Captain America: Civil War thread

FAN: Discuss various fictional worlds that don't qualify for SF.

Moderator: Steve

Post Reply
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3987
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

biostem wrote:
Khaat wrote:Well, he was happy to tell Christine Everheart about Stark-tech "intellicrops". Robot drones doing the actual farm-work probably isn't as PR-friendly (especially after the whole thing with Ultron).

Make 'em look like cute little Wall-E's and you'll be fine.
Couple that with some promo videos showing someone manning the controls not unlike the remote-controlled drones of today to reassure the public that ultimately it's a human calling the shots 8)
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3987
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

A couple of points of mine that seemingly got lost in among the political discussions that I'll reiterate:

Does the cradle seen in Ultron still exist? Because that seems like it could do a decent job of fixing up Rhodey 8)

I thought of a theory about Bucky's mechanical arm- it's possible that it wasn't made entirely of Vibranium, since by its nature it has to have a bunch of servos and other components that aren't made of the material. It may well have a Vibranium outer shell, but even the smallest gap between the segments will allow a portion of the repulsor blast through and destroy its internals.

And something else: I'd have thought Rogers would still be pissed at Stark at the end, given that his goal was essentially "Kill Bucky", while Cap's goal was "Protect Bucky".
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11862
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Crazedwraith »

EnterpriseSovereign wrote:A couple of points of mine that seemingly got lost in among the political discussions that I'll reiterate:

Does the cradle seen in Ultron still exist? Because that seems like it could do a decent job of fixing up Rhodey 8)
Presumably. But it did flesh afaik not bones and new spines column. Ultron did significantly more but with vibranium they don't have
and mind-stone knowledge they might not have. It's unclear how much info Vision gets from the stone.
I thought of a theory about Bucky's mechanical arm- it's possible that it wasn't made entirely of Vibranium, since by its nature it has to have a bunch of servos and other components that aren't made of the material. It may well have a Vibranium outer shell, but even the smallest gap between the segments will allow a portion of the repulsor blast through and destroy its internals.
Was the Arm's composition ever stated? It could be some home grown russian super-metal not even Vibranium and simply not tough enough to stand up to the unibeam.
And something else: I'd have thought Rogers would still be pissed at Stark at the end, given that his goal was essentially "Kill Bucky", while Cap's goal was "Protect Bucky".
I think Cap's sympathetic enough to realise going kill-crazy when you see you're mum being brutally murdered is kind of understandable. At that point, damage is done and it's time to mend bridges and realise how much your other friend has been hurting.

He was never unsympathetic to Stark. He just ranked Bucky higher.
User avatar
SCRawl
Has a bad feeling about this.
Posts: 4191
Joined: 2002-12-24 03:11pm
Location: Burlington, Canada

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by SCRawl »

Is there any reason to believe that the Winter Soldier's arm was fabricated from Vibranium at all?
73% of all statistics are made up, including this one.

I'm waiting as fast as I can.
User avatar
NeoGoomba
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2002-12-22 11:35am
Location: Upstate New York

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by NeoGoomba »

SCRawl wrote:Is there any reason to believe that the Winter Soldier's arm was fabricated from Vibranium at all?
There was a point when Black Panther and Winter Soldier tussled when something Black Panther wore reacted/resonated/whatever with Bucky's arm, and it made T'Challa react like he wasn't really expecting it. That may be what is leading people in that direction.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know...tomorrow."
-Agent Kay
User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Master
Posts: 1032
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Khaat »

EnterpriseSovereign wrote:Does the cradle seen in Ultron still exist? Because that seems like it could do a decent job of fixing up Rhodey 8)
Yes, but despite the cast and story involving them all, this was a Captain America film, not an Avengers film. Dr. Cho and her tech could possibly help Rhoades. It replaced skin well enough that "you can't tell the difference" (except Mrs. Barton could - or said she could), and the cradle was building an entire body (not just skin) for (Vision). That last could have been the vibranium, the mind stone, or a combination of all three.

