Page 38 of 39 FirstFirst ... 28343536373839 LastLast
Results 556 to 570 of 581
  1. #556
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I think there's a difference between what the symbol Captain America represents and what America actually is. Steve wouldn't have acted the way Walker did.
    Steve definitely wouldn't. But Steve had a blind spot about the USA, as FaWS itself showed with Isaiah, and Sam resisting taking the shield. And while the symbol may represent one ideal, America hasn't ever really lived up to that ideal.

    Aside from that, I don't think it matters what they're wearing. Because elevating symbols above people is exactly the wrong idea. John murdered one enemy combatant who, iMO, helped to kill Lemar, and then was impeached and removed from duty. Clint murdered dozens of criminals, faced no repercussions, covered it all up and the Avengers did nothing about it. Overall, John wearing America on his back isn't really that material to the discussion IMO

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I think it's a matter of degrees and specific circumstances.
    Yeah but the whole 'fictional governments are always evil' trope disregards that and ignores any nuance to make generalized statements about 'freedom good!' whether that's accurate or not.

  2. #557
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    84,447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    Sam still could've been more mature about it. Heck, he's all about talking to Karli who murdered people but is belligerent towards John, Lemar and Bucky, and honestly even his own sister.
    Sam has character flaws. I think he was more considerate towards Karli than they deserved, but I think that's on the writing for the Flag-Smashers.
    They could've stopped and think for 5 minutes. If Tony could figure out who Zemo was after Sam actually decided to be mature and talk instead of just fighting, then it's not a stretch to actually figure out Zemo's plan to some extent at least. But Steve and co. didn't really want to pause and consider, which is exactly their problem

    And the irony is, Sam preaches all that in FaWS, at least when it comes to Karli, yet fought against that side in Civil War.
    I don't think they had anywhere near enough information to ascertain what Zemo was really after, especially when they were under the impression they were dealing with a timecrunch.
    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    Steve definitely wouldn't. But Steve had a blind spot about the USA, as FaWS itself showed with Isaiah, and Sam resisting taking the shield. And while the symbol may represent one ideal, America hasn't ever really lived up to that ideal.
    That's why the world needs Captain America.
    Aside from that, I don't think it matters what they're wearing. Because elevating symbols above people is exactly the wrong idea. John murdered one enemy combatant who, iMO, helped to kill Lemar, and then was impeached and removed from duty. Clint murdered dozens of criminals, faced no repercussions, covered it all up and the Avengers did nothing about it. Overall, John wearing America on his back isn't really that material to the discussion IMO
    In the specific context it mattered a lot what they were wearing and what happened. It's not like there was really a contrasting force there to address what Clint had done as Ronin like Sam and Bucky were with Walker, and his actions were on a more personal and intimate than global level in my opinion.
    Yeah but the whole 'fictional governments are always evil' trope disregards that and ignores any nuance to make generalized statements about 'freedom good!' whether that's accurate or not.
    Again, it depends on the story and context in my opinion.

  3. #558
    Put a smile on that face Immortal Weapon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    11,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Albert1981 View Post
    "I think the "big reveal" of Kingpin relies on the viewer being familiar with the character from his appearances in the Netflix shows (or maybe form the comics?). Not a good call, since the audience for Hawkeye is very different from Daredevil. For example, my 17 year-old daughter had no interest in the Netflix shows, but was very invested in Hawkeye. Needless to say, Fisk's "surprise" appearance was a big "so what?" from her.

    I get what Disney was trying to accomplish here: revealing the Kingpin as the Big Bad, but there's just not enough recognition for that to work. Even most of the people who watched the Netflix series probably had at best a fuzzy memory of the character. A better approach would have been a slow burn. Introduce the character a few episodes earlier, establish him as a menace, then have the big showdown. If you can't have him brutally main/murder a few TSM over some perceived slight because of your audience, just don't use the character."

