Civil War Without The Foolish and Evil Actions of The Pro-Reg Side

[Agent Z]

So I recall it was stated somewhere in an interview that Marvel wanted the pro-reg side to be unambiguously right in Civil War but felt it would be too one-sided. Hence them giving the pro-reg side a bunch of unneeded puppy kicking moments.

Anyway y question is this; if Civil War had been written so that the pro-reg side did nothing wrong, none of the stupid or evil decisions they'd made had happened and it was 100% the anti-reg that were in the wrong, how would fans have felt about it?

[SpiderClops]

"THEY CHARACTER ASSASSINATED CAPTAIN AMERICA. JUST TO MAKE IRON MAN LOOK GOOD. SCREW YOU MARVEL!"

Messageboards would've been filled with something like that.

[Jekyll]

Considering ALL of my favorite marvel heroes were on the anti-reg side, I still would have been for them.

[Derek Metaltron]

I think Mark Millar was trying to have both sides be shown as equally grey, though the only serious issue on Cap's side was the addition of the Punisher to their ranks. The problem ultimately was that nearly all the people writing the tie-ins at the time were Anti-Reg personally and also that there were far fewer titles with wholly Pro-Reg aligned characters. Writers like to do the underdog, I guess. And of course after such events every post-event series wants to have their character moan at the victor, which is exactly what happened after both Civil War and Secret Invasion.

[pageturner]

I think having flaws on both sides is crucial no law does not have faults or loopholes that people exploit. The SHRA was no different.

The biggest problem was they left too much hanging. The law was not challenged legally in the MU on panel at least. Having a character go on trial would have been put into Frontline.

Instead they showed Iron Man eagerly putting people in prison without a trial, and Cap fought a law by punching people and destroying property.

I was ok with CLor not working but they could have laid that at the feet of Skym instead of the way they left it. The prison was a complete blunder etc. They had 3 of the top brains and (well assuming Skym was as smart as Hank) and they left huge holes in their organization.

I am ok with Cap being on the run with his gang of rebel but they should have spent more time putting bad guys in jail or at least stopping them.

[Huntsman Spider]

I think having flaws on both sides is crucial no law does not have faults or loopholes that people exploit. The SHRA was no different.

The biggest problem was they left too much hanging. The law was not challenged legally in the MU on panel at least. Having a character go on trial would have been put into Frontline.

Instead they showed Iron Man eagerly putting people in prison without a trial, and Cap fought a law by punching people and destroying property.

I was ok with CLor not working but they could have laid that at the feet of Skym instead of the way they left it. The prison was a complete blunder etc. They had 3 of the top brains and (well assuming Skym was as smart as Hank) and they left huge holes in their organization.

I am ok with Cap being on the run with his gang of rebel but they should have spent more time putting bad guys in jail or at least stopping them.

I would say, though, that Cap and the other anti-registration heroes were focusing on stopping bad guys until they were directly targeted by the pro-registration forces that decided they would rather focus their efforts on rounding up superheroes who disagreed with them than fighting actual threats to public safety and well-being. Otherwise, they might have caught onto that guy from Damage Control who was deliberately dosing supervillains with MGH to amp up their powers for more destructive battles that would result in more contracts and profits for Damage Control, and how that led directly to Nitro blowing up that Stamford neighborhood in the beginning of the story. Or, they could have had Steve go on television and tell everyone what Maria Hill tried to do to him just for raising an objection to an act that hadn't become law yet, forcing her, and S.H.I.E.L.D. and the pro-registration heroes, to justify themselves to the public and government for that kind of overstepping of her authority. Instead, yeah, he went and became a fugitive, thus making Hill and the S.H.I.E.L.D. jackboots look justified for what they were doing. And yes, Steve did intend to go on trial at the end when he surrendered, but he got assassinated before stepping inside the courtroom, which was very convenient for anybody who didn't want the SHRA examined too closely.

[Michael Watkins]

I think having flaws on both sides is crucial no law does not have faults or loopholes that people exploit. The SHRA was no different.

The biggest problem was they left too much hanging. The law was not challenged legally in the MU on panel at least. Having a character go on trial would have been put into Frontline.

Instead they showed Iron Man eagerly putting people in prison without a trial.

it was a detainment center. that happens in war (it's actually the m.o. of the superhero set). Stark kept them out of prison. for contrast, Reed Richards used to store the Fantastic Four's villains in stasis tubes. this was just the so-called superheroes getting a taste of how they've been treating their adversaries.

[WebLurker]

So I recall it was stated somewhere in an interview that Marvel wanted the pro-reg side to be unambiguously right in Civil War but felt it would be too one-sided. Hence them giving the pro-reg side a bunch of unneeded puppy kicking moments.

