I have not seen it yet! My question is how does the movie rate in your opinion to other superhero movies, such as the X-Men series, the Avengers Series, Bale's Batman movies, and the Iron Man movies?

Taarna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have not seen it yet! My question is how does
> the movie rate in your opinion to other superhero
> movies, such as the X-Men series, the Avengers
> Series, Bale's Batman movies, and the Iron Man
> movies?
-------------------------------------------------------
Just my opinion, but at this point, I would have to say the Captain America franchise just may be the best super hero series to date.
I enjoyed Civil War more than Avengers 2. All of the other hero franchises so far, seem to have at least one weak movie in their line up. I can't really say that about the Captain America series. Chris Evans is also proving that the Captain America role is a good fit for him.

Taarna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have not seen it yet! My question is how does
> the movie rate in your opinion to other superhero
> movies, such as the X-Men series, the Avengers
> Series, Bale's Batman movies, and the Iron Man
> movies?

I rate it above all of those. The things that were hand waved are forgivable because the acting and pacing are so good, and the action scenes are game changers.

Incredibly well done.

The fights are the best in any super hero film, period. The story makes you think you know what is happening and then it pulls out the rug, a genuine surprise (DO NOT LET YOUR FRIENDS RUIN THIS and don't waste time on fan videos until you see it yourself).

Surprisingly brutal for a Disney franchise, they must have chosen to let the directors run with it and that was the right choice.

I just want to reiterate that Disney does make R rated movies under their Touchstone, Hollywood Pictures, and previously Miramax banners.

Pulp Fiction anyone?

Agree with the sentiment about the Captain America series being the best. Not a flaw in the three of them. I was a little worried about the start of Winter Soldier and Civil War because I'm not a fan of the shacky camera style of filming a fight scene. But by the time the climax hit they got more patient and settled down to make the action pop.

J Bone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Agree with the sentiment about the Captain America
> series being the best. Not a flaw in the three of
> them. I was a little worried about the start of
> Winter Soldier and Civil War because I'm not a fan
> of the shacky camera style of filming a fight
> scene. But by the time the climax hit they got
> more patient and settled down to make the action
> pop.


Thanks, guys! I hope to see the movie this weekend!

I thought the first Captian America movie was sort of average by Marvel standards. There was zero character arc for Cap, and I expected far more tactics and agility out of Captain America. The Red Skull was a bit underused, and sometimes the movie was too campy. The second movie was much better!

I saw Captain America - Civil War. It did not suck. In fact, I'd say that Cap's movies have gotten progressively better, and Civil War has --despite how much I reviled the comic event-- has now replaced the first Iron Man as my favorite superhero movie.

Thrudjelmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I saw Captain America - Civil War. It did not
> suck. In fact, I'd say that Cap's movies have
> gotten progressively better, and Civil War has
> --despite how much I reviled the comic event-- has
> now replaced the first Iron Man as my favorite
> superhero movie.

And thus does the final sign present itself, let Armageddon commence!

Seriously tho, I would have to question anyone who calls themselves a true comics fan if they couldn't find something in this movie that hit them right in the 12 year old.

I thought I had posted in this thread already, but I guess not.

For my two bits this is not only the best comic book movie I have seen to date, its also just plain one of the best movies I have seen in years, if not ever. I looked at my watch at least half a dozen times during NotBatman v NotSuperman. I am not saying Civil War wasn't overly long I'm saying I sat there and time ceased to exist as I let this masterpiece simply wash over me. I am sure that sounds as silly to read that as it does to type, but its the only way to describe how I felt. as I watched not only a dozen movies worth of story thread play itself out, but also dozens of years worth of character development distilled down and finally shown on the big screen.

This is what every comic fan has been waiting for all their lives. They finally managed to get across what comics can truly do and show non-fans why we all spent so much time with our faces stuck between the pages of our favorite mag.

Warlock Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thrudjelmer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I saw Captain America - Civil War. It did not
> > suck. In fact, I'd say that Cap's movies have
> > gotten progressively better, and Civil War has
> > --despite how much I reviled the comic event--
> has
> > now replaced the first Iron Man as my favorite
> > superhero movie.
>
> And thus does the final sign present itself, let
> Armageddon commence!
>
> Seriously tho, I would have to question anyone who
> calls themselves a true comics fan if they
> couldn't find something in this movie that hit
> them right in the 12 year old.

