Practically all of Captain America: Civil War could be devastating for Marvel fans
Cinema Blend's told that the ending for Captain America: Civil War could be devastating for Marvel fans. But what about the wider audience, including anybody let down by the repeat of Gwen Stacy's death in the Spider-Man reboot? Or, how about anybody who's a fan of both Cap and Iron Man? Why would they want to see conflicting visions applied to either one, and told they have to take sides? The writer goes on to tell the following:
Similarly, why should I want to be, say, against Iron Man, and worse, actually want to view him as scum? That's not what Stan Lee created Tony Stark for, and my fandom for Captain America doesn't come at IM's expense. Yet alarmingly enough, in the years after Civil War, there seemed to be quite a crowd in the comics press and certain segments of "fandom" who were espousing that low an opinion of IM, as if they never wanted him created to start with. It's even worse than any people who thought Spidey trouncing a few of the X-Men during Secret Wars was a throughly wonderful thing. Namely, because they did it at the X-Men's expense.
Which brings us to the biggest problem with today's superhero marketing: instead of encouraging the audience to appreciate one creation as much as the other, they take divisive actions that can end up forming hostilities among certain groups in fandom. That's no way to sell the products. And it honestly isn't how the new Cap movie should be marketed either.
Marvel has been showing the nearly finished product in early screenings and the response has apparently been overwhelmingly positive. However, the thing that caught our eye most about Birth.Movies.Death’s recent discussion about Civil War screenings is the fact that the end of the movie is being described as "an emotional horror movie." It sounds like Captain America: Civil War will have some long-lasting consequences for the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The movie will give both sides of the Civil War conflict -- Tony Stark and Steve Rogers -- solid reasoning for their beliefs, which will only drive home the divide that will exists between The Avengers.If any of these test audiences actually liked the notion of Avenger clashing with Avenger over terrible politics as seen in the 2006 crossover, that's honestly disturbing. Nobody's saying it's wrong to create stories where there's tension between the heroes, but the 2006 monstrosity where they all clashed over registration of superheroes - in a story based on the Patriot Act - was incredibly insulting, right down to Spider-Man's unmasking, all for the sake of breaking up the Spider-marriage. What made it bad was how distinctions between hero/villain were blurred, so that the former was made to look little different from the latter. Why should I want characters I thought I was supposed to admire - even as I don't expect them to be perfect - to be put in roles where there's no distinguishing them from their adversaries?
Similarly, why should I want to be, say, against Iron Man, and worse, actually want to view him as scum? That's not what Stan Lee created Tony Stark for, and my fandom for Captain America doesn't come at IM's expense. Yet alarmingly enough, in the years after Civil War, there seemed to be quite a crowd in the comics press and certain segments of "fandom" who were espousing that low an opinion of IM, as if they never wanted him created to start with. It's even worse than any people who thought Spidey trouncing a few of the X-Men during Secret Wars was a throughly wonderful thing. Namely, because they did it at the X-Men's expense.
Which brings us to the biggest problem with today's superhero marketing: instead of encouraging the audience to appreciate one creation as much as the other, they take divisive actions that can end up forming hostilities among certain groups in fandom. That's no way to sell the products. And it honestly isn't how the new Cap movie should be marketed either.
Labels: Captain America, golden calf of death, Iron Man, marvel comics, msm propaganda, Spider-Man, violence
It sounds as if the movie tries to present both sides of the controversy, which would at least be an improvement over the comic series' simplistic, "Duh, registration bad" approach.
The comic series was published when Bush was president, and the Super Hero Registration Act was an obvious allegory for the Patriot Act and its subsets, the Terror Watch List and the No-Fly List. At the time, leftists complained that the lists would be abused, that there were no objective standards or criteria, and that the government could arbitrarily put anyone on such a list.
Then Obama got elected, and liberals learned to Stop Worrying and Love the List. After the San Bernardino massacre, Obama proposed a ban on selling guns to anyone on the No-Fly List. But the killers in that case were never on the list, or any other anti-terrorist watch list. (Not surprising, since Obama had effectively ordered the FBI and Department of Homeland Security not to spy on Muslims.)
That is, a typical leftist double standard. Obama can use the Act/List to further his agenda, but Bush was accused of imposing a Nazi dictatorship.
Posted by
Anonymous |
5:22 PM
http://shawnsjames.blogspot.com/2016/03/thoughts-on-captain-america-civil-war.html
Posted by
Anonymous |
9:43 AM