The Problem(s) With Captain America: Civil War 

Civil War is among the TOP tier MCU films. The real problem here is that MCU couldn’t make more films like this one, or The Winter Soldier.

The flaws in this movie are absolutely ignored because of the stellar character work from both the team behind the cameras and the actors themselves. Some of the lines delivered in Civil War are among the best in the MCU. Winter Soldier and Civil War had a surprising number of nuanced and understated deliveries that hold up as legitimately good acting.

"the book agrees with Cap" Wait until you find out Mark Millar, the writer of the book, literally said Iron Man was right and we were supposed to be rooting for him

The critical detail about the comic-book event that kicked off the Civil War is that the superhero team that antagonized Nitro and crew were young, barely trained and they jumped into the situation without understanding who they were up against for clout on social media. They were actually more focused on recording their endeavors than the threat posed by the villains they faced. This made the upstart superhero team responsible for the explosion. It was a threat that would have been better handled by The Avengers or Spiderman.

You can feel the desire for revenge in Iron Man's voice when he says, "I don't care he killed my mom".

United we stand Divided we fall Reminds me in Endgame when Tony confronts Steve and said “you said we’d lose together but you weren’t there”

It's a damn shame that MCU all but ignored the Sokovia Accord. There's so much potential there. However, in the context of CW, movie I thougth it was brilliant that the writers showed how things can go from political to personal, which is very true in the real world.

The fact that the sokovia didn't matter much brought to the conclusion that many guys were in the battle just to help someone else and not because they thought it was important. The story at the end evolves around cap and iron man so guys like spiderman and ant were included just in function of those two, they had basically nothing to do with the clash

Literally the ONLY problem with this overall almost brilliant movie is that they adapted the civil war storyline way too early.

My biggest problem is how easily EVERYONE was fooled by Zemo. It's totally ridiculous.

Depends on how you feel about the MCU. If you watch everything, Civil War is great. If you're a casual fan, it definitely leaves more to be desired. I saw it thru the lens of the Avengers as a whole. How it splintered them and how its consequences for their failure against Thanos. It's that dichotomy of making movies like episodes in a series vs making movies that stand on their own. I enjoy how personal Civil War is for the characters vs being a take on society.

5:47 I think these taglines serve as the core for what each version of 'Civil War' were trying to achieve and why you fundamentally may've not liked the MCU direction. The film, as the Russos/Markus & McFeely stressed, is ultimately about the breakup of a family. Rather than A "who's a side are you on" or "who's right type of story" where two ideologies are pitted and it arrives at a conclusion. Natasha's role is often overlooked in this film but what she says about "Staying together is more important than how we stay together" may as well be a/the thesis statement of the film. Like the United We Stand...Divided We Fall tagline, it emphasizes that one of the core messages is that they should focus on how they stand strong together even through all the differences than break apart because of them. I personally loved how the writers didn't write Avengers' as suddenly out of character and openly hostile towards one another. The climax of their disagreements, the airport battle, is not them violently blowing over these disputes but rather them coming at a crossroads regarding a major international issue and most members having to take a stand based on what they believe is right (it's not "Steve being in love with Bucky") a personal stake or both. So while each side is fighting hard to get to their goals, they still respect & like the other side, even exchange quips. Clint & Nat's little conversation I think is a representation of this dynamic at the heart of the sequence. Later, Tony is willing to listen to the other side, admits Steve was right about Bucky and why he protected him, and initially joins the 3rd act as an ally. The actual violent blow-up ultimately occurs over a personal issue; a dark secret kept between family is revealed, which makes it both a betrayal as it is a shock for Tony. Again, in-keeping with the family drama about "going through a divorce" theme. I also disagree that it substitutes the wider MCU's progress or the original comic's themes in favor of character progression and having heroes punch other in the face for the sake of that spectacle. While I think the Sokovia Accords ultimately didn't reach to the narrative potential and impact they could've had on the Avengers and wider universe, I feel that's mainly a retroactive failing on the MCU's part in Phase 3 rather than a problem with the script. Based on the film's ending and Markus & McFeely's commentary post release, it seemed like there was a time where we're going to the events lead to a wider arc and change to the MCU's superhero landscape. But they ultimately sidelined it and had even the heroes who signed turn away from it or ignore the accords without any acknowledgment about it in Infinity War's events. The only lasting consequence was the Avengers' division playing a factor in their loss in that film. Which does enhance aforementioned theme of "United We Stand...Divided We Fall" and the importance of the Avengers staying together. So the film had one lasting effect.

