The Problem(s) With Captain America: Civil War
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Captain America: Civil War not only changed the course of the entire MCU, but it set a new bar for superhero movies in general. Though, even with it's boundary pushing elements, Captain America: Civil War is not without it's share of problems. Whether you look at the adaptation from the comic book series, or the larger implications within the Marvel Cinematic Universe, its clear Captain America Civil War isn't a perfect movie, but it's dang close.
#captainamerica #ironman #marvel #nerdstalgic
The flaws in this movie are absolutely ignored because of the stellar character work from both the team behind the cameras and the actors themselves. Some of the lines delivered in Civil War are among the best in the MCU. Winter Soldier and Civil War had a surprising number of nuanced and understated deliveries that hold up as legitimately good acting.
You can feel the desire for revenge in Iron Man's voice when he says, "I don't care he killed my mom".
Robert Downey Jr was great at delivering it
MARTHA!
And cap became the villain in this.
@@psychoapplesauceeater8562Why did you say that name
WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME
Civil War is among the TOP tier MCU films. The real problem here is that MCU couldn’t make more films like this one, or The Winter Soldier.
honestly two incredible movies along with Infinity War
Agreed. And I do wish we got more political thrillers in the MCU with as much thematic and character focus as these two. I thought Black Widow might've potentially been another one.
Yeah. Maybe not a perfect movie, but I really think it's great when evaluated as a season finale of sorts in the Marvel series
It isn't. It pales in comparison to The 1st Avenger and ESPECIALLY The Winter Soldier.
Agree. I love most all of them, but I watched this one the most times.
"the book agrees with Cap"
Wait until you find out Mark Millar, the writer of the book, literally said Iron Man was right and we were supposed to be rooting for him
Civil War is a bad story in the comics and the movie for the exact same reason. The act is never clarified as to what it means and is only window dressing for big action set pieces
I remember liking it the first time I read it, but looking back, it's like a watered down Kingdom Come with worse art@@rudevoices9204
@@rudevoices9204the accords are pretty well explained. We dont have to physically read them to get the jist of what they are and how theyd work, along with why Tony wants them
Yeah but as Aaron Stack once told us, Mark Millar licks goats.
Not a chance to agree with Tony - at least not in the movies.
Never read the comics so I don't know what the arguments and the situation there are.
The critical detail about the comic-book event that kicked off the Civil War is that the superhero team that antagonized Nitro and crew were young, barely trained and they jumped into the situation without understanding who they were up against for clout on social media. They were actually more focused on recording their endeavors than the threat posed by the villains they faced. This made the upstart superhero team responsible for the explosion. It was a threat that would have been better handled by The Avengers or Spiderman.
That's why we ended with things like avengers academy and Xavier's institute
And it gave birth to one of the most tragic superheroes in Marvel: Speedball aka Penance
The funny thing is there was actually a conspiracy in play. U see Nitros explosions were never that powerful and wouldn't have been able to level that city if not for the fact he had Mutant growth Hormones to boost his powers. Had Millar not abandoned the plotline we could've seen a situation were it's revealed someone orchestrated the whole Civil War incident to destabilize the Heroes.
@@scientistsupreme5211 🤯 Never knew that! That's wild.
This is a better starting point because in the MCU well the heroes kinda handled the situations professionnaly
The fact that the sokovia didn't matter much brought to the conclusion that many guys were in the battle just to help someone else and not because they thought it was important. The story at the end evolves around cap and iron man so guys like spiderman and ant were included just in function of those two, they had basically nothing to do with the clash
Sokovia fate is concluded in The Captain America and Winter Soldier series on Disney Plus
@@JBTriple8
Just put the important conclusion of an important event on a spinoff that probably 40% of the audience is going to watch... or better said, "put the ending behind a paywall".
videogames have been criticized for this type of content release for at least two decades now, just those who have the paid DLC have all the context or the complete experience... and it is only defended by die hard fans or rich kids with too much time on their hands.
@@dimwarlock I'm not sure why it's bad that you had to pay to watch FATWS, considering it has more content than the individual movies (being a show). I don't consider it just an expansion of Civil War. You can also cancel your subscription, tho if your point is that you can't buy the show like you can buy the movie, you actually can.
It's a damn shame that MCU all but ignored the Sokovia Accord. There's so much potential there.
However, in the context of CW, movie I thougth it was brilliant that the writers showed how things can go from political to personal, which is very true in the real world.
The Infinity War had sped up the ending of the Sokovia Accords. Without this threat, the Sokovia Accords would have lasted longer.
Sokovias fate is addressed in the Captain American and The Winter Soldiers Mini series on Disney Plus
Opinions included:
1)Rogue Avengers movie
2) Spider-man being affected
3) Iron man creating a new team
The problem is that this movie came out after they'd showed us that the biggest spy agency in the world was easily infiltrated by the nazis.
Cap's point about the restrictions the government can impose on them for nefarious reasons is absolutely valid.
5:47 I think these taglines serve as the core for what each version of 'Civil War' were trying to achieve and why you fundamentally may've not liked the MCU direction. The film, as the Russos/Markus & McFeely stressed, is ultimately about the breakup of a family. Rather than A "who's a side are you on" or "who's right type of story" where two ideologies are pitted and it arrives at a conclusion.
Natasha's role is often overlooked in this film but what she says about "Staying together is more important than how we stay together" may as well be a/the thesis statement of the film. Like the United We Stand...Divided We Fall tagline, it emphasizes that one of the core messages is that they should focus on how they stand strong together even through all the differences than break apart because of them.
