[watching] I'm with the bad guys......

#1
I stopped watching anything about Infinity War a few weeks ago. I already know too much and enough to spoil the film for people if I discuss it.

And, dammit, an advert for flipping Lego comes on and tells me something else I didn't want to know!

But that's not why I'm posting.

From what I do know I'm pretty sure I'm sympathetic with the bad guy again.

Lex Luthor is right. His motives might be wrong. However, for us the welcome a mega powerful alien whose very existence warps our society and who gets to choose who lives and who dies, and who doesn't share his technology and abilities - which could save thousands of people - is even more misguided.

And, yes, I totally understand the allegorical nature of the X-Men stories. Treating people who are different poorly merely because they are different is fundamentally wrong. But if mutants with those sorts of abilities actually existed, I'd be first in the queue calling for medical research and registration. If I was a mutant, I'd be siding with Magneto.

Killmonger was right, of course.

The Secovian Accords were hamfistedly implemented. (Sit down with Captain America and he'll write something humane, practical and workable. Don't ambush him with something cobbled together by a committee.) However, we'd need something like that.

And what little I know about what Thanos is up to.....

You know I'm pretty on board with that as well.

The REAL villain in the MCU is, of course, Tony Stark.
 

Guvnor

Administrator
Staff member
#2
Oh yes, Tony Stark is a swine. Stan Lee realised he had a niche and filled it.
Marvel are very good at offering heroes and villains for every opinion and niche.
Usually both heroes and anti-heroes for all slots.
Of course mutants need to be registered and managed.
Of course some would follow Magneto.
I never got into the Marvel Civil War but it seemed to reflect the zeitgeist very well.
Comics are good at that
 
#3
The real villain of Civil War is Captain America.

Or rather, the real right wing icon of Civil War is Captain America.

In both the comic and the movie, we see the consequences of what happens when the theory of 'The only way to stop a bad guy with a super power, is to have a good guy with a super power' is taken to its final conclusion. In the comic, in particular, you see what happens when a load of power-toting teenagers take the law into their own hands.

So what happens? The government tries to enact some super-power control! A few sensible laws - having to register your super power, doing a few background checks to make sure people with serious issues aren't stopped from having powers, but are rather watched (and OK, used) by the government. No-one is trying to take your superpowers away - just some sensible controls.

But oh no! Not for Captain America. He can't have the government getting involved in his God given right to bear powers! That's an exercise in freedom! So he becomes a domestic terrorist. A proper libetarian domestic terrorist leading an insurgent cell against the wishes of the democratically elected government's wishes. And why? To resist legislative power control.

Captain America is the right wing power nut here, not Iron Man. Iron Man is Bernie flipping Sanders in comparison!

hehehehe
 
#6
I have lost track already with the superheroes in these films as there seems to be a real glut of them. Who’s who and why are they fighting each other?
Bored of them and their CGI spectaculars.
Not the target audience for Infinity War then?

Seriously, even if you're bored and lost with the genre, give Black Panther a try when it comes on freebieTV. The pet BBC critic (Marc Kermode?) said as a serious part of his review that in the final battle he knew who everyone was, what their part in the story was and what they were fighting for. Clearly he felt like you do about the other films.

Alternatively I can tell you who's who and why each of them is fighting each other both wthin the plot and meta - outside the plot, the real reasons why they're fighting. Every character, every plotline, every fight. But then, maybe I'm a bit obsessed.
 
#7
I'm not a huge superhero person, but I like most of the Marvel Films and the way they fit into a big narrative with films building on each-other, sometimes vastly, sometimes with smaller nods.

Anyway, in Civil War (the film, not the comics, which I don't know), it seems entirely reasonable to me to want to register superpowers. I'm against vigilantism (one thing which originally turned me off the superhero genre; they're standing for something I find personally awful), and one thing the film did well was showing what a bad idea vigilantism is when dealing with big world events. Of course there has to be some sort of official oversight.

But Tony Stark is the man who makes weapons...that isn't good, and even in the films leads to escalation all round. He doesn't take care of his creations, and goes his own way. That's another issue.

And yes, there's applicability to such things as military interventions, the whole military complex, and the US gun control situation. So there's a little subtlety in the films as well as the general fun factor, as well as just enough of a sense of verisimilitude for my tastes. And people use their powers for much more interesting things than acting as vigilantes to take on bank robbers. I wouldn't have believed a few years ago how much I would like them (especially considering I once considered all superhero films abominably awful- oh, I could rant here).
 
#8
Anyway, in Civil War (the film, not the comics, which I don't know), it seems entirely reasonable to me to want to register superpowers.
Really? Where do you draw limits?

Suppose I can lift 225kg over my shoulders. Do you need to register me? Probably not - there are dozens of people who can do that. How about 300kg? Is that a superpower? It would set a new world record, but how do you know its superhuman?

How about if I have a clear superhuman ability? Suppose I can change the colour of my urine at will? It's clearly beyond normal human limits? Do you register me and in some way limit my rights because I was born different?

Super powers in the film and comics tend not to be things people chose to have (Tony Stark and Captain America being obvious examples). When does it become appropriate to limit peoples rights because of the way they were born?
 
#9
Really? Where do you draw limits?

Suppose I can lift 225kg over my shoulders. Do you need to register me? Probably not - there are dozens of people who can do that. How about 300kg? Is that a superpower? It would set a new world record, but how do you know its superhuman?

