+Spuun the stairway scene was a difficult one to keep track of to begin with given how small a space that is, how little room there is for a camera, and how you have dozens of levels of stairs overlapping each other. the fact that the cameraman had caffeine withdrawals on top of that just gives you a headache
They did have a few wide angles where you could see hits being taken and the choreography but yes, they used too many cuts at some points and shaked the camera a bit too much. Good improvement for hollywood though. I might get some shit for this but this was so much better than Bourne Supremacy. SO MUCH SHAKY CAM AND SO MANY CUTS IN THAT MOVIE. I didn't even have to be fight scenes. The fucking car chase scene. Specifically in the tunnel. I had to pause and just únderstand what happened.( I haven't seen the third one but since it's the same director as the second movie...I really don't feel like watching it)
The worst thing of all is that when you watch the making off you can actually see them pull off some pretty amazing stunts that could've been done in a single shot. So they're just cutting for the sake of cutting and it's just awful. I mean just put the camera on a bloody tripod and let the team do its work. It would've made for a much better movie. I'm not expecting the Raid, but come on. Marvel has a series running with way better action.
Now I remember why come back to this channel. This guy is like a frustration vacuums. I come here to find out if I'm crazy or something. It really is calming to know that I'm not the only one who sees this bullshit. (I mean in general)
My biggest problem with this movie is that Tony earlier in the film tells the rest of the team about the kid who got killed in Sokovia that drives him to choose the accords, then later recruits a 15 yr old kid to fight a war! It doesn't matter if he has powers that goes against what you stood for before and is highly illogical for putting a child's life in danger
I love these reviews, in the Half in the Bag review rich said captain america is wrong and the movie didn't do a good job explaining where he was coming from or why his views made sense, while on the other hand adam is saying the same thing as criticism only he is agreeing with cap and saying iron man is the undeniably wrong one of the two. Maybe it's written better than we think :o
+YourMovieSucksDOTorg I said this in another reply. But Rich takes up the viewpoint that the "sane" view would be for people to keep these super humans, weirdos and gods in check, because they could destroy entire nations with a snap of the finger. That it would make more sense for people to look into ways to take these people down should they decide to go rogue or try to take control. Because they wield so much power. So from Rich perspective, it makes sense for people to want to keep super human/gods in line and make sure they respect the sovereignty of the states they function in. So far no Comic movie has really wanted to tackle this plot (Batman V Superman poorly alludes to the idea), and that's because these movies are supposed to be fun and entertaining. Most comic fans take up the view that the hundreds of thousands of people killed, and millions of dollars of damage - is justified collateral because they saved the world.
I saw this YMS Quickie and it was good! And by "good" I mean "as good as it possibly can be without straying away from the YMS Quickie-of-a-Marvel-movie formula whatsoever."
lol! Best comment. I think YMS sometimes expects things to be bad or just okay and goes along with it ignoring the glorious bits and the new stuff in the plot. Civil War, for me, is a breakthrough in Marvel movies with its plot.
+J. F.G agreed. If anything, it couldn't be further from the so called "Marvel Formula". But I guess if you go into the theater wanting to hate this movie, you'd hate this movie. Still, I really don't understand what's the point of watching a movie nitpicking it or thinking, "I'm sure/I hope this movie will suck" the very first time you watch it. Wtf, I mean, you're actually spending your money on the movie, and you're hating it just because you already thought that you're gonna hate it when you watch it.
I noticed he does this with some games too. Like, he thought the voice acting for TellTales The Walking Dead was bad for some reason. -_- I still like Adam and watch his vidoes, and he's probably one of my favs. Might even invest a bit in his patreon. but it seems the only way he can give a positive review is if something is overly artsy, thought or 'Genius'. For some reason Hardcore Henry is a exception. Like, in this case, it doesn't help that he's not really into super hero flicks, but he can at least notice how good everything was directed and maybe do a bit more research on the 'Formula' of Marvel. Since, in my opinion and most critics, this varies greatly when things were just starting to get stale for me. Like, Ant-Man was good, but its plot was generic and reminded me a lot of Iron Man 1. And most super-hero movies seem to be super generic like, 'Oh, problems. Villian. Good guy wins. Rushed in love interest' There is no villain here, and deeper themes are present.
Anybody else notice that Don Cheadle's character was ALSO the same one to be injured and side-lined in Avengers Age of Ultron? Its almost like they're indicating that he's a pointless disposable character and yet are unwilling to dispose of him for the sake of keeping tension in their movies.
I tried explaining to a friend that War Machine (Don Cheadle) should have died but he kept insisting there is still a lot to do with the character. However, like you say they aren't doing much with the character besides having him be a glorified punching bag
+onmas909 That's Marvel's reasoning for not killing off Nick Fury, but "character potential" in Marvel movies basically is the same as action figure value at this point.
They should start killing characters. I mean would be interesting if the winter soldier died. Maybe some kind of sacrifice and then Tony sees the error of his ways.
Scrub Lord Doubt it. Tony's character arc in Civil War was not "Hmmm, maybe I should stop being a vindictive asshole that makes terrible decisions", it was "I'll continue to be a vindictive asshole who makes terrible decisions but instead direct it at people who deserve it slightly more". Then again, Caps arc was "I'm right and the resposibile one and am still right and the responsible one at the end of the movie when I go save all my friends while tony sits on his ass hanging up on the secretary of defense in a snarky sarcastic way."
I disagree with one thing Even though we may not have seen Tony playing ball with the man in previous films, I think this film did a half decent job of showing why Tony decided to sign the agreement. Guilt can be a very powerful emotion and can completely change a person. especially someone like Tony who isn't a soldier or a warrior.
Adum also makes it seem like a conspiracy that BvS and Civil War both came out in an election year, but the comics for both have been out for about a decade, so it's really just a coincidence. It's a really good objective review aside from those points.
+Armoured Skeptic I mean, his hubris was the entire reason Age of Ultron even happened. He left thousands of people homeless or dead. He's kind of got a really, really good reason to be in favour of regulation.
Your Movie Sucks: I can't believe that anyone believes that Iron Man's side makes any sense. Rich Evans: I can't believe that anyone believes that Captain America's side makes any sense.
Because both sides are correct but there's a lot more nuance than the movie gives the debate. Yes, the Avengers need "oversight" but Yes, they also need the ability to do their super human stuff without having to wait for a vote. The middle ground is correct, ex: there needs to be something making sure Tony Stark doesn't make an evil AI that tries to destroy the world with no one else saying "hey, maybe this needs a few more checks and balances"; But, they also need to be able to take immediate action with insane power in extreme circumstances So yeah, "they saved the entire world from the evil AI" but Tony Stark made that evil AI so yes he holds some responsibility for all those deaths BUT deserves credit for helping "save the world"(many times) too - This is why Tony agrees, he understands the AI was his creation that maybe could have been avoided with "oversight". Both sides are right to a certain degree but the movie does a terrible job of explaining the details in the limited time it has to spend on not punching things. WAAYYY late to this, sorry.
Tony's character is all over the place in these movies. In avengers he's having a good time and cracking jokes. In iron man 3 he acts like the events in avengers traumatized him and he pretty much gives up being iron man. in age of ultron he acts like none of that happened and reverts back to normal. But in civil war he is ravaged by guilt even though civilians have been dying since iron man 1. in iron man two he does every thing he can to keep his tech out of government hands and know he just wants to give government full control over the avengers.
Newbius93 I know, but in avengers he didn't do anything emotionally scaring even at the end of the movie he was still cracking jokes. But in iron man 3 he is a total wreck. But then in age of ultron he is back to his old self. He switches from care-free to emotionally scared 3 times between avengers, iron man 3, age of ultron, and civil war.
He wasn't cracking too many jokes when the big battle in New York took place. Before then, yeah he had quips left and right. And he did have his serious moments in Age of Ultron. He explained to the team that the vision he had from Scarlet Witch driven to the brink of fearing another invasion, which drove him into creating Ultron. Civil War is when he's starting to become a lot more serious then before. For starters, Pepper and Tony separated, and he began to feel the weight of his actions when the Ultron incident took place, because that was entirely on him. It's like a repeat of his past mistakes with Iron Man 1, but on a bigger scale. His weapons and equipment fell into the hands of terrorists, and then his creation of Ultron
1.Iron Man wanted to kill Bucky because he killed his parrents. 2.The Avengers were torn apart at the end of the movie. 3.The reason why there werent any avengers in Winter Soldier, was because Captain America was a fugtive and was being monitored by Hydra. Which is why he gets help from Falcon because he wasnt part of the Avengers crew. 4.Spider-Man was freaking awesome.
But a news chopper caught him being arrested. You think Captain America being arrested would make some interesting headlines? You think Tony Stark would see that on the news and investigate?
+Hagar TheHonorable It really didn't. Sure Captain America doesn't hold anything against Tony but you can clearly see Tony doesn't seem all too happy about the letter. Hell, he didn't even pick up the burner phone. In fact Tony still seemed pissed at the end just by his facials alone.
+Key Maker Actually no. The break out happned way after Tony got the letter. Plus Tony didn't agree to have them prisoner in the Raft. (or at least I think that's the Raft) He even said to Ross he didn't expect them to be out there as its a prison for high level criminals and psychopaths, like Kilgrave.
+YoshiPlaysMC Not to mention that the Avengers were still severely fractured int he end, meaning that the bad guy actually won and this movie doesn't end neat and tidy like how it happens in most other cliché superhero movies. This film is so far very exceptional to most, if not all, others.
+George Henry literally laughed at your comment. Lol good shit. but he minus well had looked at the camera and said that because that's how they treat the end of the movie.
Te habla el Joel Chiguire First of Ultimate Spider-Man was great. Second, they're trying to start him from the beginning again but the right way. They want Peter to actually grow and experience things on high school which he hasn't done in the previous movies.
Peter Parker has always been an obnoxious child. It sounds like this movie finally gets him right instead of having a thirty year old man play a high school kid.
+Hayden Mof They wanted to introduce a spiderman with limited experience and young age so he could be manipulated. You're not wrong, but I think the change was necessary. Plus, who really wants ANOTHER mature spidey. Not me.
Even though I'm Team Cap, I still understood where Iron Man was coming from, and it was nice to finally see them acknowledge the collateral damage from the previous movies. That was really my biggest criticism of the other Marvel movies, that we barely (if ever) saw any innocent people die unless it was an important plot point. Usually, every time innocent people were in danger, at least one of the Avengers would intervene in time to put a stop to it. I know that they're supposed to be superheroes, but they're still supposed to be vulnerable enough for us to have some connection with them and for us to be concerned for their safety. So, it was nice that we finally got to see the Avengers failing to stop some of these events, and acknowledging that there were casualties for the previous films.
Let me please say that Tony did just find out that Bucky/Winter had killed his mom - In my opinion he was blinded by rage. And also, Spider-Man's supposed to be an obnoxious kid. This guy (I don't know his name) Is certainly better than Toby McGuire or Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man. Just my two cents on the subject, you're free to think your own way though, Adam.
Iron Man's point is better illustrated in the comics, but it's basically the same, and it's not as stupid as you're making it out to be. It's not just that the Avengers should be put in line because they're too stupid to make their own decisions, it's that superheroes in general should be put in line. Having powers doesn't inherently mean you have good judgement. In the comics this is more of an issue because there are a lot of wannabe Avengers running around causing more harm than good, but regardless I think don't think it's a totally unreasonable opinion to have.
+Jordan Del Colle Yeah, from the looks of it the movie didn't show the destruction that a small group of heroes could create. The comic showed that a small incident could have major consequences, and that humans with _supernatural abilities_ shouldn't be doing stupid things to put entire cities in danger.
But that's beside the point. The movie civil war has no relation whatsoever to the comic civil war (other than the characters). Beside, the UN is a bunch of hypocrites in the movie and this part should be more stressed out in the movie. These douchenozzles who claim they don't want civilian casualties, were more than happy to nuke New York that hadn't been properly evacuated when the aliens invaded in the first avengers.
