Hawkeye on Disney+

[CosmiComic]

IMHO, the key difference in John Walker's murder of that Flag Smasher is that as Captain America, you're a symbol. You're supposed to represent the best that America has to offer. John killed a man literally begging for his life, who wasn't even the one responsible for his partner's death. Cameras or not, that's not an action the best of America is supposed to take. Remember in Winter Soldier when that SHIELD agent thought Steve was threatening to throw him off the roof and observed that it wasn't his style? Steve agreed. That's the example John had to follow (granted, then let Natasha throw him off, but the plan always was for Sam to catch him). Like becoming an Avenger, Clint just kind of fell into becoming this role model for Kate. It's something he never intended given his prior career. His entire life prior to becoming an Avenger was to be as under the radar as possible. John agreed to embody the country's best. The entire world saw what the US government considered their best that day. To say that everyone should've been more than a little concerned is an understatement.

I don't really think that's totally true. Being a symbol isn't more important than not murdering people. And while John was totally wrong, the guy he murdered just tried to murder him and did help murder Lamar. None of the people Clint murdered did anything to him, and he killed out of some random unrelated rage due to his insta family. Even if John is wearing the symbol of the USA, or is more visible, that doesn't matter. Sam and Bucky turned on John but what did the Avengers do about Clint? Nothing. That's way worse than the symbol of a country killing a guy

And that's what bugs me. Avengers playing favorites. It's why Steve was wrong in Civil War. Because the Avengers have agendas too and they're not always right

[CosmiComic]

"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 don't think Maya and Sylvie were that much alike. While I can see your worry, Marvel's casting has been mostly on point. Her being angry isn't the problem. It's that she gets introduced but then barely does anything much in the next 3 episodes

[AnakinFlair]

I never liked the whole family excuse, as if it allows a hero to do whatever he wants. I don't necessarily mourn the death of violent gangsters and criminals, but it doesn't excuse Clint being all smug and not thinking how he put his own supposedly important family in danger. In fact his insta-wife and kids just come off as plot devices since he forgot about them in Civil War too

He didn't forget them in Civil War. But when Captain America calls and asks for your help, you say yes. Laura seems to be the kind of person who would agree with that. He knew there would be consequences, and he lived with them (and ended up on house arrest after a stint in The Raft).

I'd actually love to know how long he and Scott were locked up, or how quickly they were moved to house arrest. Was that their reward for NOT breaking out with everyone else?

[CosmiComic]

He didn't forget them in Civil War. But when Captain America calls and asks for your help, you say yes. Laura seems to be the kind of person who would agree with that. He knew there would be consequences, and he lived with them (and ended up on house arrest after a stint in The Raft).

I'd actually love to know how long he and Scott were locked up, or how quickly they were moved to house arrest. Was that their reward for NOT breaking out with everyone else?

What? Captain America was wrong, and Hawkeye threw away 2 years of house arrest for nothing. If his family was important than maybe he'd have thought twice about it.

[Frontier]

I don't think it's ever justified to this degree. Especially when they're rude to anyone who doesn't worship their idol.

I don't know about justified but I think it was understandable, from their perspective, why they didn't take it well when the government set up Walker the way they did.

I think it's comparable enough in that these 2 actually don't act like the hero they look up/are in a relationship with is perfect or their actions are always right, because they're not.

It's definitely not a matter of looking up to them but I think Steve and Sam/Bucky have a very different relationship dynamic by comparison and Steve, from their perspective, didn't give them anything that really warranted questioning.
It didn't really make sense. It's like none of them learned how their own actions put them in danger in the first place. Plus, it seemed like she was more capable than him when he was first introduced.[/QUOTE]

What? Captain America was wrong, and Hawkeye threw away 2 years of house arrest for nothing. If his family was important than maybe he'd have thought twice about it.

What was Steve wrong about? I mean, in the grand scheme of things they exposed Zemo and saved Bucky. That's what they were trying to do.

