Civil War I or Civil War II

[Stryfe8]

Lol if you say so. I just know when it was coming out it was great, now it sucks though. Just like when Final Crisis was coming out it was trash, but now its some kind of masterpiece.

no, it was garbage from issue one on. Final crisis was at least interesting for the first two issues.

[Danileriver23]

I just want it to be known that I clicked Civil War 1 by accident. Civil War 2 was so bad that I'm actually offended by it.

Say what you want about Civil War 1, at least there was a credible argument to be made there. Civil War 2 never once made me feel like carol's side was right.

[Danileriver23]

Also, something I want to point out about both Civil War 1 and 2, most of the things people state about a particular character being portrayed poorly tend to be in the tie-ins. If you read the standard civil war 1-8, tony stark doesn't come off nearly as bad as people claim, and if you read just civil war II 1-8 Captain Marvel doesn't do things like create a child police force to imprison people.

I don't think it's really fair to judge the events by their tie -ns because that's mostly out of the writers control.

[Ianbarreilles]

Also, something I want to point out about both Civil War 1 and 2, most of the things people state about a particular character being portrayed poorly tend to be in the tie-ins. If you read the standard civil war 1-8, tony stark doesn't come off nearly as bad as people claim, and if you read just civil war II 1-8 Captain Marvel doesn't do things like create a child police force to imprison people.

I don't think it's really fair to judge the events by their tie -ns because that's mostly out of the writers control.

Yeah I don't know if the child police force was wilson's idea... even given the circumstances surrounding the story of civil war 2 the child police force subplot in ms marvel's tie ins was a little too much in my opinion.

[InformationGeek]

Civil War 1. I'm reading it now for the first time and wow, is that comic god awful.

cw01.jpg

Weird how both Civil Wars ended up hitting on the Black Lives Matter moment despite being a decade apart (even before BLM was created) and ended up both siding with the police side of things.

[Stryfe8]

Also, something I want to point out about both Civil War 1 and 2, most of the things people state about a particular character being portrayed poorly tend to be in the tie-ins. If you read the standard civil war 1-8, tony stark doesn't come off nearly as bad as people claim, and if you read just civil war II 1-8 Captain Marvel doesn't do things like create a child police force to imprison people.

I don't think it's really fair to judge the events by their tie -ns because that's mostly out of the writers control.

since both the arguments were terribly flawed to begin with, they still came off wrong. as i said back then, the only way for the story to make sense, is never having read a marvel comic before

[Habis]

So the Second Civil War for Marvel has ended, and much like the first one, it has gotten a lot of ire from the fans. With both of the Civil Wars getting tons of criticism, I am rather curious now on how people feel on which between the two is the worst. Let's take a looksie.

Civil War I: National Security (Iron Man) VS Civil Liberties (Captain America), and written by Mark Millar. Was extremely politically charged and reflected a tumultuous time in American history, did not handle the subject matter very well, and badly portrayed the heroes in a negative light. So many horrible moments from the two main heroes of the book that one had to be mind-wiped of the events in order to salvage him, and the other was killed in the aftermath.

Civil War II: Determinism (Captain Marvel) VS Free Will (Iron Man), and written by Brian Michael Bendis. Made and released to seemingly tie into a critically & commercially successful movie instead of reflecting real world events, it had trouble finding a focus, meandered around, and didn't portray Captain Marvel in any positive manner. Was more interested in setting up a new status quo.

Both are bad in their own way, but as to which one is the worse?

Mmmm... CW I was quite believable if you accept that Tony is a bastard as a starting point. The government enforced laws that hadn't still been passed, and sent people to Extradimensional Guantanamo, but the MU's justice system has always been kinda weird. Captain America and his buddies seemed to think that defeating Tony would convince the government to repeal the law instead of say, deploy the army and the Sentinels and pass even harsher anti-supers legislation, but it seem he realized how stupid it was (he surrendered)...

CW II requires Carol to be stubborn, self-righteous and to refuse to listen anybody. It also requires Tony to act like an impulsive teen, and the US government to be okay with an international organization arresting American citizens for crimes they still hadn't committed on word of an Inhuman, and to accept the Inhumans to fight their shadow war against Tony. It also requires us to accept that Tony's side would try to take and destroy by force an international peacekeeping organization (what did they intend to do? kill Carol? kill Ulysses? How did they expect to stop them otherwise?...).

All in all, I would say that CW I made everybody look like assholes, while CW II made everybody look stupid and impulsive.

I think CW II was worse, because really, they came to blows too early and too easily, before nothing really serious happened. It should have been a fours issues Captain Marvel/Iron Man crossover, nothing more: Tony and Carol come to blows over Ulysses, some other heroes come between them and force them to speak it like adults, end of story.

[Frontier]

Civil War 1. I'm reading it now for the first time and wow, is that comic god awful.

cw01.jpg

Weird how both Civil Wars ended up hitting on the Black Lives Matter moment despite being a decade apart (even before BLM was created) and ended up both siding with the police side of things.

Oh Millar .

That's the same woman who spit in Tony's face right? Because her son died in Stamford?

[Matternativ]

The best thing about Civil War I was everything that happened afterwards.
But the event itself was just bad and that says a lot considering the premise itself was just really great.

Civil War II had not only a worse premise but also lacked the spice of the first one... if you want to call a Space Prison and Thor clones "spice".
Ultimately it was kind of boring but I still prefer it by a landslide.
Except for the Bannton incident (hehe) no characters really felt even close as off to me as during the first War.

That said we have already seen Bendis do a massive "Civil War" with AvX which I loved.
And the best thing thats actually named Civil War ... well.. that would be the Movie.

[baltiroo]

I have some serious thoughts about both of the series. Could be best summed up in these two video reviews I did for both of them.

CIVIL WAR
https://youtu.be/bp4MalxvMv0

CIVIL WAR II
https://youtu.be/sefz5xU7qoo

[BruceWayneJr.]

Neither. Millar and Bendis are both hacks.

[Hizashi]

Civil War II is hands down worse.