But it's also just as likely Stark broke contact with Dr. Cho over the Ultron thing. Her staff were all killed, she was injured, and her research was set back by Ultron's general nastiness. Cho may not be able to repair/rebuild the cradle. Or willing, for Stark.
Rule #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.
Rule #2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule #3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule #4: Be outraged.
Rule #5: Don’t make compromises.
User avatar
SAMAS
Mecha Fanboy
Posts: 4078
Joined: 2002-10-20 09:10pm

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by SAMAS »

I doubt they broke ties so easily. Besides, Cyberization is a thing that has been done (and this being comics, undone) to Rhodey before.
Image
Not an armored Jigglypuff

"I salute your genetic superiority, now Get off my planet!!" -- Adam Stiener, 1st Somerset Strikers
User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2488
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: California

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Darth Yan »

Some points made on tumblr is that Tony is still kinda hypocritical and selfish even as he tries to change

"The funny thing is, Tony would never sign the Accords if someone put them in front of him the way he put them in front of the Avengers.

He wouldn't. He would have a team of lawyers look it over first.

He's a hypocrite throughout the entire film. His justifications for things only exist in his own mind. The film never justifies him, it does the opposite.

I don't see how people defend him at all.

They could defend the idea of the Accords, but not what Tony does.

Right?? Like Tony would never do that considering how he's reacted to the government trying to get involved in controlling him in the past but he expects them all to sign on because he knows best (despite massively fucking up multiple times in the past). But the thing is as much as he says this about all of them and accountability and it does have to do with his own guilt ultimately he knows this won't have the same consequences for him (and it doesn't they end up in prison when he's done the same things) so he doesn't really care. He wants them to do what he wants and that's it. I agree partially with some of the ideas of the Accords because I get the concern of say a country like Wakanda with having super powers American based pseudo-military units flying around without any oversight but like Tony's motivations & the Accords as presented in the MCU are not good.

I wonder what clauses are in there are protect the Iron Man suit, because no way in Hell is he letting them get his hands on it, not after finding out that the Senator who was after it the hardest was actually HYDRA,

I mean, I know it's just a headcanon and the movie doesn't say, but it defies belief to think that Tony just decided, out of nowhere, to trust the government iwth his suits.

So Tony's had months for his lawyers to comb through the contract, he's probably inserted language that protects him (and probably one him), and then he turns around and expects anyone else to just sign the thing, no questions asked?

(And even more, to work with Ross – he knows Ross's track record, he knows what Ross was in charge of, and he knows that Ross views people only as weapons, and treats them as such. Why is Tony thinking that this is a good thing?)

I know there's supposed to be two sides to the issue, each with good reasons to be on that side, but I'm not seeing Tony's side at all, and I wonder if the Vision is being blinded by loyalty, because Vision should have been able to look on line and see the kind of crap that the Accords was going to produce.

And Rhodey? Well, he's military, and one thing we're taught in the military is that 'just following orders' is no excuse.

King T'Challa is entering into this in good faith, and Natasha is keeping the lines of communication open, but the others?

Tony thinks that he can make it all happen because of him. That's always been his biggest flaw.

This has consistently been his character arc. He was a spoiled playboy who lived off of weapons contracts until he had to live a day-in-the-life of one of his victims, then realized that he was wrong.

But, he never really learn his lesson. He didn't want to let go of his genius enough to care about other people. Like his fans, he thinks that his intellect and connections makes him morally superior. I mean, his whole relationship with Pepper is about this very struggle, and she left him before CW. Whelp.

The fact that they had Tony create Ultron instead of Pym (like in the comics) was a sure sign that he was going to fall down, because he's just trying to replicate his genius. He's so convinced that he's still in control. Which is great. It was a good story arc in the comics when Pym became a villain, too.

And they actually had Pym hate Howard in the MCU. *shrugs*

Also, great point about him working with Ross knowing what Ross stands for. That is very much canon. Which makes me think Tony probably gave Ross something in exchange. Maybe himself as a contractor?

I don't think Tony will have anyone on his side except Rhodes? And even Rhodes was like, this is really screwed up? And I'm also 1000% annoyed that Rhodes isn't like "I'm just doing this because we're friends" and they used the military excuse when both Steve and Sam are ex-military? Like, there was not a national emergency here, I felt like they just made Rhodes into Tony's sidekick and I'm totally over it and I hope he turns on him, tbh.

