Captain America: Civil War

[Soulflame]

Unless the Collector is forwarding any stones that come into his possession to Thanos.

[Sir T]

Best bit of Thor 2 was when Idris Elba soloed a fucking starship.

I liked the imigary of Thor 2 and I enjoyed it for what it was. But yeah, the whole "Ima going to destroy the universe!" was utterly meh to me at this point and it was full of Deus Ex Machina and plot holes. You can miss it if you want.

[Margalis]

Thor 2 was also really ugly in parts. Like the part where they are on the surface of the dead brown planet - just looked bad.

[MahrinSkel]

Best bit of Thor 2 was when Idris Elba soloed a fucking starship.

I liked the imigary of Thor 2 and I enjoyed it for what it was. But yeah, the whole "Ima going to destroy the universe!" was utterly meh to me at this point and it was full of Deus Ex Machina and plot holes. You can miss it if you want.

You cast one of the greatest scenery chewers of our time as the bad guy, then give him 5 lines of subtitled dialog and the emotive range of a malevolent tree stump. Who the fuck thought that was a good directorial decision?

--Dave

[Megrim]

It actually worked a lot better if you watched it without subtitles.

[MediumHigh]

Thor 2 was such a trash movie that i barely escaped the theater before vomiting.

[Soulflame]

I thought Thor 2 was decent, but forgettable.

[Sir T]

You cast one of the greatest scenery chewers of our time as the bad guy, then give him 5 lines of subtitled dialog and the emotive range of a malevolent tree stump. Who the fuck thought that was a good directorial decision?

This.

[Mandella]

One of Thor 2s weaknesses was indeed the Big Bad being both under and over developed. And no, we really didn't need the whole universe in danger bit. But the bad guys not being the focus is one of those things Marvel is known for, and this is no exception.

But that granted, this was still a fun movie. Good dialog and humor, Tom Hiddleston being top of his game as Loki, neat visuals and good action. It's a comic book movie that does not rise far above its genre, take it or leave it.

One of *my* pet peeves, and this might well just be something idiosyncratic to myself, is that I simply don't care much for Natalie Portman. I don't think she's that great an actress inside or out of genre films, and she and Chris Hemsworth have zero chemistry as far as I can see.

Oh, and as far as the London alien attack being instantly forgotten, well, to the best of my memory it never became generally known that the universe was in danger there. One alien ship crashed/attacked one dockside in the UK and was smashed to pieces by Thor. Thank you Thor.

There was an episode of Agents of SHIELD where the agents had to clean up the mess.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Well good news, Portman wont be in Ragnarok.

[Teleku]

Nice.  I really REALLY hope Marvel can get away from requiring a love interest in every one of their god damn stories.  They even managed to splice one in for 5 seconds in civil war, but thankfully there was so much going on they couldn't go beyond that.  Can we just have a story where dude or girl goes out and fights shit?  Do they always have to magically find a fuck buddy while doing this?

[HaemishM]

TBF, the character of Agent 13/Sharon Carter always WAS a love interest in the comics, as well as an almost sidekick, and they had been hinting at the attraction as far back as the first scene in Winter Soldier.

[Teleku]

Oh I know.  And they they handled it in the Cap movies way better than the others, since it took up a minimal amount of screen time but still gave him some character development.  I was directing that comment at the broader cinematic universe.

Still, every single marvel hero has banged multiple people over there many decades of comics.  Unless the love interest is reeeealllly important to the characters story (like say, Spiderman) you don't have to include it.  Nobody will actually miss Jane Foster or Agent 13 if you just skipped them.

[Evildrider]

Well Jane Foster is pretty damned important in Thor nowadays. 

[Sir T]

There was a cracked article where they pointed out that Villians tend to be very moral and faithful to their partners, sometimes to an obsessive degree, whereas the heroes tend to have a black book the sise of the Telephone book. It's a function of the camera being constantly on the Heroes and the need to figure out something for him to do when he is not smashing face, whereas the villains tend to have a lot more down time off camera. Insert new cute chick is a lazy way to keep things moving.

And yeah, Portman was pretty weak sauce in Thor 2.

[Khaldun]

In the comic books, that's a function of long-running serial storytelling of any kind. If your character's adventures run on and on for forty years without the character aging, you bet he/she is going to have more than one romantic partner in most cases, unless "family man/woman" is a central defining attribute of the character. It doesn't just happen to superheroes, it happens to their supporting casts (who also appear in most or many issues). It doesn't happen as much to villains because villains only appear sporadically and many of them get cursory attention at best to their full family or social world anyway.

