Spoiler-free review: Don't believe the sky-high RT rating. Go for the set pieces, not for the plot.
I think Marvel is riding a lot on general goodwill at this point. This movie is strikingly similar to DC's latest outing, but the reception has been just as strikingly different. Don't get me wrong: Civil War is a better movie than Dawn of Justice. But it has a lot of the same flaws, and if it manages them more adroitly, it also introduces some new flaws of its own.
First, the obvious: the selling point of this movie is two beloved superheroes fighting each other, and the plot is a pretty threadbare excuse to facilitate that. Like DoJ, it relies on a villain's improbable ability to manipulate people and events, and the heroes' inexplicable ability to go from zero to PUNCHINTHEFACE in three seconds flat. The plot also shoehorns in other heroes to set up new franchise installments. Spider-Man is just like Wonder Woman: had his scenes been left on the cutting room floor, you wouldn't even notice that anything was missing. And honestly, Black Panther is like that too -- which is especially strange, because he actually does get a character arc, and it's pretty much the character arc you'd expect from, y'know, an actual Black Panther movie.
Also like Wonder Woman, Spidey and Black Panther kind of steal the scene anyway whenever they appear, but the real scene-thief is Ant-Man of all people. And the big fight in the second act where Ant-Man, Spider-Man, and all the rest strut their stuff is easily the best part of the movie. That scene is wacky crazy comic-book fun, and I loved it. But it also highlighted a third point of similarity to DoJ: the tone. Civil War is a bleak and cynical movie in which superheroes are being asked to stand accountable for the collateral damage they do. Sigh. At least DoJ was consistently dark -- for this one to have a big colorful punch-up in the middle full of Ant-Man antics and Spidey-snark is really tonally jarring. After that, how am I supposed to buy the real feels of act three? In act two, the fighting was all fun and games, but in act three all of a sudden the fightnig is deadly serious and emotionally charged? Doesn't work.
You'll notice I've scarcely mentioned Captain America yet. There's a reason for that. Yet again like DoJ, the title character is something of an outlier in his own movie. It's more about Iron Man, Bucky, and (weirdly) T'Challa. And Steve Rogers looks tired. I'm not sure whether it's the aforementioned cynical tone of the film, or if something of Chris Evans' reported fatigue with the character is leaking into his performance, but it's not the attitude I expect from Captain freaking America. It works for Affleck's Batman, and it works for Robert Downey, Jr.'s Iron Man (who turns in a good performance) -- but not for him.
And here's the real kick in the teeth:
I still have no idea what the Scarlet Witch's powers are!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Spoiler-free review: Don't believe the sky-high RT rating. Go for the set pieces, not for the plot.
I think Marvel is riding a lot on general goodwill at this point. This movie is strikingly similar to DC's latest outing, but the reception has been just as strikingly different. Don't get me wrong: Civil War is a better movie than Dawn of Justice. But it has a lot of the same flaws, and if it manages them more adroitly, it also introduces some new flaws of its own.
First, the obvious: the selling point of this movie is two beloved superheroes fighting each other, and the plot is a pretty threadbare excuse to facilitate that. Like DoJ, it relies on a villain's improbable ability to manipulate people and events, and the heroes' inexplicable ability to go from zero to PUNCHINTHEFACE in three seconds flat. The plot also shoehorns in other heroes to set up new franchise installments. Spider-Man is just like Wonder Woman: had his scenes been left on the cutting room floor, you wouldn't even notice that anything was missing. And honestly, Black Panther is like that too -- which is especially strange, because he actually does get a character arc, and it's pretty much the character arc you'd expect from, y'know, an actual Black Panther movie.
Also like Wonder Woman, Spidey and Black Panther kind of steal the scene anyway whenever they appear, but the real scene-thief is Ant-Man of all people. And the big fight in the second act where Ant-Man, Spider-Man, and all the rest strut their stuff is easily the best part of the movie. That scene is wacky crazy comic-book fun, and I loved it. But it also highlighted a third point of similarity to DoJ: the tone. Civil War is a bleak and cynical movie in which superheroes are being asked to stand accountable for the collateral damage they do. Sigh. At least DoJ was consistently dark -- for this one to have a big colorful punch-up in the middle full of Ant-Man antics and Spidey-snark is really tonally jarring. After that, how am I supposed to buy the real feels of act three? In act two, the fighting was all fun and games, but in act three all of a sudden the fightnig is deadly serious and emotionally charged? Doesn't work.
You'll notice I've scarcely mentioned Captain America yet. There's a reason for that. Yet again like DoJ, the title character is something of an outlier in his own movie. It's more about Iron Man, Bucky, and (weirdly) T'Challa. And Steve Rogers looks tired. I'm not sure whether it's the aforementioned cynical tone of the film, or if something of Chris Evans' reported fatigue with the character is leaking into his performance, but it's not the attitude I expect from Captain freaking America. It works for Affleck's Batman, and it works for Robert Downey, Jr.'s Iron Man (who turns in a good performance) -- but not for him.
And here's the real kick in the teeth:
I still have no idea what the Scarlet Witch's powers are!