I needed a movie with Cap and Black Widow’s Avengers team before Civil War

Just because the movie is different from the comics doesn't mean that's a problem. In fact, I think it WAS a better idea to focus on the interpersonal relationships between the heroes rather than making a Star Trek: The Next Generation trial. By doing that, it not only elevates the emotional mistakes between the two figureheads of the conflict (Ironman and Captain America) but also builds expertly and develops the pretence of the Sokovia Accords. They were never meant to really underline the film but instead supposed to instigate a divide. In reality, I don't see how the comic ending could have done well in the films, especially since they are more about focusing on our favourite superhero characters than trying to insert mob mentalities or third-party interventions that rob us of the inevitable tragic ending that was delivered when two titans clash.

Remember when the MCU made movies like Civil War or Winter Soldier that took matters seriously? Now everything is a joke, everybody quips like they’re Spider-Man, Iron Man or Deadpool.

Captain America Civil War is good, but Winter Soldier easily tops it. Winter Soldier's story doesn't rely on your knowing 80 different movies and characters to care about the premise. And Civil War is arguably not an actual Captain America movie, more of an Avengers 2.5 according to Anthony Mackie.

I think the problem I have with the MCU as a whole is that these trilogies within the universe don’t feel like a series. I can’t just sit down and binge the Thor movies in a row because of how wildly different they are in tone and structure. I think the only franchises within the MCU that do this well are Spiderman, GotG, and Iron Man. These films feel similar, like they were designed as a set meant to be watched independently. I think the big mistake made by Feige is the loss of these unique tones that made each movie special. What was intriguing about Avengers was how they would take these tonally diverse characters and have them interact in an organic way. Now, as we move further through the universe, every film feels the same and there’s no interesting character mashups because each character has been forced into an MCU mold. This is why I’m excited for the DCU. I think James Gunn sees the potential for this diversity and is putting himself in the right position to give everything that marvel fans have been sorely lacking. I hope he lands the ship and we have another great film franchise to follow.

Your issue with the movie was an essential part for Infinity War because they needed to be divided when Thanos attacked.

As much as I liked the airport battle The fact the characters kept talking and making jokes while fighting really broke the suspension of disbelief

There seems to be a lot of people in the comments yelling about how nerdstalgic said it was a bad movie but they said multiple times that it was a great movie. Saying a film had missed opportunities, pointing out where it fell short or even giving constructive criticism does not mean you think it was bad. Loving something requires you to be able to see how it could be better. No film is flawless

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

I thought it was a great movie, the only problem I ever had with it from the first time I saw it? Iron Man and Cap each have their own viewpoint. Everyone else they recruit just goes along with whoever happens to recruit them. Except maybe Black Widow.

