After all, The Winter Soldier was as much Black Widow's film as Cap's.
No it wasn't. The audiences didn't know a thing about the Black Widow until "AGE OF ULTRON". Like Sam and Bucky, Natasha was a supporting character, not a co-lead.
That's a rather unusual interpretation. I've seen many reviewers expressing the opinion that it was essentially
Captain America and Black Widow: The Winter Soldier. We learned plenty about Natasha in
The Avengers and TWS, and she went through a significant part of her growth as a character in TWS (from pragmatic spy and company woman at the start to someone willing to walk away from the spy game to stand with her friends at the end).
This movie is NOT called "CAPTAIN AMERICA V. IRON MAN". Iron Man is not in the title. Nor is the name Tony Stark.
See, this is exactly what I don't understand. You're not criticizing the movie, you're criticizing the title, as if that were the only thing that mattered. And your criticism of the title makes no sense. You're falling prey to the
Protagonist Title Fallacy, assuming that a movie's title has to indicate who its lead character is. There are countless movies that are not named after their leads -- e.g. the lead of
The Wizard of Oz is Dorothy, the lead of
TRON is Kevin Flynn, the lead of
Harvey is Elwood P. Dowd, etc. Lots of movies are named for their antagonists, like
Dracula or
Goldfinger or
Predator. Sometimes the later films in a series will keep using
a title that no longer applies to them, like
The Thin Man (the antagonist in the first film) or
The Pink Panther (a diamond featured only in the first and third films) or
Friday the 13th.
I wanted a third Captain America film, not a fourth Iron Man movie, a third Avengers film or a Captain America/Iron Man movie.
Okay, that makes some sense, because it's actually about content rather than the title. Are you basically just saying that you like Captain America better than Iron Man or the Avengers?
This is one of the reasons why I disliked the movie. One of the reasons. I have already stated other reasons why I disliked it in an earlier post.
If so, then it wasn't in this thread. I've just reviewed all five of your posts about
Civil War in this thread, and the only specific thing you've complained about in any of them was the size of Iron Man's and the Avengers' roles compared to Cap's. And I was confused because you phrased that objection in terms of the title, and I don't understand how anyone could dislike a movie based on a misleading title alone. But if you're actually saying that you just like Cap better than the others, or that you don't like Robert Downey, Jr., then that would be an objection I could at least understand, although I'd still disagree with it. I'm not trying to shoot down your opinion, I'm just deeply confused by the way you've been expressing it.
