Captain America: The Winter Soldier

[Charles Phipps]

4. Didn't involve a gravity collider being shot through the Earth destabilising many tectonic plates.
5. Thousands of people didn't die due to entire city blocks full of high rises being decimated.
6. Cap doesn't snap Buckys neck.
7. No product placement on the shit they did blow up.
8. Entire planet does not explode.

Anyone else want to add anything else to this list?

It's kind of weird MICHAEL BAY of all people remembered to have Optimus Prime watching his footing during his battle with Megatron so he didn't hurt any stray humans.

[Dragonblade]

I saw it and liked it. Definitely one of the better Marvel movies to date.

Cap did pay some more lip service to his idealism in terms of dialog, something that Man of Steel didn't handle as well. But I never saw Cap and others going out of their way to help innocents getting caught in the crossfire. Sorry, but there was little difference between this and Man of Steel in terms of collateral damage, and the heroes generally being completely oblivious to innocent people being completely blown away all around them. I know some folks like to dump on Man of Steel, but if you are trying to say this movie was totally different in terms of handling collateral damage, well I have to call shenanigans on that.

Uh-uh.

1. It was over a SHIELD base, not a city.
2. The SHIELD base was being evacuated.
3. The Hellicarriers were all Hydra personnel.

In other words, a LOT less collateral damage.

I wasn't referring to the scale of the damage. I was referring to the way the heroes were mostly oblivious to it. My point still stands.

[saint_matthew]

quote="Dragonblade"]I wasn't referring to the scale of the damage. I was referring to the way the heroes were mostly oblivious to it. My point still stands.[/quote]

Except that the heroes were specifically not oblivious to it, ever going so far as to make sure the ships only crashed into the water & making sure to first clear the buildings. Steve went to great lengths to save the lives of as many people as possible, only causing physical damage to very specific buildings and vehicles, for the express purpose of stopping them from becoming weapons to be used against the world in general.

Where As Space-Jesus fails & Zod destroys roughly $700 billions worth of civilian property in that single last act, according to one hazard team. http://www.avclub.com/article/science-e ... n-of-99165

Trust me, when I say Winter soldier didn't come close to that for there entire movie.... An the death toll is not even close & its not close because once again marvels movie universe is more interested in making a movie about super heroes who actually accept responsibility for there actions & less interested in trying to make an allegorical tale about space-jesus, as told in a competition between Zack Snyder & Michael Bay to see who could include the most collateral damage in a mainstream film.

I'm sorry, but your point is still refuted.

[Dragonblade]

Except that the heroes were specifically not oblivious to it, ever going so far as to make sure the ships only crashed into the water & making sure to first clear the buildings. Steve went to great lengths to save the lives of as many people as possible, only causing physical damage to very specific buildings and vehicles, for the express purpose of stopping them from becoming weapons to be used against the world in general.

What great lengths? He didn't do anything special above and beyond trying to stop the bad guys that I would normally expect Captain America to do. I found it no different than Superman trying to stop the World Engine. Sure the scale of the threat is different, but the actions of the heroes wasn't.

Where As Space-Jesus fails & Zod destroys roughly $700 billions worth of civilian property in that single last act, according to one hazard team. http://www.avclub.com/article/science-e ... n-of-99165

Trust me, when I say Winter soldier didn't come close to that for there entire movie.... An the death toll is not even close & its not close because once again marvels movie universe is more interested in making a movie about super heroes who actually accept responsibility for there actions & less interested in trying to make an allegorical tale about space-jesus, as told in a competition between Zack Snyder & Michael Bay to see who could include the most collateral damage in a mainstream film.

What responsibility? Where did Cap accept responsibility for the freeway battle scene where dozens of people are getting shot and killed in their cars? Conveniently not shown on camera. Or I know, let's plug in a USB drive at the Apple store, knowing that it will bring an enemy hit team to a public location, jeopardizing hundreds of innocents? An enemy that's already demonstrated their willingness to make ruthless attacks in public with no concern over who gets caught in the crossfire. Clearly, this portrayal of Captain America is a paragon of virtue as opposed to Superman in Man of Steel.

