The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Edward Norton needs a lot of kicking but none of it is from him. He has burned a lot of bridges due to his behavior on set. 

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_22340_5-movie-stars-who-demanded-hilariously-insane-plot-changes.htmlnumber 5 details a number of reasons Marvel was glad to no longer work with Norton.

So that explains why MKW's appearance was so WTF? and random.

One thing I like about The Avengers cast, is how well they get along.

It appears these actors genuinely like each other.

Much as I like Norton as an actor, it's clear he doesn't play well with others.

[Rick Kitchen]

RDJ posted this on his Facebook page this morning:

 

[Bruinsfan]

Ha! Though with Rhodey and Banner around, I don't think Steve is even his best friend on the Avengers. Howard Stark might have regarded Steve as his best friend.

Edited December 7, 2015 by Bruinsfan

[Jazzy24]

RDJ posted this on his Facebook page this morning:

Lol!!

[JessePinkman]

It's crazy to think that just 10 years ago the idea of Captain America and Iron Man fighting each other would have been met by 98% of the world with a resounding "Who and What?".

[Bruinsfan]

I think Captain America was iconic enough that a big chunk of the population would have been vaguely aware of who he is even if they didn't follow comics themselves, thanks to actual WWII era popularity. Kind of in the same ballpark as Spider Man and the Hulk, though not as familiar to the public as the big DC heroes. Iron Man probably would have made all but a couple million think of athletic events or Black Sabbath, though.

[benteen]

I think Spider-Man was pretty well known before the movies.  The Hulk TV show guaranteed the character would at least be remembered by the general TV population.

[JessePinkman]

I think Captain America was iconic enough that a big chunk of the population would have been vaguely aware of who he is even if they didn't follow comics themselves, thanks to actual WWII era popularity. Kind of in the same ballpark as Spider Man and the Hulk, though not as familiar to the public as the big DC heroes. Iron Man probably would have made all but a couple million think of athletic events or Black Sabbath, though.

 

I think the idea of a Captain America might have been pretty well known but I wouldn't put him on the same level as Spidey or the Hulk, not even close. My point really was that Marvel has had an uphill battle making these character relevant to the general populace. 

[benteen]

I think the idea of a Captain America might have been pretty well known but I wouldn't put him on the same level as Spidey or the Hulk, not even close. My point really was that Marvel has had an uphill battle making these character relevant to the general populace. 

 

Agreed.  They've managed to do that very well.  When Ant-Man can get his own movie and gross over $400 million combined worldwide, you know that Marvel has become very successful with branding their characters.

[tennisgurl]

Its really sort of amazing how much things have changed in pop culture and comic book movies, thanks to the MCU. Not too long ago, I would say DC had by far the most recognizable characters, while now it seems to be more even. Marvel might even be winning.

 

I read an article on Cracked a while ago, that was about how different the "geek" landscape has changed since he went to high school about 12 years ago. H said something along the lines of "If you could name three members of the Avengers, you were considered a weirdo. If you CANT name three members now, your considered a weirdo".  

[stealinghome]

Its really sort of amazing how much things have changed in pop culture and comic book movies, thanks to the MCU. Not too long ago, I would say DC had by far the most recognizable characters, while now it seems to be more even. Marvel might even be winning.

DC has always had the more recognizable characters, but Marvel has always had the more recognizable teams (the Avengers, Fantastic Four, the X-Men). I do think Marvel's gaining ground though--the characters are more even these days, but Marvel still dominates the teams. We'll see if BvS can change any of that by at least introducing the idea of the Justice League.

[Bruinsfan]

If the Super Friends count, I would have to strongly disagree with your first point. An entire generation grew up on that Saturday morning cartoon show; I'd say it made more of an impression on pop culture than even the Batman and Wonder Woman live action shows.

[Kel Varnsen]

I think the idea of a Captain America might have been pretty well known but I wouldn't put him on the same level as Spidey or the Hulk, not even close. My point really was that Marvel has had an uphill battle making these character relevant to the general populace. 

