The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[CMH1981]

 

"So...This all seems...horrible"

 

My favorite quote from Avengers.

 

So do we think that Pietro/Quicksilver might be brought back to life during the Infinity War?  I could see Thanos w/gauntlet tempting Wanda by bringing her brother back to life, and either does so or after he is defeated somebody wielding the gauntlet does so, perhaps Steve in a moment of trying to correct everything.

Edited July 21, 2015 by CMH1981

[stealinghome]

Those 3 minutes are the reason I tune in whenever I spot the movie in the cable listings.

Hah, same here. I still think Black Widow casually blowing through like a dozen security goons is one of the MCU's most exciting action sequences, and cutting between her effortlessness and Happy struggling to take the one guy out is just genius comedically.

 

I could never really get into her character. I think one of the reasons is the Thor/Jane relationship.

They're sweet together, but I always had problems with them falling in love with each other in like, 3 days (does it ever mention how much time Thor spent on earth in that first movie?)

Which kinda makes me hypocritical because I love Disney movies with those 3 day romances. The only difference is that those were fairy tales and Thor is more realistic in a certain way.

...

I wish they could have switched out the physicist guy (the Skarsgard? Guy) with Jane in the Avengers. If there's a character I feel that's been over-used, it's him. She could have easily filled his role.

I don't necessarily disagree on the quick romance between Thor and Jane, but imo this is where it really helps to think of Thor 1 as a Shakespearean adaptation. When I think about the movie as half Shakespearean tragedy (Loki=Edmund while Thor=Edgar) and half Shakespearean comedy, it doesn't bother me nearly as much. Also I think CH and NP do have a fair bit of chemistry, so that helps.

 

I like Jane, but do agree that having her instead of Selvig in Avengers 1 would have been better for the character. I wonder if that was the original plan way back in the brainstorming stages of the movie.

 

...but than Scarlett Witch torpedoes his sense of security and he's back to the recluse he was before the Avengers/Black Widow found him.   Which is actually kind of the reason I'm not wild about the movie version (other than her basically being a MCU version of Jean Grey),  I feel like she dealt one of the team a pretty big blow that had ramifications and got away with it.  Nobody gives her the side-eye, Banner's a fugitive again and back to running away from the world and she swans into being an Avengers Team Member.

I agree that Pietro's death was a sort of karmic punishment for Scarlet Witch (punishment in the audience's eyes even if not within the world of the MCU), but I also think it's very possible that the Infinity War movies will have Bruce being pretty obviously unhappy with Wanda/her inclusion in the team. It partially depends on if Infinity War is the first time Bruce sees the rest of the team after AoU or not.

[CMH1981]

What is w/ this Selvig guy?  It really does seem like he has had a much bigger role in the MCU than Jane, it's really odd.  Did he have a comic counterpart before or after the films?  I never thought much about it, but I would have preferred if Jane had the role of Selvig in the first Avengers film.  If nothing else it would have made the slap she gave Loki in the Thor 2 more worth it, kind of a "you used/violated me you son of a bitch," instead of that weak "that was for New York" crap.

 

I have a feeling after Thor 3 that Natalie will bow out and she will be replaced.

[VCRTracking]

 Natalie Portman was pregnant during the making of the first one and I think she was busy during the second. Looking at her IMDB page she has four soon to be released movies coming out this year and next.

[OakGoblinFly]

My favorite quote from Avengers.

 

So do we think that Pietro/Quicksilver might be brought back to life during the Infinity War?  I could see Thanos w/gauntlet tempting Wanda by bringing her brother back to life, and either does so or after he is defeated somebody wielding the gauntlet does so, perhaps Steve in a moment of trying to correct everything.

 

I don't know if it means anything, but Aaron Taylor-Johnson did sign a multi-picture deal (as do most people who appear in the MCU) - but that doesn't necessarily mean he HAS to appear in additional films. 

[Advance35]

I always thought Pietro's death(while sacrificing a character with lots of potential) was kind of meant to punish Wanda for her actions. To be fair the other characters don't trust her at first when she decides to switch sides when it's clear Ultron's insane. Cap, Bruce and Clint are all pissed when they first see her later. I think fighting side by side at the end helped some of it. It is funny to though to read Tumblr and so many posts wanting Wanda and Natasha be BFFs now are completely forgetting what she did.