+John Titor Of course he does, he's a Hollywood actor. Do you expect him to be anything more than a braindead socialist who clamors for government regulation at every opportunity?
+Revanaught so when he was a teenage loser in love with a hotty while being obnoxious????? cause..... hate to break the news to you. but there never was a spiderman product not like that
+DeathgGod man how the fuck was andrew garlfield's peter parker a loser? He was a handsome, well dressed, genius in a relationship with emma stone. Tom holland and peter parker were dirt poor with a desire to save people, and maintain a normal life. Sure tobey got with mary jane, but that relationship was hardly perfect, and he couldn't be with her because of the villains that could hurt her. Andrew garfield was not a loser. He was a hipster with model status hair who got to fuck emma stone.
+leo50perez wasn't a loser? is ignored in school and gets the jocks to bully him. you're right, he became a loser midway into the film then got Emma after that. but honestly that film is so anti peter parker it hurts
I kept finding this really cute in the movie when they kept talking about the UN like it's actually an organization worthy of respect. The cringe was strong.
Enthios A. E. Cooper it's edgy to think that the organization that decides to put Saudi Arabia in charge of their human right panel might be fucked up? Golly gee!
+YS Kim (Shiny Breeder) I really wanna know what he thinks of BvS, I have been nagging him through UA-cam messages to do a quickie on it ever since its release lol
The big flaw for me was the presence of the accords in the first place. It's execution was dumb in the comic, and it's probably what bogged this movie down the most. If it had just been about the team getting divided over what to do with Bucky, it would have worked better. I have a feeling that's what the Russos wanted to do, but they were probably mandated to throw in the ham-fisted political bits to make it more like the comic. I wonder how much better it would play if someone did a fan-edit that just removed all mentions of the damn thing.
I know this was made 3 years ago but I gotta acknowledge it cause this is the only comment I’ve seen in three years regarding this point. Like the accords are brought up for less than half an hour then never mentioned again. Like they just forgot about it completely. And I don’t see the point of it when the team would be divided by Zemos plan anyway.
Adam, watch out! You said that a superhero movie was alright-- and provided valid criticisms to support your position-- instead of hailing it as a masterpiece. Prepare for the dislikes and the number of fanboys that will question your competence as a film critic.
People just seem to hate when someone doesn't give a film exactly what they expected, where as Adam actually seemed to like it more than I would have thought 😄
Tony Stark made Ultron, so he was responsible for the Sokovia deaths, that's why it makes sense he wouldn't reject the accords. People forget that even though he signed, he went rogue in the third act and did his own thing. Imagine how much grief Captain would've saved himself if he just signed and went to go save Bucky anyway. Team Iron Man!!!!! Tony's reaction at the end was totally understandable, just like Winter Soldier's rampage was understandable, but would it have been worth it if Tony or Black Widow got shot in the face when he was set loose? Cap was too emotionally close to the situation, how many times did Winter Soldier almost kill someone while he was trying to help him? "You're using blind luck to justify nearly getting your crew killed ..." - Star trek Into Darkness.
I think the Sokovia Accords dilemma is more because Iron Man (Ultron) and Hulk who create/act without consent or controle of their power. So Age of Ultron set up Civil War and I understand why Cap doesn't want to take resposibility for their actions...
+Sebastian Reng [includes slight spoilers] Actually, the Sokovia Accords is more of a direct response of Wanda more than just Tony and Bruce. You have to take into consideration that if Wanda hadn't shown him his deepest fear (the people he care about, the Avengers in particular, dead because he couldn't protect them), then Ultron wouldn't have been created. So when put into perspective, Captain America is actively supporting the side of the argument that is actually the cause of most of the issues. That's not even getting into the discussion of Steve actively knowing that Bucky killed Tony's parents and withheld that information.
"I liked it better when he wasn't an obnoxious child" dude that it literally what spiderman is, why are people even complaining about this, he's a 15 year old, so he's going to act as most 15 year olds would.
Gettin' pretty damn tired of that obligatory "Oh don't worry; there are no innocents in these buildings" line. Every goddamn superhero movie feels the need to do it. I get that loss of life sucks and 9/11 was a thing, but does anybody actually go "Oh, ok. Good" when they hear that line? Does that not take everyone totally out of the experience, when the movie's going "Well, all of downtown Metropolis is being leveled by an eldritch abomination with laser-eyes, but don't worry; the city should be almost empty at this hour." ? You're kind of missing the point of the destruction meaning anything if all the collateral damage is monetary.
Batman V Superman totally did do it. Man of Steel was I think the lone exception to this trend, granted, but it happened twice in BvS during the fight with low-rent Cave Troll Doomsday. First time it was the clip of Anderson Cooper on CNN going "oh god there's a spooky thing in Metropolis, but the downtown core is basically empty so there shouldn't be many casualties", and then later when they lure him to this island, they also make the point "There shouldn't be anybody there". I can at least excuse the second time as common sense, but there seems to be this really hard-wired desire for superhero movies to have no lasting consequences for any of the shit that goes down.
Regarding Tony being a bit of a dick in this film, that's how he's been since Iron Man 1. If you haven't got used to it now, you probably never will. It's evident in the ending fight as well, although I feel his rage at that point was understandable, but that's probably just me. I mean, if you saw some random asshole kill your parents, you'd want him dead too, especially if you never got to make peace with those parents like Stark did. That's the whole reason they show the hologram at the beginning, to remind people that Tony isn't happy with his last interactions with his dad. Then again I'm a Marvel fanshit so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
Honestly. I felt the movie wasn't being fair enough for Iron Man character. Granted he's a man that wants to do things in humanity's best interest but other attributing factors keep derailing it. He tried to make Iron Men suits to behave as peace keepers and there is always collateral damage. Too much was done to him to the point some friends I know don't like him at all. I feel that the his his estranged relationship with his father was pretty well developed from Iron Man 2. Tony saw the need to try to make a defense system to protect the planet with Ultron. It can be compared to when his father worked on the Manhattan project. A weapon to end wars but is corrupted by outside forces. Something I think that could have been expressed with Captain America is for him to see his convictions be completely challenged. Such as a with the climax of his fight with Iron Man to be in a very public place. So civilians who side with Iron Men or Captain America can help show perspective. For the review, I feel that YMS forgot to mention this was probably the most effective villain that caused this whole friction between the Avengers encountered so far.
What I find hilarious about Civil War is how strong the central argument truly is. Every single critic I know who belittles the main conflict of the movie does so with a very biased opinion on who is 'obviously' right, and there's about an even 50/50 split between them all. Half of them argue about how Captain America is acting like a petulant child with no accountability and the other half about how Iron Man is a hypocritical fascist. And they all say that the movie is trying so hard to create a false conflict, while making it readily apparent that it's a solid one by being part of a cadre of cynical critics taking an incredibly hardline stance on it, to the point of treating the 'other side' as ridiculous. It's fascinating.
So much this!!! I love how every critic is so convinced that the side they don't agree with is implausible and contrived and yet you really could break them down 50/50. They don't have any idea how many people think the other way. The central conflict is almost too good for its own good and people don't realize how differently other people can think.
It was fun seeing Rich Evans from Red Letter Media say that Stark's side was obviously the right one, and Adam saying the exact opposite. With none of them really giving any arguments other than "it's so obvious". (Not that Rich Evans necessarily plans out his reviews to any worthwhile depth.)
I'm a loser, I love comics, I get hyped superhero movies, I liked this one a lot but yeah Tony's side in this whole thing was clearly wrong yet you're set up to feel bad for him the entire time. The framing in this movie is completely one sided, I suppose to balance out the fact that Tony has serious mental issues and is clearly wrong and needs a break and a therapist. We spend 3 scenes watching his parents die, we watch him talk about how his parent's death fucked him up and we spend a a lot time panning to his face, his black eye and tired eyes (while Cap looks in pristine condition). But we're supposed to ignore him and laugh as he manipulates a teenager into a dangerous fight, and forget the fact that Ultron was HIS FAULT and we don't get any shots of any of the collateral damage caused in his movies at all. Who in their right mind actually would believe that the government (which spent the past bunch of movies infiltrated by a rogue Nazi organization) should actually be able to control the Avengers without some fucked up agenda, who the fuck is supposed to believe that anyone would actually listen to Ross after he slapped down a giant packet and expected them to read it thoroughly and sign it in 3 DAYS, a man who clearly has a beef with superheros and does not think they deserve human rights. Captain America asks about lawyers and he is scoffed at and we are just supposed to be okay with that? Despite all of this, there are still people who walked out of that theater on Tony's side, I've had to unfollow a shit ton of critics, I understand that you don't like these types of movies but I'm glad I can still get a truthful and objective opinion from you.
+YungBitchPudding Not like that. It's actually about giving superheroes official training, rather than just muddle through world crises. The comic made a lot more sense as it included a huge event where a city was destroyed because of the carelessness of some younger superheroes. As Tony was the one funding all superhero work, he was put under the pressure of the general public. As a result, they decided to make officially sanctioned superheroes across the world, with government knowledge, support, funding, and even improved weaponry (i.e. spiderman's advanced combat suit). It's nothing like just letting the government tell them what to do, which is what Captain misconstrued it to be in the first place. Captain even said at the end of the comic when he realised he was wrong "We're winning the fight, but what are we even fighting for?" The movie got it completely skewed. Completely
+joey obyrne i totally agree i felt the comics made wayyy more sense and at least made you question either side but the movie had to do it in very little time with less heros and it just came off really stupid to me but i still liked it mostly because of the action but tony came off as such an emotional ass
+YungBitchPudding To be fair, it was like that in the comics too. Iron man was made to look like a douche, Cap was made to be on the right side-- because mah freedoms. Ultimate Alliance actually does it a little better, with amendments being made to the Registration act so that it doesn't sound like Hitler wrote it.
I really enjoy spider being as a kid in this movie. maybe it's just cause i'm young so i relate more but I think it's a nice change of pace to have a kid instead of just a bunch of adults in their mid forties
Adam did you miss the part where iron man finds out Bucky killed his dad? The climax isn't as pointless as you made it sound. Also killing off a character just for the sake of showing off the guts to do so isn't such a great idea.
it does add some emotional heft and it does keep the audience more invested. Just look at Game of Thrones- you literally hold your breath any time any character enters a dangerous situation because you fear they might die- well, at least before the new writers took over. totally agree about Tony though. Conflict be damned, if you visually saw a man beating your father's skull in before choking your mother to death, you wouldn't care about hypocrisy or moral dilemmas, you'd try and tear his fucking throat out!
Exactly. They weren't friends in the end. Cap and Tony didn't just hug it out- Cap sent Tony a letter explaining how he was wrong in withholding the information on his parents' death from him, and that he hoped "one day you'll understand," implying that their friendship isn't just fixed because the conflict has gone away (in fact it hasn't gone away, Cap said he wish they agreed on the contract, so that further proves my point). There were actual consequences to the "civil war," just not death disappointingly.
John Smith that's what raised Civil War up a notch despite the lack of heroes dying- they did lose. Technically. The "bad guy's" plan worked. The fact that they then turned the tables and you end up understanding the "bad guy" was another aspect of the film I really liked. We live in a world that is rarely black or white and good writing should reflect that.
"I liked spiderman better when he wasn't an obnoxious child" - So then never? Because from the comics inception spiderman was a slick talking child. They literally nailed the origin of Spiderman. And also they are NOT all friends at the end of the film at all. Literally wrong.
complaining about having to watch other MCU movies to understand Civil War is the same as complaining about having to watch the first 3 seasons of a TV show before you get to the current episodes. *it's ALL connected and chronological.*
The way marvel this is almost reminding me of Shakespeare's history plays. We want to follow the same characters and see how they behave in multiple different situations.
+Darth Terraplex I hope that expecting movies to have decent explanations of their characters without forcing me to watch a two and a half long hour commercial is not holding film makers to too high of standards.
+Yump Bagle Its no different than a trilogy or a series like Harry Potter. If you want basic fun you can jump in without watching the other movies but if you want to get more invested than ya of course you'll need to watch the other parts.