Think about Spider-Man:

Ok, two major monogamous relationships. (Gwen Stacy, Mary Jane).
Several major recurrent hookup relationships.
A few unrequited obsessions.
Many many short-term dates/relationships.

His villains:

Green Goblin (Norman Osborn version). Wife rarely if ever mentioned--she is said (vaguely) to have died, or in some versions, is implied to have left. In one gross story that most people prefer to forget, Osborn is said to have had sex with Gwen Stacy as well. Otherwise largely desexualized, substantially due to mental health issues. And he's one of the people we know a lot about, in relative terms!
Venom (Eddie Brock version). Former family man, divorced due to financial troubles after getting fired as a journalist. Takes no interest in any social life after beginning crusade against Spider-Man due to mental health issues.
Kraven. Has a wife that I think we don't know anything about, and at least two children. Has a lover (a voodoo priestess) who is rarely seen. Takes less interest in family life (after originally being largely motivated by family) due to mental health issues.
Doctor Octopus. Was dating someone seriously early in his history, before being a villain. Tried to marry Aunt May once but it was a plot. Otherwise takes little interest in women (except when he was in Peter Parker's mind, hello comic books) due to mental health issues.
Vulture. Despite being old, generally doesn't seem to have had much of a family or romantic life in the past. Also has little interest in women due to mental health issues.
Electro. Generally hasn't been given much of a life outside fighting Spider-Man. Went out of his way to debunk a rumor than a young electrically-powered supervillain was his daughter, saying it wasn't possible. But not sufficiently obsessive to keep from dating!
Sandman. Unlike the film, doesn't seem to have been married or have children. Does seem to have a fairly ordinary social life, especially during periods of semi-heroism, so who knows. On the other hand, made of sand.
Rhino. Relatively late in his career as muscle/thug villain, found monogamous love with a fellow Russian! So there we go. Though she was murdered later. And then maybe resurrected.

I think this basically hold for most comic-book villains. Spider-Man's folks are actually a more varied lot with richer family backstories than most, in fact, and not that many of them have any love life at all, let alone a faithful and moral one.

[Sir T]

But the Joker is faithful to Harley Quinn...  (lets leave aside the beating the crap out of her part...)

And Freeze is still trying to cure his wife.

Now these 2 were created out of whole cloth by the Batman Animated series, so that's not their long term mythos. The "Dark Knight Returns" even suggested the Joker was in love with Batman.

And you are right its simply because the Villains have less character dev time than the heroes, but it is one of the Ironic factors of the Hero villain relationship

[HaemishM]

In some tellings of the Joker origin, he had a wife prior to his insanity. In fact, he turned to a life of crime as the Red Hood to financially support their marriage after his failed attempts at stand-up comedy.

[MediumHigh]

Well Jane Foster is pretty damned important in Thor nowadays.  

No she really, really isn't. Thor is a multidimensional thunder god, which is why even in the comics between him and green lantern, they often don't have their girlfriends just magically showing up. Because its cheesy as hell. In green lanterns case it general results in the immediate death of said girl friend when super power alien super criminal whose M'O is enslaving worlds figures out the emerald god of justice still keeps his love ones inside a shitty technologically backward backwater.

Which is also Man of Steels problem, in a reverse way. Lois Lane is important. To Clark Kent/Super-man not to journey-man jesus wanna be with identity issues who hasn't decided to be either. Just ramming her into the story because we already know that clark kent and lois is a thing is lazy writing. You can't have your cake (reboot the character) and eat it to (assume all his relationships stay the same because...destiny??), and expect no one to call bullshit. Is Clark Kent a virgin in this universe? Because that's the only reason why I can fathom superman going Tarzan meets Jane on her.

Characters like spiderman can afford a love interest but spiderman is your every man hero. He really can't help but to shit where he eats and we don't fault him for that.

In the comic books, that's a function of long-running serial storytelling of any kind. If your character's adventures run on and on for forty years without the character aging, you bet he/she is going to have more than one romantic partner in most cases, unless "family man/woman" is a central defining attribute of the character. It doesn't just happen to superheroes, it happens to their supporting casts (who also appear in most or many issues). It doesn't happen as much to villains because villains only appear sporadically and many of them get cursory attention at best to their full family or social world anyway.