I personally loved how the writers didn't write Avengers' as suddenly out of character and openly hostile towards one another. The climax of their disagreements, the airport battle, is not them violently blowing over these disputes but rather them coming at a crossroads regarding a major international issue and most members having to take a stand based on what they believe is right (it's not "Steve being in love with Bucky") a personal stake or both. So while each side is fighting hard to get to their goals, they still respect & like the other side, even exchange quips. Clint & Nat's little conversation I think is a representation of this dynamic at the heart of the sequence. Later, Tony is willing to listen to the other side, admits Steve was right about Bucky and why he protected him, and initially joins the 3rd act as an ally. The actual violent blow-up ultimately occurs over a personal issue; a dark secret kept between family is revealed, which makes it both a betrayal as it is a shock for Tony. Again, in-keeping with the family drama about "going through a divorce" theme.
I also disagree that it substitutes the wider MCU's progress or the original comic's themes in favor of character progression and having heroes punch other in the face for the sake of that spectacle. While I think the Sokovia Accords ultimately didn't reach to the narrative potential and impact they could've had on the Avengers and wider universe, I feel that's mainly a retroactive failing on the MCU's part in Phase 3 rather than a problem with the script. Based on the film's ending and Markus & McFeely's commentary post release, it seemed like there was a time where we're going to the events lead to a wider arc and change to the MCU's superhero landscape. But they ultimately sidelined it and had even the heroes who signed turn away from it or ignore the accords without any acknowledgment about it in Infinity War's events. The only lasting consequence was the Avengers' division playing a factor in their loss in that film. Which does enhance aforementioned theme of "United We Stand...Divided We Fall" and the importance of the Avengers staying together. So the film had one lasting effect.
beautifully put
You killed it! This it the truth right here!
Well put! So your basically saying the heroes who signed the sokovia accord signed it for no reason especially when there are greater threats like thanos out there
I came here to say this...but much less eloquently...glad you beat me to it.
Extremely well put. I 100% agree. This movie had the difficult task of not only properly using it's characters and giving them development, but introducing the Sokovia Accords. And to me, it did it masterfully. The Accords might not have held much weight later on, but yeah, that was on later movies to fulfil that role.
I can at least forgive Phase 3 for not tackling it more, since 3 was filled with amazing movies that had their own adventures (Black Panther, Thor Ragnarok, Guardians 2, Homecoming, Doctor Strange). The Sokovia Accords only really make sense in Homecoming, since Tony's in it, and he's actively discouraging Spiderman from acting on his own. The other movies have nothing to do with the UN's politics tbh. Guardians and Thor are in space. Captain Marvel is in a different time period. Doctor Strange and Black Panther are isolated events for their respective factions. Far From Home was post Endgame so things definitely changed.
Infinity War and Endgame could have tackled it more, since they were the big Avengers films, but the films already had a lot they needed to accomplish, so I'm glad the Accords weren't a big focus. And if the Avengers waited on the UN to act, Thanos would have won a lot sooner.
All in all, I'm glad that the Accords weren't shoehorned in where they didn't belong. Still, it was nice to see Civil War's impact still lingering in those movies. It still shocks me that Tony and Steve never interacted with each other in Infinity War. The writers literally separated their 2 best characters, which I would normally say is not a good idea. However, it works because 1: they get to interact with more characters without distracting the plot and taking up too much focus. 2: Thanos is the main character of IW, which was the best decision that movie made. And 3: the pay off in Endgame nails it.
Phase 3 is just something else. Phase 1 was still great and Phase 2 left a lot to be desired (Still great films like Guardians and Winter Soldier), but 3 was epic.
I needed a movie with Cap and Black Widow’s Avengers team before Civil War
Fr, with war machine as a main. I’ll take it.
The opening scene of Civil War with Cap and others detaining that biohazard from Crossbones is kind of a mini movie in itself, it shows you how an Avengers team led by Cap and Widow would work. But a full length movie of that would’ve been great yeah.
This is why I consider Age of Ultron as the ending for at least Black Widow, Hawkeye, Captain America and Iron Man’s story because of that disappointment
@@kbraven7007 Yeah, it's kinda sad that, after Age of Ultron, the core 6 Avengers don't all fight together anymore. I love Endgame, but I don't think Black Widow should have died so soon on Vormir.
I'm at least really glad that Thor, Iron Man, and Captain America all fought Thanos together, that was needed to show just how fun but dysfunctional the team was. And the 5 year time skip is no excuse, they were just as bad before 😂
Captain America Civil War is good, but Winter Soldier easily tops it. Winter Soldier's story doesn't rely on your knowing 80 different movies and characters to care about the premise. And Civil War is arguably not an actual Captain America movie, more of an Avengers 2.5 according to Anthony Mackie.
United we stand
Divided we fall
Reminds me in Endgame when Tony confronts Steve and said “you said we’d lose together but you weren’t there”
The funny thing about that line is that Tony is hypocritical and wrong to say it. He acted too rash and bold to go to space instead of staying on earth to regroup. While cap actually got everyone together in wakanda, imagine if Tony did stay and worked together with everyone.
@@michaelsuezowhat the hell r you on about? Who the hell would have helped Peter and Strange then?
@M_k-zi3tn the guardians? Dr starnge is pretty strong. I'm sure they would've portaled back to earth since strange did not want the time stone close to Thanos at all. Bringing the tome stone to titan was Tony's idea.
@@michaelsuezo Tony didn't know The Guardians existed, so it wouldn't make much sense for him to expect them to deal with that situation.
Whatever point you're tryna make makes no sense dude.
