« Home | Aligning with TV and movies won't guarantee qualit... » | A Polygon writer's love-hate relationship with Fra... » | What a few writers are saying about the Democrats » | What rich history does Hunter Zolomon have? » | Is the legacy of Stan Lee really in question, or d... » | Marvel forces thinly veiled vulgarity onto grandfa... » | "Controversial ending" to new Captain America movi... » | "Prominent" Marvel writer attacks Iron Fist TV ada... » | Gerry Conway not so impressed with contrived moder... » | How Mike Baron goofed with marketing new Badger mi... » 

Friday, March 04, 2016 

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:
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: , , , , , ,

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.


Post a Comment

About me

  • I'm Avi Green
  • From Jerusalem, Israel
  • I was born in Pennsylvania in 1974, and moved to Israel in 1983. I also enjoyed reading a lot of comics when I was young, the first being Fantastic Four. I maintain a strong belief in the public's right to knowledge and accuracy in facts. I like to think of myself as a conservative-style version of Clark Kent. I don't expect to be perfect at the job, but I do my best.
My profile



  • avigreen2002@yahoo.com
  • Fansites I Created

  • Hawkfan
  • The Greatest Thing on Earth!
  • The Outer Observatory
  • Earth's Mightiest Heroines
  • The Co-Stars Primer
  • Realtime Website Traffic

    Comic book websites (open menu)

    Comic book weblogs (open menu)

    Writers and Artists (open menu)

    Video commentators (open menu)

    Miscellanous links (open menu)

  • W3 Counter stats
  • Bio Link page
  • blog directory Bloggeries Blog Directory View My Stats Blog Directory & Search engine eXTReMe Tracker Locations of visitors to this page  
    Flag Counter

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

    make money online blogger templates

Older Posts Newer Posts

The Four Color Media Monitor is powered by Blogspot and Gecko & Fly.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.
Join the Google Adsense program and learn how to make money online.