[ SECRET POST #3415 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3415 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 027 secrets from Secret Submission Post #488.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[ariakas]

Overall I liked the movie, I really did. Toning down the non-stop quipping (or was that just whedon's departure?) was better for the feel of the film. But I still left the theater feeling unsatisfied, because there was a huge missed opportunity here to make it much more impactful:

Somebody should have died.

No, not some random barely-there guy who was just introduced, unlike Quicksilver, and not a fan favourite woobie getting Joss'd to "up the stakes" or "because it's war" or whatever he's calling it these days, but because it would have fit the theme. Revenge works in cycles and no one is satisfied until someone stops killing. But no one really chooses to stop killing - Tony doesn't kill Bucky, so when Cap breaks his power generator rather than his face it's "eh, well, obviously." You couldn't imagine him doing anything else. There was no tension in what should have been the climax of the movie as soon as you realized they were all making it out of this just fine. If, on the other hand, Tony had actually killed Bucky (or Cap) it would have given either one of them the choice to give in and keep the cycle going, or to break it and let him walk away. Cap takes that choice away from Tony, and doesn't have to make one himself.

To make matters worse the receipt of the cell phone and the rescue from prison seems to imply that everything is ookie-dookie between the two factions now, which robs the villain's "oh, didn't it?" when told his ploy didn't work of all impact too. No, it didn't. What happened to War Machine sucked, but he's got Stark technology, he'll be fine.

Just saying: if Cap (doesn't Bucky become Captain America at some point in the comics anyway?) or Bucky or hell even Tony had died, I would have walked out of the theater thinking "holy shit!"

Am I jaded or is this legit.

[kaijinscendre]

No. Killing a character is not the only way to show serious consequences in a movie/show. I am honestly sick of creators thinking the only way to "raise the stakes" is to kill someone off.

The movie was emotionally devastating without having to kill someone to show, "This is for real, guys!" They showed the stakes by showing how these two sides have ripped each other apart.

And Steve breaking them out of prison does not erase the fact that A) they are still fugitives and no longer Avengers B) the Sokovia Accords still exist and Tony has signed them.

The phone is just an olive branch to show that while they don't agree, Steve will come help if Tony calls. But I can guarantee, if Tony were to try and take Bucky out, Steve would beat the shit out of him again.

[ariakas]

But I can guarantee, if Tony were to try and take Bucky out, Steve would beat the shit out of him again.

Yes, but that's not because something has fundamentally "changed" between them. Steve would do it because Bucky is his friend, and Bucky is innocent. In other words, they're still at exactly the same point at the end of the film they were at when it started. To me that's deeply unsatisfying. Steve doesn't need to make a painful choice, he's just straight up right about everything from start to finish. If Tony had killed Bucky and Cap had still spared him - that, that would have been fucking breathtaking, you know? As it was it was robbed of all impact, because obviously, everybody's fine, he's not going to kill Tony.

As it was the chance to bring the theme of revenge full circle was squandered, "raised stakes" or no.

They might be fugitives and no longer the Avengers, but that's all plot, not character. The wounds between them are fully healed. Black Panther is now helping the "other side" and Tony if not outright helping them is quite obviously aiding and abetting them. They "ripped each other apart"... for like a day before the villain's plot was revealed and now everything is totes fine again. The fight between them was exciting and what happened to War Machine was impactful, but the resolution at the climax went out with a whimper the second you realized none of them was in any actual danger and it was three guys punching each other for a couple of minutes.

[(Anonymous)]

I still thought people were actually in danger, even if in the end they were fine. :( I agree, I don't think that killing people off would have automatically made the film better.

Plus, I felt like the phone was a "I know I screwed up, I'm sorry, and if you need us, we'll be there, but we're not really friends" kind of deal. Yes, the phone will be there, but it's not just to chat/hang out, it's need-based only.

