Is it a mistake that Marvel is packing such an event as Civil War into one movie?

[HeWhoSlapsAll]

Do you also think that it in a way undermines the gravity of the situation? Tbh, this plot could be it's own series of movies:

- Civil War I
- Civil War: Captain America
- Civil War: Spider-Man
- Civil War: Inhumans
- Civil War: SHIELD (which introduces Captain Marvel)
- Civil War: Iron Man
- Civil War II

What do you guys think? Should Marvel have waited until after Infinity War to do this? This seems like a waste of an opportunity to do something truly special than the usual superhero team ups.

Who knows, maybe they're hiding Iron Man: Civil War as the part two to this movie. However, I'd still say that this premise is far too big for just two movies as well. It could be it's own phase tbh.

Maybe it's Thanos that should've been the next phase. Thanos (and perhaps his Obsidian Cull) descending upon Earth in the aftermath of the Civil War would've been quite the sight.

[Darth Kal-el]

I think they are throwing way too much into one movie. I feel it became a response to Batman verses Superman and was not what Cap 3 was originally going to be about based on how TWS ended

[Fokken]

I'm thinking that folks might be too focused on the size of the cast.
The movie is still very much a Captain America film -- and the bonus is that we're getting as many cameo/guest stars as we are.
Additionally, I feel many are still clinging to the notion that the film will be an accurate replication of the book-event, which it will not. Its an adaption. The focus will be on Cap, and I would assume Iron Man's role would play secondary, and everyone else function in a similar capacity/screen time to any of the support characters in previous Cap films ( Carter, Bucky, etc from Cap 1, and Widow, Fury, Falcon, Carter(s), etc etc in Winter Soldier)

Don't let the amount of characters sway the idea that the Russo Bros won't be able to balance things out and still make an incredible Cap film.

[HeWhoSlapsAll]

I'm thinking that folks might be too focused on the size of the cast.
The movie is still very much a Captain America film -- and the bonus is that we're getting as many cameo/guest stars as we are.
Additionally, I feel many are still clinging to the notion that the film will be an accurate replication of the book-event, which it will not. Its an adaption. The focus will be on Cap, and I would assume Iron Man's role would play secondary, and everyone else function in a similar capacity/screen time to any of the support characters in previous Cap films ( Carter, Bucky, etc from Cap 1, and Widow, Fury, Falcon, Carter(s), etc etc in Winter Soldier)

Don't let the amount of characters sway the idea that the Russo Bros won't be able to balance things out and still make an incredible Cap film.

That's my point. Civil War isn't just about Cap, and Iron Man is just as important as him. The premise is also much bigger than just one movie; it's not the cast that's too big, but the premise. The premise itself requires the characters to make moral, and life changing, decisions. Are we going to see those effects, or are they just gonna be tossed to the side and the heroes are just on sides just for the sake of having a big hero vs hero brawl?

I'm confident in the Russo Bros to give me a good movie, but it'll not be a real "Civil War" movie. The issues brought up in this story are too big for one movie.

[MikeMC005]

100% they are trying to do too much here. Civil war could be its own trilogy.

[Carabas]

That's my point. Civil War isn't just about Cap, and Iron Man is just as important as him. The premise is also much bigger than just one movie; it's not the cast that's too big, but the premise. The premise itself requires the characters to make moral, and life changing, decisions. Are we going to see those effects, or are they just gonna be tossed to the side and the heroes are just on sides just for the sake of having a big hero vs hero brawl?

I'm confident in the Russo Bros to give me a good movie, but it'll not be a real "Civil War" movie. The issues brought up in this story are too big for one movie.

That's comic book Civil War you're talking about.
Remember comicbook Age Of Ultron? Rember the film? Did they seem at all similar? Even Winter Soldier the film and Winter Soldier the sprawling comicbook saga didn't have anything in common storywise, other than not-dead Bucky being a former Soviet assassin.