I would agree. People from multiple generations knew (even before the Sam Raimi movies) that Peter Parker is Spiderman and probably a bit more maybe about his backstory (radioactive spider bit) or his villains or Aunt May or something. I am sure if you asked a random person in say 2005 most probably wouldn't know who Steve Rogers was.

[vb68]

 

I am sure if you asked a random person in say 2005 most probably wouldn't know who Steve Rogers was.

No, but I think most would have been aware of the name "Captain America" and maybe that he used a Shield.  Heck, he was popular enough to have a couple of really cheesy TV Movies in the late 70s.   I remember watching one of them back then.  So it's not like he had zero awareness in the culture. 

 

And yeah, totally agree about Superfriends.  That was like Saturday morning religion. I even admit I own the Legion of Doom season on DVD.  Marvel had a few cartoons back then (I even faintly recall Spiderwoman), but nothing that was remotely that iconic.  

Edited December 8, 2015 by vb68

[nobodyyoucare]

There were lots of 1970s for tv movies using Marvel characters. Thing is most people forget they existed soon after watching them. 

 

There was also a 1990 direct to video Captain America. 

 

You had Man-Thing in 2005. The issue is that the majority of those that saw the movies when asked had no idea that they based on comic books or that they were Marvel properties. Heck most don't even know Blade exists in the same universe as the X-men. 

 

Its only been since Iron Man that Marvel has hit the formula for tv, movies, live action shows. 

[Dandesun]

I was about 4 when I first saw Spider-Man on the Electric Company. Wonder Woman and the Incredible Hulk were both TV shows I recall in primetime in the 70s. The Superfriends were definitely a cartoon I watched on the regular, as was Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends (with Iceman and Firestar!) I very vaguely remember a Fantastic Four cartoon back in the day, too. And Batman and Robin showed up on Scooby-Doo as well. Batman's TV was pretty kid friendly back then as well. I mean, it seemed as much of a cartoon as an actual animated show.

 

I think there's a pretty good balance of the general populace knowing characters from both companies. Now? Marvel is definitely laying down a claim for making their characters known. The interesting thing is that while you could say that people knew that Captain America or Iron Man existed they wouldn't be able to say much about them. Now it's a different story... plus they're adding characters like Ant-Man, Rocket Raccoon, Groot, Daredevil and Jessica Jones to the landscape. The Netflix characters are still not as high profile as the Avengers but they're out there and the press is positive.

[vb68]

 

I very vaguely remember a Fantastic Four cartoon back in the day, too.

 

 

I swear it had a robot in place of the Human Torch.

 

 

Marvel is definitely laying down a claim for making their characters known.

 

I didn't know anything of Black Widow for instance before the movies.

[nobodyyoucare]

There were several Fantastic Four cartoons. Four series. The second had the robot. Remember cartoons are thought as for kids not adults. Same stigma still exists for video games despite the average age of user for both groups being 25 and up.

 

In fact the cartoons were hated by the writers of the Fantastic Four comics.

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_22564_6-secret-f-yous-lurking-in-famous-pop-culture.html

[Kel Varnsen]

I was about 4 when I first saw Spider-Man on the Electric Company. Wonder Woman and the Incredible Hulk were both TV shows I recall in primetime in the 70s. The Superfriends were definitely a cartoon I watched on the regular, as was Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends (with Iceman and Firestar!) I very vaguely remember a Fantastic Four cartoon back in the day, too. And Batman and Robin showed up on Scooby-Doo as well. Batman's TV was pretty kid friendly back then as well. I mean, it seemed as much of a cartoon as an actual animated show.