    This above comment reflects my view on Hawkeye. I have a vague awareness of Fisk from the comics and the cartoons (and that awful 2003 Daredevil movie), but I know nothing about the Netflix version. And I don't think inserting Kingpin into the Hawkeye series really worked. Whatever your views on the characters who appeared in Hawkeye, I think it's safe to say that Kate and Yelena are the most popular. I really like Echo (and the actress playing her seems to be a really great person). But Hawkeye made her just another angry lady driven by revenge (like Sylvie in Loki). I'm not sure her own series will attract a lot of viewers...Unless Kingpin and Daredevil show up. I think it's wonderful we're getting some deaf and Native American representation, but I don't think they're enough to sustain a show. And I'm VERY sympathetic to Alaqua Cox. She had absolutely NO acting experience before Hawkeye, and now she's supposed to represent a couple of marginalized groups in a major MCU property? That's a LOT of pressure. I feel the same way with Iman Vellani and Ms. Marvel. I don't think Vellani has had any acting experience before Ms. Marvel, and now she's gonna be representing South Asian and Muslim communities in the MCU? Again, it seems like a tremendous pressure to me. Look up Dominique Thorne. She's gonna be the first Black American woman headlining a show in the MCU in Ironheart. And once again, she doesn't have much acting experience at all. PRESSURE. I'm definitely okay with Monica Rambeau, Brie Larson, Don Cheadle showing up to support these actresses. But when it comes to Hawkeye, I feel they introduced WAY too many characters into that show when they didn't need to. And I'm not even sure if Clint actually "retired".
    Funnily enough the Kingpin appearance on this show boosted the streaming numbers for Daredevil. It did some good

  4. #559
    Astonishing Member thwhtGuardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Albert1981 View Post
    "I think the "big reveal" of Kingpin relies on the viewer being familiar with the character from his appearances in the Netflix shows (or maybe form the comics?). Not a good call, since the audience for Hawkeye is very different from Daredevil. For example, my 17 year-old daughter had no interest in the Netflix shows, but was very invested in Hawkeye. Needless to say, Fisk's "surprise" appearance was a big "so what?" from her.

    I get what Disney was trying to accomplish here: revealing the Kingpin as the Big Bad, but there's just not enough recognition for that to work. Even most of the people who watched the Netflix series probably had at best a fuzzy memory of the character. A better approach would have been a slow burn. Introduce the character a few episodes earlier, establish him as a menace, then have the big showdown. If you can't have him brutally main/murder a few TSM over some perceived slight because of your audience, just don't use the character."

    This above comment reflects my view on Hawkeye. I have a vague awareness of Fisk from the comics and the cartoons (and that awful 2003 Daredevil movie), but I know nothing about the Netflix version. And I don't think inserting Kingpin into the Hawkeye series really worked. Whatever your views on the characters who appeared in Hawkeye, I think it's safe to say that Kate and Yelena are the most popular. I really like Echo (and the actress playing her seems to be a really great person). But Hawkeye made her just another angry lady driven by revenge (like Sylvie in Loki). I'm not sure her own series will attract a lot of viewers...Unless Kingpin and Daredevil show up. I think it's wonderful we're getting some deaf and Native American representation, but I don't think they're enough to sustain a show. And I'm VERY sympathetic to Alaqua Cox. She had absolutely NO acting experience before Hawkeye, and now she's supposed to represent a couple of marginalized groups in a major MCU property? That's a LOT of pressure. I feel the same way with Iman Vellani and Ms. Marvel. I don't think Vellani has had any acting experience before Ms. Marvel, and now she's gonna be representing South Asian and Muslim communities in the MCU? Again, it seems like a tremendous pressure to me. Look up Dominique Thorne. She's gonna be the first Black American woman headlining a show in the MCU in Ironheart. And once again, she doesn't have much acting experience at all. PRESSURE. I'm definitely okay with Monica Rambeau, Brie Larson, Don Cheadle showing up to support these actresses. But when it comes to Hawkeye, I feel they introduced WAY too many characters into that show when they didn't need to. And I'm not even sure if Clint actually "retired".
    I'm not sure your experience matches most others...literally everyone I know loved the Kingpin reveal.
    Looking for a friendly place to discuss comic books? Try The Classic Comics Forum!

