Captain America: Civil War

[The Dark Knight]

I've seen the movie. I'll share my thoughts later. I liked Spidey a lot.

[The Laughing Fish]

I saw the movie today. While I can say that I definitely enjoyed it, I still didn't think it was better than the first two Cap movies, the first Avengers or even the first Thor, which I like a lot. But it was better than Age of Ultron, which I found to be a bit of a let down. As a matter of fact, this felt more of an Avengers sequel than a Cap one because this movie has implications for the rest of the team.

I won't bother hiding the following in white because I think it's redundant since this is the spoilers thread. You've been warned in any case.

As others mentioned here, I liked how vengeance was a theme throughout the plot, from Zemo's desire to get revenge over the Avengers for the destruction of Sokovia by manipulating everybody to turn against each other, to Black Panther realising how destructive revenge is during his confrontation with Zemo near the end and prevents him from committing suicide. Another example of how destructive the desire for vengeance can be is when Iron Man discovers Bucky had killed his parents, despite Bucky was programmed to assassinate them.

I liked how the movie explored the fallout and aftermath of all the Avengers' battles, and how people react to their actions. BvS did a little, but not quite enough for my liking, and I was glad Ross was consequential to the story, unlike General Swanwick in BvS who I thought didn't need to be there.

But I have to say, I thought Spider-Man didn't need to be in this movie, and his presence together with Ant-Man changed drastically the tone of the movie. This is a fairly serious movie for two-thirds of the time, but the sense of humour those two characters brought to the middle portion didn't quite fit.

So I wonder where does this lead to now, with Cap hiding in Wakanda and now Tony Stark leading what's left of the Avengers? I guess this means the Avengers have agreed to be kept under government surveillance starting onwards, doesn't it?

Summary: Good movie, but in my opinion, I thought The First Avenger and The Winter Soldier were far more satisfying.

[The Laughing Fish]

A couple of things that occurred to me right now.

The one thing Zemo and Wallace Keefe from BvS shared in common was they blamed the heroes for destroying their lives when Sovokia and Metropolis were under attack. Of course, one was the mastermind in turning the Avengers against each other, and the other was manipulated himself by Lex Luthor.

The DCEU and now the MCU show that the heroes are subject to criticism and condemnation for their actions. As we saw Superman facing protesters before attending the US Senate hearing and Wallace Keefe's hatred in BvS, we see Sovokians protesting against the Avengers in Age of Ultron. In Civil War, we see the scrutiny the Avengers face from the government when discussing the Sovokian Accords, and the secretary who blamed Stark for killing her son during the Battle of Sovokia. But I find it a little odd that the same critics out there who complain the DCEU Superman is portrayed in a poor light seem to be okay with the Avengers being blamed for causing their share of collateral damage.

Food for thought.

[Silver Nemesis]

No spoiler looks into the comic history of Captain America and Iron Man's battles as well as the history of the villain, Zemo:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/captain-america-iron-man-who-887370
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/captain-america-civil-war-meet-888509

Thanks for posting these. I think the Captain America trilogy would be a good basis for some future comic analysis threads.

[Silver Nemesis]

My only real criticisms are that Spider-Man's presence seems relatively shoehorned (it's a shame the MCU wasn't able to strike a deal with Sony some time prior to Civil War, and thus establish this version of the character beforehand), and that once the Winter Soldier re-emerges onto the scene the whole philosophical/political issue of accountability and oversight, that initially divides the team, is somewhat forgotten about in favour of a story that is much more focused on personal allegiances, friendships and vendettas.

Much like Wonder Woman in BvS, Spider-Man could've been cut from the film without making huge changes in the story, yet he was enjoyable for the small screen time he had and impressed people enough to want to see a solo film.

It's a shame that the Andrew Garfield films were such a mess, as connecting a previous Spider-Man series or movie to Civil War would've helped feel more natural (Garfield is too old for the Civil War Spidey anyway). If you think about it, Scott Lang/Ant-Man/Giant Man isn't really any more important to the story, but his presence felt more organic given that he had a solo film and had encountered Falcon as his "audition."

