Captain America : Civil War *spoilers from post 480*

Ben Gadot

CramCycle wrote: »

The letter to Tony scene did not in anyway suggest they were buds or that Tony has forgiven him. In fact Tony still looked pissed. It was Cap apologising for being wrong about hiding his parents and his reasons why, which as it turns out were selfish and not for good as he had thought.

It also just gives Tony and out, he ignores Ross's call because he is not an idiot, he knows it is too late, he knows Fed Ex was chosen to deliver it after the fact, may as well piss off Ross as he is not going to catch Cap in the act.

It also gives the method of contact, if it is ever needed. Wakanda was always very territorial, even if he tracks where the phone is calling (which I am sure BP has helped ensure will be difficult) he won't go there. The irony being that he won't go there because of the accords, he would not be allowed. Before them he could have just swanned in.

I think it was the best Tony was going to get, we will stay quiet, in the shadows, kinda like new SHIELD (although I have seen little of the new season so I may have missed alot), until we are needed, which suits Tony, because he knows that, if he has to break the rules, he will need everyone because the reason will be huge

eg brain freeze from the ice cream, as well as the Vision being incapacitated due to sensitive teeth while testing multiple flavours

I'll have to watch it again but I recall Tony's features softening while reading the letter. He still looks obviously hurt but pissed? Not to me.

You say it's too late for Tony to do anything or track them but this is the same Tony that showcased live action memories at the beginning of the film. The man has the world of technology at his feet to track someone, so the simple answer is that he chose not to. Which again, doesn't fly with how they left things, where the only reason Tony stopped fighting was because of core damage.

ricero

Although enjoyable i felt the airport scene to be badly contrived

Riddle101

Saw it today, was a great movie. As a reader of the Civil War arc of the comics I thought they done very well.

My only gripe is Spider-Man though. As a character he was well done, ever the wisecracker and lighthearted as he usually is around the Avengers but a bit too young to me. I mean in the movie he's only had his powers for about 6 months, I would have expected him to be a bit more advanced in age. Tbh though I haven't been all that happy with Spider-Man in movies since Tobey McGuire. I realize that they've sort of moved on but I really wish they hadn't and just kept with the Spider-Man continuity from the films. But that's a bit off topic I guess.

Osmosis Jones

Pretty sure Peter is 15 when he's bitten. I'm delighted they've finally gone for a Peter Parker who looks like a high school student. Tobey Maguire was far too old.

Nervous Wreck

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Pretty sure Peter is 15 when he's bitten. I'm delighted they've finally gone for a Peter Parker who looks like a high school student. Tobey Maguire was far too old.

Yup. Glad we're getting a PP who is age appropriate, also because it gives the character a set of challenges the other MCU characters don't have.

BlitzKrieg

the only thing that threw me and I am really nervous it's me and I missed it in the last captain america movie...

When did Cap find out that Bucky killed Tony's parents? Its really the only plot points that threw me cause I dont remember it being revealed to him at anytime?

I thought he was initially just saying yes because he was standing with bucky and saying it on principal...But then the whole letter seems to indicate that he had known and chosen not to tell Tony.

Which I really dont remember

McLoughlin

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

the only thing that threw me and I am really nervous it's me and I missed it in the last captain america movie...

When did Cap find out that Bucky killed Tony's parents? Its really the only plot points that threw me cause I dont remember it being revealed to him at anytime?

I thought he was initially just saying yes because he was standing with bucky and saying it on principal...But then the whole letter seems to indicate that he had known and chosen not to tell Tony.

Which I really dont remember

In Winter Solider , Zola told Captain America that Winter Solider was in someway involved in Stark's "accident"

CramCycle

Ben Gadot wrote: »

I'll have to watch it again but I recall Tony's features softening while reading the letter. He still looks obviously hurt but pissed? Not to me.

You are right, pissed is too strong, and he does soften a bit, nut in my view, more in understanding than forgiveness.

You say it's too late for Tony to do anything or track them but this is the same Tony that showcased live action memories at the beginning of the film. The man has the world of technology at his feet to track someone, so the simple answer is that he chose not to. Which again, doesn't fly with how they left things, where the only reason Tony stopped fighting was because of core damage.

