Tweet

Marvel’s Captain America: Civil War has been met with much fanfare but little critical analysis. The fast-paced action movie has roots in its namesake story line from the comic books, but there are substantial differences that emphasizes the unique nature of each medium.

This article will break down those differences and discuss how they embody different thematic directions. There will be plenty of spoilers for both the movie and the comic, but only in terms of themes and generalities without spoiling the overall action.

What Was the Civil War?

Marvel’s Civil War comic cross-over series divided the American superhero community over the Superhero Registration Act, with Tony Stark/Iron Man commanding the supporters and Steve Rogers/Captain America leading the opposition. The fight was ideological with much gray area between the two sides. The supporters argued that superheros needed oversight to ensure the protection of the citizenry from collateral damage while the opponents stressed the need for freedom and flexibility to protect the people.

Both sides of the argument were equally provided for, and there were no rhetorical missteps. Superheroes who registered were paid by the government and regulated, and there is the constant refrain that, by getting on board, they preempt even greater and oppressive regulations. Those who opposed sought to remain above political whims and serve a higher cause, worrying that corruption could force them to violate their duties as heroes. Both sides focused only on themselves, Unwilling to compromise, which led to unnecessary deaths and fighting between those who once fought together.

The film version was primarily based on emotions: Stark’s PTSD building over multiple films led to a semi-breakdown when confronted directly with an innocent person’s death that he caused. This was compounded by power hungry government officials who sought to control the superhero community. On the other side, the re-appearance of Bucky Barnes/Winter Soldier led to a man-hunt, and Captain America’s bond of friendship forced him to fight against the government agencies. T’Challa/Black Panther, who seeks vengeance for the death of his father and countrymen, stands alone. The emotions are pure, but they are flawed because they ignore both reason and the greater good.

What Was the Scope of the Civil War?

In the comic version, the superhero community is large. Although the M-Day event severely reduced the number of mutants, there are still hundreds that exist in the world. They are segregated and neutral, but they still play a role in the greater Civil War. The Avengers themselves are vast, with their long history, and there are many other groups that are part of the dispute, including the Fantastic Four. However, the events are primarily limited to America, with other countries considering the adoption of their own registration programs.

Namor and the Atlantians are effectively neutral, as are the Inhumans. Others are not to be found: Dr. Strange has isolated himself; Hulk has been sent off to another planet; and Thor is dead. Spider-Man has had a long, prominent history up to this point, and he is working as Stark’s lab assistant. The public reveal of his identity and joining the pro-registration side is a major event that shows how complicated the issue is, with the action causing him great emotional discord. Mr. Fantastic of the Fantastic Four and Hank Pym, the original Ant-Man, are major allies of Stark’s, and they play an essential role to the emotional fallout caused by the Civil War.

The film version is effectively limited in scope because of the placement within the Marvel universe. Although Iron Man and Captain America are up to three movies, other major players are lacking. The Vision and the Scarlett Witch are new, coming from the second Avengers movie. Scott Lang/Ant-Man just had a movie, but he only emphasizes the differences between the film and the comic. His predecessor in the Ant-Man role, Pym, seemed far too old and untrained to serve in an action role. Thor and Hulk are nowhere to be found, while the television characters aren’t even hinted at as being part of the greater universe. Dare Devil is a major player in the comic, but the screen version has not aged enough to be present.

Spider-Man’s inclusion seems unnecessary and out of place except to show that there are is a whole world of potential superheroes beyond the Avengers that we have not yet seen. His identity is not revealed, and he does not serve as a catalyst in the greater ideological dispute. He is a minor comic-relief character who serves as a foil to Ant-Man. Both could have been removed from the film without damaging the plot, yet their comic counterparts (in the form of an older Peter Parker and a younger Pym) were almost as important as Stark and Rogers.

Then there are limitations imposed by character rights. The Fantastic Four and “mutants,” especially the X-Men, belong to rival movie studios. By losing these powerful characters, the scope of the Civil War is dramatically smaller. There are not thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of those with super powers. Instead, there only seems to be a dozen.

On the otherside, the Avengers are an international presence, and the UN, not the US Government, is attempting to crackdown on them. This creates a strange effect; each superhero becomes far more uniquely destructive and far more to blame as an individual. Regulating 1 million people because a handful of superheroes caused major collateral damage is far harder to justify than the regulation of a dozen because all of them were responsible in various incidents that risked the lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. None of the film characters are innocent, but none are truly to blame for collateral damage.

What Are the Major Thematic Issues?

In the comic, violators of the Superhero Registration Act were sent to an off-planet prison in the Negative Zone. This is a very dramatic punishment for a minor offense. Although the individuals interred have the potential to cause mass destruction, they have, in most causes, done little. The issue is philosophical, provoking comparison to the Japanese internment camps or Guantanamo Bay.

