BigDuke
Reservist Avenger
Posts: 136
|
Post by BigDuke on Dec 20, 2006 15:06:39 GMT -5
POSSIBLE SPOILER INFO
Maybe I'm too sappy, but I think this one shot redeemed both IM and CA a bit for those of us who have gotten wrapped up on one side of the argument order the other. They are frank with each other, say some things they should have a long time ago, some hurtful things, and really air out a lot of stuff. I think this may de-personalize some of the Civil War, and definitely give IM and Cap a starting point for the post Civil War era. Normally I don't like the "let's talk and have no action" stype of stuff, but this was well done and I liked it. But then, it's Christmas and I am in my annual weepy "It's A Wonderful Life" mode.
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Dec 20, 2006 22:28:06 GMT -5
Maybe I'm too sappy, but I think this one shot redeemed both IM and CA a bit for those of us who have gotten wrapped up on one side of the argument order the other. They are frank with each other, say some things they should have a long time ago, some hurtful things, and really air out a lot of stuff. I think this may de-personalize some of the Civil War, and definitely give IM and Cap a starting point for the post Civil War era. Normally I don't like the "let's talk and have no action" stype of stuff, but this was well done and I liked it. But then, it's Christmas and I am in my annual weepy "It's A Wonderful Life" mode. It's certainly a valid point that something along these lines should have taken place at the beginning of CW -- but if it's all that you say it is, then there would have been no Civil War.Since this is happening near the end and not the beginning, how can one justify that Cap would sit down for a heart-to-heart with the guy responsible for doing all the things that Tony (and Reed) have done? Given events of CW thus far, positions should be hardening, not softening. And even if this had been done prior -- how could one then justify their subsequent actions? "Cap, I respect and love you like a brother, but I have to tell you that I plan to ambush you given the chance, Reed and I cloned our oldest friend Thor, and we plan to use the dangerously unstable Clor to apprehend fellow superheroes and throw them into an extradimensional prison sans trial. Buddy." Or, "Tony, I respect and love you like a brother, but rather than face arrest, I'm going to go hog-wild engaging in street battles in downtown New York, sucker-punch you given the chance, spout disgusting vitriol against the American people and democracy in general, and treat Goliath's death as a recruiting tool. Pal." Ask yourselves these questions: Are the actions of these two characters, as written in CW, in accordance with their own histories?Are they in accordance with the picture that this one-shot tries to paint of their relationship?This is a belated attempt at damage control which I refuse to support with my wallet. Too little, too late. No doubt, Marvel hopes that a little touchy-feely action will assuage the fans' outrage and convince them that IM isn't really a murdering fascist and Cap isn't really a class-warfare revolutionary. How in the hell can Tony Stark and Reed Richards have been turned into murdering fascists, and no one at Marvel raised the alarm? I really want to know the answer to that question. If Marvel wants my business back, Marvel can step up in a public forum and admit they screwed up and retcon CW out of existence, rather than trying to put band-aids on it like this "Casualties of War" one-shot. If you are disgusted with what's going on, express your displeasure with your wallet. RSC
|
|
BigDuke
Reservist Avenger
Posts: 136
|
Post by BigDuke on Dec 21, 2006 9:14:27 GMT -5
I can understand your point, and in the real world your analysis would be spot on. But we have seen a lot of vicious fights between heroes resolved in comics when a little light has been shed. I am not saying this is the magic pill that makes everything better or makes all the bad stuff okay. But is does remind these two that they have trusted each other with their respective lives for 40+ years (of comics at least) and that maybe their initial reactions to each other may need to be rethought.
After all, Cap was given the "choice" to round up his fellow heroes at the point of a gun. That probably did not put him in the best position to rationally weigh all options, discuss solutions, and arrive at the best decision. If you put a soldier type on the defensive, his response is to fight and turn the tide to his favor.
As for IM, given what he knows about the government (Project Wideawake) I can't blame him for wanting to be in control of this whole thing and using some of the tactics he has used. His methods are certainly less extreme and, in the end, less bloody than what the government solutions would be. I think in his mind that if he just has enough time to convince the opposition that they will eventually come around.
Sometimes when things between friends get way out of hand, this kind of airing of grievances (in this case resulting in a fist fight) is the only way to clean out the destructive negative energy and get things moving in a positive direction again.
