Chris Evans Robert Downey Jr Iron ManMarvel’s Iron Man is apparently suiting up for Captain America 3, which is great news, but someone better tell Robert Downey Jr. to read the script very closely. If he’s not careful, then there’s a good chance Marvel will use the big screen adaptation of “Civil War” to make a fool out of his character, just like it did in the comics.

Comingsoon.net reported Oct. 13:

Marking a major twist to the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s “Phase Three,” Variety is reporting that Robert Downey Jr. is close to joining the cast of Captain America 3 as Tony Stark and that the film will launch elements of the hit comic book crossover event, “Civil War” in the MCU!

The news comes on the heels of an announcement from Marvel this morning that a new “Civil War” comic book is on the way next summer.

The good news for Iron Man fans is that Anthony and Joe Russo will be at the helm for Captain America 3. The bad news is that a.) They’ll still have to traverse Marvel’s “Civil War” material from 2006, which often made Tony Stark look like a buffoon, and b.) Tony will most-likely be seen as a villain instead of a man with incredibly-astute observations about civil liberties in a world populated by superheroes.

For those unfamiliar with the storyline, it centers around the Superhero Registration Act, which originally was supposed to require those with superpowers to simply disclose their abilities to the federal government. It soon morphed into a weird recruitment tool by the State to force individuals to sign on as living weapons.

Marvel’s tortured allegory for the Patriot Act could have been a great read if the writers handled both sides of the debate with the intellectual respect each deserved. Instead, Tony Stark became a symbol for Marvel’s interpretation of the conservative worldview and was made to look like an unhinged war-monger. Captain America, meanwhile, fought for the so-called privacy rights for men and women who could destroy entire cities, possibly warp time and space, etc.

Consider this: In the Marvel Universe, it’s apparently okay for the federal government to require an ID to vote, get a driver’s license, open a bank account, and a whole host of other actions — but it was somehow an invasion of civil liberties in 2006 to have a man register with the federal government if he had telepathic abilities.

Here is how ridiculous it became: Captain America, for all intents and purposes, fought for the “rights” of a super-villain who could do all sorts of dastardly things to his neighbor’s wife and kids, mind-wipe the whole family so they couldn’t remember what took place, and then do it over and over and over again for years on end. And yet, Tony Stark was the “bad” guy for proposing that some sort of legislation be put in place to get a handle of it all.

Again, it’s important to note that Anthony and Joe Russo did a wonderful job with Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Given the way they successfully navigated political minefields with its script, one would have to assume they would give moviegoers the best possible version of a cinematic “Civil War.”

But it isn’t them the fans should be worried about — it’s Marvel. If the company pushes them to use too many elements from the 2006-2007 event, then Tony Stark will come off looking ridiculous. If they allow the Russo brothers to just pick and chose the elements they like, then fans are likely to get a really cool film.

Robert Downey Jr. probably guaranteed himself a massive paycheck for Captain America 3, and that is wonderful for him. However, Iron Man fans better hope that he also had his lawyers secure him some clout with the script-writing process. If they didn’t, then he may have to deliver some embarrassing lines for what will still undoubtedly be a summer blockbuster.

If you’re a fan of Marvel Comics, then let me know what you thought of 2006’s Civil War in the comments below, as well as the company’s decision to visit the storyline again for summer, 2015.

Marvel Civil War 2015Related: ‘Captain America: The Winter Soldier’ keeps the Marvel movie train rolling full steam ahead

Advertisements

About the Author Douglas Ernst

I'm a former Army guy who believes success comes through hard work, honesty, optimism, and perseverance. I believe seeing yourself as a victim creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. I believe in God. I'm a USC Trojan with an MA in Political Science from American University.

33 comments

  1. I think a lot of the reason folks had problems with the Superhero Registration Act was because, both inside and outside Marvel Universe-616, it reeked of the mutant registration act, which was Big Government Gestapo and KGB all over again except with giant robots and mad science. Plus, considering the amount of villains that would have been able to exploit a database detailing the secret identities of those heroes that still had secret identities and who their friends and family were, and the amount of villains that DID exploit such a database, you can imagine a lot of folks were uneasy about this.