 

I thought Bruce's aversion to her came off very much personal, as it should have.  I believe Maria Hill said that "they" aren't calling for Banner's arrest "YET" but that it was only a matter of time.   There was so much going on in the movie that it was hard for me to keep track but that was the main reason Bruce wanted to leave wasn't it?      If we see him again, I bet his point of entry in the story is Tony.   For some reason I could see Tony, finding him and keeping tabs on him.

 

 

I agree that Pietro's death was a sort of karmic punishment for Scarlet Witch (punishment in the audience's eyes even if not within the world of the MCU), but I also think it's very possible that the Infinity War movies will have Bruce being pretty obviously unhappy with Wanda/her inclusion in the team. It partially depends on if Infinity War is the first time Bruce sees the rest of the team after AoU or not.

 

Infinity Wars would be a long time to wait to reintroduce this conflict wouldn't it?   I'm not 100% sure we will even see Bruce again (while I hope I'm wrong) I could see the writers feeling AoU is a suitable, melancholy epilogue for the Bruce/Hulk character.

 

I have a feeling after Thor 3 that Natalie will bow out and she will be replaced.

 

I question whether Hemsworth will stay with the franchise past his 3rd movie.   Word has it he's ambitious in terms of role variety and I think his contract is nearing it's conclusion.    So I feel like Hemsworth will be exiting the franchise when Portman does.

[Kel Varnsen]

I question whether Hemsworth will stay with the franchise past his 3rd movie.   Word has it he's ambitious in terms of role variety and I think his contract is nearing it's conclusion.    So I feel like Hemsworth will be exiting the franchise when Portman does.

Well if Odin is perhaps dead, having Thor take over as king of Asgard would be a pretty easy way to write Thor out of any movies. 

[Danny Franks]

Well, do Marvel actually plan to keep making sequels forever? No film company has ever done that, because there is a lot of truth in the idea that sequels offer ever diminishing returns (and there is some proof of that in the Marvel franchise already).

 

Does anyone want to see Iron Man 6, or Thor 5? I don't really think they do. Marvel have to either make new movies with new characters, make fewer movies to extend their lifespan, or actually branch out into some original, brand new content. This is if they want to be a movie studio in the long term. Sure, they've got a near endless stream of characters they could put in movies, if they're smart, but at some point all they'll be doing is repeating themselves. And as soon as they start doing any sort of recasting or rebooting (the existing Hulk recast aside, because Norton's turn was unmemorable and Bana's has probably been erased from the memories of most people), it's the beginning of the end.

 

Not many franchises get past the third movie, and those that do are mostly complete trash by that stage (if they weren't to begin with).

[Fukui San]

It's really uncharted territory.  The arrow of time in comics and movies moves so differently.  Harry Potter is the only franchise I can think of where the same actors play the same roles over 8 movies. But in comics if I pick up a Spider Man 30 years from now, I'd expect that somehow it's Peter Parker looking like a 18-30 year old guy and not a 50 year old guy. If Marvel retires the current top characters in their universe, they can't be replaced with equivalent properties.  You either have to recast and reboot roles or replace A list characters with significant downgrades in terms of profile. They could in fact be better characters (ie, Miles Morales might be objectively better than Peter Parker at this point as a character without the baggage of 40 years of continuity), but they don't sell themselves.

[Kel Varnsen]

Well, do Marvel actually plan to keep making sequels forever? No film company has ever done that, because there is a lot of truth in the idea that sequels offer ever diminishing returns (and there is some proof of that in the Marvel franchise already).

Supposedly they have plans for MCU movies that go as far as 2028. 

[Shannon L.]

I'm already sad to see a time when the Marvel movies come to an end because I enjoy them so much, especially with the original cast members, but, no, I can't conceive of a Thor 5 or 6 being too enjoyable.  However, if they have plans through 2028 and they are introducing more characters with the same quality of writing as these first dozen or so movies (I've lost count :) , then I'm all for it.  It would be especially fun if there were the occasional cameo appearance from one of the originals (in the way that Peggy Carter occasionally shows up).

[Kel Varnsen]

I'm already sad to see a time when the Marvel movies come to an end because I enjoy them so much, especially with the original cast members, but, no, I can't conceive of a Thor 5 or 6 being too enjoyable.  However, if they have plans through 2028 and they are introducing more characters with the same quality of writing as these first dozen or so movies (I've lost count :) , then I'm all for it.  It would be especially fun if there were the occasional cameo appearance from one of the originals (in the way that Peggy Carter occasionally shows up).

I guess for me it all depends. Robert Downey Jr is 50 now. I am not sure I want to see a Tony Stark in his mid 60's showing up, and trying to put on the iron man suit. If they want to keep the universe going better to just kind of James Bond it all.