Think about Spider-Man:

Ok, two major monogamous relationships. (Gwen Stacy, Mary Jane).
Several major recurrent hookup relationships.
A few unrequited obsessions.
Many many short-term dates/relationships.

His villains:

Green Goblin (Norman Osborn version). Wife rarely if ever mentioned--she is said (vaguely) to have died, or in some versions, is implied to have left. In one gross story that most people prefer to forget, Osborn is said to have had sex with Gwen Stacy as well. Otherwise largely desexualized, substantially due to mental health issues. And he's one of the people we know a lot about, in relative terms!
Venom (Eddie Brock version). Former family man, divorced due to financial troubles after getting fired as a journalist. Takes no interest in any social life after beginning crusade against Spider-Man due to mental health issues.
Kraven. Has a wife that I think we don't know anything about, and at least two children. Has a lover (a voodoo priestess) who is rarely seen. Takes less interest in family life (after originally being largely motivated by family) due to mental health issues.
Doctor Octopus. Was dating someone seriously early in his history, before being a villain. Tried to marry Aunt May once but it was a plot. Otherwise takes little interest in women (except when he was in Peter Parker's mind, hello comic books) due to mental health issues.
Vulture. Despite being old, generally doesn't seem to have had much of a family or romantic life in the past. Also has little interest in women due to mental health issues.
Electro. Generally hasn't been given much of a life outside fighting Spider-Man. Went out of his way to debunk a rumor than a young electrically-powered supervillain was his daughter, saying it wasn't possible. But not sufficiently obsessive to keep from dating!
Sandman. Unlike the film, doesn't seem to have been married or have children. Does seem to have a fairly ordinary social life, especially during periods of semi-heroism, so who knows. On the other hand, made of sand.
Rhino. Relatively late in his career as muscle/thug villain, found monogamous love with a fellow Russian! So there we go. Though she was murdered later. And then maybe resurrected.

I think this basically hold for most comic-book villains. Spider-Man's folks are actually a more varied lot with richer family backstories than most, in fact, and not that many of them have any love life at all, let alone a faithful and moral one.

Spiderman and batman are rare examples of actually developed enough rouge galleries for you to get even some data on relationships past i hate the hero. I think with villians there is this moralist thread where we assume as readers that no woman would date a supervillian. It's the price of their villainy to be forever alone, unloved by anyone despite amassing power and wealth. When in the real world it'll be the exact opposite. It's almost as if comic books were written by lonely good guy nerds pining for hot red heads that accept them for who they are 

[Evildrider]

Well Jane Foster is pretty damned important in Thor nowadays.  

No she really, really isn't. Thor is a multidimensional thunder god, which is why even in the comics between him and green lantern, they often don't have their girlfriends just magically showing up. Because its cheesy as hell. In green lanterns case it general results in the immediate death of said girl friend when super power alien super criminal whose M'O is enslaving worlds figures out the emerald god of justice still keeps his love ones inside a shitty technologically backward backwater.

Which is also Man of Steels problem, in a reverse way. Lois Lane is important. To Clark Kent/Super-man not to journey-man jesus wanna be with identity issues who hasn't decided to be either. Just ramming her into the story because we already know that clark kent and lois is a thing is lazy writing. You can't have your cake (reboot the character) and eat it to (assume all his relationships stay the same because...destiny??), and expect no one to call bullshit. Is Clark Kent a virgin in this universe? Because that's the only reason why I can fathom superman going Tarzan meets Jane on her.

Characters like spiderman can afford a love interest but spiderman is your every man hero. He really can't help but to shit where he eats and we don't fault him for that.

You realize, and as far as I know still is, she is Thor right? 

[MediumHigh]

Well Jane Foster is pretty damned important in Thor nowadays.  

No she really, really isn't. Thor is a multidimensional thunder god, which is why even in the comics between him and green lantern, they often don't have their girlfriends just magically showing up. Because its cheesy as hell. In green lanterns case it general results in the immediate death of said girl friend when super power alien super criminal whose M'O is enslaving worlds figures out the emerald god of justice still keeps his love ones inside a shitty technologically backward backwater.