    Then again, considering SHIELD, a Big Government pawn if I ever saw one, probably ALREADY had the secret identity of every hero operating inside the US… I’m not sure what the problem was. Maybe the US government really is that incompetent compared to a fictional UN Taskforce that can actually do something like SHIELD (even if that Taskforce is shadier than the dark side of the moon) and the information would leak out a lot quicker or something…

    Still, the best way to sum up this question is with this line from the otherwise very okay film, X3: X-Men United from the president. I’m paraphrasing from memory, so it’s not going to be an exact quote, but here I go:

    “How can freedom and democracy stand when there are men who can lift the golden gate bridge?”

    1. Thanks for the comments, vunderguy. I appreciate it. You make some very good points.

      My problem with Marvel’s “Civil War” was that they took a story that should have been about the really big philosophical questions you’ve raised, but instead they turned it into vehicle from which they could bash the Bush administration. As history has shown, these very large (and difficult) questions have continued to plague the Obama administration.

      How do you maximize civil liberties will also maximizing security? That’s a really good question, but Marvel’s comic writers can’t help themselves from getting bogged down in petty partisan politics…and it ruins stories with great potential.

      In a world where there would be living nuclear weapons walking among the civilian population, the government would simply not allow them to remain anonymous. The Marvel Universe doesn’t really lend itself to stories that paint conservatives as “bad” guys and liberals as “good” guys, so I’m not sure why certain writers try to go that route. I mean, I get why they do it…but it doesn’t work. Like I said, if Marvel just sticks to tacking really big ideas while not boiling down the conservative worldview into a silly caricature, then they’ll probably have an inspiring product on their hands at the end of the day.

  2. Marvel’s stance on Civil War was that Tony was in the right the entire time, but the problem was allowing the writers, who all had various opinions of the characters and their choices in the split, to weigh in with their own political agendas and graft them onto the characters. There was no editorial micromanaging (and there hasn’t been any since Jim Shooter was fired in sodding 87) to ensure both sides came out looking fair in the arc. It got so bad, that Marvel had to have Tony mindscrew himself later on down the line to escape the overwhelming levels of guilt and consequence that had engraved itself onto his pysche.

    As for the revival next year…given all the storylines revolving around alternate universes, I have a personal theory Marvel are going to ‘merge’ every reality together, sort of like DC in the first Crisis, and they will pick and choose which events from those realities will form part of the “new” Marvel history, past, present and even future. Don’t hold me to that though

    This whole mess did damage to some of Marvel’s most treasured brands. Of all the characters in the poster, Cap actually sort of came out alright (Brubaker is a class-a talent) but poor Tony and Peter were scarred beyond all recognition. It’s well documented by Doug just how far Spidey has fallen, with only the daily newspaper strip still representing the ideal variation, but that is far removed from the majority of comic reader’s minds unfortunately. The Iron Man brand was salvaged by the movies, I hope all that good will isn’t evaporated by the decision to adapt this eyesore. I’m not very politically-minded, I’m sort of a “basic hipster”, I’ll complain about some things that I feel in my stomach to be wrong, but I try to distance myself from the rigorous strain and simply choose to escape into the entertainment medium, watching tv, writing fanfics and bad poetry. Perhaps I’ve been in the deep end of that a little too long and it’s time to get a bit of the bite back and care more about what is shaping the minds of the mediocrity poured into what I enjoy.

    1. “Marvel’s stance on Civil War was that Tony was in the right the entire time…”

      If that’s true (and I have no reason to doubt you), then that’s absolutely amazing. I purchased almost every issue of Civil War, and if Marvel’s stance is that Tony was supposed to be the guy with his moral compass on straight, then I have no idea how they can make that case. “Civil War” really soured me on Marvel, and I drastically cut back after that. Then, its editors basically finished me off with what they did to Peter Parker, the way they reacted to fans, etc.

      The problem was allowing the writers, who all had various opinions of the characters and their choices in the split, to weigh in with their own political agendas and graft them onto the characters. There was no editorial micromanaging (and there hasn’t been any since Jim Shooter was fired in sodding 87) to ensure both sides came out looking fair in the arc.