 

I think there's a pretty good balance of the general populace knowing characters from both companies. Now? Marvel is definitely laying down a claim for making their characters known. The interesting thing is that while you could say that people knew that Captain America or Iron Man existed they wouldn't be able to say much about them. Now it's a different story... plus they're adding characters like Ant-Man, Rocket Raccoon, Groot, Daredevil and Jessica Jones to the landscape. The Netflix characters are still not as high profile as the Avengers but they're out there and the press is positive.

That was sort of my point above. Since his creation in the 60's every generation of kids has had a spider man cartoon or something). There was the 60's one (which was still on in the 80's when I was a kid), in the 70's there was the Electric Company bits, in the 80's there was Spiderman and his Amazing Friends (which was awesome) and in the 90's there was the Fox animated series. As far as I know prior to the movies there was only a 60's spider man show  and a really bad looking movie in 1990. So yea just looking at that I can see that Spidey would be much more of a household name than cap making his movies a much easier sell to the general movie going audience.  There was also a hulk cartoon in the 60's that was part of the same series as the Cap Cartoon. The hulk one had a hilarious theme song and the animation was really bad where it was just still images with only the lips moving (like when Conan O'Brien used to interview Bob Dole).

Edited December 9, 2015 by Kel Varnsen

[Joe]

Cate Blanchett for Thor: Ragnarok? Interesting idea. Comments I've seen suggest her for either Amora, which I really can't see. From my experience with Amora, she's someone who uses her sex appeal as one of her tools. Galadriel, while stunningly beautiful, just seems above such physical concerns. The other one is Hela. Hey, she can borrow the dark queen filter from Fellowship!

 

Or an Alvar, but she probably doesn't want to get stereotyped as someone who wears pointy ears.

Edited December 11, 2015 by Joe

[VCRTracking]

Yeah I think she might be Hela pr maybe Karnilla, Queen of the Norns. Although they better have Balder in the movie too if they have Karnilla.

[Crim]

Cate Blanchett is so amazing. I hope she gets a lot of money for this role, whatever it is.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Crim

[morakot]

Just watched Ant-man which I enjoyed (Paul Rudd has enormous ears!) but it's always the same old thing: hive insects (including ants) are almost all female, except for a few drones. They are not "guys" or "boys" and if you're going to ride a winged princess, don't call her Ant-hony

[Bruinsfan]

Aren't winged male ants more numerous than winged female ones? The wingless soldiers that make up the vast majority of the hive are all female, but Anthony could very well have been male.

Edited December 18, 2015 by Bruinsfan

[morakot]

Yes, there are more male winged ants than princesses but they tend to be smaller and lighter.  See the comparative sizes here -- Ant-hony looked much more like the princess (the big one) in terms of size.

 

[Demented Daisy]

Watching Ant-Man -- so many shots reminiscent of Star Wars.  But Disney wouldn't do that, right?

[Demented Daisy]

Of course they wouldn't.

 

(Sorry, I thought the two posts would become one.  Should have just edited.)

Edited December 24, 2015 by Demented Daisy

[VCRTracking]

Looking back at Phase II they should have had more instances of other Avengers appearing in each others movies helping each other out.

 

When I saw the Force Awakens on Wednesday it felt like the audience was mostly families, couples and non-geeks and when they showed the trailer for Civil War there wasn't the "OMG this is amazing!" that me and other fans had. After it was over one guy was sarcastically clapping which and the rest felt like they were eyerolling. I think part of it is the trailer doesn't have any laughs. I liked how serious it was going to be but the average moviegoer probably isn't interested in drama of a bunch of costumed characters. I'm sure the movie will be great and well but I get mainstream audiences are getting tired of the Marvel brand, at least when it comes to superheroes.

Edited December 25, 2015 by VCRTracking

[Kel Varnsen]

Looking back at Phase II they should have had more instances of other Avengers appearing in each others movies helping each other out.

When I saw the Force Awakens on Wednesday it felt like the audience was mostly families, couples and non-geeks and when they showed the trailer for Civil War there wasn't the "OMG this is amazing!" that me and other fans had. .