Its a comic book action movie, so I accept a certain sanitized portrayal of collateral damage. I enjoyed the movie for what it was, as I enjoyed Man of Steel for what it was. But let's call a spade a spade.

I'm sorry, but your point is still refuted.

No, but we'll clearly go around and around, so I see no further need to argue the point endlessly.

[saint_matthew]

What responsibility? Where did Cap accept responsibility for the freeway battle scene where dozens of people are getting shot and killed in their cars?

Except they didn't get shot & killed in there cars. There was a lot of car flipping, but not a whole heap of collateral death. In fact if you watched it you'll note he's not using a gun to shoot up random cars while he's on the bridge.

Or I know, let's plug in a USB drive at the Apple store, knowing that it will bring an enemy hit team to a public location, jeopardizing hundreds of innocents?

It wasn't an enemy hit team, it was a Shield team & they were aware that the mission parameters at the time was capture, not kill. Even without knowing that it was Hydra, they knew that they weren't going to show up & open fires in a crowded shopping mall.... That would have literally blown there cover before they were ready to act. That was the point of the movie: You can't force control on people, but you can trick them into accepting it willingly.

But even assuming a couple of people died on the bridge scene & it was sanitised as you claim, that doesn't even nearly make up the 129,000 people estimated to have been killed just in the third act of Man of Steel. The two do not compare, at all.

[The_Watchman]

It's ultimately about the choices made by the film-makers as much as those made by the heroes.

The Winter Soldier crew could certainly have had those helicarriers crash into the city or have a few people taken off the list before Cap managed to plug in the third card. But they didn't. That says a lot.

Cap got extremely angry that the hostages were endangered "for the greater good." He struck to neutralize rather than to kill many times when just shooting the enemy might have been more expedient. He did kill but always in the heat of battle (which I'd still rather not see in a superhero movie but k cera). And most importantly, the movie ended with redemption rather than murder. Honestly, if Cap had been in the room with Natasha and Pierce, I'm willing to bet even that would have ended differently.

And finally, Cap is pro-active and heroic straight away, he doesn't need his space dad telling him to or his earth dad dying. The makers of both Cap movies looked at a hero who was created 70 years ago and embodied goodness in a straight-up, non-ironic way, and decided that was a hero worth portraying. Man of Steel decided one of the most recognizable and beloved heroes on the planet needed to be mopey and "mature." Imagine a hero like Captain America looking at the actions Batman took in the Dark Knight trilogy and tell me that conflict wouldn't be way more interested than the conflict with Steelman we're going to get.

So, yeah, people got hurt and killed in Captain America. I wish they hadn't but the film-makers actively decided to make it better. We see people getting off the bus Cap gets knocked into. We see cars empty or people fleeing from them. We don't see buildings collapsing in the heart of a major city.

[Voltron64]

A perfect rebuttal to Hydra's belief of humanity being better off without freedom from Loki himself.

Tom Hiddleston: The villains of human history, you know, all the people in the history of time who’ve tried to subjugate people, to get everyone else to bow down and kneel at their feet; if you do any kind of amateur psychology on these guys, or not even amateur, you know, books and books and books that have been written on the fact that at rock bottom, they hate themselves. They don’t have any self-worth, they don’t have any self-approval, so the only way they can get power or status is to get everybody else to physically be beneath them.

[Kyle]

Just got back from seeing the movie, and it was pretty damn good. Not flawless, and I don't think it cracks my Top 3 Marvel Studios films, but it was pretty much everything I could have hoped for.

Regarding the comparison to 'Man of Steel' in terms of collateral damage, I agree with the argument that 'Winter Soldier' was a far more heroic film, but I understand the argument Dragonblade is making. There was that moment when Cap ended up in an overturned bus full of people, and you get to see civilians in the background helping the injured, but Cap's just kinda lying there. It would have been nice to see him actively protecting innocent bystanders.

However, the fact that the bystanders all appeared to be alive is a point in the movie's favour. 'Man of Steel' revelled in it's destruction. Also, even though Cap is beating the tar out of dudes, it almost always felt like he was making a concious effort to avoiding killing when possible.

7. No product placement on the shit they did blow up.

I don't know about that. At some point in the film, I began to get the impression that one of the producers or directors really, really hates Chevrolet.