Which is also Man of Steels problem, in a reverse way. Lois Lane is important. To Clark Kent/Super-man not to journey-man jesus wanna be with identity issues who hasn't decided to be either. Just ramming her into the story because we already know that clark kent and lois is a thing is lazy writing. You can't have your cake (reboot the character) and eat it to (assume all his relationships stay the same because...destiny??), and expect no one to call bullshit. Is Clark Kent a virgin in this universe? Because that's the only reason why I can fathom superman going Tarzan meets Jane on her.

Characters like spiderman can afford a love interest but spiderman is your every man hero. He really can't help but to shit where he eats and we don't fault him for that.

You realize, and as far as I know still is, she is Thor right? 

You mean how Doc OC is spiderman? Or how the falcon is captain america but the actual steve rodgers is still around but a hydra agent? I mean I guess the new trend now is that all the shitty contradictions are no longer unceremoniously killed in order for the old version to be brought back. But I'm talking about the MCU which is decidedly not the comics.

[Lakov_Sanite]

I hear superman is also dead.

[Khaldun]

Well Jane Foster is pretty damned important in Thor nowadays.  

No she really, really isn't. Thor is a multidimensional thunder god, which is why even in the comics between him and green lantern, they often don't have their girlfriends just magically showing up. Because its cheesy as hell. In green lanterns case it general results in the immediate death of said girl friend when super power alien super criminal whose M'O is enslaving worlds figures out the emerald god of justice still keeps his love ones inside a shitty technologically backward backwater.

Which is also Man of Steels problem, in a reverse way. Lois Lane is important. To Clark Kent/Super-man not to journey-man jesus wanna be with identity issues who hasn't decided to be either. Just ramming her into the story because we already know that clark kent and lois is a thing is lazy writing. You can't have your cake (reboot the character) and eat it to (assume all his relationships stay the same because...destiny??), and expect no one to call bullshit. Is Clark Kent a virgin in this universe? Because that's the only reason why I can fathom superman going Tarzan meets Jane on her.

Characters like spiderman can afford a love interest but spiderman is your every man hero. He really can't help but to shit where he eats and we don't fault him for that.

You realize, and as far as I know still is, she is Thor right? 

You mean how Doc OC is spiderman? Or how the falcon is captain america but the actual steve rodgers is still around but a hydra agent? I mean I guess the new trend now is that all the shitty contradictions are no longer unceremoniously killed in order for the old version to be brought back. But I'm talking about the MCU which is decidedly not the comics.

You were replying to a statement that was explicitly about the comics. But carry on, you will anyway.

[HaemishM]

I hear superman is also dead.

Actually, not only is he not dead, Lex Luthor is wearing Superman armor, Superman from Earth-something is in the current DC Universe with his wife Lois Lane and their hybrid alien son (who is being pursued by someone for something very X-Files-ey) and then there's the Earth-1 Superman from the New 52 who is the younger Superman. That's not even getting into the Supermen from other universes in the Multiverse. Also, one of those Supermen is dead? I don't read the Superman books and the Rebirth book was very goddamn confusing.

[Khaldun]

New-52 Superman is dead. Because he ate Kryptonite to get his powers back or something. I dunno, I don't read that shit any more, just read about it. I doubt I'd have a clearer understanding from reading it.

[Pennilenko]

The fastest way to turn me off of a super hero story, whether it be in book, comics, TV, or movie form, is to take away the hero's powers.  That shit frustrates me so badly that I end up never watching or reading that material ever again.  The recent flash is an example.  When Barry gave his power to Zoom, I stopped watching the show, even though I knew he would get his powers back. I just couldn't take it.  Taking a hero's powers is such a shitty plot device.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Yeah, comics are stupid.

[Khaldun]

I don't mind a short arc of 2-3 issues where the character is fighting the Parasite or some other villain whose schtick is stealing powers and the hero has to figure out a new way to solve the problem. As with every trope, there's a smart way to do it if you're a good writer. I remember an arc on Nexus where the Merk took back the powers he gave Nexus because he wasn't happy with the pace of his assassinations--that was a great story. But most of the time, it's as lazy as pretend-killing, evil-twinning, amnesia-having and all the other repeated devices.

The problem with the Flash wasn't so much the trope, it is all drama on the show now revolves around Barry doing something absolutely rock-solid stupid.

[Jeff Kelly]

Saw it yesterday.

It's a better ensemble movie than Avengers: Age of Ultron. By far better.

I liked the villain (I'm not objective though the actor is German) and how the movie undercut expectations several times (e.g. at the end where the villain kills the other winter soldiers instead of reviving them). It has a lot of great character moments and even the bit characters like Spiderman and Ant Man get their shining moment.