[ZeroBG82]

I don't really think that's totally true. Being a symbol isn't more important than not murdering people. And while John was totally wrong, the guy he murdered just tried to murder him and did help murder Lamar. None of the people Clint murdered did anything to him, and he killed out of some random unrelated rage due to his insta family. Even if John is wearing the symbol of the USA, or is more visible, that doesn't matter. Sam and Bucky turned on John but what did the Avengers do about Clint? Nothing. That's way worse than the symbol of a country killing a guy

Context matters. It's made clear during the beginning of Endgame that the Avengers were looking for Cllint, but failing to find him. Rhodey is on his trail but a step behind. It's not until the fateful moment when they have a possible fix to the Snap that Nat is finally able to track him down. At which point, there were much, much bigger fish to try.

Should Clint have had to answer for his crimes after the world was restored? Probably. But you just saved HALF THE UNIVERSE and I imagine that buys a certain amount of leeway, right or wrong. That's an awful lot of red out of the ledger, you know what I'm sayin'?

Also, it's clear that Clint knows he did wrong. That doesn't make it justice, but it clearly weighs on him. The show doesn't gloss over that. He doesn't think he should be Kate's hero either. But Kate has a point that Clint is more than his worst choices. He's also his best ones too. And I think there is something to be said for trying to be better, every day.

And that's what bugs me. Avengers playing favorites. It's why Steve was wrong in Civil War. Because the Avengers have agendas too and they're not always right

And this is just a straight misrepresentation of Steve's position in Civil War. Steve never said they were always right. Just that it always needed to be their choice. Even their hypocrisy. They can't rent out that choice to someone else to absolve themselves of guilt and they shouldn't surrender that choice or risk becoming nothing more than weapons to be directed. Steve knew full well they could be wrong. His point is that they had to own that for better or worse, because the alternative is OBJECTIVELY more terrifying.

And the funniest part of this argument? John Walker is the absolute proof of just how right Steve was. Walker is a weapon you point at somebody and turn loose. That doesn't make Walker a bad person (he kind of is, but he's not just that). But it does make him utterly terrifying with powers. He SHOULD NEVER be Captain America. He's not a symbol, he's a tool. And it's realizing that (and that the government won't stop with Walker but will continue to create more of these soldier-symbols) that is part of why Sam ultimately takes the mantle. Because it CAN be his choice. Because when it is, he can stand for something. He may not always be right, but he can take that stand and hold that line and own that in a way Walker never can.

[Frontier]

Context matters. It's made clear during the beginning of Endgame that the Avengers were looking for Cllint, but failing to find him. Rhodey is on his trail but a step behind. It's not until the fateful moment when they have a possible fix to the Snap that Nat is finally able to track him down. At which point, there were much, much bigger fish to try.

Should Clint have had to answer for his crimes after the world was restored? Probably. But you just saved HALF THE UNIVERSE and I imagine that buys a certain amount of leeway, right or wrong. That's an awful lot of red out of the ledger, you know what I'm sayin'?

Also, it's clear that Clint knows he did wrong. That doesn't make it justice, but it clearly weighs on him. The show doesn't gloss over that. He doesn't think he should be Kate's hero either. But Kate has a point that Clint is more than his worst choices. He's also his best ones too. And I think there is something to be said for trying to be better, every day.

I think there's something to be said that the Avengers don't seem to keep a good account of each other outside the team or what their teammates do beyond expecting them to hold themselves personally accountable for what they do. Because nobody else can.

I also think the argument could be made that the reality of what Clint did never seemed to really set in for Kate.

[phonogram12]

I don't really think that's totally true. Being a symbol isn't more important than not murdering people. And while John was totally wrong, the guy he murdered just tried to murder him and did help murder Lamar.

I don't buy the tried to help murder Lamar part. Only one person was responsible for that. Even the guy who John killed was shocked by Lamar's death. Basically John was looking for someone to punish and that guy who begged for his life was the most convenient person there.

None of the people Clint murdered did anything to him...

I mean, the same can be said about John going after the Flag Smashers. He just went after them because he was following orders. But if history has taught us anything, that's really no excuse, either.

