Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peter T Chattaway

Captain America: Civil War

Recommended Posts

Links to threads on the comic-book character, Captain America: The First Avenger (2011), The Avengers (2012), Thor: The Dark World (2013), Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) and Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015). (His shield also appeared in the first two Iron Man movies, as well as The Incredible Hulk sort of, but hey.)

 

- - -

 

‘Captain America 3′ Takes Shape at Marvel (EXCLUSIVE)

Marvel is still focusing on “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” which arrives in April, but sources tell Variety that Anthony and Joe Russo will be back in the director’s chair for a third installment, even though it hasn’t yet been officially greenlit.

Marvel and Russo’s reps had no comment.

Negotiations wouldn’t begin till after ‘Winter Soldier’ bows but sources say Marvel has been so impressed with the production of “Winter Soldier,” as well as with strong results from recent test screenings, that the studio has moved fast to attach the brothers to the next installment. . . .

TheWrap.com, January 28

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert Downey Jr. to Join ‘Captain America 3′ (EXCLUSIVE)

Robert Downey Jr. is on the verge of signing on to “Captain America 3,” a move that would bring the Civil War storyline from Marvel’s comicbooks to the bigscreen and trigger the start of a new phase of movies from Marvel Studios.

The actor is in final negotiations to play billionaire Tony Stark in the third installment, which is slated to begin production in the Spring for a May 6, 2016, release. Downey is already set to suit up as Iron Man for next year’s “The Avengers: Age of Ultron” and “The Avengers 3.”

The deal is significant for the Marvel cinematic universe considering the plot will pit Stark against Captain America’s alter-ego Steve Rogers, played by Chris Evans, as they feud over the Superhero Registration Act, which forces anyone with superhuman abilities to reveal their identities to the U.S. government and agree to act as a police force for the authorities.

Stark supports the program, but Rogers does not, saying it threatens civil liberties, causing sides to be taken and Rogers, among others, to go on the run to avoid arrest. The moral question and battle with his Avengers teammate essentially makes Stark a villain of sorts in “Captain America 3,” providing Downey with a meaty role he could play out into future Marvel films, including a fourth “Avengers.” . . .

Variety, October 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, one of the pix from the announcement event shows this film as "Captain America: Serpent Society." Any idea why that is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, one of the pix from the announcement event shows this film as "Captain America: Serpent Society." Any idea why that is?

It was a fake-out. They announced it as that when they announced the whole slew of films and then, I assume, did an Apple "one more thing!" and switched it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumour has it that *this* is the movie in which the third version of Spider-Man will make his first appearance, before appearing in his first solo film in 2017.

 

So... Spider-Man *and* Iron Man as guest stars in a Captain America movie. Hmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perfect blend

Spoiler

of omg Spider Man

Spoiler

and wow Spider Man is a kid that sounds pretty reluctant to be in the middle of a battle that Tony probably talked him into

 

Edited by Justin Hanvey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Josh Larsen's sum-up on Letterboxd has me begrudgingly thinking about actually seeing this in a theater. 

Quote

To destroy or not to destroy. That is the question, both for the superheroes anchoring our biggest blockbusters and the filmmakers who bring them to the screen. Critics and audiences alike are tiring of buildings being toppled, cities being leveled and innocent bystanders being dismissed — partly because these climaxes are aesthetically enervating and partly because they’re morally troubling. And so it’s no longer entertaining for the next comic-book property to be bigger and louder than the last one. There’s a hunger for a superhero flick that’s lighter on its feet, smarter in its conception and more personal in its execution. Captain America: Civil War is all of these things.

P.S. I finally got to meet Larsen at the Calvin Festival of Faith and Writing where he invited me, Paul Harrill, and CaPC's Kevin McLenithan to participate in a discussion of the past, present, and future of "Christian film criticism." We packed a lot of great conversation into a very short time.

Edited by Overstreet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Overstreet said:

Josh Larsen's sum-up on Letterboxd has me begrudgingly thinking about actually seeing this in a theater. 

FWIW, my perspective

(I had a blast watching it, for the most part. On the way home my 18yo son and I (mostly him) ripped the plot to shreds.

First some of the good: 

Quote

Civil War has nearly all the strengths of the best Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) movies so far, as well as some of the weaknesses. Among other things, it proves it’s possible for a Marvel movie to juggle an ensemble as large as Avengers: Age of Ultron … without collapsing under its own weight…

Civil War also demonstrates that the right way to do a “versus” movie pitting heroes against one another is by building relationships — and tensions — over time, then allowing characters to fall out over meaningful practical and personal issues. That way you don’t have strangers dutifully duking it out for essentially no reason beyond contrived plot requirements: just one of many, many things that went wrong with Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.

