millarworld.tv Comics Creators

Civil War: Who's side were you on?


#1

The general Civil War thread is pretty busy, so I thought I’d break this out to see where folks came down.

Put simply, who’s side were you on for the Civil War movie?

  • Team Tony
  • Team Cap

0 voters

Sadly Team Aunt may won’t be made available as an option. Also I’m wondering if your side in the comic was different from your side in the movie.

I was Team Cap in the comic, I thought the forced participation in a government led team was a step too far and felt like conscription. In the movie I was Team Tony as I thought there was a responsibility to bring Bucky in (to find a better way of dealing with him rather than just having him hide).


#2

I think I’m Team Cap. I agree with him about not signing the Accords and while I like there was a responsibility to bring Bucky in, once he’s in custody Bucky gets used again by someone on the inside. Having just dealt the the whole Hydra/Shield thing, it’s understandable that Cap would be less than trusting of the government the moment Zemo messes with Bucky again.

Plus, Tony created Ultron. Shouldn’t he be help responsible for that? Especially considering the Sokovia incident is what sparks a lot of this.


#3

Team Cap for me.

Fuck being a superhero in the real world if there’s people out there who would support Team Tony. It would be a bit like voting Tory.


#4

Team Cap. I can understand an emotionally fragile Tony getting guilted into it, but supporting the Accords after “the Man” tried to nuke New York (which came about due to an alien invasion spurred on by the government developing next-gen weapons tech secretly) and kill a third of the population with algorithms on flying murder boats was so arrogant and hypocritical.

Ross trying to pin all that on the Avengers was ridiculous.


#5

Given that the climax of the movie involved Tony going off on a personal mission without UN oversight because he thought he knew better, I’m not sure there’s really much of a practical distinction. :slight_smile:


#6

Team Panther.


#7

Ant-Man says, 60% of the time, Black Panther is right every time.


#8

Hahahahahaha if I wasn’t wearing a bag I’d have wet myself


#9

But Thanos really created Ultron.
Tony failed every time.


#10

I’m sure that’s going to get picked up later on, probably by Thanos as a statement of contempt:

You couldn’t even destroy yourselves, I had to help you.


#11

If I was living in the MCU then Team Tony but as viewers we know Cap and the other heroes are a better option for a safe world than the governments that housed HYDRA and tried to nuke New York. It’s the same with the comic. Vigilantism works in the Marvel Universe.


#12

Im sure Caps ‘safest hands’ line will be proved corect later on.


#13

Team antman


#14

Team Spidey isn’t an option?

Looking at the debate at a base level, it seems very simple - Do you think that a group of non-elected individuals should be permitted to carry out so called crime fighting activities without any legal sanction to do so and with no oversight? The answer would plainly be no. We have oversight over our police to ensure that they are acting fairly and in the best interests of the state and of the people (not always the same thing), and that any instances of corruption are handled.

If I recall correctly, the old Wildstorm Stormwatch team worked on the basis of a UN mandate. Admittedly that was run by a complete psychotic in Henry Bendix, and eventually segued into The Authority, who seized control of the United States at one point, so perhaps we need to give some serious consideration into what the correct model of regulation should be.

However there is obviously another side to this. Who gets to decide? Who will provide oversight? SHIELD provided oversight originally and was proved to be rife with HYDRA agents. Who will those people be accountable to? How will the system be made transparent to people in the 170 countries.

The introduction of the Sokovia Accords in the film was a knee jerk reaction and there needed to be more debate.

In a real world scenario, i.e. one which isn’t in a big budget summer action movie, this is an issue that would require a great deal of debate. That didn’t happen in the film because it because about finding and/or shooting on sight Bucky.

So I think that Iron Man was right, but only in a very vague way and for the wrong reasons. I think that his heart was in the right place in supporting the Accords. I think that Cap was right to oppose the Accords based on what was put in front of him in the movie.

Spoiler for anyone who hasn’t yet seen the movie:

This all goes out the window when the mission becomes save/shoot Bucky. It all becomes a bit of a battle of egos and I thought that Tony acted selfishly and lead with his ego. But he’s Tony Stark. It’s what he does .


#15

I’m finally going to see the film tonight. Can’t wait to cast my vote tomorrow!


#16

Team Cap. :wink:


#17

I maybe overthought it, huh?


#18

Nope. I love your break down. I just feel like I already explained my POV. :wink:

Tony is constantly looking out for himself and blaming others for his mistakes. His primary drive at the end isn’t because Bucky killed his parents. It’s because he had unfinished business (his fault) with his parents when Bucky killed them. Oh and the guy brings the Secretary of State to the Avengers compound with life changing news without warning anyone. He deserves his ass kicked if for nothing other than that. :wink:


#19

Sorry…I was kidding.

I don’t disagree regarding Tony. He was a loose cannon throughout this movie. One of the defining characteristics of the character in the MCU is his inability to see someone else’s point of view. He struggles with it at a personal level in his relationship with Pepper (hence the gigantic Bunny Christmas present) to how he acted throughout AOU. Once he has set his mind on something, it is hard to change it. The same happens here. He acts selfishly and other people pay for it.

With regard to the Accords, with a proper, transparent and workable system of governance, I wouldn’t see any issue with those. As with any new process, it would be important to have input from all stakeholders to ensure that the all aspects were being considered. Imposition of something like this would in effect just lead to mass resistance.


#20

No need for spoiler tags here folks.