[Ruk Reviews- Captain America: Civil War]

1 hour ago, Water Bottle said:

If "risky" is only defined as killing off major players

It's not, I never said it was. BvS is not risky because it kills Superman, Age of Ultron is not risky because it kills Quicksilver.

 

It's a sum of various factors, it's about consequences.

 

QS was introduced in AOU, getting a half-assed backstory and never being, not even close, that movie's focus, then at the end he was killed off. No one gave a flying fuck. It was like killing an extra. 

 

One movie later, Wanda doesn't even acknowledge him.

 

About War Machine, sure, you have the right for an opinion.

[Ruk Reviews- Captain America: Civil War]

go back and read my first post, I was obviously talking about the comment you made about other people's opinion, so of course I would use 'it's my opinion' card.

 

Anyway, I think I have made my points clear.

[Ruk Reviews- Captain America: Civil War]

"If they have a happy ending, it's 'too safe', if they have don't have a happy ending then it's 'zero resolution." Nope, didn't say that.

 

Thousands of people die, governments around the world proposes regulations to ease the tensions, superheroes fight over personal problems, the end. Civil War ends in the same way it started on that issue. No resolution. It even leaves Tony and Steve reconciliation to the next episode. No resolution about that either. Now, I might reevaluate Civil War if Stark and Rogers don't become buddies again in the next chapter.

 

"Half of the team on the run" until Earth needs their help to fight Thanos in the next installment, then they will be championed. How risk. Anyway, I didn't find CW risky based on my own parameters, that's what matters to me, why should I care if it's risky for whatever reason that I don't consider risky?
 
"Also, killing off a character doesn't necessarily make a movie more 'risky' or, more importantly, better... only way to make a movie 'deep"  way to go... if your objective was to completely miss my point about killing characters. I want them to be killable, so that way I can feel some urgency in the action, I want to fear for them, I want to feel they are in danger. That's the reason of action scenes, isn't it? I mean, at some point a hero says to another hero, in the middle of a fight scene, "we are still friends, right?". 

Far from being bloodlust guy you implied me to be, I don't actually want characters who I care about to die.

 

"Internal rift between the Avengers" just like in the first Avengers.... and the second?

[Ruk Reviews- Captain America: Civil War]

Agree with some points, disagree strongly with others.

 

"The bad guy won. How's that for the 'Marvel always plays it safe story-wise' crowd"

 

It is still safe, no risks whatsoever were taken. First because there was zero resolution, second we just know they will make amends and get together to fight Thanos in IW.

 

Risky would be killing one of the major players (they didn't even the balls to kill War Machine), risky would be one of the sides actually breaking with the whole moral conflict, risky would breaking the Marvel mold of doing movies.

 

Civil War ended with Cap rescusing the whole gang and Stark in the middle of the process of making peace with Cap. How did the bad guy won?