Well all I've seen of MCU is Iron Man 1, Thor 1&2 and GotG (Both of the latter having no bearing on CA:CW) and I kept up with CA:CW just fine. A couple times I was like who's that? But you learn the character relationships pretty quick and that's all you need really... So no, you don't HAVE to watch the previous movies, but it helps obviously.
i enjoyed how they fighting was actually consistent throughout the movie, like how they dont just fight once then work together,( like justice league vs teentitans movie or devil man vscyborg009), If that final scene wasnt in the movie i really like how the bad guy kind of won
You say you disagreed with Tony's stance and I'd say that's exactly what the Russo brothers wanted. This is still a Cap movie. I'd say as long as you can see both character's viewpoints and you side slightly with Cap than mission accomplished. I as a viewer don't agree with Tony but I see what his motivations were. The main complaint of "Tony's an asshole manipulating people" EXACTLY THE POINT. And Adum you're breaking my heart by preferring old Spidermen to the one the Russo's gave us in this. I love the thwip-quipster.
***SPOILERS*** 7:09 Tony is made to watch someone viciously beat his father to death before choking the life out of his mother, only to then find that killer standing right beside him in real life. Just dumb fun everyone! GOOD OL' FASHIONED DUMB FUN!!!
+Cometmoon448 Literally one of the many things that he missed during his watch of the film I think. Civil War is probably the most adult Marvel has been in a while tbh. I made a video about all this because I, for the first time found myself disagreeing with YMS on about everything in this video lol
+Cometmoon448 I think it's because it still is dumb fun compared to a lot of the stuff Adam seems to enjoy. I mean, comparatively, it's not particularly dark or deep or anything like that.
Completely unfair analysis of Iron Man's character. He's retired from being an Avenger (he referred to himself as an "active duty non-combatant", and also is feeling the weight of deaths more than anyone since he is the one who created Ultron in the first place. Not to mention Pepper left him so he was alone and all of his demons were coming back to haunt him. It would make sense that he would want in any way to get a lid on all of the mistakes he had been making. He was definitely somewhat projecting his guilt onto everyone else, but people do that sometimes. It is really the most complex Tony Stark has ever been, in my opinion.
+Anonymous Programmer That still doesn't refute that his motives are a bit ridiculous. Just cause a few civilians died out of a possible 100,000, doesn't mean it makes sense to limit the only people who could actually help, especially since its mostly people who couldn't do much to control them anyways.
+Ty Manning I think Stark is really thinking that all heroes should be evaluated and watched heavily. Some can turn at any point and some have personal issues with others. It's sort of ironic that Iron Man turned out to be the one showing this the most but I think people are overlooking the reason for the UN being needed. I kinda get his point there.
Esteban Maldonado But what could the UN actually do? Even if they all went rogue, collectively they're powerful enough to take down entire armies if they wanted too.
Ty Manning Yeah, ALL. But just like here, they had Iron Man's team act in their behalf. Again, sorta the reason for them. So they know they're on the same team. Just didn't work out that way. Again, I'm not saying it worked or that it really can but I get why they would want it.
Esteban Maldonado They were still somewhat against Stark and his team going against them though. I seem to recall Ross said to Stark "you should be locked up too after that airport fiasco,' or at least something like that.
I definitely love your channel, there are plenty of times I disagree with you, particularly with movies like the one you just reviewed, but ultimately it's personal preference like you say. I do think you can be a harsh critic at times but that's what makes me respect the differences we share that much more. Keep following your dreams and have a lovely year
+Coletrain Hetrick Not ALL of it is personal preference. As he stated, it is incredibly formulaic and cheesy, but the parts about certain characters are definitely personal. That's why he said it doesn't affect his overall score of 6/10
I agree with you to an extent: it was disappointing to see that no major character was killed in the film, there were multiple plot contrivances, not to mention the film had something of a tonal problem (Most of the characters were content to crack jokes in the supposedly dangerous airport battle, not to mention all pretense of seriousness regarding War Machine's condition was dropped when Stan Lee knocked on the window) but despite these flaws, I think it deserves a 7 from you. It wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination but the fight choreography was excellent, the special effects were great and Tom Holland as Spider man was a very welcome addition. On the whole, I felt it was a very exciting and well made action film that surpasses a classification as average, but that's just my two cents.
I agree with you, except the ending. SPOILERS BELOW. When half the Avengers are jailed and need to be busted out of an ocean prison, it's not all bubbly. I don't think Steve and Tony will ever be friends again. On the same side when the chips are down, sure. But when you withhold that your best friend is the guy who murdered your parents, trust is broken. Also, some of the fight choreography was thanks to the directors of John Wick. I was excited about that. I felt they captured what Spider-Man was to a T. He was an excited kid, trying to do his best to impress Tony. This version was exactly how I thought he'd be, having grown up reading the comics. He's a kid. For a summer movie, it was exactly what I expected. Your score is dead on.
+Candy Vegetables and darkness If Adam didn't see the drama in the movie that's disappointing but that doesn't mean he's right (he's wrong) about it just being about the fights.
So you're upset about having to see the first two movies in a franchise in order to understand the third movie? That's not just a Marvel thing. That's a thing in general. You won't understand ANY movie past the sequel without having seen the first ones. Don't be an idiot.
Tomas Canevaro I'm not being a fanboy. I'm saying you're an idiot if you expect to be able to follow the events of the third installment in a franchise without having seen the other movies.
+BioWolfProduuctions I was thinking the exact same thing. It seems like Adam just turns his brain off when he watches these films but he forgets to flip off his critical switch as well. Like this wasn't a "Oh dude you're being so harsh on something I like, come on!" thing, his statement was just legitimately dumb. His whole rant about how it lines up with the presidential election was moronic too. This movie was shot like 2 years ago and the Civil War arc in the comics is incredibly popular and was always on the table to be made. I haven't seen the film so I don't know about his other criticisms though. Adam unfortunately fulfilled everyone's false perception of him being an overly harsh hipster douchebag with this video.
The airport fight was enjoyable but ridiculously consequence-free, but the two-on-one fight in the third act was the strongest aspect of the film in my opinion.
what is so unbelievable about 1. people feeling guilty that their actions killed people even though it was for the greater good and 2. that power needs checks and balances?
I understand why Tony wants to sign it. I think the main reason is because of Sokovia: he created Ultron, he has the blame for that. But New York? Washington DC? So if the Avengers hadn't stepped in no one would have died?
in the original avengers movie, the UN security counsel ordered a nuclear strike on Manhattan. So why now do they care so much about civilian casualties?
YMS-"where the fuck are the other heros in Captain America winter soldier? ME-iron man has no suits from the events of iron man,thor is on asgard,hulk is trying not to hulk out and kill a town of people somewhere,and Hawkeye is probably setting up his family from age of ultron.YMS great channel but do some research before you hate on superhero films.
Yeah Yeah Yeah Productions WRONG! hulk/banner was counseling aka listening to Tony bitch about what fucked him up when he was young/the whole story of ironman 3 lol about time Tony was done, cap was going to the hospital from getting fucked up then saved by Bucky.
irondrumwork09 by the time captain america was in the hospital the events of iron man 3 had already happened Aka Tony has no more suits until the next movie.Hulk listened to Tony s story so he wouldn't hulk out.He would rather have a few people die by not helping than a bunch of people dying by turning into the hulk.He dosent have COMPLETE control of the hulk until age of ultron.
When I said WRONG I was joking & kept on joking from there... NO SHIT ironman 3 was over before winter soilder happened, that's obvious. But you are wrong by saying that Banner couldn't control the hulk untill AOU. He could control the hulk ever since the End of the incredible hulk. Banner: "that's my secret Cap... I'm always anger" Just because it's different actors & two different looking hulk's doesnt mean what happened in IH isn't canon. So yes banner can control hulk for the most part UNTIL they wrote that he couldn't anymore just so they can force a forced hulk black window romance ... Instead of truly developing his character.
Benish Ben yeah.acording to captain america civil war,the mcu closely follows real world time.in Iron man 3(2013) tony destroys the suits at the end of the year of 2013 (winter)captain america 2 happens spring of the next year (after tony has no suits)
Benish Ben 1.thors on asgard,widow or hawkeye wouldnt be much help and even if they were tony can't communicate with them and even if he could he needs to focus all of his time and resources on finding the Mandarin not waste time contacting team members that will take hours at the very least I show up.Same thing with hulk. Captain America doesn't exactly have a smartphone so contacting him is time consuming.Plus hes busy with fitting in with normal people.2 if every time an Avenger shows up whenever another Avenger needed help there would be no solo movies,just 10 minute movies of thor coming in to beat winter soldier in one punch,basically it would be boring if the avengers showed up in iron man 3.#3 The Avengers can't fight together all the time they need the personal space and their views of how the fight are very different to fight together all the time unless there are aliens falling from the sky again and they probably prefer to fight alone.4 when falcon and widow show up in cap 2,no one says a thing,but when hulk dosent show up in iron man 3 to do more damage than good everyone loses their minds
I never considered the marvel movies cinematic masterpieces. They are exactly as he put it, dumb fun. They're a lot of fun to watch despite their flaws and i enjoyed this one a lot.
Another thing that was incredibly idiotic about this movie: They talk about how civilian casualties were all The Avengers' fault but if you re-watch the first Avengers movie you see the same people trying to nuke the city in order to stop Loki. But no, the Avengers need to be put in check.
+YourMovieSucksDOTorg the revnant was a pretencious piece of dog shit with no story other then i survived rhis the bad guy killed this so am going to get revenge art
+YourMovieSucksDOTorg lets be honest here this movie is great you dont like it cuz you perfer movies that features people cutting there vains listening to goth music and thinking about comiting suicide
+Humberto Mendoza Because heaven forbid YMS has different taste in movies than you. He even said he liked the movie. Is he not allowed to like something without criticizing it????
Well Captain America DID die... symbolically. It's why Steve showed up in normal clothing when saving his other friends from that prison. Captain America is gone, but Steve isn't.
+EsechavaHD since he was brought back in the comics they could have tied in the reborn series story in one of the films, it's just classic marvel being too shit scared to kill off a character because it may get negative reviews. Which would be the complete opposite since it what fans wanted and non-fans wouldnt have expected
Peter parker is 17-18 and a senior in high school when his comics started. But you know what? The age isn't what's important. It is the attitude, the dorky jokes, constant banter, and the will to keep protecting people that are important.
When I heard about this movie I always though captain America and Ironmans rolls would be the opposite of what they are. Steve Rodgers just seems like the more obedient of the two characters
+Pretty Much Cap is an idealistic character who is all about doing what he thinks is right. Not what others think is right. I think Tony is more of a realist. Ideally, these heroes should be able to operate freely without any authorities to respond to. Realistically, is it really a good idea to let these characters who are basically gods have free reign over the world? In a way, these accords would violate the constitution (which Cap is against) but are probably necessary (Team Iron Man)
+Brett Arnott yeah but his actions in Ultron totally contradict his stance. Every causality in Ultron was basically 100% his fault. Cap then should have been like "ok fuck you Iron Man we are signing this shit so we don't have a repeat of Ultron."
+Brett Arnott the way I see it, the the serum flowing through caps veins is government property. If he doesn't want the government to tell him what to do with THEIR property then he should have it removed from his veins. Also, iron man is basically a guy with a weapon of mass destruction in his basement.
EDIT: SPOILERS BELOW Iron Man wasn't trying to kill Bucky at the end because of "vigilante justice" or whatever you said, he didn't give a shit about any justice, he just wanted to kill him because he was pissed. He had just found out Bucky killed his parents AND that his good friend Cap kept it from him all this time as well, so that's gotta hurt. I felt really bad for Tony in this movie. And he recruited Spider-Man not only to help him take down Cap's team but also it was like an audition for him to see if he could be in the Avengers someday. And I don't see why a lot of people think Tony Stark is still an asshole. Do you really take him that seriously? Yeah he's narcissistic sometimes but it's obviously harmless comedy. And how exactly was Spider-Man obnoxious? I feel like you're one of those people who sees any character that's lighthearted and fun to be "obnoxious and annoying" and anyone dark, serious and gritty as being "mature and realistic".
