The Winter Soldier What you didn't like about Captain America: TWS - Flaws/Critiques

[The Question]

So basically you just kind of wanted no comic book fantasy whatsoever regarding the film. Aside from the fights.

Nope. Never said that. Never even implied that. All I wanted was for HYDRA to not be behind everything.

Yup, that sounds like his protest alright. He forgot what kind of movie he was posting about.

No, it doesn't sound like my protest at all. I really don't see how you can get that from what I've said.

It did come from our failings. Our own desire to control things and expand our power base caused us to forget who we are and ally ourselves with Nazis. That virus spread, and eventually we became the problem.

I see what you're saying, and that's why the film ultimately still works. At the end of the day it's still the western intelligence apparatus turning on it's citizens in a misguided attempt to protect them.

But it still ultimately comes down to an external element, and it does kind of allow the audience to see the bad guys as not a part of their government to some extent. I think the film would have been a little bit stronger if there was no external element at all. Which is why it bugs me. It's good, but it could have been better.

I mean unless you're a total moron you get the jabs at the NSA and beefed up security and hair trigger nature of some within the government, you don't need to be beat over the head with "the government is a literal nazi regime" rhetoric.

But that's what the movie did already. I'm saying they should have removed that part, thus making it a little more nuanced.

 

[Heretic]

I dont see it as external. Hydra existed as a quasi-government agency, even though not officially and publicly. Like, when we brought Nazi scientists in and they spearheaded NASA programs and got us to the moon...did the Nazis do that or did NASA do that? NASA did it...with lots of help from Nazis that were a part of the system. In The Winter Soldier, SHIELD did that stuff, with lots of help from the Nazis they brought into their fold.

 

[The Question]

I dont see it as external. Hydra existed as a quasi-government agency, even though not officially and publicly. Like, when we brought Nazi scientists in and they spearheaded NASA programs and got us to the moon...did the Nazis do that or did NASA do that? NASA did it...with lots of help from Nazis that were a part of the system. In The Winter Soldier, SHIELD did that stuff, with lots of help from the Nazis they brought into their fold.

I see what you're saying. I still feel like it reads like "the good government got infected by a nasty case of Nazi and turned evil, which would have never happened if they hadn't hired those damn Nazis." Especially with that line about HYDRA covertly making the world ****** just so people would be willing to accept their rule, that made them feel more external to me (as well as playing into ******** conspiracy theories that I simply can't stand).

You're not wrong. Ultimately it still works. I just think it would have been more impactful if HYDRA wasn't a part of the equation, or at least was a much more minor one.

 

[Heretic]

I see what you're saying. I still feel like it reads like "the good government got infected by a nasty case of Nazi and turned evil, which would have never happened if they hadn't hired those damn Nazis." Especially with that line about HYDRA covertly making the world ****** just so people would be willing to accept their rule, that made them feel more external to me (as well as playing into ******** conspiracy theories that I simply can't stand).

You're not wrong. Ultimately it still works. I just think it would have been more impactful if HYDRA wasn't a part of the equation, or at least was a much more minor one.

I see our actual government as being twisted and power hungry enough that they would be thrilled to work with crazed groups to further their own agenda. We've done it many, many times. We routinely side with genocidal madmen and tyrannical regimes. Our hunger for power IS the problem. Without us, third world warlords (or a shattered Hydra) wouldnt be much of a threat to anybody.

 

[seishin87]

I wouldn't have preferred that, because that's a horrible moral. The security we get out of the horrible things that the CIA and the NSA do isn't worth it, especially because most of the threats to our security were the result of horrible things that the CIA did in the first place. We anointed most of the terror kingpins and dictators that haunt us today. There is a real world alternative to the CIA and NSA that isn't Captain America: Completely overhauling our foreign policy to center on humanitarian aid and working with other countries as partners instead of interfering in other peoples affairs and setting up dictatorships in the third word for our own gain.

My problem isn't that they vilified the intelligence community, my problem is that they set up the problems in the intelligence community as coming from some kind of inherently malevolent "other," instead of coming from our own failings.

But that's just me.

It might have been a little too much to imply that the government itself were the villains and having the HYDRA infiltration was a way to play it safe. Wouldn't want anyone to accuse Cap of making the public paranoid of the government. But yeah I see what you mean. I think the fact that they are dealing with these kinds of issues and anxieties even though not really going all out, is still kinda bold.

