Spoilers Batman v Superman and Captain America Civil War
- Thread starter M.A.C.O.
- Start date
And how does Nick Fury showing you mean he has a Hellicarrier crewed and ready to fly. Especially since he's supposed to be dead as far as the world is concerned.
It's the same helicarrier from the first Avengers movie. He said they pulled it out of mothballs, which means it probably was considered obsolete by the more advanced Project Insight helicarriers and stored away. It's Nick Fury, man. Even when he's supposed to be dead he's got more resources than most other people in the world. When he asked Stark if he could borrow Maria Hill and offered to drop off Banner at the Avengers Tower on his way to whatever mysterious thing he was doing, that was your clue that he had something up his sleeve.
Or its been at some sort of storage facility since SHIELD collapsed.
Oh, come on it's a freakin flying aircraft carrier! Thats not something one can just produce on command in secret.
It could be if you know where it's been stored and how to get to it. Which Fury, being the former Director of S.H.I.E.L.D., would.
In Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. we learn that Coulson, in conjunction with Fury, had acquired the helicarrier after the fall of S.H.I.E.L.D. and moved it to a secret facility to be repaired, in case of emergency. But it's simple enough to infer from the movie alone that Fury was behind the helicarrier's salvaging.
Yeah, but getting the people and necessary equipment to get it airborn is another story. Plus getting it out of where ever it is.
Which begs the question of how you move something that big in secret. Especially in how hard it was to get one quinjet.
You need to rewatch MOS because there was..
1.) Superman giving himself up to Zod so that the Earth would be spared.
2.) Superman coming to the aid of his mother who is being attacked.
3.) Superman telling people to get inside before he engages in the street fight.
4.) Superman blocking the "evolutionary" talking woman from flying into an aircraft.
5.) Superman catching the falling airmean even though the guy was just shooting at him seconds earlier
6.) Superman running into the same kryptonian woman right before she tries to dual another military guy.
And that's not counting Superman using his heat vision to save Lois's life and Superman snapping Zod's neck because he was about to obliterate innocent people. Plus you're ignoring all the heroic stuff he did before he even put on the tights. Your statements are not only contradictory in regards to holding Avengers to the same stansards but they are just flat out wrong.
You can counter each and every one of those with other scenes in the movie like:
1) Superman taking the fight from his farmhouse with only a few people around to the populated downtown area
2) in the process, Superman directs Zod through multiple silos destroying the hard work and infrastructure of a very innocent farmer just trying to make a living (they have it hard enough without Superman there, and then that)
3) And continues right into a gas station, blowing that up and the cars surrounding it (people generally don't park cars for no reason at a gas station, there's a VERY good chance they went up in that explosion)
4) Superman making out with Lois over the charred destroyed city where he could be using some of his x-ray vision and powers to find the buried people.
5) Superman trashing the drone and smashing it down a few feet in front of the soldiers, then saying "I'm here to help"??
The writing oozes with cynicism, and that's the biggest thing about the two DC movies versus the Marvel ones. That much cynicism in a story paints the whole movie (even the good parts) in such a drab tone that it's not fun at all to watch.
1) Superman taking the fight from his farmhouse with only a few people around to the populated downtown area
2) in the process, Superman directs Zod through multiple silos destroying the hard work and infrastructure of a very innocent farmer just trying to make a living (they have it hard enough without Superman there, and then that)
3) And continues right into a gas station, blowing that up and the cars surrounding it (people generally don't park cars for no reason at a gas station, there's a VERY good chance they went up in that explosion)
4) Superman making out with Lois over the charred destroyed city where he could be using some of his x-ray vision and powers to find the buried people.
5) Superman trashing the drone and smashing it down a few feet in front of the soldiers, then saying "I'm here to help"??
The writing oozes with cynicism, and that's the biggest thing about the two DC movies versus the Marvel ones. That much cynicism in a story paints the whole movie (even the good parts) in such a drab tone that it's not fun at all to watch.
You just got done saying that there were NO scenes of superman saving people and I just pointed out many examples of where he did. You were wrong. Also..
1.) If the Avengers actually cared about collateral damage and not hurting innocent people they would never allow a loose cannon like the hulk around in the first place.He's completely unpredictable and can never be fully controlled.
