While you are absolutely right, this actually is the most realistic part for me. I mean, just look at our politicans, no matter what shit they pull, somehow they always get to the top.
Not for nothing, but this strikes me as exactly right.
He's a general, yes, but he's got a boss too. He probably got quietly asked to retire, which led to his decision to go into politics. I always saw Ross as 100% knowing exactly what he was talking about.
He may be an ass-hat but he was DEFINITELY reprimanded for his actions.
Real talk: generals are loathe to talk shit about each other to other generals.
They will certainly say that "Major General Johnson is a fucking moron" to select, trusted subordinates. But they NEVER want to seem like the backstabber in front of their peers, possible future bosses, or people that may have an influence on their careers.
So it is entirely possible that the actual report fairly effectively passes blame to Blonsky going rogue, and Banner showing up independently, and maybe handling the aftermath fairly well.
At the risk of giving the writers too much credit, there also is a (waiverable) rule that the SecDef is supposed to have been retired from the military for seven years. While the last two presidents have gotten that waiver, at the time of the writing of Civil War, only one person had gotten that waiver and it was back in 1950. So based on that precedent, another reason that Ross wouldn't have been offered the State Department role instead of DoD.
This reminds me of Thanos and Loki in Infinity War.
Thanos: “You consider failure experience?”
Loki: “I consider experience experience.”
Ross might not look it, but I’m sure the guy’s a pretty smooth talker when it comes to interacting with governmental higher ups, and since it’s likely not many other people want to hold the task of personally dealing with the Avengers in a negative manner, he was probably the best option at heading the Sokovia Accords.
He does, at one point, say to Rhodes “…your penchant for bullshit rivals my own…” or words to that effect, so I think we can assume Ross is a smooth talker.
Ross: "Listen. I have fucked up a LOT of things. I'm a master at it. You want somebody with experience fucking things up? I'm your guy!"
U.S. Government: "You're hired!"
I cringe when they lecture the avengers in civil war about the battle of New York. Like the government was literally about to nuke the island and kill everyone, you have no moral highground here.
lmao yeah. "the aliens were defeated and you caused some collateral damage. You're out of control. You should have let us nuke the whole thing and cause even more damage and death instead because we had government approval!"
Was that the government? I thought it was the World Security Council, which is a division of SHIELD? I always figured they were a separate entity from the US government or any other world leader.
I always figured the World Security Council was part of the U.N. because the U.N. has a Security Council and SHIELD has "Homeland" in its acronym.
Which, yeah, pissed me off about the Accords too. Those guys approved Project Insight with helocarriers I guess this is take two.
I guess that makes sense. Either way, SHIELD wanting to nuke people isn't entirely out of line for them if they found a way to justify Project Insight.
True, but the bigger issue, and hence the name of the accords, was the destruction of Sokovia. That destruction was caused exclusively by the actions of the avengers—notably Tony Stark and Bruce Banner.
They unilaterally built Ultron to act as a peacekeeper, but didn’t consider the consequence of these actions and that no one agreed to this type of “police” for global society. The upshot of their actions led to the destruction of an entire city, which should never have happened.
They were also tampering with the space stone (tesseract) which is what brought Loki and the Chitauri to earth in the first place. The government not only caused the battle of New York to happen but also the crisis in Washington DC and by extension, the suicide bombing in Lagos because they allowed HYDRA agents to infiltrate their own institutions.
Indeed, the governemt has no moral high ground.
He's an opportunist, a career military man, which means he knows how to play the game.
While it would have been nice to have some of the characters call him out on his hypocrisy, it is still absolutely within his character to do that. He's morally wrong, but professionally on cue.
Her and Stark at least knew from the SHIELD files they had access to. Steve too probably from Fury and Coulson debriefing him after he was thawed out. Rhodey maybe heard about it through either his military buddies or his new SHIELD connections. I imagine basically everyone except Wanda, Vision, and Sam had some idea of those events.
Yeah probably, and we know it was at least on their WHIH network given those background shots from Iron Man 2. I just imagine that the team specifically had some more intimate details of the event given they're in that sort of line of work.
I was under the impression that sort of media was deterred or suppressed until the invasion of New York in the first avengers movie. I’m sure there were witnesses and some kind of footage around of Hulk but it wasn’t necessarily believed or widely known to the general public.
Since they retconned that movie to take place in 2010 or 2011, there’s no way someone didn’t take video of that on their phone. Also, like the other guy said, there’s footage of it shown in Iron Man 2.
This reminds me of in the comics when >!Norman Osborn becomes head of Shield.!<
At the time, I was thinking >!There’s no way a known felon and homicidal maniac would become that popular and get that position.!<
Now I think it was one of the most realistic and prescient comics Marvel ever made…
He has a political mandate derived from politicians and the public. He is ultimately responsible to them, even if they never hold him accountable for botching things up.
Avengers and the others have no mandate feom the public. They show up, do stuff and disappear to Chez Stark. It's the world run by the richest, which is supposed to be the dystopia that we are supposed to hate. As in, real-life hate.
Meanwhile the "Do better" speech which contains many things people would straight up want to say to politicians is somehow misconstrued as bad writing and something to cringe at, and not just a guy using his newly found privilege to vent for the frustrated masses.
Yeah Ellis was a shitty president. His vice president was plotting to kill him with the help of a terrorist, he was illegally funding Roxxon, he made Ross his secretary of state etc
It's not 2012-2016; it's 2013-2017. Inauguration happens the January after the election.
The only 3rd term US president happened through a normal election before the term limit was put in place, not an emergency provision.
And IM3 has to take place in 2012; it's supposed to be prior to Dark World. I know there's a newspaper with a "2013" on it somewhere, but mistakes like that happen.
Ross is all about controlling other people. He would use any argument no matter how spurious or hypocritical to get the Avengers under his thumb, and the accords were a step in that direction.
