# Captain America: Civil War



## Bloody_Inferno (Nov 25, 2015)




----------



## Steinmetzify (Nov 25, 2015)

Hell yes.


----------



## canuck brian (Nov 25, 2015)

Pants. 

Obliterated.


----------



## Triple7 (Nov 30, 2015)

This looks amazing. I can't wait.


----------



## wankerness (Nov 30, 2015)

More Scarlet Witch, less Hawkeye IMO


----------



## Pat_tct (Dec 1, 2015)

are we talking about the trailer? i am at work and can't see what you posted 
if it is the new trailer for CA-CW..... hell ....ing yes. i am so pumped for this. i hope they go with the death of CA story line. that would be so epic


----------



## wankerness (Dec 1, 2015)

Seems like there's a good chance, since the Bucky actor's contract was for more movies than Captain America's.


----------



## celticelk (Dec 1, 2015)

wankerness said:


> Seems like there's a good chance, since the Bucky actor's contract was for more movies than Captain America's.



I think they'll go with that storyline eventually, but if they do it now, they're going to have to make Steve's resurrection an important part of the _Infinity War_ plotline, because that's going to be an all-hands-on-deck affair.


----------



## MFB (Dec 1, 2015)

Steve will most likely retire for a little while/act as Director of SHIELD; thus leading to Bucky taking the mantle.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Dec 1, 2015)




----------



## Pat_tct (Dec 2, 2015)

They could easily kill him off now and ressurect him in "infinity wars". i mean. someone gets the gauntlet and can do basically anything^^

but yep. i would love to see them taking risks and doing something drastic. maybe ending the movie on a low note with killing cap. and then... credits. no happy ending and all that. would be balls.


----------



## setsuna7 (Dec 2, 2015)

Where's Spiderman???!!


----------



## wankerness (Dec 2, 2015)

setsuna7 said:


> Where's Spiderman???!!



Who cares?!


----------



## MFB (Dec 2, 2015)

wankerness said:


> Who cares?!



YOU WANNA THROW DOWN MATE?!


----------



## wankerness (Dec 2, 2015)

These movies tend to have too many characters as it is, I don't really want Spiderman thrown in on top of the 5 or 6 already shown in the trailer, especially since this is nominally a Captain America movie instead of Spiderman. 

I watched Spiderman 2 again the other day (the one with Kirsten Dunst and Doc Oc), that was a good movie! Rewatching it ALMOST made me forgot the travesties that were the Garfield ones. I think the best thing that can happen will be for the second reboot that Sony is working on right now to also fail spectacularly so maybe they'll just give up and throw the character up for grabs again instead of these planned super-negotiated cameos.


----------



## Xaios (Dec 2, 2015)

The sad thing is that Andrew Garfield makes a much better Spider-man than Tobey Maguire. Alas, his movies were saddled with dumb stories and lame villains.

But yeah, this looks bangin.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 2, 2015)

I loved the Civil War story arc. It got me back in to comics after _years_ of not giving a sh!t. The writing was great, and Steve McNiven's art is fantastic.

I love the Black Panther. There's so much potential for a great story whenever he's involved.

Those two things said, _so much_ can be done wrong with just those things. I loved the original arc, so a movie version runs the risk of making me shout "THAT ISN'T WHAT HAPPENED!" every five minutes. Black Panther could be ruined by either not using him enough and thus wasting the potential, or giving him some dumb alternate back story.

I dunno. Usually I have a hard time sympathizing with people who moan about a movie or show being too different from the source material, but then stuff like this comes around and I can really understand their frustration.

I wonder if Black Panther will get his own movie. Was he on that list of future releases they released a while back? I don't remember.

Unrelated, but you know who needs a movie? (or better yet, a TV show)

Motherfuggin' Iron Fist, man. So much potential.


----------



## wankerness (Dec 2, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> I loved the Civil War story arc. It got me back in to comics after _years_ of not giving a sh!t. The writing was great, and Steve McNiven's art is fantastic.
> 
> I love the Black Panther. There's so much potential for a great story whenever he's involved.
> 
> ...



Yeah, they did announce that back with their whole world domination plan. It's not scheduled till February 2018, though. 


Marvel shares first detailed look at Chadwick Boseman as Black Panther | Consequence of Sound


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 2, 2015)

Nice.


----------



## Varcolac (Dec 3, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Nice.



Also Iron Fist is coming to Netflix at some point in the next few years, after Jessica Jones and Luke Cage.

Netflix Picks Up Four Marvel Live-Action Series & A Mini Featuring Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Iron Fist, Luke Cage For 2015 Launch | Deadline

Trailer for Cap 3 looks awesome. Much better than the Superman v Batman one. I'm still waiting for Marvel to put so much as a foot wrong. Even with a few relative duds like Iron Man 3, their whole cinematic universe is still amazing.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 3, 2015)

Holy sh!t what


----------



## wankerness (Dec 3, 2015)

Iron Man 3 was awesome, it was funny almost throughout and all the "Tony has to Macgyver his way through situations" was wayyyy more involving than the robot-punching that took over the likes of Age of Ultron. It isn't my favorite Marvel movie, but it's up there! I don't get why it has a bad rep. (Iron Man 2 I do get.)


----------



## gnoll (Dec 4, 2015)

I definately look forward to this. When I think about it I sorta wanna watch this more than the new Star Wars.

I thought BOTH Captain America movies so far were AWESOME. Not been too impressed with the latest Iron Man/Thor movies though. Age of Ultron I haven't even seen yet since my friends didn't wanna go.

I look forward to seeing Spiderman too, both in Civil War and his own movie. It would be nice if they managed to make a really good Spiderman movie but I doubt it will happen. I think they've all been junk so far basically.


----------



## MFB (Dec 4, 2015)

The new Spiderman solo is NOT GOING to be an origin story and they're jumping right into Peter being full on Spiderman; so that definitely makes the next more interesting since it won't be an hour of exposition and teasing


----------



## Demiurge (Dec 4, 2015)

MFB said:


> The new Spiderman solo is NOT GOING to be an origin story and they're jumping right into Peter being full on Spiderman; so that definitely makes the next more interesting since it won't be an hour of exposition and teasing



Which is definitely a great thing. No need to see Uncle Ben die again... but for those who need to see a hero motivated as they clutch their parent-figures as they bleed-out _yet again_, I hear we get that in Batman v Superman


----------



## Varcolac (Dec 5, 2015)

Demiurge said:


> Which is definitely a great thing. No need to see Uncle Ben die again... but for those who need to see a hero motivated as they clutch their parent-figures as they bleed-out _yet again_, I hear we get that in Batman v Superman



Really? Ugh. Jesus, there's not anyone left on the planet who doesn't know Bruce Wayne's parents got killed or that Kal-El is the last son of Krypton.

Btw guys major spoilers



Spoiler



Vader is Luke's father.
The Dread Pirate Roberts is Westley, and neither he nor Iñigo Montoya are left-handed
Snape kills Dumbledore
Harry Potter is a wizard
Rosebud was his sled
Frodo destroys the One Ring.


----------



## wankerness (Dec 5, 2015)

When was Harry Potter being a wizard ever a great plot revelation?! Did I miss something? Or are you just referring to spoilers for chapter one of book one


----------



## Xaios (Dec 8, 2015)

Varcolac said:


> Really? Ugh. Jesus, there's not anyone left on the planet who doesn't know Bruce Wayne's parents got killed or that Kal-El is the last son of Krypton.
> 
> Btw guys major spoilers
> 
> ...



To add...



Spoiler



Spock dies.
Malcolm Crowe was a ghost the whole time.
Edward Norton was really Tyler Durden all along.
The planet of the apes is Earth.
Verbal Kint is Keyser Soze.
Soylent Green... is people!


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Dec 8, 2015)

You all forgot...



Spoiler



Finkle is Einhorn.


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 8, 2015)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> I loved the original arc, so a movie version runs the risk of making me shout "THAT ISN'T WHAT HAPPENED!" every five minutes.