I am sure he could but he won't catch them in the act, it will be after the horse has bolted so to speak, in which case he will now have to go through the UN to get to where they are. Wakanda is also clearly far more technologically sophisticated than most other countries, as good as Tony is, he may not be able ot get in there, or prove to the UN that they are there. If in fact the UN would allow him to go in. Might finally show him the downsies to the accord as was put to him, what if they are needed but the UN won't give them permission.

Penn

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

the only thing that threw me and I am really nervous it's me and I missed it in the last captain america movie...

When did Cap find out that Bucky killed Tony's parents? Its really the only plot points that threw me cause I dont remember it being revealed to him at anytime?

I thought he was initially just saying yes because he was standing with bucky and saying it on principal...But then the whole letter seems to indicate that he had known and chosen not to tell Tony.

Which I really dont remember

When Zola is revealing to Cap how Hydra has been working behind the scenes in Shield, he shows a newspaper clipping of how the Starks died in a car crash indicating that Hydra caused it. I'm guessing either Cap put it together that they used Bucky to cause it, or maybe Bucky simply told him in their time together between scenes.

BlitzKrieg

damn i knew I should have rewatched winter soldier before hand.

Riddle101

As a person who didn't see Captain America Winter Solider, the revelation about Tony's parents really got me in this movie. It was like Star Wars The Empire Strikes back all over again for me.

The_Valeyard

I enjoyed it.


Loved the Berlin airport scene. Ant-Man was class.

Overall, not bad. Slow to build, far too much fighting, better than Avengers sequel.

Worth it for

Goliath

alone. I'm probably one of the few people to not care about Spiderman in the Avengers universe but a good rendition and should be good standalone series

Riddle101

The final fight between Ironman and Captain America/Winter Solider was really intense. I thought Winter Solider was going to rip out Tony's heart at one point and kill him. I also thought Captain America might kill him when he smashed his chest piece.

Looking forward to Bucky's new

Wakandan made Vibranium arm

silverharp

very good movie , saw it with my son who is 11, first thing he said when we got out was "who were you supporting?" not many movies set up an ambiguous "good guys" and "bad guys" storyline.

quad_red

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

the only thing that threw me and I am really nervous it's me and I missed it in the last captain america movie...

When did Cap find out that Bucky killed Tony's parents? Its really the only plot points that threw me cause I dont remember it being revealed to him at anytime?

I thought he was initially just saying yes because he was standing with bucky and saying it on principal...But then the whole letter seems to indicate that he had known and chosen not to tell Tony.

Which I really dont remember

When Bucky's arm was stuck in the vice after the escape from the police installation, Capt asks Bucky about the fake psychologist guy and what he wanted. Bucky said he was interested in one specific mission, one that happened in 1991. Capt says tell me what happened and then the scene cuts.

Penn

quad_red wrote: »

When Bucky's arm was stuck in the vice after the escape from the police installation, Capt asks Bucky about the fake psychologist guy and what he wanted. Bucky said he was interested in one specific mission, one that happened in 1991. Capt says tell me what happened and then the scene cuts.

Damn, good catch. Forgot about that.

Mickeroo

Apart from Mandarin in IM3 this was the only Marvel movie where the plot threw a curve ball I didn't see coming, had no idea it was Tony's folks in the car (though thinking back I probably should have twigged it sooner), was fully expecting a big beat down with the super soldiers with Tony, Cap and Bucky working together at that point. Though Zemo was a pretty small scale villain compared to the other films I thought he was probably the best villain we've had in a Marvel film bar Loki, I felt pretty bad for him in the end too and really liked his scene with Black Panther.

ricero

Have to say im still upset that red skull has not come back into the mix yet. Besides loki hes the best villian in the marvel film universe

jcrowbar

ricero wrote: »

Have to say im still uoset that red skull has not come back into the mix yet. Besides lok,i hes the best villian in the marvel film universe

Highly unlikely he'll ever be back.

http://www.slashfilm.com/hugo-weaving-doesnt-want-to-reprise-red-skull-in-future-marvel-films/

Penn

I wonder would they get away with recasting him at this stage? The makeup/prosthetics would cover it fairly well, and since he disappeared after touching the tesseract (which appears to be the space stone), I'm sure they could allow for the fact he speaks differently (rather than having someone essentially doing a Hugo Weaving impression).

