Spoilers Captain America: Civil War - Grading & Discussion

[TemporalFlux]

I just don't have the time to deal with the laziness of such terms. Take the damn five seconds to spell it out. At this point, I simply ignore any posts, messages, comments, etc. anywhere that use them.

20 years from now, text language will be dominant and our current language will be filed away with such classics as "ye olde".

Thankfully I'll be dead by then because I eat Little Caesar's pizza every day.

 

[Sci]

To return for a moment to the discussion about S.H.I.E.L.D. and the Department of Defense, I just rewatched the first Iron Man movie last night (still one of the best) and found I had totally and rather glaringly forgotten the very first thing that was ever established about Coulson's organization in the MCU...

COULSON: I'm Agent Phil Coulson, with the Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistics Division.
PEPPER: That's quite a mouthful.
COULSON: I know. We're working on it.
PEPPER: You know, we've been approached already by the DOD, the FBI, the CIA...
COULSON: We're a separate division with a more specific focus.

So, there that is. Mea culpa on that one.

I am not convinced that he meant they were a separate division of the Department of Defense, especially since neither of the other two agencies Pepper listed are part of Defense. (The FBI is part of the Justice Department, and the CIA is an independent agency existing outside of the federal executive departments.

If we were only looking at Iron Man, I would be inclined to take that as an indication that SHIELD is also, like the CIA, an independent agency in the U.S. government. But between the existence of the World Security Council as a regulatory body in The Avengers and Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and the references in Agents of SHIELD Season One to SHIELD's authority to seize fantastical assets as overriding national claims in "0-8-4" and to "SHIELD-allied countries" in "The Asset," I think the strong implication is that SHIELD was founded as an international agency by treaty, with its bureaucracy maintaining exclusive control over fantastical technologies that might prompt an arms race if in the hands of national governments, and answering to those national governments collectively in the form of the WSC. I also suspect that SHIELD is a bit like North American Aerospace Command in that, even though it is legally an international agency, the U.S. probably regarded it as being under its de facto control.

Also, didn't like the giant words telling us where or when the current scene in the movie takes place. LONDON covering almost the entire screen is distracting.

I didn't care for that either. I much preferred the intertitles they used in Captain America: The Winter Soldier (albeit without the latitude and longitude coordinates).

In fairness, I think the implication was that this only worked on Thor because had been stripped of his powers by Odin at the time.

Maybe? I don't buy it, though. Asgardians apparently need to eat and can gain nourishment from the same foods as Humans, and they apparently need to sleep. So I think it is most probable that there are indeed sedatives that can work on Asgardians, too.

We're talking about the MCU--and within that universe, the World Security Council was not censured / punished for launching a nuclear missile at Manhattan.

We do not know that, actually. We have no information one way or the other as to the consequences of the launch of the nuclear missile. Although we do know that the missile probably saved thousands more lives by allowing the Avengers to defeat the Chitauri who had already made it through the portal.

The reason--the very reason for the analysis of which side is right about the Accords is what I've said all along: it should be rejected due to the inherent hypocrisy of "do as I say, not as I do," which is exemplified by the guilt-free actions of the WSC, and we can rationally conclude--the potential of any UN member nation.

So does the fact that government abuses exist mean you think governments should not have control over the exercise of executive authority or control over the organized use of violence? Do you think the Army should not answer to the President? That the New York City Department of Police should not answer to the Mayor? That the State Police should not answer to the Governor?

What, to you, are the legitimate conditions for the exercise of executive authority? Should anybody with enough might be able to exercise executive authority? Are there any conditions under which the use of organized violence is not legitimate?

Do you believe in the monopoly on the legitimate use of force by the democratic state, or do you believe that anybody capable of force should be able to use it if they claim to be engaging in the enforcement of law?

Just as, in order to be in Ohio, it is necessary that you be located in the United States but notsufficient that you be in the United States, it is necessary that the executive power be exercised by the democratic state in order to be legitimate but it is not sufficient that it be carried out by the democratic state in order to be so.

The problem is, Cap's argument denies the necessary condition.

Again, the nature of the Accords makes it creation hypocritical and prejudicial, which is soused with the tools of corruption.

1. You are equating the corruption of one intergovernmental agency (the World Security Council) with an entirely different intergovernmental agency existing as a division of an entirely different intergovernmental organization. This is like being pissed at the EPA for something the FBI did, or pissed at your local police department for something your local Parks and Rec department did. It is absurd.