@M_k-zi3tn sure man
Literally the ONLY problem with this overall almost brilliant movie is that they adapted the civil war storyline way too early.
"Almost brilliant movie" lmao watch more movies my guy
@@nalday2534 as in its own genre. Obviously nowhere to masterpieces like Green Mile. But thanks for being rude, at least I could make myself look better with such contrast.
@@zsoltbartus169 better by overhyping corporate garbage? 🫵🤣
It try to fit a giant storyline in the one movie…
I hate to add negativity, but I believe the biggest issue is it being a "Captain America" movie. It immediately makes Steve Rodgers the protagonist, making his world view the main "correct" view, which makes Tony's belief immediately antagonistic. I think if it was titled "Avengers: Civil War," maybe that would be different?
Depends on how you feel about the MCU. If you watch everything, Civil War is great. If you're a casual fan, it definitely leaves more to be desired. I saw it thru the lens of the Avengers as a whole. How it splintered them and how its consequences for their failure against Thanos. It's that dichotomy of making movies like episodes in a series vs making movies that stand on their own. I enjoy how personal Civil War is for the characters vs being a take on society.
If you watch the whole MCU upto Civil War, you realize that Cap's argument is absolutely right and that Tony is being a gulit ridden moron.
you say this film has problems but the truth is this movie is 10x better than current MCU movies right now
I think the movie is better for making it personal. It does something different from the book. The book shows how fear effects mob mentality through a nameless crowd of civilians, but the movie shows that personal bias often gets in the way of genuine progress through the main characters themselves.
Bucky being brainwashed and Wanda being a scapegoat are both examples of victims having their rights discounted for the same reasons under different contexts. They both draw emphasis to the fact that Iron Man isn't thinking logically but is driven by his personal biases, whereas Cap is trying to do what he thinks is right. We can see how Steve is torn between two friends, trying to weigh the situation and mediate justice, which makes it incredibly difficult for anyone to definitively say he has any kind of personal bias. Steve knows that Bucky is a victim of a system of control and Tony is another victim of that same system, but Tony is trying to scapegoat Bucky without any consideration for the full context. That reflects back on Tony's treatment of Wanda.
I think that successfully adds a deeper nuance that wasn't present in the book, where the secret identity aspect shoulders the weight of the themes. The movie illustrates on a character level how that fear manifests in Iron Man's stance on the issue. Tony isn't being pragmatic, he's trying to offload a lot of his own personal guilt to the government, and the issue with his parents shows how willing he is to throw justice out the window... so he isn't motivated to register out of any sense of justice, but from his own emotional imbalance. Removing the accords from his stance by giving Tony a strong bias against another victim reveals his true motivations. I think that's a brilliant augmentation of the source material, not a problem.
It's not about revenge for Tony's parents, it's about Tony's lack of regard for justice or consideration for victimized individuals. The accords are the curtain revealing Tony's flawed motives when pulled back, not the other way around. The accords are an outlet for Tony's lack of consideration for others. The accords exist because people react to disaster by demanding easy accountability rather than considering individual accountability, because civilians have no way of knowing the details that result in their destroyed livelihoods. Tony's motives to sign the accords align with the people who just want to feel in control over a situation they don't understand, so the issue of Tony's parents just highlights how that same motivation can arise outside of politics.
One stance is primarily motivated by fear, taking personal accountability and individual rights away based on discrimination against super powered individuals, all out of an emotionally charged response to a disaster. The other stance is in favor of personal accountability and individual rights, and keeping the power of supers from being exploited by government and political biases. The movie has no issue conveying any of that. I'd argue the book gets more lost with it's theming, veering off into media influence territory, than keeping focus on the honest, personal consideration of the issue based on observable factors. The movie stays centered squarely on how what motivates promotion of that kind of policy, even in moving beyond the policy itself.
There is no better MCU film than Civil War. This and Winter Soldier are the peak of the entire MCU.
Your issue with the movie was an essential part for Infinity War because they needed to be divided when Thanos attacked.
They could’ve been divided without breaking up, as the avengers rarely travel around together unless some shit is going down
@@deek60819Had they still been a team but in separate locations there would've been a sense of communication and organization that they just weren't at in Infinity War tho
theyre still have been seperated since Infinity War / Endgame Civil War works better than BVS
@@veggiewillymassnot really Tony, Strange, Peter, and Bruce weren't even on NY, the bad guy could've showed up before Tony could call and warn Cap then Bruce could pick up the phone like before. There problem solved, otherwise Black panther could've just met an Avenger in his own movie and made a truce. Scott Lang would be busy with Hope in his movie saying he's unavailable. Clint Barton would be retired or just help and have no big impact.
It's perfect the way it is
My biggest problem is how easily EVERYONE was fooled by Zemo.
It's totally ridiculous.
Not really. I mean he hung out in the shadows. No one even knew to look for him. That's how they got fooled
That and the unbelievable and stupid random camera locations to perfectly capture Stark’s parents deaths.
Yeah... They should have made some heroes like CA to question what they were doing, probably since the first avengers. Something simple, that wouldnt kill the mood of the movie, but in retrospective we would think, yeah that makes sense.
@@ComedyBros5I mean you’re watching a movie where a guy turns giant and fights someone who shoots webs. If that’s what you have an issue with idk what to tell you
Yes and no. Zemo has fooled the Avengers in the comics in the past, there's one comic where he took control of the avengers and destroyed personal stuff of the heroes. I think it's a good story, also Zemo is a great villain.
For me the problem is that Zemo has no place in civil war, bacause making everything a machination of the villain deplete of validity to argument in the film.
