Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 13:19:44 GMT
At the end of Civil War, Tony made it abundantly clear that he has no intention to chase down Cap and the other fugitives. Plus, it's not like anyone is going to try and stop them from helping out once Thanos gets off his fat ass and starts actually doing stuff.
So will they even be relevant moving forward? I kinda doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Oct 16, 2017 13:40:36 GMT
Nope not a chance. It was just an excuse to get the Avengers fighting each other (for the 50th time). They could have ended Civil War a bit more ambiguous to maintain the uncertainty in Cap and Steve's relationship but they had to play it safe and make it a cosy, upbeat ending. Plus the Sokovia Accords where only in the first 3rd of the film. The rest was about Zemos convulated plan to show the video tape to Stark.
|
|
skribb
Sophomore
IMDb since June 2005
@skribb
Posts: 767
Likes: 204
 
|
Post by skribb on Oct 16, 2017 19:05:32 GMT
Nah I don't think it will move beyond being a plot device. They want/need/will switch focus to other elements.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 16, 2017 20:38:38 GMT
Nope not a chance. It was just an excuse to get the Avengers fighting each other (for the 50th time). They could have ended Civil War a bit more ambiguous to maintain the uncertainty in Cap and Steve's relationship but they had to play it safe and make it a cosy, upbeat ending. Plus the Sokovia Accords where only in the first 3rd of the film. The rest was about Zemos convulated plan to show the video tape to Stark. Yes yes yes, they should've ended the film with Steve abandoning absolutely everyone and Stark obsessively dedicating everything to hunting down Steve no matter what. If they'd done that you'd just be complaining how petty Tony and Steve were being. |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Oct 16, 2017 23:08:00 GMT
They're gonna trump it I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by azzajones on Oct 17, 2017 1:07:48 GMT
Makes me wish they hadn't done Civil War and done a stand alone Cap 3 instead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 9:16:21 GMT
Makes me wish they hadn't done Civil War and done a stand alone Cap 3 instead. Maybe they should have done Avengers Civil War and give Cap another third part. But Im happy how they did it. |
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Oct 17, 2017 10:56:56 GMT
Nope not a chance. It was just an excuse to get the Avengers fighting each other (for the 50th time). They could have ended Civil War a bit more ambiguous to maintain the uncertainty in Cap and Steve's relationship but they had to play it safe and make it a cosy, upbeat ending. Plus the Sokovia Accords where only in the first 3rd of the film. The rest was about Zemos convulated plan to show the video tape to Stark. Yes yes yes, they should've ended the film with Steve abandoning absolutely everyone and Stark obsessively dedicating everything to hunting down Steve no matter what. If they'd done that you'd just be complaining how petty Tony and Steve were being. Na I just think it's such a safe (cowardly) way to end a film of that magnitude. Literally 10 minutes prior they are beating the crap outta each other. Just leave it at that, with some unresolved tension between the 2 which would leave audiences on edge and anticipate their relations in the next film. Why send a stupid apology letter after all thats happened in the film. It made the whole conflict feel pointless (and it was already anyway). Winter Soldier had a decent open book ending, with some mystery about Buckys fate, why couldn't they do it for Civil War given that the stakes were twice as much? Because MCU took the cowardly safe approach with a Tony Stank joke in between. They dont want audiences to think, simply be told everything is cosy. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 17, 2017 11:02:58 GMT
Yes yes yes, they should've ended the film with Steve abandoning absolutely everyone and Stark obsessively dedicating everything to hunting down Steve no matter what. If they'd done that you'd just be complaining how petty Tony and Steve were being. Na I just think it's such a safe (cowardly) way to end a film of that magnitude. Literally 10 minutes prior they are beating the crap outta each other. Just leave it at that, with some unresolved tension between the 2 which would leave audiences on edge and anticipate their relations in the next film. Why send a stupid apology letter after all thats happened in the film. It wasn't an apology letter, for one thing. It was Steve saying "I can't come back. But I can't turn my back on the World either". And we don't know how Tony felt over things either except not wanting to talk to Ross (which we already knew would happen). It's no different than how Xavier let Magneto go with a smile on his face in DOFP (and Apocalypse) despite everything Magneto did. You're fine with that. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 17, 2017 11:14:55 GMT
They're gonna trump it I guess. That phrase could mean just about anything at this point yah know?
My first thought was "what their gonna grab it by the...nah he cant mean that", or could you? that's certainly one way to shake off the kid friendly image, I mean could you imagine the posters "Avengers: Infinity War, this time we have things by the...*insert picture of black panther here*.
|
|
|
|
Post by primeone on Oct 17, 2017 13:10:59 GMT
I don’t see why it wouldn’t. A small mention relating to that in Black Panther would be cool though.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Oct 18, 2017 3:56:30 GMT
The Sokovia Accord won't matter moving forward because after MCU screwed up their continuity with the "8 Years Later" gaffe, MCU is now scrambling to come up with a new timeline (which MCU Dictator Kevin Feige himself confirmed that MCU will release soon) that will retconn most of MCU's previous movies. So the Sokovia Accords will be retconned just like Agent Coulson's death was retconned and Bucky's death was retconned and Loki's death was retconned and Nick Fury's death was retconned.
