|
Post by damngumby on Dec 7, 2017 20:27:53 GMT
Civil War was worse. There was no real need for Iron Man and Cap to fight because Cap's position is indefensible and it just made Cap look really bad. In the MCU universe it's been made pretty clear that the world government has been corrupted by a secret society pursuing a hidden agenda. Under those circumstances, the government does not represent the people. ... Therefore, Captain America is right not to trust it. Any comparison to the real world is idiotically invalid because there is no Hydra secretly pulling the strings in the real world. (Hopefully) It comes as no big surprise that DC-Fanboy is taking the position of the dutiful Nazis ... a mindless lemming, fully committed to the authority and legitimacy of the 3rd Reich.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Dec 7, 2017 20:43:53 GMT
Civil War worked because the conflict was an adult conflict. BvS was pretty much a playground brawl:
Kid 1: "I'm the tough guy around here. I don't like you because I think you're more dangerous than me. So I'm going to beat you up." Kid 2: "I don't want to fight you. But you punched me, so I'm going to beat you up."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2017 22:40:01 GMT
Hey, DC-Fan, you never replied to the post I aimed at you.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 8, 2017 6:00:53 GMT
But the fight with Iron Man itself, the conflict between the two, happened because Iron Man was trying to kill Bucky, not calmly take him in to the police. As far as Iron Man was concerned, Bucky had killed his parents, he didn't really care about any brainwashing, understandably because he just saw Bucky bash his mother's skull in, so he was trying to kill him. Cap however, knowing it wasn't Bucky's fault, again understandably tried to save his life. Hence the fight. That was in the last 5 minutes of the movie. But Cap was already acting like a power-hungry tyrant long before that. And if Cap had done the right thing and not aid and abet a double-murderer to flee from the law, then there wouldn't have been any fight at the end. But MCU Dictator Kevin Feige wanted that fight a the end so they wrote a crappy script that made no sense at all just to get that fight in there. In Batman vs Superman it doesn't make that much sense why Batman and Superman had to fight. And in Civil War, the airport fight (which was supposed to be the big fight and the highlight of the entire movie) didn't make any sense at all and was completely unnecessary. 1st, it didn't make any sense at all because why the fuck would Hawkeye abandon his girlfriend and kids to go to Germany to aid and abet a double-murderer to flee from the law and why the fuck would Ant-Man, who said that he wanted to be a superhero so his daughter could be proud of her ex-con dad, agree to leave his daughter and go to Germany to aid and abet a double-murderer to flee from the law and once again get himself thrown in jail. Way to make the daughter proud! 2nd, it was completely unnecessary because Tony Stark knew that Cap and Bucky were going to show up at the airport to hijack the quinjet to make their escape. Tony Stark is supposedly a strategic genius so why didn't he have any plan at all to set a trap for Cap and Bucky or to disable the quinjet so they couldn't hijack it? Then again, MCU Tony Stark has shown that he's as dumb as the Hulk. After all, Tony Stark was so dumb that he not only went on TV ad announced to the whole world his home address so the bad guys could launch a missile at his home but also Tony Stark didn't even bother to warn his girlfriend (who has no superpowers to defend herself) to stay away from the house for awhile so that she doesn't get in the line of fire when the bad guys attack his house. MCU Tony Stark is either a complete idiot or is so selfish that he didn't give a shit that his girlfriend could be in the line of fire.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 8, 2017 6:02:39 GMT
The reason for Captain America and Iron Man clashing, what it meant to see them clash and the end result of it was just done in a better way. There was no real need for Batman and Superman to have to fight and it just made Batman look like the bad guy. Then it was resolved and the conflict was put to an end in such a shoddy way. It should have focused more on Lex Luthor manipulating Batman in order to turn against Superman. That should have stayed the conflict until the end where it would have been resolved in a much better way and then Lex Luthor would have been sentenced for his crimes at the end. No Wonder Woman and no Doomsday. And then Superman was against Batman because he didn't approve of Batman's violent tactics. Yet, we saw at the beginning Superman killing a terrorist by slamming him through a wall at superhuman speed. He's just as violent. Superman didn't kill any terrorist nor slam any terrorist through a wall in BvS.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 8, 2017 6:07:22 GMT
None of this matters. Civil War is just the better movie. No, CIvil War was nothing but a convoluted mess. BvS is a better movie than Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Dec 8, 2017 6:43:31 GMT
And then Superman was against Batman because he didn't approve of Batman's violent tactics. Yet, we saw at the beginning Superman killing a terrorist by slamming him through a wall at superhuman speed. He's just as violent. Superman didn't kill any terrorist nor slam any terrorist through a wall in BvS. Yes he did. When Lois was being held hostage, Superman put his ass through the wall, sqaushin his ass.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 8, 2017 6:47:05 GMT
Superman didn't kill any terrorist nor slam any terrorist through a wall in BvS. Yes he did. When Lois was being held hostage, Superman put his ass through the wall, sqaushin his ass. No, he didn't.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Dec 8, 2017 6:57:35 GMT
Yes he did. When Lois was being held hostage, Superman put his ass through the wall, sqaushin his ass. No, he didn't. Yes he did. There is no way that man lived. He was speared through that wall at superhuman speed.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 8, 2017 7:05:52 GMT