[ariakas]

Yes but "killing someone would have automatically made the film better" is not at all what I'm arguing. Killing someone at a specific point in time would have brought full circle the underlying themes of the film, given Cap (or Bucky, or Tony) a truly difficult choice to make instead of an obvious one or none at all, would have fundamentally changed the dynamic between the characters in a lasting rather than superficial way, and would have given the villain's ploy teeth instead of leaving it flatly ineffective.

There is no "automatically" or because it would have "raised the stakes" in this argument I am making.

And I disagree. Tony is smiling to himself at the thought of his now "criminal" friends escaping while he puts the phone on hold to ignore a request to help stop them. They're now on "opposite sides" in name only. Cap and Tony were never super besties and they always disagreed about a lot of things, and now... that is still exactly what they are, even if plot-related circumstances have changed. It was a missed opportunity, and a letdown, imo.

[kaijinscendre]

Steve made the hard choice to prioritize Bucky over Tony. He also lied to Tony about Bucky's involvement with his parent's death.

Steve and Tony are not friends. Their relationship is not the same as it was at the beginning. Granted, they've never been super close. Just because Steve gave Tony a phone to contact him, in case the world is about to be destroyed, does not mean everything is okay between them. It means that Steve prioritizes the safety of the world over his own feelings.

And the villain got exactly what he wanted. The Avengers (who didn't sign the accords) are fugitives. If Captain America tries to go into a country to save someone, he can be arrested (if they can catch him). Their team is torn apart as well. Tony and Steve are not the only team members.

I don't know why you think Tony is helping them? It was never shown that Tony even knows they are in Wakanda. I don't think he ever realized Black Panther was there in Siberia.

I really think a death would be superfluous. Also, if Steve/Tony/Bucky killed any of the other group members, their character would likely be irredeemable to fans.

[ariakas]

Steve made the hard choice to prioritize Bucky over Tony.

How in the world is this a hard choice? Bucky is his best friend and war buddy whose life was in imminent danger. Tony is somewhat of a friend and a colleague who he's known for a couple of years and doesn't often see eye to eye with, and he's now clearly in the wrong, trying to kill an innocent man.

Really, how is this a hard choice?

And again, the no-longer-an-Avenger consequence is plot-related, not character related. It'll affect them in exactly the ways the writers choose, it won't have a lasting and profound effect on their relationships the same way death would.

Tony is smiling to himself whilst ignoring/needlessly delaying a request to aid in the capture of escaped criminals at the end of the film. I'm not really sure how not to construe that as "helping them" to be honest.

Well I agree that a random death would have been superfluous (hence mentioning Quicksilver in the first comment) and would not have served much of a purpose aside from "raising the stakes" as it were. But if any of Steve/Tony/Bucky had died in that final fight it would have dramatically improved the story for reasons of character development, theme, and narrative impact.

[kaijinscendre]

In prioritizing Bucky, Steve also became a fugitive and betrayed his team (Vision, Black Widow, Rhodey).

Tony smiling to himself (to me) felt like him recognizing that Steve is still a noble guy (that Tony wants to punch is his perfect teeth). It is also a throwback to Tony's comment to General Ross about thinking it is funny to put him on old.

I cannot see any way it would have dramatically improved the stories to have one of those characters murder the other.

Steve killing Tony would have been wildly out of character.

Tony killing Bucky would have resulted in an emotionally broken and devastated Steve Rogers (probably in jail) and is not an interesting character development to me. It the same, cheap character breaking that happens all the time in other media.

Bucky kills Tony. What would this improve? At most, Steve would be a little sad? It would also go against Bucky's character in Civil War. He spent the whole movie trying not to kill people. Hell, in that final fight, it looked like he was trying to disarm him.

[kallanda_lee]

Black Panther was only an enemy because of a misunderstanding, though, and as I hate those sort of plot, I'm glad it was resolved. He's basically the one with the real moral solidity in the movie , not Cap.

And I disagree it ends where it started. I think Cap IS tainted because of this. And him leaving his shield, not even looking back, I find that incredibly powerful.