We live in a spooky world at times. It is the way it is for a reason. The "Intelligence Community" that we have entrusted with keeping us safe has a vested interest in maintaining the world as is. It's not about peace, it's about ensuring that the world that requires their existence in the first place never truly goes away. It's their way of business. You better believe it's about power and control...and greed. And just what is their business? They call it the intelligence community to make it sound proper but it's the same old spy vs. spy, assassination games and undermining other nations, a world of lies, deception, and murder. Sounds cynical but that's the reality of it. And no this is no condemnation of our intelligence agencies. Things are the same all over. Some are far worse. What's that saying? Better the devil you know, than the one you don't. In fact I think that saying was in a Cap comic at one point. It may have been during the Marvel Knights run, ironically almost directly after 9/11. Lots of interesting issues raised. Cap even says something along the lines of a country can only be as great as those we allow to run it.

Either way I feel TWS raises some interesting points. Hopefully in time the people can change the way things are but first awareness is needed. We need to see how we don't want things to be. Things don't have to be this way. Although it'll probably be a lot less exciting.

 

[The Question]

I see our actual government as being twisted and power hungry enough that they would be thrilled to work with crazed groups to further their own agenda. We've done it many, many times. We routinely side with genocidal madmen and tyrannical regimes. Our hunger for power IS the problem. Without us, third world warlords (or a shattered Hydra) wouldnt be much of a threat to anybody.

I agree. My beef is just how it was framed more than anything else. If it had been clear that Pierce and his ilk had sought out HYDRA on their own, instead of saying that HYDRA engaged in a decades long conspiracy to corrupt SHIELD from the inside, I would have been happier. Change a few lines of dialogue, it changes the meaning of the thing.

 

[Heretic]

I agree. My beef is just how it was framed more than anything else. If it had been clear that Pierce and his ilk had sought out HYDRA on their own, instead of saying that HYDRA engaged in a decades long conspiracy to corrupt SHIELD from the inside, I would have been happier. Change a few lines of dialogue, it changes the meaning of the thing.

Maybe it is under-developed. It's an area of interest of mine, so I may have put more emphasis on it than most. When they gave Zola immunity and shipped him off in The First Avenger, my mind went straight to Operation Paperclip and I figured that America/SHIELD would use Zola's work for their own ends because I knew that this is what we did in the real world. Maybe someone who had no knowledge of that stuff wouldnt see it that way (not saying you dont, just that maybe some random kid in a theater wouldnt grasp it at all). I think that in movies like this, they will always underplay America being evil...because that means that Captain America was killing American troops that were just following orders and didn't know that they were fighting for the wrong side. Despite these movies often being commentary on American politics/war on terror...there is a line they wont cross...and that is that we can not cheer when the good guy kills what is perceived as American troops just following orders. Thats why Crossbones and the other bad guys were shown to have been in on the Hydra evil stuff.

 

[The Question]

Maybe it is under-developed. It's an area of interest of mine, so I may have put more emphasis on it than most. When they gave Zola immunity and shipped him off in The First Avenger, my mind went straight to Operation Paperclip and I figured that America/SHIELD would use Zola's work for their own ends because I knew that this is what we did in the real world. Maybe someone who had no knowledge of that stuff wouldnt see it that way (not saying you dont, just that maybe some random kid in a theater wouldnt grasp it at all). I think that in movies like this, they will always underplay America being evil...because that means that Captain America was killing American troops that were just following orders and didn't know that they were fighting for the wrong side. Despite these movies often being commentary on American politics/war on terror...there is a line they wont cross...and that is that we can not cheer when the good guy kills what is perceived as American troops just following orders. Thats why Crossbones and the other bad guys were shown to have been in on the Hydra evil stuff.

Well, maybe then the point of those scenes shouldn't be to cheer. I'm not a huge fan of violence in media being a source of excitement and spectacle. That has it's place, and there are some fun fight scenes I enjoy, but I prefer violence to be depicted as scary and uncomfortable. In a weird way, that's more exciting for me, and it sends a better message. if Cap has to fight and kill American soldiers who don't know any better and are just following orders, that's a tragedy, and that should be the point.

Still, that is probably part of the reason they made the villains a little more unambiguously evil than their real life counterparts. And for a movie studio that works with properties riding the razor thin line between children's and grown up entertainment, there is an extent to which I can't fault them for that.

 

[jmc]

The argument I've read on the last couple of pages really shows the different perspectives on how you look at these types of movies. On the one hand The Question is clearly looking at this film from a stand alone story perspective bringing up legitimate criticisms on Hydra weakening the message of the film, he makes some valid points in that regard. The other side of the equation is people looking at Hydra through the spectrum of the comics/MCU. When you look at a film through the latter perspective you're not actually bringing up much of a counter argument as to why the former is incorrect, you're more or less just reiterating that A, B and C is suppose to happen because of X, Y and Z. From what I've read anyway The Question's critique really isn't even a complaint, just a preference for there to be greater meaning behind the organization that corrupted SHIELD.