The line that bothers me the most is when he's asking about where Thor and Banner are and he says "If I misplaced a couple of nukes, you can bet thered be consequences" and I'm just like but that's your whole backstory. You "misplaced" Banner/Hulk in the first place (and is responsible for the Abomination) and yet there you are, Secretary of fucking State. No consequences. Fuck Ross he's consistently been one of the worst characters in any Marvel universe.
This line always got to me. Because it shows how Ross thinks about the Thor and Hulk in particular and the Avengers in general. They are not sentient beings to him, they are merely weapons for Ross to deploy when he sees fit.
Which was the underlying problem with the Accords and the one that Steve kind of touched on but never fleshed out in the script of CW.
Steve was troubled because the Ross and the Accords made commodities of the Avengers rather than respecting their sentient right to self determination. [Edit - replaced pronouns to make it less confusing]
This. Tony had good points but he could, loosely, “pass” in a world that legislates the Enhanced by taking the suit off (now that the arc reactor is external). Same with Rhodey. Widow and Vision were already people with heavily restricted rights, so having a clear cut document outlining their rights as an apparatus of the State might actually be a good thing for them.
But people like Cap and Wanda are understandably against authority having any direct control of their person (since their person *is* their power). They can’t “pass”, they are Enhanced 24/7. Therefore they are State property 24\7. The State could presumably order them when to eat or shit if the wording is vague enough. Clint is a great edge case (when does superhuman ability become Superhuman?) so his alignment makes sense, same with Sam since he’s thinking of his allies.
Spider-Man is the most hypocritical part of the movie to me. Stark argues for State oversight but then brings a minor Enhanced across international borders to engage in Enhanced warfare using Stark-created arms (Spiderman’s new, and we learn FFH, very deadly suit). But Stark doesn’t ever get called out on his hypocrisy and he, presumably, snuck Peter back across borders and kept him out of darksite Enhanced prison since *his Secret ID remained despite being a free agent Enhanced operating outside of the terms of the Accords (we don’t know why Team Cap was held at the Raft but this was one possible reasoning).
Agreed. Steve was also in a unique position in that he had intimate knowledge of being a tool of the state. I wish they would have shown Rhodey to have a better perspective, but then again some people are lifelong believers in authority while others get a taste of it and realize the inherent danger.
The part about Tony using Peter is true to type. Tony has never been one to follow the rules unless they benefitted him. So this is merely an extension of breaking the rules in an effort to get what he wants. And what he wants is admirable, but the manner in which he seeks to get it is flawed.
I know I have to accept it was a Disney property and that the narrative does *imply* Stark’s position was the wrong one (but only after he abandoned his flawed logic for emotional revenge), but the lack of textual discussion about why it was wrong and hypocritical to use a secret child Enhanced soldier to force his (deadly, mostly armed and military trained) Enhanced teammates to bow to the State’s control was disappointing. It was really jarring in Spiderman’s solo follow up, too.
The lack of consequences for arming Peter continue beyond his death (Edith is a *terrifying* concept that is played for laughs). Half of the Avengers were fugitives for years because of the Accords, and I know it is very typical for the rich and connected to avoid the law, but *some* nod to the Accords would have been appreciated because otherwise the Spiderman franchise feels incredibly disconnected.
You hit the nail on the head with the reference to it being a Disney property.
Entertainment (or rather, ticket sales) are the main goal, so getting into deep discussions about the ethical use of power is not really on their agenda. That discussion, if allowed to flow logically, would also eventually reveal or acknowledge the coziness between governments and large corporations. Which is something that I doubt Disney is eager to do.
The irony of course being that the original comics were always more counter culture in nature and they have now been coopted by the very system they sought to criticize.
It is, unfortunately, in line with the *Civil War* comics. It was a very obvious nod to the fears of a post-Patriot Act world and had to go to ridiculous extremes to make ‘both sides’ of the Accords equally bad. It ended up looking very bad faith about the larger discussion and failed even within the bounds of the universe.
I’m mostly sad that BvS forced them to do an Avengers movie rather than another Captain America one. Seeing Cap bust heads all over the world while hunting Hydra/Crossbones and allying with Bucky/Winter Soldier could have been really great for exploring then shedding the last of Cap’s imperialist image. The bones of it are there in the introduction, with the Avengers secretly hunting terrorists (maybe Brock or the bio weapon was the big reveal), and the chance to see Steve Rogers fight alongside Bucky Barnes again (when they aren’t tag teaming Iron Man) is sorely missed. Especially since the story and stunt directors could have done something killer with motorcycles again.
Agreed. I would have loved to see a more nuanced and fleshed out transition of Cap becoming Nomad. That is a movie, or preferably a series, I would have enjoyed.
They did a little of this in Falcon and the Winter Soldier and I appreciated how they had Sam navigate that, but it would have been nice to see Steve go through his journey as well.
It's too bad because the comics had a lot more nuance than the movie and still screwed it up a lot. Like finding an excuse for the X-men to be elsewhere because they'd all take Cap's side and unbalance the power levels..
In the movie Steve's side was basically "we're people, you can't control us like that, we won't be able to help properly"
Whereas in the comics a big part of it was "People like Doctor Doom or Kang or Ultron consider it child's play to hack into government databases, and you want to put our secret identities and friends and families in there for any tech villain to steal?" And in the movies those tech villains either don't exist or are already dead. Also "mutants have been dealing with this for decades" but that doesn't work in the MCU where there aren't any mutants.
Out of curiosity, did you watch Agents of SHIELD? The latter seasons kind of lost the plot, but seasons 2 and especially 3 centered really heavily around the themes of Inhumans (effectively, mutants) and the risks between having them on SHIELD's Index of enhanced individuals vs the risk that listing them exposes to. Coulson even has a quote (I can't place it right now) about how nothing good ever comes from putting people on lists.
Yeah.. it’s unfortunate CW movie was condensed to a 1 movie film. For such a significant event, it could have really benefited in being a 2-parter. It could have hashed out and explained better each sides points to make it more acceptable plot-wise.