      But there is the rub, my friend. As far as I know (and I implore someone to correct me if I’m wrong), there isn’t one openly-conservative writer employed by Marvel’s comics division. And if there is someone who is conservative, then I’d love to see if his Twitter feed is 1/8 as partisan on the right as Dan Sott’s is on the left. Marvel doesn’t need to micro-manage its content when it comes to stories that get political because it already knows what the end result will be. In some sense its editors had to know that if they were writing a giant Bush/Patriot Act allegory, then Tony was going to come across looking horrible. If I had more time on my hands I’d probably go back and read some of the interviews with writers that came out in 2006 and 2007 just to see what they were saying about “Civil War.”

      As for the revival next year…given all the storylines revolving around alternate universes, I have a personal theory Marvel are going to ‘merge’ every reality together, sort of like DC in the first Crisis, and they will pick and choose which events from those realities will form part of the “new” Marvel history, past, present and even future. Don’t hold me to that though

      This seems very plausible. If it comes to pass I hope you stop on by with a review!

      I try to distance myself from the rigorous strain and simply choose to escape into the entertainment medium, watching tv, writing fanfics and bad poetry.

      Don’t sell yourself short. Your poetry is probably a lot better than you think. 🙂

  3. I was never a fan of “Civil War” at all. It was one of those stories the led to me swearing off modern comics altogether. There’s just so much wrong with it that I don’t even know where to begin. First, it was simply a regurgitation of earlier, better storylines from X-Men (the Mutant Registration Act) and the 1989 crossover “Acts of Vengeance.” Plus, I hated the way it derailed Tony Stark’s character and turned him into a straw man of conservatives. I also hated when heroes battle each other instead of supervillains, and Mark Millar made it so that everyone was acting grossly out of character. I remember how during the battle between Cap and Iron Man, Cap called Tony a “pampered little punk.” They’re the best of friends, for Christ’s sake.

    In regards to Spidey, I don’t like how it led to “One More Day” and reverted him back to an immature man-boy living with his aunt.

    Also, in one of the tie-ins, Brian Bendis had Cap behave out of character: “They want superheroes to be controlled by the government. They want us to be puppets to a corporate shill structure, like their politicians and everything else on the planet. What do you expect from a society that gets all its news from late-night comedy shows? Of course they don’t care! Everything is a punchline. Everything is just — no. That’s not true. They care. They just care about themselves more than they care about the world they live in. They want to be comfortable, not safe. They don’t want to fight for their freedom. They want someone like me to fight for it for them.” So it’s obvious they were all in lockstep in terms of where Civil War stood politically. Tell me, would the real Cap say something so disgustingly out of character? No. Methinks somebody had a political axe to grind.

    The PATRIOT Act allegory was also pathetic. Did Millar and the other Marvel writers really think that in real life, people who could level an entire city would be allowed to roam free? No, they wouldn’t. Wouldn’t you want to know if your neighbor possessed telepathic abilities and could alter your mind at a whim or turn your family against you by simply taking control of their minds? I would. In Agents of SHIELD, they have a database that monitors people with superpowers called the Index and will take them out if necessary.

    An example of a much better-written superhuman registeration act would be in Larry Correia’s “Grimnoir” series, in which superhumans called “Actives” are under constant threat of an “Active Registration Act,” (championed by FDR) which is more of an allegory for gun control legislation than it is the PATRIOT Act. If they refuse to comply, they’ll be rounded up and thrown in prison camp. Although Correia was accused of ripping off X-Men, he actually based it on FDR’s internment of Japanese-Americans.

  4. Hey Doug,

    As you know, I always like to hear your stance on superheroes and the medium in general. Sometimes we end up agreeing (Dan Slott’s an asshole) and sometimes not quite as much (can’t recall an example at this time.) So I suppose it is time to weigh in on this:

    Civil War was certainly an interesting story, if a clusterfuck that bastardized a lot of characters. Iron Man did become a symbol of “the man” and a lot of writers at Marvel being very anti-establishment, weren’t really keen on giving that kind of superhero weight because at one point or another, they were subject to some kind of upheaval of their own. Not every writer has (Mark Millar of course helming the story and was the only one to give Iron Man a fair shake) but it did strike a cord with me even back then and now:

    Yes, supervillains are a threat. They can do horrible and horrendous things. Superheroes often wear masks in order to protect their loved ones from the dangers that their lives will create whenever they decide to take those masks off. Daredevil immediately comes to mind and he was subject to an unmasking plotline just 5 years before. Spider-Man during the storyline got a taste of just what happens when a hero of his stature, ie. deals with a lot of street crime and the mob, DOES become publicly known and Aunt May ended up getting shot, though the bullet was intended for him and Mary Jane.

