Why the hell MARVEL never kills any major character in their movies?
Coulson is dead... but not really!
Nick Fury is dead... but not really!
Quicksilver is dead... but no one gives a shit!
Rhodes is dead... but not really!
I just really wanted to see Captain to die in this one.
How was it for you?
>why don't they kill characters that print money
cos comics
Literally gave my ticket to a friend for free. No idea why I bought it in the first place.
antman, arrowman, leatherlady, catnigger and nigger-bot needed to die before their solo films can be conceived and implemented.
>killing off a major marvel character before the final avengers movies
lel ok
>anyone not named Uncle Ben staying dead
Babby's first marvel
>Quicksilver is dead... but no one gives a shit!
hey, I liked him
Capecuck
You are worse than anyone who actually likes these movies. Pathetic
I didnt see that coming :^)
Quicksilver wasn't a character, he was a plot device for Scarlet Witch.
>Uncle Ben staying dead
Every couple of years he gets up so they can kill him again
You're thinking of Days of Future Past, user. That Quicksilver was good. The one in AoU was a cardboard stand in they had to film because Aaron Taylor Johnson hates acting and refused to leave his trailer.
>I just really wanted to see Captain to die in this one.
Why?
Civil War in the comics was retarded any way.
The movie was a better execution of the ideas.
And Cap dying would've been pretty retarded.
Crossbones is dead. I'll miss him.
>And Cap dying would've been pretty retarded.
Why?
inb4 BECAUSE HURR DURR INFINITY RESURRECT HURR DURR. They shouldn't resurrect him.
inb4 CONTRACT HURR DURR
Film him in a flashback or something, or as a Tony's conscience fucking with him, I don't know.
I liked it more than Civil War desu.
Frank Grillo is handsome.
>edgy dcucks want more violence
wait for the new batman movie, I heard he gets raped and then gets hanged from a bridge for all gotham to see, with his bleeding gaping anus exposed of course, I'm sure you'll love that
>Rhodes is dead... but not really!
They never once implied he was dead.
a better version of quicksilver in x-men
To be fair to user, the trailers sort of implied it.
Of course, the trailers would've been pretty retarded if they spoiled a character's death.
Which isn't really that far off from generic Hollywood trailers.
I'm done with this Mickey Mouse-tier soap opera drama. It doesn't help either that all the fight scenes are edited by a teenager with Tourette's and Parkinson's, it's as if they want to distract the audience from how shoddy everything looks by waving a flashlight on their face. I couldn't give a damn about any of these sterile excuses for characters. During the airport scene all the artificially-inflated conflict devolved into a child playing with one toy in each hand and bashing them together.
It's riddled with sophomoric and shallow pseudo-political ponderings that are thrown out the window when the quiptastic action starts. They completely disregard for the umpteenth time the collateral damage while they're having fun showcasing their flashy abilities.
The third act pretends to get serious when in reality it turns into a cheap heartstring manipulation revolving around "why didn't you tell me Cap waaa".
This part completely disregards the fact that Stark knows all too well that brainwashing and mental manipulation is a thing, let's not forget that he has witnessed it firsthand with Banner. There's no excuse for him to have such a sudden change of heart other than to extend the conflict for another 15 minutes of mindless violence, and leave the manchildren with the impression that they've just witnessed an intricate revenge tragedy.
All smoke and mirrors, the constant quipping is an effective tool to cloud a fanboy's mind and judgement.
Finally, what's left is an entire team of "world-class" heroes that got fooled by a man wearing a Bucky mask. Not to mention that the villain's stale trope was better executed 19 years ago when Scream 2 came out, ironically, a film satirizing this cliché.
If you don't think this is cartoonish and laughable you might be too young to post on this site.
Never again.
That wouldn't make sense still. Tony saw him dead with the other Avengers during the AoU nightmare.
Also, Phase 3 will be about Civil War, killing off Cap the very first movie it starts would be retarded.
>DC kills Superman and everyone fucking knows he will be back in the next movie
Oh noes, Marvel doesnt resort to gay gimmicks!
I watched John Wick before I watched Civil War and gotta say I really appreciated that the camera in John Wick didn't fucking shake and cut all over the place during his extended fight scenes, then in Civil War the first big fight Crossbone vs Cap is fucking shaky cam, looking at their legs, cutting all over the fucking place.
Story was about the same level of complexity too
Yeah, because killing him in this movie and then reviving him for Infinity War would be so much better.
Fuck off you cuck, Quicksilver and Superman dying were some of the most retarded decisions these capeshit companies made. Quicksilver had no impact because he had just been introduced and Superman was pointless because we already know he'll be back for JL. I'm glad they didn't kill Cap, that would've been such a shitty gimmick.
Welcome to comics.
Because I want Infinity War to be about Infinity War, not have the first part be some out of place quest to revive Cap even though he can't do shit against Thanos.
Honestly i still think that Quicksilver death was more the result of an under the table compromise between Marvel and Fox. They keep their version of Quicksilver as a central X-Men character while Marvel keeps Wanda.
What's annoying is the whole point of Civil War was Cap being killed and exposing the corruption continued and he was right.