Also, would it really have been so hard for Wilson to have been wearing a red-shirt while using his wings? I did like that the first time we see him in the harness, his shirt is green, which I assume was an intentional call back to the original Falcon costume, but the red is much more iconic.

There's other stuff I want to talk about, but I'd straying into spoiler territory.

[saint_matthew]

I don't know about that. At some point in the film, I began to get the impression that one of the producers or directors really, really hates Chevrolet.

Luckily I can't tell one model of car from another.... When asked what type of car someone is in my description usually starts and ends with the colour of the vehicle.

[The_Watchman]

Also, would it really have been so hard for Wilson to have been wearing a red-shirt while using his wings? I did like that the first time we see him in the harness, his shirt is green, which I assume was an intentional call back to the original Falcon costume, but the red is much more iconic.

Anthony Mackie said something similar. He wanted the costume to be red and white like the Falcon's iconic costume. Given the praise Mackie seems to be getting for the role, I'm hoping he'll be back in Avengers 2 and/or Captain America 3 in a customized rig in red and white to symbolize his new role as a full-on superhero.

Speaking of the Falcon, I've noticed a few points raised about the film making Sam explicitly inferior to Cap physically (which, well, duh. Everyone that isn't a literal god is physically inferior to Cap) and having him blindly follow Cap morally. I can see the issue but I don't think it's really the case that Sam is meant to be an inferior back-up. Rather, I think Sam is a sidekick in the classic Robin mold where his purpose is to be there to help. Sam isn't following Steve blindly but choosing to support Steve's efforts because he shares Steve's morality and help him adjust to the new world using Sam's own experience in having to do so when he completed his tours. Sam is a soldier but he's explicitly stated to be part of a rescue unit. He's there to help first and foremost. Now there's still some potential for questionable racial politics, just like with Jim Rhodes in the Iron Man movies (who is more explicitly treated as a second-string version of the hero), but there's absolutely nothing about Sam in the narrative that ties into his ethnicity. He's not an inner city school-teacher, he's a decorated soldier from an elite unity and a key part of a program to help veterans. I think the film makes him a hero in his own right but, like Black Widow, he doesn't get as much spotlight purely because his name isn't in the title (though seriously, if Cap 3 was "Captain America and the Falcon" I would be stoked). Sam's a great character and I really hope he's got a continuing role in the movie verse.

Although I would have liked to see a more conclusive victory in his fight at the end.

[saint_matthew]

Anthony Mackie said something similar. He wanted the costume to be red and white like the Falcon's iconic costume. Given the praise Mackie seems to be getting for the role, I'm hoping he'll be back in Avengers 2 and/or Captain America 3 in a customized rig in red and white to symbolize his new role as a full-on superhero.

You've got to keep something back for the sequel.

Rather, I think Sam is a sidekick in the classic Robin mold where his purpose is to be there to help.

The Falcon isn't a sidekick at all, he's an equal partner: Sure Cap has the physical strength, but Falcons got the aerial superiority (more so once Tony's finished tinkering with the harness).

Same goes for moral codes, Falcon chooses to sign up with Cap against an unknown threat, against unknowable but very steep odds, not because of personal tragedy, or due to some philosophical sound bite, he did it because it was the right thing to do: Does that remind you of another character? Maybe one who threw themselves on a grenade to defend his fellow soldiers? Because it certainly does me.

Zack Snyder should be taking notes on how not the #$%^ it up from this movie.

I don't see Falcon as a sidekick, I don't see him as lesser, I see him as equal to Cap, just with complimentary skills & abilities, rather than competing abilities.

[Mr Mole]

I didn't hate Man of Steel nearly as much as some. I just thought they did a very poor job capturing the character of Superman. The acting and effects were fine and the story wasn't terrible. It just wasn't Superman.

Winter Soldier did a much better job of capturing the character of Cap. He made an obvious effort to use non-lethal force when possible. He didn't grab any big bads and punch them from a relatively isolated farm, through buildings, into the middle of a small town. Cap had no way of moving any of the fights to a less populated area, and only contributed significantly to the destruction when the alternative was to allow countless thousands of people to be slaughtered. Cap didn't snap anyone's neck, whether they were a hell-bent, killer sociopath or not.