    By that point, SHIELD knew 80% of the superhero population by name and kept tabs on them anyways, so the idea of registering was already a silly idea to begin with. But the tipping point was the whole “reveal your public identity” bit. Now in recent comics some heroes, like Daredevil, have decided that coming out would save more than harm more in the now, but we all know this is a response to the social media age where anybody with access to Google will just put two-and-two together anyways. But in that vein, a publicly known superhero better be prepared to deal with the consequences of putting your name out there because you alone are not just the target, but now so is your family and those close to you because you decided to poke an ever-mutating bear that is crime. Which is why most heroes wear masks: to protect that part of their life from the wrath the endure on their own.

    With that in mind, and if I was a superhero, I would not want my name on any registry where any mobster with a thick chequebook and a senator in his pocket could find out who I am and use me like a pawn and hide it under “the law.” When superheroes, mostly, are morally-certain vigilantes that must break a few laws in order to stop the ones from breaking any law they can in order to profit on the suffering of others. In that vein, I will not stand by and do nothing, but I am not stupid enough to make myself a target. Now while I found the climax of this book absolutely fucking stupid, the Dark Knight Returns does drive this point home very effectively: The government doesn’t like to be embarrassed by their own failures and will do what they must, even if these acts are truly heinous, to remain strong. Now while I think Superman could, would, should, and pretty much DID, annihilate Batman in that book on the physical level, Batman’s moral high ground stood strong. I would rather do what is morally right than what is legally right, because they do not always agree.

    But that is my two cents, which actually don’t exist anymore here in Canada, so I guess it would be five cents.

    1. Now while I found the climax of this book absolutely fucking stupid, the Dark Knight Returns does drive this point home very effectively: The government doesn’t like to be embarrassed by their own failures and will do what they must, even if these acts are truly heinous, to remain strong. Now while I think Superman could, would, should, and pretty much DID, annihilate Batman in that book on the physical level, Batman’s moral high ground stood strong. I would rather do what is morally right than what is legally right, because they do not always agree.

      As you nicely highlight, these sorts of stories can be done well. I agree with you that there is a case to be made against such laws. Your points are well spoken. Unfortunately, Marvel does not have guys like you on its payroll — it has editors and writers of the Slottian mold.

      I think that some writers, in their zeal to essentially stick it to the Bush administration at the time, just went off the reservation in terms of making Stark’s side look like ignorant tools of totalitarian monsters and police state overseer wannabes. All they really did was make a disappointing product and alienate guys like me. I can’t remember the last time I spent “Civil War”-type money on a Marvel storyline… That was basically the end of the line for me. I’d change my mind if a future crop of editors adopted a more welcoming business model towards guys like me, Truthwillwin1, Carl, Hube, etc.

      Anyway, as always I appreciate your two cents…or five cents, or whatever the conversion rate would be these days. 🙂

  5. I just want to say that I always appreciate the comments section here. I think people should read them more before making statements like “out of touch conservatives” or “crazy right-wing nuts”, they would find much more rational discussion and thought than they expect. Civil War was a stain on the character of many heroes. Brubaker is a great writer and did some very good stories but I will say that his unfair targeting of conservatives was ridiculous. I would also say that Marvel still has editorial mandates but since it seems they share the same goals I do not think they will get in the way of the writers agendas in most cases. Marvel has consistently spit on conservative fans and if they really want to increase the market share they need to grow up.

    1. There’s a definite echo chamber mentality at Marvel (and DC). They basically tell themselves how wonderful they are and anyone who isn’t within their inner circle is labelled a “bigot” and “crazy right-wing nuts” and any other immature ad hominem attack they can come up with.