With the Vision, I think they made it clear that he was rejecting his "programming" and Tony noticed that Vision is starting to think for himself and wasn't capable of that before.

T'Challa and Tasha might both be diplomatic, but Tony chewed Tasha out for being a spy and a double-agent because he's a dick who likes to make people feel guilty about stuff. T'Challa won't owe him jack shit. I mean, I kind of hate Tony, so, I'd love him to give the US Iron Men to infiltrate Wakanda and Black Panther basically crushes his technological soul. :}"
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Simon_Jester »

Darth Yan wrote:They could defend the idea of the Accords, but not what Tony does.

Right?? Like Tony would never do that considering how he's reacted to the government trying to get involved in controlling him in the past but he expects them all to sign on because he knows best (despite massively fucking up multiple times in the past)...
I think Stark has changed a lot since the days of Iron Man 2 when he was all like "I have successfully privatized world peace!"

Back then, he was basically the only superhero on Earth for all practical purposes. Cap was still an icicle, the Hulk was basically a more destructive version of Bigfoot, and so on. The only thing capable of threatening Iron Man was another Iron Man- that is, someone else stealing his technology and using it against him. Sure, he'd gotten burned because of his own irresponsibility and recklessness and other faults

He was psychologically on top of the world, or would have been except that his own tech was killing him. And he invented his way out of that too.

Everything since that point has basically been Stark experiencing trauma and batterings, nearly being killed in battle, losing his home, having his beloved transformed into some kind of weird posthuman fire-being, having his inventions turn on him. Through much of this time he's been crying out for help, and no one really responded by helping him meaningfully. So now he's trying to invent his way out of this problem, like he invented his way out of captivity, and betrayal, and lethal disease, and vengeful enemies, back in his glory days. But his first attempt to do that was Ultron and that failed horribly.

So now Stark has so much invested in finding a way to "put the world in a suit of armor" that will solve the problems of security and control that he's compulsive over, that he's acting in a way that is completely out out of character compared to his personality of five or seven years ago.
This has consistently been his character arc. He was a spoiled playboy who lived off of weapons contracts until he had to live a day-in-the-life of one of his victims, then realized that he was wrong.

But, he never really learn his lesson. He didn't want to let go of his genius enough to care about other people. Like his fans, he thinks that his intellect and connections makes him morally superior. I mean, his whole relationship with Pepper is about this very struggle, and she left him before CW. Whelp.
That's a valid alternate take on what I'm saying, I think. Stark's one great strength was his power to invent his way out of his problems, to build and create things that could defeat his enemies, overcome his frailties, and save the day.

A more... rational... person would have stopped to rethink his strategy after his life's been getting worse for three movies in a row on account of his inventions no longer being enough to do what he needs of them.

Stark is having very severe trouble doing this- although to be fair to him, no one else is giving him a hand up. Cap had people to help him to adjust to the new 21st century. Banner has everybody and their cousin Fred trying to help him stay calm (obviously). Thor has (or at least had, the last time Stark saw him) a loving, supportive family and a whole country that needs him. Who and what does Stark have, to support him emotionally in hard times rather than force him back onto his old, failed coping strategies?
I don't think Tony will have anyone on his side except Rhodes? And even Rhodes was like, this is really screwed up? And I'm also 1000% annoyed that Rhodes isn't like "I'm just doing this because we're friends" and they used the military excuse when both Steve and Sam are ex-military? Like, there was not a national emergency here, I felt like they just made Rhodes into Tony's sidekick and I'm totally over it and I hope he turns on him, tbh.
I can see it. On the other hand, I feel like one of the things about Rhodes' character is that he's always been more comfortable playing second fiddle. To some extent they intentionally play this for laughs, even. But Rhodes sticks with the hierarchy and friendships he's comfortable with. The only time we've ever seen him go against that was in Iron Man 2 when he basically had to be ordered to go steal an Iron Man suit to deal with Tony. And he was angry about the whole thing, without that anger it wouldn't have worked, and even then it was a case of one of his loyalties conflicting with another.

Arguably more so than Cap, Rhodes is a soldier, he doesn't seem to have an identity outside of fitting into an army.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
User avatar
Gaidin
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2646
Joined: 2004-06-19 12:27am
Contact:

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Gaidin »

Darth Yan wrote: They could defend the idea of the Accords, but not what Tony does.
I gotta kinda cut a long post down to this because what I have to say that agrees(or not as the case may be) with you sort of goes with this and there's not a need to include...all.

