Captain America: Civil War (Joe & Anthony Russo, 5/6/2016) Movie • Page 7

I don't like it

 

Yeah, in comic book continuity, Peter got his powers at 15, and Miles at 13. I think Miles is currently in high school (and probably will be for a long time). Michael B Jordan and Donald Glover are both totally unrealistic suggestions. If they get a Peter trilogy down before bringing him into the mix, the actor who eventually ends up playing him could be an actual baby right now.

With Hollywood's obsession with young Spidey, actors aging in real time (unlike comic book drawings), and the whole MCU unlikely to be rebooted any time soon, I imagine they'll use Miles for maximum young Spidey time.

 

AOU or this trailer?

it just occurred to me that if they follow Ultimate continuity, Peter has to die before Miles is brought in. I wonder if that will ever happen.

 

AOU

 

I pretty much ignored the Marvel threads on ap as best I could because I have, well some interesting opinions on the MCU. But I am looking forward to this, I hope it's not as bad as the comic Civil War.

I am reserved about the tone of the film though, certainly from the trailer I don't see what Tony has done deserve his position.

 

Yeah I've heard almost exclusively bad things. I'm sure I'll get some enjoyment out of it. There'd fun to be had even with Iron Man 2, which is a really bad movie for the most part.

 

AOU gets a lot of deserved criticism, but as a thorough Marvel fan, I really liked it through its flaws.

Hawkeye, in spite of being almost the opposite of his comic book counterpart, was great. Vision was cool in his limited screen time. Wanda was really cool, too. I got a kick out of seeing the Avengers on multiple continents in one film. I own it and rewatched it a couple months ago with a friend who hadn't seen it yet, and I still dug it a lot.

They could also bring in Miles via alternate dimensional nonsense. If they get the rights to F4 back, they could find a way to write a story with the Maker that also factors in that Spider-Man.

It's also worth noting that the Ultimate Peter Parker was revealed to be alive and possibly semi-immortal via strong healing factor in the year before Secret Wars. (I imagine this version perished with the Ultimate universe in Secret Wars.) So, they could kill Peter, bring in Miles, and then eventually bring Peter back and use both.

(A nerdy footnote: The Ultimate story where Peter and Norman return implies that the chemical responsible for both of their powers gave them powerful healing factors, but both characters are probably gone, and Bendis probably knew they would be when he wrote that. My theory is that he wanted to give Miles a powerful healing factor so that, if the company tried to kill him off down the road, he could be easily revived. lol.)

 

I'm gonna try to find it at Redbox this weekend. When it came out I was starting to get really burned out on these. I did love Ant Man though, so excited to see him in this.

I read the first two issues of Secret Wars and as a casual fan I had no idea what was happening

 

I liked AoU when I saw it, the more i thought about it the more I disliked it.

 

Secret Wars is probably my favorite massive superhero event I've ever read, but a lot of the appeal is that it was the culmination of so much Jonathan Hickman Marvel work beforehand. Avengers ran for 44 issues, New Avengers for 33 issues, there was a 6-issue miniseries event called Infinity that has to be read with the others, and Secret Wars was 9 issues plus a Free Comic Book Day #0. So, the entire saga approaches one hundred issues, lol. PLUS, it has some callbacks to Hickman's previous Fantastic Four epic, which ran for I think 50 or so issues.

 

You know who I don't like?

 

i really, really wish they had done more with steve and tony in the MCU. the best parts of AOU for me were their scenes. i have about a million ideas as to how they could have done better (seriously, they're BASICALLY IN LOVE in every comic arc i've ever bothered to read) and i've read doubly digit fan fics that honestly capture every character better than the film writers.

 

poor Pepper.

 

I feel like their bickering in the Avengers films was meant to help foreshadow Civil War. I will say that they succeeded at making a convincing character arc from the "screw you authority" of Iron Man to the "I am authority" of Civil War.

The drawback of their preparation, of course, is that much of the emotional impact was lost. Steve and Tony aren't friends until halfway through Avengers, at which point the focus is on the invasion. Then, in the second film they share, they begin and end as friends but are split on Ultron and Vision for most of the runtime.

