I'll admit that it's too early to say what kind of repercussions there will be from this besides the obvious half being criminals in the eyes of society. The main thing was the way it was done made it seem that the team isn't exactly torn apart, and after adrenaline went down they aren't exactly holding any grudges. Then again after thinking about it the morale of everybody is at an all time low with everything that happened. Like you said, I'll just have to wait and see how it all goes down.
I think the only ones that weren't torn apart were the likes of Hawkeye and Black Widow (whose banter sums up a lot of their relationship); those that were able to see it as a profesional job that this time pits them one against another.
Many of them had their friendships seriously compromised (Stark, Rogers, Rhodes), and I could see a lot of the rest (Wanda, Lang, Bucky) wanting nothing to do with the team if (and when) they are reunited. It is a movie, so we all know they will get back together for the next Avengers movie (maybe not Bucky), three years from now, right on time to face "their bigger challenge yet", but I think at least half of that movie will be them having to deal with their trust issues.
But yeah, he had the best idea of what oversight for them should be. That there should be some, but with an unbiased third party. He wasn't even on Iron Man's side, he just wanted to eviscerate Bucky.
I wonder if Bucky will make an appearance in the Black Panther solo movie to help out? BP can give him a new vibranium arm! I doubt it.
Huge fan of Civil War and I think the OP's interpretation of Cap's motivations (and everyone else's) are completely backwards. It's not that Cap is being emotional and wants to save his friend and Iron Man is being logical, it's totally the other way round. Iron Man is acting emotionally out of guilt and Cap is being completely logical and trying to get to the bottom of the situation rather than jump to conclusions.
All the motivations of why each character joined which team is pretty clear and (with the possible exception of Ant-Man and Spiderman who are basically the starry-eyed newbies leaping at the chance to follow the first big name superhero that asks for them which basically makes sense)
The main focus of the Captain America films has been that people constantly can't deal with the fact that yes Steve Rogers really is that good and pure in his intentions. This is admittedly contrived and wouldn't work in real life where the whole super-heroes working without supervision or accountability thing is obviously a bad idea but that's what fiction is for.
Civil War did all the stuff that I wanted from Age of Ultron so I'm happy. Having a much smaller focus let it have some real lasting consequences over and above killing off a few imaginary nameless civilians and occupying the MCU's presumably highly profitable construction industry.
The only thing i'm not sure about is the fact that nobody died. I was kind of surprised by that and I'm wondering how much longer the MCU can go without killing off any of its heroes (Quicksilver doesn't count, I mean a headliner rather than a glorified red shirt)
I'm in the "This should have been what Avengers 2 was". Not only did it give the characters room to breath without dragging but the airport fight and the final throwdown were great. Both sides were shown as being sorta-right. And it introduced Spider Man without being a bloated mess (friend's complaint: May looked too young).
There wasn't a city-fight against a swarm of sci-fi baddies (seriously, that airport scene. Especially with the comedy guys kicking ass) and the end was "what will happen next?" instead of "oh, that's going to happen next". Plus the promise of a good Spiderman is huge. Good running time, still wanted more. Great place for a movie to be.
Tonally though, I'm still not sure if the movie studio is capable of going into really dark places. They keep faking out deaths and dragging in more jokes when darker aspects are in play. With infinity war, either the squishy humans of the team and/or Vision are going to bite it, and I don't know if they can go really, truly sad without immediately pulling a switch and having a character use a space-rat as a microphone
I think you need to consider where Captain America is coming from at that time in the storyline. There was, very recently, a group that organized and controlled the movements of super-powered individuals; it was called S.H.I.E.L.D.. Remember what happened with them? Rogers has a very good reason to feel that his moral compass is more accurate and accountable regarding his activities than some third party bureaucracy made up of its own interests and agendas, subject to its own power-plays and internal compromises.
That said, that's motivation. The movie actually does a pretty good job of saying that both sides have perfectly good reasons for feeling the way that they do, and they both make some good points. It's a little odd to have the guy who was saying he had privatized world peace and under no circumstances would turn over the Iron Man suit to the government now saying he's ready for any kind of oversight the U.N. would see fit to install, but they do a decent job of getting him there organically.
I do somewhat wish they had given Rogers better reason to think Bucky innocent from the beginning than "He's my friend and he wouldn't do that." I kind of have to wonder if something ended up on the cutting room floor. What the movie shows us suggests that a brainwashed Bucky is perfectly capable of doing "that", and Rogers knows it. The fact that
Bucky was indeed innocent of the attack on the U.N. assembly comes out making Rogers less right than lucky... But score one for that infallible moral compass, I guess.
Still haven't seen BvS yet, so I can't comment on the comparison.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