Also there's a couple of points that are never brought up in the film, like the whole ultron situation was Tony Stark fault, yet the sokovian accords doesn't affect him nor make him any more accountable since his identity was made public in the first film. Also the winter soldier was brainwashed when he murdered tony's parents, he had no responsability of his actions, and tony knew it yet he went straight forward for the revange.
Remember when the MCU made movies like Civil War or Winter Soldier that took matters seriously? Now everything is a joke, everybody quips like they’re Spider-Man, Iron Man or Deadpool.
Deadpool 3 could steer the MCU back on course
@@JBTriple8 Deadpool being serious? I think you might have mixed up with Deathstroke.
I thought it was a great movie, the only problem I ever had with it from the first time I saw it? Iron Man and Cap each have their own viewpoint. Everyone else they recruit just goes along with whoever happens to recruit them.
Except maybe Black Widow.
Sure they didn’t outline each persons beliefs but the only ones they didn’t were the ones not in the room when the accords were announced. Everyone in that room spoke up about which one was right
In Tony's team Vision always agreed with the accords and what they stood for, Rhodey also same and his closeness for Tony too and you have already mentioned Natasha making her own choice despite being closer to Cap(and she never actually agreed with Tony) The only one he recruited was Spiderman.
Same way with Cap's side Wanda and Bucky had obvious reasons to be on cap's side, and I don't think Hawkeye had any baises towards anyone like that. The only recruits from his side were Antman and maybe Sam but he mostly agrees with Cap's viewpoints.
As much as I liked the airport battle
The fact the characters kept talking and making jokes while fighting really broke the suspension of disbelief
I haven't watched the video yet, but having watched the battle I personally disagree. It makes sense that these characters would banter because they are friends. They aren't mortal enemies trying to kill each other. I don't believe Black Panther doesn't make any jokes because he is trying to kill Bucky. There aren't any jokes in the battle later battle with Captain America and Bucky vs Iron Man because Iron Man is trying to KILL Bucky. It is serious.
U must not know the characters
Yeah, it definitely wasn’t the dudes in flying robot suits, a kid bitten by a radioactive spider fighting an elderly man with a physics defying shield that broke my suspension of disbelief, it was the quippy dialogue.
People seem to forget this movie is based on a superhero comic. Its not going to be realistic. 😒
@@Mr2dmonkey
The Dark Knight and Logan can prove you wrong
As someone who saw this film having not seen many of the Marvel films, I totally agree. I felt like they were setting up an intelligent film, and then it descended into the typical overly long action scenes that put me off the franchise generally.
I feel like the issues you mentioned might be because the film (which is my favorite MCU film) was too divided between its two main stories: the Accords and the Winter Soldier. I think the whole Sokovia Accords/team vs team should have been in an actual Avengers film, because it had little to do with the main “protect Bucky” story.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Pretty sure a guy talking about a well regulated militia didn’t think ‘freedom’ meant anyone who accrued enough power could just kill. This film claims stopping someone killing those they consider ‘bad’ is infringing their rights?!? A right to murder?!
@@RickBerman-iv2illol wtf are u yapping about.
@RickBerman-iv2il Just say you didn’t watch the movie or you’re just too stupid to understand it
I don't think Ben Franklin thought of people that could move cities with their minds when he said that.
@@somerandomdude1179 Lol. 😂
Where tf is SHIELD? They literally brought the team together in the first place and constantly work with superheroes even after this movie. It makes sense that they would be part of this event.
I think the problem I have with the MCU as a whole is that these trilogies within the universe don’t feel like a series. I can’t just sit down and binge the Thor movies in a row because of how wildly different they are in tone and structure. I think the only franchises within the MCU that do this well are Spiderman, GotG, and Iron Man. These films feel similar, like they were designed as a set meant to be watched independently. I think the big mistake made by Feige is the loss of these unique tones that made each movie special. What was intriguing about Avengers was how they would take these tonally diverse characters and have them interact in an organic way. Now, as we move further through the universe, every film feels the same and there’s no interesting character mashups because each character has been forced into an MCU mold.
This is why I’m excited for the DCU. I think James Gunn sees the potential for this diversity and is putting himself in the right position to give everything that marvel fans have been sorely lacking. I hope he lands the ship and we have another great film franchise to follow.
Um what? lol
I mean, I think the MCU had a good mix of connected movies, and movies that are split up. Cap and the Avengers movies are all super connected to the MCU. Thor and Antman are kinda their own thing for the first 2 movies, then the sequels become more MCU ish. Then the 3 you named are independent.
the very fact that we are still dissecting the film almost 8 years later tells me it was a great movie
Amen.
people still dissect bad movies too years later thats Nostalgia critic's whole thing
Just because the movie is different from the comics doesn't mean that's a problem. In fact, I think it WAS a better idea to focus on the interpersonal relationships between the heroes rather than making a Star Trek: The Next Generation trial. By doing that, it not only elevates the emotional mistakes between the two figureheads of the conflict (Ironman and Captain America) but also builds expertly and develops the pretence of the Sokovia Accords. They were never meant to really underline the film but instead supposed to instigate a divide. In reality, I don't see how the comic ending could have done well in the films, especially since they are more about focusing on our favourite superhero characters than trying to insert mob mentalities or third-party interventions that rob us of the inevitable tragic ending that was delivered when two titans clash.
For a Captain America movie, the story was perfect. For the Civil War title, it's not so much.
you want to talk about interpersonal relationships within the MCU? What's your take on this theory?