To me Civil War was a great great movie. With all the hype leading up to it I got worried but it did not disappoint. Honestly this movie should be in the discussion for Best Picture, if ever a comic book movie would get it this would be the movie. It would deserve it.

Oh and if anyone is interested a lawyer in California did an analysis of the movie and here it is: (obviously spoilers ahead)
[thelegalgeeks.com]

Savagex1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh and if anyone is interested a lawyer in
> California did an analysis of the movie and here
> it is: (obviously spoilers ahead)
> [thelegalgeeks.com]
> a-accords-are-unconstitutional/


The lawyer failed to do enough comic book research.

Quote

It is arguably within the President’s power to draft all of the male Avengers for military service. However, the purposeful selection of the Avengers would not be in an impartial manner under 50 U.S.C. § 3805. Moreover, as Steve Rogers served honorably between December 7, 1941 to September 2, 1945, he would not be eligible to be drafted. 50 U.S.C. § 3806(b)(1). Moreover, as all of the human male Avengers are over 26 years of age, they could not be drafted. 50 USCS § 3803(a).

Doesn't apply to Thor because

Quote

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, it shall be the duty of every male citizen of the United States, and every other male person residing in the United States, who, on the day or days fixed for the first or any subsequent registration, is between the ages of eighteen and twenty-six, to present himself for and submit to registration at such time or times and place or places, and in such manner, as shall be determined by proclamation of the President and by rules and regulations prescribed hereunder. The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to any alien lawfully admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (66 Stat. 163; 8 U.S.C. 1101), for so long as he continues to maintain a lawful nonimmigrant status in the United States.

Even if the age thing wasn't a factor to rule the Avengers out, Thor --like Captain America-- has an out from a draft. He isn't a U.S. citizen or even an immigrant. The government has the right to exile him from the country if it chooses, but good luck on making that happen to an alien of godly power with the ability to come and go as he pleases via an extra-dimensional bridge that is entirely controlled at the end on his dimension's side. Did Odin ever fix Bifrost? Well, if not, there's still obviously another way(s) to travel between Earth and Asgard.

Warlock Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am
> not saying Civil War wasn't overly long I'm saying
> I sat there and time ceased to exist as I let this
> masterpiece simply wash over me.

Same here. I checked my phone while walking out of the movie to see how long it was. It felt like right around 2 hours, so it was quite a bit longer than what it felt like while watching it.

I really hope J.J. Abrams watches this movie and realizes that it's okay to let the audience breathe now and then and throw in some character and plot development between action scenes.

Savagex1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To me Civil War was a great great movie. With all
> the hype leading up to it I got worried but it did
> not disappoint. Honestly this movie should be in
> the discussion for Best Picture, if ever a comic
> book movie would get it this would be the movie.
> It would deserve it.
>
> Oh and if anyone is interested a lawyer in
> California did an analysis of the movie and here
> it is: (obviously spoilers ahead)
> [thelegalgeeks.com]
> a-accords-are-unconstitutional/

I like the analysis it's pretty spot on, just had a few disagreements with it. SHIELD's experiments had nothing to do with Loki coming to Earth, as Hawkeye pointed out doors open from both sides and Loki opened the door himself and SHIELD couldn't stop it from opening. Loki was going to come to Earth no matter where the Tesseract was. In regards to Ultron while Banner and Stark created the hardware the AI that ended up running it wasn't really created by them and was more of a super-virus/worm that they acquired from the Mind Gem. So while they were guilty of terrible security in regards to software firewalls they didn't actually make Ultron as a murder bot its purpose was usurped by someone else. No need to pad the record against Stark (or SHIELD) since they had plenty enough of their own to damn them by that point anyway.

Nightmask Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In regards to Ultron while Banner and Stark
> created the hardware the AI that ended up
> running it wasn't really created by them and
> was more of a super-virus/worm that they
> acquired from the Mind Gem. So while they
> were guilty of terrible security in regards to
> software firewalls they didn't actually make
> Ultron as a murder bot its purpose was
> usurped by someone else.