2.) There are many examples already cited of how the Avengers caused FAR more damage than Superman did and you dismiss it based on " Superman has a higher standard." Hogwash! Ironman,Captain America, Thor etc. ALL are heroes who are out there to serve and protect people. You can't hold a different standard amongst superheroes when it comes to protecting the innocent just because it conflicts with your favorite movie .It's dishonest and also inconsistent with the comics themselves.
3.) The dark novels that these D.C movies are based on are cynical and drab. Have you ever read " The Dark Knight Returns" or "The Death of Superman?" There's nothing joyful,happy or fun about them. It might not be your cup of tea but it is staying faithful to its source material and fir that Im glad. The LAST thing I want is Batman and Superman cracking cheesy one liners during a fight just for a cheap laugh. No thank you.
Last edited:
While not a BvS/CACW comparison, I did want to point this out.
- In BvS and Avengers, there are scenes of the hero winning the fight against their adversary and some government backed military agency orders a tactical nuclear strike where the heroes are fighting. Iron Man diverts the missile into the wormhole, and Superman takes Doomsday into space where it detonates.
I should also add that Superman threw Zod into stratosphere in MOS. Despite all the complaints he didn't try to take the fight outside of Metropolis.
- In BvS and Avengers, there are scenes of the hero winning the fight against their adversary and some government backed military agency orders a tactical nuclear strike where the heroes are fighting. Iron Man diverts the missile into the wormhole, and Superman takes Doomsday into space where it detonates.
I should also add that Superman threw Zod into stratosphere in MOS. Despite all the complaints he didn't try to take the fight outside of Metropolis.
Other way around. Zod was the one that primarily caused them to go out into space. He also started them back towards Earth, until Superman took over and brought them both rocketing down into the building.
I don't really have a horse in this race, as I generally enjoyed MoS, haven't yet seen BvS, and really don't have a problem with the portrayal of collateral damage in any of these movies, though I understand why some do.
But, on your point 2, I think an argument can be made that the circumstances aren't really the same between the fights the Avengers have taken part in, and the battle at the end of MoS. Supes vs Zod was a one on one fight, which plays by different rules than the sprawling battles in New York and Sokovia. A fairier comparison is actually Hulk vs Hulkbuster, where the film explicitly shows Tony trying to get Hulk away from civilians (and not totally succeed, repeatedly).
Your point 1, however, is completely misguided. Collateral damage is a thing. As CW points out, it happens in every one of these super-hero fights in crowded places. It happens in military engagements in the real world. It happens. The goal is to minimize it when possible. But if the fight is near any place inhabited, let alone densely populated, it's going to happen. Hulk, especially as presented in the Avengers films, isn't really about hurting innocent people. He fights back when he feels threatened, but otherwise he is repeatedly shown acting to protect the innocent in the larger scrums. The only time he's shown actively threatening people without provocation is in South Africa, when he's also explicitly under the influence of Wanda's Mind Whammy.
You're correct, the Hulk is dangerous, because like a small child he lashes out when he feels scared or threatened, and has no real sense of how his own strength influences the world around him. I've seen a lot of people use Jekyll/Hyde as a metaphor for Hulk, but the version of the character in the MCU is much more akin to Banner's wounded inner child. He means well but he's incapable of seeing beyond his own needs. But in this sense, he's a weapon to be deployed by the Avengers, when the situation calls for it. Weapons, especially big ones or things that explode or smash, cause collateral damage. Period, full stop. That's accepted. Those who use them are expected to attempt, in all good faith, to minimize that damage, which the Avengers certainly seem to. But sometimes not using a weapon is the more irresponsible action.
And in both the case of New York and Sokovia, where you're talking about potentially extinction level events, not deploying all your tools is patently irresponsible. AoU goes out of it's way to show that they attempt to keep Banner on the sidelines as much as possible, both through dialogue after the assault on Castle Strucker and through action when the Avengers raid Klaue's boat.
At least one of those people was one of the Cap loyalists from TWS.
I just find it puzzling that the one movie where people complain about collateral damage the most is the one where it was actually depicted as this horrible thing that it is instead of just "fun" destruction.
Yes! I was asking if he made it out back in the Winter Soldier thread, I was happy to see him. Not all of the SHIELD agents were bad, and I'm wondering if he'd even be considered an "agent" maybe an employee, he seems to be a computer user, he doesn't appear to be armed at anytime.
I'm sure Fury would be happy to have him working for him, though after he stood up to Rumlow with basically nothing.
Similar threads