I think the movie is better for making it personal. It does something different from the book. The book shows how fear effects mob mentality through a nameless crowd of civilians, but the movie shows that personal bias often gets in the way of genuine progress through the main characters themselves. Bucky being brainwashed and Wanda being a scapegoat are both examples of victims having their rights discounted for the same reasons under different contexts. They both draw emphasis to the fact that Iron Man isn't thinking logically but is driven by his personal biases, whereas Cap is trying to do what he thinks is right. We can see how Steve is torn between two friends, trying to weigh the situation and mediate justice, which makes it incredibly difficult for anyone to definitively say he has any kind of personal bias. Steve knows that Bucky is a victim of a system of control and Tony is another victim of that same system, but Tony is trying to scapegoat Bucky without any consideration for the full context. That reflects back on Tony's treatment of Wanda. I think that successfully adds a deeper nuance that wasn't present in the book, where the secret identity aspect shoulders the weight of the themes. The movie illustrates on a character level how that fear manifests in Iron Man's stance on the issue. Tony isn't being pragmatic, he's trying to offload a lot of his own personal guilt to the government, and the issue with his parents shows how willing he is to throw justice out the window... so he isn't motivated to register out of any sense of justice, but from his own emotional imbalance. Removing the accords from his stance by giving Tony a strong bias against another victim reveals his true motivations. I think that's a brilliant augmentation of the source material, not a problem. It's not about revenge for Tony's parents, it's about Tony's lack of regard for justice or consideration for victimized individuals. The accords are the curtain revealing Tony's flawed motives when pulled back, not the other way around. The accords are an outlet for Tony's lack of consideration for others. The accords exist because people react to disaster by demanding easy accountability rather than considering individual accountability, because civilians have no way of knowing the details that result in their destroyed livelihoods. Tony's motives to sign the accords align with the people who just want to feel in control over a situation they don't understand, so the issue of Tony's parents just highlights how that same motivation can arise outside of politics. One stance is primarily motivated by fear, taking personal accountability and individual rights away based on discrimination against super powered individuals, all out of an emotionally charged response to a disaster. The other stance is in favor of personal accountability and individual rights, and keeping the power of supers from being exploited by government and political biases. The movie has no issue conveying any of that. I'd argue the book gets more lost with it's theming, veering off into media influence territory, than keeping focus on the honest, personal consideration of the issue based on observable factors. The movie stays centered squarely on how what motivates promotion of that kind of policy, even in moving beyond the policy itself. There is no better MCU film than Civil War. This and Winter Soldier are the peak of the entire MCU.

Civil War should've been an entire phase, if you ask me. I was kind of baffled that they decided to make it a single movie.

I feel like the issues you mentioned might be because the film (which is my favorite MCU film) was too divided between its two main stories: the Accords and the Winter Soldier. I think the whole Sokovia Accords/team vs team should have been in an actual Avengers film, because it had little to do with the main “protect Bucky” story.

There was no bulid up for this film, they should have kept the plot of bucky an cap and have it through some of caps actions in the film and events in previous mcu films have the registration act start to be talked about then have it bulid in the background for the next few films having the events in said films factor into people wanting the registration act then do the civil war in an avengers film

you say this film has problems but the truth is this movie is 10x better than current MCU movies right now

I don't see how focusing on characters as being a flaw. Quite the contrary, the movie did something very very smart. Instead of making them both right, in their own way, and them making you choose a side (automatically making you hate the "other" side), like the comics, the movie, making them both "wrong" (not wrong per se, only guiding their actions through conflicting and opposite emotions), doesn't make you choose a side, other than the side of union. You WANT them to be together again. Anyway, everyone is entitled to give at least ONE punch on the guy that killed/murdered your parents, and, on the other hand, bros for life. I'd say it's a very masculine movie.

“We dropped the building on them while we were kicking ass”. what were you gonna do? not fight and let the whole earth die? LMAOO

Where tf is SHIELD? They literally brought the team together in the first place and constantly work with superheroes even after this movie. It makes sense that they would be part of this event.

The stakes aren't high enough. The heroes are not fighting each other to the death, so it is just a fun scrimmage (e.g. the airport fight scene is fun to watch, but it's like watching a kid smash toys together, with no consequences). And then a movie or two after this one, the characters are back together acting like this never even happened. In retrospect (from 2024), the Civil War movie occurred relatively close to the beginning of the MCU, which makes it seem even more silly because we were just starting to get to know the characters and it seemed a little too early to get all postmodernist and meta.