This movie was great, excellent plot and characters but the villain could have been better. This really feels like the sequal to avengers that we wanted instead of Ultron.
I disagree with most of your points. Civil war juggles multiple characters so much better than DoJ its uncanny. When they do introduce characters it feels organic and everything flowed properly. I am annoyed that marvel still doesn't have the balls to kill off any characters. War machine will likely be fully recovered when we see him next when his death could have had real emotional significance and its annoying that they freeze Bucky in the end as well since it almost makes it as though nothing really changed. Spiderman and Black Panther each have me excited for solo adventures and I don't feel like they distracted from the main story line and they each stepped away before they wore out their welcome. I agree Spiderman could have been left out but I think his character was an excellent addition and it didn't bloat the film like wonder woman did for DoJ.
At no point did I find myself bored out of my mind wondering when the next set piece is so in that regard its light years better than DoJ
Spoiler-free review: Don't believe the sky-high RT rating. Go for the set pieces, not for the plot.
I think Marvel is riding a lot on general goodwill at this point. This movie is strikingly similar to DC's latest outing, but the reception has been just as strikingly different. Don't get me wrong: Civil War is a better movie than Dawn of Justice. But it has a lot of the same flaws, and if it manages them more adroitly, it also introduces some new flaws of its own.
First, the obvious: the selling point of this movie is two beloved superheroes fighting each other, and the plot is a pretty threadbare excuse to facilitate that. Like DoJ, it relies on a villain's improbable ability to manipulate people and events, and the heroes' inexplicable ability to go from zero to PUNCHINTHEFACE in three seconds flat. The plot also shoehorns in other heroes to set up new franchise installments. Spider-Man is just like Wonder Woman: had his scenes been left on the cutting room floor, you wouldn't even notice that anything was missing. And honestly, Black Panther is like that too -- which is especially strange, because he actually does get a character arc, and it's pretty much the character arc you'd expect from, y'know, an actual Black Panther movie.
Also like Wonder Woman, Spidey and Black Panther kind of steal the scene anyway whenever they appear, but the real scene-thief is Ant-Man of all people. And the big fight in the second act where Ant-Man, Spider-Man, and all the rest strut their stuff is easily the best part of the movie. That scene is wacky crazy comic-book fun, and I loved it. But it also highlighted a third point of similarity to DoJ: the tone. Civil War is a bleak and cynical movie in which superheroes are being asked to stand accountable for the collateral damage they do. Sigh. At least DoJ was consistently dark -- for this one to have a big colorful punch-up in the middle full of Ant-Man antics and Spidey-snark is really tonally jarring. After that, how am I supposed to buy the real feels of act three? In act two, the fighting was all fun and games, but in act three all of a sudden the fightnig is deadly serious and emotionally charged? Doesn't work.
You'll notice I've scarcely mentioned Captain America yet. There's a reason for that. Yet again like DoJ, the title character is something of an outlier in his own movie. It's more about Iron Man, Bucky, and (weirdly) T'Challa. And Steve Rogers looks tired. I'm not sure whether it's the aforementioned cynical tone of the film, or if something of Chris Evans' reported fatigue with the character is leaking into his performance, but it's not the attitude I expect from Captain freaking America. It works for Affleck's Batman, and it works for Robert Downey, Jr.'s Iron Man (who turns in a good performance) -- but not for him.
And here's the real kick in the teeth:
I still have no idea what the Scarlet Witch's powers are!
I partially agree. I'd put it in the solid 3 to 3.5/5 range - a film I enjoyed a lot but didn't wow me. I do think people who are saying it is the best marvel film (or the best other than the Avengers) are doing the film a disservice - overhyping it is going to lead to bad feels.
(I'd rank this probably 7th or 8th of the MCU films - it's better than thor, ironman 2, hulk, ironman 3, and is somewhere in the ultron-thor 2-Cap 1 bundle for me)
On specifics:
I hadn't actually realised until you said it the tonal issues with the last fight - I mean I knew it didn't sit right, but I think you are exactly right as to why - coming right after the big sassy fight, it feels very weird. Also Zemo's need to get to the bunker doesn't make any ******* sense - if he already knows (possibly from the hydra files?) why not just tell stark? why go through all the - as you noted, very convoluted and highly lucky - process of framing nucky etc.
However, I thought black panther didn't feel shoehorned, and had no issues with Cap. Well...not with his performance.
My main issue with the film is that it makes almost zero effort to have cap's side of the argument made. I mean he briefly disagrees when whoeverthehellitis from the government outlines the accords, but he actually has a good argument if they bothered to make it. (Specifically, new york was the governments doing, not the avengers - the world security council are functionally equivalent to whatever oversight committee - and they tried to nuke manhattan. Yes, people have died in some of these cases, but the avengers have *directly* saved between millions and billions of lives.)
Anyway, like I said - any fan of comic book films should go see this, just dial your expectations a little lower than the reviews.
I partially agree. I'd put it in the solid 3 to 3.5/5 range - a film I enjoyed a lot but didn't wow me.