Anyway, I understand your opinion, but maybe you'll at least give this a quick read in the store while you're browsing.
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Dec 22, 2006 13:14:47 GMT -5
I have to say when I read this story I was unimpressed. As a long time Avengers fan, I knew all of the events that were referenced and it didn't feel like I came away with any more insight as to what was fueling each character. However, my boyfriend really enjoyed the story. He wasn't aware of all the different times when these two Avengers have come into conflict, and for him, it helped explain many of the differences that have driven a wedge between the two. So I suppose this book has served a purpose after all.
Although I initially enjoyed CW, mainly because it felt like it was putting some life into the MU, it now feels dragged out and contrived (particularly when it comes to the behavior of Stark and Mr. Fantastic).
|
|
|
Post by Van Plexico on Dec 22, 2006 13:30:30 GMT -5
I agree, Tana. It was "nice," and a pleasant walk down memory lane... but I hate that I paid $4 for it.
But it did make progress, I think, toward balancing the moral views of the sides out once again. So much of CIVIL WAR in the early stages was so purely pro-Cap, I couldn't believe it.
(Well, I could, actually, because how can anyone be against Cap's side...?)
But, still, we were promised a situation where both sides have equally valid points, yet from the start Iron Man has been portrayed as the equivalent of the baddest villain in the Marvel Universe. At least this showed both of them as on somewhat equal moral terms, I think.
So I suppose that was worth my four bucks...
|
|
|
Post by balok on Dec 23, 2006 1:20:09 GMT -5
Iron Man's side, much as I am loathe to admit it, isn't entirely lacking in merit.
The problem is, how is he ever going to get people to trust him again, when it comes out what he as done? Certainly much of what Tony has done flies in the face of the Constitution, and therefore it seems like Cap will have a big problem with him. Cap actually fought - killed people - in defense of the values Tony seems to spit on.
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Dec 23, 2006 3:22:57 GMT -5
Unfortunately there are a lot of people in this country - in our senate and white house even - that feel the ends justify the means, and that security is worth any price, even at the cost of our most basic freedoms. It seems like that is where Tony is at. For superhumans to survive, he thinks they must make sacrifices now. I can understand this view, to a point. Not condone it, but understand it.
I do think though that both Tony and Reed will have lost much of the respect they once had from the community. As Balok brought up, how can Tony and Cap ever really reconcile? Whatever Marvel does in regards to resolving CW, there should be long term repercussions on relationships in the MU.
And hey, wouldn't it be informative to get some idea of how the average citizen in the MU views the war? Are they siding Pro or Anti by large? Has this been really dealt with in any of the books?
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Dec 23, 2006 23:27:50 GMT -5
I personally that some writers are handling Tony far more villianous than he is supposed to come off as.
JMS is very much guilty of this, often portraying him as cold and ruthless.
However, I feel as though Millar is handling him well - willing to reach out to Cap before that battle when Thor showed up; trying to talk "Daredevil" into leading a team after he was captured; and even trying to talk things out with Spider-Man (it was Hill that sent the Thunderbolts after him).
I've stated it elsewhere, but I don't still don't think that Tony is coming off as a villian at all. He's trying to stand for the registration so that others will comply. He knows that if it's not registration, it's shutting super-heroes all together.
~W~
|
|
|
Post by balok on Dec 27, 2006 19:31:44 GMT -5
I personally that some writers are handling Tony far more villianous than he is supposed to come off as. JMS is very much guilty of this, often portraying him as cold and ruthless. In connection with Babylon 5, I have read bits about JMS. He is very much a defender of personal liberty and what most would call a liberal, favoring personal freedom over government in most cases. I suspect that what you're seeing are his views of Iron Man and registration in general projected onto the character. Were the character entirely his own that would be entirely appropriate. However, he's playing in someone else's sandbox, both at Marvel and to the degree his stories must interlock with other Civil War material. And that requires a greater degree of personal detachment than I think he has shown on Iron Man's character.
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Jan 7, 2007 12:02:24 GMT -5
I've just read the book and I enjoyed it much more than expected. I liked the various continuity references and especially the fact that the two heroes were portrayed more close to their classic characterization, while still defending their reasons. As they said in the end, they should have done it earlier.
|
|