I appreciated the differences in Cap's use of lethal force between the first and second movies. In The First Avenger, he was a soldier in a war. He didn't kill brutally or without need, but he also didn't go far out of his way to find an alternative to killing. In Winter Soldier, he shows a willingness to kill, but he also gravitates time and again to using non-lethal force against enemies who are more than willing to use lethal force against him.

I'm not knocking Man or Steel or saying there wasn't widespread carnage in Winter Soldier... But they were handled very differently and I think they did a much better job portraying Cap as the hero he was meant to be than they did Superman.

Just sayin'.

[Ares]

Yeah, I didn't see Sam's actions as that of a guy who was completely overwhelmed by Cap's charisma and was being subservient to him. He was a character with his own personality who bonded with Cap over shared life experiences and helped him out because it was the right thing to do. He followed Steve because Steve was in the right, and was his friend who needed some help. Even Nick Fury, the poster boy for the paranoid control freak, was listening to Cap at the end, because Cap knew what the right thing to do was.

And I can understand why the Falcon didn't have a more traditional costume starting out. He basically just threw the harness on over a T-Shirt and some cargo pants. I imagine the next time he'll have something more akin to his red and white costume, hopefully along with a new and improved flight pack courtesy of Tony Stark. Maybe give it some built in weaponry so that it can hold its own against jets.

[The_Watchman]

Rather, I think Sam is a sidekick in the classic Robin mold where his purpose is to be there to help.

The Falcon isn't a sidekick at all, he's an equal partner: Sure Cap has the physical strength, but Falcons got the aerial superiority (more so once Tony's finished tinkering with the harness).

Same goes for moral codes, Falcon chooses to sign up with Cap against an unknown threat, against unknowable but very steep odds, not because of personal tragedy, or due to some philosophical sound bite, he did it because it was the right thing to do: Does that remind you of another character? Maybe one who threw themselves on a grenade to defend his fellow soldiers? Because it certainly does me.

When I say "sidekick in the classic Robin mold" I mean in the best possible way, i.e. a partner with different skills that isn't the first person listed on the title. I don't view Dick Grayson as an inferior character to Bruce Wayne but Bruce has the skills and character that the adventures are usually tiered toward, so to speak. Sam never does anything in the movie where he isn't directly working together with Steve, ergo within this movie I view him as a sidekick while Black Widow did more on her own. It's not a knock on the Falcon and as I said, I'd love to see him given equal screen time or even his own movie or TV series.

And yeah, I definitely got the feeling Sam was meant to be morally equivalent to Cap. He's coming from a bit of a different place but he's proof that Pierce is wrong. He's the perfect embodiment of the speech Mark Waid had Daredevil give in his recent run about tragedy not being essential to heroism since plenty of people choose to help others and even risk their lives without some kind of defining tragedy.

[saint_matthew]

I didn't hate Man of Steel nearly as much as some. I just thought they did a very poor job capturing the character of Superman. The acting and effects were fine and the story wasn't terrible. It just wasn't Superman.

Really? Because I thought even the effects looked terrible, though I will admit I have a soft spot for practical effects over CGI. The strangest issue I had with special effects in man of steel was the uncanny valley effect of Zod's face.... The strange part being is that Zod's face wasn't CGI.... Yet I kept on having the disconcerting feeling that I was looking at a CGI animation that wasn't quite right & so I kept on getting that uncanny valley feeling.... It was really creepy.

But having said that I think the acting & effects weren't all that great, but I think its a matter of scale: When compared to the terrible writing, the mixed metaphors and the complete lack of anything resembling Superman, pointing out the flaws in the acting & effects feels kind of like we are just being frivolous.... Kind of like having an engineer surveying a plane crash & having him point out things like "the toilet was out of order." The toilet shouldn't have been out of order, you expect it to work, but its far from the worst technical issue the plane had considering it crashed, killing dozens of people, it just seems nit-picky. In a much better movie, I think the acting & effects would have borne mentioning as something in need of improvement, but in Man of Steel its the least of the issues the movie suffered from.