Anyway y question is this; if Civil War had been written so that the pro-reg side did nothing wrong, none of the stupid or evil decisions they'd made had happened and it was 100% the anti-reg that were in the wrong, how would fans have felt about it?

Don't know about the comic, but I do know that the movie presented a balanced version of the issue giving each side good points and problems with their position, and it was a smash hit. So, maybe the balanced take was better than having one side in the right and the other in the wrong?

[MichaelC]

The regulation of those with power, such as policemen and soldiers, is necessary if society is to have real freedom in an adult context. If policemen and soldiers are free, no one else is. That's why Duterte's administration is so awful, even though his defining act has been to simply allow vigilantes to run amok. That simple truth is why superhero comics are fundamentally absurd. It's a silly fantasy where Duterte thinking is all wonderful and really for the best. The SHRA deconstructed this silly conceit of comics, and so undermined the very underpinning of the genre. So of course the guys in favor of making those who volunteer for the roles of cops and soldiers being accountable to democracy had to be portrayed as torturing puppies. If they weren't, the genre collapses like a soufflé.

[DragonsChi]

I don’t think the concept the OP is purposing would have worked for the simple fact that I could never see Captain America being on the Pro Reg side. For that reason alone anyone else pro reg would have been the “bad guys” or “written negatively” .

As a rule of thumb “when in doubt side with Cap” since he is usually going to do the most morally pure thing and because at the end of the day Cap is usually on the winning side of things.

For those reason and a few others there would be no way ProReg could have been right.

[Frontier]

Don't know about the comic, but I do know that the movie presented a balanced version of the issue giving each side good points and problems with their position, and it was a smash hit. So, maybe the balanced take was better than having one side in the right and the other in the wrong?

The movie also provided a clearer villain in Zemo and the conflict with Bucky that also kind of diverted from the whole registration issue .

(Seriously, outside that debate in Avengers Compound and a few scene's after Bucky's taken into custody I don't think the Accords really came up that much).

[ItzdoctorZ]

I'd root for whoever Ironman was against, no matter what

[Michael Watkins]

The regulation of those with power, such as policemen and soldiers, is necessary if society is to have real freedom in an adult context. If policemen and soldiers are free, no one else is. That's why Duterte's administration is so awful, even though his defining act has been to simply allow vigilantes to run amok. That simple truth is why superhero comics are fundamentally absurd. It's a silly fantasy where Duterte thinking is all wonderful and really for the best. The SHRA deconstructed this silly conceit of comics, and so undermined the very underpinning of the genre. So of course the guys in favor of making those who volunteer for the roles of cops and soldiers being accountable to democracy had to be portrayed as torturing puppies. If they weren't, the genre collapses like a soufflé.

^this guy gets it

The movie also provided a clearer villain in Zemo and the conflict with Bucky that also kind of diverted from the whole registration issue .

(Seriously, outside that debate in Avengers Compound and a few scene's after Bucky's taken into custody I don't think the Accords really came up that much).

well they led to Ant-Man being on house arrest.

[pageturner]

I would say, though, that Cap and the other anti-registration heroes were focusing on stopping bad guys until they were directly targeted by the pro-registration forces that decided they would rather focus their efforts on rounding up superheroes who disagreed with them than fighting actual threats to public safety and well-being. Otherwise, they might have caught onto that guy from Damage Control who was deliberately dosing supervillains with MGH to amp up their powers for more destructive battles that would result in more contracts and profits for Damage Control, and how that led directly to Nitro blowing up that Stamford neighborhood in the beginning of the story. Or, they could have had Steve go on television and tell everyone what Maria Hill tried to do to him just for raising an objection to an act that hadn't become law yet, forcing her, and S.H.I.E.L.D. and the pro-registration heroes, to justify themselves to the public and government for that kind of overstepping of her authority. Instead, yeah, he went and became a fugitive, thus making Hill and the S.H.I.E.L.D. jackboots look justified for what they were doing. And yes, Steve did intend to go on trial at the end when he surrendered, but he got assassinated before stepping inside the courtroom, which was very convenient for anybody who didn't want the SHRA examined too closely.

Steve fought the law with his fists which made no sense. I guess he did trick the group of bad guys into being caught by Stark.

I agree something like Steve getting on TV would have helped his cause. Hawkeyes/Ronin did it easy enough against Osborne.

They could have done more with Iron Fist fighting the law as he indicated he was going to do or with Robbie and She Hulk. Really they could have done it with anyone. It would have fleshed out the law better.

They did little to expose ay faults in the law or the ways it was enforced.

[Lukmendes]

Without the evil actions, there would still be the questionable idea of trying to force supers into registering, honestly the registering should be like drafting, but to draft only active super heroes for training, not anyone who has powers, but then if everything is done in a reasonable way then there's no conflict lol.