I think it could work. They need some big name enemy once Thanos is gone.

ricero

jcrowbar wrote: »

ricero wrote: »

Have to say im still uoset that red skull has not come back into the mix yet. Besides lok,i hes the best villian in the marvel film universe

Highly unlikely he'll ever be back.

http://www.slashfilm.com/hugo-weaving-doesnt-want-to-reprise-red-skull-in-future-marvel-films/

Thats a pity but im sure he be easy enough to recast

Nervous Wreck

The other option is Marvel insists Weaving fulfill his contract by reappearing. Dunno how many films he signed on for but I read an interview with him recently where he said he doesn't know if he'll be back as Red Skull and, while he doesnt want to reprise the role, he's tied to it contractually.

I'd say they'd rather recast at this stage though. They could do as in Ed Brubaker's comic version and have his COMIC SPOILERS consciousness bond with someone else and bring him back that way.

FunLover18

Nervous Wreck wrote:

The other option is Marvel insists Weaving fulfill his contract by reappearing. Dunno how many films he signed on for but I read an interview with him recently where he said he doesn't know if he'll be back as Red Skull and, while he doesnt want to reprise the role, he's tied to it contractually.

I think they learnt their lesson with Natalie Portman re making stars fulfil contractual obligations

FunLover18

FunLover18 wrote: »

I think they learnt their lesson with Natalie Portman re making stars fulfil contractual obligations

Weaving comes across as a bit more professional than her

sky88

FunLover18 wrote: »

I think they learnt their lesson with Natalie Portman re making stars fulfil contractual obligations

what happened here??

sky88

sky88 wrote: »

what happened here??

They sacked the director she pushed for and she threw a hissy, tried to force her way out of the show

CramCycle

Deleted User wrote: »

Weaving comes across as a bit more professional than her

I agree, he doesn't want too but he comes across as someone who will do his best if he is asked. He knows that if he does a good job, it insures more work, if he does a bad job, it won't ruin him but it won't do him any favours.

josh_96

Saw civil war last week, absolutley brilliant, spiderman easily stole the show in my opinnion looking forward to the next few films, gonna be hard to top that film though.

Thanos

Saw the film and really enjoyed it. Thought Spiderman and giantm, an were very good, the latter was cool as i had not read anything so did not know that he was going to appear. Liked the Black Panther also.

Looking at the number from the box office and Civil War came out as the fifth highest opening film, which is some achievement as it was going up against DC's Superman and Batman who would be considered the 2 biggest super heroes around. Seems like Marvel have got DC in their pocket as far as super hero movies go........

homerun_homer

In fairness to Natalie, look how sh!te Thor 2 turned out. She only had good intentions for it to be made by a good film-maker she trusted and vouched for. I'm sure there's far more to it but I believe her signing up to the movies was on condition that there wasn't any run of the mill director doing them.

The Golden Miller

Penn wrote: »

I think it could work. They need some big name enemy once Thanos is gone.

Read Marvel for years as a kid. Never seen the Red Skull as a "big" villain or that big a presence outside Captain America arcs. It's probably Magneto or Norman Osborn, the former which cannot be used and probably wouldn't be as big a presence through-out the whole Marvel universe at Osborn anyway. Osborn is Marvels Joker, he should take center stage next imo (now that they have him back)

Riddle101

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Read Marvel for years as a kid. Never seen the Red Skull as a "big" villain or that big a presence outside Captain America arcs. It's probably Magneto or Norman Osborn, the former which cannot be used and probably wouldn't be as big a presence through-out the whole Marvel universe at Osborn anyway. Osborn is Marvels Joker, he should take center stage next imo (now that they have him back)

They would have to reintroduce Osborn in a new Spider-Man movie because he was one of Spider-Man's arch enemies. No Spider-Man no Green Goblin.

That being said, there was a Dark Reign story arc in the Avengers comics. Norman Osborn took over as head of Shield in the aftermath of the Secret Invasion story arc due to his efforts in the war against the Krulls. He formed a new Dark Avengers with his own hand picked squad which who were supposed to mirror the Avengers at the time. So I could totally see Norman Osborn as an antagonist if they go that way with the movie, especially if they introduce The Sentry/The Void

This was the Dark Avengers squad
Norman Osbourne(As Iron Patriot)/Ironman
Spider-Man/Venom
Daken/Wolverine
Bullseye/Hawkeye
Ares/Thor
Moonstone/Ms Marvel
Nov-Varr/Captain Marvel
The Sentry

Of course some of those characters probably wouldn't make it into the film but you know what I mean.