  5. #560
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Sam has character flaws. I think he was more considerate towards Karli than they deserved, but I think that's on the writing for the Flag-Smashers.
    I don't think Sam really learned his lesson, though. He didn't really reflect on his behavior. Heck, almost no one did in FAWS. I agree the writing for Flag Smashers sucked but that's not the only problem

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I don't think they had anywhere near enough information to ascertain what Zemo was really after, especially when they were under the impression they were dealing with a timecrunch.
    The time crunch was somewhat of false interpretation, though. And I don't think they couldn't have figured something about Zemo's plan. Did they ever ask why Zemo would've unleashed the soldiers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    That's why the world needs Captain America.
    I think that's why it needs heroes who are more careful and understanding. Not necessarily a symbol, especially of a problematic nation. I think the show would've been better if Sam rejected the mantle and said he didn't need America. Especially if he's supposedly rejecting problematic government

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    In the specific context it mattered a lot what they were wearing and what happened. It's not like there was really a contrasting force there to address what Clint had done as Ronin like Sam and Bucky were with Walker, and his actions were on a more personal and intimate than global level in my opinion.
    But that's entirely the problem. There isn't anyone stopping Clint, or any other Avengers for that matter. And Clint's actions didn't make any logical or narrative sense to me. He just killed random unrelated people out of misplaced anger. But his family was at most a plot device so how am I even supposed to care about his motivations? IMO Clint's storyline showed exactly the wrong way to handle things

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Again, it depends on the story and context in my opinion.
    But the story and context is always the same: gubmint bad, freedom good, because that's the plot the wriers always want, without considering whether one's freedom hurts another. I agree it depends on the context but it's always the same context, except in FaWS when John was removed from duty.

  6. #561
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thwhtGuardian View Post
    I'm not sure your experience matches most others...literally everyone I know loved the Kingpin reveal.
    I've heard criticism about how he was handled, but idk about just the reveal

  7. #562
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    I didn't misrepresent anything. Steve said they need to regulate themselves but Civil War and the following MCU showed they can't do that because they act on their own agendas, mess up and get away
    You did. You continue to.

    Steve never said they need to regulate themselves. Steve's ENTIRE argument was about choice. About how it had to be theirs. Their decisions, their mistakes. Built into Steve's argument is the realization that they won't always be perfect, that they will screw up or choose poorly. He knows this because he's seen them do it several times already (AoU being the biggest one).

    Steve's argument is that you can either put your trust in people, as individuals, or you can put your trust in fear, of individuals. People will let you down from time to time. Fear will cage you forever.

    And, curiously, Clint is both a best and worst case scenario in that regard. His actions as Ronin are reprehensible. While they've never spent significant time dwelling on his actions specifically or the fallout of them, the films and now Hawkeye show have never been unclear on that. They've never glorified what he did, or attempted to excuse it. Explain it, make it understandable, but never excuse it. Rhodey is horrified by what he saw in Endgame. His every choice in trying to get the soul stone shows the weight he knows he carries for his actions. To the point that he is prepared to kill himself because he doesn't believe he deserves to continue living.

    But his choice to turn away from that path and try to walk a better road is admirable, in it's way. It's a hard road to walk, and I commend anyone who seriously and meaningfully tries to embrace a second chance. Forgiveness need not be forthcoming to respect the choice at the attempt.

  8. #563
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunch of Coconuts View Post
    There's also the fact that the guy Walker killed was actively running away, which somewhat (effectiveness can be debated) mirrors police brutality. Walker had him and could have incapacitated him; he chose to kill him instead.
    Yeah. He was running away. When he got cornered he had given up and was begging not to be killed.

    That is very different from the multiple active shooters/combatants situations that Ronin or Hawkeye finds himself in. Killing somebody who is actively trying to murder them isn't the same as killing somebody who had given up and was practically begging for mercy.

    While Ronin had no legal/official justification for putting himself in an active shooter siituation in the first place, we aren't ever shown that he killed people who had surrendered.