Even if John is wearing the symbol of the USA, or is more visible, that doesn't matter. Sam and Bucky turned on John but what did the Avengers do about Clint? Nothing. That's way worse than the symbol of a country killing a guy

Still have to disagree. Whether people like to admit it or not, optics matter and there are bigger things at play than the simple actions of one individual. On a purely nationalistic level, sure, John murdering that guy wouldn't matter in the least. But there was a reason his title was taken away from him. Murdering an unarmed man begging for his life for all the world to see I would imagine really upset the US's standing with the rest of the world. And those relationships matter.

A couple comic book examples come to mind. On JLU, The Question thought the only way to prevent the end of the world was for him to kill Lex Luthor before Superman could. He knew the League could survive the controversy. Another is from the LOSH. Before being forced to kill in battle, a Legionnaire renounced his Legion membership so his actions wouldn't become a blight on the Legion's history. Like I said, optics matter.

And that's what bugs me. Avengers playing favorites. It's why Steve was wrong in Civil War. Because the Avengers have agendas too and they're not always right

If reading comics and watching movies have taught me anything, fictional governments are not to be trusted. It's either a trope you accept or you don't.

[CosmiComic]

I don't know about justified but I think it was understandable, from their perspective, why they didn't take it well when the government set up Walker the way they did.

Sam gave up the shield, for a good reason. And he and Bucky didn't really take the time to consider whether John was a good person or not.

It's definitely not a matter of looking up to them but I think Steve and Sam/Bucky have a very different relationship dynamic by comparison and Steve, from their perspective, didn't give them anything that really warranted questioning.
It didn't really make sense. It's like none of them learned how their own actions put them in danger in the first place. Plus, it seemed like she was more capable than him when he was first introduced.

I'm a little confused here.

What was Steve wrong about? I mean, in the grand scheme of things they exposed Zemo and saved Bucky. That's what they were trying to do.

Zemo was never going to unleash the Winter Soldiers. He just wanted to steve to believe that because Steve would end up fighting the other Avengers

[CosmiComic]

Context matters. It's made clear during the beginning of Endgame that the Avengers were looking for Cllint, but failing to find him. Rhodey is on his trail but a step behind. It's not until the fateful moment when they have a possible fix to the Snap that Nat is finally able to track him down. At which point, there were much, much bigger fish to try.

Should Clint have had to answer for his crimes after the world was restored? Probably. But you just saved HALF THE UNIVERSE and I imagine that buys a certain amount of leeway, right or wrong. That's an awful lot of red out of the ledger, you know what I'm sayin'?

Also, it's clear that Clint knows he did wrong. That doesn't make it justice, but it clearly weighs on him. The show doesn't gloss over that. He doesn't think he should be Kate's hero either. But Kate has a point that Clint is more than his worst choices. He's also his best ones too. And I think there is something to be said for trying to be better, every day.

But how much context ends up excusing heroes just doing whatever they want? Heroes can do anything if they save the world?

And I don't think Clint really did feel what he did was wrong. He acted like anyone coming after him was wrong but didn't really acknowledge how he put his own family in danger. And as you said, it's not justice. If every person who did wrong just felt guilty and that was enough, then why are these superheroes punishing and fighting supervillains in the first place?

And this is just a straight misrepresentation of Steve's position in Civil War. Steve never said they were always right. Just that it always needed to be their choice. Even their hypocrisy. They can't rent out that choice to someone else to absolve themselves of guilt and they shouldn't surrender that choice or risk becoming nothing more than weapons to be directed. Steve knew full well they could be wrong. His point is that they had to own that for better or worse, because the alternative is OBJECTIVELY more terrifying.

And the funniest part of this argument? John Walker is the absolute proof of just how right Steve was. Walker is a weapon you point at somebody and turn loose. That doesn't make Walker a bad person (he kind of is, but he's not just that). But it does make him utterly terrifying with powers. He SHOULD NEVER be Captain America. He's not a symbol, he's a tool. And it's realizing that (and that the government won't stop with Walker but will continue to create more of these soldier-symbols) that is part of why Sam ultimately takes the mantle. Because it CAN be his choice. Because when it is, he can stand for something. He may not always be right, but he can take that stand and hold that line and own that in a way Walker never can.