|
|
|
|
Post by azzajones on Oct 18, 2017 5:13:20 GMT
I'd bet money the Sokovia accords are never mentioned again, nor the U.N. panel The Avengers are supposed to get approval from and report to.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agent of Chaos on Oct 18, 2017 5:48:08 GMT
Na I just think it's such a safe (cowardly) way to end a film of that magnitude. Literally 10 minutes prior they are beating the crap outta each other. Just leave it at that, with some unresolved tension between the 2 which would leave audiences on edge and anticipate their relations in the next film. Why send a stupid apology letter after all thats happened in the film. It wasn't an apology letter, for one thing. It was Steve saying "I can't come back. But I can't turn my back on the World either". And we don't know how Tony felt over things either except not wanting to talk to Ross (which we already knew would happen). It's no different than how Xavier let Magneto go with a smile on his face in DOFP (and Apocalypse) despite everything Magneto did. You're fine with that. That's because Xavier blew up two submarines himself. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 18, 2017 10:24:47 GMT
The Sokovia Accord won't matter moving forward because after MCU screwed up their continuity with the "8 Years Later" gaffe, MCU is now scrambling to come up with a new timeline (which MCU Dictator Kevin Feige himself confirmed that MCU will release soon) that will retconn most of MCU's previous movies. So the Sokovia Accords will be retconned just like Agent Coulson's death was retconned and Bucky's death was retconned and Loki's death was retconned and Nick Fury's death was retconned. You're clinging to that minor typo for dear life....it's starting to get really sad. Anyways, none of those deaths were retconned. Coulson DID die, he was revived. Bucky never died to begin with, neither did Loki or Fury. Their deaths were faked. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 18, 2017 10:25:37 GMT
It wasn't an apology letter, for one thing. It was Steve saying "I can't come back. But I can't turn my back on the World either". And we don't know how Tony felt over things either except not wanting to talk to Ross (which we already knew would happen). It's no different than how Xavier let Magneto go with a smile on his face in DOFP (and Apocalypse) despite everything Magneto did. You're fine with that. That's because Xavier blew up two submarines himself. Doesn't matter, he keeps letting him go when he knows it's inevitable he'll just cause more trouble later on. If you can accept that, then there shouldn't be any problems with Steve and Tony. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 18, 2017 10:56:35 GMT
The Sokovia Accord won't matter moving forward because after MCU screwed up their continuity with the "8 Years Later" gaffe, MCU is now scrambling to come up with a new timeline (which MCU Dictator Kevin Feige himself confirmed that MCU will release soon) that will retconn most of MCU's previous movies. So the Sokovia Accords will be retconned just like Agent Coulson's death was retconned and Bucky's death was retconned and Loki's death was retconned and Nick Fury's death was retconned. Those were not retconned you dunce, Fury & Loki were fake outs revealed to be just that in the movies they "died" in Bucky's "death" was a fake out anyone who knows anything about Cap or Bucky knew was going to happen, especially since the actor had signed on for a Sam Jackson amount of movies, Coulson's death is the only one close but even that I don't think was a retcon, I think they wanted to give Clark Gregg his own show and needed to write him out of the movies so they killed him, they even spent a great deal of time in his show explaining he did in fact die but was revived through questionable medical treatment, this isn't a retcon as it does not rewrite his death scene in Avengers, Jason dying and coming back in in the Friday The 13th films are not retcons because by reviving him they are adhering to the story of the last film which had him "die".
Retconning is what Arrow did in S3 when Ras Al Gul stabs Oliver through the heart and boots him off a mountain then when we see Oliver and his wound it's suspiciously not in the heart but in the abdomen, that's a retcon.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 18, 2017 10:57:29 GMT
The Sokovia Accord won't matter moving forward because after MCU screwed up their continuity with the "8 Years Later" gaffe, MCU is now scrambling to come up with a new timeline (which MCU Dictator Kevin Feige himself confirmed that MCU will release soon) that will retconn most of MCU's previous movies. So the Sokovia Accords will be retconned just like Agent Coulson's death was retconned and Bucky's death was retconned and Loki's death was retconned and Nick Fury's death was retconned. Those were not retconned you dunce, Fury & Loki were fake outs revealed to be just that in the movies they "died" in Bucky's "death" was a fake out anyone who knows anything about Cap or Bucky knew was going to happen, especially since the actor had signed on for a Sam Jackson amount of movies, Coulson's death is the only one close but even that I don't think was a retcon, I think they wanted to give Clark Gregg his own show and needed to write him out of the movies so they killed him, they even spent a great deal of time in his show explaining he did in fact die but was revived through questionable medical treatment, this isn't a retcon as it does not rewrite his death scene in Avengers, Jason dying and coming back in in the Friday The 13th films are not retcons because by reviving him they are adhering to the story of the last film which had him "die".
Retconning is what Arrow did in S3 when Ras Al Gul stabs Oliver through the heart and boots him off a mountain then when we see Oliver and his wound it's suspiciously not in the heart but in the abdomen, that's a retcon.
Don't bother, his mindset is "If DC does it it's good, if Marvel does it it's bad". |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 18, 2017 11:09:41 GMT
Those were not retconned you dunce, Fury & Loki were fake outs revealed to be just that in the movies they "died" in Bucky's "death" was a fake out anyone who knows anything about Cap or Bucky knew was going to happen, especially since the actor had signed on for a Sam Jackson amount of movies, Coulson's death is the only one close but even that I don't think was a retcon, I think they wanted to give Clark Gregg his own show and needed to write him out of the movies so they killed him, they even spent a great deal of time in his show explaining he did in fact die but was revived through questionable medical treatment, this isn't a retcon as it does not rewrite his death scene in Avengers, Jason dying and coming back in in the Friday The 13th films are not retcons because by reviving him they are adhering to the story of the last film which had him "die".
Retconning is what Arrow did in S3 when Ras Al Gul stabs Oliver through the heart and boots him off a mountain then when we see Oliver and his wound it's suspiciously not in the heart but in the abdomen, that's a retcon.
Don't bother, his mindset is "If DC does it it's good, if Marvel does it it's bad". I know but I cannot help myself, I try to think he's just unaware of things so if we educate him maybe he wont say such silly things, I forget it's like trying to teach French to a squirrel talking sense into him. |
|