Yeah, I'd say 2.5 to 3. Decent popcorn movie. Wouldn't say no to watching it again -- but I'd rather just watch the second act three times than watch the whole thing.
(I'd rank this probably 7th or 8th of the MCU films - it's better than thor, ironman 2, hulk, ironman 3, and is somewhere in the ultron-thor 2-Cap 1 bundle for me)
Our rankings of the Marvel movies are very different.
I hadn't actually realised until you said it the tonal issues with the last fight - I mean I knew it didn't sit right, but I think you are exactly right as to why - coming right after the big sassy fight, it feels very weird.
The other thing I didn't mention about the final fight is that it just plain isn't very good on an action level. Even a pretty good final fight would have felt like a letdown after the awesomeness in the second act, but this just wasn't. Small scale, bad lighting, and the scenes where Cap and Bucky are double-teaming Iron Man looked ridiculously choreographed. Those shield-passing moves -- didn't buy them at all.
Where is is good is on a performance level. Like I said, Robert Downey, Jr. brings the feels. I don't buy him going immediately from helpful mode to punch mode upon the big revelation -- there are intermediate stages in the emotional spectrum between conciliation and violence -- but that was demanded by the excuse plot. Setting that aside, his pain is very earnest and sympathetic. It does feel hard to root for one side or the other, which is a lot more than can be said of the comic source material. So well done there, movie.
Crazy thought: what if the same things had happened, but they didn't fight? They just had a tense-as-hell conversation. Handled well, I think that could have been better. And maybe they trade a few more blows in the airport fight to make up the punch quota.
I mean he briefly disagrees when whoeverthehellitis from the government outlines the accords, but he actually has a good argument if they bothered to make it.
That was "Thunderbolt" Ross from the Hulk franchise. Haven't seen him in a while, have we?
This movie was meh to me, I enjoyed DoJ more surprisingly, as that movie had some bad flaws. Wasted potential with the "civil war" Arc, the movie should be called Winter Solider: Origins. I'm still waiting for an actual event that shakes these characters, I thought Civil War was going to deliver the shake up but nope. Such a shame because Captain America: Winter Solider is one of my favorite movies.
I was irritated by Scarlet Witch's babysitting. In X-Men the young inexperienced team members are babysat and receive training. Scarlet Witch was supposed to just sit there and not do anything. And it seems like Vision was powered down so that he didn't wreck everything. When he got "distracted" it made me wonder why didn't Iron Man follow up on that more.
Word up to everyone else who stated that not killing off War Machine was a cop-out (but in the back of my mind I was screaming "Oh god not another Black Dude Dies First" trope). They should have found a way to kill him and Bucky so that the final fight felt so much more real and raw. I got the feels from Iron Man/Robert Downey jr, but not from Captain America/Chris Evans. His desire to protect Bucky was starting to feel contrived near the end. Locate the super soldiers, oh they're dead? Turn him in so that he can be properly de-programmed.
I also could feel for Captain America pointing out that the U.N. has an agenda. I expected a new agency to be created so that such a concern would not be relevant.
Also as soon as Sam Wilson/Falcon said "I know a guy" I knew they were bringing in Ant-Man. I was really impressed with Spider-Man but I wish that they had actually made Aunt May older. I'm used to Peter Parker and Aunt May being boderline destitute and her not being able to work to make ends meet because of her age. I'm also surprised we didn't get the "with great power comes great responsibility" line. It feels like Peter Parker was dancing around it so maybe he wasn't allowed to say it.
I feel bad for Black Panther though. I know he's getting his own movie but thanks to his well done intro in this film it kinda makes it seem like he shouldn't have his own movie. What's unique about him? Ant-man incorporates the spy/thriller elements so I can see why he got his own movie. Dr. Strange is one of the few characters who focus almost exclusively on mystical elements so I can see why he's getting his own movie. But what's actually Unique about Black Panther vs Falcon, Captain America, Spider Man or Iron Man?
edit: After reading a NPR analysis it looks like Black Panther will have strong political storylines which could be interesting.
Word up to everyone else who stated that not killing off War Machine was a cop-out (but in the back of my mind I was screaming "Oh god not another Black Dude Dies First" trope). They should have found a way to kill him and Bucky so that the final fight felt so much more real and raw. I got the feels from Iron Man/Robert Downey jr, but not from Captain America/Chris Evans. His desire to protect Bucky was starting to feel contrived near the end. Locate the super soldiers, oh they're dead? Turn him in so that he can be properly de-programmed.
I was really hoping (unrealistically) that they would stay true to the comic and kill Cap to have Bucky take up the mantle. It would have been an interesting and in character death for Cap to sacrifice himself for his friend. But without knowing much about Bucky it would have been stretched for movie goers if that were to happen
Also Annoyed at the forced and then immediately discarded love interest part. I feel as though Peggy's funeral and her niece kissing cap could have been left on the cutting room floor to the benefit of the movie. The bright side being they don't waste much time with either point so shrug.
