Summer Movies Thread

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

CA: Civil War - pretty damn good. I think I liked Winter Soldier better, just because of the spy elements and mystery... but Civil War is by far my favorite "Avengers" movie (i mean, come on, it's Avengers 2.5).

It has the BEST action sequence in any comic book movie, possibly any movie (the airport scene). Just in awe the entire time (and if you have a real IMAX in your area - go see it there. That entire scene was shot on IMAX film). Fight choreography/effects throughout the movie were top-notch, and like most Marvel films, had a good mix of drama and some light-heartedness.

Saw it, had a really sh!tty movie-going experience, need to re-watch it again when the theaters aren't so packed... Can't wait until Screening Room becomes a more affordable/realistic option -- I wouldn't be sad if I never stepped foot into a movie theater again, just as long as I can see new releases before they get spoiled by the internet.

Black Panther, Ant-Man and Spider-Man were definitely the best part of the movie (can't wait for their upcoming films!), but am I the only one who felt like the ridiculously-enjoyable airport scene was plucked out of a much more entertaining movie? Most of Civil War was a slog to get through -- I definitely noticed the two-and-a-half hour runtime.

[Big Boy Laroux]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Saw it, had a really sh!tty movie-going experience, need to re-watch it again when the theaters aren't so packed... Can't wait until Screening Room becomes a more affordable/realistic option -- I wouldn't be sad if I never stepped foot into a movie theater again, just as long as I can see new releases before they get spoiled by the internet.

Black Panther, Ant-Man and Spider-Man were definitely the best part of the movie (can't wait for their upcoming films!), but am I the only one who felt like the ridiculously-enjoyable airport scene was plucked out of a much more entertaining movie? Most of Civil War was a slog to get through -- I definitely noticed the two-and-a-half hour runtime.

it was definitely more "talky" than most Marvel movies, but it did have some good action sequences to break that up, albeit small scale (Lagos, the Panther/Bucky chase, etc.). But I liked a lot of the exposition. I think it laid out a plot in which you really could side with either guy.

While of course Spider-man was awesome (really the best-filmed version of him in action, quipping/talking constantly), Black Panther was my favorite newcomer. And Falcon continues to grow into his own character, he had some of the best moments of the movie - he's kind of a dud in the comics.

yeah, it was tough to avoid spoilers, but i've had a good track record of seeing movies in week 2. People are polite enough not to reveal huge spoilers in that timeframe.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

it was definitely more "talky" than most Marvel movies, but it did have some good action sequences to break that up, albeit small scale (Lagos, the Panther/Bucky chase, etc.). But I liked a lot of the exposition. I think it laid out a plot in which you really could side with either guy.

I kinda skipped over this point earlier (because work), but I really didn't have a problem with the "talky" parts that justified the Civil War plot (I can shift back & forth between what "should be" and what "is be")... No, what bored me were all the superfluous subplots added to force a "Civil War" -- like EVERYTHING between Wanda/Vision/Hawkeye.

Sure, they used Scarlett Witch's whole house arrest thing to develop the characters (so I credit the Russos for making the most of unnecessary screentime), but all of that could have easily been cut for narrative's sake... Like, couldn't Hawkeye just stay retired and the Avengers send their hard-hitters on a mission to find Hulk or something? It's not like the plot was dependent on those characters -- Tony could have just as easily pointed out Vision's observations of villainous escalation (which actually would have lent more weight to his guilt).

BUT, if you gotta go all Civil War, then adding Black Panther, Ant-Man and Spider-Man was definitely the way to go... One comic relief for team blue, one comic relief for team red, one neutral BAMF who always lands on his feet.... I didn't like some of the narrative choices in this movie because they felt forced into Marvel's overall arc, but I do think the filmmakers maximized their execution of the studio's notes.

Ultimately, I think they should have split this film into two parts -- all the grimdark should have ended Phase 2 in Captain America 3, and then maybe all the funtime-Avengers stuff could have kicked off Phase 3 with Avengers: Civil War, grown organically from the Winter Soldier's assassination of everyone's parents (including Batfleck's. . . . DIE, MARTHA!)

[Big Boy Laroux]

Originally Posted by Underdog

One thing that bugs me about the new Captain America is that the whole "Civil War" thing feels shoehorned in just to take the wind out of Batman v Superman's sails... All this "collateral damage" crap in AoU and CW seems like a calculated reaction to everyone on the internet complaining about the destruction of Metropolis in Man of Steel (even BvS couldn't help itself!).... Please, please, PLEASE, Hollywood -- learn the lessons from Lost and BSG when it comes to changing your plots based on fanboy overreactions. The calculation of collateral damage adds absolutely nothing to a candy-coated action romp where super-powered individuals are pummeling each other while delivering snarky quips.

Definitely disagree with you there. Collateral damage has been acknowledged/mentioned in Marvel movies for a while. Scenes of Cap specifically trying to get people out of harm's way in Avengers 1, Iron Man feeling remorse for his actions way back in Iron Man 1. And it all culminated in this film. This was not a knee-jerk reaction, i believe this was planned for some time.

The Civil War plotline from the comics couldn't be used here, as that focused on registration and revealing secret identities - secret identities really aren't a thing in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. So i thought the change to be more about accountability and oversight really fit well, especially in this day and age of people screaming for less government.

The BvS reaction was super ridiculous -Random guy calling out - "it's ok, guys! that island is uninhabited!"

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

Definitely disagree with you there. Collateral damage has been a plot item for Marvel for a while. Scenes of Cap specifically trying to get people out of harm's way in Avengers 1, Iron Man feeling remorse for his actions way back in Iron Man 1. And it all culminated in this film. This was not a knee-jerk reaction, i believe this was planned for some time.

The Civil War plotline from the comics couldn't be used here, as that focused on registration and revealing secret identities - secret identities really aren't a thing in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. So i thought the change to be more about accountability and oversight really fit well, especially in this day and age of people screaming for less government.

The BvS reaction was super ridiculous -Random guy calling out - "it's ok, guys! that island is uninhabited!"

Collateral damage can always be a plot line in a superhero movie, but I think it was a bad fit here -- especially because the "logic" behind it was fvcking stupid... You're telling me the same government body that was about to *nuke* NYC during an alien invasion is mad about the 164 people who died as collateral damage during the battle? Not only that, but they're mad at the guys who prevented the entire world from being destroyed (or whatever Loki's plan was)??? Nah son, I expect better writing from the people who made The Winter Soldier -- this feels like a studio decision (like when they scheduled CW's release for the same exact date as BvS).

And it's not like the scene in BvS was any worse than the scene in AoU where the Avengers kept talking about saving every single individual in Sakovia while the fate of the WORLD was at hand... Sorry, but collateral damage should probably be expected when the survival of the entire species is on the line. There's a reason why the comic books don't waste their time with this stuff.

Besides, the Netflix shows did a much better job of dealing with the fallout of The Avengers (especially Jessica Jones) -- let's move the F on to something else, this is some well-trodden ground at this point.


**Major Spoilers**

Plus, they had more than enough motivation to fuel the conflict between Captain America and Iron Man without the Sokovia Accords -- Bucky killing Tony's parents... Which is probably why they dropped the whole collateral damage plot halfway through the movie anyway -- because it was ultimately frivolous... I think this movie worked better as Winter Soldier 2.0 than as Avengers 2.5 (even though the Avenger-y parts were the most entertaining).