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

And Walker proves Steve was totally wrong. Walker's problem wasn't being a government stooge, but being too aggressive and not thinking. Exactly the problem Steve had in Civil War, and even Hawkeye in Endgame. That's the problem. He was removed from power because a higher body held him accountable. Something Steve, and Sam, and Bucky all fought against. Whereas Clint did worse and got away with it because the Avengers didn't want to turn on their buddy. That proves Steve was entirely wrong in Civil War

[Frontier]

Sam gave up the shield, for a good reason. And he and Bucky didn't really take the time to consider whether John was a good person or not.

Well, I think for Sam it was complicated. And Sam didn't know they were going to just make a new Captain America and give them the shield.

Zemo was never going to unleash the Winter Soldiers. He just wanted to steve to believe that because Steve would end up fighting the other Avengers

They had no way of knowing that, though.

[CosmiComic]

I don't buy the tried to help murder Lamar part. Only one person was responsible for that. Even the guy who John killed was shocked by Lamar's death. Basically John was looking for someone to punish and that guy who begged for his life was the most convenient person there.

They were trying to kill John, though, and that guy did help kill Lemar. They all contributed to kidnapping Lemar.

I mean, the same can be said about John going after the Flag Smashers. He just went after them because he was following orders. But if history has taught us anything, that's really no excuse, either.

If that's true then all MCU heroes are bad guys. None of them have any reason to be fighting villains in that case.

Still have to disagree. Whether people like to admit it or not, optics matter and there are bigger things at play than the simple actions of one individual. On a purely nationalistic level, sure, John murdering that guy wouldn't matter in the least. But there was a reason his title was taken away from him. Murdering an unarmed man begging for his life for all the world to see I would imagine really upset the US's standing with the rest of the world. And those relationships matter.

A couple comic book examples come to mind. On JLU, The Question thought the only way to prevent the end of the world was for him to kill Lex Luthor before Superman could. He knew the League could survive the controversy. Another is from the LOSH. Before being forced to kill in battle, a Legionnaire renounced his Legion membership so his actions wouldn't become a blight on the Legion's history. Like I said, optics matter.

Sorry, but I just don't agree. That symbol isn't more important than people's lives. Clint killing a bunch of unrelated people isn't less evil just because it's less visible or symbolic. And the rest of the world kinda already views America like that because that's honestly what America is. Even Steve Rogers thought he could go wherever he wanted wearing that symbol. It's not suddenly bad just because John killed someone. It's always been a symbol of oppression and belligerence to many. But so is unchecked, murderous vigilantism, especially when the excuse is 'they're criminals'.

If reading comics and watching movies have taught me anything, fictional governments are not to be trusted. It's either a trope you accept or you don't.

I don't buy that trope. Yeah, even in the real world, governments can be and are evil, but the fictional trope is often an excuse to lionize the hero doing whatever they want and ignoring the consequences. Governments are evil if they abuse the populace, but not if they prevent rogue agents from doing that. So governments can be good and bad.

[Frontier]

Sorry, but I just don't agree. That symbol isn't more important than people's lives. Clint killing a bunch of unrelated people isn't less evil just because it's less visible or symbolic. And the rest of the world kinda already views America like that because that's honestly what America is. Even Steve Rogers thought he could go wherever he wanted wearing that symbol. It's not suddenly bad just because John killed someone. It's always been a symbol of oppression and belligerence to many. But so is unchecked, murderous vigilantism, especially when the excuse is 'they're criminals'.

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.

I don't buy that trope. Yeah, even in the real world, governments can be and are evil, but the fictional trope is often an excuse to lionize the hero doing whatever they want and ignoring the consequences. Governments are evil if they abuse the populace, but not if they prevent rogue agents from doing that. So governments can be good and bad.

I think it's a matter of degrees and specific circumstances.

[CosmiComic]

Well, I think for Sam it was complicated. And Sam didn't know they were going to just make a new Captain America and give them the shield.

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.

They had no way of knowing that, though.

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.

[CosmiComic]

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

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.