[Shannon L.]

 

I am not sure I want to see a Tony Stark in his mid 60's showing up, and trying to put on the iron man suit.

I don't mean showing up as Iron Man (which is probably how I made it sound when I mentioned Peggy).  But, he'll still be a brilliant scientist/inventor.  There could be a place for a cameo.

[anyanka323]

The problem with Loki is that he's been overused as a villain.  In the comics, he's more of a second tier antagonist.  He's been elevated to an A level antagonist in the films because of the conflicting character rights issues.  The MCU can't use Dr. Doom or Magneto, both of which are the first tier comics villains.  Spider-man, which IMO has the best rogues' gallery of any Marvel title, is coming.  I'd love to see a Norman Osborne/Doc Oct versus Tony Stark because either pairing would be an equal match of intelligence.

 

Like others have said, the main obstacle for a Black Widow solo movie is SJ's salary.  If Marvel wanted to keep production costs down with fewer action sequences, they could do something similar to the Americans which currently has several Black Widow-esque characters, more of a character study than a series of action set pieces. 

[benteen]

Marvel also can't use Galactus and I don't believe they can use Kang either.

[CMH1981]

I understand as to why Marvel can't use Kang in the MCU, but you would think there would be a clause ala Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver, b/c he is more of an Avengers villain than FF.  I mean do really that many people remember that Kang is actually connected to Reed Richards?

[JessePinkman]

How is Kang connected to Reed Richards? Does it have something to do with his dad? In my mind he's always been Avengers villain. Weird that they'd give him over to the FF universe.

Edited July 23, 2015 by JessePinkman

[Kel Varnsen]

Marvel also can't use Galactus and I don't believe they can use Kang either.

I have always thought that Marvel getting back the Fantastic Four rights, would be great not because of the Fantastic Four (who they could shelve for all I care) but for everything else that comes with it. An avengers movie with Dr. Doom (and Latveria), Galactus, the Skrulls, the watcher, Kang (and I guess Immortus) or the Silver Surfer would be awesome.

[benteen]

I've often wondered how rights go when it comes to multiple characters.  Take Kingpin for instance.  Before he became Daredevil's greatest villain in the 80s through the present day, he was originally a Spider-Man villain (and has plagued Peter often through the years).  Yet there never seemed to be any doubt that Marvel (and Fox before them) owned the rights when they got Daredevil back.  Now Spider-Man has been brought into the Marvel Universe too but I don't know how that worked out.

Edited July 23, 2015 by benteen

[Bruinsfan]

How is Kang connected to Reed Richards? Does it have something to do with his dad? In my mind he's always been Avengers villain. Weird that they'd give him over to the FF universe.

Kang first appeared as the time traveling pharaoh Rama-Tut in an early Fantastic Four comic, he subsequently created his armored Kang identity after meeting Doctor Doom, and many years later he was retconned/revealed to be a distant descendant of Reed Richards. Although he was mainly an Avengers villain as Kang, I can definitely see a legal basis for including him in the FF licensing rights.

[CMH1981]

I think if Marvel ever gets back the FF rights, I will want the FF to have been pre-established before everything else, like they have always been around, but at the time of the Chitauri invasion or Ultron they were off on one of their cross-dimensional capers.

[Dandesun]

The question of villains is a good one.

 

Loki is an interesting one because he's a villain and then he's an ally with his own agenda and then he's a woman and then he's a kid and then he's a teenager. Tom Hiddleston is delightful. I do not question this but so is Hugo Weaving. So is Eccleston but they really hamstrung Malekith in Dark World, I thought. Malekith is a freaking loon. He should have been Loki dialed up to eleven. He's been a fascinating villain in the recent Thor storylines. Absolutely bizarre and manipulative and chaotic to the core. If Eccleston had played him more like the 9th Doctor -- manic and then raging -- I think that would have worked better. In fact, I would say they could bring Malekith back and whatever he went through to get put back together snapped a few things to result in someone far more dangerous and chaotic.

 

But, I don't expect that. Given that Ragnarok is the next Thor movie we should probably see Surtur and perhaps Hela as well. Is it wrong that I absolute want to see Hela wearing that Kirby headress? Because it is amazing and every drag queen will be sporting something like it for years to come.