I thought the plots of those movies did a pretty good job explaining why the solo Avrngers didn't call for backup. The Dark World takes place mostly off earth except for a final battle in London that is over relatively quickly.

In Iron Man 3 once Tony figures out who the bad guy is things happen really fast. Plus there is the whole PTSD thing.

And Winter Soldier main themes are who can you trust and government is watching everyone. Once cap is on the run he is basically in hiding. Even if he knew he could trust Tony 100% calling him would pretty much give away hid location to Hydra.

Edited December 25, 2015 by Kel Varnsen

[VCRTracking]

I understood the in-universe reasons and didn't have a problem with the other Avengers not appearing, I'm just saying it would have probably benefited Age of Ultron if they showed that the Avengers were a tighter group and not just assembling for only two occasions.

[Bruinsfan]

Plus, if Thor's around to help out in that one you don't need an intricate caper to disable Project Insight, Captain America can prop his feet up while Thor holds up his hammer and pelts the helicarriers with lightning bolts and 300 mph wind shear until they crash or explode.

[Raja]

I understood the in-universe reasons and didn't have a problem with the other Avengers not appearing, I'm just saying it would have probably benefited Age of Ultron if they showed that the Avengers were a tighter group and not just assembling for only two occasions.

My biggest problem with the MCU was that The Avengers in The Age of Ultron seemed to contradict  everything else, the other movies and the TV show were saying about the world. With Coulson and the Agents of SHIELD finding the location of Loki's spectre after fighting a secret war with Hydra and calling Maria Hill to assemble The Avengers it did seem as if The Avengers had been around raiding Hydra bases for a long time before the first battle in the movie

[Zuleikha]

. I liked how serious it was going to be but the average moviegoer probably isn't interested in drama of a bunch of costumed characters.

I've enjoyed the movies I've seen, but I'm not a huge MCU fan and there are a lot of movies that I haven't seen. To me, Civil War looked like an MCU version of Super Smash Bros. Winter Soldier was my absolute favorite MCU film, so that was disappointing to say the least. I wanted a third Captain America film to be a small, quiet film that, like Winter Soldier, focused on Captain America and Black Widow with strong supporting roles for Falcon, Bucky, and Sharon Carter or Maria Hill. This looks to be the opposite of that.

 

Also, the trailer didn't explain the stakes very clearly to me... I didn't get how the oversight-of-superheroes issue connected to the how-to-charge-Bucky issue or why I should be backing Captain America when some kind of regulation seems sensible.

[nobodyyoucare]

My biggest problem with the MCU was that The Avengers in The Age of Ultron seemed to contradict  everything else, the other movies and the TV show were saying about the world. With Coulson and the Agents of SHIELD finding the location of Loki's spectre after fighting a secret war with Hydra and calling Maria Hill to assemble The Avengers it did seem as if The Avengers had been around raiding Hydra bases for a long time before the first battle in the movie

According to the timeline it had been a year since the events of Winter Soldier when Age of Ultron occurred. Note that the battle against the Hydra base in Slovakia occured after Coulson lead the United Shield against a Hydra research base capturing vital data including the location of Loki's staff. Its not contradicting stuff from the other movies or tv show. There is a timeline that was put out. The Avengers had actually just been reassembled as a team for that. Captain America, Black Widow, Hawkeye would have been taken out various Hyrda bases as part of Shield assignments on their own time. It had been three years since the alien attack in New York. 

 

When Maria Hill in Age of Ultron talks about how Coulson asked the Avengers for help she is referencing a video conferance call she had with Coulson in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.: The Dirty Half Dozen

[Kel Varnsen]

I think the contradiction is that in Age of Ultron they mention that the Avengers have been teaming up to bust up various HYDRA bases for awhile prior to them taking the castle and getting the Sceptre. But in Agents of SHIELD there is no mention of the Avengers assembling prior to that battle and fighting HYDRA. The answer to that is no one working on the movies gives a shit what happens on Agents of SHIELD.