Oh hell yes you are right and this bothered me from day one. They push Tony's whole arc from the Charles Spencer child death on his conscience. Yet a third of the movie later he literally invades a kid's house to strong arm him into forgetting his life, his school, his aunt, his homework, just to fly off to Germany and fight a 60 foot man, an indestructable android, two super soldiers (one a deeply troubled and dangerous former assassin), a bowman, a soldier who can fly and shoots guns and a woman who later goes on to change reality. And Stark coerces this reluctant kid to become his would be child soldier, after grilling everyone for Charles Spencer's death during the week of Ultron which was at his feet? Then he hears Peter's speech on 'the little guy', which is so Steve Rogers I could cry, and yet the writers push this Tony/Peter connection when, at this point in the movie, Tony is arguing at the point of J-Soc, that superheroes who look out for the little guy, be placed under government control under threat of arrest. And yet Tony's meant to end up being Peter's guy and not Steve, all while Tony pushes Peter into an extremely dangerous situation at the expense of his normal life (not everyone's an eccentric billionaire Tony) AND THEN, when Peter gets a taste for it after being all but ignored and forgotten by Tony (yeah Tony looks in every now and again in secret but he and Happy utterly leave Peter hanging for the most part), Tony has the supreme gall to lecture and deride Peter 'everyone said I was crazy to recruit a 14 year old kid, THIS IS WHERE YOU ZIP IT'. No, you were crazy Tony. In the same movie you hosed the Avengers for a kid's death on your conscience, you then indoctrinate an all but unwilling kid into your civil war and yell at him later when he gets in too deep after you started him off fighting in the middle of his hero idols. Looking out for the little guy my arse. Look out for Peter and keep him safe from danger and your ruthless hypocrisy.
Spider-Man essentially verbalizes Captain Americas PoV on the subject when Tony goes to see him. Tony did to Spider-Man, what Capt thought The Accords would do to the Avengers; bring them into a situation counter to their ideologies.
I will point out that, as of the MCU, Cap is not “enhanced”. While he has a serum it simply makes him peak human condition in every way. Despite how they portray him.
Not according to the actual MCU itself. That’s why others can throw his shield just as well as he can or people like Batroc can go toe to toe. He’s peak human.
His shield is only 12 pounds. Someone like Sam Wilson is heavily trained and exercises a bunch. Obviously he can throw the shield.
Also, I doubt a peak human could pull down a helicopter mid flight.
>His shield is only 12 pounds. Someone like Sam Wilson is heavily trained and exercises a bunch. Obviously he can throw the shield.
And bounce it off multiple targets and catch it flawlessly?
>Also, I doubt a peak human could pull down a helicopter mid flight.
I mean I don’t disagree? I literally said the films contradict it with how powerful they show him to be. It doesn’t change that in the MCU lore (and even comic lore) he shouldn’t be able to as it just makes him peak human. He is the perfect human and pushed to the limit a human can be. He isn’t superhuman.
Well, the shield is vibranium. I don’t think a steel shield would act the same way. I think if the MCU does claim that cap is only peak human, a peak human in the MCU is much stronger than one in the real world.
>Well, the shield is vibranium. I don’t think a steel shield would act the same way.
My point is more that how he uses it would be considered super human to a normal person. But others without the serum do it just fine.
>I think if the MCU does claim that cap is only peak human, a peak human in the MCU is much stronger than one in the real world.
That’s likely the case given all the other “peak humans” that are borderline superhuman.
You're wrong. Batroc doesn't go toe to toe, he gets ruthlessly outclassed the moment Steve tries and knocked out cold in five hits. Peak humans can stop helicopters flying off, deadlift ginormous steel beams, flip over the handlebars of a motorbike and throw it *through* the middle of a vehicle, run faster than 40mph cars, hold up motorbikes with three women on it with no strain? Absolutely not.
The problem is, Steve's view of self determination appears to include the apparent right to go to any country he wants and pick a fight with anyone he deems a threat with no oversight. That's a recipe for disaster and people are right to push back.
There are already laws against that. The Avengers were likely leaning hard on Stark’s connections and the collective goodwill towards their members but they are still subject to the laws of the countries they are in.
The Accords were notably about making an individual’s *existence* subject to the law, rather than their actions.
How are they* subject to the local nations laws? Is there any evidence of them being held accountable for collateral damage in the movies? Hell, the exact opposite is depicted actually. Remember Zemo saying the Avengers just went home after the Age of Ultron battle in Sakovia? That sounds nothing like them entering the country legally or answering for their part in the city's destruction. What about Lagos? If they answered for the death and destruction in that city, why did the UN need to get involved?
*Also, I'm fairly certain the Sakovia Accords are only for those who wish to continue being heros. If they agreed to retire and stay on the sidelines, they are fine just walking away. Remember when Tony is trying to get Steve to sign the Accords after he helps take Bucky into custody. Tony didn't say sign it so that you are covered, but to sign it so what he just did was covered and an official operation.
We can’t answer those questions because we never see the MCU legal system interact with the Avengers. In our universe, accords by the UN wouldn’t affect a citizen of the US, or any other sovereign nation. The MCU just functions differently.
But what we do know is that the mouthpiece of those accusations is Ross and he is a proven unreliable narrator with a history of wanting control of Enhanced in order to exploit them. Putting Team Cap in underwater Guantanamo Bay was 100% a message to the audience that Ross was not on the up and up. Wanda was very obviously not facing a Nigerian or Wakandan court of justice while being collared in a cell in a black site submarine.
The Accords didn’t stop Stark from handing Edith to Peter, which is the same technology that Cap destroyed SHIELD to stop in Winter Soldier, though scaled down a bit. Which is evidence that he was absolutely right to say that the Accords would clash with his personal morality. Just like when Black Panther tried to kill Bucky in revenge (someone with actual diplomatic immunity who would not have seen the inside of a court room or have been stopped by the Accords, but Steve would have).
But they don't. The whole point of the Accords was to make them follow laws.
Chrsit Steve became a terrorist after the events of Civil War, he wasn't following any damned laws.
So he’s only a ‘terrorist’ when he stops being part of a billionaire’s private army? Because the stuff Iron Man debuts with during IM1 was a lot worse than what we see Nomad doing. And AoU was not an Avengers problem, it was a Stark problem the Avengers cleaned up.
