Raising The Bar: Examining “Civil War” and its Place in the Marvel Cinematic Universe

Marvel Studios’ latest takes the comic book movie into transcendent territory…but not everyone will enjoy the ride

(Warning: Numerous detailed spoilers to follow. Like duh!)

Last year, when I ran through Marvel Cinematic Universe’s (MCU) library to this point, I proclaimed Captain America The Winter Soldier to be the MCU’s Empire Strikes Back. I also doubted the possibility that any of the Phase 3 MCU films slated would be able to take that crown away from Winter Soldier. After seeing Captain America Civil War’s first showing prior to opening day, I have to revisit that proclamation.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say something controversial here: Captain America Civil War isn’t the best Marvel movie ever made. It’s the most fully realized comic book movie ever made.

I know what I’m saying here and I know what it implies. I don’t toss out the “best ever” title lightly and I’m not trolling for reactions from those who would point out other great comic based films of the past, particularly Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight.

Of all the comic book based movies I have seen — and I’ve seen most of them going back decades — Captain America Civil War has come the closest to transposing the comic book reading experience to the big screen. Others have tried — Watchmen and Deadpool are the two most recent examples — but none have pulled it off to this degree without some part of the film suffering as a result. Certainly Watchmen was the most faithful, reverent adaption of the original source material to the big screen; so many panels showed up on film painstakingly recreated down to the tiniest details. But Watchmen, at least the original released version (I have not yet seen the 3 hour Blu-Ray version) left me cold and disinterested; I would marvel at the technical achievement involved in duplicating the books so closely while at the same time being bored silly by the plot pacing and most of the characters (save for Rorschach and The Comedian). And Deadpool? It copied the tone of the book perfectly but the film’s visual style, with its heavy CGI green screen utilization, put me off it in a big way. I also hated the way the film makers adapted Colossus to the film. He came off as more Boris Badanov than Piotr Rasputin.

For most of our lifetimes Hollywood has approached comic based films in a singular manner; taking characters from the books and adapting them to the framework of the traditional Hollywood drama narrative. Captain America Civil War transcends that by playing the movie the way a comic book would handle it.

The most obvious example is the big airport showdown. Most viewers consider it the best fight scene ever for a comic book film and deservedly so. There’s a reason for that beyond the visual dynamics which are mostly flawless (there were a couple of shots that weren’t up to snuff from an effects standpoint when compared to the rest of the shots and I did wince a bit at their inclusion). That fight scene plays out the way a comic book fight scene would play out in print. At one point The Falcon chides Spider-Man that there isn’t this much talking during fights. I laughed at the line, not because it’s funny but because he’s wrong. In the comics there is this much talking during fights.

Some reviewers have carped about everyone having their scene in this film to a fault, with seemingly unnecessary discussion taking place between second or third tier characters. But that’s how the books usually play out. Fight sequences in the books rarely dominate the whole issue the way fight sequences tend to dominate too many comic films these days.

This is also why Captain America Civil War out-Avengers both Avengers films…the fights don’t overwhelm the film. There are plenty of them but they don’t loom large and dominate the picture the way the alien invasion did in the first Avengers film and the battle of Sokovia did in the second film. I would stipulate that it’s kind of a given that if you have plot points like alien invasions and whole cities being raised into the air with an army of robots flying around…well…it’s just going to take up a lot of cinematic space. There’s no way around it. But it does force you into a position where you have to make editorial decisions to accommodate that space if you don’t want a film running very long. This is a point that will become increasingly germane as we near the releases of the twin Infinity War films where a big showdown with Thanos looms.

I need to quote what I wrote about Civil War before it came out as to why I had misgivings that it could top Winter Soldier.

This is the Achilles heel for The Avengers as a movie franchise. You have so many characters and a studio with an aversion to long film running times. In order to fit them all in the time allotted you may have to shaft someone’s character development and plot time. It can make the film feel uneven. It did here (in Age of Ultron).