I think it was Tony in Age of Ultron who mentions how the Avengers can easily handle HYDRA, but if there was another alien invasion they might not be enough. I was when he was talking about why they needed Ultron.

[nobodyyoucare]

I think the contradiction is that in Age of Ultron they mention that the Avengers have been teaming up to bust up various HYDRA bases for awhile prior to them taking the castle and getting the Sceptre. But in Agents of SHIELD there is no mention of the Avengers assembling prior to that battle and fighting HYDRA. The answer to that is no one working on the movies gives a shit what happens on Agents of SHIELD.

I think it was Tony in Age of Ultron who mentions how the Avengers can easily handle HYDRA, but if there was another alien invasion they might not be enough. I was when he was talking about why they needed Ultron.

Define awhile. Sometimes that means weeks or days.   It may have begun to feel routine. 

[anna0852]

 

Also, the trailer didn't explain the stakes very clearly to me... I didn't get how the oversight-of-superheroes issue connected to the how-to-charge-Bucky issue or why I should be backing Captain America when some kind of regulation seems sensible.

Yeah, that's why I'm on Team Iron Man so far. Oversight and regulation is sensible (provided it's not abused of course) and quite frankly I think it shows the world that these super-powered beings do *not* intend to run amok or become the next generation of dictators. I'm having a hard time seeing Cap's reluctance besides "Hydra!".

 

As for Bucky, he did some terrible things while brainwashed. Cap's fooling himself if he thinks that "I'm sorry, I was brainwashed" is just going to clear that slate. The Winter Soldier killed Tony's parents. I don't see how Steve can't understand that.

[vb68]

 

Yeah, that's why I'm on Team Iron Man so far. Oversight and regulation is sensible (provided it's not abused of course) and quite frankly I think it shows the world that these super-powered beings do *not* intend to run amok or become the next generation of dictators.

I agree.  I've always preferred Cap, but I really do feel Tony has the much better side of the argument here.  And in the trailer at least, he's very sympathetic saying he was Steve's friend too.      Even with the events in Winter Solider, it's hard to understand why Steve doesn't see why any unchecked power is bad, including his own.  And people won't forgive Bucky just because Steve knows who he was before and says they should.  

 

The Winter Soldier killed Tony's parents. I don't see how Steve can't understand that.

 

 

.

Then there is that, of course.   I really hope they don't ignore that, and have Steve wrestle with that through the movie.  He needs to at least acknowledge it.

 

 

Looking back at Phase II they should have had more instances of other Avengers appearing in each others movies helping each other out.

 

 

If there is fatigue setting in, and some would be natural by this point anyway, I don't see that this would have helped that much.  I think they have done as much of that as they could honestly given contract stipulations and business realities and whatever other factors at play.  People know it's a shared universe.   If anything, I think a "Civil War" concept and heroes beating the crap out of each other is a tougher sell than having them united against a common villain. I don't love it, myself.  When we see Cap and Bucky going full beat down on Tony, I'm not thinking " So cool!"    I'm thinking, "that's enough boys." 

Edited December 26, 2015 by vb68

[stealinghome]

Yeah, that's why I'm on Team Iron Man so far. Oversight and regulation is sensible (provided it's not abused of course) and quite frankly I think it shows the world that these super-powered beings do *not* intend to run amok or become the next generation of dictators. I'm having a hard time seeing Cap's reluctance besides "Hydra!".

Because the World Security Council provided such great oversight for SHIELD? They only ordered a nuclear strike on Manhattan and all....

The problem, for me, is that you're ALWAYS going to have a "who watches the watcher?" problem. The MCU has HAD oversight of the superheroes before, and pretty inevitably, they end up making bad/stupid/agenda-driven decisions. So do you create an organization to watch them? And then to make sure that this second organization isn't corrupt, do you create a third? And a fourth, to watch the third? How about a fifth? It's cascading watchdog organizations and at the end of the day, you're never going to eliminate the possibility for corruption.