It seemed redundant to bring in Ross yet also have Martin Freeman's character in there. The implication being that Freeman will be a recurring character now seems to negate Ross coming back at but I guess they wanted to remind us that Hulk's solo movie is actually canon even if they switched actors
This movie was meh to me, I enjoyed DoJ more surprisingly, as that movie had some bad flaws. Wasted potential with the "civil war" Arc, the movie should be called Winter Solider: Origins. I'm still waiting for an actual event that shakes these characters, I thought Civil War was going to deliver the shake up but nope. Such a shame because Captain America: Winter Solider is one of my favorite movies.
Half of the avengers are actual fugitives now. Scarlet witch and Visions's relationship(They are romantically involved in the comics) is severely fractured. Most of the Avengers will not be able to trust Tony again. Tony and Steve are severely at odds and Steve no longer has his shield. Short of killing several characters I am not sure how the characters could have been more shaken up honestly
Yeah, Black Panther is in sort of a weird place politically. He was dreamed up by Stan Lee to capture the "Black Power" zeitgeist of the 60s. I haven't read any of those comics, but Stan Lee is, well, Stan Lee, so I'm sort of skeptical as to their accuracy and sensitivity. In any case, since then he's long had that undercurrent of black nationalism. He's an African character, but he's always been rooted more in American views on Africa than in the real Africa. And then Reginald Hudlin started writing him and it became outright black supremacy.
But those impulses really seem like artifacts of a past age to me. I'm certainly not going to say there are no black nationalists in America, but they're hardly a major voice in the racial discourse of the 21st Century. So I'm interested to see what direction Marvel takes the Black Panther going forward to make him relevant. Ta-Nehisi Coates is going to be writing his comic book -- that I'm really interested to see. Prediction: that thing I said about him being rooted in American views on Africa? They're going to try to refocus him on Africa.
Though the stinger in Civil War is not a promising start, if indeed it's implying that his movie will be another chapter of the Winter Soldier saga. Honestly, how long do we need to spend on this? Bucky isn't that important or interesting a character.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Word up to everyone else who stated that not killing off War Machine was a cop-out (but in the back of my mind I was screaming "Oh god not another Black Dude Dies First" trope). They should have found a way to kill him and Bucky so that the final fight felt so much more real and raw. I got the feels from Iron Man/Robert Downey jr, but not from Captain America/Chris Evans. His desire to protect Bucky was starting to feel contrived near the end. Locate the super soldiers, oh they're dead? Turn him in so that he can be properly de-programmed.
I was really hoping (unrealistically) that they would stay true to the comic and kill Cap to have Bucky take up the mantle. It would have been an interesting and in character death for Cap to sacrifice himself for his friend. But without knowing much about Bucky it would have been stretched for movie goers if that were to happen
Also Annoyed at the forced and then immediately discarded love interest part. I feel as though Peggy's funeral and her niece kissing cap could have been left on the cutting room floor to the benefit of the movie. The bright side being they don't waste much time with either point so shrug.
It seemed redundant to bring in Ross yet also have Martin Freeman's character in there. The implication being that Freeman will be a recurring character now seems to negate Ross coming back at but I guess they wanted to remind us that Hulk's solo movie is actually canon even if they switched actors
This movie was meh to me, I enjoyed DoJ more surprisingly, as that movie had some bad flaws. Wasted potential with the "civil war" Arc, the movie should be called Winter Solider: Origins. I'm still waiting for an actual event that shakes these characters, I thought Civil War was going to deliver the shake up but nope. Such a shame because Captain America: Winter Solider is one of my favorite movies.
Half of the avengers are actual fugitives now. Scarlet witch and Visions's relationship(They are romantically involved in the comics) is severely fractured. Most of the Avengers will not be able to trust Tony again. Tony and Steve are severely at odds and Steve no longer has his shield. Short of killing several characters I am not sure how the characters could have been more shaken up honestly
I disagree, at what time did any(besides Tony) look shaken because of the events that unfolded? The way the movie ended I bet the next Avengers Tony gives Captain his shield back they hug it out, only to have something else blow up in their faces. The way the movie ended it's like nothing really happened expect Captain Dropping his shield, and the governments being really super upset with them. When the Next Avengers hits Tony is going to pick up that phone and everyone is going to be so happy to see Avengers.
The movie ended with Cap in Wakanda, buddy-buddies with King T'Challa. That's like losing your keys but crashing on the couch of the President of the Associated Locksmiths of America.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
it relies on a villain's improbable ability to manipulate people and events
Well we're dealing with a world of superheroes. Getting supervillains tend to be part of the package deal.
and the heroes' inexplicable ability to go from zero to PUNCHINTHEFACE in three seconds flat.
Well in the first round, Stark was asked to bring in Rogers and he refused to turn himself in. Seemed rather obvious that a fight would break out from there. In the second round, Stark finds out that Bucky killed his parents and Rogers covered it up. If they didn't fight, i'd honestly find that pretty strange
So is Tony left with just Vision and Spider Man on his side? It seemed Black Window bounced, Black Panther helped Captain America at the end, maybe setting up for Tony making an Army of Ironman Suits, without alien technology?