 

Cap's enemies, at this point, tend to be the cynical nature of today's world as opposed to someone specific. Hydra is also a decent enough go to to be a troublesome obstacle. And I'm totally fine with seeing Madame Hydra or Viper show up. How about Baron Zemo? Since Ultron killed off Stucker no more of that guy... maybe the Fenris twins? Although I'm used to seeing them as X-Men villains to be honest.

 

The Hand seems have been introduced in Daredevil although they didn't come out and name them. Again, I'm used to seeing them as X-Men villains. The ones who turned Psylocke into a Japanese ninja as opposed to the armored British butterfly and I know they fought Wolverine a lot once they gave Logan his 'samurai' style background. But they aren't specifically X-Men villains and do, in fact, fight Daredevil plenty. Probably Iron Fist, too, so I'm guess Marvel's got them locked down for the Netflix series.

[benteen]

Wilson Fisk was a terrific film on the Daredevil show.

 

Hugo Weaving was a massive disappointment as the Red Skull.  I expected much better from him.  Hydra in the FIrst Avenger was a complete joke.  They were about as effective as a threat as the stormtroopers were in the original Star Wars trilogy.

[Kel Varnsen]

Wilson Fisk was a terrific film on the Daredevil show.

 

Hugo Weaving was a massive disappointment as the Red Skull.  I expected much better from him.  Hydra in the FIrst Avenger was a complete joke.  They were about as effective as a threat as the stormtroopers were in the original Star Wars trilogy.

Speaking of Hydro, if Howard Stark found the Tessaract when he was still young Howard, before he became Roger Sterling Howard, and Hydra infiltrated SHIELD starting in the 40's, how come no one though of getting that thing out of storage for 60+ years. Shouldn't Hydra have been all over that?

[CMH1981]

Why does everyone dislike Hugo Weaving as the Red Skull.  I really liked him in the role, and the fact that he has said he won't play the role again upsets me.  So what was it that everyone hated about him in the role?  I know his role wasn't all that prominent in the overall film, but again it was Cap's movie, and Peggy really stole the entire movie to me.  I've always thought of the Red Skull as the master manipulator, using others as the heavy to go after the heroes until he has no other choice but to step in and battle.

[Kel Varnsen]

Why does everyone dislike Hugo Weaving as the Red Skull.  I really liked him in the role, and the fact that he has said he won't play the role again upsets me.  

Why couldn't he play the role again? I watched First Avenger on a plane a few weeks ago, and he wasn't really killed, just sucked into a tesseract space vortex. Seems like they could bring him back if they wanted to, although I am not sure how he would fit.

[JessePinkman]

They really haven't built up very good villains aside from Loki. I mean they've all been pretty could for whatever movie they've had to play the heavy in but they don't stay with you.

The villain in IM 1 is basically the same guy in Ant-Man. Same motivation, same last minute desperate "put on the villain costume" moment at the end of the movie.

 

But, I don't expect that. Given that Ragnarok is the next Thor movie we should probably see Surtur and perhaps Hela as well. Is it wrong that I absolute want to see Hela wearing that Kirby headress? Because it is amazing and every drag queen will be sporting something like it for years to come.

 

Oh man if they can do Loki's horns they can definitely do Hela's headdress. I remember the first time I saw it, it was in I believe Thor #1 (Vol. 3) drawn by Romita Jr. I was in awe. Imagine this on the big screen:

 

 

It would be instantly iconic.

Edited July 23, 2015 by JessePinkman

[CMH1981]

Weaving did sign the multi-picture deal for MCU, but he has vocally said he doesn't want to be forced to play the character again...he played the role and is ready to move on.  I just find that humorous considering he did what, almost all the LoTR/Hobbit movies, video games and whatnot.  

 

http://www.gamesradar.com/hugo-weaving-doesn-t-want-to-play-red-skull-again/

 

I wouldn't mind seeing the Red Skull going the cloned way, another actor steps into the role but it's played as this is a cloned body of the original Skull, it could be anyone under the mask I guess.  

 

I really thought they were going to go with Pierce from the Winter Soldier as being the Red Skull...there was even something about one of the tracks on the Winter Soldier soundtrack being titled "Alexander Pierce is the Red Skull.

Edited July 23, 2015 by CMH1981

[Raja]

I think if Marvel ever gets back the FF rights, I will want the FF to have been pre-established before everything else, like they have always been around, but at the time of the Chitauri invasion or Ultron they were off on one of their cross-dimensional capers.

The problem becomes that everyone was surprised by the Battle of New York. Even after Thor's visit. Any previous historical Fantastic Four activities would be totally secret like Hank Pym's.