2. You are avoiding the question of how organized violence may be made legitimate.

I'm evaluating that scene from an out-universe perspective, not an in-universe perspective.

...which is patently inapplicable to the characters and situations presented in the films.

Your...

And, yes, it bothers me very much that Cap is depicted as arguing that he should not be regulated after his actions lead to the deaths of innocent black people. Hard for that not to in the age of Ferguson. I don't think Cap is racist -- but I think that writing decision carries unfortunate implications the writers did not intend.

That's creating a situation that does not exist for audiences by treating the CA:CW Lagos sequence as an isolated situation for Cap, and misapplying it to real world situation bearing no resemblance to Ferguson, etc. One cannot watch the film and edit overall intent (i.e. reactions to the deaths caused by the heroes) unless you have a tendency to frame all situations--no matter how inapplicable--to fit a preexisting narrative.

I am sorry to hear that it bothers you when people interpret works of art in the context of the culture and time period in which they were produced. But I don't like it when filmmakers depict Cap as accidentally killing innocent black folk and then argue he shouldn't suffer any consequences for it. I don't think it's consistent with Cap's character, and I think it brings to mind too many real-life abuses of black people that have been consequence-free. If it bothers you that I interpret works of art in the context of the eras in which they were produced, too bad.

In other words -- the Civil Rights Movement was not about demonstrating the will of the people as a whole, but about demonstrating the power of an oppressed segment of the people to disrupt the status quo until they were no longer oppressed.

The movement most assuredly included a demonstration of the will of the people after a century of facing both social & political brick walls using (among many arguments) that "people want things the way they are--there's no need to change anything," The first fight was on the social, human level, not a legal one; the belief that if the people recognize and want change, then change it must--which then (naturally) had to progress to the legal level.

None of which would have told us in any given year the will of the people who the President of the United States should be.

The Civil Rights Movement demonstrated that a segment of the people where no longer willing to be oppressed. It demonstrated the refusal of a segment of the population to be excluded from demonstrating the will of the people. It did not tell us the will of the people as a whole who should lead the country, or what policies should undertaken. You are confusing "I refuse to be beaten down" with "I, in conjunction with Bob and Ted, think that Jim should be president."

Again: the only way to know the will of the people is to have an election.

Yes, the history of governmental abuses is a well-established fact. But this fact is not relevant to the discussion.

It is the discussion,

No, it is not, because the exercise of executive power can never be legitimate if it occurs outside of the context of a democratically-elected government. Period.

No, in favor of a system of democratic accountability in carrying out the primary duty of a government (to regulate the infliction of organized violence) rather than the personal whim of an unaccountable man putting himself above the law.

...or unaccountable government operatives who kick law aside when it suits their agenda for assassinations (domestic and abroad), erecting puppet governments, wars (including their "collateral damage" that goes along with it), etc.

Democratic governments must be accountable to the people and carry more mechanisms for accountability built into them than a private mercenary army that does whatever it wants whenever it wants.

Government abuses occur. When an abuse occurs, rebellion is legitimate until such time as the abusers have been thwarted--at which point, those who rebel must then re-submit to democratic authority.

If your problem is a lack of accountability and collateral damage, letting the Avengers answer to no one and accidentally kill people without taking responsibility for it is not the answer.

Obviously such an act on the WSC's part would have been completely illegitimate, and obviously the members of the WSC who order that attack should have been charged with war crimes.

...the point is that they were not.

No, the point is that the exercise of executive power can only be legitimized through the context of a democratically-elected government, and that the private exercise of executive authority represents an inherent abuse of power.

And we do not know that the WSC members were not charged with war crimes.

The comic was WAY better but the only way that could have worked on screen was for marvel to have the film rights to Fantastic Four, Xmen and the rest of their roster. It would have also at the very least been a two parter.

... no. The 2006 Civil War crossover was a ridiculous, over-the-top joke, featuring characters behaving irrationally from start to finish in utter defiance of their own established personalities, thematic integrity, and common sense, all in the attempt to make a ham-fisted point about the USA PATRIOT Act by creating conflict between ridiculous straw men.

