The Four Color Media Monitor

As the third Captain America movie draws near, we again get announcements that it's more or less basing its premise on one of the worst politicized crossovers of the mid-2000s:

Marvel’s “Captain America: Civil War” finds Steve Rogers leading the newly formed team of Avengers in their continued efforts to safeguard humanity. But after another incident involving the Avengers results in collateral damage, political pressure mounts to install a system of accountability, headed by a governing body to oversee and direct the team. The new status quo fractures the Avengers, resulting in two camps—one led by Steve Rogers and his desire for the Avengers to remain free to defend humanity without government interference, and the other following Tony Stark’s surprising decision to support government oversight and accountability.

Boy, do I pity the moviegoer who attends this movie without pondering just how insulting the source material used for this new movie is. Of all the movies adapted from Marvel stories to date, this could end up being the most pretentious. Cinema Blend's asking if this new film will make us dislike Iron Man:

It’s certainly hard to imagine the Tony we met in 2008 doing the things he set to do in 2016. He's going from refusing to give the U.S. government his armor in Iron Man 2 to working with them to register superhumans. Of course, it sounds like this stance switch isn't coming without reason, as the changing political climate and the fallout from the Avengers’ battle with Ultron will force Tony’s beliefs to change. Unfortunately, that will put him in conflict with Captain America and perhaps several other close allies, but it's interesting that Robert Downey Jr. doesn't see the character as the villain in the story - especially when you consider the comic book source material.

If this movie adheres closely to the original 2006 story, then Tony is likely to get a bad rap in Captain America: Civil War. What started out as a ideological debate over whether superpowered individuals should give up civil liberties in the name of safety and security turned into a witch hunt against anyone who didn’t register and divulge their secret identity, with Captain America playing the part of resistance fighter. It certainly didn’t help that Tony was imprisoning his former allies and recruiting villains to enforce the Superhuman Registration Act. Topped off with Captain America being "killed," a lot of people (both Marvel heroes and real-life readers) looked at Tony as the bad guy. But it seems that Robert Downey Jr. doesn't see it that way for the big screen version.

While I realize it could turn out to be a case of Tony Stark being brainwashed in the finished screenplay, that doesn't make this any less politicized a premise. But if readers looked at Tony as the "baddie" in a literal sense instead of voicing disapproval of Mark Millar and company for putting him in that kind of role, that's insane, and embarrasses all sensible readers who know where the blame should really be laid. Of course, it's also possible that CB is putting words in the mouths of all readers, and that's very foolish. The real culprits in Civil War were Joe Quesada, Millar and even J. Michael Strazcynski and Brian Bendis. Just why aren't they held accountable? Oh right, because a movie site can't possibly be bothered to offer a more objective take on comics.

If the movie does force Tony into a role where he's meant to be disliked, then the filmmakers have done a terrible disfavor to the source material, much like the comics published by Quesada did for several years. And even if that's not the case, Civil War was a bottom of the barrel excuse for superheroes to clash with each other, and not the kind of tale deserving to be adapted for the silver screen. Or, put another way, the moviemakers should know better, and clearly, they don't.

Labels: Avengers, bad editors, Captain America, crossoverloading, Iron Man, marvel comics, politics