I just got finished with an hour plus long argument with my girlfriend about this actually. One thing that stands out to me especially though is the fact that Captain America's opposition makes a lot of sense given his experiences with the last agency that was supposed to oversee him.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Proving god exists isn't hard. Proving god is God is the tricky part" - Roommate
Just saw it last night. I enjoyed it. It wasn't the best Marvel movie ever but certainly not the worst either.
My only real gripe is they didn't take some of the better aspects of the story from the comics. Its been a while since I read the comics but I remember Iron Man being a bigger part of the story than Cap. I think it would have worked better as "Iron Man: Civil War" or even "Avengers: Civil War".
I'd have preferred to see more about the actual split and ideological arguments being made and less of Cap and Falcon chasing down Bucky.
They missed the mark on Spider-Man too IMO. Not the way the character portrayed, that was great, but the way he was used in the story. He was a big central part of the story in the comics, and his arch was a big deal in the story, and they didn't touch on it at all in the movie. Kind of a missed opportunity.
I really liked Chadwick Boseman. I thought he did a great job as Black Panther and it makes me a lot more excited for that solo movie.
They missed the mark on Spider-Man too IMO. Not the way the character portrayed, that was great, but the way he was used in the story. He was a big central part of the story in the comics, and his arch was a big deal in the story, and they didn't touch on it at all in the movie. Kind of a missed opportunity.
Given the timeline of the Sony deal I'm pretty sure he was a relatively late addition to the script.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
They missed the mark on Spider-Man too IMO. Not the way the character portrayed, that was great, but the way he was used in the story. He was a big central part of the story in the comics, and his arch was a big deal in the story, and they didn't touch on it at all in the movie. Kind of a missed opportunity.
It was never meant to be a full retread of the comic book. It would need to be much much longer and have many more characters to even come close to that (how would they explain the mecha thor to movie goers lol) I am pleased with the story they made that was inspired by the comic though. I agree with the earlier statement as well, it almost could have been labeled better as an iron man film since most of the character sympathy (in my opinion at least) goes to tony. But the movie as a whole stems a lot from the events of winter soldier so it would have been a bit odd to see an iron man movie about a capt america side kick/villain.
I have one very major disagreement with your BvS comparison.
Baron Zemo's entire story line was dedicated to his mission. Every scene that featured him intended to drive his narrative and his mission forward. Lex Luthor's ridiculous plan of pitting Batman and Superman against one another wasn't a part of the story until almost 3/4ths of the way into the film and that only happened after Batman stole the kryptonite before Lex could. Lex's plan also only is revealed in literally one scene and none of the leg work is shown for how he got there (how does he know everything about Superman and his secret identity??!?! he never earned that information!!!!).
Yes, Civil War is a crowded film, but it manages to juggle those elements so much better than BvS that to compare the two is, IMO, ridiculous. On top of that, it's actually fun to watch unlike pretty much every film Zack Snyder has ever directed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
They missed the mark on Spider-Man too IMO. Not the way the character portrayed, that was great, but the way he was used in the story. He was a big central part of the story in the comics, and his arch was a big deal in the story, and they didn't touch on it at all in the movie. Kind of a missed opportunity.
Given the timeline of the Sony deal I'm pretty sure he was a relatively late addition to the script.
Actually, I'm just happy both studios agreed it was in their best interests to have him appear at all! Heck, I thought he was going to be a "cameo"; I was a bit surprised the amount of screen time they gave the wall-crawler. I mean, Sony could've said "you found a 'new' Quicksilver', so find a new 'Spiderman.'"
Overall it was another fine edition to the MCU; I'll buy it when its available.
Although I do agree, it could've/should've been titled differently. This just didn't seem like a Captain America movie. There have been great suggestions here = Winter Soldier: Origin, Avengers: Civil War (has my vote), etc... but still... worth the time and money to watch on the big screen (especially 'Act II').
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "Mysticake" »
(about the English language) It's kinda like a raft that was cobbled together from parts of three different boats and since then has been kept barely afloat with crude repairs every time a leak appeared.
They missed the mark on Spider-Man too IMO. Not the way the character portrayed, that was great, but the way he was used in the story. He was a big central part of the story in the comics, and his arch was a big deal in the story, and they didn't touch on it at all in the movie. Kind of a missed opportunity.
It was never meant to be a full retread of the comic book. It would need to be much much longer and have many more characters to even come close to that (how would they explain the mecha thor to movie goers lol) I am pleased with the story they made that was inspired by the comic though. I agree with the earlier statement as well, it almost could have been labeled better as an iron man film since most of the character sympathy (in my opinion at least) goes to tony. But the movie as a whole stems a lot from the events of winter soldier so it would have been a bit odd to see an iron man movie about a capt america side kick/villain.
Yeah I know, and I agree it would have been too much to make it exactly like the comics. But I do wish they'd have put more time into the non-fighting part of the story. Specifically the impact it had on the characters lives away from being a super hero. But I suppose that too wouldn't have fit in the time constraints they had to work with. Mostly I'm just bummed about the way Spiderman was used. In the comics he was central to the story in a big way.
specifically the way he switched sides half way through the story. In the movie he's not pivotal to the story at all and the movie wouldn't have been any different at all had he not been in it.