      The only Brubaker-written Cap story I enjoyed was his first arc where he brought back Bucky as the Winter Soldier, and even then I thought the movie was vastly superior to the story. The Cap goes after the Tea Party storyline was the final straw for me as far as modern Marvel was concerned, although my disgust with their comics began with “Avengers Disassembled” (basically an attempt by Bendis to throw out the characters he didn’t like and put his pet characters onto the New Avengers) and “Civil War.”

      Civil War lost Marvel a lot of fans. I think the Russo Brothers could take the basic elements of the story and make it good, but they have to avoid the straw man caricatures of conservatives that permeated the original storyline.

    2. The Cap goes after the Tea Party storyline was the final straw for me as far as modern Marvel was concerned, although my disgust with their comics began with “Avengers Disassembled” (basically an attempt by Bendis to throw out the characters he didn’t like and put his pet characters onto the New Avengers) and “Civil War.”

      The Tea Party story was really weird… I don’t know how they thought they would get away with that in a world with Twitter, Facebook, etc. They tried to backpedal after the fact, but it didn’t really work.

      I can see where you’re coming from on “Avengers Disassembled,” but I thought the quality of the writing was pretty good. I think I read that on a flight home to see my parents one Christmas.

    3. I disagree about Avengers Disassembled, but I nonetheless respect your opinion. I just felt that he forced too many of his pet characters onto the Avengers. Now, I don’t mind Spider-Man being on there. I don’t mind Luke Cage being on there. But Wolverine? He’s already on five different teams (and counting) and it strains credulity, even in a comic book world, that he could have all that time to be with all those teams. Spider-Woman? I like the character, but felt that Bendis tried to force her into just about every storyline. And don’t get me started about Jessica Jones, a Mary Sue if there ever was one.

      As for the Tea Party storyline, I remember how Mark Waid went onto a tirade defending it, calling anyone who criticized it “lunatics.” Yeah, that’s a surefire way to get more fans, Marvel.

    4. Wasn’t Spider-Man on The New Avengers, a pseudo-member of The Fantastic Four, and then handling his own title all at the same time for awhile? Heh.

      I used to read The New Avengers just to get in a little Spider-Man reading since the regular title was pretty forgettable. Heck, Spidey wasn’t so deep in The New Avengers, but it was better than whatever was going on in The Amazing Spider-Man at the time…

    5. “Wasn’t Spider-Man on The New Avengers, a pseudo-member of The Fantastic Four, and then handling his own title all at the same time for awhile? Heh.”

      I think so, yeah. It made slightly more sense than Wolverine being on five teams at once and having his own solo title.

      “I used to read The New Avengers just to get in a little Spider-Man reading since the regular titles were pretty forgettable. Heck, Spidey wasn’t so deep in The New Avengers, but it was better than whatever was going on in The Amazing Spider-Man at the time…”

      I never really got into New Avengers, because of the reasons I mentioned above. I’m not a Bendis fan, and the only story of his that I ever liked was “Secret War.” But I do agree that Spider-Man fared better there than in his own title, at least for a while.

    6. I just want to say that I always appreciate the comments section here. I think people should read them more before making statements like “out of touch conservatives” or “crazy right-wing nuts”, they would find much more rational discussion and thought than they expect.

      Yes, certain comic book writers would like their fans to believe that rational discussions can’t be had here, on your blog, Hube’s blog, etc. They say nasty things on Twitter because a lot of people will just take what they say at face value, give them retweets and feed their egos. Sad.

  6. When I first heard about this, I was like “wow are they really going with that storyline”. As stated by other people, it is a very risky choice as it could easily blow up in their faces (e.g. audience being weirded out over villainous conservative Tony Stark).

    On one hand, it could be done really well considering how they handled the balance in Captain America: The Winter Soldier. On the other hand, it might not considering the cliché of the Mandarin in Iron Man 3 (evil white American businessman).

    I hope they go down the original intended path for this storyline being that both sides are right and wrong at the same time on this issue. I also hope they don’t use the weird elements from the comic book story like using brainwashed villians as soldiers, Peter revealing his identity on TV etc. Bleedincool reckons they might have Captain killed off at the end of the movie (like the comics), leading into another film where the Falcon becomes the new Captain America.