Now what? He just disappears? It completely removes the gravitas of the storyline, so why even do it to begin with?
It's also very stupid to kill off a characters knowing that he will be revived in the next movie. At least in comics they revive characters after a good amount of time inside their continuity. In fact the only interesting thing about super heroes deaths is the aftermath and how the other characters deal with their absence.
>What's annoying is the whole point of Civil War was Cap being killed and exposing the corruption continued and he was right.
He wasn't.
Civil War ends with Cap arrested. He dies later, after the event's over. And he never really died.
He was. The laws were done away with and the team reassembled.
The comic version of Civil War was actually terrible. A lot of utterly stupid things (cyborg clone Thor anyone?) and totally out of character moments. The death of Cap was also AFTER the storyline ended and it wasn't a good idea either. The story in the original version has no gravitas at all, aside from the novelty of seeing those character go after each other. If anything the follow up was even worse and i stopped reading Marvel comics during Dark Reign. The movie is more about collateral damages and it works withouth stupid fake super hero deaths.
The villain was the most horseshit part about the movie.
He should not have been able to fool neither the Avengers nor any government with his shit.
And both Cap and Tony were basically bitches bitching about MUH MOM and MUH FRIEND.
These are the superheroes you want us to root for or something?
Obviously "die" is just the word. They'll never kill a MC. As said, it's the reaction from the other characters that matters.
That's not the point in the movie you idiot. Tony's involvement with the UN symbolizes the corruption can be countered with his collaboration.
He underscored the tension that lied beneath their relationship. They could never truly be allies until they cleared this out amongst themselves. I agree Zemo was kind of a plot device to set this up though.
I know he was killed after, but they're not going to kill him in one of the other movies. That's why they should have shifted it to this one, so dealing with it can underscore the other MCU movies.
>The movie is more about collateral damages and it works withouth stupid fake super hero deaths.
All of a sudden. That's the problem. The idea is it's supposed to bring them home to the Avengers doesn't really work without repercussions beyond Super Hero Fight.
>not wanting a movie about Hawkeye fixing up his farmhouse and fucking his hot wife
That's not what happened in the comic. It appears to work, then after CA surrenders, he's killed exposing the corruption that continues. That's what I said. Why do Civil War if you're not goign to do Civil War?
Because comic Civil War is a fucking disgrace and by far the worst comic book event ever made.
The concept was interesting, the execution was a complete disaster.
>not realizing this isn't a Captain America movie but Iron Man
>believing Marvel will ever show Iron Man to be the POS he is
Never happen for the same reason they won't kill a main character.
>by far the worst comic book event
You misspelled Identity Crisis.
Why is he a PoS?
He's been trying in both AoU and CW to make ammends for all the damage he has caused.
Requesting "not my friend anymore" pic
>it's not like much comic
Literally anyone with taste would tell you this movie with all its flaws is still a far better adaptation of the premise
To the exclusion of personal responsibility. Stark's problem is he makes all the decisions and sees himself fit to make those decisions. They should accept the Accords and that's it. He confines Wanda because she made a mistake.
Everyone should be accountable for mistakes or brainwashing except him.
Debatable, the fact is that Civil War comic was garbage that made Iron Man, someone who was claiming to be fighting for superhero rights, act like a villain.
It's not an adaption of the premise. It just takes the title.
And it is, everyone agrees that the movie is much better than the comic because the comic just committed so many mistakes that they would really have to try hard to make it worse.
I don't really disagree for the same reason I hated Identity Crisis. I didn't care much for it, myself, don't get me wrong. But if you're going to adapt it, adapt it and not have Stark behave similarly but never call him out on it and instead make him appear sympathetic.
But that's what they wanted to do, they wanted to make both sides sympathetic because they are both heroes, they both want the best for the security of the planet.
They are both annoying whiners played like a fiddle by the most basic villain.
Zemo only just fast-forwarded something that was going to happen.
The issues were still there and things were going to go to shit regardless of him.
He just found their weaknesses and exploited them.
I wouldn't have a problem with that if they'd have called attention to what Stark was doing and focused more on the Security v Liberty angle. I don't know, maybe they didn't want to get too political given where we are. Bucky killing his parents just seemed so melodramatic and left me feeling that it was put in there simply to make him sympathetic. Aside from that, it doesn't add anything to the story.
Maybe Spiderman will give some time to it, but CW left me underwhelmed.
To add, I liked Stark as a character, but he's getting too close to MCU-wide protagonist privilege for my liking.
Bucky killing his parents was already heavily implied in TWS, in Zola's scene.
It didn't feel like the issues grew naturally out of what has happened to that point, or that the catalyst were strong enough. I get the premise of a flawed, emotions-driven hero, I really do, but the way they tried to set it up felt a bit shallow.
Because the tone of the movies that came before didn't make it seem as if the casualties were that important.
Then don't revive him. Everybody wins.
And kill the leader of the Avengers before the great finale?
No.
Meanwhile based DC has the balls to kill Superman and the Joker
Well that's because they weren't.