Now, I think asking the ostensible heroes to take some measures to make sure that one of them can't go crazy and destroy the world is sensible. I think trying to create weapons that can at least temporarily incapacitate them is sensible, like the Hulkbuster. But depending on what registration entails, I do also think creating a blueprint for corrupt overseers to take the team down, or trying to make them beholden to a special interest group, is a bad idea. Frankly, given all of the superheroes' experiences with governmental oversight, I can't see why they WOULD think it's a good idea.

[anna0852]

 If anything, I think a "Civil War" concept and heroes beating the crap out of each other is a tougher sell than having them united against a common villain. I don't love it, myself.  When we see Cap and Bucky going full beat down on Tony, I'm not thinking " So cool!"    I'm thinking, "that's enough boys." 

It really is. I'm watching that and cringing, wondering how our team could have fallen this far.

 

Then I hope to myself that this is settled by Coulson walking into the room and declaring that enough is enough and for everyone to get over it. :-)

[nobodyyoucare]

 

Because the World Security Council provided such great oversight for SHIELD? They only ordered a nuclear strike on Manhattan and all....

Because to their understanding a nuke would stop the portal and save the world. 

[stealinghome]

Because to their understanding a nuke would stop the portal and save the world.

They had no clue if a nuke would do that, though. It was a desperation move that would also neutralize their greatest assets and the only one (Thor) who could even slow Loki down.

[Raja]

They had no clue if a nuke would do that, though. It was a desperation move that would also neutralize their greatest assets and the only one (Thor) who could even slow Loki down.

But being people facing perhaps the ultimate challenge perhaps an extinction level event with only Iron Man and the Hulk being publicly known super powered they were doing their sworn best to protect humanity while Thor's battle was out in the desert and could be chalked up to something like Roswell. In the MCU while the New York National Guard showed up on the ground with the NYPD an air force which has had some ready fighters around during the Cold war and then after the 9/11 terrorist  never showed a old F-16 or a newer F-22 used in Iron Man for dramatic reasons. And  in trying to take out the portal hole the council did provide the weapon that actually stopped the enemy, not just held the line until Iron Man's reactor went dry and Thor tired. I can't think of an alien invasion story were nukes were not tried, maybe V and they used a biological weapon.

 

Thus a Civil War coming from a world were it was actually SHIELD, but could have been a well meaning  super vigilante, that mutinied in the Battle of New York. The questions who is control, elected and non elected representatives of nations or chosen ones who have the skill and the heart to do the right thing?

[Kel Varnsen]

The idea of where is the line on who super heroes should fight fascinates me. But i still think that the idea of a registration list is a dumb way to deal with that concept in a movie. I mean if aliens were to invade again, would some burocrat be like "I'm sorry Dr. Banner you'll have to back away as you haven't submitted the correct forms".

[VCRTracking]

Because the World Security Council provided such great oversight for SHIELD? They only ordered a nuclear strike on Manhattan and all....

Because to their understanding a nuke would stop the portal and save the world.

 

They had no clue if a nuke would do that, though. It was a desperation move that would also neutralize their greatest assets and the only one (Thor) who could even slow Loki down.

 

I love though in Agents of SHIELD recently the World Council member in The Avengers played by Powers Boothe is revealed to be an old HYDRA agent who wanted to achieve it's original goal from hundreds of years ago of bringing an Inhuman warlord exiled into an alien planet back to Earth so he can rule it! I don't think THAT is going to be mentioned in any of the MCU movies!