Peggy married Steve after he went back in time, she made reference to the man she married and had children with in the movie Cap watches at his museum. (Old Cap has kids!)
While attending Peggy's funeral Cap realizes that Sharon is Peggy's niece, a fact which Sharon has been hiding from Cap the whole time... that means when Cap and Sharon kiss in Germany, they both knew who they were and decided to go with it anyways.
1. Don't judge their love!!! they aren't blood relatives
2. At what point did Steve tell Peggy about his past relationship with her future niece (and how do you think that conversation went?)
3. At what point did Sharon realize who Aunt Peggy's husband really is?
3. Is it possible that Sharon has been trained from birth as an operative for Old Cap's independent intelligence agency? (a kind of grey widow!)
4. Do you think Sharon hooked up with Old Cap after delivering young Cap's superhero suit in Germany? She was talking to someone on the phone at the end of Falcon and Winter Soldier.
... this is the theory of Creepy Uncle Steve... The real Power Broker
When it comes to the MCU in particular,I think that they do well to deviate from the comics,and that these films are typically better for it. Like the way No Way Home lightly peppered in certain elements from One More Day. I think we can all agree that we don't want THAT story adapted for a film.
@nunyabizniss4087 You clearly misunderstood the timeline rules of endgame didn't you?
The Peggy we know, the one that died, never married Steve.
@@Problemsolver434 see,I would agree with you except that Endgame broke its own time traveling rules by having old man Steve show up at the end of the film. He still lives in our timeline/universe,so he was married to our Peggy. What other Peggy COULD he have been married to!?
I keep trying to like this movie, and as much as I like parts of it, I just don't like it overall, as a whole. It just came off more as Domestic Disturbance rather than Civil War.
The stakes aren't high enough. The heroes are not fighting each other to the death, so it is just a fun scrimmage (e.g. the airport fight scene is fun to watch, but it's like watching a kid smash toys together, with no consequences). And then a movie or two after this one, the characters are back together acting like this never even happened. In retrospect (from 2024), the Civil War movie occurred relatively close to the beginning of the MCU, which makes it seem even more silly because we were just starting to get to know the characters and it seemed a little too early to get all postmodernist and meta.
There was no bulid up for this film, they should have kept the plot of bucky an cap and have it through some of caps actions in the film and events in previous mcu films have the registration act start to be talked about then have it bulid in the background for the next few films having the events in said films factor into people wanting the registration act then do the civil war in an avengers film
Civil War should've been an entire phase, if you ask me. I was kind of baffled that they decided to make it a single movie.
$
Seems to me they would've made a ton more money stretching it out into three or four films. Especially considering, unlike some franchises that split a third movie into two when it's a terrible idea, it probably would've been quite welcomed by the fanbase. But then again, considering all these box office failures lately, the executives may not have a good grasp on what the fants want at all@@jeremyv2163
Something that I learned from a TH-cam video several years ago is the fact that they would never have been called the Sokovia Accords. Accords are named after the place in which they are signed,and not after any cities or territories that they happen to concern.
Interesting that the push to remove the heroes' right to have a secret identity was led by Iron Man -- one of the few who notably did not have a secret identity.
He did, though! For decades Iron Man was supposedly his bodyguard, not him.
There seems to be a lot of people in the comments yelling about how nerdstalgic said it was a bad movie but they said multiple times that it was a great movie. Saying a film had missed opportunities, pointing out where it fell short or even giving constructive criticism does not mean you think it was bad. Loving something requires you to be able to see how it could be better. No film is flawless
The fact this film is about Captain America in the first place just shows much it isn't interested in the nuances of the original comic.
Civil War gets overshadowed by Infinity War and End Game, but I always thought it was better, despite the "main" antagonist Zemo being lackluster, because I always saw Ironman actually being the main antagonist and Captian America the main protagonist of the movie.
To me , the Civil War movie was great in the first two acts, but the 3rd act stinks. The comic is brilliant and the MUA 2 game did a great job adapting it, even better than the MCU.
Happy to see MUA 2 mentioned in the comments!
Spider-Man never had to deal with the Socovia Accords in his own films despite fighting on behalf of them.
Yeah, you'd think that there'd be people distrusting or campaigning for him to sign the Accords and police officers trying to apprehend him.
@@EclipsingTNT
Spider-Man comes off as a hypocrite. He fought for superhero registration yet doesn’t have it applied to himself
@@Sjono guys spiderman never cared about the accords he only cared about bieng an avenger and the police did try to catch spidey in his own movie by the that monument that looks like a 8===D
He didn’t even know what he was fighting for. Stark didn’t tell him
@@sublimescorpio230very true and that’s what makes stark dangerous
the other issue is how ridiculously complicated the villians plot is. this movie is much over rated
Interesting discussion. Civil War is still one of my favorite Marvel movies. 😁
“We dropped the building on them while we were kicking ass”. what were you gonna do? not fight and let the whole earth die? LMAOO
And on top of that, they were actively trying to help get the people out while also fighting Ultron. It's not like they just showed up and started fighting without thinking about protecting civilians.
2:46 “give me a break” great scene because that’s what this really is about. He wants a cop out instead of following his morals
I don't see how focusing on characters as being a flaw. Quite the contrary, the movie did something very very smart. Instead of making them both right, in their own way, and them making you choose a side (automatically making you hate the "other" side), like the comics, the movie, making them both "wrong" (not wrong per se, only guiding their actions through conflicting and opposite emotions), doesn't make you choose a side, other than the side of union. You WANT them to be together again. Anyway, everyone is entitled to give at least ONE punch on the guy that killed/murdered your parents, and, on the other hand, bros for life. I'd say it's a very masculine movie.
love how black widow was beating the shit out of antman each time she got lol
This wasn't a cap movie it was tony stark guilt tripping about creating the Ultron movie
Edit - or iron man 4 or Avengers 3
I disagree, the fallout events in Civil War were heavily foreshadowed in Age of Ultron and really the purpose of the movie was to setup the fracture before Infinity War.