I think people misunderstand the whole "we need to be kept in check"thing. It's not so much "you need to have the government's permission and go through 6 months of red tape before getting that cat out of the tree" but more "holy shit, these people could literally destroy the entire planet if they felt like it, maybe we should have some sort of official system in place"
+Nickolas Marchuk And I felt like people are missing the point that the potentially world-ending events correlate to the creation of the Avengers. The idea is that the existence of the weaponry and power the Avengers hold allow inspire and create dangerous enemies. Ultron wouldn't have even been a thing if it weren't for Stark.
+Nickolas Marchuk People aren't misunderstanding it at all. The whole thing is an incredibly stupid idea, who would want a government that has very clearly been infiltrated and influenced by Hyrdra to be allowed to decide when the Avengers can and can't save people? Nothing about the accord keeps the avengers in check, it just turns them into a weapon to do the governments bidding. The Sokovia Accords is basically an allegory for The Patriot Act wherein people driven by emotion gave up important freedoms an liberties to people with questionable intentions that couldn't be trusted with that power. Tony Stark is very clearly an emotional driven person that doesn't think about the larger ramifications of the things he does so obviously he supports the accords but if you look at the bigger picture it really isn't a good idea. People that have bad intentions will still do bad things except now The Avengers have to look up to big brother for permission to intervene and hope that big brother doesn't have anything to gain from bad people doing bad things. “Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
Dragonbrad So... what are we supposed to do then? Comparing the situation described in the comics and movies to real life is inaccurate. We're talking about gods among men, one of them a literal god. What could any regular people possibly do to oppose them? The avengers are good, but if they had a change of heart they could literally destroy the earth on a whim. Having a system in place that monitors them, and having them answer to SOMEBODY at least would make the situation a whole lot safer. Sure, the avengers could all be angels in human form, but as the saying goes: power corrupts. And these are people with very literal absolute power
Nickolas Marchuk Power does corrupt and giving the government and hydra more power is not a good idea. The solution to the problem is not to hand over the responsibility to other equally corruptible people. What do you do? Nothing. The Sokavia Accord already does nothing to stop rogue super beings from destroying shit. No one that actually want's do to do anything nefarious has a reason to get permission from the government. Doing something like the Sokovia Accord only makes good peoples job more difficult. If any of Avengers went rogue they would go rogue with or without the Sokovia accord, there is no reason for it to exist. The odds of all the Avengers going rogue at once are slim to none and there will always be other heroes there to stop any that go rogue. What is it that you think the Sokovia Accord does to oppose villains?
Dragonbrad Now I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't know the details of the Sokavia Accord. The entire thing might be full of shit. I'm just trying to argue for the sake of having some sort of control of the superheroes' actions. Imagine if it were the 20's, and some guy had invented the nuclear bomb right then. Not a country, just some dude in his basement invented the ICBM and developed a nuclear payload for it (I can't pretend I know anything about the resources or expertise this would require, but frankly it's more realistic than the comic book stuff I'm using it as a comparison for). Would you really just say "Oh, he's nice. He said he'd only nuke the bad guys, no problem here, keep your nukes good sir". Can you seriously tell me that? Let's say this man is perfectly incorruptible now. Now the question is: What gives him the right to make the decision of who lives and who dies? When the police rest someone, they don't immediately execute them in the street (They're not supposed to anyways). The police have the authority to arrest people, which is given to them by the government. The government is given the power to give them this authority by the people, and the laws of the country. Would you be in favor of a military state, where the police/military were in charge and decided everything by virtue of being the ones with the biggest guns? can you seriously tell me you would support that?
"Hey, Captain, your team's power is immense, and you have proven to be irresponsible with the destruction you cause. We should keep you in check." "How dare you call me irresponsible?! I'm starting a war to prove you wrong!"
Diana, the Inorganic Vegan Funny though that in the video he said that Iron man was in the complete and obvious wrong and yet you manage to make it seem like Cap is justified. Things aren't necessarily black and white with this movie and that's what I love about it.
I loved this movie and its plot and I dont think iron man was as massive a dick as you say he was. I actually think spiderman was perfect in every way and this is the best marvel movie. GOAT
The thing is, Spiderman is a young teenager. That's his character, poorly mis-represented in so many other adaptions because they cast 30-year-old's to play him. He's an actual kid, in the comics, and in this movie. I think they've really done the character justice, making him an actual, entertaining human being.
Eh, I think it's fine the way the MCU works, so long as the movies are entertaining and stand up enough on their own. For the most part, Marvel's done that. Also, it should at least be assumed that if you go to see the 3rd movie in a franchise, you've at least seen one or the two before it.
TO BE FAIR, Iron Man did create Ultron in Avengers 2 which caused plenty of people to die. They may have saved the world, but only from a threat they created so the blood from the casualties is on their, specifically Iron Man’s, hands. Even though the video montage is very stupid, the woman in the hallway does hit pretty hard considering it is directly Tony’s fault that her son is dead.
There's probably two thousand comments praising or condemning you, Adam, but I'd like to think that your observations were informed by how successfully the film was able to get you invested you into it even if it wasn't perfect.
I think Tony's dilemma with being put in check was more based on him almost causing humanity to be destroyed, not him killing a few people while stopping it
While I'd disagree with the Spiderman is annoying bit, I'd say this is pretty spot on. Marvel movies are their own breed, and I think this is one of the only Marvel movies that is a good film not just a good Marvel film.
They say that still, to this day, the camera is still shaking with every fight scene.
I KNOW, I GOT SO DIZZY ;-;
+Spuun the stairway scene was a difficult one to keep track of to begin with given how small a space that is, how little room there is for a camera, and how you have dozens of levels of stairs overlapping each other. the fact that the cameraman had caffeine withdrawals on top of that just gives you a headache
Oh hi, Spuun. Like your vids.
They did have a few wide angles where you could see hits being taken and the choreography but yes, they used too many cuts at some points and shaked the camera a bit too much. Good improvement for hollywood though.
I might get some shit for this but this was so much better than Bourne Supremacy. SO MUCH SHAKY CAM AND SO MANY CUTS IN THAT MOVIE. I didn't even have to be fight scenes. The fucking car chase scene. Specifically in the tunnel. I had to pause and just únderstand what happened.( I haven't seen the third one but since it's the same director as the second movie...I really don't feel like watching it)
The worst thing of all is that when you watch the making off you can actually see them pull off some pretty amazing stunts that could've been done in a single shot. So they're just cutting for the sake of cutting and it's just awful. I mean just put the camera on a bloody tripod and let the team do its work. It would've made for a much better movie. I'm not expecting the Raid, but come on. Marvel has a series running with way better action.
is it just me or does the Iron man CGI look like shit when his helmet is off?
+KillerMonkeyKram YES! Finally someone pointed it out!
+KillerMonkeyKram Shh, don't think about it, it'll break the immersion.
its just you
Me too. Also I know it might have been intentional, but his younger face in that memory VR thing was so strange imo
Ellie Smelly I was too distracted by his mother being played by the same woman who played the fanatical teacher from Wayward Pines.
"Super hero movies are the new pro wrestling" So well put lmfao.
Now I remember why come back to this channel. This guy is like a frustration vacuums. I come here to find out if I'm crazy or something. It really is calming to know that I'm not the only one who sees this bullshit. (I mean in general)
phyak hue Did you just comment on your own comment?
@@jack29724 exactly what I was thinking.
My biggest problem with this movie is that Tony earlier in the film tells the rest of the team about the kid who got killed in Sokovia that drives him to choose the accords, then later recruits a 15 yr old kid to fight a war! It doesn't matter if he has powers that goes against what you stood for before and is highly illogical for putting a child's life in danger
I love these reviews, in the Half in the Bag review rich said captain america is wrong and the movie didn't do a good job explaining where he was coming from or why his views made sense, while on the other hand adam is saying the same thing as criticism only he is agreeing with cap and saying iron man is the undeniably wrong one of the two.
Maybe it's written better than we think :o
+Brock Butler or maybe Rich is a HACK FRAUD
+Brock Butler Or maybe we think so much better than they write, we give it more meaning.
+IxaKnightmare Calling him a HACK FRAUD is a reference to them joking about HACK FRAUDS all the time, so fucking chill.
*****
Ah shit, disregard with apologies.
+YourMovieSucksDOTorg
I said this in another reply. But Rich takes up the viewpoint that the "sane" view would be for people to keep these super humans, weirdos and gods in check, because they could destroy entire nations with a snap of the finger. That it would make more sense for people to look into ways to take these people down should they decide to go rogue or try to take control. Because they wield so much power.
So from Rich perspective, it makes sense for people to want to keep super human/gods in line and make sure they respect the sovereignty of the states they function in. So far no Comic movie has really wanted to tackle this plot (Batman V Superman poorly alludes to the idea), and that's because these movies are supposed to be fun and entertaining.
Most comic fans take up the view that the hundreds of thousands of people killed, and millions of dollars of damage - is justified collateral because they saved the world.
I saw this YMS Quickie and it was good! And by "good" I mean "as good as it possibly can be without straying away from the YMS Quickie-of-a-Marvel-movie formula whatsoever."
Lmao Savage
lol! Best comment.
I think YMS sometimes expects things to be bad or just okay and goes along with it ignoring the glorious bits and the new stuff in the plot. Civil War, for me, is a breakthrough in Marvel movies with its plot.
J. F.G I give your response a 6/10, the same rating I give every comment I've ever read.
+J. F.G agreed. If anything, it couldn't be further from the so called "Marvel Formula". But I guess if you go into the theater wanting to hate this movie, you'd hate this movie. Still, I really don't understand what's the point of watching a movie nitpicking it or thinking, "I'm sure/I hope this movie will suck" the very first time you watch it. Wtf, I mean, you're actually spending your money on the movie, and you're hating it just because you already thought that you're gonna hate it when you watch it.
I noticed he does this with some games too. Like, he thought the voice acting for TellTales The Walking Dead was bad for some reason. -_- I still like Adam and watch his vidoes, and he's probably one of my favs. Might even invest a bit in his patreon. but it seems the only way he can give a positive review is if something is overly artsy, thought or 'Genius'. For some reason Hardcore Henry is a exception. Like, in this case, it doesn't help that he's not really into super hero flicks, but he can at least notice how good everything was directed and maybe do a bit more research on the 'Formula' of Marvel. Since, in my opinion and most critics, this varies greatly when things were just starting to get stale for me. Like, Ant-Man was good, but its plot was generic and reminded me a lot of Iron Man 1. And most super-hero movies seem to be super generic like, 'Oh, problems. Villian. Good guy wins. Rushed in love interest'
There is no villain here, and deeper themes are present.
Anybody else notice that Don Cheadle's character was ALSO the same one to be injured and side-lined in Avengers Age of Ultron? Its almost like they're indicating that he's a pointless disposable character and yet are unwilling to dispose of him for the sake of keeping tension in their movies.
I tried explaining to a friend that War Machine (Don Cheadle) should have died but he kept insisting there is still a lot to do with the character. However, like you say they aren't doing much with the character besides having him be a glorified punching bag
+onmas909 That's Marvel's reasoning for not killing off Nick Fury, but "character potential" in Marvel movies basically is the same as action figure value at this point.
I forgot he was even in the movie besides the party scene honestly...
They should start killing characters. I mean would be interesting if the winter soldier died. Maybe some kind of sacrifice and then Tony sees the error of his ways.
Scrub Lord Doubt it. Tony's character arc in Civil War was not "Hmmm, maybe I should stop being a vindictive asshole that makes terrible decisions", it was "I'll continue to be a vindictive asshole who makes terrible decisions but instead direct it at people who deserve it slightly more". Then again, Caps arc was "I'm right and the resposibile one and am still right and the responsible one at the end of the movie when I go save all my friends while tony sits on his ass hanging up on the secretary of defense in a snarky sarcastic way."
