It's just a matter of what/how much you're willing to accept when it comes to the portrayal of superpowers and superheroes. And for superheroes like Cap. they can't "break the laws of physics" which means his 200-some pound frame, practically standing on tip-toes, isn't going to prevent a helicopter with a 2000lb-plus lift capacity from lifting off. The "curl" he does to prevent it from leaving the helipad, maybe. There's enough "wiggle room" when it comes to how "super strong" he is, but he's technically not supposed to be stronger than the maximum potential for a human with maybe a bit more oomph. But I'll give him the helicopter curl but not him pulling the helicopter back to the ground.
The Hulk? Yes. He's got enough mass to overpower a helicopter's takeoff capability. Iron Man? Sure, particularly due to reverse-thrust from the suit. Superman? Sure. Again, "reverse thrust" from his ability to fly/manipulate gravity?
Steve Rogers, otherwise normal human being? Him pulling the helicopter back to the ground just strikes me as ignoring physics. Though, again, maybe there's something in the helicopter's flight dynamics that allowed for it (lift from a ground effect rather than the helicopter's own rotors) but it still strikes me as a bit silly looking.
But, again, it's me nitpicking and looking for things to pick on when it comes to the movie as there's no real, major, problems I have with it. Besides, I'm a Trek fan, nitpicking trivial things like this while accepting greater slips is part of that.
Yeah. And I would be more willing to rationalize it away if I thought that the filmmakers were actually aware of the physics involved. I can more easily forgive filmmakers breaking the rules if I think they realize that they're breaking them and making a deliberate choice to do so. (For me, this principle applies to both physics and continuity/characterization.)
Meanwhile, that youtube video that someone posted of a helicopter crashing while towing a boat is totally different. The boat is significantly heavier than Captain America and that's the point.
BTW, since we're speaking of Marvel movie physics, how heavy is Mjolnir, actually? While Thor & Vision are the only people able to physically lift it, we've seen it placed on top of various surfaces and even on a wooden coat rack once, so it can't be that heavy. (I figure, if an unworthy person tries to move it, it becomes "quantum locked" or something, fixing it in space.)
And speaking of Mjolnir, I would like to point something out in the whole
Civil War debate: Vision was able to lift the hammer easily while Captain America could barely shift it. Shouldn't that mean that, when it comes to making ethical decisions about the Avengers' conduct, we should defer to Vision's judgment rather than Captain America's?
If Stark knew who Spider-man, operating for a few months, was then he certainly knew ho Ant-Man was who's probably been operating longer and had a much more public "debut" not to mention Tony's likely connections/dealings with Pym's company and probably even had some knowledge of Pym's work, the Pym Particle and what the CEO of the company was doing with the Yellow Jacket project.
The "Who are you again?" line was less seriously asking and more rubbing salt in AM's wounds of being an "unknown" in their circle of Superheroes and for getting himself captured.
Either way, I still find it hilariously meta considering how tacked on Ant-Man's presence in the film felt to begin with.
To me the argument boils down to this: while the power of one of these in the hands of an individual is potentially scary, the collective power of all of them in the hands of a political entity is downright terrifying. It's the old security at the expense of freedom hand-off.
I think most people would be better off living in a slightly more dangerous world than existing safely with their faces under a jackboot.
Shouldn't the possibility of a rogue group of multiple superhumans working in concert for their own agenda be just as worrying, if not moreso, than such a group in the hands of a multinational government organization? The whole point of democracy is not that the people as a whole are inherently smarter or better than any particular individual or group. It's that spreading out the decision making process over a larger group of people minimizes the risk (as much as humanly possible) of any particular agenda abusing the system.
It's highly questionable whether a group that powerful should even be getting involved in things like 'busting arms dealers' in the first place, and maybe in that regard, there should be a legal threshold for their involvement. That could be a part of the deal - give them the latitude to do what needs to be done when the fate of the world is at stake, and in return they agree to stay out of matters that logically probably ought to be handled by police, unless they're specifically asked in.
I agree that that would be an extremely effective compromise.
It depends how the concussive force hits the Hulk.
If it bats him, he could be knocked away for miles, but he'll survive getting struck, and survive landing. The blast wave will save the Hulk from the heat which is probably what would get him. Radiation is his breakfast of champions.
If the Hulk was pressed against something immovable like the planet, because the explosion was from above, he'll be green pancake, and sure he might be still alive at the end of that but all that powdered bone is not going to re-knit into a recognizable skeleton.
I dunno. In the comics, Wolverine has survived having his entire flesh burned away in lava (and somehow his sideburns always know to grow back). I'm not entirely sure if anything can kill the Hulk. Your idea has possibilities but do we even know if the Hulk's bones can be broken at all?
Side-note: It is interesting how much less sympathetic President Matthew Ellis's administration comes across in this film (in the person of Secretary of State Ross) than it does in Agents of SHIELD (in the person of President Ellis himself). President Ellis seems much more personable and reasonable--even going out on a limb to protect SHIELD agents from the Russian government--there than he does in Civil War, even though Secretary Ross and his counterparts must have been negotiating the Accords in secret for a very long time before the Lagos incident.
IMO, in general, William Sadler is always more personable than William Hurt.
And is there that much of a difference between HYDRA and ISIS.
IIRC, Hydra is a non-state actor, though not for lack of trying. Meanwhile, although the governments of the world don't want to formally acknowledge it for all kinds of legal reasons, ISIS is kind of a de facto government. It controls specific territory with the intent of administering its concept of justice in that territory. As a non-state actor, Hydra is more akin to al-Qaeda.
)