In the film, Roger’s allies are sent to a supposedly strong prison after destroying an airport. Although they were trying to stop a potentially greater evil, they caused serious issues and ultimately deserved to be punished. They are given an emotional, not a rational, pass on their behavior. They are the good guys, so we can ignore the loss of property. The airport, after all, was strangely empty. The film prisons, therefore, have nothing to do with safety but are minor inconveniences that get in the way of action.

While the government in both versions has people who will use it for abusive ends, there is no one in the movie version that really makes the government look justified. There are some general political principles that are in effect, but those are upheld only in passing by those like Black Widow, Black Panther, etc. Governments as a whole seem inept and unable to react, and, when they do act, are only a minor inconvenience.

The attempt to regulate the superheroes in the film is more of an act of desperation; governments exist only at the whim of those with powers. The regulation of superheroes in the film is a final act by a super competent government that is able to use fear to take even greater power unto itself. While the film universe revealed the potential corruption of governments by the infiltration of HYDRA, it is more dangerous to superheroes to be registered in the comic universe.

At no time is Stark or any of his people used by the government to do something immoral or wrong in the film. Instead, Stark alone seems capable of blunders. In the second Avengers movie, his attempt to replace superheroes with a robotic fighting force created an evil AI, one, interestingly, created by Pym in the comic. In the film, Stark embodies all of his comic problems plus those of other characters, seemingly only ever able to succeed in spite of himself.

What Was the Greatest Difference?

Many of the people in the comic prison were just trying to help fight crime, all actions that are minor and very sympathetic. The film superheroes are all major players who were involved in major incidents. There is no sense of collateral damage to the crime fighting community, and the appearance of Spider-Man partway through the film makes it seem as if minor crime fighting vigilantes would be ignored by the greater regulation.

Furthermore, the prison in the movie was filled only with those who clearly caused a lot of problems and chaos, working outside of the system, but their actions could still be justification. Though they were “right,” they were wrong in their actions. In the comic, the opposition was filled with many innocents, and the opposition owns the moral high ground until the very final moments of the Civil War. It was only in the end that Rogers recognized that by opposing, they force the government to take action, that the government needs to end them, and that action would lead to others getting hurt. By surrendering, Captain America owns the moral high ground to the very end, sacrificing all personal liberty to protect others.

The film reverses this ending: Stark looked petty and vindictive, and he is in the wrong but excusably so because he is under the influence of severe emotional trauma. He is no longer trying to protect humanity but avenge a personal hurt. Ultimately, Rogers was able to defeat Stark and run off, leaving the issue completely unresolved. He is beyond the law, and we cheer that idea.

There are no moral dilemmas in the film. No one is challenged. Most of the fighting is based on the emotional bond between others, and those emotions are resolved by throwing fists at another’s face. There is no political intrigue, no ideological back and forth. The only time that a political speech could truly be made resulted in a massive explosion, which is representational of the director’s approach to politics as a whole: who needs politics when we can have action.

This is not a failure of the film, just a reality of its medium. We do not have enough characters with enough histories to create a poignant debate over the Patriot Act. We also do not have enough time to get into such events. While comic book characters get away with detailed monologues, such activities are boring on film. We need motivation, and emotional desires to defend friends and family are the easiest to tap into for an audience. This is a summer blockbuster, and people would like to see Stark and Rogers pound at each other while making silly quips.

Overall, “Civil War” is a misnomer for the film; it is merely a split within the Avengers, with many of the players not actually having a history with the Avengers. Important questions are not resolved, but the comic refused to resolve the issues, too. Ultimately, Stark doubles down on the plan and creates the “50 State Initiative,” a government regulated superhero group in each state. At the same time, Rogers is assassinated in prison, causing great emotional distress for many. Eventually, Rogers is brought back, but his death represented a low point that defied any resolution to the original dispute.

The problem is neither the film’s nor the comic’s. We are confronted by major issues, but none of us has an answer. The comic allows us to dwell on the issues, to see how some of them would play out, but it does not give us a resolution. The film goes the opposite way; it plays on the issues, allowing us to subconsciously feel them, but it substitutes action and the need to always move forward to prevent us from being overwhelmed by our inability to find answers.

Marvel learned from the comics that the best way to move on is to throw the universe into another major crisis. Defensive action is the best unifier, which is a lesson that the films adopted. We do not know where Rogers will end up, but the Infinity War is looming, and it is certain that everyone will be together for the most important battle to affect the universe.

As an action film, Captain America: Civil War met all expectations, though the fighting might have been too fast paced in some instances to truly keep up with, while too slow in others that it felt drawn out. There are no flaws with the fundamental plot structure, but it does fail to serve to provoke a discussion regarding the central aspects of the original comic Civil War.