 

[The Question]

From what I've read anyway The Question's critique really isn't even a complaint, just a preference for there to be greater meaning behind the organization that corrupted SHIELD.

Pretty much, yeah.

 

[Mysteryman]

Flaws for TWS?
Yeah a real big one .
It ended.
I had a real problem with that and I am still trying to recover!

 

[Heretic]

Well, maybe then the point of those scenes shouldn't be to cheer. I'm not a huge fan of violence in media being a source of excitement and spectacle. That has it's place, and there are some fun fight scenes I enjoy, but I prefer violence to be depicted as scary and uncomfortable. In a weird way, that's more exciting for me, and it sends a better message. if Cap has to fight and kill American soldiers who don't know any better and are just following orders, that's a tragedy, and that should be the point.

Still, that is probably part of the reason they made the villains a little more unambiguously evil than their real life counterparts. And for a movie studio that works with properties riding the razor thin line between children's and grown up entertainment, there is an extent to which I can't fault them for that.

I agree that it might make a "better" point or whatever...but these are popcorn films designed for kids to buy toys. They aren't going to go there. The same could be said when Lorelei put a spell on Ward on AoS and had sex with him. Some people were upset that there was no follow-up on the fact that he was raped, and the emotional repercussions that come with that. Of course, that is a story that I would find emotionally hard hitting and worthwhile...but there's no way that a Marvel show will deal with that as an issue. To walk that line, they made a point to call the evil shadow group in SHIELD Hydra, which fit the franchise as well. I'm not knocking a single point off for that decision. I cant expect Marvel to be willing to risk that controversy and anger...and the idea of turning their fun family movie into a sad, though thought-provoking movie.

 

[terry78]

Basically don't expect Disney to go that much darker than the books the movies are based.

 

[Spider-Fan]

It fit. Smoothly and within the narrative. This is a Captain America film and that's exactly where Hydra's influence belongs. It was set into motion the day Zola was captured in CA:TFA.

By definition shoehorning is fitting something that doesn't belong for the sake of doing so.



And that's irrelevant, thankfully.

It is amazing that people are missing the very basic concept of how the elements of WWII found there place in modern times, and that Hydra somehow didn't fit into the movie. Like, especially when it is obvious in why they were used and how smoothly they fit into the storyline.

Too many people seem not proud this is based off a comic or something, and act like an evil group like Hydra just wasn't mature enough for this material. Especially bugs me here given how well they were handled.

 

[jmc]

Too many people let their comic book knowledge cloud their objectivity when arguing against someone who gives an opinion on some aspect of the movie.

 

[Rock Sexton]

The argument I've read on the last couple of pages really shows the different perspectives on how you look at these types of movies. On the one hand The Question is clearly looking at this film from a stand alone story perspective bringing up legitimate criticisms on Hydra weakening the message of the film, he makes some valid points in that regard. The other side of the equation is people looking at Hydra through the spectrum of the comics/MCU. When you look at a film through the latter perspective you're not actually bringing up much of a counter argument as to why the former is incorrect, you're more or less just reiterating that A, B and C is suppose to happen because of X, Y and Z. From what I've read anyway The Question's critique really isn't even a complaint, just a preference for there to be greater meaning behind the organization that corrupted SHIELD.

That's what I said to him, but he insisted it was a legitimate complaint/flaw.

Btw, we're looking at Hydra through the lense of what is established in the MCU, not just what happened in the comics.

Too many people let their comic book knowledge cloud their objectivity when arguing against someone who gives an opinion on some aspect of the movie.

He didn't just give an opinion. He argued for pages on end that Hydra being the cause of the erosion of SHIELD was a flaw(hence the title of this thread) and that it took away from the movie experience/themes. Both statements are patently false.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Pretty much, yeah.

Flip-flopper.

I said the same thing to you a few pages ago when I pointed out your statements weren't a flaw, but a preference. You fought me on it tooth and nail.

 

[Rock Sexton]

It is amazing that people are missing the very basic concept of how the elements of WWII found there place in modern times, and that Hydra somehow didn't fit into the movie. Like, especially when it is obvious in why they were used and how smoothly they fit into the storyline.