Winter Soldier had a smaller main cast and therefore had more room to maneuver in terms of letting the scenes flow well. Cap was the center of the universe and everyone else played off of him. Yet, despite this being Cap’s show, nobody goes hungry. Everyone gets their killer scene and, more importantly, the scenes don’t feel forced into place like the left turn the film Ant-Man took to Avengers HQ. That was not part of the original treatment for the film. Marvel wanted it there and I know why it wanted it there; to set up Ant-Man’s inclusion in the next MCU film. But with a sprawling Avengers HQ that showed one…just one character, The Falcon, it played out like it was shoehorned in there, as an afterthought.

“Oh, one more thing. We want Ant-Man in the next MCU film…let’s add a scene where Scott Lang stumbles across Avengers HQ.”

Not the best transition in the history of film, by far.

With Phase 3, cast size will only get worse. Captain America: Civil War will have every major hero in the Earth centered MCU including Bucky Barnes, Ant-Man, the B level characters from Winter Soldier, plus the debut of Black Panther. The only major characters who won’t appear are Thor, Fury, and The Hulk. Yeah, I too am still scratching my head at Fury’s omission.

(snippage of several non-relevant paragraphs)

But it will take a juggling act of monumental proportions to make Civil War flow well without a three hour running time. If Whedon couldn’t get a three hour film through with Age of Ultron, I don’t see the Russos having a shot at it. So I expect a 2:10–2:25 minute film. This has me nervous.

I had used Age of Ultron as something of a guide as to how Civil War would probably play out. That film had character balancing trouble precisely because it had epic battle set pieces in Africa and Sokovia that ate up a lot of time and put pressure on the film to truncate or eliminate non-battle scenes elsewhere in order to preserve that sub 2:30 running time.

What I failed to consider was the possibility that Civil War screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely would emphasize character development at the expense of big eye popping battles. We only have one in Civil War. Yes, its the best fight scene ever in all of comic cinema but it’s just one…and it’s a lot shorter than either big showdown in both Avengers films. This freed up the necessary space in Civil War to do what Markus and McFeely did in Winter Soldier; ensure that everyone gets their share of character development even though there were a lot more characters that needed that development.

This is particularly true for Robert Downey Jr. Everyone has been just about unanimous in their opinion that Civil War features Downey’s best work in the role of Tony Stark. Markus an McFeely gave Downey plenty of meat to sink his teeth into.

The end result is an incredibly balanced film with beyond expectation character development for more central characters than ever before and yet it manages to run just a few minutes longer than Age of Ultron did. Yes, there were some opportunities missed. I would have liked to see a more granular realistic appraisal of the so called “damage” The Avengers caused. Of the incidents Secretary Ross detailed, I would only count Sokovia as a situation the Avengers themselves caused.

The rest don’t really stand up to scrutiny. The battle of New York was not caused by the Avengers and there was no choice…the alternative was enslavement at the hands of Loki. The destruction in Washington was really a failure of S.H.I.E.L.D. and the Avengers as a team weren’t involved. And, like New York, there was no alternative because to do nothing meant HYDRA wins. Blaming Wanda for the destruction in Lagos was asinine. If she hadn’t encased Crossbones with her magic a whole mess of people would have died in the market. I would have liked to have seen some push-back from the Avengers on these points. It probably wouldn’t have altered the trajectory of where things wound up vis a vis the Sokovia accords (for reasons I will get into shortly) but it would have made the process flow a bit more realistically instead of the whole team basically turtling when confronted. But this is a minor quibble and didn’t dampen my enjoyment of the film.

Not only is Civil War the most balanced Marvel film (though I wouldn’t argue much if anyone chose to nominate Guardians of the Galaxy instead) but it is also the darkest Marvel film ever. I had held Winter Soldier as Marvel’s Empire Strikes Back but I cannot deny the obvious — this film beats it on almost every level.