This and Age of Ultron were the movies that soured me on the MCU. The arguments each side make about the Accords are surface level at best and most of the conflict throughout the movie comes from no one wanting to communicate. I wasn't a big comic book fan growing up but even I knew the comic actually presented thorough and complex arguments for each side. In the movie no one really makes an attempt to defend their position with counterarguments such as the fact that in The Avengers the "oversight" wanted to nuke Manhattan during the invasion which would have killed tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people, that Tony's position is because he was guilt-tripped into caring about one kid that was killed by Ultron's actions after Tony inadvertently created Ultron (overlooking the fact that a lot of others were killed too), and that it's likely far more would have been injured or killed if Scarlett Witch hadn't intervened with Crossbone. No one really takes responsibility for their actions in the movie. I think what frustrated me the most is how everyone was lauding how great this is and how shit the DCEU movies were even though they aren't all that different (aside from the MCU having the stronger story and characterization), and in general the fight choreography in the DCEU had always been good whereas the airport scene in Civil War was one of the first times the MCU did it well. Civil War just ultimately felt like it was to set up for the rest of phase 3 without letting the movie be its own story.

As someone who saw this film having not seen many of the Marvel films, I totally agree. I felt like they were setting up an intelligent film, and then it descended into the typical overly long action scenes that put me off the franchise generally.

I am a big fan of this channel and have watched this content for years, so take what I am about to say with that in mind. I have felt that the writing of videos over the last year or two has suffered compared to older ones. The structure is a little confused, and by bouncing back and forth between topics, a lot of comments/ideas end up being repeated. I think the central ideas of the videos are often great, but the videos themselves often spend a lot of time adding little to them

2:46 “give me a break” great scene because that’s what this really is about. He wants a cop out instead of following his morals

I disagree, the fallout events in Civil War were heavily foreshadowed in Age of Ultron and really the purpose of the movie was to setup the fracture before Infinity War.

In the whole of the MCU, this movie does make a impact with its characters and their character arcs. Because it plays back on them in the opening of Endgame with Tony still not forgiving Rogers for splitting the Avengers and lessening their ability to take down Thanos in Infinity War. He blames him for not going along with the accords and maybe making a difference in that pivotal battle as a united force and not a divided one as it showed in that film and thus resulting in half of all life dying.

I realized Marvel wasn’t interested in thoughtful storytelling when they gave America a pass on all the horrible things it’s responsible for during CA: Winter Soldier because “Hydra did it.” They removed any culpability and were content to let Cap and the Avengers become defenders of the status quo instead of improving the world. It’s the same reason they have so many villains who are objectively correct, but the Avengers kill anyway. Marvel’s more interested in a team of heroes that preserves the status quo than one that makes things better. Because they know those stories are political by nature and they don’t want to ruffle any feathers.

To me , the Civil War movie was great in the first two acts, but the 3rd act stinks. The comic is brilliant and the MUA 2 game did a great job adapting it, even better than the MCU.

I keep trying to like this movie, and as much as I like parts of it, I just don't like it overall, as a whole. It just came off more as Domestic Disturbance rather than Civil War.

Something that I learned from a RU-vid video several years ago is the fact that they would never have been called the Sokovia Accords. Accords are named after the place in which they are signed,and not after any cities or territories that they happen to concern.

Interesting that the push to remove the heroes' right to have a secret identity was led by Iron Man -- one of the few who notably did not have a secret identity.

This video should become a classic Nerdstalgic analysis ❤

Civil War gets overshadowed by Infinity War and End Game, but I always thought it was better, despite the "main" antagonist Zemo being lackluster, because I always saw Ironman actually being the main antagonist and Captian America the main protagonist of the movie.

I’m on and forever will be with captain America on this one

Finally someone who critiques civil war.

Interesting discussion. Civil War is still one of my favorite Marvel movies. 😁

I mostly remember this movie for the handful of really great fight scenes, and the flimsy stance Tony Stark's character takes to force the plot forward. It also ignores how in the opening scene, that guy either blows up in the streets, killing everyone, or heroes intervene and try to prevent it, which leads to the same result a few seconds later. It confuses me how they try to make Scarlet "responsible" for an act that was literally already happening, where she did what she could. It seems confusing to hold her responsible and is just more flimsy plot-building. But then like 8 movies later when she is incredibly insane and dangerous everyone is like, "Nah she's good just leave her be"

the very fact that we are still dissecting the film almost 8 years later tells me it was a great movie

love how black widow was beating the shit out of antman each time she got lol

The only real complaint is they should have had an Avengers movie without half the team. So when Infinity War happens be more powerful when they lost. Just me.