Agree agree agree. This movie was def 10/10
Marvel didnt plan out civil war into being a movie😂its because BVS was announced so they wanted a piece of that pie
The movie was never going to fully adapt the "super heroes must/must not be regulated" aspect of the comics because that would get viewers asking themselves hard questions about governmental regulation and the powers that be simply cannot have that happening
“Hey, Buddy… i think you lost this!”
I realized Marvel wasn’t interested in thoughtful storytelling when they gave America a pass on all the horrible things it’s responsible for during CA: Winter Soldier because “Hydra did it.” They removed any culpability and were content to let Cap and the Avengers become defenders of the status quo instead of improving the world.
It’s the same reason they have so many villains who are objectively correct, but the Avengers kill anyway.
Marvel’s more interested in a team of heroes that preserves the status quo than one that makes things better. Because they know those stories are political by nature and they don’t want to ruffle any feathers.
“You want to protect the world, but you don’t want it to change.” -Ultron
100%@@JoshWise1010
Giving America a pass for the horrible things the government has done wasn't the point. It's that the U.S.-based intelligence apparatus was infiltrated via Operation Paperclip & that they were creating a chaotic world trying to get the people to surrender their freedom. They also didn't say Hydra was behind lynchings, our involvement in the Vietnam War or other shady things we've done. The film never contradicts those events because it keeps almost everything Hydra did vague. The exception being the Stark murders.
i'm kind of confused by your comment, for one thing , yes i agree that marvel/disney wasted many oportunities to be thoughtful about the themes on the superheroes stories, but what confuse me is : according to you, what villain was objectively correct? the one who actually wanted to pacify the world by killing everyone on earth , the one that wanted to slave the whole world , or the want who wanted to solve overpopulation by killing half of the people (which, if you think about it doesn't work at all)?
@@naegling Killmonger, Flag Smasher, and Gorr the God Butcher (among others) all held the correct positions, but had to be killed to keep the status quo. They got around this by making the villain do something wildly heinous and outside of their mission statement so they'd have to be put down.
Interestingly, the villain they decide to rehabilitate is John Walker, who is overtly fascist.
Who else paused the video every time a new still from the comics appeared on screen to read all the comic's dialogue and therefore lost track of the video's overall thoughts and had to rewatch it? 😅😂
In the whole of the MCU, this movie does make a impact with its characters and their character arcs. Because it plays back on them in the opening of Endgame with Tony still not forgiving Rogers for splitting the Avengers and lessening their ability to take down Thanos in Infinity War. He blames him for not going along with the accords and maybe making a difference in that pivotal battle as a united force and not a divided one as it showed in that film and thus resulting in half of all life dying.
Yes, while the accords were were wasted as a piece of long-term impact from this film (I don't fault the film itself for it) I think the video overlooked/forgot that it did lead to the Avengers division and it being a factor in Thanos gaining the mind stone & time stone and ultimately winning. On that front, Civil War did lead to a greater consequence and character progression from that point.
I never really liked Civil War. It seemed very rushed and forced due to trying to undermine BvS. They could’ve waited longer and done Civil War more naturally.
I am a big fan of this channel and have watched this content for years, so take what I am about to say with that in mind.
I have felt that the writing of videos over the last year or two has suffered compared to older ones. The structure is a little confused, and by bouncing back and forth between topics, a lot of comments/ideas end up being repeated. I think the central ideas of the videos are often great, but the videos themselves often spend a lot of time adding little to them
Yeah. Had quite the same feelings for a while.
Saw one of those
I completely disagree with the thesis of this video. The reason Captain America Civil war is one of the best MCU movies is BECAUSE it focuses more on personal relationships than world building
The MCU could easily delve into this idea again and flesh it out way more.
The biggest issue with Civil War is how it influenced battles in later Marvel movies. After this every battle is just two groups charging at each other. It made absolutely no sense in Infinity War for this to happen since Wakada should have long range weaponary and have soldiers outside the shield, also some type of military vehicles as they clearly showed in Black Panther they have invisible jets. Also when nobody knows who the villains are, no one cares if they're charging at each other. Samething with endgame. And no, other large scale battles in other movies are not this dumb. In Lord of the rings one side is being sieged or defending. In the Battle of the Bastards it was a trapped setup by Ramsey. Yet now Marvel movies have every large scale battle just ramming into each other.
My biggest problem was i wanted a good solo movie with Zemo and Crossbones as the villians with Falcon and Winter Soldier as supportive characters.Also to keep the political thriller tone that made Winter Soldier so great.
This and Age of Ultron were the movies that soured me on the MCU. The arguments each side make about the Accords are surface level at best and most of the conflict throughout the movie comes from no one wanting to communicate. I wasn't a big comic book fan growing up but even I knew the comic actually presented thorough and complex arguments for each side. In the movie no one really makes an attempt to defend their position with counterarguments such as the fact that in The Avengers the "oversight" wanted to nuke Manhattan during the invasion which would have killed tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people, that Tony's position is because he was guilt-tripped into caring about one kid that was killed by Ultron's actions after Tony inadvertently created Ultron (overlooking the fact that a lot of others were killed too), and that it's likely far more would have been injured or killed if Scarlett Witch hadn't intervened with Crossbone. No one really takes responsibility for their actions in the movie.