This is one of those strange films that I'm not sure has a protagonist. Oddly. I think Tony and Steve are just caught in the middle and on opposite sides of each other when the accords come out. The closest might be T'Challa who had a fully legitimate arc in the movie. But that's another debate about another character. Tony and Steve had fully legitimate arcs as well, but I would still maintain they're more caught in the middle as they keep switching from the feel of antagonist to protagonist feel and back as they move on each other. The true antagonists being Ross and Zemo, albeit totally separate from each other with different agendas.

Ross builds the Accords from a foundation of four majorly public incidents(why he doesn't use the hulk rage in the port city I don't know) and accuses the Avengers of having no oversight for any of them. The irony of the movie is that they were using the results of two major attacks where the Avengers or members of the Avengers took orders from official Agencies in the movie The Avengers and The Winter Soldier so the Sokovia Accords are flawed from the start when they use New York and Washington, DC as evidence against them being an independent group with no oversight.

Again, I have no idea why he doesn't use the hulk rage in the port city. Where an Avenger is actually breaking things and his own team has to put him down. Make your case better Ross.

In Washington, Steve was given his mission by Fury when he was Director of SHIELD overseen by the World Security Council and nobody took him off the mission. Hell instead they have the brilliant idea of trying to arrest and/or kill him. Worthy of a slow clap there. The corruption of SHIELD is discovered and is discovered to be so deep that SHIELD is outright taken down as there is no way to clean it up.

In New York? Well, characters want to call the concept of the Avengers dangerously arrogant? They actually take the orders of SHIELD to protect Earth from an alien invasion and then are blamed instead of the invading aliens? Who is blamed for the damage when a six man team is able to stop an alien invasion AND a nuke? Which side is more arrogant? Which side is more flawed?

Legitimately, that gives us the left out port city breakdown of Hulk he never touches, Sokovia, and their fight against Rumlow.

So like I said, you gotta lie to get an international treaty passed, so that makes it ok because: "Sokovia". Remind you of something in the real world in 2003? Only, I don't think the real UN fell for it in 2003. I'm not sure how many of us buy this, but we may say 'realpolitik' and shrug. I will understand. Either way. They lied. Ross though, Ross is an underhanded weasel who wants people like the Avengers under his thumb and will do anything he has to in order to get them there. The difference? He's adapted after getting his ass utterly handed to him in The Incredible Hulk. But in the end he lost mostly thanks to Zemo driving Steve(and many of the Avengers and potential Avengers) away from the Avengers as well as driving Tony away from Ross. Ross got utterly played by his own ego because he can't listen to what his own team of superheroes is telling him. He just wants his team of weapons. That's not how this crap works. Listen to your people.

Ross and Zemo. The movie's antagonists. Ruining the ability for the government to call on the Avengers in any dependable way anyway because now Tony doesn't trust the government regardless after they wouldn't listen to him after he found independent evidence. And, well, Steve has an independent backer for the most part and has extended a hand to Tony and with a little back and forth after a few movies and time passed, the Avengers will mostly be the Avengers and screw Ross.
User avatar
NeoGoomba
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2002-12-22 11:35am
Location: Upstate New York

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by NeoGoomba »

Yeah Gaidin, you pretty much nailed how Ross played fast and loose with rules and events and how he misplayed his hand. So now instead of an American-based Avengers Ross can dominate, we get the Wakanda-based Secret Avengers (basically) that he can't touch, plus whomever remains with the "official" Avengers (Stark, Vision, Spider-Man I guess). The similar lies-backed case to the WMD situation in the early 2000's is an apt one, I think.

