Captain America: Civil War

One of the best Marvel movies, if not the very best. Fortunately, the trailers didn't reveal everything, so the plot of Civil War is surprising, whether you know the original or not, and yet it is not at all overdone and, moreover, from beginning to end it flows so naturally, not a trace of any awkwardness... In short, the complete opposite of (the first and second) The Avengers. Impressive quiet conversational scenes like Singer's X-Men are interspersed with Paul Greengrass-like action, jokes are not a necessity but a welcome spice, what is meant to be dramatic and fateful is so, and when it comes to emotion, it is 100% touching and not the least bit ridiculous. The new characters fit in quite naturally (the likeable Spider-Man), Henry Jackman, unlike the previous Captain, composed seriously listenable music, and finally someone thought that in the epic ending of the film, a flood of digital special effects does not have to destroy cities to make the audience clutch their throats.___P.S. It wasn't until now that I realized what Batman v Superman was missing, which, by the way, has a very similar plot, but it just serves it worse. (04/05/2016)

A new Marvel era begins with Civil War. Not only because the film introduces new players to the stage with unusual ease, but also because it definitely opens the door to a dimension left completely aside in the first, and partly also in the second Avengers. Civil War closes the gap between the "down-to-earth" series Daredevil and the escapist blockbusters, while at the same time showing DC and Warner quite indiscriminately what a careful character and story build-up is for. There may be cliché in the middle of the story, but Brühl, as a mysterious mover, is an unusually civil and believable (semi) villain. At the same time, Captain America is definitely finding his role as Captain of Inconsistency - a character so faithful to the original heroic idea of the comics that in the time of relativization, everything actually becomes a subversive element. His clash with Stark is much better motivated and, most importantly, much more meaningful than Batman v Superman. The intimate and unexpectedly impressive finale is an imaginary breakthrough. In this world, nothing will be as simple and clear as before. Marvel overwhelmingly won the battle with the competition and with itself. After Civil War, you may be wondering if you're more on the side of Team Captain America or Team Iron Man. But it's hard not to be on the side of Team Marvel. Who would have thought back in 2012? (05/05/2016)

Three long-term problems of the Marvel movies (if we do not count the uniform unisex kind of movies that Disney regularly produces) is the absence of proper respect for real respected bad guys with clear motivation, who do not only stare aggressively, depersonalized generic interchangeable CGI action and no consequences, impacts or personal sacrifices of the characters. It has always been the case that Marvel movies are better at squabble rather than at blockbuster action. The director brothers did try to change it in the Winter Soldier, and I must compliment them on trying to do the same in this movie too. They were successful in two cases (a scam in the form of the need for a bad guy, no matter how much potential this one has, and amazing action based on stunts) but terribly failed in one, because the unwillingness of Marvel movies to make main heroes any sacrifices has always been obvious but in this movie it is even more obvious in a silly way. In any case, this time the director's duo deserves more praise, because to handle so many characters in a way so that all their intentions are clear and understandable, that new players are properly introduced and do not act as useless as the fifth wheel, that the tension is tangible (unfortunately only in the final) and despite the escalation (although it is more required by the script than the movie itself) and the ambivalence of opinions of both parties, it kept the style of minor exaggeration and on top of all that, all the characters do their job and have enough space. Obviously, even much more experienced movie makers often fail in this department. On the contrary, they did not handle the footage well. It is not lengthy, but it has more sequences with very slow pace than would be appropriate. Other flaws include the epileptic camera in action scenes, and that the whole trifling dispute is more like a pub brawl of a few individuals than a war, let alone a civil war. (04/05/2016)

So many themes and subplots that I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually three movies edited into one. Nonetheless, even such a flood of information and plot twists doesn't hurt and makes Captain America: Civil War a dense 147 minutes. I am feeling a dizzyingly blissful feeling that it will be Anthony Russo and Joe Russo who will be orbiting around Avengers: Infinity War. Because here, so many characters are gathered that even Avengers: Age of Ultron seems almost intimate. But I love Steve Rogers' stories precisely because they are... well, simply, about Steve Rogers. Promoting Iron Man's participation to the second main character is a perfect idea, because Robert Downey, Jr. has never given such an amazing performance before, but the detour to Spider-Man, though perfectly functional and enticing, is too obvious a backdoor restart to not disrupt the pace. Something like that would fit wonderfully into an Avengers film, theoretically even into an Iron Man film, but here I felt a slight disappointment that this particular excursion takes away space from more important things. Fortunately, the rest of the newcomers (Baron Zemo, Black Panther, or at last larger roles for Sharon) and familiar faces, led by the perfect Ant-Man, fit into the stories wonderfully, and the incorporation of Wanda or Hawkeye into the plot brings me immense joy. Based on the reviews, I feel like writing that this is Cap's weakest solo film, but considering how much fun I had and the fact that even at its greatest ease, it simply isn't a solo film, it's not necessary to do so. It just seems that this time it enters the genre boundaries perhaps a bit too broadly. (10/05/2016)

I'll say right off the bat that I liked the second Captain America better, but fortunately the Russos carried a lot of things over from that into Civil War. The action is still just as gritty and full of clever moments, and there's plenty of room for the other heroes, both newcomers and those from the other films, to show off their abilities. When the action starts, fans of Cap, Iron Man, Ant-Man, Hawkeye and the newcomers will come into their own – Spidey and Black Pather are excellent. The problem, however, comes when the action stops. The Russos are still great at handling characters and defining their perspective on the whole situation in one sentence, making you understand why Black Widow doesn't go with Captain and why Scarlet Witch is on his side. But it's too much. There are simply too many heroes, so while the shorthand works, few get the space to impress. In the end, this is a film in which Tony Stark and Bucky are at the center of the action and the others are more or less extras. Everyone has a chance to make an impact, but if half of the supporting characters were cut out, it wouldn't matter at all. They don't hurt, they don't step over each other, but there's just no time to resolve the conflicts of these secondary characters in a way that makes one really care. On the other hand, even two sentences tossed off by Vision in a silly sweater are still more interesting than the ramblings of Batman and Superman discovering that their moms have the same name. The third Captain is good, but the thing we feared was a bit of a factor. The Marvel Universe has swelled so much that the even best filmmakers simply can't make a movie out of the pile of characters and motives in a way they all get adequate space in. And it's a bit of a shame. The solos suit this franchise better than the team-ups. On the other hand, if the team-ups look like Civil War, I'll always be happy to be there. (15/05/2017)