  9. #564
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    84,447

    Default

    Man, Ronin basically keeps sounding like the Punisher the more we talked about them.
    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    I don't think Sam really learned his lesson, though. He didn't really reflect on his behavior. Heck, almost no one did in FAWS. I agree the writing for Flag Smashers sucked but that's not the only problem
    I think he and Bucky reflect on their behavior in their own way, just maybe not the behavior you're thinking of.
    The time crunch was somewhat of false interpretation, though. And I don't think they couldn't have figured something about Zemo's plan. Did they ever ask why Zemo would've unleashed the soldiers?
    I never got the impression that they felt they had enough time to sit and think through what was going on before Zemo enacted what they felt he was his plan or enough to discern Zemo's true motives.
    I think that's why it needs heroes who are more careful and understanding. Not necessarily a symbol, especially of a problematic nation. I think the show would've been better if Sam rejected the mantle and said he didn't need America. Especially if he's supposedly rejecting problematic government
    But that basically sounds like giving up. Cap isn't about the government, it's about the dream and what it represents. And that involves understanding.
    But that's entirely the problem. There isn't anyone stopping Clint, or any other Avengers for that matter. And Clint's actions didn't make any logical or narrative sense to me. He just killed random unrelated people out of misplaced anger. But his family was at most a plot device so how am I even supposed to care about his motivations? IMO Clint's storyline showed exactly the wrong way to handle things
    I can understand it in abstract (and not condone it) because we're looking at a man who basically lost his entire family, and whether you care about them or not, that can do dark things to people.
    But the story and context is always the same: gubmint bad, freedom good, because that's the plot the wriers always want, without considering whether one's freedom hurts another. I agree it depends on the context but it's always the same context, except in FaWS when John was removed from duty.
    I mean, we'd probably have to debate other works to see if it was really unwarranted or unjustified within the context of the narrative.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vic Vega View Post
    While Ronin had no legal/official justification for putting himself in an active shooter siituation in the first place, we aren't ever shown that he killed people who had surrendered.
    Did he kill people he'd already subdued? I feel like he did that to one of the Yakuza's.

    If I remember Maya's dad was just sitting in his chair when he gutted him.

  10. #565
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZeroBG82 View Post
    You did. You continue to.

    Steve never said they need to regulate themselves. Steve's ENTIRE argument was about choice. About how it had to be theirs. Their decisions, their mistakes. Built into Steve's argument is the realization that they won't always be perfect, that they will screw up or choose poorly. He knows this because he's seen them do it several times already (AoU being the biggest one).

    Steve's argument is that you can either put your trust in people, as individuals, or you can put your trust in fear, of individuals. People will let you down from time to time. Fear will cage you forever.
    I'm not misrepresenting anything no matter how many times you keep saying it, ok? All in all, Steve's argument is poor. Who are the Avengers going to answer to if they just keep doing it the way he wants? When did they fix their mistakes? Not often enough. And trust in individuals vs people is a false choice, because people are made of individuals. And some of these individuals, including some of the Avengers, make mistakes and didn't make up for them. If it's about choice then why do they never choose to own up to their actions? That's my point. Steve claims to be all about responsibility but when have he and the others actually faced sufficient consequences for all of their mistakes?

    Quote Originally Posted by ZeroBG82 View Post
    And, curiously, Clint is both a best and worst case scenario in that regard. His actions as Ronin are reprehensible. While they've never spent significant time dwelling on his actions specifically or the fallout of them, the films and now Hawkeye show have never been unclear on that. They've never glorified what he did, or attempted to excuse it. Explain it, make it understandable, but never excuse it. Rhodey is horrified by what he saw in Endgame. His every choice in trying to get the soul stone shows the weight he knows he carries for his actions. To the point that he is prepared to kill himself because he doesn't believe he deserves to continue living.

    But his choice to turn away from that path and try to walk a better road is admirable, in it's way. It's a hard road to walk, and I commend anyone who seriously and meaningfully tries to embrace a second chance. Forgiveness need not be forthcoming to respect the choice at the attempt.
    That's not nearly enough. If guilt is enough then why exactly do the Avengers go around beating up villains? I mean, they impose their will on others so why shouldn't they be subjected to harsher consequences when they mess up? Clint didn't give that same chance to all the people he killed.

  11. #566
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vic Vega View Post
    Yeah. He was running away. When he got cornered he had given up and was begging not to be killed.

    That is very different from the multiple active shooters/combatants situations that Ronin or Hawkeye finds himself in. Killing somebody who is actively trying to murder them isn't the same as killing somebody who had given up and was practically begging for mercy.