Yeah, well, it's Marvel. There are likely enough variants and retcons that "what happened" is actually a 1 in 14 occurrence. I mean, Jean Grey died how many times already ? (Her, her clones, her lookalikes  )


----------



## wankerness (Dec 8, 2015)

I had to look up Malcolm Crowe. I have seen that movie multiple times and never had a clue what the character's name was. It's just "Bruce Willis" to me


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Mar 10, 2016)

setsuna7 said:


> Where's Spiderman???!!


----------



## A-Branger (Mar 10, 2016)

is that spiderman CGI?? or just the face?


coming from the last two avengers Im "meh" about this one. I even tried to watch age of ultron again and I stopped after like 40min in, couldnt handle it anymore. Sorry for the die hard fans but the movie is not that good at all, nor was the first one either. I hope Civil War does better justice to it


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Mar 10, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> coming from the last two avengers Im "meh" about this one. I even tried to watch age of ultron again and I stopped after like 40min in, couldnt handle it anymore. Sorry for the die hard fans but the movie is not that good at all, nor was the first one either. I hope Civil War does better justice to it



They're not. The cultural impact of the Avengers movies (particularly the first) on cinematic continuity are gamechangers and nobody's gonna deny that. But looking past that, they're still just average 'blockbusters' with obvious flaws. 

If we're measuring the great MCU movies, Guardians Of The Galaxy and the previous 2 Captain America movies have the rest beat. Ant Man running for second.


----------



## A-Branger (Mar 11, 2016)

^^ and the first Iron Man


----------



## wankerness (Mar 11, 2016)

Iron Man has a great first half, but devolves into robots punching each other, and I defy anyone to give a detailed explanation of Jeff Bridges' character's motivation and actions that makes any sense.

I didn't like Ant Man nearly as much as I thought I would based on the concept and the fact it stars Paul Rudd. Most of the stuff with Michael Douglas and his daughter was intolerable. Michael Pena was absolutely hilarious and I would have much rather watched an entire movie about him. A bunch of gags in the climactic fight were also fantastic, but yeah, overall I'd put it about middle of the pack for those movies. I agree that the Captain America movies and Guardians of the Galaxy are the high points. I like all of them, though, with Ultron and Iron Man 2 bringing up the rear. The much-maligned Thor 2 has about my favorite climax, it just gets so ridiculous with all the stuff flying through portals.


----------



## Steinmetzify (Mar 11, 2016)

That new trailer is awesome. About time he showed up.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Mar 12, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Iron Man has a great first half, but devolves into robots punching each other, and I defy anyone to give a detailed explanation of Jeff Bridges' character's motivation and actions that makes any sense.
> 
> I didn't like Ant Man nearly as much as I thought I would based on the concept and the fact it stars Paul Rudd. Most of the stuff with Michael Douglas and his daughter was intolerable. Michael Pena was absolutely hilarious and I would have much rather watched an entire movie about him. A bunch of gags in the climactic fight were also fantastic, but yeah, overall I'd put it about middle of the pack for those movies. I agree that the Captain America movies and Guardians of the Galaxy are the high points. I like all of them, though, with Ultron and Iron Man 2 bringing up the rear. The much-maligned Thor 2 has about my favorite climax, it just gets so ridiculous with all the stuff flying through portals.




Agreed about Iron Man 1. The third act is perfunctory and nonexistent. Iron Monger is as important as Whiplash in Iron Man 2 (IMO, the weakest of all MCU films with Hulk barely winning above it). 

The reason I ranked Ant Man high, is exactly what you mentioned. Paul Rudd, while not as cool as Starlord, but still works as a superhero, creative on the humour (Michael Pena) and all the action scenes (especially the final showdown), plus all the emotional scenes (at least with Scott Lang) work here, and you don't see them in the other movies sans the the first Captain America. So I rate this over Iron Man 1 (despite many jokes about this being a re-tread in essence) and probably equal to the first Thor, if not higher. And unlike Iron Man.. or all other Phase 1 films (sans Cap again), this gets better in the third act. I still like all of the MCU films though. Iron Man 2 I may lose attention every now and then but I'll still watch it. 

Thor 2 really suffers from the super fast pacing giving little time for the movie itself to breathe. This and Age Of Ultron would benefit from a Director's Cut. But Ultron didn't get one, so not much chance of Dark World either. I am however really happy that Taika Watiti will be directing Ragnarok.


----------



## A-Branger (Mar 12, 2016)

for me the worst were the Thor movies, bad acting/plot/characters, everything. It was one of the movies to be made according to the plan so we could enjoy the Avengers, rather than a movie made for the main character.

Ant man, for me its was ok, good. But not sure if because the movie itself or because my expectations were so low by that point that the movie actually surprised me. I was expecting another cheesy made in a hurry fest, but I got a good movie instead. I almost didt went to see it on the cinema due to the low expectations I had


----------



## Kryss (Mar 28, 2016)

prediction besides this will be an incredible movie, winter solder dies and cap goes to prison in that new super fortress. it's symbolic of todays society. he goes from war hero to prison. cap seeing his best friend killed and peggy finally dieing, he doesn't feel the desire to be cap anymore til infinity war when they need him to stop thanos. bucky probably will be resurrected at the end of IW and then the shield passed on to bucky then. it leaves rogers available for future movies or cameos but bucky still gets to be the new cap. 

not sure if it will play out like this but would be it a great twist and symbolic of the times today. it's an extreme version of the dark knight where they talk about dieing a hero or seeing yourself become the villain.


----------



## wankerness (Mar 28, 2016)

Based on their history with these movies, they'll probably follow the comic instead. (


Spoiler



Steve Rogers dies and Bucky takes over for him


)


----------



## MFB (Mar 28, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Based on their history with these movies, they'll probably follow the comic instead. (
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...



I don't know about that, my thought process has been:



Spoiler



Nick Fury somehow gets removed as the head of SHIELD/whatever remains of it, and Steve takes over to restore it to what it should be while Bucky acts as Capt. 

I think Jackson's role as Fury is coming to a close soon since he had what, a 9 picture deal? So given all the Iron Mans, Caps, Avengers, he's got to be close to that cap.


----------



## Kryss (Mar 28, 2016)

ya dude I could totally see that as well. I do like the fact that you know someone is probably going to die but they have deviated enough to not know who it's going to be for sure. there are a lot of interesting ways they could have the end go down. one of the big 3 though has to die....steve, bucky, or stark. this is supposed to be a major setup to the rest of phase 3. so something big has to end that affects it all and any of those 3 would be huge for the future of all the other marvel movies. I do think they could use the infinity stones to bring someone back though and that more than likely will play a part somehow either during or at the end of IW, depending on who is left at the end. I have very high hopes for this and dr. strange. I think both are going to be the best 2 movies so far from marvel.

also I should add dr. strange could possibly intervene at the end of civil war use some type of illusion to save someone but it could remain hidden til IW. so many possibilities.....


----------



## wankerness (Mar 28, 2016)

Yeah, both of these seem cool. I wish they'd just stick with this stuff instead of bringing Thanos in, though. Can't say anything about that character looks entertaining.


----------



## Demiurge (Mar 28, 2016)

I'm a bit rusty on Marvel cosmology, but can't the Infinity Gauntlet resurrect the dead? Of course, there's the speculation of at least one "shocking" character death, so


Spoiler



if it turns out to be Cap, I'd imagine that bringing him back at a key moment during the Infinity War movies would be the intent


.

It would be great if there was some deviation, though, since (other movie spoiler)


Spoiler



another Hero Vs Hero movie just came out featuring similarly-archetype'd characters and one of them (likely temporarily) dying as well


- it will just look bad.


----------



## wankerness (Mar 28, 2016)

Half of these movies seem to have a fake-out death (and even CERTAIN TV SHOWS are jumping into this habit now), so I don't think this would look like it was ripping off that particular one. It's almost a requirement for both child and man-child media now, it seems. I vaguely remember an article complaining about it after GotG that I think dubbed it "the Disney Death."