But like I said, I like it overall and I'll add it to my collection when it comes out for purchase.
Yeah I know, and I agree it would have been too much to make it exactly like the comics. But I do wish they'd have put more time into the non-fighting part of the story. Specifically the impact it had on the characters lives away from being a super hero. But I suppose that too wouldn't have fit in the time constraints they had to work with. Mostly I'm just bummed about the way Spiderman was used. In the comics he was central to the story in a big way.
specifically the way he switched sides half way through the story. In the movie he's not pivotal to the story at all and the movie wouldn't have been any different at all had he not been in it.
But like I said, I like it overall and I'll add it to my collection when it comes out for purchase.
It would have been super cool to see the spider man armor suit from the comic for sure perhaps a bit out of place though.
Yeah I know, and I agree it would have been too much to make it exactly like the comics. But I do wish they'd have put more time into the non-fighting part of the story. Specifically the impact it had on the characters lives away from being a super hero. But I suppose that too wouldn't have fit in the time constraints they had to work with. Mostly I'm just bummed about the way Spiderman was used. In the comics he was central to the story in a big way.
specifically the way he switched sides half way through the story. In the movie he's not pivotal to the story at all and the movie wouldn't have been any different at all had he not been in it.
But like I said, I like it overall and I'll add it to my collection when it comes out for purchase.
It would have been super cool to see the spider man armor suit from the comic for sure perhaps a bit out of place though.
I thought that's what they were implying we would see in future movies with the after credits scene.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
I thought that's what they were implying we would see in future movies with the after credits scene.
I doubt we will see the iron spider armor from the civil war comic. Since that comic is so new, newer than even the Sam Raimi movies, it is hardly recognizable as a spiderman costume considering how different from his classic suit that goes mostly unchanged since his 60's debut. As cool as that suit is I just don't see it coming to film anytime soon.
I disagree with most of your points. Civil war juggles multiple characters so much better than DoJ its uncanny. When they do introduce characters it feels organic and everything flowed properly.
Just what exactly flowed well with Spider-man's introduction in the film? It was pretty freaking obvious that scene was added simply because they wanted to get Spider-man into the movie (and so into the MCU). The idea that Stark needs to bring in one singular super-hero to even the odds is silly. The man has an entire factory churning out autonomous suits in AoU. Why the hell didn't he just get a whole bunch of them to go take down Captain America?
Because it wouldn't have created the big action sequence of the film, that's why. But that scene makes no real sense to me either, for the reasons that Blinking_Spirit mentioned.
And why the flying **** would Ant-man agree to go help Captain America?
And why the **** is Vision, heralded to be this epic superpower, basically the equivalent of a nuclear deterrent in the ultimate showdown against the Big Bad (Thanos), reduced to being a character that feels oddly similar to Data from TNG and fighting Barton of all people? Seriously? The artificial being who has one of the Infinity Stones on his head, has the right state of mind to lift Mjolnir, is comprised entirely of vibranium, can somehow create a cape out of thin-air, fights... Barton. The guy with the bow and arrow.
Oh, and he's somehow incapacitated, even momentarily, by Scarlet Witch.
My impression of the film-
It was just a silly film. The real major problem I have is that the conflict between Rogers and Stark just seems really manufactured to serve the plot. I can't say much more without spoiling the film, but I just don't think there's an actual reason they'd be so at odds with one another.
I disagree with most of your points. Civil war juggles multiple characters so much better than DoJ its uncanny. When they do introduce characters it feels organic and everything flowed properly.
Just what exactly flowed well with Spider-man's introduction in the film? It was pretty freaking obvious that scene was added simply because they wanted to get Spider-man into the movie (and so into the MCU). The idea that Stark needs to bring in one singular super-hero to even the odds is silly. The man has an entire factory churning out autonomous suits in AoU. Why the hell didn't he just get a whole bunch of them to go take down Captain America?
Because it wouldn't have created the big action sequence of the film, that's why. But that scene makes no real sense to me either, for the reasons that Blinking_Spirit mentioned.
And why the flying **** would Ant-man agree to go help Captain America?
And why the **** is Vision, heralded to be this epic superpower, basically the equivalent of a nuclear deterrent in the ultimate showdown against the Big Bad (Thanos), reduced to being a character that feels oddly similar to Data from TNG and fighting Barton of all people? Seriously? The artificial being who has one of the Infinity Stones on his head, has the right state of mind to lift Mjolnir, is comprised entirely of vibranium, can somehow create a cape out of thin-air, fights... Barton. The guy with the bow and arrow.
Oh, and he's somehow incapacitated, even momentarily, by Scarlet Witch.
My impression of the film-
It was just a silly film. The real major problem I have is that the conflict between Rogers and Stark just seems really manufactured to serve the plot. I can't say much more without spoiling the film, but I just don't think there's an actual reason they'd be so at odds with one another.