Spoiler: Civil War comic

To wit, it featured:

• Maria Hill ordering SHIELD agents to execute Steve for refusing to lead SHIELD's planned registration division even though the Superhero Registration Act was not yet law, and even though refusal to take a job is not a violation of law;
• 
  
• Tony Stark torturing people and imprisoning them without trial in an alternate dimension;
• 
  
• Reed Richards and Tony Stark literally murdering people;
• 
  
• Steve Rogers completely ignoring the public's overwhelming approval of superhero registration and the unbelievable amount of collateral damage he was causing

Let me get this straight . . . it was okay for Marvel to close the HYDRA arc with the bad and lazy writing found in "AGENTS OF SHIELD", because the impatient fanboys wanted the company to quickly move on to satisfy their desire for instant gratification, instead of allowing the arc to end on a well written note in a Captain America film. No wonder culture is going down the drain.

Yes. Yes, that's it. The decline of Western culture is best exemplified by the fact that Marvel Studios decided not to have Hydra be a direct antagonist in this movie. Definitely true. No hyperbole there at all.

I just don't have the time to deal with the laziness of such terms. Take the damn five seconds to spell it out. At this point, I simply ignore any posts, messages, comments, etc. anywhere that use them.

Don't forget to tell those kids to get off your lawn.

 

[Tempest]

I just don't have the time to deal with the laziness of such terms. Take the damn five seconds to spell it out. At this point, I simply ignore any posts, messages, comments, etc. anywhere that use them.

C'mon man. You have such problem with shortforms which take a second of Googling to find out. Then smileys shoudl also both you, especially on websites that cannot recognize them

 

[Stoo]

He only kept up with Thor because Thor inadvertently supercharged his armor. And it's not as if Bucky and Cap are ordinary human beings.

Also, the fight was largely in closed confines, which negate some of Iron Man's advantages in mobility.

 

[Tempest]

Iron Man was kind of jobbed in that fight. He can match hands with Thor, Whiplash and Iron Monger, but can't overpower Bucky and Captain America.

Well, it was about time comic Cap's PIS Powers entered the movie verse lol

On serious note, it was not just Iron Man. Power levels were all over the place in Civil War purely for the plot even ignoring what was shown in the previous movies. During the movie, I was like:

******** SPOILERS*********
(how do you mark them any way)









"Wait, did Bucky just wreck Cap by accident? But they were pretty evenly matched before. Oh wow, BP is kicking Bucky's ass. Wow, BP is running faster than Cap. Wait, Falcon is is only fast as them in flight? But wasn't he was much faster in TWS? Wait, did Bucky just overpower Cap's two arms with his metal hand and oneshot him? But he barely overpowered Cap's two arms with his metal arm and normal arm in the precious movie and Cap took many hits from the metal arm there before going down. Did Bucky jsut onehsot Falcon? But he didn't do that in TWS? (Okay atleast Falcon has his suit them) Good, good, Bucky just kicked the combined asses of armorless Tony, Black Widow, Sharon Carter and several CIA operatives. Waittamit, did Tony do better in h2h against Bucky than Black Widow and Sharon Carter together? Okay, now suitless Black Panther is kicking Bucky's ass and outrunning him. Waittaminit, he failed to catch up with Bucky earlier. And his armor is not that heavy. So does the suit degrade him? Hey, did he just shrug off the first hit from Bucky's metal arm and no sell the second one? But Bucky just oneshotted Cap. Wait, did T'challa (BP's real name) match the metal arm in strength with just one arm? But it just overpowered both Cap's arms. Hey, is Cap and BP grappling equally with both arms? But didn't he just match Bucky's metal arm just before with? Hey, did Cap just kick BP's ass? But he just got his ass kicked by Bucky twice and was evenly matched with him back in TWS. Hey, is Bucky now looking way better agaisnt Panther? But he got his ass kicked twice before even in Winter Soldier mode. Did BP just overpower the metal arm more easily than he did before? Does the suit enhance his strength? But then why did Cap look equal to him in strength. Good, good Spider Man kicks the combined asses of Bucky and Falcon and catches a punch from the metal arm and then overpowers it with zero effort. Wait, did Cap look very close to Spidey in strength while grappling and then kick his ass? But Spidey just overpowered Bucky's metal arm effortlessly. If Cap was only a hairbreadth weaker then he would have owned Bucky. Okay, Hawkeye did much better against Widow than in Avengers, but she still came off as better (though Wanda noted he was pulling his punches). Wait, did Hawkeye take it to BP in CQC? But BP matched Cap and kicked Bucky's ass, who had owned Widow in this movie and TWS, while Widow came off as better here and in Avengers. Wait, did Hawkeye's explosive arrow just heavily damage Iron Man? But Iron Man can tank missile explosions. Wait, did Iron Man just get wrecked by Wanda's cars throw at him? But he was okay when his house collapsed on him in Iron Man 3. Okay, Giant Man can shrug off missiles and tank Iron Man's and War Machine's punches equally. But isn't Iron Man stronger than War Machine? Wait, did Spidey's punch get more of a reaction out Giant Man than War Machine throwing a truck at him and Iron Man hitting him? Hey, did Falcon just knock around Iron Man? But Iron Man was doing pretty well against Cap just moments ago. Wait, did Iron Man and Falcon failed to catch Rhodey falling? But Falcon already did the same thing twice in Tws while Iron Man did it in Iron Man, Iron Man 3 and Avengers. Wait, did Iron Man while damaged just effortlessly block Spiderman's punch and then easily restrain him? But he just hurt Giant Man more than War Machine or Iron Man did.Wait, did Bucky's metal arm effortlessly overpower Iron Man fresh and crush his armor? Hey did just Cap overpower Iron Man and start crushing his armor But Iron Man while damaged overpowered Spider Man who overpowered the metal arm. Hey did Cap just overpower Iron Man and start crushing the armor? But Bucky's metal arm didn't cause this much damage while crushing this armor. Hey did Iron Man temporarily go down to his own repulsor Wait did Bucky just overpower Iron Man with his normal arm despite Iron Man having leverage advantage? But Cap just barely overpowered Iron Man. Wasn't Bucky's normal arm inferior to Cap in strength? Hey, did Iron Man just get an advantage over Cap and Bucky due to pure skill and one needed the other to bail them out? When did Tony become this skilled? Hey, did Bucky just no-sell punches from Iron Man? But his punches just before really rocked Cap. And Iron Man was explicitly out to kill Bucky while holding back agaisnt Cap. Okay, did Cap just punch a chunk off the armor with his bare hands? Bucky hitting the armor with the shield's edge using his metal and normal arm did not cause this just much damage. Wait, did FRIDAY just say Iron Man cannnot take Cap in h2h? Buthe jsut did moments ago. Okay, did Cap just tank three repulsor blasts from Iron Man along with several punches? But Iron Man just before KOd both Cap and Bucky with a single repulsor blast each.






















