It could be seen as a flaw in Civil War that neither of them makes a particularly good argument for those perspectives. Both men have good reasons for their perspectives. Tony has seen his reckless arrogance cause catastrophes, and he recognizes the need for responsible oversight. After three Iron Man films, two Captain America films, and two Avengers films where they fight side-by-side, Steve and Tony's personalities are well-established, and their roles in this particular drama are foreordained: Captain America is a compulsive do-gooder who can't imagine asking permission to save lives. The involvement of Cap's old sidekick Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan), both in the past and in the present, hugely complicates the situation. When an Avengers intervention results in civilian casualties, and the UN attempts to put the heroes under bureaucratic supervision, Tony is in favor, and Cap isn't. But that doesn't mean they charge directly into the action.Īfter seven films, iron man and Captain America's personalities are well-establishedĬivil War hinges on the ideological clash between Steve (aka Captain America) and Tony (aka Iron Man), the two generals in the titular civil war among the Avengers super-group. They're also intimately familiar with Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), and they assume viewers are as well.
At this point, they're intimately familiar with MCU banter, and the shifts from somber to sarcastic that keep the tone manageable. And they're writing the two-part Avengers: Infinity War saga that's meant to cap Phase Three of the MCU film saga.
#Captin america movies series#
They also scripted Thor: The Dark World, and co-created the spinoff TV series Agent Carter. Markus and McFeely also wrote the MCU's previous two Captain America films. Still, by comparison with the heavy-handed hero-on-hero face-off in Batman v Superman, Civil War maintains a wry, light voice. Like any ongoing comic title, this is a continuing story, and it's aimed squarely at people who are already completely on board.Ĭivil War has more baggage to unpack than Avengers, and less room for the MCU franchise's trademark humor. Screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely spend a lot of time on scene-setting and obfuscation, and on callbacks and echoes. Viewers who come in not caring about them personally - about their agendas, their emotional well-being, or at the very least, who would win in a fight - may find the film endlessly frustrating. More than any Marvel Cinematic Universe film before it, it trades on the history built up in previous films, the protagonists' relationships with each other, and the goodwill (or lack thereof) they've engendered in audiences. And in terms of sheer thrill, it surpasses Avengers - at least for fans who come prestocked with an emotional investment in these characters.Ĭaptain America: Civil War is openly, unapologetically for fans.
In terms of narrative ambition, and giving meaningful screen time to an ever-growing stable of onscreen characters, Civil War rivals Joss Whedon's MCU standout The Avengers. (We'll get into all that in a later piece, once more people have seen the film.) And its storytelling is similarly complicated, and not always successful.
Civil War's internal politics, and its symbolic ones, are deeply complicated. And it's no surprise that both modes inform each other. It's no surprise that one of these modes is much more fun than the other. In the other mode, they get pissed because communications have broken down, and they find creative, involved, and very immediate ways to beat the ever-living crap out of each other. They explore the principles they operate on, and sincerely try to communicate them to each other. In one, heroes have quiet, sincere talks about their personal beliefs and intentions. Most of Captain America: Civil War breaks down into two storytelling modes.
0 kommentar(er)