I think what frustrated me the most is how everyone was lauding how great this is and how shit the DCEU movies were even though they aren't all that different (aside from the MCU having the stronger story and characterization), and in general the fight choreography in the DCEU had always been good whereas the airport scene in Civil War was one of the first times the MCU did it well. Civil War just ultimately felt like it was to set up for the rest of phase 3 without letting the movie be its own story.
Tony is clearly wrong in the movie as he serves the purpose of the antagonist to Steve. Dropping the accords which would have made it a fascinating movie combined with Tony not having a leg to stand on really drops the movie.
Instead of the accords being a superhero registration it should have been about mind control and if those under it were culpable. This would have lead into the conflict that ended up happening and given a chance for it to be explained why anyone would go after someone who doesn’t have free will when doing actions.
I do like that airport battle.
As fun as it was, I had a big problem with it. Vision, being a hyper-intelligent AI, should have been able to come up with a very simple solution to avoid it, at least temporarily. At the airport battle, they still had 24 hours to bring Steve and Co. in, so go check out Bucky's claims in Siberia, deal with that, then come back and turn him over for deprogramming. If they want to fight about it in the middle of nowhere Russia, fine, they're not destroying public infrastructure, which was the whole point of the Sokovia Accords.
@@michaelmurphy2112 While I feel it's one of the first times the MCU really has good fight choreography the airport battle is ultimately just a fight to fill time and have a big superhero punchup even if its location is a good argument for the Accords. It's just another point of no one in the movie having anything deep and meaningful to say in argument or counterargument about the purpose of the Sokovia Accords.
Still my favourite MCU movie.
same
I’m on and forever will be with captain America on this one
This is the correct answer. It's a Captain America movie. Tony is in the wrong and the events in the next two movies prove it.
@@JimmyDThingiron man is actually worse in the comics as gets a fellow avenger killed by hiring a group of villains to hunt down cap.
Ditto👍🏾
Finally someone who critiques civil war.
The main problem is that Iron Man should've annihilated cap and bucky. It's like Mike Tyson vs an Apache helicopter lmao
I love the movie, but yes, it has some flaws
Instead of just making this film coz dc announced batman v superman they should have set it up and have it be an avengers film
This is a terrible take. Civil War was never gonna be like the comics and it worked exceptionally for the movie and for the entire MCU
Still has flaws.
The only real complaint is they should have had an Avengers movie without half the team. So when Infinity War happens be more powerful when they lost. Just me.
I think their adaptation was reasonable. The deeper potential you mention at the end seems like a bit of a reach. It would go over most peoples' heads. They judged it better to suck every type of viewer in by making about personality.
This video should become a classic Nerdstalgic analysis ❤
I ultimately agree. When this film was announced, I was against it because I felt like it shouldn’t have been a captain America centric movie. It should’ve been just an avengers movie.
Other than that the best parts to me was every seen with Spider-Man and Black Panther. Also, the shot of the comic accurate portrayal scene at the end with cap and Iron Man.
The airport scene is arguably the most fun action scene of any Marvel movie.
Peter referencing Star Wars to take down Scott 😂
At the end of the day, the "right" side in Civil War came down to one question: is this happening in a comic book world, or a realistic world?
- In a comic book world, Steve Rogers can ALWAYS be trusted to do the right thing. He's perfectly, unerringly righteous, and every situation has a right answer. Anyone who wants oversight on his activities will only get in the way, and anyone who disagrees with him is guaranteed to be wrong. The only right answer is to give him everything he wants, because we know he'll never misuse it.
- In the real world, NO ONE should trust a guy who grew up in the 1920s to navigate the most sensitive situations of the modern world, murder whoever he wants, break international law, and not even have to explain why he did it. It's absolute insanity to think anyone deserves that kind of power, especially because most situations have no objectively right answer and every action creates unexpected consequences. Oversight is the only way we can prevent abuses of power, either deliberate or accidental, and only by working with a larger system can restitution be made to the victims of those abuses.
Like Josh Lyman says on The West Wing: "People think politics is a fight over two answers to the same question. It's not. It's a fight over the question itself." For all the arguing about "Team Cap" and "Team Iron Man", it's not a question of who's right, it's a disagreement over the context of the story.
My biggest problem is Tony trying to kill a victim who he knew was being controlled.
The lack of required characters at the time, hurt this story. Coupled with the fact that the issues Cap had in the comics took time to bear fruit. The government did use heroes to be police agents, but that took time the film didn’t have.
Bucky isn't a MacGuffin. He's relevant to the stories of the two main characters in this movie, as he killed Tony's parents and he's Captain America's best friend, and he is relevant to the overarching MCU story as well. He does not decline in importance with the narrative either, he is the reason for the climactic showdown.
Civil war is amazing and in the top 5 of the mcu films. But with that said the villains plan relies way to heavily on luck to the point if you really dissect it and certain plot points the movie then becomes on its own bad
The problem with Civil War wasn't that it made things personal with Steve, Bucky, and Tony. The problem is that it was trying to be an Avengers movie when it was supposed to be a Captain America movie, which was not what the screenwriters initially wanted, that was forced on them from on high. Captain America 3 was supposed to be a more personal story with Steve & Bucky, completing the Captain America trilogy that was already about the two of them. And maybe we bring in Tony for that opposing part to Bucky's past. But the Sokovia Accords and all the other Avengers got shoehorned into it. Civil War should've been a completely separate thing from Captain America 3.