********SPOILERS end*********
(again, how do you mark spoilers?)

This movie's power levels are a mess

 

[Tempest]

I'm not the only one who thinks so either:
http://www.comicboards.com/php/show.php?msg=ironman-2016060514501164&layout=thread

 

[Tempest]

I felt they did a much better job presenting the case for both sides and making both sides sympathetic in the movie.

I agree

 

[Tempest]

This was funny though:

http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/User_b..._Captain_America_Civil_War_-_spoilered_review

 

[Tempest]

Also, wow at all these psychological analysis in the previous page. You don't see them anywhere, I think I'm gonna like this place.

 

[Tempest]

If Yondu is "a dead beat father substitute for a dead beat father," then why can't Obadiah be a substitute for a father who (in the most uncharitable view, before Tony learned the whole truth about Howard, or at least that there was more to the story) profited by war and destruction and death, duplicitously stole designs from other inventors, "a butcher and a thief" as Vanko put it, who cared for no one? Sure, Tony didn't necessarily consciously know Stane was as bad as all that before he turned on him...and yet that's exactly what he turned out to be.

Vanko would be the few who considers that, as Howard was not at all simply seeking profit. Vanko's father and Howard co-created the arc reactor, but Vanko's father embezzled govt money so he was deported. Its jsut Vanko being tunnel visioned. And as Agent Carter revealed, many of Howard's incomplete designs and even those he realized were too dangerous were put to use anyway over his objections and without his knowledge, and in the end the blame comes to him. Like Tony couldn't stop being Iron Man, Howard's problem was that he could not stop inventing

 

[Tempest]

New
I had a problem with watching a Cap film begin with the murder of Iron Man's parents.

Since the murderer is a big part of Steve's story, it relates to Bucky as well

 

[Tempest]

What I'm trying to say is . . . all of this - the Sokovia Accords, the Civil War, Tony Stark's man pain - should have been saved for an Avengers film. Instead, Kevin Fiege and Marvel shoved it all in a Captain America movie and allowed Robert Downey Jr. to hijack half of Chris Evans' third SOLO film. This would have never happened in an Iron Man movie.