How about if I have a clear superhuman ability? Suppose I can change the colour of my urine at will? It's clearly beyond normal human limits? Do you register me and in some way limit my rights because I was born different?

Super powers in the film and comics tend not to be things people chose to have (Tony Stark and Captain America being obvious examples). When does it become appropriate to limit peoples rights because of the way they were born?
Ah! The appeal to the shades of grey that stops decisions being made.

A gun needs a license. What about a knife? What about a bow? Crossbow? Air pistol? Spud gun? At what point does something become a weapon?

Driving at speed is dangerous. 250mph too fast? What about 100mph? 80mph? Who said 70 was safe and 71 was wrong?

A line has to be drawn somewhere. That's why we appoint a Government, to draw those lines, monitor them and amend them.

If Dr Doom was in charge we wouldn't have any problem making these decisions.
 
#10
A gun needs a license. What about a knife? What about a bow? Crossbow? Air pistol? Spud gun? At what point does something become a weapon?
Gun, Bow, Crossbow, air pistol, spud gun - all items. Things you can make a choice to pick up, purchase or make

Driving at speed is dangerous. 250mph too fast? What about 100mph? 80mph? Who said 70 was safe and 71 was wrong?
Driving at excessive speed - An Action. It's fairly clear we can judge people based on their actions, at least where they appeared to have free will.

Superhuman - as a general rule something you are and have no control over.

Now if you suggest that we limit peoples freedoms based on what they use powers for, that seems clear-cut. If you use super-strength to rip the bars off the vault and take the gold, then you do time, and when you get out you report into a probation officer. That's fine.

However, if you're strong, so we're tagging you and monitoring your actions, you have to sign up with the military (even though most people don't) and you're not allowed in banks, It seems to me you've prejudged. It could also be argued that by limiting supers freedoms you are forcing them into a position where they feel discriminated against, that the government favours 'normals' and that they've been marginalised. The very fact that you've implemented these measures suggest that there is a danger, which is likely to increase fear and mistrust of these people.
 
#11
In the MCU, none of the human superheroes presented as of yet, were born with superpowers. That would make them mutants and Sony still holds those cards I believe

Captain America - created
Thor - not human
Iron Man - Suit
Hawkeye - equipment/training
Black Widow - equipment/training
Hulk - experiment
Vision - created
Scarlet Witch - created
Quicksilver - created
Ant Man - equipment
Wasp - equipment
Spiderman - accident
War Machine - equipment
Falcon - equipment
Dr Strange - training/equipment
Black Panther - magic ribena/equipment

Not one naturally born superpower amongst them. No-one born a superpower.
 

Guvnor

Administrator
Staff member
#12
They're all dangerous running tigers for the Ayn Rand myths of ultra libertarianism.. except Tony Stark, who's a fat capitalist snout at the Pentagon's trough.

** Just in case it's not obvious, I am utterly and totally going bonkers here.. no opinion expressed by me in this thread has any meaning at all apart from as insane superhero trolling. Well apart from the following:

As it happens I parted company from the bloated MCU films sometime ago, but am a very contented reader of the Marvel X-men comics, DC post 52, and lots of indies. I have never engaged with the Marvel Civil War only because I suspect it would require more work than my PhD, but as a concept it is a cracking way to explore the core issues in the American zeitgeist, and an excellent re-examination of the very long running plotline about 'mutant' registration.. which has always been presented in a delightfully balanced and yet twisting way in the various X-Men reboots since the late 60s

I liked Guardians of the Galaxy 1&2, if they mix it with the other nonsense I'm out.
If Black Panther is worth a watch I'll have a nibble, but again if I see Thor or the Avengers nearby, I am out..


Obviously I'd roleplay [badly] any or all of this..

Free Magneto!
 
#14
Really? Where do you draw limits?

Suppose I can lift 225kg over my shoulders. Do you need to register me? Probably not - there are dozens of people who can do that. How about 300kg? Is that a superpower? It would set a new world record, but how do you know its superhuman?

How about if I have a clear superhuman ability? Suppose I can change the colour of my urine at will? It's clearly beyond normal human limits? Do you register me and in some way limit my rights because I was born different?

Super powers in the film and comics tend not to be things people chose to have (Tony Stark and Captain America being obvious examples). When does it become appropriate to limit peoples rights because of the way they were born?
I don't know X-Men, where I understand that is the whole interesting theme. But to focus on equipment... surely Tony Stark's lethal suit, Falcon's wings, Hawkeye's exploding arrows, Spiderman's funky suit, Ant Man's shrinking gear, even Captain America's shield are all things which shouldn't be uncontrolled and in private hands?

Innate powers are a whole different dilemma, I agree. Such things as super strength are quite minor really, in terms of what I would personally want to control in this fictional universe. Unless we're talking the Hulk- which is a moral dilemma.
 
Last edited:
#16
I don't know X-Men, where I understand that is the whole interesting theme. But to focus on equaipment... surely Tony Stark's lethal suit, Falcon's wings, Hawkeye's exploding arrows, Spiderman's funky suit, Ant Man's shrinking gear, even Captain America's shield are all things which shouldn't be uncontrolled and in private hands?

Innate powers are a whole different dilemma, I agree. Such things as super strength are quite minor really, in terms of what I would personally want to control in this fictional universe. Unless we're talking the Hulk- which is a moral dilemma.
You don't actually need to legislate for equipment - just apply the existing laws. Stark's "aircraft" isn't approved to fly and he certainly doesn't register a flight plan with air traffic control before che takes off!
 
Top