this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
385 points (77.3% liked)

Comic Strips

12411 readers
4091 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ninjabard@lemmy.world 60 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's a major driving force in Civil War even the watered down version in the MCU.

Tony Stark: I don't have powers but made something that almost wiped out a nation so we should all register with the government that really hasn't liked us all that much.

Captain America: That's a massive invasion of privacy and I fought against those who catalogued people, so get bent.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Well, it's more motivated than the comic version where Reed Richards and Tony Stark suddenly acted like super villians and cloned Thor without his consent as well as establishing a concentration camp for superheroes in the negative zone. Comic Civil War was wild.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah this is my take too. Comic book writers aren't very good at being subtle, so it ended up being Reed Richards and Tony Stark become supervillains for a while. The whole debate about the laws were rendered moot when they made a Thor clone and a negative zone gitmo.

The movie had put the debate over the laws a little more prominently, and it was more about the character's differences in how they saw things. Cap favouring individual responsibility over instituitions made sense given the whole hydra infiltration. Stark not trusting his own judgment makes sense because his story started with almost being killed by a weapon he invented. Different experiences led to different conclusions and neither of these guys turned into super villains.

Nice little touch to have an actual villain manipulating things in the background and almost getting away with it because the heroes were too busy fighting each other to even notice him.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah. The comic civil war had some of the best spin-offs, but the event itself ended up way too black and white. The movie version, I fell right at the knife's edge when it came to whose side I favoured.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

To be fair the motivating factor of that one is a bunch of teenage heroes accidentally get a school (and themselves) blown up because they were filming a reality TV show.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

To be even more fair it was Nitro (a villain) that blew up the school, not the teenagers.

Only character I liked in that plotline was Wolverine because he didn't bother with any of the bullshit and was just trying to track down Nitro and kill him.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah, but the point of registration (from Stark's point of view) was to train superheros how to engage villains safely. Not run blind into a situation with a villain who can level a square quarter mile at the speed of thought.

Nitro is gonna Nitro, the kids should have known better.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sounds to me like kids shouldn't be superheroes (looking at you, Xavier).

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Hey don't talk shit about Xavier or he'll kill you with his mind powers.

Therefore training children to be in his own personal army is cool and awesome!

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Sure but they instantly lost the thread by going after superheroes that didn't sign on before going after Nitro. Dude's still out there and could still blow up more schools, but let's instead duke it out with Captain America because that's more important right now. WTF?

Tony Stark is behaving way more irresponsibly than those teenagers were. But he's heading up an initiative to train teenagers with super powers to be more responsible?

The movie did it better. They weren't debating a law while Ultron was still out there doing his thing. The debate came after Ultron was taken care of. Immediate danger is taken care of, so now we can think about how we can do things better. Comic book version was just Tony Stark and Reed Richards become super villains for a while. Their actions don't really make any sense.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

Wolverine was literally pulverized down to his adamantium skeleton by Nitro and regenerated back from that in a matter of, what, 2 minutes? That part always annoyed me to no end

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Also Civil War - Cap punches Iron Man, and Iron Man recoiled.

The same Iron Man that takes a tank round while airborne, has an uncontrolled landing, and stands back up with some scratches and scorch marks.

I loathe that film.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 31 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Since when has superhero logic ever held up to close inspection?

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago
[–] RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago

Yeah, that take is beyond ridiculous. If unrealistic fiction movies get you that riled up, stick to other genres. There are some great documentaries, too.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Both are kinda weird considering just being in a suit of armor isn't gonna save you from concussive forces turning your body into liquid inside that armor.

Just consider that Captain America is stronger than a tank shell.

[–] Shapillon@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

He surely has stopped a tank shell with his shield at some point or another.

Also it's pretty common for the strength of super heroes to vary wildly depending on the script's need.