They were warring against aliens, or evil cyborgs, or super-terrorists, and all things considered, they got off easily every single time. The only time Avengers were really directly at fault is when Tony created Ultron trying to create a defense system. And that wasn't even fucking brought up! Yeah, people get killed when such things happen, it's better than giving up an entire city or a country or a continent worth of population. The movie appeals to muh feelings more than anything logical. It was one straw short of showing a kitten getting killed by a stray shrapnel off Iron Man's suit.
Superman remained dead for about 10 minutes.
>great finale
Implying it will be either.
In Infinity War everyone will die but then it will be undone by Dr.Strange/Scarlett Witch. Although, I wouldn't be surprised to see Cap die and have Falcon take his place, or have Iron Man die and Pepper Potts take his place.
I'm sure plenty of the actors involved in the MCU are over it and want to be killed off so they can just go on vacation and do indie movies for shits and giggles. It's just a matter of "who doesn't make it, who makes the ultimate sacrifice?"
The Russos delivered with Civil War, they made a decent movie out of one of the worst comic book events ever made.
>The Russos delivered with Civil War
topkek
>The only time Avengers were really directly at fault is when Tony created Ultron trying to create a defense system. And that wasn't even fucking brought up!
Aside from the group, the gov doesn't know Stank created him.
They did, it's by far the best Avengers movie and easily in the top 3, which is remarkable considering the atrocious source material they had to work with this time.
>and easily in the top 3
Top three what? Marvel films? Gee whiz.
If they simply discard the source material it's not remarkable at all
Then that's even worse. Populace at large has no reason to be angry with Avengers.
>If they simply discard the source material it's not remarkable at all
It is because they were clever enough to realize that comic Civil War is garbage.
Yes, considering there's only TWS, GOTG and Iron Man, the fact that it got into my top 3 with such an originally atrocious storyline is quite a success.
I know, but the reveal adds nothing to CW other than Muh Parents and spawn the Super Hero Fight.
Again, if it would have been to portray Tony as being kinda hypocritical, OK. Except they don't.
It wasn't, it was to show that Cap made a mistake too and that it's questionable the fact that he wanted to defend Bucky.
>Top three what?
TOP THREE OF MANKIND'S GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS.
They are as follows,
1.Internet
2.Anime
3.Captain America: Civil War
>top 3 with such an originally atrocious storyline is quite a success.
I'm beginning to suspect you are little more than an Iron Manlet fag who hates the comic but loves the movie because of Stark's contrasting portrayals.
>originally atrocious storyline
You keep saying this. What the fuck was so bad about it?
No, in fact I was in Team Cap from the begining, and in the end I just wasn't in either.
I'm happy that Iron Man wasn't portrayed as a villain because he's a superhero. Making him a villain would have been completely retarded.
It's not questionable at all since it's established he was fucking brainwashed.
> he's a superhero. Making him a villain would have been completely retarded.
ANd that kind of shallow black and white thinking is the exact reason these Marvel movies are so fucking boring. There is a difference between "villain" and "antagonist."
There's a lot of issues regarding the story, but it's mainly the fact that they had to make every single character act out-of-character to make the conflict happen.
Not only that, but they went on with it for so long that they didn't know what to do to end it, and in the end they just decided to make Iron Man's team mustache-twisting villains and make Cap the good guy to end it.
The movie promised a conflict with both sides being sympathetic, the comic did that and it dropped it half-war through.
They could definitely kill Black Iron Man. Him falling from the sky felt like a soap opera.
Iron Man is portrayed as an emotional wreck from movie to movie which may be worse. Like he doesn't grow and that's his entire character, he lets his ego fuck it up then rolls eyes and everything is business as usual. I thought between IM3 and AoU they'd have gotten over it.
Carter is dead
Why are you implying that antagonist = villain?
Coulson is dead, have you seen him in any movies since then?
You know what's funny?
The directors of that did second unit in Civil War.
...I'm doing the exact opposite of that. Is english not your first language?
Stark could've remained sympathetic and still have his double standards addressed. I agree he's more in-character in the movie. Stark is self-centered and thus, projects his guilt onto others.
But it's never addressed.
Neither of them was the villain, only Zemo.
>he doesn't grow
>Iron Man 1
>''Maybe I have to take the responsability for the mistakes I made.''
>Iron Man 2
>''Maybe I do need to accept the help from others since I can't do this alone.''
>Avengers
>''Maybe not even me and my friends are enough to make it work.''
>Iron Man 3
>''Maybe there's something more to me than these suits and I should look at the bigger picture.''
>AoU
>''Maybe I can make it so heroes are not needed anymore.''
>Civil War
>''Maybe we really need someone to control us.''
From Iron Man 2 to Civil War he has changed a lot.
Look at how he defied the government in IM2, to agreeing with them now.
But that's exactly what Iron Man is in CW, an antagonist, not a villain.
Who's got pics of Peggy Carter's death?!
...
That's not growth, user.
You'll notice how through it all, dealing with his ego-centrism in no way factors in. All his decisions are informed by that.
He feels guilty after Ultron. Great. Instead of saying "Hey, I fuck up, maybe I should categorically make decisions for the group" he pretty much mandates they should sign up with the government, despite all the corruption.