The stakes, as far as the Avengers as a functioning team were concerned, were far higher. Much more was at risk. The end result was about as bleak an outcome as one could expect…short of multiple fatalities or a major character being crippled (say what you will but War Machine is not a major character in the MCU).

I’ve read some argue that a major character should have died in Civil War. But you have to look at it from Marvel’s standpoint. With the two part Infinity War on the horizon, killing off one of the central characters was an impossible outcome for the studio to contemplate at this juncture. And with Chris Evans extending his deal with Marvel to cover both Infinity War films (his contract would have ran out after one), my earlier prognostication of Cap getting killed and Bucky taking over as the new Captain America (as happened in the books), are now probably deader than an Edgar Wright helmed Ant-Man movie.

I generally don’t vocalize reactions while watching movies in the theater. But when that video of the 1991 mission started up and I recognized Howard Stark, I let out an “Oh no…”. On my second viewing a whole bunch of the audience gasped at that moment. I had been wondering how Tony would start fighting Cap again after it became clear he realized that he had been played and was now on Cap’s side. But we didn’t see this twist coming. We probably should have. As has been written elsewhere, Markus, McFeely, and the Russo brothers telegraphed this scenario in Winter Soldier when Cap and Black Widow came across what was left of Zola’s brain in that underground complex. But I didn’t piece it together beyond the fact that HYDRA was behind Howard Stark’s death.

I was a tad disappointed that Markus and McFeely eased off the downward spiral a bit at the end with Cap’s letter to Tony which gave the film a little too optimistic an ending than I wanted based on the way Civil War unfolded. Yes, it was your typical Cap speech — the kind we’ve come to expect in the MCU — but I really wasn’t in the mood to see a potential olive branch by that point.

But that’s a minor bone to pick given that The Avengers are, as a functional team, essentially destroyed for the time being. Cap, Hawkeye, Falcon, Scarlet Witch, Ant Man/Giant Man, Winter Soldier, and Black Widow are all on the run. War Machine is a cripple. Tony Stark and Vision look lost (Vision looked bored actually but you can never tell with him). There are major unresolved issues that need resolving…particularly between Stark and Bucky. I really hope we don’t get something stupid like the all too easy out of Bucky saving Stark’s life at some point to help smooth things over. We deserve a more realistic resolution.

I had given Ultron the title of “Most realized villain in the MCU” but after Civil War, I have to take it away from Ultron and hand it to Zemo. Yes, if you think hard about Zemo’s plot to do in the Avengers things start to unravel. The Verge has an excellent back and forth between Tasha Robinson and Bryan Bishop that explores this subject thoroughly as well as other issues that merit discussion. But that issue just doesn’t undo Civil War for me the way the plot holes in The Force Awakens did. I can’t account for this discrepancy…other than to say maybe the holes in Force were more egregious to me than any possible holes in Zemo’s plan in Civil War. I didn’t feel I had to shut my brain down to enjoy Civil War the way I had to in order to enjoy Force. Too much was transpiring on the screen.

One area I would disagree with The Verge article is Robinson’s point that both Cap and Stark dragged everyone in to that fight. I would argue that both sides were constantly trying to avoid a fight but without compromising in their firm held beliefs. The one major skirmish that occurred was at the airport and the only reason Cap insisted on fighting was fighting was the only way to get past Stark’s team who were in the way…and not “in the way” in terms of who was for or against the Sokovia accords but “in the way” in terms of blocking them from stopping Zemo. Cap even mentioned what Zemo was doing before the fighting started but Team Stark had gone deaf by that point. So the airport fight was only about the accords from Stark’s point of view, not Cap’s.

I would also argue that there probably shouldn’t be a point of contention about how Civil War played out regarding whether anyone felt the accords could or should be modified. I think Stark was definitely amenable to that course of action as evidenced by his response to Cap when Cap said, “I’m not saying it’s impossible…” before things quickly unraveled and positions became entrenched again.