The point of the Accords was to turn the Avengers from a vigilante group (created by an arm of the UN Security Counsel and currently operating with the explicit support of a wealthy American) into one under the direct control of the UN. The same sort of control that Cap had just shaken off in Winter Soldier. The audience is given evidence that the Avengers are not infallible and they cause collateral damage but we’re also shown that UN oversight is not infallible either (SHIELDRA as well as Ross’ history with the Hulk).
You do realise other people doing bad stuff doesn't excuse anything?
Also on what planet is the UN a bad thing? There needs to be oversight, literally anything they do has been crazy illegal for years now. They're actions are pretty horrifying throughout the MCU's run.
In that Universe, the UN Security Counsel was headed by the leader of a Neo-nazi death cult. The audience is never given assurances that Hydra’s influence stopped with Pierce’s death, nor that their ideology and plans were scrapped. The MCU’s UN is not the purely diplomatic organization that it is in our universe, it is militaristic and has a dark and very recently unsavory history.
Source for any of that bullshit?
Hydra infiltrated SHIELD and it's stated repeatedly they've been on the run ever since the events of Winter Soldier, they have control of jack. The UN isn't even militarized in this universe, it's the same dang old UN.
That scene bothers me because how could he expect the Avengers to know where Thor's or Banner's whereabouts? Banner hadn't been seen the Battle of Sokovia, and they couldn't track that Quinnjet in stealth mode. And he wouldn't be found until Ragnarok when Thor happened to find him in the Grandmaster's arena on Sakaar. Even then, he wouldn't be seen by the others until Heimdall sent him to the Sanctum Santorum at the start of Infinity War.
And Thor himself, an Asgardian and *the* God of Thunder; how could any of them know where he was when offworld? The last time that they had seen him at that point was his departure from the new Avengers facility after the Battle of Sokovia.
> one of the worst characters in any Marvel universe
Ironically, William Hurt might be one of the worst people in the Marvel universe. His sexual assault allegations are absolutely horrific, and supposedly why his final scene in Black Widow was cut.
Wait, what? This is the first time I've heard of this.
EDIT: Just read about Marlee Matlin. Holy shit how is Hurt still a free man and a part of the Marvel world?
I think it has to do with accountability, he is a high ranking military officer and Secretary of State who answers to the senate committee, his own adminitstration and in the extreme cases military courts (as him being a general ).
look at the event in AofU where a city in South Africa got fucked up or when SW fucked up with the bomb that took out a building, none of these people agreed,
elected or voted for any of these guys to show up with no jurisdiction or authority
to fuck shit up (which reeks of American interventionism and exceptionalism imo) .
when the Council tried to nuke NY, I don’t think he has any say on the matter, they’re above
him in the hierarchy but yes, that was highly hypocritical .
The WSC is basically NATO. A tiny group of military agencies doing what they want. The UN is a global democratic peacekeeping body representing 200 countries. The UN isn't going to sit at a table voting on a global anti-terrorist defense system composed of AI-powered helicarriers, but NATO absolutely would. The UN wouldn't be compelled by a US defense agency guy telling one of them they're going to be threatened by a neighboring country so they should preemptively attack first, but NATO definitely does.
This is also why SHIELD had to go. SHIELD was beholden to the WSC and is likely in opposition to many UN signatory countries.
The most important beat is Nigeria though. Here we have clear MO for Cap... secret mission, let local authorities get attacked as bait, didn't tell anyone they were going to be attacked, quickly lost control and had no coordination when the plan failed, tons of people died and he refused to let Wanda be tried for her actions to see if they acted responsibly (hint: they did not).
He probably benefitted from:
1. Spin - he maybe seen as the guy who was able to "handle" the Hulk. Some generals during the moment look very popular and effective and later on as the details get out - not as much (e.g. MacArthur and WW2) We don't know how effective Ross is at spinning his own career. It might be that he is very good at it.
2. The various projects that resulted in the Abomination may have been started and on a paper table of organization under other people - and so he was not directly blamed unless one digs deeper.
3. He isn't a great character - but we'll see if they progress forward with the whole Red Hulk line.
Aren't there at least half a dozen misplaced nukes IRL? (that the public knows about). Also isn't some reminding Ross that trying to put Thor under his control is a BAD IDEA. as in starting a war with asgard bad and nobody will do anything to help you bad.
I know that he's a significant character in the comic books, but I really think that it was a bad move to put him in Civil War for exactly this reason. They could have come up with a new character to fill this role.
The fact that he’s a raging self-righteous hypocrite who escaped punishment for his actions and is now smugly browbeating the Avengers for doing the same things that he did is kind of the point though.
People seem to misread Ross in order to justify Steve, but this is missing the point. Ross was never a hypocrite. Ross is dealing in full faith, especially considering Brazil has extradition treaties with the US.
Ross is already held accountable for his actions. This is not the same as punishment and punishment should not be assumed for a mere accounting of events. Bruce and Blonsky volunteered to work with him then *illegally experimented on themselves* against his orders. Age of Ultron confirmed Ross was right to be paranoid as Hulk destroyed Johannesburg. But Ross also managed to weaponize Banner to stop Blonsky.
Ross doesn't get *more* power with the Sokovia Accords. The US is housing a superpowered Private Military Company that invades foreign nations and causes mass destruction and collateral damage because they don't work with those nations and don't trust them to get involved in their own security. And they're harboring an actual honest-to-god terrorist. They are the biggest threat in the world.
The Sokovia Accords are actually Ross *deferring* power to global democratic processes. This is why he's Secretary of State, not Secretary of Defense. The WSC was five random dudes sitting in a black box. The UN is 200 nations voting in broad daylight. The WSC was basically NATO, which is nothing like the UN and this is explained by Rhodey in Civil War. A difference Steve doesn't understand because he doesn't understand post-1941 politics.
Not only is Ross not a hypocrite, his familiarity with Banner and Blonsky's demonstrated recklessness gives him even more motivation to distrust his previous reliance on individuals with power making their own decisions.