Now some of the not so good: 

Quote

If you think about it (and you might be happier not doing so), it’s hard to avoid concluding that the film’s real protagonist and hero is not Cap, but Iron Man — and that Cap is effectively, if not the accidental villain, at least the misguided antagonist…

…the movie succumbs to a variation on the pitfall affecting most of the Mission: Impossible movies: Namely, the Impossible Missions Force is itself (like alcohol in Homer Simpson’s famous aphorism) the cause of, as well as the solution to, all our problems.

In a way Civil War is handicapped by an inevitable but limiting decision made in the first Captain America movie: to reimagine the star-spangled Avenger for a global audience as a hero of decency and valor unmoored from specifically American commitments. Disney’s big-screen Captain America never talks about democracy, constitutional freedoms, or civil rights. Chinese moviegoers buy a lot of tickets…

I could probably overlook these issues, if only the filmmakers would stick their landing like a movie should. In the MCU, every movie is a middle movie, like an episode in a TV series, or the latest issue of a comic book.

 

Edited by SDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** No real spoilers, but if you're super-sensitive about that stuff, might as well skip this post. ***

I think re-watching The Winter Soldier on Netflix a couple nights ago (and Ant-Man a couple nights before that) might have been a mistake. One can only handle so much Marvel at one time.

Marvel's really getting good at the digital de-aging thing, aren't they?

A part of me is glad that this movie acknowledges the strange dissonance between the final scenes of Iron Man 3 and the opening scene of Age of Ultron (first Tony destroys all his Iron Man suits, then he shows up in one again), but another part of me really didn't want to be reminded of that dissonance. Filling a continuity hole is best left to Marvel No-Prizers, methinks. (Anyone else here ever see Battlestar Galactica: The Plan? That miniseries was about nothing *but* retconning and filling the continuity gaps.) (And now I'm wondering how this film's depiction of the Ross-Stark relationship squares with the Agent Coulson short film 'The Consultant' -- which, itself, was meant to fill a continuity gap between the Iron Man and Incredible Hulk movies.)

Is the bit with the car an example of "shrinking world syndrome"?

I want to know who Daniel Bruhl is talking to on his cell phone. Maybe it would explain how a guy like him could somehow infiltrate SHIELD and all the rest of it. (I mean, being infiltrated by HYDRA is one thing, but *this*...)

I kind of loved seeing Vision and Captain America on opposite sides of the "civil war". Each character represents something pure, maybe even purely "good", so pitting them *against* each other was interesting (even if their actual combat was mostly with other people).

Tony Stark really owns this movie, no matter whose name is in the title. So much of what happens here is motivated by his guilt, his memories, his desire to make things right.

So Captain America refuses to submit to the United Nations, eh? The Left Behind fans will love this one.

Black Panther's introduction works very well as part of the story. Spider-Man's, eh, not so much; you can tell he was shoehorned into the story fairly late. And how wild is it that they actually try to spin Marisa Tomei's casting as a younger, hotter version of Aunt May as some sort of triumph for diversity ("aunts come in all shapes and sizes", she says, or words to that effect).

More later, perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, regarding Ant-Man: If he has the same mass when he changes his size, which is what makes him so powerful for such a tiny guy, then wouldn't it follow that he'd be relatively weak when he's in "giant" mode?

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On May 6, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Peter T Chattaway said:

By the way, regarding Ant-Man: If he has the same mass when he changes his size, which is what makes him so powerful for such a tiny guy, then wouldn't it follow that he'd be relatively weak when he's in "giant" mode?

 

Spoiler

He didn't seem to be that strong, and certainly not as fast.  He was just big, and that much weight is going to pack a punch.  To be honest that part was kind of clunky for me.

 

On May 5, 2016 at 0:36 AM, Overstreet said:

To destroy or not to destroy. That is the question, both for the superheroes anchoring our biggest blockbusters and the filmmakers who bring them to the screen. Critics and audiences alike are tiring of buildings being toppled, cities being leveled and innocent bystanders being dismissed

That is certainly part of this film's content, and would seem obvious that the writers are responding to a push back to this issue.  I still think that Batman and Superman wrestled with this issue in a much less obvious (and probably less moralizing) way.