And as for why Ross didn't mention Harlem, I'm assuming he wants to keep his name out of the mud at all costs, and he was a highly prominent player in unleashing Abomination(a government-sanctioned monster!!) upon NYC. That is just classic political revisionism at work.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know...tomorrow."
-Agent Kay
User avatar
hunter5
Padawan Learner
Posts: 377
Joined: 2010-01-25 09:34pm

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by hunter5 »

I always figured Ross tried to avoid mentioning Hulk related incidents because they could be easily turned back on him.
User avatar
Gaidin
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2646
Joined: 2004-06-19 12:27am
Contact:

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Gaidin »

NeoGoomba wrote: And as for why Ross didn't mention Harlem, I'm assuming he wants to keep his name out of the mud at all costs, and he was a highly prominent player in unleashing Abomination(a government-sanctioned monster!!) upon NYC. That is just classic political revisionism at work.
To be clear, I don't mean Harlem, I mean the port city in Avengers: Age of Ultron who's name I don't remember where Iron Man has to take a raged Hulk down solo. I only ever used incidences after the Avengers became the Avengers. Hell we could've used London too.
User avatar
NeoGoomba
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2002-12-22 11:35am
Location: Upstate New York

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by NeoGoomba »

Whoops, I misread your post then!
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know...tomorrow."
-Agent Kay
User avatar
Civil War Man
NERRRRRDS!!!
Posts: 3790
Joined: 2005-01-28 03:54am

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Civil War Man »

Gaidin wrote:
NeoGoomba wrote: And as for why Ross didn't mention Harlem, I'm assuming he wants to keep his name out of the mud at all costs, and he was a highly prominent player in unleashing Abomination(a government-sanctioned monster!!) upon NYC. That is just classic political revisionism at work.
To be clear, I don't mean Harlem, I mean the port city in Avengers: Age of Ultron who's name I don't remember where Iron Man has to take a raged Hulk down solo. I only ever used incidences after the Avengers became the Avengers. Hell we could've used London too.
I think the post above yours explains it well, in that Ross going "Looks how much collateral damage this Hulk rampage caused!" inevitably brings up the counter-argument of "You've personally caused more than a few of those rampages yourself, almost always in heavily populated areas no less, so how is that an argument in favor of us submitting ourselves to your authority?"

Also, it's likely that he didn't bring up those incidents because Thor and Banner weren't at that meeting. He would have specifically wanted to choose footage and incidents that would have an effect on the people there since that would make it easier to guilt them into signing the Accords. None of the other Avengers were in London when Thor was fighting Malekith, and the only other Avenger involved in the Hulk's rampage in South Africa was Stark (since the others were incapacitated), and he was already on board.
User avatar
Lord Revan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12211
Joined: 2004-05-20 02:23pm
Location: Zone:classified

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Lord Revan »

We should also remember that Ross approved (relucnantly but still) of unleashing the Hulk against the abbomination, something Banner if present would point out.
I may be an idiot, but I'm a tolerated idiot
"I think you completely missed the point of sigs. They're supposed to be completely homegrown in the fertile hydroponics lab of your mind, dried in your closet, rolled, and smoked...
Oh wait, that's marijuana..."Einhander Sn0m4n
User avatar
Tsyroc
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13746
Joined: 2002-07-29 08:35am
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Tsyroc »

Lord Revan wrote:We should also remember that Ross approved (relucnantly but still) of unleashing the Hulk against the abbomination, something Banner if present would point out.
Ross also shares some of the blame for the Abomination. He's the one who gave Blonsky the mothballed super soldier serum. Yeah it suped him up but also appears to have done a number on him mentally that ended up in him making Dr. Sterns turn him into the Abomination.

Speaking of Sterns and Blonsky. When are we going to see or hear about either one of them again? I'd like to see a redesigned Abomination make it into one of the films again.
By the pricking of my thumb,
Something wicked this way comes.
Open, locks,
Whoever knocks.
User avatar
SCRawl
Has a bad feeling about this.
Posts: 4191
Joined: 2002-12-24 03:11pm
Location: Burlington, Canada

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by SCRawl »

Tsyroc wrote:
Lord Revan wrote:We should also remember that Ross approved (relucnantly but still) of unleashing the Hulk against the abbomination, something Banner if present would point out.
Speaking of Sterns and Blonsky. When are we going to see or hear about either one of them again? I'd like to see a redesigned Abomination make it into one of the films again.
Sterns, to the best of my knowledge, is dead-ended after the failure of the Hulk franchise.