But that point misses a pretty obvious counterargument; whether the countries behind the accords were amenable to modification. All indications presented in the film strongly suggest they were not. That ship was built, set sail, and neared port long before the Avengers were made aware of the accords existence. At that point it was never a question of amending things…it was a question of going along or not. This argument is buttressed by Stark arriving at the “Super Max” ocean prison and reacting in disbelief to what he saw. Modification was never in the cards from the Sokovia accords’ backers perspective. They were tired of the unchecked carnage and wanted it under control. Now. They had presented a “take it or retire” proposal and were ready to enforce it with or without anyone jumping on board. So it’s my feeling that any discussion about whether there should have been a protracted discussion about modifying the accords would be rendered moot by the Sokovia accords’ backers’ uncompromising stance. Besides, as the Verge discussion also notes, it would have killed the film to play it out that way.

But the mere fact that we are able to have these discussions at all about who should have done what and how is indicative of how deep Civil War is for a comic film. Like Winter Soldier before it, there are real world allegories in play. With Winter Soldier it was the NSA/Edward Snowden/drone strike national security world we are still debating over. With Civil War there are echoes to America’s reaction to 9/11, where, some have argued, a lot of knee jerk actions were taken without adequate discussion taking place regarding the merits or long term viability of the strategy. Sokovia Accords…meet The Patriot Act. Ocean bound “Super Max” prison…meet Guantanamo Bay.

Yeah…it’s just a film so let us not get too carried away here. But the fact that a comic film could open the door to even contemplate parallels like this says something about the film.

And, believe it or not folks, comic fans sometimes argue just as much over the plotting and character motivation in the books. So when I see similar arguments break out over the films I kind of view it as par for the course.

I had scheduled in advance to see the film three nights in a row but after the first viewing I wasn’t sure I wanted to go through it again so soon. Not because it was too soon or because I didn’t think it worth seeing again, but because the movie was so emotionally draining I didn’t think I could recover fast enough in 24 hours for another go around. We’ve had 10 MCU films to get to know these characters…to become invested in them. Because Markus and McFeely set this up with nobody being able to indisputably claim the moral high ground, watching these characters fall out with each other was unnerving.

Civil War may go down in history as the biggest blockbuster to have trailers riddled with so many inaccurate scenes. Movie trailers, especially the first trailer, come out well before the final cut is made on the film and things can change a little. One of the most famous examples is Michael Biehn talking to Linda Hamilton in the first Terminator 2 trailer. Biehn wound up being excised completely from the final film. So this can happen to some extent with early trailers.

But Civil War is different. The sheer number of deleted shots, missing dialogue, and alternate takes in the final film vs. the trailers is astounding. Further confounding things is the fact that some of the most recent trailers/TV spots on YouTube have the most inaccuracies which is 180 degrees opposite of what we should expect to occur.

To name a few of those inconsistencies…

• The Black Widow looking down at the airport as things go BOOM! with a look of worry on her face — shot deleted from final film.
• Explosions going off around Hawkeye and Scarlett Witch as they are on the run — alternate shot in different area of the airport used in final film.
• Tony Stark’s famous “Sometimes I want to punch you in your perfect teeth” line — alternate version used in final film.
• Iron Man and Cap dialogue “Captain, you’re looking a little defensive”/”Well, it’s been a long day” — alternate version used in final film.
• Iron Man saying “I was wrong about you. The whole world was wrong about you” — dialogue deleted from final film so we’ll never know who or what he was referring to.
• Secretary Ross’ comments to the Avengers about how scared the world is about them now — alternate versions of parts of that speech used in final film.
• Iron Man yelling “You just started a war!” to someone — dialogue deleted from final film.
• Bucky jumping out of a building and flying through the air — I’m not 100% certain of this but I believe they changed the background for the final film or it was an alternate shot.
• There’s also a lot of misdirection in the trailers where the wrong dialogue is superimposed over a given scene. This is more the case for the TV spots on YouTube than the much longer film trailers.

