What you didn't like about Captain America: Civil War - Flaws/Critiques - Part 1

Discussion in 'Captain America: Civil War' started by Thread Manager, May 18, 2016.

  1. zephyrinthesky Registered

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    60
    Including Spidey and Ant-Man changed the tone of the airport fight from what it could have been if they'd elected to keep BW's deleted scenes. Widow fighting with Cap and overlooking the destruction of the airport are a far cry from the levity/fan-service spectacle that Spider-Man/Ant-Man were included for. The Russos chose to make the airport scene "fun" until Rhodey got hurt. The tone/focus of the airport fight is one of my bigger criticisms about CW in general.


    The sheer number of characters is definitely something keeping me skeptical about IW.
     
  2. Capsfan Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, but Ant-Man has been there from the start. They even had very early drafts where he was in team Iron Man.
    So I really doubt they changed the tone due to the Spider-Man inclusion. They've talked about how they needed Spidey and Ant-Man for the comic relief, since the overall story is pretty dark, so they wanted to balance it with a lighter tone from the characters which were not so involved in the conflict as other Avengers.

    Yeah, that's my point. I don't see how they are gonna handle IW, if they had so much trouble fitting one Spider-Man in the airport.

    However, I distinctly remember that they talked about how Spidey had always been their plan A and they had no plan B, they wouldn't have known what to do, had the deal with Sony failed. So by their words, they have never planned the movie without SM.
     
    #177 Capsfan, Aug 14, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2017
  3. NealKenneth Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2014
    Messages:
    762
    Likes Received:
    0
    I distinctly remember them saying they had to rewrite after they got Spider-Man.

    That being said, I am so sooo glad Spidey and Ant-Man were at the airport. I actually feel the movie is the only one in the MCU that is too dark and serious.
     
  4. zephyrinthesky Registered

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    60
    I believe this is the interview you're looking for:

    I for one feel the opposite about Civil War's tone. If it's supposed to be a dark tale, don't worry about having to please everybody and just own it. Make the airport scene more grim and frightening, with superheroes tearing the place apart and coming to superpowered blows with their friends. Leave Steve's team in prison to nail home that the Avengers as we knew were no more. Leave the breakout for IW.
     
  5. Capsfan Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    571
    Likes Received:
    0
    http://www.cbr.com/anthony-russo-reveals-spider-man-was-always-plan-a-for-captain-america-civil-war/

     
    #180 Capsfan, Aug 15, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2017
  6. TheVileOne Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    60,694
    Likes Received:
    4,711
    All of that was just nonsense really. They were pushing that narrative to help the case for Marvel/Spider-Man deal and they basically admitted that later.
     
  7. Godzillasaurus Someone with no strings

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Messages:
    1,609
    Likes Received:
    2
    That quote always confused me.

    Spiderman did not have an integral part in the story at all, not like Black Panther for example. You could've removed him entirely and no drastic changes would've been made.
     
  8. Capsfan Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    571
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the Russos just articulated it badly. I think what they really meant is that they integrated Spidey into the airport battle so much, that they couldn't imagine how to rewrite it without him. And since this battle is basically the "face" of the movie and the concept of "civil war", they couldn't have imagined it without him.
     
  9. zephyrinthesky Registered

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    60
    If they wrote a character (that they didn't own the rights to) so deeply into their biggest set piece that a plan B wasn't possible, that's so mind-bogglingly foolish of them.

    That the spotlight of its centerpiece action scene was given to two characters with ZERO stakes to the plot is one of my biggest beefs with Civil War.
     
  10. Limonade Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2014
    Messages:
    2,258
    Likes Received:
    397
    I thought the centerpiece action scene was the Iron Man vs Captain America fight at the very end and that had the most stakes.

    They'd even ripped the panel where Cap is blocking Tony's Hand beams at close range.

    I guess you'd need to clarify what you consider a centerpiece action scene... as there's a few of action sequence.
     
    #185 Limonade, Aug 17, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2017
  11. zephyrinthesky Registered

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    60
    They spent a ton of time introducing all the characters just to make them plausibly fight each other at the airport. Trailers, posters and concept art heavily featured the heroes all fighting each other and taking sides.

    If the airport fight wasn't the centrepiece they would have trimmed back the number of character introductions.
     
  12. MIKE10 Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2015
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dissapointed by the portraying Iron Man as quite weak and not superhero enough. His abilities are so much bigger than it was shown in the film. He is able to fly at hypersonic (or at least supersonic) speed, he was meant to be able to catch rhodey easily before he hits the ground at the airport scene.....another mistake is that he loses against Cap in a fight, Iron Man is able to kill Bucky within few seconds, the same with cap.....
    And the whole airport scene.....Iron Man has problems with fighting Hawkeye or Falcon? ********....I know he was going easy on them but come on!!!! The only Avengers that could make problems to him are Thor, Hulk, Vision, Wanda and maybe Cap if he prepares for him and has strategical advantage just as he had in the last fight in Siberia (small area, close range, two on one, moment of surprise etc...)...
    Come on Iron Man fought Thor and came out with tied result lets say, he is able to withstand fight with Hulk and suddenly he has problems wih Cap, Hawkeye or Falcon....
    That's poor writing.....
     