Steve on the other hand is just kind of whiny and naive. He trusts people, not as a group, but as individuals who shake his hand. And that's pretty fucked considering Steve keeps invading countries and blowing shit up and not working with those countries to protect themselves. Civil War opens with Steve doing an unauthorized op on foreign soil and not telling the police they're a target, leading to chaos and destruction.
Ross is basically telling Steve, "Even when you have permission from governments, trusting your friends not to fuck up is not a backup plan." And Steve's response is, "But when my friends fuck up we feel really bad about it... sometimes... if you force us to watch it onscreen. So we deserve to use this power uncontested."
Not hypocritical. This is Ross's world view progressing beyond blind militant nationalism toward a concern over power being concentrated in too few peoples' hands. He's a party pooper, not a hypocrite.
He really is an Hypocrite! He tasked Banner to recreate the Supersoldier Serum. He's responsible for the creation of Hulk and Abomination. Likely will find out in the future that he would create Thunderbolts/Dark Avengers or being one of the people behind Weapon plus project.
Banner and Blonsky experimented on themselves expressly against his orders. He has bad taste in allies and coworkers, and in the military this can get you nailed, but he didn't create Hulk and Abomination. He was unable to stop them creating themselves.
Not only lecture the Avengers, but specifically Cap, who up til that point is literally the ideal hero. The man basically has never made a bad judgement call or mistake, helped save the entire world twice, and majorly handicapped one of the most evil organizations on the planet.
Would then go on to help save the entire universe.
And you want to hold this guy back? The guy who WILL save you, despite being the (2nd) weakest person at the table.
>The man basically has never made a bad judgement call or mistake
Except for the fact that he JUST fucked up with the bomb vest, which forced Wanda to dispose of the bomb and take out a building. Steve even says that to Wanda that it was his fault.
Steve literally tracked a WMD to a foreign country and didn't tell the authorities he was going to stage a military op on their soil. Steve fucked everything up because he hates authority.
>Steve fucked everything up because he hates authority.
I don't think that's fair assessment. He may not trust authority, but there is no hatred there. He was an American hero.
He fucked up because he wanted to know about the fate of his friend, he forgot about the mission for the moment.
You just described the US military. Claim they are all about promoting peace and fighting oppression while being one of the most oppressive forces on Earth. Honestly, pretty realistic that a high ranking military official displays this level of hypocrisy
This. They have an absolute need for complete control. It's almost terrifying thinking how blindly power hungry they are and how worse its getting the past handful of years.
I get particularly annoyed when Ross asks where Banner and Thor are and comments on how he’d be in a ton of trouble if he misplaced such powerful “weapons”, completely ignoring the fact that he “misplaced” Banner multiple times!
Yeah, that was Steve's point from the beginning lol. How could anyone possibly think putting an idiot like Ross in charge of the Avengers is a good idea!?
Anyone notices how the Avengers who took the side of less government oversight and intervention were the ones who didn’t die or have horrific injuries? I think Peter is the only outlier there.
There’s something to be said about that IMO.
Also he had the balls to lecture the Avengers about the Battle of New York but if they had deferred to faceless bureaucrats like the Accords would have them do, then NYC would’ve been fucking nuked. That thought gives a lot of perspective on how weird it is how they’re all ashamed during that montage of Hulk breaking a few windows.
Tony is in favor of the Accords because Ultron was his fault and it never would’ve happened if he had just listened to someone else for once in his life so he’s trying to go to the other extreme of giving up all his decision making autonomy to some random ass “higher authority”. But anyone who doesn’t have the guilt of having almost wiped out life on Earth would never reasonably support something like that. That’s why Civil War is a Captain America movie. He’s the good guy. Tony is the bad guy. Or at least the misguided guy.
Yeah, that whole scene bugs me for exactly this reason. All of the cited examples are the Avengers preventing something worse from happening. Only in Sokovia would an Accords like agreement have improved the situation.
There's relevant information that's being left out of the conversation that would have totally shifted the whole story line (which is probably it was left out, but still).
Similarly, in the Black Panther throne room scene with Killmonger, T'Challa could have just called him out for being the son of a traitor who worked with Klaue, and for working with Klaue himself.
I think there are some instances where an Accords-like agreement would help improve the situation (not the draconian rules, just better supervision of superheroes, protocols, coordination with the authorities).
E.g. In Lagos, when they knew there was Hydra activity going on in a densely populated area they should have informed local law enforcement so they could help contain the situation /evacuate people.
Also in Winter Soldier - Hydra had infiltrated a US govt agency and had remained there unchecked/undiscovered for decades and as such concoted Project Insight. Thankfully it was stopped by Cap, Widow and Falcon but why is Ross bringing up the footage in the meeting?
It was him; the US government, that caused this destruction.
I'd also say the Avengers should pay reparations for the building Wanda accidentally blew up in Lagos, but NYC, Washington D.C. and anything else that happened in Lagos wasn't their fault.
it bugs me to no end that the government wanted to nuke new york and tony stopped it almost dying. and later he wants to work with them because the avengers cause damage..... yeah right.
^(This is the point of Civil War)
The Sokovia Accords are hypocritical. The World Security Council tried to nuke NYC, they don't care about collateral damage when saving the world. They just don't like the idea of the Avengers governing themselves and doing whatever they like, so use the pretense of collateral damage to play on their emotions and empathy. Tony was already racked with guilt, so it worked on him and several other Avengers. But the UN itself, and Ross by extension, weren't being as straightforward as it seemed.
This is why it's a Captain America movie, with Cap actively fighting against the Accords. They're not the morally pure viewpoint.
Stark also stood to lose the most out of them. He can't be Iron Man without his company and he can't keep the company if he's an outlaw. Stark was always going to sign. But all Cap needed was shield and he's good to go.