The Golden Miller

Riddle101 wrote: »

They would have to reintroduce Osborn in a new Spider-Man movie because he was one of Spider-Man's arch enemies. No Spider-Man no Green Goblin.

That being said, there was a Dark Reign story arc in the Avengers comics. Norman Osborn took over as head of Shield in the aftermath of the Secret Invasion story arc due to his efforts in the war against the Krulls. He formed a new Dark Avengers with his own hand picked squad which who were supposed to mirror the Avengers at the time. So I could totally see Norman Osborn as an antagonist if they go that way with the movie, especially if they introduce The Sentry/The Void

This was the Dark Avengers squad
Norman Osbourne(As Iron Patriot)/Ironman
Spider-Man/Venom
Daken/Wolverine
Bullseye/Hawkeye
Ares/Thor
Moonstone/Ms Marvel
Nov-Varr/Captain Marvel
The Sentry

Of course some of those characters probably wouldn't make it into the film but you know what I mean.

Ye I get you. It's a given of course that he'd start out in Spider-man at some point, before going global. Marvel don't have alot of "big" name villains who would be household names (neither do DC for that matter, but I suppose it goes with the territory since villains don't have their own comic book franchises), so the only household name who could work in phase 4 is Osborn, who is probably Marvels biggest villainous property anyway (they don't have the film rights to Magneto, Venom would have no interest or the brains to challenge the Avengers, Loki has already been used and Doc Ock isn't on Osborns level as a global threat). Any other household Marvel villains? Dr. Doom maybe, since they'll have him back?

As you say, Osborn is always assembling some form of a team too, whether it's the Dark Avengers, a Green Goblin army, Cabal, Sinister 6/12 etc, plus has the financial means to compete with Stark and has genius intellect, and it doesn't hurt that he's superpowered to Spider-mans level. You could have Oscorp now manufacturing weapons and military equipment in the void Stark Industries left, with Osborn getting very cosy with the government and effectively infiltrating it and resurrecting Hydra, while having mass public support and masquerading as America's new hope/good guy while the Avengers are demonised by the public etc. etc. It makes alot of sense. Read this earlier too: http://www.toptenz.net/10-reasons-norman-osborn-is-the-most-important-addition-to-the-marvel-movies.php. I'd say Osborn is their plan A tbh, and are trying to find a way to work him in at the moment.

CramCycle

The Golden Miller wrote: »

As you say, Osborn is always assembling some form of a team too, whether it's the Dark Avengers, a Green Goblin army, Cabal, Sinister 6/12 etc, plus has the financial means to compete with Stark and has genius intellect, and it doesn't hurt that he's superpowered to Spider-mans level. You could have Oscorp now manufacturing weapons and military equipment in the void Stark Industries left, with Osborn getting very cosy with the government and effectively infiltrating it and resurrecting Hydra, while having mass public support and masquerading as America's new hope/good guy while the Avengers are demonised by the public etc. etc. It makes alot of sense. Read this earlier too: http://www.toptenz.net/10-reasons-norman-osborn-is-the-most-important-addition-to-the-marvel-movies.php. I'd say Osborn is their plan A tbh, and are trying to find a way to work him in at the moment.

When you put it like that, he sounds like the villain Lex should have been in the BvS movie

They don't own Osborne. That relationship could sour again do doubt that they would base their villain arc over him.

Pity that they cut the nuts off Mandarin (One-Shot or not)

Varik

Deleted User wrote: »

They don't own Osborne. That relationship could sour again do doubt that they would base their villain arc over him.

Pity that they cut the nuts off Mandarin (One-Shot or not)

That's what contracts are for, making people stick to their side of an agreement even if the Sony/Disney relationship goes bad.

Varik

Varik wrote: »

That's what contracts are for, making people stick to their side of an agreement even if the Sony/Disney relationship goes bad.

Would be amazed if Sony were that naive though, not to have a get out.

The Golden Miller

Deleted User wrote: »

They don't own Osborne. That relationship could sour again do doubt that they would base their villain arc over him.

Pity that they cut the nuts off Mandarin (One-Shot or not)

Aren't they thinking of reintroducing the actual Mandarin though?