YeP: https://thedissolve.com/features/exposition/814-its-time-to-retire-the-disney-death/ 

It only talks about kid's movies, but it's directly applicable to several of these darn sorts of movies too. Ex,


Spoiler



Star Trek 2, Star Trek Into Darkness, Guardians of the Galaxy, Batman Vs Superman, The Avengers, Thor 2, etc


----------



## Kryss (Mar 29, 2016)

Loki's fake out deaths make great sense though cause he is a trixster god. that's his whole thing. it made sense because it setup his ascension to the throne of asgard. so to me any marvel character that should specialize in a fake death it should be him in that universe.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Mar 29, 2016)

Let's face it. Any form of superhero death is not so much death, but rather a detour. And there's always the Time Gem macguffin that the MCU have yet to exercise. 

I mean who knows, this may show up in the DC universe... except I seriously hope not.


----------



## wankerness (Mar 29, 2016)

I think that would be entertaining, at least, unlike everything else done with Superman in these two Snyder movies


----------



## Xaios (Apr 4, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Star Trek 2





Spoiler



In all fairness, Wrath of Khan was originally filmed with the full intention of Spock staying dead, because coming into filming it, Leonard Nimoy was quite adamant about never playing Spock again. Ironically, he had such a positive experience shooting Wrath of Khan that he negotiated with Paramount the terms under which he would reprise the role, namely that he would direct Star Treks 3 and 4. As such, Paramount added those beauty shots of his torpedo after it soft-landed on Genesis, against the wishes of director Nicholas Meyer.


----------



## Varcolac (Apr 13, 2016)

So the first batch of reviews are in, and it's apparently another tour de force from the Brothers Russo. 

Captain America: Civil War

Some reviews online are quite spoilery, so be warned if you go searching. Had to close a few tabs once I started reading plot points.

Showing the movie to critics almost a month before the general release: ballsy.

Lifting the review embargo a handful of days after that, still a month before release: confident they're on to a winner.

Can't freakin' wait for this.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Apr 13, 2016)

Just for those who can't wait, Civil War isn't the first time Captain America and Spiderman were together on film...


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Apr 28, 2016)

Just came back from seeing the movie, and I have only one thing to say:

Go see it. 

That is all.


----------



## setsuna7 (Apr 28, 2016)

Just came back from the theater, man, you guys are gonna love this one!! After the disappointment of a certain DC film, this is a reprieve for me. Plus Aunt May has never been hotter!! I bet RDJ had a say in casting her as Aunt May. A nice touch I'd say. Bring back memories of the nineties..


----------



## StevenC (Apr 28, 2016)

Going to a triple bill/midnight showing for it tonight! Can't wait.


----------



## wankerness (Apr 28, 2016)

How are you people all seeing it? Is the official release date a week earlier everywhere that isn't the US?


----------



## setsuna7 (Apr 28, 2016)

It was released today in Asia. Not sure about the US


----------



## MFB (Apr 28, 2016)

setsuna7 said:


> It was released today in Asia. Not sure about the US



May 6th for us


----------



## Varcolac (Apr 28, 2016)

wankerness said:


> How are you people all seeing it? Is the official release date a week earlier everywhere that isn't the US?



Friday in the UK. First showings tonight at midnight.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 28, 2016)

is it good good? or "its a bunch of high actors and high budget and "superhero" movie good"??

I though the Avengers, the two of them, mainly the second one was pretty bad, average movie at the least. Its the whole hype of superhero movies that made people like them.

So are these actually good?, or just superhero/explotions/action/$$$$$/CGI good?


----------



## wankerness (Apr 28, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> is it good good? or "its a bunch of high actors and high budget and "superhero" movie good"??
> 
> I though the Avengers, the two of them, mainly the second one was pretty bad, average movie at the least. Its the whole hype of superhero movies that made people like them.
> 
> So are these actually good?, or just superhero/explotions/action/$$$$$/CGI good?



You'll have to define your idea of good with examples.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 28, 2016)

how do this movie compare to the Avengers movies?

its a good movie, or just a cool blockbuster fill with random action and a bunch of superheroes


put it this way... I dont give a crap about the amount of superheroes showing up in here, dont care about spiderman showing up, or the fact I can see ironman or thor one more time ect ect.... So putting the "superhero marvel hype" away, is it still a good movie?


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Apr 28, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> put it this way... I dont give a crap about the amount of superheroes showing up in here, dont care about spiderman showing up, or the fact I can see ironman or thor one more time ect ect.... So putting the "superhero marvel hype" away, is it still a good movie?



It's a good movie in a sense that it's a good Captain America movie. Great storytelling with compelling characters, all while having fun in the process. 

Funny how one of my least favorite avengers happens to the best streak of genuinely great films overall. First Avenger was a great war movie. Winter Soldier was a great spy thriller that shames the Bourne and latter day Bond movies. Civil War just validates the trifecta. And that's before adding all the hype and cast, take them away and the movie would still stand on it's own. Hell, even the marquee supporting cast get just the right amount of screen time that it doesn't feel all too overcrowded. It's what the 2 Avengers movies should have been. 

I've got total confidence in the Russo Brothers knocking the Infinity Wars movies right out of the park. 


EDIT: Just to add:

I used to be pretty harsh and condescending towards the first Avengers movie. I thought, there's really no real conflict other than each other. No real stakes (well they would've if they kept Coulson dead), and no real consequences for their actions. I had fun watching it, but kept being a cynical killjoy about the whole thing. Then I realized why; I really loved Batman Begins and The Dark Knight: and that Christopher Nolan's reimagining of the superhero genre was a refreshing game changer to a lot of what's come before when it was dying again with Spiderman being corporately rebooted, Deadpool becoming the Merc without a mouth and Galactus turned into a stupid cloud. I was eagerly waiting for the Dark Knight Rises to get more of that gritty realism in the genre. 

That is, until I watched Dark Knight Rises. I loved it, but it was also the straw that broke the camel's back. Right after that, the want for more gritty realism ended, and I just had enough. It took me a while to warm up to what really makes Avengers a good movie. It still has many flaws yes, but underneath it all, it's a fun party and a celebration that inter-film continuity really does work. Joss Whedon isn't perfect, but character relation is his jam and he's pretty damn good at it here. It was the buildup that the phase 1 bunch of decent movies and one great movie (the Captain again) were all leading to. And it was triumphant. A real game changer. And the inter-film continuity goes on...

Returning to the 'consequences' part, the Battle of New York was eventually addressed in the future films and series. Yes it's a not-so-subtle 9/11 allegory, and at first watching the Avengers kinda felt a little too over-heroic on it. But the MCU went on, the after effects lingered. You see it in Iron Man 3 with Tony Stark's erratic behavior. It's all over Daredevil and Jessica Jones as well. The weight is even heavier when Age Of Ultron comes along (though we all know that's an inferior film). 

I maybe overselling the movie here, but as the MCU movies went on (and some got even better), I've grown to appreciate Avengers more. Granted that I still rank a few more MCU movies over it, namely Guardians Of The Galaxy, and now All 3 Captain America movies.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 28, 2016)

Movie was great. Probably my favourite Marvel movie, too. Did everything well, I thought. Also Community.


----------



## gnoll (Apr 29, 2016)

I've seen it too now! I thought it was really good. About on par with Winter Soldier. Maybe better.


----------



## wankerness (Apr 29, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> how do this movie compare to the Avengers movies?
> 
> its a good movie, or just a cool blockbuster fill with random action and a bunch of superheroes
> 
> ...



If you're watching a CGI-heavy superhero movie and have such contempt for those two fundamental aspects of the film, why on earth would you enjoy it? If your criteria for "good movie" are "it's critically respected for the strength of writing, characterization, pacing and spectacle, and practically everyone who sees it likes it," then yeah, it's a very good movie. If your criteria for "good movie" are "no cgi, no superheros" like your last two posts made it sound, then no, it's not a good movie. The first Avengers movie got excellent reviews and crowds loved it, so if you hated that, I doubt you'll be too big on this! It sounds like it's closer to Captain America 2 (also loved by critics and audiences alike for the aforementioned qualities, somewhat lower key on the CGI), but has a lot more characters being juggled. Liking the characters and having some kind of attachment to them definitely sounds like a prerequisite. If you haven't seen at least the first two Captain Americas and the two Avengers it sounds like this won't have much impact, and if you actively despised those movies...why are you even asking? 