No, that's a technicality. Yes, the sentience was within the mind gem to begin with, but Stark hooked it up to a computer system linked to all of his tech with the purpose of upgrading his robots into more intelligent defenderbots without fully understanding the Mind Gem's capabilities first. And he did that because he only had three days to "study" it before Thor would insist on taking it back to Asgard. If all he did was study it, I'd be more forgiving of how things got out of control when it usurped his computer system... but he was trying to jam alien tech into his hardware because he was curious and reckless.

Thrudjelmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nightmask Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > In regards to Ultron while Banner and Stark
> > created the hardware the AI that ended up
> > running it wasn't really created by them and
> > was more of a super-virus/worm that they
> > acquired from the Mind Gem. So while they
> > were guilty of terrible security in regards to
> > software firewalls they didn't actually make
> > Ultron as a murder bot its purpose was
> > usurped by someone else.
>
>
> No, that's a technicality. Yes, the sentience was
> within the mind gem to begin with, but Stark
> hooked it up to a computer system linked to all of
> his tech with the purpose of upgrading his robots
> into more intelligent defenderbots without fully
> understanding the Mind Gem's capabilities first.
> And he did that because he only had three days to
> "study" it before Thor would insist on taking it
> back to Asgard. If all he did was study it, I'd
> be more forgiving of how things got out of control
> when it usurped his computer system... but he was
> trying to jam alien tech into his hardware because
> he was curious and reckless.

That's not a technicality, while it was usurped and misused to kill and destroy that was never what it was actually built for and I already noted that Stark's only real guilt in that was failing to properly isolate things in case something went wrong but it doesn't rise to the level of his actual bad choices that caused trouble.

Well, I'm going to disagree with you on that. The rush to use the gem while he had access to it made Stark reckless. His failure to properly isolate the experiment was the result of his bad decision to try to make use of something he didn't fully understand.

Thrudjelmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, I'm going to disagree with you on that. The
> rush to use the gem while he had access to it made
> Stark reckless. His failure to properly isolate
> the experiment was the result of his bad decision
> to try to make use of something he didn't fully
> understand.

His haste certainly resulted in things going horribly wrong I certainly agree, BUT Ultron was never intended to be a murder machine and it's a mischaracterization for lawyer who wrote that article to describe Ultron in such a fashion because it leads people to think Stark intentionally created an autonomous killing machine which he didn't he was creating something intended to protect people from harm.

This analysis was on the movie only and not comic book history. He has analysis for that in other articles including the trial where Jennifer Walters was defending Steve Rogers who was being tried for wrongful death with Matt Murdock on the opposing counsel. He didn't comment on Thor because he wasn't in the movie other than being mentioned. But yes you are correct that Thor would not be eligible for a draft.
Surprised you didn't point out it was 117 nations and not 177.

Also, I agree that Banner and Stark would likely not be held liable because of the fact their robot malfunctioned and the established safeguards (Jarvis) failed to act. However, car manufacturers often are held liable when parts fail so this may establish case law that a law suit could be filed on behalf of the victims in Sokovia. I'd also like to point out that I don't think Stark should in anyway be held accountable for Obadiah Stane's illicit activities. Oversight often does miss things like this because the perpetrators understand how to cover up the markers that would identify them as doing illicit activity. Most of the time they are the accountants, and middle managers, and even CEO's that understand how to work the books and cover their tracks.

Savagex1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This analysis was on the movie only and not comic
> book history. He has analysis for that in other
> articles including the trial where Jennifer
> Walters was defending Steve Rogers who was being
> tried for wrongful death with Matt Murdock on the
> opposing counsel. He didn't comment on Thor
> because he wasn't in the movie other than being
> mentioned. But yes you are correct that Thor would
> not be eligible for a draft.
> Surprised you didn't point out it was 117 nations
> and not 177.
>
> Also, I agree that Banner and Stark would likely
> not be held liable because of the fact their robot
> malfunctioned and the established safeguards
> (Jarvis) failed to act. However, car manufacturers
> often are held liable when parts fail so this may
> establish case law that a law suit could be filed
> on behalf of the victims in Sokovia. I'd also like
> to point out that I don't think Stark should in
> anyway be held accountable for Obadiah Stane's
> illicit activities. Oversight often does miss
> things like this because the perpetrators
> understand how to cover up the markers that would
> identify them as doing illicit activity. Most of
> the time they are the accountants, and middle
> managers, and even CEO's that understand how to
> work the books and cover their tracks.