Too many people seem not proud this is based off a comic or something, and act like an evil group like Hydra just wasn't mature enough for this material. Especially bugs me here given how well they were handled.

Smoothly? I was told they were shoe-horned in by someone who doesn't even know what that phrase means.

The Hydra element was handled magnificently. I found it infinitely creepier that they were in the shadows spending decades eroding the good guys from within.

 

[jmc]

He didn't just give an opinion. He argued for pages on end that Hydra being the cause of the erosion of SHIELD was a flaw(hence the title of this thread) and that it took away from the movie experience/themes. Both statements are patently false.

No, it's not false, it's called opinion. If you don't agree that's perfectly fine. Frankly he gave some valid points to back up his opinion, I don't necessarily agree with them 100% but I can see where he's coming from.

 

[Rock Sexton]

No, it's not false, it's called opinion. If you don't agree that's perfectly fine. Frankly he gave some valid points to back up his opinion, I don't necessarily agree with them 100% but I can see where he's coming from.

I know you do. You're always a contrarian in these Marvel threads. That's why we love you so much.

Regardless I still said the same things you said to him. I told him his issue with Hydra being the reason for the power shift/abuse were a personal preference. He argued to high hell that it was not a preference but a real complaint.

 

[jmc]

I know you do. You're always a contrarian in these Marvel threads. That's why we love you so much.

Regardless I still said the same things you said to him. I told him his issue with Hydra being the reason for the power shift/abuse were a personal preference. He argued to high hell that it was not a preference but a real complaint.

I'm only a contrarian in your eyes if I don't like a particular Marvel movie, incase you missed I actually loved WS. I'm a film nerd not a comic nerd my friend.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I'm only a contrarian in your eyes if I don't like a particular Marvel movie, incase you missed I actually loved WS. I'm a film nerd not a comic nerd my friend.

You're not talking to a comic nerd either ..... my friend.

 

[Windows]

I've been lurking around here for quite a while during the past few days, especially in this thread. I've finally decided to register an account, since I have a lot of problems with this movie and would like to hear others' opinions on it. So far, from talking to my friends, all I keep getting is "it's just a comic book movie, who cares?" and that's really unsatisfying for me...

The problems that I have with this movie fill three pages, but a lot of them are minor points or have already been discussed, so I'll just stick to the main ones:

How does SHIELD even work, at least in the MCU? Who controls SHIELD? Who funds it? Where are its members from? These questions started to become problematic in The Avengers, but after CA2, they have really become huge plot holes. Specifically, the climax with the Helicarriers makes absolutely no sense, as others have pointed out.

1. Who knew about the launching of the Insight Helicarriers?

a) Nobody knew except SHIELD. This is impossible, given how DC has probably the most restricted airspace in the US. Three massive flying ships popping up in the middle of DC, unbeknownst to the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, would be a major problem.

b) The government knew, but not the public. This is also impossible given the extremely prominent location of the Insight Helicarrier shipyard underneath the Potomac River. If the Insight Helicarriers were supposed to be a secret operation, then why weren't they built somewhere more discrete instead of the nation's capital? There's no way three massive ships appearing over DC like that could happen without notification of the public.

c) Everyone including the public knew. If so, then why weren't there any spectators? For such a grand event as the launching of three Helicarriers, a not-so-mundane occasion, there should be massive crowds lined up to see. But there wasn't anyone around.

2. Who paid for the Helicarriers? I can accept that Helicarriers can fly. I can accept that three can be built simultaneously under an accelerated timetable (even though it can take seven years to build a real-world modern carrier, that is, the non-flying kind). But what doesn't make sense is this: real-world carriers can cost $25 billion to build. I'm assuming flying ones will cost more. So let's say the three Insight carriers cost $100 billion. The US had a huge military budget, something close to $700 billion annually, but most of that goes into maintaining bases all around the world; only about $20 billion of that goes into construction. No other nation in the world spends anywhere even close a quarter of what the US spends on military; so where did this money come from? It certainly didn't come from Tony Stark, whose net worth has been estimated by Forbes to be around $6 billion, hardly enough for just a single Helicarrier turbine engine.

3. How was HYDRA's plan ever going to work? Project Insight seemed to be made up of two parts: surveillance to acquire data on "threats", and Helicarriers to eliminate those "threats", including President Ellis. Let's say Captain America and company never found out about HYDRA's plan, and those Helicarriers were able to start blasting people away. Almost immediately, everyone important in DC, including much of the nation's leadership, would be killed. Then what?