Black Widow was introduced in Iron Man 2. Hawkeye's first appearance was in Thor. Coulson appeared in Iron Man 1, Iron Man 2 and Thor. Fury appeared in Iron Man 1 and 2.
Plus pretty much everything that happened in this movie happened to be through Bucky in one way or another, and he definitely belongs to Cap's cast, and the other Avengers were brought in due to its scope.

 

[Tempest]

WITH BAD WRITING! The movie started with Tony's parents getting killed. 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. Sam and Bucky's relationship was never explored. Instead, it was presented in a series of comedy routines in which they are mildly hostile toward one another. The movie spent 10 to 15 minutes showing how Tony recruited Peter Parker (who really had no business being in this movie) for Team Iron Man, yet it failed to explain or show why Scott Laing and Clint Barton had decided to side with Steve. Zemo's whole plot was all about Tony finding out that Bucky had killed his parents. Again, it all became about Tony. The worst aspect of all of this is that Marvel ended Steve's conflict with HYDRA in such a weak manner. Marvel ended it on "Agents of Shield" . . . 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's personal arc was weakened by the screenwriters' unnecessary focus on Tony. After seeing this movie, I heartily agree. What is really sickening about this is that Marvel came up with the idea to focus the Civil War arc in a "Captain America" movie in order to lure Downey Jr. into another Marvel film. Because of this decision, I have now developed contempt toward Marvel and pure dislike toward Downey Jr.'s Iron Man.

So basically you ignore everything that was about Cap in this movie

 

[DimesDan]

Ten in a row, that must be a new record.

I'm sure you won't get into trouble, but the quote button is pretty handy in these situations as you seem to be aware, to get lots of quotes in one post, just hit the quote button for each post and it should come out like this:

C'mon man. You have such problem with shortforms which take a second of Googling to find out. Then smileys shoudl also both you, especially on websites that cannot recognize them

Well, it was about time comic Cap's PIS Powers entered the movie verse lol

On serious note, it was not just Iron Man. Power levels were all over the place in Civil War purely for the plot even ignoring what was shown in the previous movies. During the movie, I was like:

******** SPOILERS*********
(how do you mark them any way)









"Wait, did Bucky just wreck Cap by accident? But they were pretty evenly matched before. Oh wow, BP is kicking Bucky's ass. Wow, BP is running faster than Cap. Wait, Falcon is is only fast as them in flight? But wasn't he was much faster in TWS? Wait, did Bucky just overpower Cap's two arms with his metal hand and oneshot him? But he barely overpowered Cap's two arms with his metal arm and normal arm in the precious movie and Cap took many hits from the metal arm there before going down. Did Bucky jsut onehsot Falcon? But he didn't do that in TWS? (Okay atleast Falcon has his suit them) Good, good, Bucky just kicked the combined asses of armorless Tony, Black Widow, Sharon Carter and several CIA operatives. Waittamit, did Tony do better in h2h against Bucky than Black Widow and Sharon Carter together? Okay, now suitless Black Panther is kicking Bucky's ass and outrunning him. Waittaminit, he failed to catch up with Bucky earlier. And his armor is not that heavy. So does the suit degrade him? Hey, did he just shrug off the first hit from Bucky's metal arm and no sell the second one? But Bucky just oneshotted Cap. Wait, did T'challa (BP's real name) match the metal arm in strength with just one arm? But it just overpowered both Cap's arms. Hey, is Cap and BP grappling equally with both arms? But didn't he just match Bucky's metal arm just before with? Hey, did Cap just kick BP's ass? But he just got his ass kicked by Bucky twice and was evenly matched with him back in TWS. Hey, is Bucky now looking way better agaisnt Panther? But he got his ass kicked twice before even in Winter Soldier mode. Did BP just overpower the metal arm more easily than he did before? Does the suit enhance his strength? But then why did Cap look equal to him in strength. Good, good Spider Man kicks the combined asses of Bucky and Falcon and catches a punch from the metal arm and then overpowers it with zero effort. Wait, did Cap look very close to Spidey in strength while grappling and then kick his ass? But Spidey just overpowered Bucky's metal arm effortlessly. If Cap was only a hairbreadth weaker then he would have owned Bucky. Okay, Hawkeye did much better against Widow than in Avengers, but she still came off as better (though Wanda noted he was pulling his punches). Wait, did Hawkeye take it to BP in CQC? But BP matched Cap and kicked Bucky's ass, who had owned Widow in this movie and TWS, while Widow came off as better here and in Avengers. Wait, did Hawkeye's explosive arrow just heavily damage Iron Man? But Iron Man can tank missile explosions. Wait, did Iron Man just get wrecked by Wanda's cars throw at him? But he was okay when his house collapsed on him in Iron Man 3. Okay, Giant Man can shrug off missiles and tank Iron Man's and War Machine's punches equally. But isn't Iron Man stronger than War Machine? Wait, did Spidey's punch get more of a reaction out Giant Man than War Machine throwing a truck at him and Iron Man hitting him? Hey, did Falcon just knock around Iron Man? But Iron Man was doing pretty well against Cap just moments ago. Wait, did Iron Man and Falcon failed to catch Rhodey falling? But Falcon already did the same thing twice in Tws while Iron Man did it in Iron Man, Iron Man 3 and Avengers. Wait, did Iron Man while damaged just effortlessly block Spiderman's punch and then easily restrain him? But he just hurt Giant Man more than War Machine or Iron Man did.Wait, did Bucky's metal arm effortlessly overpower Iron Man fresh and crush his armor? Hey did just Cap overpower Iron Man and start crushing his armor But Iron Man while damaged overpowered Spider Man who overpowered the metal arm. Hey did Cap just overpower Iron Man and start crushing the armor? But Bucky's metal arm didn't cause this much damage while crushing this armor. Hey did Iron Man temporarily go down to his own repulsor Wait did Bucky just overpower Iron Man with his normal arm despite Iron Man having leverage advantage? But Cap just barely overpowered Iron Man. Wasn't Bucky's normal arm inferior to Cap in strength? Hey, did Iron Man just get an advantage over Cap and Bucky due to pure skill and one needed the other to bail them out? When did Tony become this skilled? Hey, did Bucky just no-sell punches from Iron Man? But his punches just before really rocked Cap. And Iron Man was explicitly out to kill Bucky while holding back agaisnt Cap. Okay, did Cap just punch a chunk off the armor with his bare hands? Bucky hitting the armor with the shield's edge using his metal and normal arm did not cause this just much damage. Wait, did FRIDAY just say Iron Man cannnot take Cap in h2h? Buthe jsut did moments ago. Okay, did Cap just tank three repulsor blasts from Iron Man along with several punches? But Iron Man just before KOd both Cap and Bucky with a single repulsor blast each.






