Yes he did.[/quote] No, he didn't. There is no way that man lived. He was speared through that wall at superhuman speed. No, he wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Dec 8, 2017 8:30:16 GMT
Yes he did. When Lois was being held hostage, Superman put his ass through the wall, sqaushin his ass. No, he didn't. Yes he did. Look @ 3:53
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Dec 8, 2017 8:31:43 GMT
That was in the last 5 minutes of the movie. Yeah but my comment was just based on the fight itself. But that was something that he only did AFTER Bucky told him about Zemo and his plan to release five dangerous super soldiers. The others were not interested in that part, they only wanted Bucky who wasn't the threat. Cap broke the law in order to deal with the threat that nobody else was aware or was interested in. Hawkeye and Ant-man's involvement didn't have anything to do with aiding Bucky flee from the law. Their involvement was about them helping Captain America with stopping the super soldier assassins. When Ant-man met Captain America and Cap asked him if he knew what they were up against he mentioned the "psycho assassins". They were aiding Captain America not the Winter Soldier. You've gone completely off track here. This was about the reason for why the two characters fought. Somehow you've gone from that to talking about something completely different from an entirely different movie altogether.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Dec 8, 2017 10:41:37 GMT
And in Civil War, the airport fight (which was supposed to be the big fight and the highlight of the entire movie) didn't make any sense at all and was completely unnecessary. 1st, it didn't make any sense at all because why the fuck would Hawkeye abandon his girlfriend and kids to go to Germany to aid and abet a double-murderer to flee from the law and why the fuck would Ant-Man, 1. They were there to help fight the Super Soldiers. 2. Both Hawkeye and Ant Man had children/families to protect. The Sokovia Accords would have meant that they would have to Register and in turn their secret identities being known to a much wider number of people/nations than they were before. Also Ant-Man had a distrust of all things Stark ingrained in him, and there was an element of hero worship toward Cap. And further proof you don't watch the films. They were there to hijack a helicopter. Just as they get there they the copter is disabled by Iron Man. During the fight they notice there is a Quinjet in one of the hangers.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Dec 8, 2017 16:42:03 GMT
Yes he did. When Lois was being held hostage, Superman put his ass through the wall, sqaushin his ass. No, he didn't. Lying now, huh?! Can't face the truth can you that BvS just sucks balls.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Dec 8, 2017 16:45:28 GMT
None of this matters. Civil War is just the better movie. No, CIvil War was nothing but a convoluted mess. BvS is a better movie than Civil War. Critics, reviews, RottenTomatos, everything says otherwise you dumb fuck.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 9, 2017 5:12:04 GMT
No, he didn't. 1st, 3:53 of your video proves that I'm right that Superman didn't put the guy through any wall. Lois is standing in between the guy and Superman. Since Superman doesn't have phasing powers like Martian Manhunter or Shadowcat have, it's impossible for Superman to charge at the guy from the front without going through Lois, who was still standing. So the only other possibility was Superman simply used his superspeed to get behind the guy and then pulled the guy through the hole in the hole that Superman created when he punched a hole through the wall. So the guy was pulled through the hole in the wall but not driven into the wall. 2nd, Zack Synder himself has confirmed that Superman didn't kill the guy. The Director of the movie obviously knows more about what happened in that scene he filmed than you do. Zack Snyder confirms Superman didn't kill anyone in BvS"Snyder addressed the issue, explaining that Superman is innocent and also the man is probably gone for good.
Simply put, Snyder said the man is "not dead but not a problem either"
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Dec 9, 2017 5:16:18 GMT
Nope.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Dec 9, 2017 5:17:54 GMT
So Snyder backtracked once he realized his vision wasn't getting a good reception.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 9, 2017 5:23:03 GMT
Hawkeye and Ant-man's involvement didn't have anything to do with aiding Bucky flee from the law. Their involvement was about them helping Captain America with stopping the super soldier assassins. When Ant-man met Captain America and Cap asked him if he knew what they were up against he mentioned the "psycho assassins". They were aiding Captain America not the Winter Soldier. Hawkeye and Ant-Man fought on Bucky's side during the airport fight and it was their distraction of the members on Iron Man's team that allowed the 2 fugitives, Bucky and Cap, to escape. You've gone completely off track here. This was about the reason for why the two characters fought. Somehow you've gone from that to talking about something completely different from an entirely different movie altogether. MCU says all their movies are connected. So if it's all supposed to be connected, then it's fair game to talk about events in those other movies. Unless MCU's movies aren't all connected and Kevin Feige is just a liar.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Dec 9, 2017 5:27:31 GMT
Nope. Like I proved above and President Ackbar also proved above, Superman didn't kill that terrorist in BvS. Zack Snyder confirms Superman didn't kill anyone in BvS"Snyder addressed the issue, explaining that Superman is innocent and also the man is probably gone for good.
Simply put, Snyder said the man is "not dead but not a problem either"
|
|