They would base their villain arc on Osborn (if that's the direction they wanted to go down) as the Spider-man world is already in the MCU. They aren't going to give a weaker villain the nod just because Sony may potentially, in the highly unlikely scenario, pull out. If they couldn't do what they wanted with the Spider-man properties, I doubt they would have struck a deal and involved him as an upcoming key character. Infact, according to the Russo brothers in a interview with honest trailers a few weeks back, they had already gone ahead and included Spider-man in phase 3 before the deal was done and had no plan B if it didn't materialise (contrary to what everyone thought). Anyway, Sony have no use for Spidey as they have no fresh idea's and only hold onto him to make money, and the only way they can make money off him is if he's in the MCU. If push came to shove and Sony did pull the Spidey world out, Marvel/Disney would begrudgingly pay whatever they had to to get the full rights back. No other option now that he's featured.

The Golden Miller

CramCycle wrote: »

When you put it like that, he sounds like the villain Lex should have been in the BvS movie

I actually didn't mind the way Lex was portrayed in BvS (mannerisms etc), but ye, his plan was fairly useless, considering the potential they had with him. His plan was fairly aimless at best. And thus far, Marvel haven't done a great job of getting the best out of their villains either. But if done right, Osborn could be good

pixelburp

On reflection, I think this was probably the film Age of Ultron should have been really. Some of the groundwork for the divisions that finally split the Avengers started in Ultron for sure, but in terms of the standardised tropes, having teamed everyone up in The Avengers, the more organic sequel was surely to break the team apart and put it to the test - as was the case with Civil War.

A far more competent and coherent film than Age of Ultron, Civil War demonstrated how effortless Marvel make these superhero films feel. Sure, there's still a legitimate criticism to be made than the MCU films can be pretty flavourless and homogeneous - and those complaints were all valid in Civil War, a film without a single directorial flourish - but there's little doubt the studio has a format that works.

More importantly, and when indulging in the inevitable comparisons with other franchises outside of their remit, it feels like they not only trust their characters can work on film, but that Marvel trusts the audience will buy into them as well - no matter how overtly outlandish they might seem (case in point, The Vision; though said strangeness was hilariously undercut by his strolling around in a dad-sweater). And while the Spider Man cameo was a little on the side of needless, that they nailed the character in his 10/15 minutes of screen time more than 5 Sony films says a lot.

Also deserving of praise was something small, yet significant in my eyes: this was the first MCU film, the first big ticket superhero film really in a while whose final act was not an orgy of mass CGI destruction: instead it was simply the three or four main characters having a fight in an enclosed space. And while I can appreciate people preferred the previous Captain America film, its own climax was simultaneously dull, overwhelming and typical of the genre; the character work was thrown aside so the CGI Artists' Union-mandated finale could take place. In Civil War, the climax was a fairly vicious (for MCU standards) tussle between the two largest heroes in the mythology. I loved the film for that alone & I hope this wasn't a fluke; that Marvel understand how much more powerful and lasting a final act can be when its stakes are more person and immediate.

Gbear

pixelburp wrote: »

Also deserving of praise was something small, yet significant in my eyes: this was the first MCU film, the first big ticket superhero film really in a while whose final act was not an orgy of mass CGI destruction: instead it was simply the three or four main characters having a fight in an enclosed space. And while I can appreciate people preferred the previous Captain America film, its own climax was simultaneously dull, overwhelming and typical of the genre; the character work was thrown aside so the CGI Artists' Union-mandated finale could take place. In Civil War, the climax was a fairly vicious (for MCU standards) tussle between the two largest heroes in the mythology. I loved the film for that alone & I hope this wasn't a fluke; that Marvel understand how much more powerful and lasting a final act can be when its stakes are more person and immediate.

At this stage they've now had fairly intimate to medium level destruction in Iron Man 1, CA 1, Thor 1 and now this, with medium-level stuff in IM2 + 3 and giant orgies of violence only appearing in the Avengers Films and CA2.

There's just probably no way around it - it depends on whose fighting.
You can't imagine these guys picking a petting zoo full of orphans for their climactic fight scene, whereas a threat that requires the intervention of all the Avengers is likely to be happening somewhere it'll cause real harm.

As long as it fits the characters and the tone of the film I don't see the issue. Then it's only a question of whether it looks good - I think the first Avengers film managed that and while CA was less on point in that regard, it was still fairly cool in parts and it had the more meaningful battle at the end with Bucky and CA to give it a bit more weight.
AoU lacked a bit of drama because they never really looked like losing, but technically it looked fairly decent and had enough banter and energy to keep it ticking over.