[Carabas]

100% they are trying to do too much here. Civil war could be its own trilogy.

They can't even do comicbook Civil War. Most of the pieces aren't on the table yet. There's no Atlantis, no mutants, SHIELD isn't officially back yet, there's no even enough characters in the universe to form two sides.

They're just taking the name, and using it for what will turn out to be essentially "Steve And Tony's Uncivil Disagreement Over Freedom Versus Protection, Without Cheating And Turning One Of Them Chaotic Evil." Which is what comicbook Civil War should have been in the first place.

[GoingPostal]

Nah, in comics it was a huge deal because of all the characters involved and all but you can make it in one movie with the MCU.

[Holt]

People would get sick of an entire series or trilogy focused on the same story. The idea of doing individual "Civil War" tie-in movies for every franchise would be too much.

[HeWhoSlapsAll]

They can't even do comicbook Civil War. Most of the pieces aren't on the table yet. There's no Atlantis, no mutants, SHIELD isn't officially back yet, there's no even enough characters in the universe to form two sides.

They're just taking the name, and using it for what will turn out to be essentially "Steve And Tony's Uncivil Disagreement Over Freedom Versus Protection, Without Cheating And Turning One Of Them Chaotic Evil." Which is what comicbook Civil War should have been in the first place.

I'd say that the current SW tie-in should've been the tone, and direction, the story went to. Both sides being extremes of the other, and neither really being able to labeled as 100% bad or good.

Nah, in comics it was a huge deal because of all the characters involved and all but you can make it in one movie with the MCU.

Well, the SHRA affected all those characters' lives. This is like saying the American Civil War was only a big deal because it was half the country seceding. They seceded because because it affect their way of life, and their ideals. Same thing happens here. To tell this story that, while the faces of the event are Cap and Tony, affects the lives of so many people, and brings legit questions regarding accountability, vigilantism and freedom, and how this could affect potential international/non-US heroes, you need to give this story time to breath, and establish the sides. This story should've been done after the Inhumans, Black Panther, Spider-Man, Captain Marvel and Defenders movies and shows came out.

They're about make Civil War all about Cap when the premise is bigger than one man, and affects more than one man.

[SuperiorIronman]

Comic book Civil War just can't happen without multiple films.

The movie Civil War is simply going to have its supporting cast be super heroes and focus on Captain America. This is likely a response to Batman versus Super Man but at least here I don't have to worry about them cramming too much in because everyone is already established.

[DrNewGod]

It's all in the execution. They might get away with it, but honestly, that many characters in it makes me nervous that it's going to descend into some kind of a geekfest rather than being a good film.

[Rising7]

One way I like to see it as is that the other Avengers are like the strike team that followed Cap around in TWS. Although of course, they will need at least a little more characterization/dialogue than random SHIELD guys for their appearances to be worthwhile.

An alternate way I could see it working out is if the Avengers remain divided at the end of the film, and we get to see the effects of that divide sprinkled in other films until they finally reunite in Infinity War.

[HeWhoSlapsAll]

People would get sick of an entire series or trilogy focused on the same story. The idea of doing individual "Civil War" tie-in movies for every franchise would be too much.

It wouldn't have to be totally focused on the story, but it should be the overarching plot that everything eventually convenes into. That's what's happening with Thanos, and the Infinity Stones: every movie has it's own plot, but still adds to the overarching plot of Thanos' coming attack. Of course, because the Civil War is closer to home it'd have a bigger influence, than Thanos, but it still makes more sense.

[HeWhoSlapsAll]

One way I like to see it as is that the other Avengers are like the strike team that followed Cap around in TWS. Although of course, they will need at least a little more characterization/dialogue than random SHIELD guys for their appearances to be worthwhile.

An alternate way I could see it working out is if the Avengers remain divided at the end of the film, and we get to see the effects of that divide sprinkled in other films until they finally reunite in Infinity War.

Yup, that's another way it could work.