Yeah, revenge for murdered parents is totally silly!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The artist formerly known as Dimir Impersonator.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
First, the obvious: the selling point of this movie is two beloved superheroes fighting each other, and the plot is a pretty threadbare excuse to facilitate that. Like DoJ, it relies on a villain's improbable ability to manipulate people and events, and the heroes' inexplicable ability to go from zero to PUNCHINTHEFACE in three seconds flat. The plot also shoehorns in other heroes to set up new franchise installments. Spider-Man is just like Wonder Woman: had his scenes been left on the cutting room floor, you wouldn't even notice that anything was missing. And honestly, Black Panther is like that too -- which is especially strange, because he actually does get a character arc, and it's pretty much the character arc you'd expect from, y'know, an actual Black Panther movie.
Also like Wonder Woman, Spidey and Black Panther kind of steal the scene anyway whenever they appear, but the real scene-thief is Ant-Man of all people. And the big fight in the second act where Ant-Man, Spider-Man, and all the rest strut their stuff is easily the best part of the movie. That scene is wacky crazy comic-book fun, and I loved it. But it also highlighted a third point of similarity to DoJ: the tone. Civil War is a bleak and cynical movie in which superheroes are being asked to stand accountable for the collateral damage they do. Sigh. At least DoJ was consistently dark -- for this one to have a big colorful punch-up in the middle full of Ant-Man antics and Spidey-snark is really tonally jarring. After that, how am I supposed to buy the real feels of act three? In act two, the fighting was all fun and games, but in act three all of a sudden the fightnig is deadly serious and emotionally charged? Doesn't work.
You'll notice I've scarcely mentioned Captain America yet. There's a reason for that. Yet again like DoJ, the title character is something of an outlier in his own movie. It's more about Iron Man, Bucky, and (weirdly) T'Challa. And Steve Rogers looks tired. I'm not sure whether it's the aforementioned cynical tone of the film, or if something of Chris Evans' reported fatigue with the character is leaking into his performance, but it's not the attitude I expect from Captain freaking America. It works for Affleck's Batman, and it works for Robert Downey, Jr.'s Iron Man (who turns in a good performance) -- but not for him.
And here's the real kick in the teeth:
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
At no point did I find myself bored out of my mind wondering when the next set piece is so in that regard its light years better than DoJ
I partially agree. I'd put it in the solid 3 to 3.5/5 range - a film I enjoyed a lot but didn't wow me. I do think people who are saying it is the best marvel film (or the best other than the Avengers) are doing the film a disservice - overhyping it is going to lead to bad feels.
(I'd rank this probably 7th or 8th of the MCU films - it's better than thor, ironman 2, hulk, ironman 3, and is somewhere in the ultron-thor 2-Cap 1 bundle for me)
On specifics:
I hadn't actually realised until you said it the tonal issues with the last fight - I mean I knew it didn't sit right, but I think you are exactly right as to why - coming right after the big sassy fight, it feels very weird. Also Zemo's need to get to the bunker doesn't make any ******* sense - if he already knows (possibly from the hydra files?) why not just tell stark? why go through all the - as you noted, very convoluted and highly lucky - process of framing nucky etc.
However, I thought black panther didn't feel shoehorned, and had no issues with Cap. Well...not with his performance.
My main issue with the film is that it makes almost zero effort to have cap's side of the argument made. I mean he briefly disagrees when whoeverthehellitis from the government outlines the accords, but he actually has a good argument if they bothered to make it. (Specifically, new york was the governments doing, not the avengers - the world security council are functionally equivalent to whatever oversight committee - and they tried to nuke manhattan. Yes, people have died in some of these cases, but the avengers have *directly* saved between millions and billions of lives.)
Our rankings of the Marvel movies are very different.
Where is is good is on a performance level. Like I said, Robert Downey, Jr. brings the feels. I don't buy him going immediately from helpful mode to punch mode upon the big revelation -- there are intermediate stages in the emotional spectrum between conciliation and violence -- but that was demanded by the excuse plot. Setting that aside, his pain is very earnest and sympathetic. It does feel hard to root for one side or the other, which is a lot more than can be said of the comic source material. So well done there, movie.
Crazy thought: what if the same things had happened, but they didn't fight? They just had a tense-as-hell conversation. Handled well, I think that could have been better. And maybe they trade a few more blows in the airport fight to make up the punch quota.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Word up to everyone else who stated that not killing off War Machine was a cop-out (but in the back of my mind I was screaming "Oh god not another Black Dude Dies First" trope). They should have found a way to kill him and Bucky so that the final fight felt so much more real and raw. I got the feels from Iron Man/Robert Downey jr, but not from Captain America/Chris Evans. His desire to protect Bucky was starting to feel contrived near the end. Locate the super soldiers, oh they're dead? Turn him in so that he can be properly de-programmed.
I also could feel for Captain America pointing out that the U.N. has an agenda. I expected a new agency to be created so that such a concern would not be relevant.
Also as soon as Sam Wilson/Falcon said "I know a guy" I knew they were bringing in Ant-Man. I was really impressed with Spider-Man but I wish that they had actually made Aunt May older. I'm used to Peter Parker and Aunt May being boderline destitute and her not being able to work to make ends meet because of her age. I'm also surprised we didn't get the "with great power comes great responsibility" line. It feels like Peter Parker was dancing around it so maybe he wasn't allowed to say it.
