Sunday, June 5, 2016
How Iron Man Ruined “CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR″ For Me
HOW IRON MAN RUINED "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR" FOR ME
I am so disappointed with Marvel. And I am especially disappointed with its latest entry for the Marvel Cinematic Universe - namely"CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR". I never thought I would be so disappointed with a Captain America film, considering how much I loved "CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER" and especially "CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER".
As for "CIVIL WAR", I found it disappointing. Worse, I left the movie theater feeling unusually angry. And a great deal of my anger was focused on Tony Stark aka Iron Man’s role as the movie’s co-lead, which the writers had allowed to nearly dominate the film. Someone on the TREK BBS forum had pointed out that "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR" had sewn up the plot lines left dangling from "THE WINTER SOLDIER". And the movie did so . . . WITH BAD WRITING!
"CIVIL WAR" started with a flashback of Tony’s parents getting killed in 1991. The screenplay tried to make a mystery of it, but even a dummy would have known who was the killer.
Steve’s romance with Sharon Carter was rushed, because the Sokovia Accords story line and Tony’s man pain made it impossible for the screenwriters to do justice to it. Now, we have fans demanding that Steve become a bisexual, so that he can have a romance with his old buddy, Bucky Barnes. One, I cannot believe that these fans are so unwilling to see how badly written that Steve and Sharon’s romance was that they would rather he become a bisexual. Really? Because the screenwriters had failed to follow up the promise of Steve and Sharon? And two, I find it ironic (or not) that they would not consider Steve having a romance with Sam Wilson, who is African-America.
Speaking of Sam and Bucky, I noticed that their relationship was never really explored. Instead, the movie presented their rivalry over the role of Steve’s "best friend" in a series of silly comedy routines in which they are mildly hostile toward one another. The movie spent 10 to 15 minutes showing how Tony Stark recruited Peter Parker (who really had no business being in this movie) for Team Iron Man. They could have saved this first meeting in MCU’s upcoming "SPIDER-MAN" movie. Yet, "CIVIL WAR" failed to explain or show why Scott Lang and Clint Barton had decided to side with Steve.
Zemo’s whole revenge plot was all about Tony finding out that Bucky, as the brainwashed Winter Soldier, had killed his parents in order to break up the Avengers for what happened in Sokovia. Again, it became all about Tony. The worst aspect of all of this is that Marvel ended Steve and S.H.I.E.L.D.’s conflict with HYDRA in such a weak manner. The studio ended it on "AGENTS OF S.H.I.E.L.D." - with Phil Coulson and Glenn Talbot coordinating a series of bombing on HYDRA bases . . . off screen. I found that incredibly pathetic. Someone on Tumblr had pointed out that Steve Roger’s personal arc in "CIVIL WAR" had been weakened by the screenwriters’ unnecessary focus on Tony Stark. After seeing this movie, I heartily agree. What is really sickening about this is that Marvel Studios came up with the idea to focus the Civil War arc in a Captain America movie in order to lure Robert Downey Jr. into another Marvel film.
You would think after the box office successes of movies like "CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER" and"GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY" that this idea was unnecessary. But apparently, Marvel thought otherwise and decided to shove an Avengers film into a Captain America movie . . . all because they could not do without the increasingly overrated Robert Downey Jr. And because of this decision, I have now developed deep contempt toward Marvel Studios.