  13. Spider-Fan SHHFFL 2014/2019 Champion

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    56,365
    Likes Received:
    9,892
    Thor clearly would have beat Iron Man in Avengers. He was breaking his suit, while Thor seemed unphased. As for fighting Hulk, he was in an armor designed for it. In his standard armor, Hulk wins easily.

    In this fight, Cap had several advantages over Iron Man like you pointed out. So, it worked for me. Like you also said, he was taking it easy on them, and not taking the fight seriously.
     
    KevTravels likes this.
  14. DyeLorean will return

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,442
    Likes Received:
    566
    Rewatched Civil War last night and, while still a favorite, I'm wondering how the hell did they catch Wanda/Falcon/Hawkeye/Ant-Man after the airport fight. Ant-Man was just there with the suit, he could've gone away, same with Wanda. Any ideas how?
     
    KevTravels likes this.
  15. Spider-Fan SHHFFL 2014/2019 Champion

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    56,365
    Likes Received:
    9,892
    They surrendered in order to create a distraction to allow Cap to get away. Also when Rhodey was injured, I imagine they all felt somber and not like fighting anymore.
     
    KevTravels likes this.
  16. DyeLorean will return

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,442
    Likes Received:
    566
    Yeah, that makes sense.
     
  17. nypinta Certified Delightful

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2017
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    19
    Due to Infinity War coming up I was doing a mini-marathon of the MCU movies, and I included Civil War on the list because it's the movie that shows pretty much where at least half of the characters are before Thanos shows up... yet I can't bring myself to watch it again.

    First, it's pretty clear that they edited some of the Sharon/Steve scenes, and after they did that they should have also cut the kiss. Because what we're left with seeing is two people that apparently haven't spoken since TWS, & only get some eye contact during a rather odd funeral scene, before a few quips after Steve keeps a SWAT team from executing Bucky, so when she shows up with all of their stuff and Steve kisses her, it took her actions from "CIA agent making a really difficult call because of how she read the situation" to "girl who stole shiny things for the boy with big biceps that she likes". They really should have skipped the funeral scene and instead had Steve and Sharon meeting up after Peggy's death and through dialog make it clear they've been talking to each other on the regular, that he's aware of her relationship to Peggy, and have her relate the "No, you move" story after Steve mentions his conflicted feelings about the Accords. And even then, still skip the kiss. I know she's his girlfriend in the comics, but if you don't have the time to build the relationship in the movies, skip the relationship.

    I would have liked more interaction between Steve and Bucky, but things were moving pretty fast so... not sure how that could have been helped unless they just made the movie longer.

    The fact that Ross's arguments were complete BS and no one called him on it. In three of the four instances he brings up as to why they need oversite, they had oversite. It was the SHIELD council that nearly killed millions of people via a nuke during the Battle of New York. It was SHIELD letting a fascist group grow right under their nose that nearly killed millions of people had those carriers launched. And in Ultron, Steve *was* the oversite, but Tony (and Bruce) went behind his back. And then later did it again and when Steve tried to stop them Tony punched him. So it's a little odd that Tony sides so completely with Ross saying they all need accountability since we know based on Tony's past actions that he'll just ignore whoever he feels like when he wants to do something. Nor would Tony ever face the consequences of it if he did. Basically, he seems to want rules for everyone else, but he'll still get to do what he wants, and he knows it.

    Other than his guilt, Tony is pretty much the only one arguing for the Accords whose thinking I do not follow or understand. There is an article linked on here where one of the Russo brothers talks about how in IW Tony's motivations are revealed to have all been about whatever threat he feels coming. What I don't understand is WHY DIDN'T HE JUST SAY THAT in Civil War? That would have been a great way to tie this movie into the overall story leading up to Infinity War. Have Tony tell Steve he needs them all to sign because he needs the resources of all the world governments, but Steve can't because he's not the type of person to ignore an immediate problem. He's just not built that way. And the threat Zemo poses is too great to ignore. Plus, Steve clearly has trust issues now with any governmental body, even ones he might need. (Sending out a kill squad on Bucky without any kind of trail didn't help.) At least then their conflict would be rooted in things outside themselves and both for a greater good. Just... different greater goods. Plus, if they had framed Tony's reasoning better, I'd feel less uncomfortable with him bringing in a high schooler to a battle between superheroes.