3:37
drama drama drama drama drama chameleooooon
PICK A SIDE PICK A SIDE PICK A SIDE
+A-2807205 Pikacide: The darker reboot of your favorite Pokémon.
+Jonathan Medina Funny how that's only the marketing and most people are not really taking sides yet YMS is heavily anti Iron Man.
midgetwars1
My thoughts precisely.
Picacide or Genocide!!
That pro wrestling/superhero movie comparison might have changed my life.
I can never watch a superhero movie again.
Pro-Wrestling is honestly better.
I picture cm punk as iron man now
I disagree with one thing
Even though we may not have seen Tony playing ball with the man in previous films, I think this film did a half decent job of showing why Tony decided to sign the agreement.
Guilt can be a very powerful emotion and can completely change a person. especially someone like Tony who isn't a soldier or a warrior.
Adum also makes it seem like a conspiracy that BvS and Civil War both came out in an election year, but the comics for both have been out for about a decade, so it's really just a coincidence. It's a really good objective review aside from those points.
+Armoured Skeptic I mean, his hubris was the entire reason Age of Ultron even happened. He left thousands of people homeless or dead. He's kind of got a really, really good reason to be in favour of regulation.
+Armoured Skeptic And they DO set up the guilt very well, they show it in AoU and IM3.
Hey Skeptic! I love u and Shoes content! Keep it comin man!
+Armoured Skeptic "Tony who isn't a soldier or a warrior." BullShit.
"I wanted to see black panther" anyone who watch Adams vlogs knows why that's funny...
+Lectar117 I'm watching it for the plot ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+YourMovieSucksDOTorg dat plot doe
YourMovieSucksDOTorg I noticed all the character development on his crotch too :)
+Lectar117 furry stuff?
dere he is
Your Movie Sucks: I can't believe that anyone believes that Iron Man's side makes any sense.
Rich Evans: I can't believe that anyone believes that Captain America's side makes any sense.
+Flip.555 Right? That's exactly what I said!
Z Max Im so sorry mate but I wanted to post it from the RLM vid because I didnt see it on this one jus tto see what people would think.
+Flip.555 It's no prob Bob
Because both sides are correct but there's a lot more nuance than the movie gives the debate. Yes, the Avengers need "oversight" but Yes, they also need the ability to do their super human stuff without having to wait for a vote.
The middle ground is correct, ex: there needs to be something making sure Tony Stark doesn't make an evil AI that tries to destroy the world with no one else saying "hey, maybe this needs a few more checks and balances"; But, they also need to be able to take immediate action with insane power in extreme circumstances
So yeah, "they saved the entire world from the evil AI" but Tony Stark made that evil AI so yes he holds some responsibility for all those deaths BUT deserves credit for helping "save the world"(many times) too - This is why Tony agrees, he understands the AI was his creation that maybe could have been avoided with "oversight". Both sides are right to a certain degree but the movie does a terrible job of explaining the details in the limited time it has to spend on not punching things.
WAAYYY late to this, sorry.
Everyone was friends at the end? I guess I watched a different movie.
Well Cap seemed to make amends with Tony with that "call me when you need me" thing.
+McKnighty Thats what the letter implied
Strider119119 That was more of a, "call me when shit gets real" kinda thing.
McKnighty Infinity War mwahahaha
Yeah thanks for telling two fucking years later.
Tony's character is all over the place in these movies. In avengers he's having a good time and cracking jokes. In iron man 3 he acts like the events in avengers traumatized him and he pretty much gives up being iron man. in age of ultron he acts like none of that happened and reverts back to normal. But in civil war he is ravaged by guilt even though civilians have been dying since iron man 1. in iron man two he does every thing he can to keep his tech out of government hands and know he just wants to give government full control over the avengers.
+Hoss Delgado Tony is the way he is in Civil War because Ultron was his responsibility. He created an AI that was hell bent on killing the human race.
Newbius93 he was even more messed up is iron man 3 and he didn't seem to effected by the event of the avengers until that movie
Because Iron Man 3 came after the events of The Avengers.
Newbius93 I know, but in avengers he didn't do anything emotionally scaring even at the end of the movie he was still cracking jokes. But in iron man 3 he is a total wreck. But then in age of ultron he is back to his old self. He switches from care-free to emotionally scared 3 times between avengers, iron man 3, age of ultron, and civil war.
He wasn't cracking too many jokes when the big battle in New York took place. Before then, yeah he had quips left and right. And he did have his serious moments in Age of Ultron. He explained to the team that the vision he had from Scarlet Witch driven to the brink of fearing another invasion, which drove him into creating Ultron. Civil War is when he's starting to become a lot more serious then before. For starters, Pepper and Tony separated, and he began to feel the weight of his actions when the Ultron incident took place, because that was entirely on him. It's like a repeat of his past mistakes with Iron Man 1, but on a bigger scale. His weapons and equipment fell into the hands of terrorists, and then his creation of Ultron
1.Iron Man wanted to kill Bucky because he killed his parrents.
2.The Avengers were torn apart at the end of the movie.
3.The reason why there werent any avengers in Winter Soldier, was because Captain America was a fugtive and was being monitored by Hydra. Which is why he gets help
from Falcon because he wasnt part of the Avengers crew.
4.Spider-Man was freaking awesome.
good points
But a news chopper caught him being arrested. You think Captain America being arrested would make some interesting headlines? You think Tony Stark would see that on the news and investigate?
BilboB points 1 and 3 are good, point 2 and 4, meh.
a shame how spider-man turned out in ffh tho. didnt like him there.
>I liked spiderman when he wasn't an obnoxious child
but spiderman is an obnoxious child
+Sam B Yeah, an obnoxious adult
+Sam B He literally explains that he does his "banter" (being annoying) as a tactic while fighting. He's still like that to this day.
also as I'm assuming YMS is referring to the rami movies "You're the one whos out gobby"
Well then the comics sucks
Jossy FTW Not really. They're loads better than the Raimi/Webb bullshit. Nothing they did really added more to the character
We all know Adam would've given this a higher score if the issue they were all fighting about was whether or not people could fuck animals.
lol good one dude
Ouch haha
Given how many superheroes have their powers based around animals, it would make sense
is he a furry?
+Surge Protector yes
It's not correct to say that everyone is friends again at the end of the movie. It's absolutely spelled out that Tony Stark hates Steve Rogers.
+oohgoditsbees That letter seemed to have smoothed things over quite a bit though.
+Hagar TheHonorable It really didn't. Sure Captain America doesn't hold anything against Tony but you can clearly see Tony doesn't seem all too happy about the letter. Hell, he didn't even pick up the burner phone. In fact Tony still seemed pissed at the end just by his facials alone.
+Xavior Nieves But he let Cap break criminals out of a federal facility because of that letter
+Key Maker Actually no. The break out happned way after Tony got the letter. Plus Tony didn't agree to have them prisoner in the Raft. (or at least I think that's the Raft) He even said to Ross he didn't expect them to be out there as its a prison for high level criminals and psychopaths, like Kilgrave.
Xavior Nieves So Tony even had time to think about how he feels about what happened and still let them break criminals out of a government facility?
"Everyone's friends again at the end of the movie."
...Not really. Tony was still really pissed off at Cap.
+YoshiPlaysMC Not to mention that the Avengers were still severely fractured int he end, meaning that the bad guy actually won and this movie doesn't end neat and tidy like how it happens in most other cliché superhero movies. This film is so far very exceptional to most, if not all, others.
+George Henry literally laughed at your comment. Lol good shit. but he minus well had looked at the camera and said that because that's how they treat the end of the movie.
I'm glad he put some respect on the movie. I thought Adam would give the movie a look like "I'm pulling up on you".
*respeck
+Morris Ratliff you is right... Hoo!
+Morris Ratliff nice meme
memes
+Reginald Goudeau god i fucking love memes
He just said ,"I liked Spider-Man when he wasn't an obnoxious child."
So you're saying you liked Spider-man when he wasn't Spider-Man.
beat me to it
Chris Cuevo I can understand he's not the big fan of the genre. But at least know the characters.
+Chance Goss Spider-man hasn't been a child in the comics for decades, ultimate bullshit notwithstanding, and even that was in 2000
Te habla el Joel Chiguire First of Ultimate Spider-Man was great. Second, they're trying to start him from the beginning again but the right way. They want Peter to actually grow and experience things on high school which he hasn't done in the previous movies.
Well the 90s animated series and the comics based on that beg to differ. Also, the Raimi movies
Peter Parker has always been an obnoxious child. It sounds like this movie finally gets him right instead of having a thirty year old man play a high school kid.
But for some reason they got the ages flipped. In civil war he's supposed to be around 30 years old and played by a 15 year old
+Hayden Mof no
+Adam Cunningham He's right, I think Peter is like 28 during Civil War (comics).
+Hayden Mof They wanted to introduce a spiderman with limited experience and young age so he could be manipulated. You're not wrong, but I think the change was necessary. Plus, who really wants ANOTHER mature spidey. Not me.
+Tactical Ace Yeah but lets be honest that comic sucks
Even though I'm Team Cap, I still understood where Iron Man was coming from, and it was nice to finally see them acknowledge the collateral damage from the previous movies. That was really my biggest criticism of the other Marvel movies, that we barely (if ever) saw any innocent people die unless it was an important plot point. Usually, every time innocent people were in danger, at least one of the Avengers would intervene in time to put a stop to it. I know that they're supposed to be superheroes, but they're still supposed to be vulnerable enough for us to have some connection with them and for us to be concerned for their safety. So, it was nice that we finally got to see the Avengers failing to stop some of these events, and acknowledging that there were casualties for the previous films.
Let me please say that Tony did just find out that Bucky/Winter had killed his mom - In my opinion he was blinded by rage.
And also, Spider-Man's supposed to be an obnoxious kid. This guy (I don't know his name) Is certainly better than Toby McGuire or Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man.
Just my two cents on the subject, you're free to think your own way though, Adam.
"Never trust a stark" - Ant Man
Best quote ever!
Iron Man's point is better illustrated in the comics, but it's basically the same, and it's not as stupid as you're making it out to be. It's not just that the Avengers should be put in line because they're too stupid to make their own decisions, it's that superheroes in general should be put in line. Having powers doesn't inherently mean you have good judgement. In the comics this is more of an issue because there are a lot of wannabe Avengers running around causing more harm than good, but regardless I think don't think it's a totally unreasonable opinion to have.
+Jordan Del Colle Yeah, from the looks of it the movie didn't show the destruction that a small group of heroes could create. The comic showed that a small incident could have major consequences, and that humans with _supernatural abilities_ shouldn't be doing stupid things to put entire cities in danger.
But that's beside the point. The movie civil war has no relation whatsoever to the comic civil war (other than the characters). Beside, the UN is a bunch of hypocrites in the movie and this part should be more stressed out in the movie. These douchenozzles who claim they don't want civilian casualties, were more than happy to nuke New York that hadn't been properly evacuated when the aliens invaded in the first avengers.
Even Chris Evans in the European Press says he believes Iron Man is right.
+John Titor Of course he does, he's a Hollywood actor. Do you expect him to be anything more than a braindead socialist who clamors for government regulation at every opportunity?
Nope,Tony is a piece of shit in CW comics.
Adam reveals that he doesn't watch pro-wrestling.
rly
+9ssgoku Woah, calm down. You seem to be kind of ignorant.
+9ssgoku No. That's not how logic works.
9ssgoku Okay kid.
Yeah another idiot who thinks he knows everything when he knows nothing
You miss when spiderman wasn't an obnoxious child? So you miss when spiderman wasn't spiderman?