RE: you darn foreigners, it's somewhat ironic that a movie called "Captain America" is opening in America last  I can't wait to see it.


----------



## PunkBillCarson (Apr 29, 2016)

wankerness said:


> If you're watching a CGI-heavy superhero movie and have such contempt for those two fundamental aspects of the film, why on earth would you enjoy it? If your criteria for "good movie" are "it's critically respected for the strength of writing, characterization, pacing and spectacle, and practically everyone who sees it likes it," then yeah, it's a very good movie. If your criteria for "good movie" are "no cgi, no superheros" like your last two posts made it sound, then no, it's not a good movie. The first Avengers movie got excellent reviews and crowds loved it, so if you hated that, I doubt you'll be too big on this! It sounds like it's closer to Captain America 2 (also loved by critics and audiences alike for the aforementioned qualities, somewhat lower key on the CGI), but has a lot more characters being juggled. Liking the characters and having some kind of attachment to them definitely sounds like a prerequisite. If you haven't seen at least the first two Captain Americas and the two Avengers it sounds like this won't have much impact, and if you actively despised those movies...why are you even asking?
> 
> RE: you darn foreigners, it's somewhat ironic that a movie called "Captain America" is opening in America last  I can't wait to see it.




I personally don't know what the phuck he's watching comic book movies for if he doesn't want any of what's listed.


----------



## MFB (Apr 29, 2016)

PunkBillCarson said:


> I personally don't know what the phuck he's watching comic book movies for if he doesn't want any of what's listed.



What he's saying is, he doesn't care about adding in heroes for the sake of heroes - he wants them to serve a purpose, which is valid and a sentiment that any movie should follow (why have something that adds nothing to the story?) In the case of this one, it sounds like everyone is there for a specific purpose (choosing who's side to be on) and necessary to the story in one way or another.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 29, 2016)

wankerness said:


> If you're watching a CGI-heavy superhero movie and have such contempt for those two fundamental aspects of the film, why on earth would you enjoy it? If your criteria for "good movie" are "it's critically respected for the strength of writing, characterization, pacing and spectacle, and practically everyone who sees it likes it," then yeah, it's a very good movie. If your criteria for "good movie" are "no cgi, no superheros" like your last two posts made it sound, then no, it's not a good movie. The first Avengers movie got excellent reviews and crowds loved it, so if you hated that, I doubt you'll be too big on this! It sounds like it's closer to Captain America 2 (also loved by critics and audiences alike for the aforementioned qualities, somewhat lower key on the CGI), but has a lot more characters being juggled. Liking the characters and having some kind of attachment to them definitely sounds like a prerequisite. If you haven't seen at least the first two Captain Americas and the two Avengers it sounds like this won't have much impact, and if you actively despised those movies...why are you even asking?





PunkBillCarson said:


> I personally don't know what the phuck he's watching comic book movies for if he doesn't want any of what's listed.





MFB said:


> What he's saying is, he doesn't care about adding in heroes for the sake of heroes - he wants them to serve a purpose, which is valid and a sentiment that any movie should follow (why have something that adds nothing to the story?) In the case of this one, it sounds like everyone is there for a specific purpose (choosing who's side to be on) and necessary to the story in one way or another.



yup pretty much that^

dont get me wrong I love superhero movies and I have watched all of them. The 2 CapMurica where pretty good movies, the two Thor were a joke, the most awful movies of the saga. A movie purely made in order to make the Avengers.

The first Avengers was "meh ok" movie. But you cant deny their success wasnt because the movie it self, it was purely as a result of the Marvel universe thing, were they showed you every character individual film, so now they all are together, everyone is "AAAHHHHHHH I NEED TO SEE ITTTTTT" and "yaaaay explosions!!", if you take those things aways the movie was in reality a "meh" . The second Avengers was BAD, again people are gonna love it no matter what because it is "avengers" but that movie was baaad. I watched at the cinema and thats it. I tried to watched again couple of weeks back to remember and I couldnt even finish it. Same goes with the two latest Spiderman movies, TMNT and Transformers (I blame Michael Bay for the last two)

So yeah Im a bit dubious about it. As because I wanna see a good movie. When I say "I dont care about superheroes" Im not actually saying I dont care about superheroes, like you say it would be stupid for me to watch the movie then. What I mean is that I not goign to watch the movie purely because X guy is in there. Yes, cool Siderman is appearing, but thats is not my reason to go and watch the movie with a blindfold just because "Siderman!!!!!" 

I like superheroes but Im not into the HYPE the majority of the audience is. Im probably one of the very very few who would say "meh" to the Avengers movie, and from the whole MCU movies I like less movies than the ones I dont. Everyone else is HYYYYPPPEEEEEEEEE SUPERHEROES YAAAY about them.


so hearing this movie compares to the two CapMurica and its better than those its what I needed to read to make my decision to go and watch it at the cinema.


----------



## Varcolac (Apr 29, 2016)

StevenC said:


> Movie was great. Probably my favourite Marvel movie, too. Did everything well, I thought. Also Community.



Oh my God I forgot about 


Spoiler



the Dean! Didn't see that coming. Brilliant cameo that made about half the theatre guffaw when we realised who it was.



Movie was epic. Sweeping, emotional, grand in places, intimate in others. Every character had their place and the whole fight setup unfolded with a tragic inevitability that made the final throw down all the more of a tear-jerker.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 29, 2016)

Varcolac said:


> Oh my God I forgot about
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...





Spoiler



Disappointingly, my friend and I were the only ones laughing. Makes me think it wasn't Abed in Cap 2, like Abed in Cougartown, though. My money's on Joel McHale in Infinity Wars


----------



## wankerness (Apr 30, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> yup pretty much that^
> 
> dont get me wrong I love superhero movies and I have watched all of them. The 2 CapMurica where pretty good movies, the two Thor were a joke, the most awful movies of the saga. A movie purely made in order to make the Avengers.
> 
> ...



Ah, OK. Yeah, it's getting rave reviews that all compare it much more to Captain America 2 than the Avengers. I guess the whole climax is quite personal and the avengers style massive cgi battle stuff is in the middle. I'm kinda with you on the Avengers movies. I like the first one, but it's several spots down on the list of superhero movies for me, I don't really get why it's considered the best by so many people.


----------



## Varcolac (Apr 30, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Ah, OK. Yeah, it's getting rave reviews that all compare it much more to Captain America 2 than the Avengers. I guess the whole climax is quite personal and the avengers style massive cgi battle stuff is in the middle. I'm kinda with you on the Avengers movies. I like the first one, but it's several spots down on the list of superhero movies for me, I don't really get why it's considered the best by so many people.



Got to think about the time that it came out, and the sheer glory of finally getting to see this shot on the big screen:








Also Whedon banter between the characters was amazeballs. The Russos' work in Community clearly paid off when it came to continuing the great dialogue as seen in Civil War.


----------



## wankerness (Apr 30, 2016)

That shot was my single least favorite thing about the movie when I saw it, I inadvertently groaned when that shot happened. It looks SO fakey. The opening of Ultron is the same way, they look even less realistically integrated into that bluescreen forest footage than the speeder bikes did in Return of the Jedi. The lower key dialogue moments in Avengers were what I liked, and obviously the "Loki gets smashed" scene. I LIKED it, and I particularly loved what they did with the Hulk, I just didn't think "OMG BEST MARVEL MOVIE EVER" like it seems like everyone else did. I even prefer the oft-maligned Iron Man 3.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Apr 30, 2016)

wankerness said:


> RE: you darn foreigners, it's somewhat ironic that a movie called "Captain America" is opening in America last  I can't wait to see it.



Once again...



Bloody_Inferno said:


> Just for those who can't wait, Civil War isn't the first time Captain America and Spiderman were together on film...




Just a show of hands: Who was expecting Captain America to be the main hero partnered with a Mexican Lucha Libre to do battle in Istanbul Turkey against the evil... ugh... Spiderman?