    While Ronin had no legal/official justification for putting himself in an active shooter siituation in the first place, we aren't ever shown that he killed people who had surrendered.
    Um, John killed a guy who just tried to kill him. Clint sought out and killed people who weren't attacking him in the first place (from what we can tell). That's far worse

  12. #567
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Man, Ronin basically keeps sounding like the Punisher the more we talked about them.
    Haha, I thought that when I first watched Endgame

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I think he and Bucky reflect on their behavior in their own way, just maybe not the behavior you're thinking of.
    Not that I remember, except Bucky apologizing for not understanding why Sam first refused the shield, which, don't get me wrong, was a good moment, but not enough IMO. Neither reflected on how being uncooperative with the other two might've actually exacerbated the situation, or how breaking out Zemo might've made the situation worse with Wakanda

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I never got the impression that they felt they had enough time to sit and think through what was going on before Zemo enacted what they felt he was his plan or enough to discern Zemo's true motives.
    They had time to wait for Clint, Wanda and Scott to show up and Sharon to get their stuff, so it's not like they had no time to think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    But that basically sounds like giving up. Cap isn't about the government, it's about the dream and what it represents. And that involves understanding.
    It's not giving up. It's saying "I'm my own person". If they're all about rejecting institutions and putting trust in individuals then why take on a symbol that's been forcibly imposed on minorities for centuries?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I can understand it in abstract (and not condone it) because we're looking at a man who basically lost his entire family, and whether you care about them or not, that can do dark things to people.
    I just don't think it was logical enough. He randomly murders people he has nothing to do with. And if the MCU had actually better developed his connection to his family before then, then I might've been able to believe it, but he's such an underdeveloped and boring character that I don't know enough about him to logically justify this random detour in the middle of a movie it has no plot effect on. I more easily bought John Walker's actions because I saw him get better development in 4 episodes than Hawkeye did in 5 prior movies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I mean, we'd probably have to debate other works to see if it was really unwarranted or unjustified within the context of the narrative.
    Just in the MCU or all around?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Did he kill people he'd already subdued? I feel like he did that to one of the Yakuza's.

    If I remember Maya's dad was just sitting in his chair when he gutted him.
    IIRC it looked like he just came in there and killed a bunch of people. I think her dad was sitting down but it all happened quickly. Regardless, it didn't look like they were going after him.

  13. #568
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    84,447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    Um, John killed a guy who just tried to kill him. Clint sought out and killed people who weren't attacking him in the first place (from what we can tell). That's far worse
    It kind of sounds like you're downplaying the severity of what John did. It wasn't self-defense.
    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    Not that I remember, except Bucky apologizing for not understanding why Sam first refused the shield, which, don't get me wrong, was a good moment, but not enough IMO. Neither reflected on how being uncooperative with the other two might've actually exacerbated the situation, or how breaking out Zemo might've made the situation worse with Wakanda
    Bucky also realized how he wasn't properly addressing what he did as the Winter Soldier and we saw them come together as partners by the climax.

    Zemo was complicated but they managed to bring him back into custody and he did for them what they needed him to do.
    They had time to wait for Clint, Wanda and Scott to show up and Sharon to get their stuff, so it's not like they had no time to think.
    We don't have a timeframe for how long any of that took, I assume they were trying to move as quickly as possible since Bucky was a fugitive and they needed to beat Zemo there. I don't think they had enough evidence to ascertain his endgame.
    It's not giving up. It's saying "I'm my own person". If they're all about rejecting institutions and putting trust in individuals then why take on a symbol that's been forcibly imposed on minorities for centuries?
    It's giving up in the context of the symbol, what it represents (or can represent) and the hope for the future.

    Captain America doesn't represent the worst of America, he represents the best.
    I just don't think it was logical enough. He randomly murders people he has nothing to do with. And if the MCU had actually better developed his connection to his family before then, then I might've been able to believe it, but he's such an underdeveloped and boring character that I don't know enough about him to logically justify this random detour in the middle of a movie it has no plot effect on. I more easily bought John Walker's actions because I saw him get better development in 4 episodes than Hawkeye did in 5 prior movies.
    It wasn't random, he was taking out criminals and mob bosses.

    Having lost everything and having no recourse I can understand why a trained SHIELD Agent/assassin would then apply himself to trying to make an unfair world just after what it put him through.
    Just in the MCU or all around?
    All around.

  14. #569
    Extraordinary Member j9ac9k's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    If I remember Maya's dad was just sitting in his chair when he gutted him.
    Just looked - he wasn't.

  15. #570
    Extraordinary Member j9ac9k's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,539

    Default

    Now that we know Clint's wife Laura was a SHIELD agent, is it safe to guess that Nat actually set them up? Thinking back on her and Cap's recurring dialogue about Cap's love-life in "Winter Soldier", I can imagine her doing the same with Clint, which just makes her loss all the more impactful.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •