Captain America: Civil War

[The Laughing Fish]

We've seen the latest Batman v Superman trailer, now we should talk about the latest trailer for Marvel's superhero smackdown/team-up that was released last week.

I understand some may have been disappointed by Age of Ultron because it tried to be too light-hearted at times (even though I still liked it), but I trust the Russo brothers will have a more serious tone as they delivered for The Winter Soldier.

But I have to tell you: I'm more concerned about the level of overcrowding characters here than I am for Batman v Superman.

[Edd Grayson]

I share your concern, Laughing Fish, it seems to me that this will mainly be Tony Stark vs Steve Rogers with the rest in the background. And I thought AOU was not a bad movie, but not a very good one either, especially when compared to the Captain America movies.

[The Laughing Fish]

Admittedly, the story here does require a lot of heroes to take sides over the handling of the Winter Soldier and their stance over the Registration Act, but there's always going to be characters who get short-changed in terms of screen time. And you're right Edd, Age of Ultron does fall down in the middle of the MCU pecking order when compared to the two Cap movies and the first Avengers film.

[Edd Grayson]

I want to see every hero having his own opinion and motivations. The fighting should be later in the film.

[johnnygobbs]

But I have to tell you: I'm more concerned about the level of overcrowding characters here than I am for Batman v Superman.

I'm not.  I you're familiar with the Civil War comic-mini-series you'll know that the upcoming film barely covers a fraction of the characters featured.  And more importantly, most of the characters in Civil War have already been introduced and established in previous movies.  The only big new additions are Black Panther and Spider-Man in what is rumoured to be little more than a cameo.  And the fact that they'll be interacting with characters we already are invested in helps considerably.

By contrast Batman v Superman has to introduce a new Batman, Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor, Alfred, Mercy Graves and, if rumours are correct, Aquaman and Cyborg.  At least a film called 'Civil War' has a reason to shoehorn so many characters into its running time.  But it seems like the DC Cinematic Universe is already desperate to build-up to a big team movie without doing all the groundwork and building up each character in their solo movies first.  Not a wise approach IMHO.

[Edd Grayson]

I'd like it if this thread was on Civil War and not "B v S against Civil War fans" 

[johnnygobbs]

I'd like it if this thread was on Civil War and not "B v S against Civil War fans" 

I understand Edd.  I was just following up a comment made by The Laughing Fish earlier on:

But I have to tell you: I'm more concerned about the level of overcrowding characters here than I am for Batman v Superman.

[thecolorsblend]

I'm not.  I you're familiar with the Civil War comic-mini-series you'll know that the upcoming film barely covers a fraction of the characters featured.  And more importantly, most of the characters in Civil War have already been introduced and established in previous movies.  The only big new additions are Black Panther and Spider-Man in what is rumoured to be little more than a cameo.  And the fact that they'll be interacting with characters we already are invested in helps considerably.

The central conflict in the Civil War comic is between Iron Man and Captain America. It's carried out through their deputies in many cases but they were the leaders of their respective sides. It was their conflict.

That said, it looks like the movie will address the same basic themes in different ways and with a smaller cast of characters. I must say it's disappointing. What I dig about the CW comic is that it affected pretty much the entire Marvel universe. Restricting a story this important to one Captain America movie seems wrong somehow.

By contrast Batman v Superman has to introduce a new Batman, Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor, Alfred, Mercy Graves and, if rumours are correct, Aquaman and Cyborg.  At least a film called 'Civil War' has a reason to shoehorn so many characters into its running time.  But it seems like the DC Cinematic Universe is already desperate to build-up to a big team movie without doing all the groundwork and building up each character in their solo movies first.  Not a wise approach IMHO.

Considering you haven't seen BvS and don't know if any of those rumors are true or in what context those characters might appear, I'm not sure how you're qualified to make that statement.

[johnnygobbs]

Considering you haven't seen BvS and don't know if any of those rumors are true or in what context those characters might appear, I'm not sure how you're qualified to make that statement.

As qualified as The Laughing Fish is to state the following:

But I have to tell you: I'm more concerned about the level of overcrowding characters here than I am for Batman v Superman.

But hey, we all have different opinions and are entitled to them, right? 

[The Laughing Fish]

But I have to tell you: I'm more concerned about the level of overcrowding characters here than I am for Batman v Superman.

I'm not.  I you're familiar with the Civil War comic-mini-series you'll know that the upcoming film barely covers a fraction of the characters featured.  And more importantly, most of the characters in Civil War have already been introduced and established in previous movies.  The only big new additions are Black Panther and Spider-Man in what is rumoured to be little more than a cameo.  And the fact that they'll be interacting with characters we already are invested in helps considerably.

By contrast Batman v Superman has to introduce a new Batman, Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor, Alfred, Mercy Graves and, if rumours are correct, Aquaman and Cyborg.  At least a film called 'Civil War' has a reason to shoehorn so many characters into its running time.  But it seems like the DC Cinematic Universe is already desperate to build-up to a big team movie without doing all the groundwork and building up each character in their solo movies first.  Not a wise approach IMHO.

Point taken, but is there really a possible alternative for DC/WB to build a cinematic universe? I'm no fan of WB as a corporation, but they are in a no-win situation here. if they copy the Marvel approach with 'solo films first, team-up movie later', they'll get accused of having no innovation and are desperate to catch up with Marvel. They try to build  with having three big name heroes with a confirmed cameo by Aquaman, yet they're still being accused of trying to catch up with Marvel.

Like I said, I know there's a reason there are more characters in Civil War, but there's always going to get somebody who is short-changed, and you'll likely get people complaining that their favourite character didn't get to do much.

Let's face it: there's a first time in everything, and you got to start somewhere. I like the premise that BvS has, and it has a lot of potential in my opinion. But again, it depends how it's executed.

I'd like it if this thread was on Civil War and not "B v S against Civil War fans" 

I for one am looking forward to both films, so don't you worry.