Edited December 28, 2015 by VCRTracking

[benteen]

But being people facing perhaps the ultimate challenge perhaps an extinction level event with only Iron Man and the Hulk being publicly known super powered they were doing their sworn best to protect humanity while Thor's battle was out in the desert and could be chalked up to something like Roswell. In the MCU while the New York National Guard showed up on the ground with the NYPD an air force which has had some ready fighters around during the Cold war and then after the 9/11 terrorist  never showed a old F-16 or a newer F-22 used in Iron Man for dramatic reasons. And  in trying to take out the portal hole the council did provide the weapon that actually stopped the enemy, not just held the line until Iron Man's reactor went dry and Thor tired. I can't think of an alien invasion story were nukes were not tried, maybe V and they used a biological weapon.

 

Thus a Civil War coming from a world were it was actually SHIELD, but could have been a well meaning  super vigilante, that mutinied in the Battle of New York. The questions who is control, elected and non elected representatives of nations or chosen ones who have the skill and the heart to do the right thing?

 

This reminds me, screwing around with the Tesseract was really stupid by Shield but I don't understand the hostility at all shown toward them (the non-evil Shield at least) by sanctimonious Cap and others for...gasp...developing weapons to defend themselves from an alien invasion.  Shield got shit for doing this by the Avengers but what the hell did the Avengers expect?  No, Earth...don't try to improve your own defensive capabilities.  Rely on us, six people, to defend the entire planet!

 

The Avengers wanted Earth and Shield to rely on them for defense against alien threats but lets look at the Avengers for a second.  Hawkeye and Widow are highly trained and talented but have no powers whatsoever.  Captain America is even more highly trained and talented and has enhanced powers but he's nowhere close to taking down alien spacecraft with them.  Iron Man built an incredible war suit but in the end, he's still an ordinary guy in a suit of armor.  The last two Avengers have high end powers but one of them is an alien.  We know Thor is committed to Earth's defense but it's fair for those who don't know to ask just how committed he is.  The other guy is the Hulk, who is extremely unstable and is one bad moment away from leveling a city. 

 

So the Avengers don't want Earth to develop their own means of protecting themselves and instead want them to rely on six people to do so?

[AimingforYoko]

Well, I think Cap's point was that with such weapons: A) They rarely remain as purely defensive weapons and B) They rarely stay out of the wrong hands.

[Bruinsfan]

Also the fact that they were basing their weapons program on the designs of Nazi scientists that Cap was fighting a couple years ago in subjective time, with all the major cities of the world at risk of annihiliation, and that he thought he was giving his life to disable, might have had something to do with the intensity of the reaction.

[stealinghome]

I'm not even sure it was as much about the weapons as it was Fury lying by omission (thus suggesting that he wasn't trustworthy enough to be holding those very dangerous weapons). I think most of the Avengers would have reacted 50% more mellowly had Fury been up-front from the beginning about it.

Plus Loki's scepter powers making everyone like 30% angrier than usual.

Also the fact that they were basing their weapons program on the designs of Nazi scientists that Cap was fighting a couple years ago in subjective time, with all the major cities of the world at risk of annihiliation, and that he thought he was giving his life to disable, might have had something to do with the intensity of the reaction.

I loved Steve's little stink-eye toward the Tesseract as Thor and Loki left. From his perspective, it's pretty directly the reason his life blows in that moment. Edited December 28, 2015 by stealinghome

[anna0852]

I like Cap, I really do. But he seems to lack the ability to see shades of grey. World War II is perhaps one of the only wars in history with such clear sides of good-versus-evil. Cap was a perfect fit for that conflict.

 

Unfortunately, we all know that nothing since has ever been so clear. It's been shades of grey and multiple viewpoints since 1945, something Cap either can't or won't accept. And that is what is going to be his downfall. Case in point, his view towards Bucky. Yes Bucky is his friend. But in the past 70 years Bucky committed terrible crimes (against his will or not is a different debate) and Cap is foolish if he thinks that those victims are somehow wrong to be seeking justice or that all is somehow forgiven because Steve says so.

 

I'm on Tony's side because he recognizes that pure intentions can become warped. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. And that is a lesson he learned the hard way. A lesson that Steve has not.