I feel bad for Black Panther though. I know he's getting his own movie but thanks to his well done intro in this film it kinda makes it seem like he shouldn't have his own movie. What's unique about him? Ant-man incorporates the spy/thriller elements so I can see why he got his own movie. Dr. Strange is one of the few characters who focus almost exclusively on mystical elements so I can see why he's getting his own movie. But what's actually Unique about Black Panther vs Falcon, Captain America, Spider Man or Iron Man?
edit: After reading a NPR analysis it looks like Black Panther will have strong political storylines which could be interesting.
http://www.npr.org/2016/05/07/477089249/2016-age-of-the-on-screen-black-superhero
Also Annoyed at the forced and then immediately discarded love interest part. I feel as though Peggy's funeral and her niece kissing cap could have been left on the cutting room floor to the benefit of the movie. The bright side being they don't waste much time with either point so shrug.
It seemed redundant to bring in Ross yet also have Martin Freeman's character in there. The implication being that Freeman will be a recurring character now seems to negate Ross coming back at but I guess they wanted to remind us that Hulk's solo movie is actually canon even if they switched actors
But those impulses really seem like artifacts of a past age to me. I'm certainly not going to say there are no black nationalists in America, but they're hardly a major voice in the racial discourse of the 21st Century. So I'm interested to see what direction Marvel takes the Black Panther going forward to make him relevant. Ta-Nehisi Coates is going to be writing his comic book -- that I'm really interested to see. Prediction: that thing I said about him being rooted in American views on Africa? They're going to try to refocus him on Africa.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Well we're dealing with a world of superheroes. Getting supervillains tend to be part of the package deal.
Well in the first round, Stark was asked to bring in Rogers and he refused to turn himself in. Seemed rather obvious that a fight would break out from there. In the second round, Stark finds out that Bucky killed his parents and Rogers covered it up. If they didn't fight, i'd honestly find that pretty strange
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I just got finished with an hour plus long argument with my girlfriend about this actually. One thing that stands out to me especially though is the fact that Captain America's opposition makes a lot of sense given his experiences with the last agency that was supposed to oversee him.
My only real gripe is they didn't take some of the better aspects of the story from the comics. Its been a while since I read the comics but I remember Iron Man being a bigger part of the story than Cap. I think it would have worked better as "Iron Man: Civil War" or even "Avengers: Civil War".
I'd have preferred to see more about the actual split and ideological arguments being made and less of Cap and Falcon chasing down Bucky.
They missed the mark on Spider-Man too IMO. Not the way the character portrayed, that was great, but the way he was used in the story. He was a big central part of the story in the comics, and his arch was a big deal in the story, and they didn't touch on it at all in the movie. Kind of a missed opportunity.
I really liked Chadwick Boseman. I thought he did a great job as Black Panther and it makes me a lot more excited for that solo movie.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I have one very major disagreement with your BvS comparison.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
Actually, I'm just happy both studios agreed it was in their best interests to have him appear at all! Heck, I thought he was going to be a "cameo"; I was a bit surprised the amount of screen time they gave the wall-crawler. I mean, Sony could've said "you found a 'new' Quicksilver', so find a new 'Spiderman.'"
Overall it was another fine edition to the MCU; I'll buy it when its available.
Although I do agree, it could've/should've been titled differently. This just didn't seem like a Captain America movie. There have been great suggestions here = Winter Soldier: Origin, Avengers: Civil War (has my vote), etc... but still... worth the time and money to watch on the big screen (especially 'Act II').
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I know, and I agree it would have been too much to make it exactly like the comics. But I do wish they'd have put more time into the non-fighting part of the story. Specifically the impact it had on the characters lives away from being a super hero. But I suppose that too wouldn't have fit in the time constraints they had to work with. Mostly I'm just bummed about the way Spiderman was used. In the comics he was central to the story in a big way.
But like I said, I like it overall and I'll add it to my collection when it comes out for purchase.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!
Because it wouldn't have created the big action sequence of the film, that's why. But that scene makes no real sense to me either, for the reasons that Blinking_Spirit mentioned.
And why the flying **** would Ant-man agree to go help Captain America?
And why the **** is Vision, heralded to be this epic superpower, basically the equivalent of a nuclear deterrent in the ultimate showdown against the Big Bad (Thanos), reduced to being a character that feels oddly similar to Data from TNG and fighting Barton of all people? Seriously? The artificial being who has one of the Infinity Stones on his head, has the right state of mind to lift Mjolnir, is comprised entirely of vibranium, can somehow create a cape out of thin-air, fights... Barton. The guy with the bow and arrow.
Oh, and he's somehow incapacitated, even momentarily, by Scarlet Witch.
My impression of the film-
It was just a silly film. The real major problem I have is that the conflict between Rogers and Stark just seems really manufactured to serve the plot. I can't say much more without spoiling the film, but I just don't think there's an actual reason they'd be so at odds with one another.
Follow me on Twitter @VapidPodcast and listen to my podcast "Vapid Existentialism" on iTunes!