I ultimately agree. When this film was announced, I was against it because I felt like it shouldn’t have been a captain America centric movie. It should’ve been just an avengers movie. Other than that the best parts to me was every seen with Spider-Man and Black Panther. Also, the shot of the comic accurate portrayal scene at the end with cap and Iron Man.

I've never watched the movie or read the source material. But realistically... yeah, if youre gonna have superheroes, they should be regulated. That doesnt mean you should have to give up your liberties just because you were born with superpowers or so, but if youre gonna use them in ways that affect other people, youre gonna have to accept some rules and responsibilites that come with that. Like if I were to buy a gun, even in places where you dont need a license to own one, I'd still hope there are at least some laws in place as to when and where it's okay for me to point that thing at someone.

Spider-Man never had to deal with the Socovia Accords in his own films despite fighting on behalf of them.

Still my favourite MCU movie.

The main problem is that Iron Man should've annihilated cap and bucky. It's like Mike Tyson vs an Apache helicopter lmao

This wasn't a cap movie it was tony stark guilt tripping about creating the Ultron movie Edit - or iron man 4 or Avengers 3

The airport scene is arguably the most fun action scene of any Marvel movie.

the other issue is how ridiculously complicated the villians plot is. this movie is much over rated

The political message that the comics conveyed got lost in the movie, so instead of Freedom vs. Security debate but with superheroes it became Super Dude vs. Super Dude: The Reckoning

Bucky isn't a MacGuffin. He's relevant to the stories of the two main characters in this movie, as he killed Tony's parents and he's Captain America's best friend, and he is relevant to the overarching MCU story as well. He does not decline in importance with the narrative either, he is the reason for the climactic showdown.

Tony is clearly wrong in the movie as he serves the purpose of the antagonist to Steve. Dropping the accords which would have made it a fascinating movie combined with Tony not having a leg to stand on really drops the movie. Instead of the accords being a superhero registration it should have been about mind control and if those under it were culpable. This would have lead into the conflict that ended up happening and given a chance for it to be explained why anyone would go after someone who doesn’t have free will when doing actions.

That kiss between Steve and Sharon was so contrived and unearned that I've been (internally) ranting about it frequently for the past three months after rewatching the movie. I do think they should be together because she's his girlfriend in the comics and having her not be his girlfriend would make her a bad adaptation (as her being his girlfriend is part of the point of her character), but the kiss, as is, was still contrived and needed proper build-up. One could argue that they flirted in The Winter Soldier, but otherwise they didn't seem really close before the kiss.

Instead of just making this film coz dc announced batman v superman they should have set it up and have it be an avengers film

I completely disagree with the thesis of this video. The reason Captain America Civil war is one of the best MCU movies is BECAUSE it focuses more on personal relationships than world building

The fact this film is about Captain America in the first place just shows much it isn't interested in the nuances of the original comic.

My biggest problem was i wanted a good solo movie with Zemo and Crossbones as the villians with Falcon and Winter Soldier as supportive characters.Also to keep the political thriller tone that made Winter Soldier so great.

The movie was never going to fully adapt the "super heroes must/must not be regulated" aspect of the comics because that would get viewers asking themselves hard questions about governmental regulation and the powers that be simply cannot have that happening

Civil war is amazing and in the top 5 of the mcu films. But with that said the villains plan relies way to heavily on luck to the point if you really dissect it and certain plot points the movie then becomes on its own bad

The lack of required characters at the time, hurt this story. Coupled with the fact that the issues Cap had in the comics took time to bear fruit. The government did use heroes to be police agents, but that took time the film didn’t have.