********SPOILERS end*********
(again, how do you mark spoilers?)

This movie's power levels are a mess

I'm not the only one who thinks so either:
http://www.comicboards.com/php/show.php?msg=ironman-2016060514501164&layout=thread

I agree

This was funny though:

http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/User_b..._Captain_America_Civil_War_-_spoilered_review

Also, wow at all these psychological analysis in the previous page. You don't see them anywhere, I think I'm gonna like this place.

Vanko would be the few who considers that, as Howard was not at all simply seeking profit. Vanko's father and Howard co-created the arc reactor, but Vanko's father embezzled govt money so he was deported. Its jsut Vanko being tunnel visioned. And as Agent Carter revealed, many of Howard's incomplete designs and even those he realized were too dangerous were put to use anyway over his objections and without his knowledge, and in the end the blame comes to him. Like Tony couldn't stop being Iron Man, Howard's problem was that he could not stop inventing

Since the murderer is a big part of Steve's story, it relates to Bucky as well

Black Widow was introduced in Iron Man 2. Hawkeye's first appearance was in Thor. Coulson appeared in Iron Man 1, Iron Man 2 and Thor. Fury appeared in Iron Man 1 and 2.
Plus pretty much everything that happened in this movie happened to be through Bucky in one way or another, and he definitely belongs to Cap's cast, and the other Avengers were brought in due to its scope.

So basically you ignore everything that was about Cap in this movie

 

[Tempest]

Ten in a row, that must be a new record.

I'm sure you won't get into trouble, but the quote button is pretty handy in these situations as you seem to be aware, to get lots of quotes in one post, just hit the quote button for each post and it should come out like this:

I am a pretty impulsive guy. So I see something, I have to reply immediately. I will try that next time.

On second thought, if there was an edit button it would have been possible to edit in those quotes into my first post, or correct the spelling mistakes

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

I am not convinced that he meant they were a separate division of the Department of Defense, especially since neither of the other two agencies Pepper listed are part of Defense. (The FBI is part of the Justice Department, and the CIA is an independent agency existing outside of the federal executive departments.