I'm good at filling in the gaps, so I'm convinced that they're friends, but they definitely told more than they showed. Just a few more one-on-one friendship moments would have helped a lot.

As an avid Marvel fan, though, I can easily overlook that misstep, lol.

 

Alright, I watched AOU and enjoyed it pretty well. My only real complaint is how formulaic it was. Most of the criticisms I saw were pretty overblown The stuff about Natasha being reduced to a love interest -- if anything Bruce was her love interest. Ultron was fine. I didn't think it was as overstuffed as it was made out to be either. And I really liked Elizabeth Olsen.

Also holy shit Linda Cardellini

 

The criticisms were all based on reality, but yeah, it's still an enjoyable film. I agree on basically all counts except maybe Natasha; I'd agree with you on the direction of the romance, but I don't like her being paired off with someone. I imagine it feeling overstuffed is relative to expectations, so seeing it after the complaints probably helped.

Did you know Linda was in this before seeing it? I adored every scene she was in.

 

Yeah my expectations were pretty low, so that probably benefited my enjoyment

I had no idea she was in it and I actually didn't realize it was her until her last scene.

 

Such a pleasant surprise (though I had read that she was in it beforehand). I hope she shows up again, maybe a surprise cameo in Civil War? Kinda looked like Steve was in the Barton house in the trailer.

 

Natasha felt like a completely different character in AOU. Felt like I was watching a weird alternate universe movie at some points

 

As I said, I agree and also didn't like how Natasha was handled in the film. Poor choice on Whedon's part. BUT, just to be fair, Natasha is a very guarded character personality-wise, plus she's a trained spy. It's certainly possible that she just kept the part of herself that wanted to escape hidden from everyone until she found someone she related to.

Of course if that's the case, they'll have to address that eventually, which I wouldn't like. That's not the version of Black Widow I care for. As such, I'd rather if they treat it as a hiccup, ignore it, and move on, just like what happens to various disliked decisions in comic book history. I just personally wouldn't use it being a curveball as why I don't like it, though I know there's more that's wrong with it than that.

While I don't like the implications for the characters, it is interesting to look at AOU as an isolated film (easier to do than people give it credit for, in spite of all the references and set-up built in) and compare the various character arcs. Natasha wanted to escape the Avengers world and start a family; Clint already had a family he wanted to go home to; Bruce wanted to run away from everyone and everything; Tony wanted Ultron to eliminate the need for Avengers and left at the end; Steve wished he could be reunited with his past but, knowing that it would be impossible, settled for the "home" of Avengers. Almost everyone wanted to get out. Almost makes you wonder if Joss Whedon's desire to move away from the Marvel Studios machine influenced his character arcs.

... I have so many thoughts on so many things, what is wrong with me.

 

I got this same feeling. She's felt the most different to me, like going back to IM2 and how they used her (blech) to now, it almost feels like each movie she's someone else.

 

@Tim I don't necessarily disagree with that, but the problem is that it was written poorly. Finding out you can't conceive children is a pretty traumatic event for some people. I've seen it really destroy people who didn't even want to have children. I've also seen people who always hoped to have children shrug it off because of all the other options. My issue is that referenced that as making her a monster. The desire for love and companionship and family wasn't my issue. I get that and I think if down properly, it could be an interesting arc watching her struggle with being an assassin and her upbringing and how that translates to her being part of a family and a potential maternal figure. But again, it was all so poorly written and they characterized her in AOU in away that I couldn't draw a line to it from her past appearances.

 

Oh man I forgot about that monster line, so weird.

 

Oh, I totally agree with it being poorly written. I think Whedon was trying to say that he being made into a killing machine was what made her a "monster," but that's not what was conveyed, and the whole thing was messy and not in line with what I know of or want from the character. I don't defend the decision or execution. I just don't think a character like Natasha necessarily needs to be consistent through all films, though the seeming sincerity of her conversation with Bruce was all the more reason to not like it.

 

I mean, for the most part, the only common thread (in my opinion) is that it's the same actress and she has bad as action sequences. Maybe I need to go back and watch everything in order, but she just doesn't feel like one character.