----------



## sakeido (May 6, 2016)

Civil War was soooooooo good 

Black Panther is an ultimate badass, can't wait for his movie.


----------



## MFB (May 6, 2016)

sakeido said:


> Civil War was soooooooo good
> 
> Black Panther is an ultimate badass, can't wait for his movie.



Yuuuuup.

I've been planning on snagging the Matt Fraction Hawkeye omnibus for my birthday, and since seeing this movie earlier today, I'm adding a definitive Black Panther collection to that list.

Spiderman was also amazing and his solo is going to be great if it's anything like his role in this.


----------



## wankerness (May 6, 2016)

I reserved tickets a whole three days in advance to see it on Saturday night, so obviously I'm pretty hyped.  I guess I haven't seen many of these in the theater (Iron Man 1, Thor 1, Avengers 2 and Captain America 2 were it, I think), but I'm making a point here after seeing the reviews!


----------



## A-Branger (May 6, 2016)

finaly saw it yesterday. and yup it was pretty good 

finally a more serious movie. Still bits of comedy but well made, not under12 comedy like the avengers. Everyone git their fare share of action, and I prob got confused coupe of times on who is in whos side during the battle lol

only negative, too much "rapid camera close up action quick cuts thing". Sometimes I just wanna actually "see" the fight rather than trying to take a peak out of it between the camera shaking and the quick cuts and closeups.

and agree black panther its a total badass and I cant wait to see a movie out of him.

not sure if this is consider a spoiler but just in case


Spoiler



Also tha F*$ happened to Aunt May from spiderman???? seriusly. She suposed to be the sweet old lady, now shes like been taking care of spidy since she was what 20?, whats next? uncle Ben is not death is her last ex-boyfriend and the onlyone who Petter liked? lol

also
go here to see the funny pic
https://i.chzbgr.com/full/8794336768/h7F8CB524/
if I post the image it can be seen trough the spoiler


----------



## mcleanab (May 6, 2016)

Saw it last night... VERY fun. Lots of good stuff, great action, except for some early shaky cam work...

Love Paul Bettany and Elizabeth Olsen.


----------



## Lemons (May 6, 2016)

I thought it was a good movie, but honestly a little weak on some points. Then again I could be going against the masses here since I rather enjoyed BvS.

EDIT: Oh yeah, Black Panther was sick.


----------



## Xaios (May 7, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



Heh, funny thing is that Marisa Tomei is actually 51, so considering Peter comes off as being about 16, she's actually ENTIRELY age appropriate as Aunt May. She's just aged REALLY well. 



Saw it, loved it. The airport action scene was great, and the final scenes between Cap, Bucky and Iron Man (with Black Panther on the side) really pulled the movie together.


----------



## gnoll (May 7, 2016)

Xaios said:


> The airport action scene was great,



Honestly, I wish I hadn't heard this so much before I saw the movie. With all the hype for that scene and for Spider-man, those were the bits that REALLY disappointed me when I saw the movie. I was expecting to be completely mind-blown by them and... totally wasn't. Those were probably my least favorite bits of the movie.


----------



## A-Branger (May 7, 2016)

Xaios said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Heh, funny thing is that Marisa Tomei is actually 51, so considering Peter comes off as being about 16, she's actually ENTIRELY age appropriate as Aunt May. She's just aged REALLY well.



 daaaaaaammn


----------



## HeavyMetal4Ever (May 7, 2016)

On par with GoTG, Ant Man and CA WS I think. Marvel are completely and utterly destroying DC on the big screen.

Also, Marissa Tomei. Seriously, she can't be 51. My theory is Marvel Studios are funnelling all profits into creating real Infinity Gems and she is the test subject for the time gem...


----------



## MFB (May 7, 2016)

Xaios said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Heh, funny thing is that Marisa Tomei is actually 51, so considering Peter comes off as being about 16, she's actually ENTIRELY age appropriate as Aunt May. She's just aged REALLY well.



Precisely.

Even as a long time Spidey fan who's willing to say he's my #1 superhero, I've never understood why they made Aunt May so old in relation to Peter. He's supposed to be a high school student who gets bit by a radioactive spider, but the aunt he lives with is in her mid-60s to late 70s? That's just crazy to imagine, because it means the age range between his mother and her sister would've been somewhere in the 10-15 years, maybe even 20.

If Peter's actually going to be in high school for Spiderman: Homecoming, then the idea of a younger Any May just makes sense.


----------



## Demiurge (May 7, 2016)

Just got back from a surprisingly-packed matinee showing. Definitely one of the best Marvel movies to date and I would dare say Russos > Whedon at this juncture.

I went into it expecting- probably because of the reputation of the comics- the Tony Stark side being the more heavy-handed, and easier to consider "wrong" side of it, but I was pleased to see each side a little more nuanced and compelling.


----------



## A-Branger (May 7, 2016)

MFB said:


> Precisely.
> 
> Even as a long time Spidey fan who's willing to say he's my #1 superhero, I've never understood why they made Aunt May so old in relation to Peter. He's supposed to be a high school student who gets bit by a radioactive spider, but the aunt he lives with is in her mid-60s to late 70s? That's just crazy to imagine, because it means the age range between his mother and her sister would've been somewhere in the 10-15 years, maybe even 20.
> 
> If Peter's actually going to be in high school for Spiderman: Homecoming, then the idea of a younger Any May just makes sense.



she doesnt have to be the young sister of Peter's mom, she can be the older sister too  For me aunt May was always that kind of a in between a mother and a grandmother kinda thing, but yeah I know what you mean, the age gap its a bit extreme

So for me it looked weird with this hottie in the role. Yes she might be the age appropriate, but you know Hollywood, they always push the boundaries of actors "age" down not up, so a slight older (or older lookng) actress would have made bit more sense. But her comic goofy nature goes well with the siderman character too. Either way, exited to see a new sipdy movie, and please make it right this time


----------



## Varcolac (May 8, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> But her comic goofy nature goes well with the *siderman* character too. Either way, exited to see a new *sipdy* movie, and please make it right this time









I agree with most of your post apart from the spelling of Spodermen's name.

Put it like this: I'm 30. My mum is 60, oldest of her siblings. Both my aunts (wives to my uncles) are 3-5 years younger than her.

If my parents had died before I was 15 and I'd been bitten by a radioactive spoder, my aunt Anne would've been 42, my aunt Yvonne would've been 40. Aunt May in her 60s-70s is way too old in my opinion. Late 40s, early 50s for a mother-figure to a 15-year-old kid is fine. 

Source: I teach 15-year-olds. Some of their mothers are foxes.


----------



## gnoll (May 8, 2016)

Varcolac said:


> Put it like this: I'm 30. My mum is 60, oldest of her siblings. Both my aunts (wives to my uncles) are 3-5 years younger than her.
> 
> If my parents had died before I was 15 and I'd been bitten by a radioactive spoder, my aunt Anne would've been 42, my aunt Yvonne would've been 40. Aunt May in her 60s-70s is way too old in my opinion. Late 40s, early 50s for a mother-figure to a 15-year-old kid is fine.



But what if Peter's mom was 45 when she had him, and May was 25 years older than her? Then May would have been 85 when Peter was 15.

Of course, at the other extreme, May could actually be younger than Peter  Almost any age would theoretically _work _for her. I don't think it matters too much, but some variation is nice.


----------



## Varcolac (May 8, 2016)

gnoll said:


> But what if Peter's mom was 45 when she had him, and May was 25 years older than her? Then May would have been 85 when Peter was 15.
> 
> Of course, at the other extreme, May could actually be younger than Peter  Almost any age would theoretically _work _for her. I don't think it matters too much, but some variation is nice.



Most families of 2-4 kids there are less than 10 years between the children. Most people start having kids in their late 20s- early 30s. 

I'm not saying your idea is impossible, just unlikely, demographically speaking.