[ChelseaNH]

He should have been Loki dialed up to eleven.

 

Loki didn't have to communicate through subtitles.  Seriously, who the hell thought that was a good idea?

[nobodyyoucare]

Speaking of Hydro, if Howard Stark found the Tessaract when he was still young Howard, before he became Roger Sterling Howard, and Hydra infiltrated SHIELD starting in the 40's, how come no one though of getting that thing out of storage for 60+ years. Shouldn't Hydra have been all over that?

They had plenty of tesseract derived stuff from Hydra from WW2. Taking the Tess out would have revealed Hydra's presence. So why not have sheild put it in storage for occasional research since Hydra would get the fruits of that labor? 

How about Baron Zemo?

Which  Baron  Zemo do you mean? The father Heinrich or his son Helmut?  

Captain America 3 has the son Baron Helmut Zemo in it

[stealinghome]

Why couldn't he play the role again?... Seems like they could bring him back if they wanted to, although I am not sure how he would fit.

iirc Weaving really blasted the directing and script for the film after it came out, so I don't think Marvel would be particularly keen to have him back either.

[nobodyyoucare]

iirc Weaving really blasted the directing and script for the film after it came out, so I don't think Marvel would be particularly keen to have him back either.

Which is rich considering his voice over performance in Transformers. 

[benteen]

Loki didn't have to communicate through subtitles.  Seriously, who the hell thought that was a good idea?

 

I know!  I'm a big fan of Christopher Eccleston but he was very ill-served with the character that they gave him.  Having him speak most of his lines in a made-up alien language was idiotic from the start and wasn't going to get the character over with the audience.  Also, having Thor's MOM beat him up really didn't do much for his street cred.  That's not me being sexist...there's another superhero movie where the main hero's father beat the main villain in a fight and it did him no favors either.  You want your villain to go over with audiences?  Don't let the hero's parents beat him up and don't let him speak his dialogue in an imaginary language.

[frenchtoast]

I listened to the commentary for TDW (because Tom Hiddleston is delightful) and I think it was Kevin Feige who made the comment that Malekeith is basically angry because of the Big Bang. I admit, I still giggle at that. Because it's not far from the truth--he's a big baby throwing a temper tantrum because he can't go outside and play in the rain.

[Rick Kitchen]

Supposedly, Feige has verified that the microverse in Ant-Man is a setup for a major part of the Doctor Strange plot, and that, when Scott shrinks into the microverse, there is a very very fuzzy image of Eternity.

[CMH1981]

So Feige says the fuzzy image is Eternity, but the director Reed has alluded to the fuzzy image w/ wings as Jan/Wasp....hmmm...

 

The other thing that puzzles me here is the microverse isn't the same thing as the mystic realm that Dr. Strange messes w/ .  Oh well...

[wingster55]

 Natalie Portman was pregnant during the making of the first one and I think she was busy during the second. Looking at her IMDB page she has four soon to be released movies coming out this year and next.

I don't know about the second one, but I do remember her saying that she wouldn't be in the first Avengers way back in 2010 when she wasn't pregnant. 

[VCRTracking]

So according to Heroic Hollywood here's how the teams align in Captain America: Civil War

 

Team Cap

1) Captain America(leader)
2) Hawkeye
3) Falcon
4) Scarlet Witch
5) The Winter Soldier
6)  Ant-Man

 

Team Iron Man:

1) The Vision
3) Spider-Man
2) Iron Man(leader)
3) Spider-Man
4) Black Widow
5) War Machine

 

And according to Kevin Feige Black Panther is neutral.

Edited August 8, 2015 by VCRTracking

[Danny Franks]

Really struggling to see a convincing reason for Black Widow to side with Iron Man against Cap and Hawkeye. Especially if the conflict is partially fuelled by Bucky's past life crimes. Natasha knows plenty about the sins of the past and making up for them.

It feels more like a 'well she sided with Iron Man in the comics so...' situation.

[caracas1914]

How can Marvel plan an Inhumans movie when they don't have rights to FF yet? I mean I find those two groups so interlinked in the Marvel Universe.

[Joe]

Pretty easy. Tony, Thor, Vision, or the GOTG, who could all visit the moon, encounter a bunch of people with random powers. Or the people find a reason to venture to Earth. Maybe to join in the Thanos fight. It doesn't have to be the FF.

 

And just randomly, another scene I'd like to see. Tony interacting with Spidey. "So how'd you get your powers?" "I was bitten by an irradiated spider." ", You know, radiation doesn't actually work like --" Tony sees Bruce. "Huh. Okay, wecome to the team."