This is very true. I remember after seeing both movies thinking you could remove Wonder Woman and Spider-Man altogether, and in neither case would it really affect the narrative in any meaningful way. You would however lose major fan service points, as both characters really lit up the screen whenever they appeared.

I agree that Ant-Man's inclusion felt more organic as a payoff for the "I know a guy" thread established in his solo movie last year. Likewise I thought Black Panther's introduction felt like an organic progression from the Wakanda/stolen vibranium subplot in Age of Ultron. And T'Challa ultimately plays a significant role in the plot, justifying his presence a good deal more than Spider-Man or Ant-Man did. IMO one of the things that made Civil War's potentially cluttered narrative feel cohesive is the manner in which it picked up loose threads from earlier MCU films. Obviously it's primarily a sequel to The Winter Soldier, but it also connects to unresolved storylines from The Incredible Hulk (2008), Iron Man 3 (2013), Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) and Ant-Man (2015). In that sense, some of the legwork regarding plot, themes and characterisation had already been completed in advance of the film's release. Which meant the Russos could hit the ground running. The only problem with this approach is that it risks alienating viewers who haven't seen those earlier films.

We're presently living in the age of multi-hero films, and some of them are becoming really overstuffed with characters. Yet somehow, for me at least, Civil War worked. On paper it shouldn't have. But it did. While I'm looking forward to the Infinity War films, I do have reservations about the sheer number of characters involved. That said, I have faith in the Russo brothers. They've hit two consecutive homeruns now and I think they've earned our trust.

But when was the last time there was a major superhero film featuring just one hero? I think it was either Man of Steel or Thor: The Dark World (not counting Cap's cameo, as that was Loki in disguise).

[johnnygobbs]

Thanks for posting these. I think the Captain America trilogy would be a good basis for some future comic analysis threads.

It's arguable whether the Captain America Trilogy is a true trilogy (since it's highly possible there will be further Captain America films, and one cannot isolate these films from the other MCU films particularly The Avengers and AOU which impacts significantly on the events of Civil War), but as a standalone set of three films it definitely has a strong, cohesive self-contained narrative, primarily in relation to the Steve-Bucky relationship.

And if we are to judge the 2011, 2014 and 2016 Captain America films as part of a standalone trilogy, I think there's a very strong case in favour of it being regarded as the best comic-book-movie trilogy so far, give or take TDK series.

[johnnygobbs]

I agree that Ant-Man's inclusion felt more organic as a payoff for the "I know a guy" thread established in his solo movie last year. Likewise I thought Black Panther's introduction felt like an organic progression from the Wakanda/stolen vibranium subplot in Age of Ultron. And T'Challa ultimately plays a significant role in the plot, justifying his presence a good deal more than Spider-Man or Ant-Man did. IMO one of the things that made Civil War's potentially cluttered narrative feel cohesive is the manner in which it picked up loose threads from earlier MCU films. Obviously it's primarily a sequel to The Winter Soldier, but it also connects to unresolved storylines from The Incredible Hulk (2008), Iron Man 3 (2013), Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) and Ant-Man (2015). In that sense, some of the legwork regarding plot, themes and characterisation had already been completed in advance of the film's release. Which meant the Russos could hit the ground running. The only problem with this approach is that it risks alienating viewers who haven't seen those earlier films.

I think whatever faults can be laid at Civil War (and I don't think it's quite 'the best Marvel film of all-time' as some critics are claiming; as far as the MCU is concerned I still favour 2012's Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy and possibly The Winter Soldier ahead of Civil War, although 'the fourth best MCU movie' still isn't bad going), I don't think 'over-cluttering' is one of them.  All of the super-powered characters on either side of the civil war divide, including the arguably shoehorned Spider-Man, were given sufficient screen-time and more than justified their inclusion particularly during the big airport-set fight sequence, and even those Avengers with the briefest screen-time, including Ant-Man and Hawkeye, made their presence felt, the former acting as the closest thing to comic-relief (not to mention being the focus of the film's most spectacular action sequence), and the latter building upon his AOU role as the team's everyman and deadpan snarker (especially now that an increasingly anguished Iron Man has seemingly relinquished that position).