That's not what I meant, either. With that post, I was correcting myself in my own earlier suggestion that S.H.I.E.L.D. would likely fall under the purview of the D.O.D. as it seems to be contradicted by that reference.

If we were only looking at Iron Man, I would be inclined to take that as an indication that SHIELD is also, like the CIA, an independent agency in the U.S. government. But between the existence of the World Security Council as a regulatory body in The Avengers and Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and the references in Agents of SHIELD Season One to SHIELD's authority to seize fantastical assets as overriding national claims in "0-8-4" and to "SHIELD-allied countries" in "The Asset," I think the strong implication is that SHIELD was founded as an international agency by treaty, with its bureaucracy maintaining exclusive control over fantastical technologies that might prompt an arms race if in the hands of national governments, and answering to those national governments collectively in the form of the WSC. I also suspect that SHIELD is a bit like North American Aerospace Command in that, even though it is legally an international agency, the U.S. probably regarded it as being under its de facto control.

That all sounds about right to me.

Maybe? I don't buy it, though. Asgardians apparently need to eat and can gain nourishment from the same foods as Humans, and they apparently need to sleep. So I think it is most probable that there are indeed sedatives that can work on Asgardians, too.

Oh, I can believe they might be created, I just meant that it might not be quite as simple and straightforward to administer them as we saw in the case of the already de-powered and disorientated Thor. Would a needle or dart normally penetrate Asgardian skin so readily, for example? Would it need to be constructed of a super-strong material? We haven't really seen that scenario come up, so we don't really know for sure, is all I was saying there.

Vanko would be the few who considers that, as Howard was not at all simply seeking profit. Vanko's father and Howard co-created the arc reactor, but Vanko's father embezzled govt money so he was deported. Its jsut Vanko being tunnel visioned. And as Agent Carter revealed, many of Howard's incomplete designs and even those he realized were too dangerous were put to use anyway over his objections and without his knowledge, and in the end the blame comes to him. Like Tony couldn't stop being Iron Man, Howard's problem was that he could not stop inventing

You should have also bolded "in the most uncharitable view" because I was not suggesting that it was in fact an accurate view of Howard. What I was saying is that Obadiah embodies many negative qualities which are also prominently attributed to Howard, that he actually is the stereotypical backstabbing war profiteer which Howard (and Tony) have been conspicuously accused of being, whether fairly or unfairly, dressed up in superficial affectation of a more caring, approachable, attentive nature.

 

[Set Harth]

Power levels were all over the place in Civil War purely for the plot even ignoring what was shown in the previous movies.

Yeah, I thought Sharon taking on Bucky was pretty silly. Didn't this guy basically kill Howard Stark by punching him in the face? And then whatever Widow was doing to Bucky... come on. That looked f'ing ridiculous. That wouldn't even hurt a regular person. He should have just trashed them. And in that sequence Bucky is just walking away at a slow pace. He seemed a lot faster in TWS...

 

[Star Wolf]

That's not what I meant, either. With that post, I was correcting myself in my own earlier suggestion that S.H.I.E.L.D. would likely fall under the purview of the D.O.D. as it seems to be contradicted by that reference.

.

From Agent Carter's second season it looked like the MCU was headed away from Defense/War Department with the SSR/SHIELD. The SSR was defense related but in universe the world was about to go through the reorganization which created the CIA and at that point the SSR seemed to be mostly a law enforcement agency.

 

[DimesDan]

I am a pretty impulsive guy. So I see something, I have to reply immediately. I will try that next time.

That's the attitude

On second thought, if there was an edit button it would have been possible to edit in those quotes into my first post, or correct the spelling mistakes

You're new which means there won't be one until you've earned it.

 

[Tempest]

Yeah, I thought Sharon taking on Bucky was pretty silly. Didn't this guy basically kill Howard Stark by punching him in the face? And then whatever Widow was doing to Bucky... come on. That looked f'in ridiculous. That wouldn't even hurt a regular person.

Widow punched him in the crotch. That would definitely hurt. Yet he looked like he lost his breath like one got lightly punched in the gut and lost his breath, but when Tony smacked him in the face with the gun slide he pulled out of Bucky's gun, Bucky cried out audibly.

He should have just trashed them. And in that sequence Bucky is just walking away at a slow pace. He seemed a lot faster in TWS...

He does it because he can. The CIA guys are no Cap. If they shoot, block with metal arm. They get in close, one or two hits, they are down, then take their weapons. No problem