For me this was about on par with the other films.  Good but not great.  Yet what *was* great for me was the battle amongst the Avengers.  It had an element largely missing from modern superhero films.  It was funny and fun.  I also loved how they handled the new Spiderman.  Every scene with him in it was a joy for me.  I had no problem with how he was introduced, in fact I found the banter to be great.

 

 

Edited by Attica

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** SPOILERS ***

Attica wrote:
: He didn't seem to be that strong, and certainly not as fast.  he was just big, and that much weight is going to pack a punch.  

Ah, but that's the thing: changing his size is all about changing the space between his atoms, and the actual mass/weight of his atoms doesn't change when he changes size -- that is why, when he's ant-sized, he can still pack a human-sized punch. (Of course, the Ant-Man movie fudged this in the first place by saying he could ride on the backs of insects -- which would be ridiculous if he still had the mass of a normal-sized adult human.)

So when he goes gigantic, he should still have the same mass/weight -- and thus strength -- as a regular-sized human. Falling on a truck or whatever shouldn't crush it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Peter T Chattaway said:

So when he goes gigantic, he should still have the same mass/weight -- and thus strength -- as a regular-sized human. Falling on a truck or whatever shouldn't crush it.

I was thinking more along the lines that he just seemed clumsy.  But, thinking about it from that angle, yeah, you're right.  

Not sure what to make of a superhero movie which doesn't obey the laws of physics.   ;)

 

Edited by Attica

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Attica said:

 Not sure what to make of a superhero movie which doesn't obey the laws of physics.   ;)

 

Spider-man (in the film) agrees. He quips how Captain America's shield doesn't follow the laws of physics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jumping to another topic: What *is* it with superhero relationships turning on a dime when we learn something about someone's mother  these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of hated this movie. More later, perhaps, but for now I will say that my questions about Cap's attitude toward Hiroshima have been pretty much answered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NBooth said:

I kind of hated this movie. More later, perhaps, but for now I will say that my questions about Cap's attitude toward Hiroshima have been pretty much answered. 

FWIW, from my review

Quote

In a way Civil War is handicapped by an inevitable but limiting decision made in the first Captain America movie: to reimagine the star-spangled Avenger for a global audience as a hero of decency and valor unmoored from specifically American commitments. Disney’s big-screen Captain America never talks about democracy, constitutional freedoms, or civil rights. Chinese moviegoers buy a lot of tickets.

The Civil War conflict in the comics turned on Cap’s commitment to individual liberty and opposition to government overreach. Here’s how these ideals are translated in this film: “If I see a situation going south, I can’t just turn away.”

Meanwhile, Amanda Marcotte, in a piece for Salon, complains that the movie has turned the character — whom she says the earlier movies cast as "Steve the liberal: Anti-racist, anti-sexist, valuing transparency in government and his belief that we the people should hold power instead of some unaccountable tyrants who believe might makes right" — into a "douchy libertarian"… 

Quote

a guy who believe [sic] it’s cool to belong to a secretive paramilitary that rejects oversight and accountability to the public. Because while we all know and love them as the Avengers, hero squad, the brutal truth, which the movie does admit, is that is exactly what they are: A mercenary [sic; presumably she means militia] group who has resisted even the most basic oversight from democratic governments, oversight that would allow the people that the Avengers are supposed to be protecting some say in what this militaristic police force is allowed to do.

Ironically, she also argues that the movie  

Quote

would have been so much better if they’d just cut all that stuff about the Sokovia Accords, which was unnecessary, muddled and made Steve Rogers look like the bad guy for no reason whatsoever…The Sokovia Accords plot could have been lifted right out of the movie and it wouldn’t have changed the plot much, if at all.

What's hilariously ironic about this is that the Sokovia Accords — that is, the idea of government oversight of superheroes — represents the essential premise of the whole Civil War story arc, at least in the comics. If Marcotte is right that the premise could have been lifted from the movie without altering the plot much (and, after some initial resistance, I think she might have a case), then the movie really botched its own premise. Anyway, somebody missed the point of the story, either the filmmakers or Marcotte. 

(And now I'm reminded of an anecdote by C.S. Lewis: “A friend of mine wrote a play in which the main idea was that the hero had a pathological horror of trees and a mania for cutting them down. But naturally other things came in as well; there was some sort of love story mixed up with it. And the trees killed the man in the end. When my friend had written it, he sent it an older man to criticise. It came back with the comment, ‘Not bad. But I’d cut out those bits of padding about the trees.’”) 

Edited by SDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...