----------



## wankerness (May 8, 2016)

I can't believe anyone has a problem with her age. 15 year old with a 51 year old aunt is totally normal :O

Casting a 51 year old that looks hot as an aunt that looks hot is not hollywood having an age problem! The age problem is a reference to things like Olivia Wilde being rejected from the part of Leonardo Dicaprio's wife for being too old despite being the same age and REALLY, REALLY hot. If you're a woman over 30 in hollywood and getting casted as anything other than a crone, you are part of the solution  I also kind of think it's shaking itself out at this point, since there are plenty of women well over 30 still getting regular work as romantic leads, including many of the most popular actresses right now. I think it's just some really visible relics of its ugly past (like Jennifer Lawrence repeatedly getting cast in high-profile Oscar-winning roles that were very clearly written much older). And awful comedies, of course. There seems to be a direct correlation between size of the age gap between romantic pairs and the movie being a pile of garbage.

ANYWAY, I saw the movie yesterday. The airport scene WAS as great as everyone said. The most surprising thing about it was how gd funny it was. I was laughing my head off throughout it, it's just hilarious right and left. The movie isn't really funny at all before about halfway through the movie, so it was a nice surprise. 

This is easily the best villain in any Marvel movie yet, since he is just an agent for chaos instead of some generic "GUY WHO WANTS TO BLOW UP THE WORLD." He's far more insidious, successful, and has great motivations. He rightly is used to highlight drama between the heroes and make THAT the focus of the movie, instead of being a scene-stealing nut who transfer all the drama onto himself and absolves the Avengers of dramatic responsibility. It's so damn good. (Especially in comparison to Jesse Eisenberg acting CUHHH-RAZZZZZYYYYY with his jars of piss and aunt-kidnapping-schemes)

Black Panther was great due to his character progression. For a long time, I was like


Spoiler



"this guy is a vengeful idiot." When he showed up at the frozen base at the end I just groaned, like LET IT REST ALREADY YOU PRICK!! Then, of course, it gets totally reversed and he ends up the most mature and noble guy in the film. The stinger in the credits makes me like him even more, obviously. I love the character and can't wait to see what they do with his movie.


 Falcon is also great throughout. The car scene with him and Bucky is my favorite, but he's such a solid dude throughout the movie and I'm glad he didn't get wasted as a background character.

Scarlet Witch is the character I want to see more of the most, but I've been kind of let down two movies in a row now. It's just because Elizabeth Olsen gave the best debut performance (in Martha Marcy Mae Marlene) this side of Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone, and she just hasn't gotten the same level of material since. She's good here and I like the character, but that damn accent hobbles her, even though they clearly toned it down from the last movie. I was amused by the cooking scene with her and Vision. I just want more of her, dammit. I don't think she functions as a standalone character, but hopefully she becomes the main supporting character in one of these things.

I did kinda have one conceptual problem with the whole thing, which was enhanced by me watching Age of Ultron the same day. Everyone in the film is constantly crying about all the death caused by the Avengers in Sokovia, but NOT ONCE is anything good they did there mentioned. Considering MOST of the focus of the entire last act of that movie was specifically them going to huge lengths to save every civilian they could possibly find at all costs, it rang very false having Tony be so laser-focused on his "WE KILLED PEOPLE IN SOKOVIA SO WE ARE BAD!!!!" mindset for the entire movie. I mean, not just the fact they personally went through and saved civilians one at a time and used all their resources to save every one they could find, but the fact they prevented an extinction-level event!!! I mean, I guess it's to be expected that's what the general populace would spin it as, the UNGRATEFUL LITTLE MAGGOTS, but to have Tony believe the same thing seemed ridiculous. (I'm on the Captain America side clearly)


----------



## A-Branger (May 8, 2016)

wankerness said:


> I can't believe anyone has a problem with her age. 15 year old with a 51 year old aunt is totally normal :O



the problem was I though she was in her late 30's maybe 40 

I think Im at that age now when I cant tell whos my age anymore and since friends are having babies and what not

same just happened with the new trailer of bad Moms, I was like no F way Mila Kunis can be the main character with two kids.... Then I realize shes actually my age and yes, she can do that lol


----------



## Demiurge (May 8, 2016)

gnoll said:


> Of course, at the other extreme, May could actually be younger than Peter  Almost any age would theoretically _work _for her. I don't think it matters too much, but some variation is nice.



 The 'traditionally' older Aunt May & Uncle Ben seemed to me to evoke Superman's Ma & Pa Kent to the "raised by a sweet, wholesome, salt-of-the-earth couple that instilled good values" effect.

One thing I wonder, though, is whether there was actually an Uncle Ben for this new Spider-Man.


Spoiler



In their first scene together when Tony asked Peter why he was trying to help people. I was totally expecting Peter to say something like, "My Uncle Ben once told me that with great power comes great responsibility"- which was really the ideal context for that phrase to come out, but instead Peter offers kind of a fumbling explanation about if bad things happen and we could have done something about it then that would be like letting it happen. Kind of the same effect as the famous phrase, but more like how a shy, modest teenager would formulate it himself.


----------



## Demiurge (May 8, 2016)

wankerness said:


> I did kinda have one conceptual problem with the whole thing, which was enhanced by me watching Age of Ultron the same day. Everyone in the film is constantly crying about all the death caused by the Avengers in Sokovia, but NOT ONCE is anything good they did there mentioned.



The easy answer is that it's so true to life- you can do great things again and again, but eff up once and that's all people will talk about! 

There was that thing that Vision said in that early scene where they discussed the Accords that was probably meant to explain the mindset. He said something along the lines of the number of large catastrophes increased commensurately with the appearance of enhanced beings, basically along the lines that the Avengers were perceived as taking in their own wash, so to speak. I'll presume that Tony, supposed super genius, was too wracked by guilt to engage in a "chicken or the egg" or "correlation is not causation" argument.


----------



## wankerness (May 8, 2016)

Demiurge said:


> The easy answer is that it's so true to life- you can do great things again and again, but eff up once and that's all people will talk about!
> 
> There was that thing that Vision said in that early scene where they discussed the Accords that was probably meant to explain the mindset. He said something along the lines of the number of large catastrophes increased commensurately with the appearance of enhanced beings, basically along the lines that the Avengers were perceived as taking in their own wash, so to speak. I'll presume that Tony, supposed super genius, was too wracked by guilt to engage in a "chicken or the egg" or "correlation is not causation" argument.



Well, I get why the ungrateful public would focus on it and think "they're a bunch of dicks that don't even try to avoid collateral damage," but not Tony! I guess it could be argued that since Tony was dicking around in the guts of the flying island for the entire climax, he didn't realize the complete focus by everyone else on avoiding any civilian casualties. And of course, he's the one that caused the whole thing in the first place by building Ultron, but he doesn't really seem to acknowledge that in this movie! Not to mention, why would he blame everyone ELSE for that and be perfectly happy to have them all thrown in prison while he's walking around free?


----------



## wankerness (May 8, 2016)

Demiurge said:


> The 'traditionally' older Aunt May & Uncle Ben seemed to me to evoke Superman's Ma & Pa Kent to the "raised by a sweet, wholesome, salt-of-the-earth couple that instilled good values" effect.
> 
> *One thing I wonder, though, is whether there was actually an Uncle Ben for this new Spider-Man. *
> 
> ...



I didn't even think of that, but it would be wonderful if there wasn't. I can do without yet another Spider-Man film that's relentlessly emo and loaded with flashbacks to ponderous old Uncle Ben solemnly intoning life lessons and Spider-Man's agony at causing his death or whatever. We have the Zach Snyder movies already if we want GRIMDARK.