    1. Bleedincool reckons they might have Captain killed off at the end of the movie
      That would make sense. As I understand it, Chris Evans isn’t too hot about acting and wishes to become a director. The end of Civil War is the perfect excuse to write him out.

    2. I suppose they could set up Civil War in Captain America 3, then go into The Avengers 3 with all sorts of tension between Tony and Steve…have them barely come out of that alive…and then end Civil War in Iron Man 4 with Steve dying.

      Regardless of what one thinks of the Marvel movies, it’s hard not to tip your hat to their overall vision. I really like that they’re trying to plan all of this stuff out years ahead of time. As a kid, I just wanted to see a single blockbuster Spider-Man movie made. That was basically a pipe dream throughout the 80s and 90s. Now, we have members of the Marvel Universe running around on the big screen multiple times a year.

    3. I remember reading about a possible Avengers movie way back in 2001 (when I was 11), when it was floated around as a possible future movie in some magazine I subscribed to at the time. But at the time, it just seemed like a pipe dream and even in 2005 when Marvel announced they would be producing their own movies, I wasn’t sure it would actually come into fruition. But I’m glad to have been proven wrong on that.

    4. I hope they go down the original intended path for this storyline being that both sides are right and wrong at the same time on this issue.

      To me, that is what would really make it something special. If even the audience is torn as to who to essentially root for, then you know that it will spark all sorts of cool conversations. You know that both guys want the best for America, and that there are trade-offs with any decision that is made, but ultimately someone has to give. If Tony and Steve are both in anguish over what’s going on, the audience will wrestle with it all as well. If Tony just comes across as a mustache-twirling bad guy, then it will be lame.

  7. Why are they doing this storyline again? What can they say that hasn’t already been said. and said badly at that? Is the villain this time around going to be a heteropatriarchal RethugliKKKan with an axe to grind?

    At this point I don’t even care. Marvel has the right to redo this arc but when they reboot, something that is apparently happening next year, I hope they go hard. The “soft reboot” BS tried with NOW and the New 52 obviously isn’t working.

    (Also, The Avengers 4??? LOL…)

    1. At this point I don’t even care. Marvel has the right to redo this arc but when they reboot, something that is apparently happening next year, I hope they go hard. The “soft reboot” BS tried with NOW and the New 52 obviously isn’t working.

      I look at reboots like Marvel’s decision to end Peter and MJ’s marriage. Marvel said the marriage was the problem. No, lazy writing was the problem. Likewise, I don’t think Marvel needs a reboot — I think it needs good writing. They’d probably have better sales if they lowered the price for comics as well. I can’t be spending $4.00 a pop, especially if I’m going to have three months or more of “meh” stories in between their big events… On top of that, they charge the same price for digital as they do for print. Huh? Can someone explain how that makes sense?

    2. Yeah, given the quality of most books and the quantity of pages $4 a comic is pretty ridiculous. I’m surprised that and the inefficient distribution process haven’t caused a company to implode yet.

      Having advertisements in a book lowers its price, right?

    3. My guess is that if you were able to audit Marvel’s comics division you would see a lot of inefficiency. Something isn’t right. How would a younger audience be able to afford such a hobby? They don’t have that sort of disposable income. If Marvel wants to charge that much for print, okay — but digital should be lower.

    4. To me, reboots are just a sign of poor writing. It’s taking the easy way out when they can’t come up with a way to advance the story.

    5. @Carl

      Speaking of poor writing, how is your book coming along?

      I kid, I kid. I’m actually really interested in buying and reading it, but I mean come on, you set yourself up for that one. 😛

    6. Reboots only seem to work in TV and film and even then only when the series being rebooted is in that limbo between mainstream and obscurity. With the Batman films, Forever was a piece of garbage that killed the series and caused it to be forgotten. Since people now only cared about Batman tangentially, Begins was able to reintroduce them to the series in a way the original movie never did.

      Batman v. Superman, on the other hand, is being made in a time where EVERYONE knows about Batman – not to mention the last film only came out 2 years ago, and is still in the public eye (just look at all those Bane memes, sheesh.) When the movie premiers there are going to be tons of people who bitch and moan about how it’s “NOT MUH BATMAN”; I don’t think any Schumacher fans complained about the Nolan trilogy.