I'm tired of the MCU's reliance on the mind-control plot device. It has always felt like a cop out, a means to introduce a conflict without compromising a character's likeability. It also shows how little accountability there is in this world they've built. No risk, no reward. Not in a narrative sense anyway.

Movie versions of the Avengers never seemed to get along anyway. After all, having people not get along is how things are done nowadays. The Avengers from the 1960's to early 2000's actually trained together so they used their powers as a team effectively. They did have problems with each other, but nothing as bad as the movie versions. In short, they should have waited to do the civil war storyline. Hell, it would have helped to show Thanos gaining more power and losing that power several times like in the comic books. Course movies have to rush the storylines. Where comics can take months or years to do a storyline properly.

The biggest issue with Civil War is how it influenced battles in later Marvel movies. After this every battle is just two groups charging at each other. It made absolutely no sense in Infinity War for this to happen since Wakada should have long range weaponary and have soldiers outside the shield, also some type of military vehicles as they clearly showed in Black Panther they have invisible jets. Also when nobody knows who the villains are, no one cares if they're charging at each other. Samething with endgame. And no, other large scale battles in other movies are not this dumb. In Lord of the rings one side is being sieged or defending. In the Battle of the Bastards it was a trapped setup by Ramsey. Yet now Marvel movies have every large scale battle just ramming into each other.

There was never going to be a way for them to do the comic book justice in movie form. There are too many threads like the Negative Zone Prison, Spider-Man publicly coming out and having to face the backlash, Speedball's depression and self harm. They still got the over arching message across in the first half. My only critique is that they could've tied the Winter Soldier Program itself into the film as an analogy for why Governments should not have control over super-powered people. But outside of that the film does its job well and the reason people haven't brought up the issue as you put it is because the film did such a good job that people overlook it. I like that the film in a way is a mirror opposite to the comic with Cap's team basically winning this time instead of Iron Man's in the comic version.

I think a point you might have missed is that Tony and Steve are supposed to both be wrong by the end of the movie. They both fall prey to their demons and we see the worst of both characters. It humanizes them and creates the biggest impact for Avengers Infinity War and Endgame, where we see the effects and later healing from their fight.

The MCU could easily delve into this idea again and flesh it out way more.

I do like that airport battle.

The movie may not have had a desire to explore the themes of liberty vs security because it was more about continuing each character's arc from different films and how they landed on each side. This continuity more than made up for it. It even shows how Tony's bad blood towards Cap goes back his entire life, due to the strained relationship he had with his father, who admired the shit out of Steve. Having him partly responsible for the murder of Tony's parents was just the last straw in a long standing feud.

I never really liked Civil War. It seemed very rushed and forced due to trying to undermine BvS. They could’ve waited longer and done Civil War more naturally.

Civil War for me was the first Marvel movie that I felt was a good movie (as opposed to merely sometimes being enjoyable previously). I didn't know the comic book storyline but after watching this video I feel like the films adaption of the story was a good choice.

About adapting Civil War II: One of the best Batman movies Mask of the phantasm is based in one of his worst comics, Year two. Also the excellent first Shazam movie was based on the crappy version by Geoff Johns. So a competent writer sometimes can fix what a bad one turned into trash.

tbh I like how they did it in the movie. always in these types of media they try to tackle these big and important issues but will never go all the way with it since these issues are not so simple as for a handful of comic book artists to give a definite answer on. Due to this, while the start of the run might be thought provoking and intriguing, a lot of these types of stories end really strangely. At least in this movie, the issue was just a catalyst and the finale was more about the characters instead.

Steve wasn't trying to "protect" Bucky... he wanted to be the one to bring him in.. he thought by him being the one to do it... it would save lives..... until he gets very suspicious about things and feels Bucky is being set up.

People talk about fighting for ideals (book) but when they actually fight it's because it's personal (movie).

I think their adaptation was reasonable. The deeper potential you mention at the end seems like a bit of a reach. It would go over most peoples' heads. They judged it better to suck every type of viewer in by making about personality.