----------



## Xaios (May 8, 2016)

wankerness said:


> I did kinda have one conceptual problem with the whole thing, which was enhanced by me watching Age of Ultron the same day. Everyone in the film is constantly crying about all the death caused by the Avengers in Sokovia, but NOT ONCE is anything good they did there mentioned. Considering MOST of the focus of the entire last act of that movie was specifically them going to huge lengths to save every civilian they could possibly find at all costs, it rang very false having Tony be so laser-focused on his "WE KILLED PEOPLE IN SOKOVIA SO WE ARE BAD!!!!" mindset for the entire movie. I mean, not just the fact they personally went through and saved civilians one at a time and used all their resources to save every one they could find, but the fact they prevented an extinction-level event!!! I mean, I guess it's to be expected that's what the general populace would spin it as, the UNGRATEFUL LITTLE MAGGOTS, but to have Tony believe the same thing seemed ridiculous. (I'm on the Captain America side clearly)



Regarding them citing the events of New York and Washington as reasons to put a leash on the Avengers, I can agree with you there. However, the thing to remember about both Sokovia and Lagos is that those incidents were caused by Ultron, a being who was basically created by Tony Stark mucking about with forces that he really didn't understand. As such, Tony's guilt over the resulting casualties of those incidents is completely understandable, because he did basically cause them, albeit in a roundabout fashion. I do wish the movie had stated that explicitly as not doing so leaves the door open for interpretation, but I think that conclusion is easy enough to come to that people can figure it out.


----------



## Demiurge (May 8, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Well, I get why the ungrateful public would focus on it and think "they're a bunch of dicks that don't even try to avoid collateral damage," but not Tony! I guess it could be argued that since Tony was dicking around in the guts of the flying island for the entire climax, he didn't realize the complete focus by everyone else on avoiding any civilian casualties. And of course, he's the one that caused the whole thing in the first place by building Ultron, but he doesn't really seem to acknowledge that in this movie! Not to mention, why would he blame everyone ELSE for that and be perfectly happy to have them all thrown in prison while he's walking around free?



That really seems to be how Tony Stark's moral compass works: feel really guilty about something going wrong, self-righteously pursue what turns out to be an ill-advised over-correction with total inflexibility, feel really guilty about it going wrong, rinse and repeat.


----------



## MFB (May 8, 2016)

> I didn't even think of that, but it would be wonderful if there wasn't. I can do without yet another Spider-Man film that's relentlessly emo and loaded with flashbacks to ponderous old Uncle Ben solemnly intoning life lessons and Spider-Man's agony at causing his death or whatever. We have the Zach Snyder movies already if we want GRIMDARK.



In Homecoming, and I suppose in CW as well, he'll already have been established as Spiderman so I don't know how much they'll hammer home is origins. Probably something like BvS, where it takes place during the opening credits and then be done with it from there.


----------



## HeavyMetal4Ever (May 8, 2016)

Is anyone else thinking we might see Quicksilver back in the Infinity War? Vision will have to be stomped by Thanos at some point so he can take his gem, and at the end someone is going to have to take the gauntlet from Thanos...they could easily bring back both Vision and Quicksilver with the gauntlets power, and probably a few other casualties as well.

What does everyone think?


----------



## Xaios (May 8, 2016)

I think that the MCU is going to stay away from Quicksilver so that the X-Men franchise can have him, while X-Men will likewise do the same with Scarlet Witch.


----------



## wankerness (May 8, 2016)

I thought Quicksilver completely sucked in AoU. He came across as more of a shoe ad than a character, and I know I won't miss him if he doesn't come back. He was great in DOFP and I'm more than happy to keep him isolated to that group.  Plus, having him come back to life would remove one of the key elements of Scarlet Witch's character.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (May 9, 2016)

HeavyMetal4Ever said:


> Is anyone else thinking we might see Quicksilver back in the Infinity War? Vision will have to be stomped by Thanos at some point so he can take his gem, and at the end someone is going to have to take the gauntlet from Thanos...they could easily bring back both Vision and Quicksilver with the gauntlets power, and probably a few other casualties as well.
> 
> What does everyone think?



I've stated before that death in the MCU, or other superhero films in general, will follow the comic ethic, and that death is merely a detour and not a final destination, and how the Time stone is going to play a part in that. 

Of course we won't know until it's introduced in Doctor Strange this November. 




Xaios said:


> I think that the MCU is going to stay away from Quicksilver so that the X-Men franchise can have him, while X-Men will likewise do the same with Scarlet Witch.



It also depends on whether the 2 studios want to continue in their constant pissing contest. But it looks like that may be the case after all. While yeah, as they're more associated with Avengers more than the X-Men, there's also the caveat that MCU can't mention the Maximoff twins as mutants nor mention Magneto. Hell, Namor The Submariner is in all sorts of rights issues. But anyway... both studios can use both characters, but neither seem to want to fully commit both of them into one studio together for a long duration. 

Everyone knows that the only reason Quicksilver was in Days Of Future Past was to use him first before Ultron, as a giant middle finger to MCU. Even Scarlet Witch is hinted in DOFP so another incarnation of her may still be around the X-Men universe. 







MCU's response was to give Quicksilver his fate in Ultron, which can be cynically viewed as a shrewd business move above all else. 

In any case, Fox Quicksilver and MCU Scarlet Witch have now solidified their roles in their respective studios. X-Men Apocalypse has already called him Magneto's son, and the Scarlet Witch/Vision pairing motion has begun. We'll find out in a few years I guess. 




wankerness said:


> I thought Quicksilver completely sucked in AoU. He came across as more of a shoe ad than a character, and I know I won't miss him if he doesn't come back. He was great in DOFP and I'm more than happy to keep him isolated to that group.  Plus, having him come back to life would remove one of the key elements of Scarlet Witch's character.



MCU's Quicksilver is one of the least interesting characters in their list that feels more like a plot device than anything else. Whether he does come back or not, really won't make that much of a difference, even to Scarlet Witch's story. 20Fox Quicksilver is represented better but not saying much. Aside from that one scene (which can be argued as being a tired retread of the Matrix films), he's not much else.


----------



## wankerness (May 9, 2016)

Quicksilver in DOFP was a ton of fun, he wasn't a deep character. His big scene was the highlight of that movie, IMO (and I really liked that movie). I look forward to more of him. 

The idea of Vision/Wanda pairing is creepy as heck. I thought it was just platonic, I wish that was all they'd leave it at! At least we wouldn't see red peen ala Watchmen.


----------



## Varcolac (May 10, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Quicksilver in DOFP was a ton of fun, he wasn't a deep character. His big scene was the highlight of that movie, IMO (and I really liked that movie). I look forward to more of him.
> 
> The idea of Vision/Wanda pairing is creepy as heck. I thought it was just platonic, I wish that was all they'd leave it at! At least we wouldn't see red peen ala Watchmen.



They are an item in the comics. Like, married and everything. Cheesy lines and all. I thought it was awkward and sweet.


----------



## wankerness (May 10, 2016)

I guess I just get on edge whenever I see an old dude in a hollywood movie paired with a young chick. She's a few years older than I thought, though (27) so I guess it's not as bad as most. Obviously it's a fantasy context, but it's still contributing to the general narrative when you have such age-mismatched actors. I guess it's balanced out by the fact they actually stuck Robert Downey Jr with someone that's the same age (51)!


----------



## Varcolac (May 10, 2016)

wankerness said:


> I guess I just get on edge whenever I see an old dude in a hollywood movie paired with a young chick. She's a few years older than I thought, though (27) so I guess it's not as bad as most. Obviously it's a fantasy context, but it's still contributing to the general narrative when you have such age-mismatched actors. I guess it's balanced out by the fact they actually stuck Robert Downey Jr with someone that's the same age (51)!



The character's less than two years old in-universe. I'll let that reverse-creepy nugget sit with you for a while.

Androids: not even once


----------



## wankerness (May 10, 2016)

Haha, fair enough. 

I keep thinking back to the airport scene. I might have to watch this again. The eye reaction after the


Spoiler



Giant Man transformation from Paul Rudd had me dying.



The one thing I think was definitely a misfire in the movie was


Spoiler



Tony Stark blasting Falcon after he gets to the injured War Machine. The way they film it, it's practically like Hulk punching Thor off the screen in the first Avengers. There was a group of unattended ~10 year olds next to me at the theater and they all burst out laughing at that scene, and I don't think they were the only ones who thought that was supposed to be funny! I don't think it WAS, though, since that scene is so heavy.


 Ah well. A very minor quibble. I was pretty surprised at how those kids reacted to the movie. They were a bit loud at the beginning, but all of them sat there attentively through the whole thing and never got up to go anywhere at any point. I guess it worked pretty well as a kid's movie!