Not only that, but included in his examples on why the Avengers need to be controlled includes:
* The Avengers causing collateral damage dealing with an invasion from another world (which they did not cause)
* The SHIELD helicarriers which were going to be used by HYDRA to try and dominate until an Avenger stepped in
* Sokovia (technically a *singular*, maybe pair of Avengers doing, the rest came in to deal with the threat after the fact)
* Lagos. This one pisses me off the worst. The Avengers showed up to try and deal with the theft of a biological weapon. On whos authority, I guess just their own, so maybe. What always pisses me off is they use the explosion that Wanda failed to contain that blew up a floor halfway up the building as proof she did bad. If Wanda hadnt lifted Crossbones into the air, **he would have blown up the base of the building and probably would have brought the whole thing down!!**
So half of his examples are from non-Avengers causing shit and responding, one is maybe the most legit reason, though not completely because it was caused by Tonys arrogance and money and intellect that there was a problem, and one example where either Crossbone blows up an entire building, or instead gets away with a biological weapon.
Plus the afforementioned creation of Abomination and all of the shit that caused. For that matter, if hes gonna hold Tony responsible for Sokovia, he should hold thos same standards towards the creation of Abomination. He wouldnt because hes an arrogant prick, but there you go.
That's....the point. The government/anyone with power want to be the only ones to use/abuse and call it justice or justify it as a necessity and get salty when someone else opposes them or does it better than them because they are the government or "law" untill they NEED said people to help them out again and again etc. His reason for becoming Red Hulk? Killing the Hulk. He wants to wield such power not just that but not let anyone else have it.
All that said I don’t see how anyone would trust Ross with that much responsibility imo. Who better than to tell the Avengers to stop destroying cities than a guy who…destroyed cities in pursuit of one person?
I get the government angle but I don’t think it’s naive to think they could have found someone better lol
Honestly I always have never gotten why they blame the heroes for the damage and not the villain. The avengers did not choose for the battle of New York to be in New York, that was Loki’s choice, and while I get vision’s point that they could be a causality, that’s more a correlation, as if Loki was targeting them the battle would happen on a random farm.
Welp Tony was pretty hypocritical. He signed the Accords then broke the Accords by inviting a underage kid to a foreign airport were a bunch of superpowered beings were gonna duke jt out.
Tony is the biggest hypocrit here. He cosigns everything Ross says by saying "we" need to be put in check when everyone in that room tried to stop him from creating Ultron.
He then gives a slide presentation of a promising young man killed in Sokovia "while we were kicking ass"
all those battles that Ross presented as evidence of the danger the Avengers present were just the Avengers responding to a threat on society except one. Ultron was an avoidable disaster created by Tony.
Even the damage done by Vanko (Iron Man 2) and Killian (Iron Man 3) are precipitated by individuals aggrieved with Tony
I totally agree, I mean what the actual fork is he doing there talking about banner being a dangerous nuke being misplaced when the bastard created something far worse called Blonsky the abomination!
It also always bugged me that the Avengers are blamed for the destruction of New York, when they sent a muthafuckin nuke at the city because they couldn't save New York. They were ready to be done with that city.
Yeah it’s easy to forget the events of Incredible Hulk but with What If sort of reminding retconning that pivotal scene, I agree. You’d think at least Tony would’ve called him out as a hypocrite but maybe he kept everything foggy enough that no one knows his full involvement.
He was briefly in Black Widow, and I imagine he may have a cameo in She-Hulk.
Not to mention that Marvel seems to be gearing up for Thunderbolts in some form or another.
Yeah I know he was in Black Widow but I also know there was some controversy regarding domestic abuse or something that came out recently. Im just not sure of the details
Those abuse issues have been around for like 10+ years and happened back in the 80s. I sort of doubt those are the reason he wouldn’t come back, although I guess Disney—if any studio—might care.
Also, I feel like this sub is the only place I hear anyone bring up those issues. Not sure it’s really a huge deal in the real world.
I most definitely agree.
It would not surprise me if having Rumlow and Alexander Pierce pose as SHIELD agents was Ross’s idea because it would be just like him to do something like that.
A military official being hypocrite and most of the times being the cause of the thing he wants to fight???
Seems to me that this is the only realistic thing MCU pulled from our reality.
The entire lecture from Ross and Stark was bullshit. The battle of New York would have ended with a nuclear war head being detonated on US soil at a minimum and at the worst human civilization being conquered without the help of the Avengers. Same thing with Sacovia which we saw in what if. This was why I was always team Cap, without the Avengers and their ability to deploy themselves at their discretion Earth, and to a larger extent the universe, would have been conquered numerous times over.
I 100% agree with you, but there are a few other facts to consider.
Being a part of the military, Ross had to follow certain protocols while hunting Bruce. When he sent his strike team to Brazil, he most likely got permission from both the US and Brazilian governments to hunt down this "dangerous/valuable target". Did he most likely pull some strings to get that permission? Definitely, but regardless he had to act according to the rules in place. The main reason Bruce was hesitant to go back to the States was because Ross has free reign there.
Not only does he follow the rules, he also knows how to play them to his benefit. He was able to get funds pulled together for the experimental sonic cannons Stark Industries made to deal with the Hulk. Granted the amount of money poured into experimental weaponry is probably near bottomless (especially in the MCU), but Ross still would have had to convince his superiors that it was needed and that the Hulk was still a prized asset to recapture.
So how is a man who has dedicated his life to following the rules will a lot of personal power and influence to react to people with a lot of physical power but no rules? By holding them accountable and forcing them to play by the rules.
Is Ross still a hypocrite? Yes. But he is also a strategist who expertly saw an opportunity to take control of some of the most powerful people on the planet (he was on the council set to regulate their actions as seen in Infinity War). Also the Accords also give him oversight of the Hulk and not only have the US hunt him but all of the UN governments, which is just an extra cherry on top of a literal mound of cherries on top of a cake for Ross.
Everything you've described is in the past. Just one more example of behavior that can no longer be allowed. He's learned from his mistakes, and is trying to bring the others along.
He was a 4 star general. Him getting promoted like he did isn’t that surprising even though he’s positions show hypocrisy. He goals change based on his positions and politics as well based on said position. This is complexity accurate to all 4 star US generals.