    Zemo's plan did seem to rely on a lot of things that he couldn't control going his way, but he also just seemed to be poking at weaknesses between them that he already knew where there and just how the Avengers broke apart wasn't as important, so I feel like a lot of what he does is actually in reaction to the moves they make. He gets this, they do that, so he moves *over here* instead of *over there*. But having someone else on the inside, even if it wasn't Sharon, would have gone a long way to make him seem less lucky.

    The fact that Bucky, a supposedly highly trained (although brainwashed) assassin, would stand face front to a camera after going to all the trouble of making a hit look like an accident was silly. Or the fact that security cameras would be that clear in the 90s on a random road. I understand Tony's reaction though. No, he doesn't talk about his mother all the time. Probably because she died nearly 30 years ago. But seeing how they died, so brutally, would make that rage completely fresh for anyone. However, I do not blame Steve for not telling Tony. Why would Steve paint a gigantic, billionaire with a history of making global weapons, target on Bucky's back when he knows Bucky went through hell, that Bucky didn't do anything of his own free will, and he probably needs a lot of help? What kind of ******* friend of Bucky's would that make him? Bucky is the solvable problem. There is nothing Steve can do about Tony's parents. Plus, we don't actually know what Steve knows. Sure it's easy to suppose he figured it out. But that is not shown in the movies. All we see is Zola flashing files and images at them, and then just a few moments later admits he was stalling them so they could be neutralized, making anything he told them suspect. But there is nothing that says who actually carried out the mission. And later Steve is given an extremely slim file by Natasha that wouldn't have anything about it since it all seems to predate... everything. Hydra clearly didn't have mission files or any more details about it or after Nat put everything on the web Tony would have known a long time ago his parents were murdered by them, if not specifically by the Winter Soldier. So assuming what Steve knew in order to argue keeping it from Tony was wrong is unfair. And it's also odd to me to think Steve owes Tony the truth more than he owes Bucky a chance to live.
     
    Chesterfield likes this.
  18. carpenter82 Registered

    Joined:
    May 10, 2016
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    439
    I know this is coming a little late, but I agree with all of your criticisms. Also, wanted to add another problem I had. Black Widow helping Cap escape the airport fight makes zero sense. I guess the writers thought we'd just go along with it because they're friends, but at the same time she's friends with everyone else that she's been fighting with on the airport. The only reason the film gives you in terms of why she flipped is her saying "We played this wrong". How did she come to that conclusion? The film plays it like she's aware of what Cap is doing but she doesn't know. On top of that she brings Black Panther to another country just to betray him. I'm surprised more people don't have a problem with that whole plot point.
     
  19. fan4stic Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,665
    Likes Received:
    352
    Natasha didn't want to fight them and knew Steve would never stop. I think there's even a moment where things are exploding and she has a look of concern at the situation. She's hesitant throughout the whole fight. I'd argue she doesn't even side with the accords really completely on a personal level, an idea I think is hinted at when she tells Steve, "Staying together is more important than how we stay together." I think she realized that by siding with the accords, she'd be put in a situation where she'd lock up or fight her friends and she didn't want to do that.

    I remember the Russos or the writers or somebody saying in regards to Natasha, "Her head's with Tony, but her heart's with Steve." or something like that.
     
  20. Schlosser85 A Very Stable Genius

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    41,355
    Likes Received:
    19,326
    Natasha only “supported” the Accords in the first place out of purely pragmatic reasons and to keep the team from fracturing. I don’t think she ever believed in them or had any real loyalty to them.
     
    KevTravels and Tymminator like this.
  21. samsnee Ok

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    17,101
    Likes Received:
    6,642
    Agreed, you can tell she never really believed in the Accords. She just wanted to keep the team together and thought it was best to "keep one hand on the wheel".
     
    KevTravels likes this.
  22. KevTravels Registered

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    481
    I was annoyed by Rhodey in the film. He seemed to come down hard on Cap and the others for refusing to automatically sign the Accords. I get that Rhodey is a military officer, but I wish a few more lines of dialogue (earlier in the film) dwell into why he was so gung-ho for it.

    Like if he were to say that he felt the Avengers were temporary and thus they had to be under the control of someone with more credibility or something.
     
    Schlosser85 likes this.
  23. DyeLorean will return

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,442
    Likes Received:
    566
    Here's a question: is Joe Russo's character the same as in Winter Soldier? Is he the same doctor?
     
  24. Schlosser85 A Very Stable Genius

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    41,355
    Likes Received:
    19,326
    Yea Rhodes comes off kind of annoyingly righteous. “Congratulations Cap...you’re a criminal”.
     
    KevTravels likes this.
  25. KevTravels Registered

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    481
    That line always rubbed me the wrong way. One would have thought he would be a fan of his. At least, show there might be a tad antagonism prior to that before dropping a line like that.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"