Monday, June 20, 2016

Captain America- Civil War: A mostly redeeming new installment in the increasingly stale Marvel Cinematic Universe

Again, a really late review, but I only recently saw this film in theaters.

Captain America, Civil War:
After another somewhat destructive attempt at containing a violent situation, the Avengers are contacted by General Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross (the headstrong, stubborn military official who's usually off hunting the Hulk), representing the UN, who criticize the Avengers' often reckless nature, despite the amount of people they save. Ross instructs them to support a new set of bills that will put the Avengers under the jurisdiction of the UN, who will first discuss if a situation even needs their attention. Captain America doesn't want to be a part of this, for obvious reasons, and it leads to a split in the team: those in favor and those opposed. Iron Man leads those in favor, as he is in complete agreement with the UN (for reasons which are very apparently selfish). Meanwhile, a string of recent terror attacks are blamed on Bucky Barnes/The Winter Soldier, who is still on the run after escaping the clutched of HYDRA at the conclusion of the previous film. Captain America violates his commitment to his team to chase after and save his old friend from persecution by the government, all while new players come into the fray and a mysterious new villain pulls the strings of the entire situation.
    I wasn't even particularly excited for this film, but saw it more out of obligation, and was pleasantly surprised by how entertained I was with it. Is it a flawless film? Hell no. In fact, the entire basis for the conflict in the movie is contrived and clearly one-sided (Captain America's side is clearly in the right throughout the entire movie, and the government in this film is one of the most misguided and idiotic and stubborn in all fiction). It's not even the best Captain America movie (it's not as bland as the first, but is nowhere near as focused as the second). It was, regardless, a fun blockbuster movie, and really should just be considered an Avengers 2.5, as the only Avengers absent from the film are Hulk and Thor. The Russo Brothers are actually able to juggle the overstuffed roster of heroes, villains and supporting characters fairly well, but the character relationships meaning anything to you really rely on you seeing all the previous Marvel films first (great monetary strategy there, Disney/Marvel).
    One of my most dreaded aspects of this film was Spider-Man, as I felt having him introduced in someone else's film was no way for such a major character to get treated, and I felt it was just too much. While I still hold on both of those accounts, he wasn't in the film all that much, and I actually liked Tom Holland's portrayal a lot. Time will tell if he bests Tobey Maguire, but he was nowhere near as annoying or unlikable as Andrew Garfield's portrayal, and felt like an awkward, funny teenager. The suit itself is design-wise excellent, but the CG looked way too synthetic and they'll need to work on that in future installments.
    Daniel Bruhl as the main villain Helmut Zemo was actually a breath of fresh air for an MCU antagonist. He was genuinely compelling (as much as a summer blockbuster villain can be, anyway) and didn't rely too heavily on crazy costumes or a gimmick to make him stand out. However, once his motivation is revealed as an overdone and almost comical cliche, all the mystery and menace surrounding his character washes away and he falls flat. Even though a problem with many Marvel villains is they only show up for one installment and don't do much interesting, I hope he can be involved in future installments so he can do something interesting and redeem the damage done to his character.
    Frank Grillo briefly returns as Brock Rumlow/Crossbones, the renegade STRIKE leader from the previous film. While I was sad his role was cut short, I also felt he was used appropriately, the same way Batroc the Leaper was used in The Winter Soldier: have a more minor villain show up at the beginning to reintroduce the heroes using an exciting action sequence and provide a match for Captain America in a cool fight.
     New introductions to the series include Martin Freeman in a very minor role, and Chadwick Boseman, who does a fine job as T'Challa/Black Panther, prince of Wakanda and who is on a revenge mission against the Winter Soldier, bringing him to butt heads with Captain America. While is screen time is limited compared to other heroes, he is a welcome addition to the ensemble.
    There were many narrative problems with the movie, from some cliched and rushed scenes (the death of a character's father was cliche and totally handled poorly), and, again, as many have pointed out, the government and Iron Man in this film are very unsympathetic and their motivation is garbage. "The Avengers cause collateral damage wherever they go, resulting in thousands of deaths." Yeah, versus billions of deaths if they did nothing, which Ross almost acknowledges when he's not smugly and unflinchingly showing death footage of their various battles to guilt them into agreeing with him. And the UN bill wouldn't even stop the casualties, just acknowledge when the casualties were "worth it" for the greater good. And the government was all for nuking NYC in The Avengers, which would've resulted in far more civilian deaths had Iron Man not stepped in.
     As far as I understand, the Civil War arc in the comics was less a UN board squabbling over whether to let the Avengers fight and more a registration act like in X-Men, where each hero would have to publically register themselves (still a really stupid idea). But the motivation felt more realistic because the entire controversy in-story was set off when heroes neglected to contain a villain who can explode on command, resulting in hundreds of children dying, as they were fighting in a playground. Here, it's because an accident near the beginning leads to a few dozen deaths at a government office complex in Lagos, in addition to the other times the Avengers' actions led to unintentional carnage. That just feels a little forced to me, as the benefits of the team so clearly outweigh the flaws.
    The relationship between Bucky and Captain America feels a bit forced at times, but ultimately gets more fleshed out in this movie, and the final three-way battle between them and Iron Man is a lot more emotional and investing than expected, even though, crushingly, it (and the other events in the film) have little impact on the team in the end.
     Captain America: Civil War has plenty wrong with it, and often has too much going on (I didn't even mention the inappropriately placed and a bit creepy romantic interest shoved in this film- who is the niece of Captain America's original love interest) but it should just be taken at face value. It's better than the last two Marvel films for sure, and balances out the fun, campy humor with some more serious and dark moments, creating a good bridge of tones I felt should be kept for future Marvel films. 7/10 stars.

Two great reviews (the former more a discussion) about the film, with Spoiler Segments, that cover a lot of what I left out of this review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJvUTFVqwJQ (RedLetterMedia)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q6X8oHh7wA (Your MovieSucks)


Official poster shows the Avengers team factions which led by Iron Man and Captain America, confronting each other by looking each other, with the film's slogan above them, and the film's title, credits, and release date below them.                          (Image: Wikipedia)

No comments:

Post a Comment