Savage
+Revanaught so when he was a teenage loser in love with a hotty while being obnoxious????? cause..... hate to break the news to you. but there never was a spiderman product not like that
+DeathgGod man how the fuck was andrew garlfield's peter parker a loser? He was a handsome, well dressed, genius in a relationship with emma stone. Tom holland and peter parker were dirt poor with a desire to save people, and maintain a normal life. Sure tobey got with mary jane, but that relationship was hardly perfect, and he couldn't be with her because of the villains that could hurt her. Andrew garfield was not a loser. He was a hipster with model status hair who got to fuck emma stone.
+leo50perez wasn't a loser? is ignored in school and gets the jocks to bully him. you're right, he became a loser midway into the film then got Emma after that. but honestly that film is so anti peter parker it hurts
+DeathgGod lol true.
I kept finding this really cute in the movie when they kept talking about the UN like it's actually an organization worthy of respect. The cringe was strong.
Edgy m8
+LunaticThinker I know right!!! #OneWorldGovernment #LiberalPlot
Enthios A. E. Cooper it's edgy to think that the organization that decides to put Saudi Arabia in charge of their human right panel might be fucked up? Golly gee!
LunaticThinker No, but commenting about it on a video about a Captain America movie is.
+A. E. Cooper
HOW DARE YOU COMMENT IN THE COMMENT SECTION!
Too be fair Spider-Mans teenage years of crime fighting were quite literally him being an annoying kid.
Looking forward to YMS: Batman v Superman
+YS Kim (Shiny Breeder) I really wanna know what he thinks of BvS, I have been nagging him through UA-cam messages to do a quickie on it ever since its release lol
"Please just kill one of them!"
Well, boy, do I have good news for you.
The big flaw for me was the presence of the accords in the first place. It's execution was dumb in the comic, and it's probably what bogged this movie down the most. If it had just been about the team getting divided over what to do with Bucky, it would have worked better.
I have a feeling that's what the Russos wanted to do, but they were probably mandated to throw in the ham-fisted political bits to make it more like the comic. I wonder how much better it would play if someone did a fan-edit that just removed all mentions of the damn thing.
I know this was made 3 years ago but I gotta acknowledge it cause this is the only comment I’ve seen in three years regarding this point. Like the accords are brought up for less than half an hour then never mentioned again. Like they just forgot about it completely. And I don’t see the point of it when the team would be divided by Zemos plan anyway.
Adam, watch out! You said that a superhero movie was alright-- and provided valid criticisms to support your position-- instead of hailing it as a masterpiece. Prepare for the dislikes and the number of fanboys that will question your competence as a film critic.
People just seem to hate when someone doesn't give a film exactly what they expected, where as Adam actually seemed to like it more than I would have thought 😄
ehhh I really wouldn't say they were friends at the end
Tony Stark made Ultron, so he was responsible for the Sokovia deaths, that's why it makes sense he wouldn't reject the accords. People forget that even though he signed, he went rogue in the third act and did his own thing. Imagine how much grief Captain would've saved himself if he just signed and went to go save Bucky anyway. Team Iron Man!!!!!
Tony's reaction at the end was totally understandable, just like Winter Soldier's rampage was understandable, but would it have been worth it if Tony or Black Widow got shot in the face when he was set loose? Cap was too emotionally close to the situation, how many times did Winter Soldier almost kill someone while he was trying to help him?
"You're using blind luck to justify nearly getting your crew killed ..." - Star trek Into Darkness.
What???? you had to watch the first two captain america movies to know whats going on in the third??? I didnt know thats how sequels worked???
MrJoe1928 THANK YOU!
I think the Sokovia Accords dilemma is more because Iron Man (Ultron) and Hulk who create/act without consent or controle of their power. So Age of Ultron set up Civil War and I understand why Cap doesn't want to take resposibility for their actions...
+Sebastian Reng [includes slight spoilers]
Actually, the Sokovia Accords is more of a direct response of Wanda more than just Tony and Bruce. You have to take into consideration that if Wanda hadn't shown him his deepest fear (the people he care about, the Avengers in particular, dead because he couldn't protect them), then Ultron wouldn't have been created. So when put into perspective, Captain America is actively supporting the side of the argument that is actually the cause of most of the issues. That's not even getting into the discussion of Steve actively knowing that Bucky killed Tony's parents and withheld that information.
"I liked it better when he wasn't an obnoxious child" dude that it literally what spiderman is, why are people even complaining about this, he's a 15 year old, so he's going to act as most 15 year olds would.
Exactly what I was thinking.
unsubscribed tbh I thought Spiderman hit a nice tone
+Enjoy the Decline that's not the point. the character is a comic book character. its called acting to play a role
Gettin' pretty damn tired of that obligatory "Oh don't worry; there are no innocents in these buildings" line. Every goddamn superhero movie feels the need to do it. I get that loss of life sucks and 9/11 was a thing, but does anybody actually go "Oh, ok. Good" when they hear that line? Does that not take everyone totally out of the experience, when the movie's going "Well, all of downtown Metropolis is being leveled by an eldritch abomination with laser-eyes, but don't worry; the city should be almost empty at this hour." ?
You're kind of missing the point of the destruction meaning anything if all the collateral damage is monetary.
Batman V Superman totally did do it. Man of Steel was I think the lone exception to this trend, granted, but it happened twice in BvS during the fight with low-rent Cave Troll Doomsday. First time it was the clip of Anderson Cooper on CNN going "oh god there's a spooky thing in Metropolis, but the downtown core is basically empty so there shouldn't be many casualties", and then later when they lure him to this island, they also make the point "There shouldn't be anybody there".
I can at least excuse the second time as common sense, but there seems to be this really hard-wired desire for superhero movies to have no lasting consequences for any of the shit that goes down.
Regarding Tony being a bit of a dick in this film, that's how he's been since Iron Man 1. If you haven't got used to it now, you probably never will. It's evident in the ending fight as well, although I feel his rage at that point was understandable, but that's probably just me. I mean, if you saw some random asshole kill your parents, you'd want him dead too, especially if you never got to make peace with those parents like Stark did. That's the whole reason they show the hologram at the beginning, to remind people that Tony isn't happy with his last interactions with his dad.
Then again I'm a Marvel fanshit so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
Honestly. I felt the movie wasn't being fair enough for Iron Man character. Granted he's a man that wants to do things in humanity's best interest but other attributing factors keep derailing it. He tried to make Iron Men suits to behave as peace keepers and there is always collateral damage.
Too much was done to him to the point some friends I know don't like him at all.
I feel that the his his estranged relationship with his father was pretty well developed from Iron Man 2. Tony saw the need to try to make a defense system to protect the planet with Ultron. It can be compared to when his father worked on the Manhattan project. A weapon to end wars but is corrupted by outside forces.
Something I think that could have been expressed with Captain America is for him to see his convictions be completely challenged. Such as a with the climax of his fight with Iron Man to be in a very public place. So civilians who side with Iron Men or Captain America can help show perspective.
For the review, I feel that YMS forgot to mention this was probably the most effective villain that caused this whole friction between the Avengers encountered so far.
***** You gotta expect it though, he's clearly gone through some fucked up shit and it's making him act irrationally.
Avengers: infinity war part 1, directed by George r. r. Martin.
lelz
+mand0rk omfg that would be brutal
+mand0rk The bad guys win because they killed all the good guys at the wedding of Hulk and Black Widow.
+mand0rk Avengers: Infinity War Part 2, directed by Robert Kirkman.
Directed by Osama bin Laden
What I find hilarious about Civil War is how strong the central argument truly is. Every single critic I know who belittles the main conflict of the movie does so with a very biased opinion on who is 'obviously' right, and there's about an even 50/50 split between them all. Half of them argue about how Captain America is acting like a petulant child with no accountability and the other half about how Iron Man is a hypocritical fascist. And they all say that the movie is trying so hard to create a false conflict, while making it readily apparent that it's a solid one by being part of a cadre of cynical critics taking an incredibly hardline stance on it, to the point of treating the 'other side' as ridiculous. It's fascinating.
So much this!!! I love how every critic is so convinced that the side they don't agree with is implausible and contrived and yet you really could break them down 50/50. They don't have any idea how many people think the other way. The central conflict is almost too good for its own good and people don't realize how differently other people can think.
It was fun seeing Rich Evans from Red Letter Media say that Stark's side was obviously the right one, and Adam saying the exact opposite. With none of them really giving any arguments other than "it's so obvious". (Not that Rich Evans necessarily plans out his reviews to any worthwhile depth.)
I'm a loser, I love comics, I get hyped superhero movies, I liked this one a lot but yeah Tony's side in this whole thing was clearly wrong yet you're set up to feel bad for him the entire time. The framing in this movie is completely one sided, I suppose to balance out the fact that Tony has serious mental issues and is clearly wrong and needs a break and a therapist. We spend 3 scenes watching his parents die, we watch him talk about how his parent's death fucked him up and we spend a a lot time panning to his face, his black eye and tired eyes (while Cap looks in pristine condition). But we're supposed to ignore him and laugh as he manipulates a teenager into a dangerous fight, and forget the fact that Ultron was HIS FAULT and we don't get any shots of any of the collateral damage caused in his movies at all. Who in their right mind actually would believe that the government (which spent the past bunch of movies infiltrated by a rogue Nazi organization) should actually be able to control the Avengers without some fucked up agenda, who the fuck is supposed to believe that anyone would actually listen to Ross after he slapped down a giant packet and expected them to read it thoroughly and sign it in 3 DAYS, a man who clearly has a beef with superheros and does not think they deserve human rights. Captain America asks about lawyers and he is scoffed at and we are just supposed to be okay with that? Despite all of this, there are still people who walked out of that theater on Tony's side, I've had to unfollow a shit ton of critics, I understand that you don't like these types of movies but I'm glad I can still get a truthful and objective opinion from you.
+YungBitchPudding Not like that. It's actually about giving superheroes official training, rather than just muddle through world crises.
The comic made a lot more sense as it included a huge event where a city was destroyed because of the carelessness of some younger superheroes. As Tony was the one funding all superhero work, he was put under the pressure of the general public. As a result, they decided to make officially sanctioned superheroes across the world, with government knowledge, support, funding, and even improved weaponry (i.e. spiderman's advanced combat suit). It's nothing like just letting the government tell them what to do, which is what Captain misconstrued it to be in the first place. Captain even said at the end of the comic when he realised he was wrong "We're winning the fight, but what are we even fighting for?"
The movie got it completely skewed. Completely
+joey obyrne i totally agree i felt the comics made wayyy more sense and at least made you question either side but the movie had to do it in very little time with less heros and it just came off really stupid to me but i still liked it mostly because of the action but tony came off as such an emotional ass
+YungBitchPudding To be fair, it was like that in the comics too. Iron man was made to look like a douche, Cap was made to be on the right side-- because mah freedoms. Ultimate Alliance actually does it a little better, with amendments being made to the Registration act so that it doesn't sound like Hitler wrote it.
Captain America is an agent of Hydra.
Not for long
I was watching like DAMN Crossbones looks sick Aaaaaaaannnnnddddd hes gone. Forever
I really enjoy spider being as a kid in this movie. maybe it's just cause i'm young so i relate more but I think it's a nice change of pace to have a kid instead of just a bunch of adults in their mid forties
It's always distracting when they cast some 40 year old as a teenager.
The only thing that this new Spider-man can't top is the dancing scene from Spider-Man 3.
Such a great scene.
"Just kill ironman already"
Oh well
Adam did you miss the part where iron man finds out Bucky killed his dad? The climax isn't as pointless as you made it sound.
Also killing off a character just for the sake of showing off the guts to do so isn't such a great idea.
it does add some emotional heft and it does keep the audience more invested. Just look at Game of Thrones- you literally hold your breath any time any character enters a dangerous situation because you fear they might die- well, at least before the new writers took over.
totally agree about Tony though. Conflict be damned, if you visually saw a man beating your father's skull in before choking your mother to death, you wouldn't care about hypocrisy or moral dilemmas, you'd try and tear his fucking throat out!