Thing is though it wasn't like Ultron was a machine that a defect caused accidental death and injury it was a machine that was taken over by a hostile external force and used for deliberate mayhem. Stark can hardly be blamed for someone (the AI that became known as Ultron) breaking through his advanced adaptive AI with firewall capabilities to take malicious control over a prototype robot. It's much the same as a hacker hacking a factory network and causing the assembly machines to injure or kill workers, as long as the factory had made all reasonable effort to secure the network but it was hacked anyway they wouldn't be libel. Stark made all reasonable effort to firewall his Ultron directive but the AI was just too advanced and breached the firewall anyway.

Okay, I saw it. Now I can comment. 8.5 out of 10!

Why only an 8.5?

***Spoilers *** I felt the early action was a little rushed and fast framed, which sort of cheaped the action a bit. Zemo was just okay as the villain.

Having said that I loved the new characters, especially the Black Panther. His costume was outstanding. Spiderman was well done. The action overall was very good, and I liked the political backdrop and adult-like decisions the hero's had to make. Iron match watching his parents death was well done, however if Iron Man if he really wanted to, could barbecue Cap and Bucky. I wish we could have heard Tony's thoughts, which could explain why he had to hold back at times.

Taarna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Iron match watching his parents death was well
> done, however if Iron Man if he really wanted to,
> could barbecue Cap and Bucky. I wish we could
> have heard Tony's thoughts, which could explain
> why he had to hold back at times.


I would just assume it's heroic instinct, because even though he's trying to kill Bucky, he's the good guy trying to avenge the death of his mom. You don't get that by standing back and just watching your enemies burn; That's too supervillainy. Nope, he wanted to punish him... get his iron mitts on mom's killer, and righteously pummel the life out of him.

Finally saw the movie today and the reasons for the accords are to say the least ridiculous but hey at least the Vision demonstrates that his synthetic brain is just as flawed and human as a normal human brain. Ross was doing quite good too, considering his little war he started on American soil at a heavily populated college campus to attack someone he had no business attacking and creating a super-villain that destroyed part of NYC himself. His video montage was a whole lot of blame-shifting on the part of the world, particularly when it comes to acting as if the devastation in NYC during the first Avengers movie was somehow their fault and not the invaders.

Cap though was definitely in the right for opposing both the Accords and the 'kill on sight' for Bucky. I mean seriously, MAYBE it would have taken just a couple hours of investigation and the authorities would have known it wasn't Bucky that set off the bomb, and 'kill on sight' orders are just orders to assassinate someone they definitely weren't interested in justice or being sure they they had the right person let alone finding out who was behind it (since given everything known about Bucky as the Winter Soldier was he was an assassin who worked for others he wouldn't have attacked anyone on his own).

Can't fault T'Challa for not investigating Winter Soldier's involvement further, though, as he was going through a grieving process and bringing to justice (or killing) the man he thought responsible for his father's death was part of that.

Thrudjelmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can't fault T'Challa for not investigating Winter
> Soldier's involvement further, though, as he was
> going through a grieving process and bringing to
> justice (or killing)
> the man he thought responsible for his father's
> death was part of that.

True, he was running totally on revenge protocols and had the benefit of diplomatic immunity to get away with quite a bit crime-wise, and Spider-man's involvement came totally from being young, naive, and trusting when someone he likely looked up to as an example of where he could go if he applied himself. For which btw Aunt May was way way too young and attractive, they seriously should have used someone older and plainer.

I did enjoy Ant Man going Giant Man during the fight at the airport (where Stark was totally responsible for massive destruction given how he handled things by refusing to LISTEN because he had to prove himself right no matter what), I hope further Giant Man scenes are even better. Totally didn't need the near dirt-nap for Rhodey (just like they didn't need the Quicksilver dirt nap in Avengers: Age Of Ultron), we already knew how serious things were we didn't need him being crippled to 'make it real'. Also didn't need the claw marks on the shield or Stark demanding it considering it was given to Steve by Tony's father it wasn't really government property or Tony's.