[vb68]

 

Really struggling to see a convincing reason for Black Widow to side with Iron Man against Cap and Hawkeye. Especially if the conflict is partially fuelled by Bucky's past life crimes. Natasha knows plenty about the sins of the past and making up for them.

 

 

Well, to play Devil's Advocate, she did completely out herself with that big info dump in Winter Solider.  I could see her expecting no less from him.  Just my guess.  The bigger question is her relationships.  Even disregarding Hawkeye, she's so much closer to Steve.  Maybe her siding with Tony is more central to the story than anyone previously thought. 

[stealinghome]

Really struggling to see a convincing reason for Black Widow to side with Iron Man against Cap and Hawkeye. Especially if the conflict is partially fuelled by Bucky's past life crimes. Natasha knows plenty about the sins of the past and making up for them.

Calling major BULLSHIT on Natasha siding with Iron Man was my immediate reaction to these teams. Like, come on. A product of the Red Room is going to be all about registration and letting governments meddle with superheroes? After she told the government to go fuck itself in CA:TWS? Yeah, no. Frankly, it seems to me like the studio went "oh shit, aside from RDJ, there are a bunch of nonentities on Team Iron Man...we need someone else with star power there!" And SJ has more star power than anyone aside from RDJ, so she drew the unlucky straw.

 

But then, I still think it's contrived that the MCU Iron Man, who has spent like six movies telling the government to go to hell, is going to now do a heel turn, so what do I know.

[Bruinsfan]

If Natasha is actually on Tony's side I'm almost certain it will be as a double agent. She is, after all, the perfect character to spy on the opposing side and turn coat at the most advantageous moment. Also, Cap's team would need a significant advantage if they're going to be openly fighting a team with two Iron Man suit pilots and the Vision; Wanda's far too fragile/vulnerable to equalize the power discrepancy on her own.

[CMH1981]

Natasha's reasoning may have to do w/ the one hero that isn't listed on there.  Banner.  He is in the movie, but i'm wondering if her siding w/ Tony has to do w/ her ex-boyfriend.  I'm thinking Hulk vs Hulkbuster trashing that city from AoU is partly to blame for all this....of course Wanda was responsible for all that.

[VCRTracking]

Natasha in opposite sides against Steve and Clint is actually more dramatic than the Cap and Iron Man conflict. Steve and Tony have always clashed over everything and it's actually rarer when they get along. Natasha however has been very close friends with Clint for years and also been like part of his family. She and Steve have also forged a great friendship establishing trust.

[nksarmi]

Really struggling to see a convincing reason for Black Widow to side with Iron Man against Cap and Hawkeye. Especially if the conflict is partially fuelled by Bucky's past life crimes. Natasha knows plenty about the sins of the past and making up for them.

It feels more like a 'well she sided with Iron Man in the comics so...' situation.

I don't buy her siding against Hawkeye and Cap either but I suppose it will come down to what the issue is about in the movie.  Since they gave Hawkeye a family to protect, I can see him being anything that would endanger them.  Of course one article said there was a double agent and another speculated that she might side with Iron Man to be in the role to bring the two of them together in the end.

[Kel Varnsen]

So according to Heroic Hollywood here's how the teams align in Captain America: Civil War

 

Team Cap

1) Captain America(leader)

2) Hawkeye

3) Falcon

4) Scarlet Witch

5) The Winter Soldier

6)  Ant-Man

 

Team Iron Man:

1) The Vision

3) Spider-Man

2) Iron Man(leader)

3) Spider-Man

4) Black Widow

5) War Machine

 

And according to Kevin Feige Black Panther is neutral.

I am really having a hard time trying to wrap my head around what the whole civil war/superhero registration thing means in the context of the MCU. I mean looking at the people in those lists taking sides you have Cap, War Machine, Black Widow, Falcon, Hawkeye and the Winter Soldier all of whom used to work for SHIELD and/or the US military. Plus you have Iron Man, who has no secret identity (kind of like most MCU heroes) and announces his home address on TV. Aren't all of those people kind of registered by default, which makes me wonder what they are fighting over. 

 

On the plus side, Vision and the Scarlet Witch are on opposite teams so hopefully we won't be getting their stupid love story anytime soon.

[JBC344]

Well I think it is one thing to "OUT" yourself, and another to support legislator that will take that choice away from another person.  (obvious parallels intended)