Blonsky was mentioned in the Marvel One-Shot "The Consultant" in the conversation between Sitwell and pre-death Coulson as being locked away. Maybe he'll stay that way forever.
73% of all statistics are made up, including this one.

I'm waiting as fast as I can.
User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13073
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Elheru Aran »

I wouldn't be surprised if they pull out Sterns in the future for Defenders or Agents of SHIELD on Netflix. I could see him being a fit on one of those shows as a behind-the-scenes mastermind.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.
User avatar
Lost Soal
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2614
Joined: 2002-10-22 06:25am
Location: Back in Newcastle.

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Lost Soal »

I'm still waiting for Gravaton. They set him of On Agents then just forgot about him.
"May God stand between you and harm in all the empty places where you must walk." - Ancient Egyptian Blessing

Ivanova is always right.
I will listen to Ivanova.
I will not ignore Ivanova's recommendations. Ivanova is God.
AND, if this ever happens again, Ivanova will personally rip your lungs out! - Babylon 5 Mantra

There is no "I" in TEAM. There is a ME however.
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by The Romulan Republic »

Lost Soal wrote:I'm still waiting for Gravaton. They set him of On Agents then just forgot about him.
Given his power level, I feel like he might make an end-of-series grand finale villain.

On the other hand, he's largely disconnected with the rest of the series at this point.
User avatar
ArmorPierce
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:54pm
Location: Born and raised in Brooklyn, unfornately presently in Jersey

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by ArmorPierce »

In light of the comics depiction of Captain America coming out as a agent of hydra all along, has anyone changed their opinion regarding supporting team Captain America's position that there should be an absence of social oversight with regard to their activities?

In my opinion, just because you feel like you KNOW he's a good guy does not free them from a formal oversight process. After all, much of Trump's supporters KNOWS he is right too.

That said, I doubt that they are going to pursue that story arc in the movies... but perhaps they will follow a lite version of that story arc, with him making a wrong decision that could have been avoided.
Brotherhood of the Monkey @( !.! )@
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. ~Steve Prefontaine
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11862
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Crazedwraith »

Gosh you are an idiot with a bug up your ass. I don't recall anybody really arguing that oversights a bad idea or wrong. Just that the specific implementation of it in the film was shite and given Steve's experiences in the MCU it was very understandable he had concerns.

The stupid comic book story doesnt change that at all.
User avatar
Civil War Man
NERRRRRDS!!!
Posts: 3790
Joined: 2005-01-28 03:54am

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by Civil War Man »

ArmorPierce wrote:In light of the comics depiction of Captain America coming out as a agent of hydra all along, has anyone changed their opinion regarding supporting team Captain America's position that there should be an absence of social oversight with regard to their activities?

In my opinion, just because you feel like you KNOW he's a good guy does not free them from a formal oversight process. After all, much of Trump's supporters KNOWS he is right too.

That said, I doubt that they are going to pursue that story arc in the movies... but perhaps they will follow a lite version of that story arc, with him making a wrong decision that could have been avoided.
Since you seem to be arguing that Captain America is in the wrong for not signing the Accords because of an unrelated comic storyline where he's secretly evil, let's take a step back and look at it from another direction.

Who will you trust with this oversight? Ross is only Secretary of State because his predecessor was a Hydra agent, along with a large percentage of SHIELD's personnel and several members of the US government (including at least one Senator). Not long before that, the VP was arrested for being part of an AIM-based conspiracy to assassinate the President. Would you trust the US to be part of this UN committee to oversee the Avengers, considering that they've been infiltrated by supervillains on multiple occasions? How will you ensure that the members of the committee from other countries are not similarly compromised? Are there assurances that none of them are already compromised, and that the Accords themselves were designed as a way to cripple the Avengers so they'd have no legal way to counter Hydra's next big scheme?

As Crazedwraith said, some form of accountability would be good, but the Accords as presented are absolutely ripe for abuse, with the underwater Super Gitmo and the overt denial of due process probably only being the tip of the iceberg. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3987
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: Captain America: Civil War thread

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

Did anyone else think that Vision wearing normal clothes looked just plain weird? If his goal was to blend in, it failed spectacularly :lol: Also, when Scarlet Witch neutralised him, for a moment it looked like she was going to tear the infinity stone from his head :mrgreen:
Post Reply