And I completely concur with respect to T'Challa, arguably the film's ace card (Chadwick Boseman's performance here has substantially increased my, already high, anticipation for the Black Panther solo movie).  He is almost the de facto antagonist for the second third of the film, as Cap tries to defend his clearly mind-controlled buddy Bucky from Black Panther's potentially lethal retribution for the death of his father, T'Chaka (played by the excellent John Kani), and as you pointed out in an earlier post, Silver Nemesis, T'Challa's story echoes Tony's own determination to punish his parents' murderer, as well as offering an alternative resolution to this desire for vengeance.

[Silver Nemesis]

They could make another Cap film some day, but quotes from Kevin Feige suggest Civil War is intended to be the conclusion of Steve's solo adventures:

"It's very much, in a certain way, the completion of a Captain America trilogy. I think one day you'll look back and watch — 'Captain America: The First Avenger,' 'Captain America: The Winter Soldier,' and 'Captain America: Civil War' — and it'll be one of the most unique and different trilogies ever around a single character."

http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/civil-war-bring-marvels-captain-america-trilogy/

The Dark Knight trilogy comparisons are interesting. I've been keeping an eye on the critic and user scores for the Cap trilogy and comparing them against Nolan's films. Obviously these numbers might change as more reviews and votes are tallied, but here's how things presently stand:

THE CAPTAIN AMERICA TRILOGY

ROTTEN TOMATOES
Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) – 80% (6.9) – TC 76% (6.5) – audience 74% (3.7/5)
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) – 89% (7.5) – TC 80% (7.4) – audience 92% (4.3/5)
Captain America: Civil War (2016) – 91% (7.7) – TC 90% (7.5) – audience 92% (4.5)
AVERAGE: 86.6% (7.4) – TC 82% (7.1) – audience 86%

METACRITIC
Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) – Metascore 66 – user score 7/10
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) – Metascore 70 – user score 8.5/10
Captain America: Civil War (2016) – Metascore 75 – user score 8.3/10
AVERAGE: 70.3 – user score 7.9

IMDb
Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) – 6.8
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) – 7.8
Captain America: Civil War (2016) – 8.5 (ranked #64 in the Top 250)
AVERAGE: 7.7

And for comparison, here are the same numbers for Nolan's films.

THE DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY

ROTTEN TOMATOES
Batman Begins (2005) – 85% (7.7) – TC 63% (6.8 ) – audience 94% (3.9/5)
The Dark Knight (2008) – 94% (8.6) – TC 92% (8.3) – audience 94% (4.4/5)
The Dark Knight Rises (2012) – 87% (8 ) – TC 75% (7.8 ) – audience 90% (4.3/5)
AVERAGE: 88.6% (8.1) – TC 76.6 (7.6) – audience 92.6%

METACRITIC
Batman Begins (2005) – Metascore 70 – user score 8.7/10
The Dark Knight (2008) – Metascore 82 – user score 8.9/10
The Dark Knight Rises (2012) – Metascore 78 – user score 8.3/10
AVERAGE: 76.6 – user score 8.6

IMDb
Batman Begins (2005) – 8.3 (ranked #109 in the Top 250)
The Dark Knight (2008) – 9 (ranked #4 in the Top 250)
The Dark Knight Rises (2012) – 8.5 (ranked #62 in the Top 250)
AVERAGE: 8.6

As you can see, the average RT score for the Cap trilogy is only 2% lower than the DK trilogy. And Cap's average top critic percentage is higher than that of the DK trilogy, even though Nolan's films still win in terms of average rating. But even so, I think these numbers illustrate just how close Marvel has come to matching a trilogy that many fans claimed was untouchable. Obviously it's too early to compare box office results at this stage, but here's how things currently stack up financially:

BOX OFFICE (worldwide, unadjusted for inflation)