I’m not going to count the shots in the trailers where Spider-Man was missing from a shot but added to that shot in the final film. They wanted to keep that under wraps as much as possible. Hell, they wanted to keep Giant Man under wraps as long as possible and they would have succeeded if not for merchandising leaks giving it away months ago.

I know there were reshoots for Civil War but I can’t believe all of the above are the end result of reshoots. Plus, I thought some of the performances/takes in the trailers were better than the alternate versions that wound up in the final film. So I am very curious to know why there was such a divergence between the trailers and the final film. None of this detracts from the film. I just find it very odd.

The one problem Civil War has to overcome — a problem any advanced complicated comic film like this one has to overcome — is to straddle that fine line between satisfying the fans and satisfying the general public. If you go for the fans, you risk losing everyone else (hello Watchmen). If you go for everyone else, you alienate the purists. To Marvel’s credit, its “go slow” approach of launching characters first in their own films and then building that increasingly complex cross-pollinated nebulous amalgamation that is the MCU — where any character could theoretically show up in any film if not for the cost involved in securing the talent — has allowed the studio to acclimate (indoctrinate?) the general public on the nuances of the greater MCU. As I note later, if you try to truncate that process and then attempt a deep film like Civil War…you risk losing both audiences in a big way. You couldn’t have done Civil War in Phase 1 and pulled it off anywhere near as well. You probably couldn’t have done it in Phase 2. You needed to wait for Phase 3 so that there is that shared backstory and history to draw upon.

Civil War straddles that line just fine. The fans will be satisfied as will the casual viewer. But their reactions to the film should be different as will their satisfaction levels. Many of the points I have raised here will probably not resonate with the casual viewer. My appreciation for the film as a transcendent comic film will probably not be shared by the general viewing public precisely because they are not as invested in comic lore to the degree I am.

Best Cap/Avengers film ever? You bet.

Best Marvel film ever? Maybe. Guardians of the Galaxy was very good.

Best comic film ever? Uhhhh…I’ll have to get back to you on that one. Dark Knight was awesome!

I’m aware of this schism. Subjectivity and relativism are hard at work here. This is why I say at the very top that “not everyone will enjoy that (transcendent) ride”. I did because I have that history as a former collector. Those who don’t have it will probably not share my reaction...if they can even see it to begin with. I have read more than one (of the few) negative reviews of the film and after reading my first reaction was always “This person doesn’t understand comic books. This is the review of someone who just isn’t getting it.” This should be expected. Not everyone will get it.

The only area where Civil War does not beat Winter Soldier is in regards to film score. That film score for Winter Soldier was iconic. The film score for Civil War just isn’t in the same league even though Henry Jackman did both scores. The only time I really felt like the score rose to the occasion was during the airport showdown. I’ve seen the film three times now and I’m hard pressed to remember the rest of Civil War’s score.

Movie scores aside, Civil War is absolutely deserving of taking the title of “Marvel’s Empire Strikes Back” away from Winter Soldier. It is the superior film. It is Marvel’s best film. It is the closest we’ve ever come to getting that comic book feel transposed to cinema.

I feel sorry for Warner Brothers and D.C. Comics. They have no hope of matching this let alone beating this. None. People have used Civil War as a repudiation of Batman vs. Superman but as I have already argued that is using the wrong standard and Batman vs. Superman has gotten a bum rap as a result. But for Justice League 1 and 2, Civil War is very very bad news for Warner/DC. Marvel used 10 of its 12 MCU films to set the stage and gave Markus, McFeely and the Russos the ability and freedom to go where they went with Civil War. If this had been attempted as part of Marvel’s Phase 2 it would have utterly failed to resonate the way this film has at the start of Phase 3.

Under any metric you care to choose, Warner and DC do not have the same path to that kind of success with the Justice League films because they are fast tracking the process by putting many of the Justice League main characters’ standalone films after the first Justice League film comes out. The Justice League films may wind up being fine cinema but they have no shot at equaling the greatness that is Civil War.

Then again, I didn’t think Civil War could top Winter Soldier. So there you go…