Who else paused the video every time a new still from the comics appeared on screen to read all the comic's dialogue and therefore lost track of the video's overall thoughts and had to rewatch it? 😅😂

The Sokovia Accords had massive implications on the MCU for years. Civil War ended with the Avengers divided, half of them fugitives, leaving Earth vulnerable to Thanos. They remained divided until Endgame and its climactic word: "Assemble." The ground laid by Civil War made that moment all the more stirring and brilliant.

The art in the civil war kicks ass. That's when artist could still draw good.

The reason the movie makes sense is because it re-engages the audience into an age-old problem (at least comics-wise) but on a more personal level, as the MCU has always been known to do when compared with the DCEU. In fact the MCU owes its success to its emotionality, its individuality, its ability to make the characters within it feel like people you might know in your own world, such that they're not necessarily part of a certain faction but rather individuals that choose the factions they choose based on what personal values they hold. Ultimately, these decisions prove critical to the end of phase 3, and set up a world where a coming together of these disjointed forces becomes the greatest show of unity against a common enemy once all the losses are taken into account. How would you want to regard Civil War as a movie about the Sokovia Accords when the ultimate direction of phase 3 was always towards Thanos? Ask yourself this, would we have needed two movies to end the saga if Cap and Iron Man hadn't split? The Sokovia Accords, Zemo, they're all happenstance coming together to create a cinematic marvel, and for the sake of the bigger plot, expert movie critics had to turn a blind eye to that happenstance to allow for the Infinity Saga to happen.

The biggest problem was that it was a Captain America movie with avengers in it. The story was about cap & his struggle because it was his movie. Had it been called avengers civil war the story could have went a different way

bold move advocating for a comic written by Millar in the 2000’s, it’s not like the movie had a good material to adapt from to begin with

Great video. I think stagnating the mcu was on purpose to set up our heroes' defeat in infinity war. Love this movie so much.

Ironman was the antagonist %100 and Captain America was in the right. The less government control and the more individual freedom the better (which is even more relevant now). This was the only movie where I hated Ironman's ideology even though it made sense for his character, but I was rooting for the protagonist Captain America all the way.

Just because it tells a different story than the original comic book arc doesn’t make it a bad story/movie.

They were going the Comic book route until Robert Downey Jr said he wants to be in the film and demanded it so they had to make thess changes for the film. He also got paid more than Captain America on his own film. It was meant to be Cap vs Black Panther

I don’t think the film was going for what was in the comics at all. It was a base for it, but the film was really a masterpiece because it showed that both were wrong, and that pulled the Avengers apart. This is exactly what Thanos needed to win, and he did. The Sokovia Accords was the macguffin used to split them up. And the action and brilliant acting on all parts really shines in this one.

My biggest problem is Tony trying to kill a victim who he knew was being controlled.

I think that Captain America Civil War should have been instead Avengers Civil War now at phase 4 because we have a lot more heroes making it much more interesting than 6 vs 6 battle we got in Civil War

@7:21 I see your understanding of this movie is very surface level. Steve's entire motivation for doing what he's doing is covered in The Winter Soldier movie and dates back to the First Avengers movie... Steve doesn't trust the government. Fury lied to him about why Shield wanted the tesseract, then he withheld information about their mission on the Lumerian Star, then he learns Shield has secretly been Hyrda... So no, he doesn't want to sign the accords. And once again.. He's right.. Bucky was set up and probably would have been killed by the swat team.. Had he not gotten involved.. Killed for something he didn't do.. Had Steve signed rhe accords... He wouldn't have been there to save Bucky.... Oh about the Accords being appealed... The Avengers blipped everyone back into existence and then stopped a genocidal alien... So yeah, proof rhe accords needed to be repealed. Imagine rhe Avengers not fighting Thanos Army because they're awaiting approval from the UN Security Council.

Ultimately the superheroes should answer to the people. But that is not what the S Accords demand, they demand the superheroes answer to the State, which as we know, is a very different thing. Cap was correct to distrust the State.