Spoiler



One of them couldn't look at the screen for the entire climactic fight, though, and one of his friends told him it was safe to look again after Captain America stuck the shield in Tony Stark's generator and backed off. I guess it did get a bit GRIMDARK. I'm glad not all kids are totally desensitized.


----------



## Xaios (May 10, 2016)

wankerness said:


> I guess it's balanced out by the fact they actually stuck Robert Downey Jr with someone that's the same age (51)!



And the irony is that no one believed it.


----------



## wakjob (May 10, 2016)

Just saw it. Still high.

OMG... go see it if you haven't!


----------



## A-Branger (May 10, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Haha, fair enough.
> 
> I was pretty surprised at how those kids reacted to the movie. They were a bit loud at the beginning, but all of them sat there attentively through the whole thing and never got up to go anywhere at any point. I guess it worked pretty well as a kid's movie!



I think the other way around. This movie was more serious and "grown up" than the last avenger. Hence why they stoped screaming and laughing hard at any "joke" on the screen. Thats why I liked this move much better as they dial down on the "fart jokes comedy" hollywood think kids love. To be honest trow bunch of action in a more serious note and kids love that. I know I will when I was at that age "yeaah punch it on the face! yeahh!"


----------



## MoonJelly (May 10, 2016)

Seeing this movie got me excited for another Spiderman movie. The impossible, they did it.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (May 10, 2016)

A-Branger said:


> I think the other way around. This movie was more serious and "grown up" than the last avenger. Hence why they stoped screaming and laughing hard at any "joke" on the screen. Thats why I liked this move much better as they dial down on the "fart jokes comedy" hollywood think kids love. To be honest trow bunch of action in a more serious note and kids love that. I know I will when I was at that age "yeaah punch it on the face! yeahh!"



I think it's more than just 'more serous and "grown up" than the last avenger'. 

One of the biggest reasons Civil War works as a narrative is that it's comfortable and self assured in it's own existence, thanks to the help of 12 freaking movies (!) prior building into it's own cultural zeitgeist. We've invested ourselves to these characters over the course of those movies so we know what they're about. Because of that, the characters can develop further. Scarlet Witch and Vision have their development, Falcon, War Machine and Black Widow have hard hitting statements despite being only support. Best example of this is Black Panther, who gets a whole origin story as a side plot to this film. 

The strength of the previous movies is used in the plot as well. Avengers was a team coming together and Civil War was that same team falling apart. 

The villain - now there seems to be consensus that he's the weakest aspect of the whole movie, and he's as superfluous as Iron Monger's third act fight. Quite the contrary. Yeah, all his actions seem illogical, but the result is one of the strongest and most personal payoffs in the entire MCU villain catalog. That and the fact that Daniel Bruhl sells the hell out if it. Really looking forward to more of his roles here. 

The whole third act (after the airport scene) is where the personal theme gets real. On careful analyzing (I saw it again last night), the main plot practically ends on the second act. But the fighting isn't over, the secrets and flaws and emotional torment of the characters stick out and refuse to disappear making the final confrontation so heavy despite a more intimate setting than act 2's airport. 

That's a lot to consume in any serious and mature movie in general. That's pretty damn impressive and that's even before you dress up the characters in superhero costumes. And THEN they add Spiderman and freaking Ant Man. 

Overall Civil War is a much more personal movie (more than Winter Soldier) and the kind of character building that Batman V Superman desperately tries to shoehorn in 3.5 hours but fails by collapsing in it's own weight.


Also, am I the only one who giggled to himself whenever I saw a stair car at the airport?


----------



## wankerness (May 10, 2016)

Consensus? I'm seeing articles (not to mention hundreds of comments) saying he's the BEST villain in any of these movies. He's about the only one besides Loki that's not just set up as some empty threat that the movie isn't really interested in who's only there to set up the quips between the heroes or whatever. He's given an understandable and sympathetic motivation, and he actually DOES SOMETHING to the characters apart from poking them with a stick for a while before getting smashed. "Best since Loki" is about the worst I'm seeing anyone say. Maybe in the other areas of the internet where people just want the guy with the biggest hammer or special-ist powers or whatever makes a "good" villain that he's lacking.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (May 10, 2016)

wankerness said:


> Consensus? I'm seeing articles (not to mention hundreds of comments) saying he's the BEST villain in any of these movies. He's about the only one besides Loki that's not just set up as some empty threat that the movie isn't really interested in who's only there to set up the quips between the heroes or whatever. He's given an understandable and sympathetic motivation, and he actually DOES SOMETHING to the characters apart from poking them with a stick for a while before getting smashed. "Best since Loki" is about the worst I'm seeing anyone say. Maybe in the other areas of the internet where people just want the guy with the biggest hammer or special-ist powers or whatever makes a "good" villain that he's lacking.



When i first saw the movie last week, i looked up a few of the first wave of reviews afterwards and it was a common thread about Zemo. But i suppose thats due to the main spectacle of the heroes against each other being the central focus while Zemo lurks in the shadows.

But I'm glad that seems to have changed in favour now once they've looked at what's really going on.


----------



## A-Branger (May 10, 2016)

I never liked Loki, never saw him as a villan, it was more of a joke for me


----------



## PunkBillCarson (May 12, 2016)

I personally loved this one. Have seen it twice already. I must say looking at all of these responses that when it comes to Marvel movies I'm a.) Either really entertained easily b.) I have low standards or c.) I guess I never really try to find deep meaning in these movies other than the movies that have it blatantly there. The only complaint I have about the whole MCU at this point is just Iron Man 3. I guess I just don't feel the need to nic pic when all of my wants are satisfied: my favorite characters in movies, fair amount of comedy and action, and what I consider decent or great storylines. I just take these movies as they are for me which is just fun. I just cannot wait until my favorite hero to ever wear a red cape (Doctor Strange) gets his own movie this November. I see all the Inception comparisons from other sites and to that I respond that it's just one small part of a grand scheme. I think I'm going to be one of the only ones who enjoys Doctor Strange.


----------



## bostjan (May 12, 2016)

I just saw this film.

First, the people sitting all around us were all obnoxious. I won't get in to that but to say that if you want to go see a movie, but you can't make it more than ten minutes without shouting or even speaking at full voice, then stay home. And if people quietly ask you to pipe down, don't go explaining in a full voice to them why it is impossible for you to remain halfway quiet.

The movie was overall pretty good. I think the title was misleading, since it was definitely another Avengers movie. There might have been 10 seconds more screen time for Captain America than there was for Iron Man, but, whatever. Secondly, I actually did not like the villain. I didn't really think his actions were all that believable. His motivation to be the villain was fine, but his motivation for his specific actions seemed to be merely to move the plot of the film one way or another. His interrogation scene was really nifty, though.


----------



## Kryss (May 12, 2016)

dr strange is going to be as impactful too as civil war in the grand scheme of things. I definitely see a post credit scene with strange and bucky now. this will allow bucky to join IW without his programming, this also allows him to pick up the shield if rogers dies to thanos before the end. some of the old guard is definitely going to die in IW, most likely iron man and cap. it gives the event weight and sets up the new avengers lineup for phase 4. bucky as the new cap, black panther, scarlet witch, captain marvel, possibly dr strange although I think he'll mostly stick to his own trilogy with a few avengers cameos, antman and wasp. civil war was a fantastic movie though. I'd say it's on par with the awesomeness of winter soldier although I don't think overall it is a better movie than cap2: ws. overall I think the russos have created the best 2 marvel movies so far. avengers 1 is right there as well and gotg. it will be interesting if after a gotg trilogy they bring on that director (gunn) to do an avengers or possibly bring whedon back for something down the road. I definitely think whedon will make a return but probably not for something as large as avengers probably for something smaller.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (May 18, 2016)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> Also, am I the only one who giggled to himself whenever I saw a stair car at the airport?









Everyone knows about the Russo brothers' history with Community and Arrested Development. But I still thought this was charming.


----------



## wankerness (May 21, 2016)

I completely missed that when I saw it, it makes me want to watch it again. Obviously I noticed the dean from Community (impossible to miss given he has dialogue!) and was greatly amused, though.


----------