He effectively gives up being Captain America for his best friend, then breaks out the rest of his friends, and goes outside the law.

For perfect, polite, law-abiding Steve Rogers - that is massive character development.

[ketita]

I really enjoyed the film, and I agree with you that the stakes were plenty good. If anything, I was glad that there was no bullshit threat of a high body count at the end, like in most other Marvel films.

The funny thing is, that with all the talk of how angsty it is, I was expecting some real pain, and it... I mean I enjoyed it, but I think my angst-o-meter is broken XD

[kaijinscendre]

It was the perfect level of pain for what I want in a Marvel movie.

[ketita]

Ha. I would have been happy with ratcheting the angst up in the middle third, and then kind of slowing it down in preparation for the end. I liked the climax, and I liked how the evil plot did end up working, and Tony couldn't even see it.
For me, the only truly 유A유 moment was when Zemo started reprogramming Bucky, and Bucky was struggling to get out. Other than that, I didn't find anything super angsty.

[ariakas]

the only truly 유A유 moment was when Zemo started reprogramming Bucky

I loved this moment too. It was really well-acted and I can't imagine how horrific that would be -_-

[(Anonymous)]

Me too. I'm utterly done with grimdark. It's everywhere now. It was downright refreshing to see a film that played on the character's emotional vulnerabilities and deep attachments to each other without throwing in a major character death or sexual violence every few seconds for cheap drama.

[kaijinscendre]

Exactly. And it ended the film with an intimate fight between the three instead of "Oh no, now we have to join together to fight this [insert group of villains or one giant villain]."

[ketita]

to clarify: I am 100% with you. I didn't want more grimdark, and certainly not character death or sexual violence.
More moments like Bucky's realization he was going to be reprogrammed, though. Or like, idk, what if when Cap and Bucky went off, Cap thought Rhodey had died, but had to leave anyway? Stuff like that. Pain. Happy pain.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[(Anonymous)]

I just got back from a second viewing.

And the expression on Tony's face when Steve had him-- man, he totally thought Steve was going to kill him. Notice that he shielded his face right before Steve brought the shield down. He seriously thought that Steve was going to take his head off.

I love this movie to itty bitty pieces. It hurts so much, in the best way possible, because the emotional impact for the characters is so high.

Also, Spider-man was adorable.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[(Anonymous)]

Spiderman was too cute. I want to adopt him.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[kallanda_lee]

YES YES, I got that on third viewing. I LOVED HOW HE SHIELDED HIS FACE.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[philstar22]

I agree. I think They chickened out with Rhodey. They should have gone all the way and killed him.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[(Anonymous)]

Noooooooooooooooooooooo. I love Rhodey. I was so distressed when it looked like he'd died in the trailers.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[philstar22]

I love him too. He's one of my favorites, and I ship him and Tony so hard. I just feel like killing him would have been better for the story.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[tabaqui]

Nah. That would have shattered the Avengers forever, that would have had Tony not just fighting Cap but killing him, or Bucky. Tony was, in my opinion, holding back a lot of the time and there is no way in hell he would have done that if Rhodey had died.

I love that no one died, but we still have betrayal and heartbreak and pain and emotions. It was perfect.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[ariakas]

Yeah, I originally thought they had, and that would have put a chill over everything and a somewhat permanent wedge between them, the worst part being that it was an attack from their own side that caused it. As it stands... I still think it ended on a weak note. Politically, the Avengers are a part now, but emotionally they're not far from where they started.

Re: Spoilers: What Captain America: Civil War was missing

[kallanda_lee]

I don't know...I honestly thought someone MIGHT die up till the very end. I was really scared for Bucky and Steve in that last fight - and at the end when Steve is bashing and rips off Tony's helmet, you can see him shielding his face, so Tony DOES thing Cap is capable of killing him.

I mean, they could have made that choice to kill someone and it would have been legit, but I must disagree on the impact part (for myself).