Exactly. They weren't friends in the end. Cap and Tony didn't just hug it out- Cap sent Tony a letter explaining how he was wrong in withholding the information on his parents' death from him, and that he hoped "one day you'll understand," implying that their friendship isn't just fixed because the conflict has gone away (in fact it hasn't gone away, Cap said he wish they agreed on the contract, so that further proves my point). There were actual consequences to the "civil war," just not death disappointingly.
John Smith that's what raised Civil War up a notch despite the lack of heroes dying- they did lose. Technically. The "bad guy's" plan worked. The fact that they then turned the tables and you end up understanding the "bad guy" was another aspect of the film I really liked. We live in a world that is rarely black or white and good writing should reflect that.
"I liked spiderman better when he wasn't an obnoxious child" - So then never? Because from the comics inception spiderman was a slick talking child. They literally nailed the origin of Spiderman. And also they are NOT all friends at the end of the film at all. Literally wrong.
What he means is that he likes the Sam Raimi Spiderman movies better than any other depiction of him
I guess that just means he's not a Spider-Man fan because "obnoxious child" is a major part of his character lol.
iron man could catch a dozen people falling out of an airplane but one dude free falling right next to him and his armor can't compute
I personally don't see much of a difference between Spidey in this movie and Adum on his gaming channel.
And that's important because?
Electric Eye Just an observation, my dear.
Jacob De Paz, so, pointless for a movie review. Great, my dear.
Electric Eye That would be a relevant point (was it even a point?) if I were the one reviewing the film.
Anyway, carry on.
Jacob De Paz, wherever you say. I don't see why it's relevant.
complaining about having to watch other MCU movies to understand Civil War is the same as complaining about having to watch the first 3 seasons of a TV show before you get to the current episodes. *it's ALL connected and chronological.*
The way marvel this is almost reminding me of Shakespeare's history plays. We want to follow the same characters and see how they behave in multiple different situations.
+Darth Terraplex I hope that expecting movies to have decent explanations of their characters without forcing me to watch a two and a half long hour commercial is not holding film makers to too high of standards.
+Yump Bagle Its no different than a trilogy or a series like Harry Potter. If you want basic fun you can jump in without watching the other movies but if you want to get more invested than ya of course you'll need to watch the other parts.
+Darth Terraplex Except the first one costs a lot more and is more of an inconvenience.
Well all I've seen of MCU is Iron Man 1, Thor 1&2 and GotG (Both of the latter having no bearing on CA:CW) and I kept up with CA:CW just fine. A couple times I was like who's that? But you learn the character relationships pretty quick and that's all you need really...
So no, you don't HAVE to watch the previous movies, but it helps obviously.
i enjoyed how they fighting was actually consistent throughout the movie, like how they dont just fight once then work together,( like justice league vs teentitans movie or devil man vscyborg009), If that final scene wasnt in the movie i really like how the bad guy kind of won
You say you disagreed with Tony's stance and I'd say that's exactly what the Russo brothers wanted. This is still a Cap movie. I'd say as long as you can see both character's viewpoints and you side slightly with Cap than mission accomplished. I as a viewer don't agree with Tony but I see what his motivations were. The main complaint of "Tony's an asshole manipulating people" EXACTLY THE POINT.
And Adum you're breaking my heart by preferring old Spidermen to the one the Russo's gave us in this. I love the thwip-quipster.
***SPOILERS***
7:09 Tony is made to watch someone viciously beat his father to death before choking the life out of his mother, only to then find that killer standing right beside him in real life. Just dumb fun everyone! GOOD OL' FASHIONED DUMB FUN!!!
+Cometmoon448 Literally one of the many things that he missed during his watch of the film I think. Civil War is probably the most adult Marvel has been in a while tbh. I made a video about all this because I, for the first time found myself disagreeing with YMS on about everything in this video lol
+Cometmoon448 I think it's because it still is dumb fun compared to a lot of the stuff Adam seems to enjoy. I mean, comparatively, it's not particularly dark or deep or anything like that.
***** True, I just think it's fair to give these films their due instead of writing them off as Superhero schlock etc
Rogelio Rocha what about it was shitty or cringeworthy? I thought it was well formulated and entertaining, so I’d like to know your reasoning.
@Elvick big w
Completely unfair analysis of Iron Man's character. He's retired from being an Avenger (he referred to himself as an "active duty non-combatant", and also is feeling the weight of deaths more than anyone since he is the one who created Ultron in the first place. Not to mention Pepper left him so he was alone and all of his demons were coming back to haunt him. It would make sense that he would want in any way to get a lid on all of the mistakes he had been making. He was definitely somewhat projecting his guilt onto everyone else, but people do that sometimes. It is really the most complex Tony Stark has ever been, in my opinion.
+Anonymous Programmer That still doesn't refute that his motives are a bit ridiculous. Just cause a few civilians died out of a possible 100,000, doesn't mean it makes sense to limit the only people who could actually help, especially since its mostly people who couldn't do much to control them anyways.
+Ty Manning I think Stark is really thinking that all heroes should be evaluated and watched heavily. Some can turn at any point and some have personal issues with others. It's sort of ironic that Iron Man turned out to be the one showing this the most but I think people are overlooking the reason for the UN being needed. I kinda get his point there.
Esteban Maldonado But what could the UN actually do? Even if they all went rogue, collectively they're powerful enough to take down entire armies if they wanted too.
Ty Manning Yeah, ALL. But just like here, they had Iron Man's team act in their behalf. Again, sorta the reason for them. So they know they're on the same team. Just didn't work out that way. Again, I'm not saying it worked or that it really can but I get why they would want it.
Esteban Maldonado They were still somewhat against Stark and his team going against them though. I seem to recall Ross said to Stark "you should be locked up too after that airport fiasco,' or at least something like that.
In Captain America The Winter Soldier Captain America could not trust anyone. He didn't know if he could trust his on team let along the Avengers.
+John Carter
Especially since he knew Stark designed some of the tech for Operation Insight.
The pro wrestling analogy is dead on.
I definitely love your channel, there are plenty of times I disagree with you, particularly with movies like the one you just reviewed, but ultimately it's personal preference like you say. I do think you can be a harsh critic at times but that's what makes me respect the differences we share that much more. Keep following your dreams and have a lovely year
+Coletrain Hetrick Not ALL of it is personal preference. As he stated, it is incredibly formulaic and cheesy, but the parts about certain characters are definitely personal. That's why he said it doesn't affect his overall score of 6/10
6:43 - Well I hope you're happy now Adam.
These movies are like the call of duty of the film industry they churn one out every year and it's pretty much just a reskin of the last.
I agree with you to an extent: it was disappointing to see that no major character was killed in the film, there were multiple plot contrivances, not to mention the film had something of a tonal problem (Most of the characters were content to crack jokes in the supposedly dangerous airport battle, not to mention all pretense of seriousness regarding War Machine's condition was dropped when Stan Lee knocked on the window) but despite these flaws, I think it deserves a 7 from you. It wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination but the fight choreography was excellent, the special effects were great and Tom Holland as Spider man was a very welcome addition. On the whole, I felt it was a very exciting and well made action film that surpasses a classification as average, but that's just my two cents.
best spiderman yet tho
agree
+ВАНЯ hahahahahahaha no..
Adam Madanat bahahahaha yes.
ВАНЯ Thank you for agreeing with me
Adam Madanat well done
"Everyone was friends at the end"
Did we watch the same movie?
"I liked Spider-man better when he wasn't an obnoxious child"
So you've never liked Spider-man (except for Tobey Maguires spider-man maybe)?
I agree with you, except the ending.
SPOILERS BELOW.
When half the Avengers are jailed and need to be busted out of an ocean prison, it's not all bubbly. I don't think Steve and Tony will ever be friends again. On the same side when the chips are down, sure. But when you withhold that your best friend is the guy who murdered your parents, trust is broken.
Also, some of the fight choreography was thanks to the directors of John Wick. I was excited about that.
I felt they captured what Spider-Man was to a T. He was an excited kid, trying to do his best to impress Tony. This version was exactly how I thought he'd be, having grown up reading the comics. He's a kid.
For a summer movie, it was exactly what I expected. Your score is dead on.
the Superhero -wrestling analogy was amazing
+Candy Vegetables and darkness If Adam didn't see the drama in the movie that's disappointing but that doesn't mean he's right (he's wrong) about it just being about the fights.
I watch wrestling for the plot :(
I think Iron man being a hypocrite fit the character very well and also showed the humane side of our favourite hero.
So you're upset about having to see the first two movies in a franchise in order to understand the third movie? That's not just a Marvel thing. That's a thing in general. You won't understand ANY movie past the sequel without having seen the first ones. Don't be an idiot.
+BioWolfProduuctions dont be a fanboy
Tomas Canevaro I'm not being a fanboy. I'm saying you're an idiot if you expect to be able to follow the events of the third installment in a franchise without having seen the other movies.
+BioWolfProduuctions I was thinking the exact same thing. It seems like Adam just turns his brain off when he watches these films but he forgets to flip off his critical switch as well. Like this wasn't a "Oh dude you're being so harsh on something I like, come on!" thing, his statement was just legitimately dumb. His whole rant about how it lines up with the presidential election was moronic too. This movie was shot like 2 years ago and the Civil War arc in the comics is incredibly popular and was always on the table to be made. I haven't seen the film so I don't know about his other criticisms though. Adam unfortunately fulfilled everyone's false perception of him being an overly harsh hipster douchebag with this video.
The airport fight was enjoyable but ridiculously consequence-free, but the two-on-one fight in the third act was the strongest aspect of the film in my opinion.
what do you mean it crippled rhodes
+TySchnydes 23 vision missed lol.
what is so unbelievable about 1. people feeling guilty that their actions killed people even though it was for the greater good and 2. that power needs checks and balances?
+newgarda i think the american culture in general might have a little difficulty dealing with those concepts. they are coming out of it though, slowly
I understand why Tony wants to sign it. I think the main reason is because of Sokovia: he created Ultron, he has the blame for that. But New York? Washington DC? So if the Avengers hadn't stepped in no one would have died?
in the original avengers movie, the UN security counsel ordered a nuclear strike on Manhattan. So why now do they care so much about civilian casualties?
That wasn't the UN. It was the World Security Council........tbh it's pretty much the UN haha
+André TM then why where the other 4 okay with it?
+André TM the unsc doesn't have a leader all decisions most be unanimous.
SHH your confusing the Marvel Movie fanboys they don't even remember that movie anymore
THE UN also funds S.H.I.E.L.D. which in effect funds the Avengers meaning they already have the control they need allready making this movie pointless
YMS-"where the fuck are the other heros in Captain America winter soldier?
ME-iron man has no suits from the events of iron man,thor is on asgard,hulk is trying not to hulk out and kill a town of people somewhere,and Hawkeye is probably setting up his family from age of ultron.YMS great channel but do some research before you hate on superhero films.
Yeah Yeah Yeah Productions WRONG! hulk/banner was counseling aka listening to Tony bitch about what fucked him up when he was young/the whole story of ironman 3 lol about time Tony was done, cap was going to the hospital from getting fucked up then saved by Bucky.
irondrumwork09 by the time captain america was in the hospital the events of iron man 3 had already happened Aka Tony has no more suits until the next movie.Hulk listened to Tony s story so he wouldn't hulk out.He would rather have a few people die by not helping than a bunch of people dying by turning into the hulk.He dosent have COMPLETE control of the hulk until age of ultron.
When I said WRONG I was joking & kept on joking from there... NO SHIT ironman 3 was over before winter soilder happened, that's obvious. But you are wrong by saying that Banner couldn't control the hulk untill AOU. He could control the hulk ever since the End of the incredible hulk.
Banner: "that's my secret Cap... I'm always anger"
Just because it's different actors & two different looking hulk's doesnt mean what happened in IH isn't canon. So yes banner can control hulk for the most part UNTIL they wrote that he couldn't anymore just so they can force a forced hulk black window romance ... Instead of truly developing his character.