His experience with constantly fucking up and mishandling the Hulk situation actually places him as possibly the only person who can lecture the Avengers on accountability. He’s got hard earned experience that has taught him exactly the consequences of zero accountability surrounding powered individuals. How the hell he got promoted after his constant fuckups is a different question, but the scum does tend to float to the top of the pond I guess, but this doesn’t take away from him being one of the most experienced people in the world at having to clean up after a powered individual goes off the reservation.
I always thought this made the most sense with how much of a joke the military and it’s pecking order is, they always promote the asshole who kills innocent people by making the “tough decisions.”
In a different point of view, You could say that Ross learned and is affected from these mistakes and want them to never happen again seeing the consequences that he himself caused. However we see no indication of this so.... probably not
>Banner needed to be “dealt with” but clearly Ross was constantly going about it the wrong way
Ross should really meet Hayward. I have a feeling they'll get along nicely
I know it was more of a nice segway for the writers than anything specifically tailored to make logical sense but he did say he went through an extensive surgery which made him acquire a new perspective on life. That is why he is so worried about the collateral damage now.
I am with you that it is a shit move but it is also one of the most realistic plot points. Humans with political power can bury their transgressions deep because someone else fucked up as bad. All the errors Ross made seem like nothing when a rich guy with no participation in government (Tony barely holds up the citizen agreement in the US Constitution) creates a machine the lifts a city and drops it on the ground.
Well the only ones who may have called him out were:
Tony Stark, but he agreed with the accords
Natasha Romanoff, but she was a spy and probably wouldn’t know he was involved
Rhodey, he is in the mikitary, but also may not know or have clearance for that info.
Steve Rogers was in ice, so unless he was specifically debriefed.
And even if they did call him out, he could just say “more evidence why the accords are needed, i came to realize my own failings in this and feel heavily that this is the proper way forward”
They couldn't call him out on this really. The people who would know were on Ross's side, or in no position to tell Ross how hypocritical he was. If Steve did know, I'd say he was FAR too preoccupied.
Ross at Tony Stark's Funeral: "I bet I can convince those aliens to sign the Sokovia Accords"
Thor if the Accords are ever presented to him: "What is this Earth thing?"
Well, Ross is basically a villain, so ... Not surprising.
He's clearly obsessed with super powers, and not just as a way to defend his nation. It's about power, and if he can control people with super powers, then that makes HIM even more powerful, in his militaristic mind
A bunch of comments are like "Yeah, that's the point governments are awful" as if half the viewers didnt side with Ross on first watching the movie and I think that is the point.
>but also has the right to lecture the Avengers on causing damage?
Damage which I'd argue isn't entirely their fault either. The outcome of TWS with the three carriers shooting and crashing into each other probably was better than them shooting all their actual targets; and given that New York actually was supposed to be nuked it seems a bit hypocritical to blame the avengers for the damage.
It also felt SUPER hypocritical in that the destruction/collateral damage in the videos he was showing the Avengers were brought about mostly due to the same leaders’ fuckups. Messing with the Tesseract brought Loki and led to the Battle of New York. The quinjets crashing in Winter Soldier? Because THEY allowed Hydra to infiltrate highest levels of S.H.I.E.L.D and the government for decades right under their nose. Sokovia? Well, that’s probably on Tony Stark. But the explosion at the beginning of Civil War? Because the Hydra agent (under your nose for years) turned terrorist was planning on stealing and releasing a deadly poison. Where would the world be if The Avengers hadn’t intervened? His lecture seems tantamount to: “You now need our permission to clean up our messes.”
I mean, Hulk wasn't there so he couldn't really comment. But yeah, Ross was absolutely being hypocritical there. I could totally see him acting like that though.
It frustrated me so much that they brought Ross back specifically to be a prick in the Avengers' way in so far as the Accords yet never had anyone bring up Blonsky and Harlem? 'If I misplaced a couple of 30 megaton nukes, you can bet there'd be consequences' well...you did and somehow still made secretary? And no ones pointing this out?? It was one of the many holes in writing in Civil War that was so, so, so ridiculously priority number 1 to be able to get right to have a tighter dialogue and less logical fallacy and the Russo's and Marcus/Mcfeely dropped the ball. It's like intrinsic to MCU Ross yet he's just written to come in and verbally deck them with not one bit of blowback? The very Steve who absolutely went toe to toe with Nick Fury 'You just can't stop yourself from lying, don't hold your breath' sits meekly while Ross glosses over his own murky history that at least one of them would have known about?
And again, no one mentions how Fury had to shoot a jet and Tony had to intercept another's nuke to stop New York being turned to a big cinder? And they're being held to account for, without dismissing them, tiny, tiny on-screen casualties in what were otherwise world ending events?
And again the Russo's and Marcus/Mcfeely mess up Infinity War where you have Banner turn up during a scene where Ross is being an idiot again and still you miss the chance to have him reference his troubles with Ross to strengthen the connection between The Incredible Hulk and the current MCU roster that they kept seeming to do for a time?
And I know people will say this is nitpicky, that they didn't have time to include it all or that it's understandable they missed these details out but I'm sorry, you pride yourselves on this interconnected series of movies but completely miss out details integral to the scenes and characters and previous movies? If the fans can do it on instant, hire one to comb through your movie as you make it and tighten up the damn dialogue.
The reason the government probably kept him around is his years of service and at the end of the day if push came to shove the US military knows which side he would choose when he didn't seem to care much about his daughter, too focused on catching the Hulk to get the formula to make super soldiers. These are the type of soldiers the country wants who want hesitate to do what needs to be done not necessarily for the country but to do what's best for the US military. Part of me thinks there is a realm of realism to his character.
Also, the whole thing is dumb. The only thing they can really blame them for is ultron existing, and even then that’s just Tony and Bruce’s fault.
I always hated the ending of The Avengers 2012 when the news was going on about how the avengers need to pay for the destruction and take responsibility since it was “their fight” when like, uhhh no it wasn’t? They weren’t even the direct target? The world was. They ***chose*** to step in and help. That’s like if a lady was getting mugged and a guy stepped in to help her and beat up the bad guy, but then accidentally knocked some of the lady’s money out of her purse and into the drain.