The three Helicarriers would be shot down in a gigantic Independence Day style battle, that's what. There's no way they would have ever gone anywhere beyond DC. Maybe they would have killed thousands, maybe tens of thousands, and that would have been horrible, but there's no way they could have gotten to twenty million. No way. And then where would HYDRA be? They still wouldn't have been in position to take over, not unless they paid off the new vice president or something.

It really feels like the directors and writers wanted an amazing finale but forgot to justify it through the plot, which is a shame, considering how awesome the movie is, otherwise. The excuse "it's just a comic book movie" only goes so far. It works for little things like how Sam was able to avoid getting hit by any anti-aircraft fire or how he was able to deploy his parachute at the last second. It even works for things like Helicarriers being able to fly. But it doesn't work for major considerations like the the inconsistencies of the entire SHIELD organisation.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I've been lurking around here for quite a while during the past few days, especially in this thread. I've finally decided to register an account, since I have a lot of problems with this movie and would like to hear others' opinions on it. So far, from talking to my friends, all I keep getting is "it's just a comic book movie, who cares?" and that's really unsatisfying for me...

The problems that I have with this movie fill three pages, but a lot of them are minor points or have already been discussed, so I'll just stick to the main ones:

How does SHIELD even work, at least in the MCU? Who controls SHIELD? Who funds it? Where are its members from? These questions started to become problematic in The Avengers, but after CA2, they have really become huge plot holes. Specifically, the climax with the Helicarriers makes absolutely no sense, as others have pointed out.

1. Who knew about the launching of the Insight Helicarriers?

a) Nobody knew except SHIELD. This is impossible, given how DC has probably the most restricted airspace in the US. Three massive flying ships popping up in the middle of DC, unbeknownst to the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, would be a major problem.

b) The government knew, but not the public. This is also impossible given the extremely prominent location of the Insight Helicarrier shipyard underneath the Potomac River. If the Insight Helicarriers were supposed to be a secret operation, then why weren't they built somewhere more discrete instead of the nation's capital? There's no way three massive ships appearing over DC like that could happen without notification of the public.

c) Everyone including the public knew. If so, then why weren't there any spectators? For such a grand event as the launching of three Helicarriers, a not-so-mundane occasion, there should be massive crowds lined up to see. But there wasn't anyone around.

2. Who paid for the Helicarriers? I can accept that Helicarriers can fly. I can accept that three can be built simultaneously under an accelerated timetable (even though it can take seven years to build a real-world modern carrier, that is, the non-flying kind). But what doesn't make sense is this: real-world carriers can cost $25 billion to build. I'm assuming flying ones will cost more. So let's say the three Insight carriers cost $100 billion. The US had a huge military budget, something close to $700 billion annually, but most of that goes into maintaining bases all around the world; only about $20 billion of that goes into construction. No other nation in the world spends anywhere even close a quarter of what the US spends on military; so where did this money come from? It certainly didn't come from Tony Stark, whose net worth has been estimated by Forbes to be around $6 billion, hardly enough for just a single Helicarrier turbine engine.

3. How was HYDRA's plan ever going to work? Project Insight seemed to be made up of two parts: surveillance to acquire data on "threats", and Helicarriers to eliminate those "threats", including President Ellis. Let's say Captain America and company never found out about HYDRA's plan, and those Helicarriers were able to start blasting people away. Almost immediately, everyone important in DC, including much of the nation's leadership, would be killed. Then what?

The three Helicarriers would be shot down in a gigantic Independence Day style battle, that's what. There's no way they would have ever gone anywhere beyond DC. Maybe they would have killed thousands, maybe tens of thousands, and that would have been horrible, but there's no way they could have gotten to twenty million. No way. And then where would HYDRA be? They still wouldn't have been in position to take over, not unless they paid off the new vice president or something.

It really feels like the directors and writers wanted an amazing finale but forgot to justify it through the plot, which is a shame, considering how awesome the movie is, otherwise. The excuse "it's just a comic book movie" only goes so far. It works for little things like how Sam was able to avoid getting hit by any anti-aircraft fire or how he was able to deploy his parachute at the last second. It even works for things like Helicarriers being able to fly. But it doesn't work for major considerations like the the inconsistencies of the entire SHIELD organisation.

it's just a comic book movie, who cares

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

can someone clarify something for me?

didnt Fury and a section of SHIELD know that Insight was meant to kill threats? What was the difference between Hydras plan and what Nick Fury thought Insight was about? (Considering he's the one who advocates neutralizing threats before they happen).

Also, when Cap says that SHIELD has to go, does he mean exposing it or intentionally destroying the HQ? Or was that an epic accident?