      Comics are partially a literary medium, which doesn’t lend well to do-overs, and when they first started getting rebooted they were gradually sinking into obscurity as the trademark sign of Cheetos-encrusted neckbeards.

      Does that make any sense?

    7. Batman v. Superman, on the other hand, is being made in a time where EVERYONE knows about Batman – not to mention the last film only came out 2 years ago, and is still in the public eye (just look at all those Bane memes, sheesh.) When the movie premiers there are going to be tons of people who bitch and moan about how it’s “NOT MUH BATMAN”; I don’t think any Schumacher fans complained about the Nolan trilogy.

      I really like Zack Synder, but at the same time I’m not a huge fan of Affleck. I’m going to try and go into the movie with an open mind because of Synder, but I can see why people would say “not my Batman” with this one… I just don’t understand how or why they picked Affleck. Come on. Warner Bros. is saying that out of all the actors available to them, the only one who epitomized Bruce Wayne was Ben Affleck? Yeesh. Maybe he’ll knock it out of the park. Who knows. It just seems like a needlessly divisive pick on Warner Bros.’ part.

      Comics are partially a literary medium, which doesn’t lend well to do-overs, and when they first started getting rebooted they were gradually sinking into obscurity as the trademark sign of Cheetos-encrusted neckbeards.

      Ouch! There’s probably quite a bit of truth to that one, but it still was a bit harsh. Heh. I hope I don’t have any readers who sport Cheetos-encrusted neckbeards! 🙂

    8. “I really like Zack Synder, but at the same time I’m not a huge fan of Affleck. I’m going to try and go into the movie with an open mind because of Synder, but I can see why people would say “not my Batman” with this one… I just don’t understand how or why they picked Affleck. Come on. Warner Bros. is saying that out of all the actors available to them, the only one who epitomized Bruce Wayne was Ben Affleck? Yeesh. Maybe he’ll knock it out of the park. Who knows. It just seems like a needlessly divisive pick on Warner Bros.’ part.”

      If memory serves, they were originally considering Josh Brolin for the part. I think he would’ve been a better choice than Affleck.

    1. Nicely put:

      Look, there were some interesting ideas in the mix for Civil War. A discussion of vigilantism, of private citizens holding essentially weapons of mass destruction, of post-9/11 America being willing to trade some freedom for security…I’m not saying that these are necessarily great ideas for a comic full of costume wearing super-heroes. But somebody else might have been able to make the idea work, at least a little better.

      But when you try to make super-heroes a metaphor in your real-world allegory, and can’t even get the basic facts about the real world right, you’ve lost before you started. By carelessly turning this into Minority Report–where people can be punished before they commit crimes, indeed before the law even exists–you’re no longer making a slippery slope argument, you’re setting up a very stupid strawman that takes everyone away from your real arguments. If your text doesn’t make any sense, your sub-text doesn’t, either.

  8. Great post, Doug! I’m worried, too; however, Cap 2 was pretty good and not too preachy about politics. (Although the “secret government-within-a-government cabal” schtick is wearing pretty thin.)

    I was actually hoping to see the Cap-Falcon relationship fleshed out more in Cap 3. I thought Anthony Mackie was woefully under-utilized in the sequel.

    1. Great post, Doug! I’m worried, too; however, Cap 2 was pretty good and not too preachy about politics. (Although the “secret government-within-a-government cabal” schtick is wearing pretty thin.)

      🙂 True! And yes, I hope they utilize Anthony Mackie more in the next movie. A dog fight between Iron Man and Falcon might be interesting. Granted, for the most part Falcon would have to be flying for his life…but maybe he could use some quick thinking to land some blows, complete his mission objective, and escape.

  9. Hey Doug, thanks for the perk-up regarding my poetry, made me feel a lot better. It’s not just Civil War getting relaunched either, Planet Hulk, Age of Ultron, and Days of Future Past are getting revisited (with “Days” becoming “Years”) of all the events announced so far, it seems quite telling only “Days” is the sole representation of VINTAGE events, everything else is quite recent

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s