Benish Ben yeah.acording to captain america civil war,the mcu closely follows real world time.in Iron man 3(2013) tony destroys the suits at the end of the year of 2013 (winter)captain america 2 happens spring of the next year (after tony has no suits)
Benish Ben 1.thors on asgard,widow or hawkeye wouldnt be much help and even if they were tony can't communicate with them and even if he could he needs to focus all of his time and resources on finding the Mandarin not waste time contacting team members that will take hours at the very least I show up.Same thing with hulk. Captain America doesn't exactly have a smartphone so contacting him is time consuming.Plus hes busy with fitting in with normal people.2 if every time an Avenger shows up whenever another Avenger needed help there would be no solo movies,just 10 minute movies of thor coming in to beat winter soldier in one punch,basically it would be boring if the avengers showed up in iron man 3.#3 The Avengers can't fight together all the time they need the personal space and their views of how the fight are very different to fight together all the time unless there are aliens falling from the sky again and they probably prefer to fight alone.4 when falcon and widow show up in cap 2,no one says a thing,but when hulk dosent show up in iron man 3 to do more damage than good everyone loses their minds
Vigilante justice? Wtf. No he wanted to kill Bucky out of anger for killing his parents
that is vigilante justice dumbass
I never considered the marvel movies cinematic masterpieces. They are exactly as he put it, dumb fun. They're a lot of fun to watch despite their flaws and i enjoyed this one a lot.
Another thing that was incredibly idiotic about this movie: They talk about how civilian casualties were all The Avengers' fault but if you re-watch the first Avengers movie you see the same people trying to nuke the city in order to stop Loki. But no, the Avengers need to be put in check.
did you get a new mic? the audio sounds slightly different in this video
+rinnyvinny I'm out of town with some friends and made this video in a hotel with a different mic. Good ears.
YourMovieSucksDOTorg oooh,i see. i kinda thought i was just imagining things. thanks!
+YourMovieSucksDOTorg the revnant was a pretencious piece of dog shit with no story other then i survived rhis the bad guy killed this so am going to get revenge art
+YourMovieSucksDOTorg lets be honest here this movie is great you dont like it cuz you perfer movies that features people cutting there vains listening to goth music and thinking about comiting suicide
+Humberto Mendoza Because heaven forbid YMS has different taste in movies than you.
He even said he liked the movie. Is he not allowed to like something without criticizing it????
Damn imagine if he saw BVS
+Flip.555 The review would just be "0/10" *END*
He'd most definitely hate it.
+rfxone marvall Um...No. The movie was just plain bad, and this one tried to be good and succeeded.
+rfxone marvall No, I think he's going to make a YMS on it because it's probably one of the worst movies this year.
1:00 The movie takes place over 3 days, no hero could rush in in that short amount of time
i was really disappointed that captain america didnt die at the end, kind of made everything for nothing
Well Captain America DID die... symbolically. It's why Steve showed up in normal clothing when saving his other friends from that prison. Captain America is gone, but Steve isn't.
+EsechavaHD since he was brought back in the comics they could have tied in the reborn series story in one of the films, it's just classic marvel being too shit scared to kill off a character because it may get negative reviews. Which would be the complete opposite since it what fans wanted and non-fans wouldnt have expected
+EsechavaHD is ep 7 force awakens? i thought that film was a crappy rehash of the first one
I'm sad that nobody died.
I actually liked this version of Spider-man. I feel like he's closer to what I think of regarding that character, even if he is for some reason 15.
It's because that's how old he was when he started in the source material. Marvel are just reflecting that.
Blunderbuss Reviews I can always count on these films to teach me something new about these familiar characters.
Peter parker is 17-18 and a senior in high school when his comics started. But you know what? The age isn't what's important. It is the attitude, the dorky jokes, constant banter, and the will to keep protecting people that are important.
I meant to add that Holland is capturing this pretty well in Civil War.
I think they might me taking inspiration from the Ultimate comics, where Peter started out as Spider-man when he was 15.
When I heard about this movie I always though captain America and Ironmans rolls would be the opposite of what they are. Steve Rodgers just seems like the more obedient of the two characters
+Pretty Much Cap is an idealistic character who is all about doing what he thinks is right. Not what others think is right. I think Tony is more of a realist. Ideally, these heroes should be able to operate freely without any authorities to respond to. Realistically, is it really a good idea to let these characters who are basically gods have free reign over the world?
In a way, these accords would violate the constitution (which Cap is against) but are probably necessary (Team Iron Man)
+Brett Arnott yeah but his actions in Ultron totally contradict his stance. Every causality in Ultron was basically 100% his fault. Cap then should have been like "ok fuck you Iron Man we are signing this shit so we don't have a repeat of Ultron."
+Pretty Much I think their positions are meant to be ironic for dramatic purposes.
+Brett Arnott the way I see it, the the serum flowing through caps veins is government property. If he doesn't want the government to tell him what to do with THEIR property then he should have it removed from his veins. Also, iron man is basically a guy with a weapon of mass destruction in his basement.
+jessica paws the comic sucked too though
EDIT: SPOILERS BELOW
Iron Man wasn't trying to kill Bucky at the end because of "vigilante justice" or whatever you said, he didn't give a shit about any justice, he just wanted to kill him because he was pissed. He had just found out Bucky killed his parents AND that his good friend Cap kept it from him all this time as well, so that's gotta hurt. I felt really bad for Tony in this movie. And he recruited Spider-Man not only to help him take down Cap's team but also it was like an audition for him to see if he could be in the Avengers someday. And I don't see why a lot of people think Tony Stark is still an asshole. Do you really take him that seriously? Yeah he's narcissistic sometimes but it's obviously harmless comedy.
And how exactly was Spider-Man obnoxious? I feel like you're one of those people who sees any character that's lighthearted and fun to be "obnoxious and annoying" and anyone dark, serious and gritty as being "mature and realistic".
+bashbro1able What can I say? The real world can be a cruel place oftentimes.
No but dose every one know who Spider-Man is buy the end like in the comic?
Mind Gaz I'm not sure what you mean, but maybe everyone will by the end of Spider-Man: Homecoming next year.
Actually cap didn't know it was Bucky, he just knew it was someone in shield(hydra), that's why he said he kind of knew.
Rolando Castillo Good point
I think people misunderstand the whole "we need to be kept in check"thing. It's not so much "you need to have the government's permission and go through 6 months of red tape before getting that cat out of the tree" but more "holy shit, these people could literally destroy the entire planet if they felt like it, maybe we should have some sort of official system in place"
+Nickolas Marchuk And I felt like people are missing the point that the potentially world-ending events correlate to the creation of the Avengers. The idea is that the existence of the weaponry and power the Avengers hold allow inspire and create dangerous enemies. Ultron wouldn't have even been a thing if it weren't for Stark.
+Nickolas Marchuk People aren't misunderstanding it at all. The whole thing is an incredibly stupid idea, who would want a government that has very clearly been infiltrated and influenced by Hyrdra to be allowed to decide when the Avengers can and can't save people?
Nothing about the accord keeps the avengers in check, it just turns them into a weapon to do the governments bidding.
The Sokovia Accords is basically an allegory for The Patriot Act wherein people driven by emotion gave up important freedoms an liberties to people with questionable intentions that couldn't be trusted with that power. Tony Stark is very clearly an emotional driven person that doesn't think about the larger ramifications of the things he does so obviously he supports the accords but if you look at the bigger picture it really isn't a good idea. People that have bad intentions will still do bad things except now The Avengers have to look up to big brother for permission to intervene and hope that big brother doesn't have anything to gain from bad people doing bad things.
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
Dragonbrad So... what are we supposed to do then? Comparing the situation described in the comics and movies to real life is inaccurate. We're talking about gods among men, one of them a literal god. What could any regular people possibly do to oppose them? The avengers are good, but if they had a change of heart they could literally destroy the earth on a whim. Having a system in place that monitors them, and having them answer to SOMEBODY at least would make the situation a whole lot safer. Sure, the avengers could all be angels in human form, but as the saying goes: power corrupts. And these are people with very literal absolute power
Nickolas Marchuk Power does corrupt and giving the government and hydra more power is not a good idea.
The solution to the problem is not to hand over the responsibility to other equally corruptible people.
What do you do? Nothing. The Sokavia Accord already does nothing to stop rogue super beings from destroying shit. No one that actually want's do to do anything nefarious has a reason to get permission from the government.
Doing something like the Sokovia Accord only makes good peoples job more difficult.
If any of Avengers went rogue they would go rogue with or without the Sokovia accord, there is no reason for it to exist.
The odds of all the Avengers going rogue at once are slim to none and there will always be other heroes there to stop any that go rogue.
What is it that you think the Sokovia Accord does to oppose villains?
Dragonbrad Now I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't know the details of the Sokavia Accord. The entire thing might be full of shit. I'm just trying to argue for the sake of having some sort of control of the superheroes' actions.
Imagine if it were the 20's, and some guy had invented the nuclear bomb right then. Not a country, just some dude in his basement invented the ICBM and developed a nuclear payload for it (I can't pretend I know anything about the resources or expertise this would require, but frankly it's more realistic than the comic book stuff I'm using it as a comparison for).
Would you really just say "Oh, he's nice. He said he'd only nuke the bad guys, no problem here, keep your nukes good sir". Can you seriously tell me that?
Let's say this man is perfectly incorruptible now. Now the question is: What gives him the right to make the decision of who lives and who dies? When the police rest someone, they don't immediately execute them in the street (They're not supposed to anyways).
The police have the authority to arrest people, which is given to them by the government. The government is given the power to give them this authority by the people, and the laws of the country. Would you be in favor of a military state, where the police/military were in charge and decided everything by virtue of being the ones with the biggest guns? can you seriously tell me you would support that?
I disagree
With
99% of everything you just said
"Hey, Captain, your team's power is immense, and you have proven to be irresponsible with the destruction you cause. We should keep you in check."
"How dare you call me irresponsible?! I'm starting a war to prove you wrong!"
Diana, the Inorganic Vegan Funny though that in the video he said that Iron man was in the complete and obvious wrong and yet you manage to make it seem like Cap is justified. Things aren't necessarily black and white with this movie and that's what I love about it.
***** maybe you should stop wasting your time writing essays for me in my reply section then
***** God damn have you every heard of a hyperbole fucking hippocrite
+Big Ben you could have actually explained your opinion afterwards instead of complaining about how you don't have to and causing a shit thread
I loved this movie and its plot and I dont think iron man was as massive a dick as you say he was. I actually think spiderman was perfect in every way and this is the best marvel movie. GOAT
The thing is, Spiderman is a young teenager. That's his character, poorly mis-represented in so many other adaptions because they cast 30-year-old's to play him. He's an actual kid, in the comics, and in this movie. I think they've really done the character justice, making him an actual, entertaining human being.
your gaming gets a 6/10
Eh, I think it's fine the way the MCU works, so long as the movies are entertaining and stand up enough on their own. For the most part, Marvel's done that.
Also, it should at least be assumed that if you go to see the 3rd movie in a franchise, you've at least seen one or the two before it.
TO BE FAIR, Iron Man did create Ultron in Avengers 2 which caused plenty of people to die. They may have saved the world, but only from a threat they created so the blood from the casualties is on their, specifically Iron Man’s, hands. Even though the video montage is very stupid, the woman in the hallway does hit pretty hard considering it is directly Tony’s fault that her son is dead.
"Dere he is"
There's probably two thousand comments praising or condemning you, Adam, but I'd like to think that your observations were informed by how successfully the film was able to get you invested you into it even if it wasn't perfect.
I think Tony's dilemma with being put in check was more based on him almost causing humanity to be destroyed, not him killing a few people while stopping it
While I'd disagree with the Spiderman is annoying bit, I'd say this is pretty spot on. Marvel movies are their own breed, and I think this is one of the only Marvel movies that is a good film not just a good Marvel film.
that pro wrestling analogy is so true
Fun fact: this is the only movie with Spiderman where Uncle Ben is not even mentioned
+Kiuraz Thank GOD!
You can't mention uncle Ben when uncle Tony is in the house
Pick a side, pick a side, pickaside, pikaside, picka scythe!
Pickachu!