THE DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY
Batman Begins (2005) – $372.7
The Dark Knight (2008) – $1,003.0
The Dark Knight Rises (2012) – $1,084.9
TOTAL: $2,460.6 million

THE CAPTAIN AMERICA TRILOGY
Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) – $370.6 million
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) – $714.4 million
Captain America: Civil War (2016) – $678.3 million
TOTAL: $1,763.3 million

Naturally Civil War will gross a lot more before it completes its theatrical run. It'll need to make approximately $700 million more WW to surpass Nolan's trilogy. Though if we adjust domestic box office results for inflation, Nolan's trilogy would probably still come out on top. But once again, the fact we're even able to compare these figures shows just how successful Marvel's Cap trilogy has become.

Personally, I still think The Dark Knight trilogy takes the top spot. But the Captain America trilogy is a worthy second. And I can totally understand why many would prefer it. But I'd argue Nolan's films function better as a trilogy from a structural perspective. The dramatic emphases of the classic three act narrative are usually as follows:

•   ACT 1: introduce your characters, explain the hero's back story and motivation, have the hero lose a mentor figure, depict one of the hero's early victories

•   ACT 2: the central conflict, the hero fails for the first time and suffers a personal setback/loss, the stakes are upped, the hero confronts issues of self doubt

•   ACT 3: the final battle, the hero has matured and grown stronger/wiser, the hero must confront their greatest challenge, often involving an element from their past, the story is concluded, the loose ends are tied up

The best narrative-based movie trilogies usually conform to the above pattern, more or less. The Cap trilogy mostly does, but the conclusion at the end of the final film isn't really conclusive. We know he'll be back. His story began in The First Avenger, but it doesn't end in Civil War. Some would argue this is preferable to having the hero die or retire, as it means their adventures can go on and on, as they do in the comics. But it does mean the Cap trilogy isn't really self-contained the way the DK trilogy is. On a related note, to get the most out of the Cap trilogy you really need to watch The Avengers movies too. Whereas with the DK trilogy you get the entire story within three films.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the comparisons.

[Silver Nemesis]

It's already made $97 million in China. For comparison, BvS's Chinese gross stands at $95.7 million. And Civil War beat that in just 3 days.
http://variety.com/2016/film/asia/china-box-office-captain-america-blockbuster-weekend-1201768850/

I'd say $1 billion WW is a lock at this point.

[The Dark Knight]

This is very true. I remember after seeing both movies thinking you could remove Wonder Woman and Spider-Man altogether, and in neither case would it really affect the narrative in any meaningful way. You would however lose major fan service points, as both characters really lit up the screen whenever they appeared.

Yes. Spider-Man's appearance in CW restoked the fire. I'm a Spider-Man fan. I love this character just as much as Batman. And I have a lot of nostalgia for the Raimi trilogy. A lot. You just have to play 'Raindrops Keep Falling on my Head' and I'm back in 2004, as a 15 year-old who felt just like Maguire's Peter Parker, and in many ways, still do. I got on board with Garfield, but honestly, it was never the same. I was majorly bitter and twisted about that reboot. It was like my soul being ripped out. But more than enough time has passed now, and I think Holland represents a genuine return to form. I can see him rivalling Maguire, and the filmic output with Marvel is consistently solid.

So I'm excited about the future. In those brief scenes in CW, we see a young kid who loves science and reading comics. He loves his aunt. He has the smarts to make his own webbing, and while poor, manages to build his own makeshift suit. Tony Stark is a logical entry point for Peter entering the Avengers, and I like their explanation as to how he acquires the professional, tailored suit Raimi and Garfield apparently built themselves. Generally speaking, with the mask on he's the hyperactive quipper enjoying life, and with it off, he's the nervous, somewhat awkward teenager who still has an endearing heart of gold. Having a young person play a young person no doubt helps, too.

I can see Marvel doing some new, creative things in the reboot. We already have the spider-signal, as shown during the end credits scene. And I'm hoping they get creative with the webbing. Meaning parachutes and different constructs being made, along with spider-tracers and other tech. It hasn't been touched upon in the films yet. So go for it.