The story is inane drek though, because the whole civil war arc is and always has been drek. They make the most of it and given the source material they had to work with the result is actually OK for the most part. Granted it's because they mostly ignore the civil war plot in lieu of character interactions.

Even the Rousseau Brothers couldn't turn the civil war arc into something that is not stupid though and so a lot of protagonists completely act out of character for large chunks of the movie for the sake of Drama. They also conveniently locked everyone else away in a magic underwater super prison (impenetrable for everyone except Captain America) just so that only Iron Man, Cap and Bucky are left over for the final confrontation.

They did what they could to salvage a story out of the mess that is the Civil War comics and it's a great movie whenever they largely ignore the overarching plot and decent when they don't.

[Hutch]

The redeeming feature of the Civil War plot is that at the end of the movie, the Avengers are divided. This gives the writers and directors a launch pad for the first Infinity War film. It could also be worked into the stories for Ant Man, Black Panther, etc.

[Khaldun]

Is everybody on Team Cap already in the prison by the time Cap and the Winter Soldier arrive at the base in Russia? Tony could also have taken along the Vision to Russia if he'd asked--and of course the Black Panther *does* go to Russia, just not to Tony's knowledge. Tony is the only one who goes to Russia because it's personal for him at that point--he wants to apologize to Cap for not looking into the Winter Soldier thing more carefully, and see if there's a way out of the hole they've all dug, but Zemo screws that reconciliation up by showing the tape.

[Hutch]

Sam Wilson told Tony where they were going, on condition that Tony would go alone, and as a friend.

Not that he had any way to enforce that, or even check up on him.

[Jeff Kelly]

Sam Wilson told Tony where they were going, on condition that Tony would go alone, and as a friend.

Not that he had any way to enforce that, or even check up on him.

Easily the most stupid part. Falcon had absolutely no reason to tell Iron Man - the person responsible for him ending up in that super hero guantanamo bay - and Stark had no reason to heed the condition of a traitor and criminal. In the real world the only words out of Sam Wilson's mouth would have been "go fuck yourself". Which would have ruined the villains plan.

The plot only works because everyone is acting out of character. A hedonistic libertarian billionaire with delusions of grandeur and an alcohol problem sides with the government and IM's characterization is not even the worst offender here.

[Hutch]

Sam Wilson told Tony where they were going, on condition that Tony would go alone, and as a friend.

Not that he had any way to enforce that, or even check up on him.

Easily the most stupid part. Falcon had absolutely no reason to tell Iron Man - the person responsible for him ending up in that super hero guantanamo bay - and Stark had no reason to heed the condition of a traitor and criminal. In the real world the only words out of Sam Wilson's mouth would have been "go fuck yourself". Which would have ruined the villains plan.

The plot only works because everyone is acting out of character. A hedonistic libertarian billionaire with delusions of grandeur and an alcohol problem sides with the government and IM's characterization is not even the worst offender here.

Traitor? Criminal? According to who, the UN? Fuck the UN right in its ear.

Falcon sends Tony to Siberia because he figures Steve could use his help vs the threat he thinks they're going up against, which is the Super Soldier Squad.

Tony sides with the Accords in the first place, because he wants to shift the blame for the collateral damage that he has both directly and indirectly caused. Next time something awful happens, he wants to be able to say "hey I just went where they told me." It's a terrible impulse, and I think he's started to figure that out by the end of the film. But, he's also driven by his nightmare of alien invasion. He pushed the Accords because he wants to keep the Avengers together and functioning, for when <something> (i.e. Thanos) comes knocking.

Alcohol problem. We haven't seen him take a drink since IM2, and he thought he was on death's door at the time. He's had some character development.

[HaemishM]

I actually buy Tony's acceptance of the accords completely because of how badly his fuckups have shaken his confidence. He already had that crisis of confidence in IM1 when he discovered how his weapons had been used for terrible purposes by the people he's supposed to have been fighting. It made him be Iron Man. After the death and destruction of Ultron, he realizes he needs some kind of check and with Pepper not there to act as his conscience, it makes total sense that he'd foist that responsibility off onto some kind of world government, especially knowing (or believing) that the next big thing is going to be an alien invasion.

Steve's resistance to the accords also makes sense because he saw first hand how organizations can be corrupted from within, in the form of Hydra. Plus the whole Bucky couldn't have done this thing.