I never really got it. Seems forced.
That kiss between Steve and Sharon was so contrived and unearned that I've been (internally) ranting about it frequently for the past three months after rewatching the movie. I do think they should be together because she's his girlfriend in the comics and having her not be his girlfriend would make her a bad adaptation (as her being his girlfriend is part of the point of her character), but the kiss, as is, was still contrived and needed proper build-up.
One could argue that they flirted in The Winter Soldier, but otherwise they didn't seem really close before the kiss.
He has better chemistry with Black Widow than she had with Banner
bruce and tony summarized the overall impact of this film in the MCU
tony: the avengers broke up. we're toast.
bruce: broke up? ... like a band? like, the beatles?
The problem with the story was that the ethical question, no matter which side you’re on, wouldn’t divide Marvel heroes down the middle. More than half of them were mutants by this point. Then, pretty much every single other character treasures their freedom. So they decided to switch most of their natural political outlook, so the fight would be more than just Iron Man and the F4 against every other character. The most egregious switch was Spider-man, whose biggest motivation from the beginning was protecting his loved ones, where in this story he unmasks himself on TV, even though multiple friends and loved ones were killed when villains discovered his identity.
@7:21 I see your understanding of this movie is very surface level. Steve's entire motivation for doing what he's doing is covered in The Winter Soldier movie and dates back to the First Avengers movie... Steve doesn't trust the government. Fury lied to him about why Shield wanted the tesseract, then he withheld information about their mission on the Lumerian Star, then he learns Shield has secretly been Hyrda... So no, he doesn't want to sign the accords. And once again.. He's right.. Bucky was set up and probably would have been killed by the swat team.. Had he not gotten involved.. Killed for something he didn't do.. Had Steve signed rhe accords... He wouldn't have been there to save Bucky.... Oh about the Accords being appealed... The Avengers blipped everyone back into existence and then stopped a genocidal alien... So yeah, proof rhe accords needed to be repealed. Imagine rhe Avengers not fighting Thanos Army because they're awaiting approval from the UN Security Council.
👍🏾👌🏾
The sokovia accords were a terrible mistake
I've never watched the movie or read the source material.
But realistically... yeah, if youre gonna have superheroes, they should be regulated.
That doesnt mean you should have to give up your liberties just because you were born with superpowers or so, but if youre gonna use them in ways that affect other people, youre gonna have to accept some rules and responsibilites that come with that.
Like if I were to buy a gun, even in places where you dont need a license to own one, I'd still hope there are at least some laws in place as to when and where it's okay for me to point that thing at someone.
I'm tired of the MCU's reliance on the mind-control plot device. It has always felt like a cop out, a means to introduce a conflict without compromising a character's likeability. It also shows how little accountability there is in this world they've built. No risk, no reward. Not in a narrative sense anyway.
My only problem was the lack of Hulk
The mcu butchered the Planet Hulk storyline.
The problem with Civil War is that they show a fairly grounded and mature superhero film that worked but then dumped the concept for fantastical nonsense and the Whack Adventures of Thor and his Space Goats.
I stopped being able to take civil war seriously when a dozen grown adults were lined up on an airstrip, stared each other down, said absolutely nothing, and then started throwing punches. Come on 😂
Ultimately the superheroes should answer to the people. But that is not what the S Accords demand, they demand the superheroes answer to the State, which as we know, is a very different thing. Cap was correct to distrust the State.
Exactly 💯👌🏾
Scarlet Witch: “it’s my fault, I killed those people :(“
Scarlet Witch a few movies later: “I have successfully enslaved a town, killed a bunch of wizards and killed an entire Avengers team :)”
The revenge thing makes so much sense though for Tony's character, to take away that for his "obligation for justice/authority/accountability" would be too out of character
Great video. I think stagnating the mcu was on purpose to set up our heroes' defeat in infinity war. Love this movie so much.
I disagree, because the film tells another story, different from the comic. They both have their merits, but whereas the comic is a broader conflict led by Tony and Cap, the film, as you say, focuses on the personal contradictions on the background of the grander ideological conflict. Comparing the comic and film is an example of misunderstanding this in my opinion.
bold move advocating for a comic written by Millar in the 2000’s, it’s not like the movie had a good material to adapt from to begin with
There was never going to be a way for them to do the comic book justice in movie form. There are too many threads like the Negative Zone Prison, Spider-Man publicly coming out and having to face the backlash, Speedball's depression and self harm.
They still got the over arching message across in the first half. My only critique is that they could've tied the Winter Soldier Program itself into the film as an analogy for why Governments should not have control over super-powered people.
But outside of that the film does its job well and the reason people haven't brought up the issue as you put it is because the film did such a good job that people overlook it.
I like that the film in a way is a mirror opposite to the comic with Cap's team basically winning this time instead of Iron Man's in the comic version.
About adapting Civil War II:
One of the best Batman movies Mask of the phantasm is based in one of his worst comics, Year two. Also the excellent first Shazam movie was based on the crappy version by Geoff Johns.
So a competent writer sometimes can fix what a bad one turned into trash.
The biggest problem was that it was a Captain America movie with avengers in it. The story was about cap & his struggle because it was his movie. Had it been called avengers civil war the story could have went a different way
I think the accords were handled better in agents of shield cuz it shows the conquences of the actions
Ironman was the antagonist %100 and Captain America was in the right. The less government control and the more individual freedom the better (which is even more relevant now). This was the only movie where I hated Ironman's ideology even though it made sense for his character, but I was rooting for the protagonist Captain America all the way.