MilesMorales1

They're gonna bring Osborne in though right? He's pretty important. The goblin is an important spiderman villain.

unplayable

Wtf was vision doing during airport fight? Had he lost his nerve completely?

Really enjoyed this just seen it tonight.spiderman was great.must better than last avengers imho

Bacchus

pixelburp wrote: »

On reflection, I think this was probably the film Age of Ultron should have been really. Some of the groundwork for the divisions that finally split the Avengers started in Ultron for sure, but in terms of the standardised tropes, having teamed everyone up in The Avengers, the more organic sequel was surely to break the team apart and put it to the test - as was the case with Civil War.

In terms of the quality, yes AoU doesn't meet the levels CW did. However, I think AoU was the right sequel to The Avengers. They only teamed up in the previous movie so it was cool to see them as a fully functioning team taking on a big baddie. Also, the events in AoU helped set up the motivations for everything that happened in CW.

Overall, I really enjoyed CW. It'd definitely up there with the best of the MCU and when I catch it on BluRay release it might wriggle up to the top spot. The action was fantastic in it, in particular the staircase fight which was awesome. The airport fight was great too but more of a spectacle than the more brutal staircase and final fights. Spiderman made that whole sequence though, he just lit up the screen.

They nailed the motivations for the characters... I was actually a bit surprised how deep the conflict actually went. I thought for a moment that they were going to cop out after Stark sees the Avengers behind bars but then the reveal that Bucky killed Starks parents :eek: That was one of the most intense moments I think the entire MCU has created and took the conflict up to a whole new level. The fight that followed actually had me thinking they were going to kill each other. I also thought they handled how they beat IM pretty well here (considering how much more powered IM is than Cap and WS) with them chipping away at his suit a bit at a time.

I loved the bad guy in this too, such an understated role, with a simple, effective and clever plan that... worked!

Final big positive here was the humour in it. Once again the MCU nails mixing the action with little moments like; the two lads in the VW smiling when Cap kisses the agent; Vision walking around in a sweater; every word that comes out of Spidermans mouth; Ant-Man becoming Giant-Man; "bird costume";

The only complaint I'd have about it is that the IM team should really have beat Cap's team quite easily. Especially so when they added Spiderman to the roster. With the exception of Wanda and maybe Ant Man, every one else there should have been fairly easy to take out. Was War Machine firing paint bullets or something, he seemed to have no effect. IM too seemed far more ineffectual in this than he typically does against "baddies". Vision went missing. Only Spiderman seemed to be pulling his weight in the airport fight. Anyway, it all still worked and looked great and was a joy to watch but I still felt that they purposefully played down Vision and IM to even up the fight.

They did show that IMs team would win. Wanda saved them again and again.

Bacchus

Deleted User wrote: »

They did show that IMs team would win. Wanda saved them again and again.

Yup, but really Vision should have taken her on. There was a whole thing between the two of them in the first half of the movie and the natural conclusion to that should have been them facing off. Actually, come to think of it, they downplayed Wanda's abilities in certain places too. Why not just rip Tony's armour off instead of throwing cars at him. So yeah, the airport fight looked amazing and was thrilling but they didn't get the balance right.

Penn

Bacchus wrote: »

In terms of the quality, yes AoU doesn't meet the levels CW did. However, I think AoU was the right sequel to The Avengers. They only teamed up in the previous movie so it was cool to see them as a fully functioning team taking on a big baddie. Also, the events in AoU helped set up the motivations for everything that happened in CW.

I've genuinely enjoyed AoU more and more each time I've watched it. It definitely has issues, but I still think it's a solid film with some great moments and characters. I'd still have it in my top 5 Marvel movies.

As for Team Iron Man being more powered than Team Cap, that's true, but at the same time nobody on either side wanted to hurt the other side. For Team IM, it was all about capture. For Team Cap, it was all about getting to the jet. Both sides were trying to disable/distract each other rather than seriously hurt.

Bacchus

Bacchus wrote: »

Yup, but really Vision should have taken her on. There was a whole thing between the two of them in the first half of the movie and the natural conclusion to that should have been them facing off. Actually, come to think of it, they downplayed Wanda's abilities in certain places too. Why not just rip Tony's armour off instead of throwing cars at him. So yeah, the airport fight looked amazing and was thrilling but they didn't get the balance right.

Any side with Wanda wins, let's be honest.
They have to nerf them a bit but, as above, the teams were trying to disable and not kill.