SWORD.

"That Up There... That's The Endgame."

Captain America, being the shield wielding nationalist he is, would rather secure our own borders before enacting a cosmic war. And having already defeated one corrupt organization (SHIELD) he probably wouldnt be too keen on starting another.

"Every time someone tries to win a war before it starts, innocent people die. Every time."

Both are reasonable points of view and neither has to do with government control (which we've already seen that the majority of the Avengers despise: Hulk, Stark, Cap, etc.). And in the end Steve can be assassinated leading to the establishment of SWORD and the then very relevant and inevitable introduction of Captain Marvel and a very decent segway into Infinity War.

 

[falconcrest87]

It would make sense for the gov't from the gov't point of view to force people to work for them and weaponize them but it wouldn't make it right. We don't even have the draft in the US any more in times of war.

They were on firmer ground with registration since in many ways that would be like registering weapons, though there were concerns of secret identities coming out and endangering lives and families. They might even push it into regulation or needs for training etc. But conscription?

Conscription certainly isn't some kind slam dunk issue that can only be opposed using flimsy superhero logic and expectation.

Tony in IM didn't even want his suits in the hands of the gov't. By the same logic of making those with special physical abilities under the gov't thumb and used as weapons why would Tony or others like him be exempt? Ergo as a super genius isn't he an asset that the gov't should be able to use at will as a weapon? Why can't they force him to make weapons for the gov't?

In the MCU, one gathers that the AOU changes Tony's mind about having too much power outside of sanctioned hands and no doubt his guilt drives him to overcompensate. I could see him agree with parts of the law and not by others. It might be like in the comics where at first he sees it as compromise or there will be even more draconian measures taken by the gov't.

Considering the way Steve Rogers is written in the comics and the MCU it wouldn't make any character sense for him to support this law especially not after the events in TWS.

Totally with you on this. Drafting superheros for some kind of government group is fundamentally wrong on so many different levels. I mean, if we're calling up superheros. Who are we calling up. Yeah Tony may not mind working for the government, but what about Cap. Cap just had to destroy a government agency because it was corrupt to the core. What about Bruce? He's spent a fraction of his adult life running from the military. You know, the same military that has tried to kill him multiple times. Or just any old super person who just wants to live their lives in peace. Gonna have a hard time convincing them that going to super war waaaaaay better than living a normal life, especially if they are pacifists.

Also who is in charge of the super group and what are they going to be doing? The government that had a VP who plotted with a known terrorist organization? The government that had a Nazi death cult in all of it's branches? Or will it be Tony, who will be proving how flawed his judgement is in theatres everywhere on May 1. Who may be using this initiative to find a certain brainwashed assassin who may or may not have killed his parents. And who's to say that whoever gets control of these draftees won't use them to kick of Project Insight 2: Electric Boogaloo. We already have a problem with the militarization of our culture in this country. Who could possibly want Iron Man breaking up a protest or making a drug bust?

Also when does it end? When do the soldiers go home? This team could probably never disband. When we got rid of the draft in this country, we replaced it with the stop loss policy. Meaning that a soldier could have his discharge postponed theoretically indefinitely. Captain America has served his country many times over, but can the Cap really see himself fighting for the next 50-70 years of his life? No but that could be what happens if this super hero law is put into effect.

Ugh I think I pulled something nerding this hard.

 

[BarryAllen]

I'm worried about what this will mean for Tony Stark/Iron Man. Iron Man became hated after the comic Civil War (which people forget wasn't all that great), and it wasn't until the 2008 movie that he started making his comeback into popularity. What if the same thing happens to the MCU version? What if he starts to get hated? Should Marvel really use their cash cow character in an antagonistic role? What if he sides with villains or does ruthless actions like he did in the books? What will the general audience think then?

 

[TalismanRing]

I'm worried about what this will mean for Tony Stark/Iron Man. Iron Man became hated after the comic Civil War (which people forget wasn't all that great), and it wasn't until the 2008 movie that he started making his comeback into popularity. What if the same thing happens to the MCU version? What if he starts to get hated? Should Marvel really use their cash cow character in an antagonistic role? What if he sides with villains or does ruthless actions like he did in the books? What will the general audience think then?

Feige and the Russos have said that they're adapting the Civil War loosely and one hopes they've learned their lessons from the comic run. The MCU so far has been very hero centric and character based so it's difficult to believe they'd sabotage that no matter how large the plot involved..

Aside from artistically in terms of business Disney would likely kibosh anything that hurt film, DVD or toy sales. It would be nonsensical for them to turn Tony into a villain and tarnish the goose that laid the golden egg.

 

[wampa1]

I think Cap will be shot with a Time Gem powered weapon and be apparently 'killed' but in actual fact is sent back in time and will work with Agent Carter to get back to the present, in time for Infinity War Part. II