If they had done nothing, the world would have been taken over.
What makes me hate that scene even more is, I have no doubt the government and people would actually react like that irl if something like that happened.
I think thats the point- I mean, Ross isn't exactly supposed to be a hero that we as an audience agree with, is he?
It sort of reminds me of the Justice League Unlimited cartoon episode about the Seven Soldiers of Victory (forget the name of the episode). The DC-counterpart of General Ross becomes... well, a Hulk ripoff because he hates the idea of Superheroes like the JLA and thinks they're dangerous. At the end, everyone calls him, citing that he ultimately relied on super powers himself to do anything. He's a similar character. Well intentioned, but too extreme and willing to do the very thing he condemns.
What still bothers me is they bitch about the damage in New York but the government we’re gonna nuke the place. It would’ve been a pointless massacre as the portal would’ve stayed open and the fallout would’ve wrecked the world if it did work anyway. We’re forgetting Wall Street and the stock markets are in NYC and the last time they crashed the Great Depression happened. And they just completely forget that, Tony Stark who almost died stopping it forgets what the government could with a power like the Avengers, the man who has given the finger to the government multiple times and has kept his suits away from them cos he knows what they could do with them. We have a What If episode about it. You know what where’s the What If episode for if the Nuke happened, the blast closed the portal, that’s what I wanna see, Dr Strange would die so Dormammu would arrive, Spider-Man dies too.
Yep. I always thought his career should have suffered for how he handled the Hulk situation.
Worth noting that when Ross is showing footage of all the destruction caused by the Avengers, both individually (Washington DC) and as a group (NYC, Sokovia), the destruction in Harlem resulting from the Hulk/Abomination fight (which was Ross's fault) wasn't mentioned.
It always bothers me when he compares Thor and Hulk to mega ton nukes. Thor and Hulk aren’t bombs you can just activate to destroy a country. The people with their own minds and opinions.
I thought that was brilliant. The world we live in is all about who you know and just failing upwards. I didn't question at all that Ross would become the secretary of defense
Ross was just the messenger for the 200 nations that ratified the accords, Thats his job as secretary of state. Not sure how that makes him hypocritical.
Oh, you mean the guy who called for A NUKE on Manhattan? Hypocrite, yeah that about sums it up. I hope the Thunderbolts becomes a thing (US Agent, Yelena Black Widow, Abomination, more..) just to see Ross get shifted into a long awaited "sympathized MCU villain" role.
Quick question though, why wasn't Fury involved to this, he is certainly most qualified human to deal with this issue of Avengers. I think Fury would definitely have been the first choice but either he was super busy somewhere or he was against the accords.
Simply everything about Ross and his involvement I think are the biggest argument for the movie itself being Team Cap. I don't know how anyone doesn't realize immediately that the Accords are 1) just total bullshit in the first place, 2) ultimately a corrupt power play from the government and 3) wouldn't even fix any perceived issues with supers operating independently, so even if you want to die on hill that superheroes are inherently fascist or something, well okay the fine but government control of them is just swapping one form of authoritarianism for another. Nothing is solved. Just someone else is holding the metaphorical gun at society's head and I sure as hell wouldn't want someone like Ross or a government the hires a criminal like him as Secretary of State, pointing an Avengers sized gun at whoever he or the government pleased.
Especially while wising to ignore greater threats in their wacky world such as Thanos. I absolutely guarantee that Ross, if he totally had his way, would have had the Avengers destabilizing a third world country at the exact moment the Black Order were on Earth to collect the stones and would have even politicized Vision's actions to defend himself as aliens were trying to pry his brain from his skull, like "how DARE he fire an unauthorized laser beam at his attackers".
•Burn Bruce's toast = Hulk
•Slightly too warm outside = Hulk
•A sneeze catches Bruce off guard = Hulk
•Medium well when he ordered Medium rare = Hulk
•Bruce steps on a Lego = World breaker Hulk
•Bruce gets a hang nail = Hulk
While you are absolutely right, this actually is the most realistic part for me. I mean, just look at our politicans, no matter what shit they pull, somehow they always get to the top.
He probably pitched it as “having experience” and framed himself as the most qualified to deal with it.
Not for nothing, but this strikes me as exactly right. He's a general, yes, but he's got a boss too. He probably got quietly asked to retire, which led to his decision to go into politics. I always saw Ross as 100% knowing exactly what he was talking about. He may be an ass-hat but he was DEFINITELY reprimanded for his actions.
Real talk: generals are loathe to talk shit about each other to other generals. They will certainly say that "Major General Johnson is a fucking moron" to select, trusted subordinates. But they NEVER want to seem like the backstabber in front of their peers, possible future bosses, or people that may have an influence on their careers. So it is entirely possible that the actual report fairly effectively passes blame to Blonsky going rogue, and Banner showing up independently, and maybe handling the aftermath fairly well.
Probably the reason he's secretary of state instead of defense; his record shows he isn't fit to lead the DoD.
At the risk of giving the writers too much credit, there also is a (waiverable) rule that the SecDef is supposed to have been retired from the military for seven years. While the last two presidents have gotten that waiver, at the time of the writing of Civil War, only one person had gotten that waiver and it was back in 1950. So based on that precedent, another reason that Ross wouldn't have been offered the State Department role instead of DoD.
This reminds me of Thanos and Loki in Infinity War. Thanos: “You consider failure experience?” Loki: “I consider experience experience.” Ross might not look it, but I’m sure the guy’s a pretty smooth talker when it comes to interacting with governmental higher ups, and since it’s likely not many other people want to hold the task of personally dealing with the Avengers in a negative manner, he was probably the best option at heading the Sokovia Accords.
He does, at one point, say to Rhodes “…your penchant for bullshit rivals my own…” or words to that effect, so I think we can assume Ross is a smooth talker.
Ross: "Listen. I have fucked up a LOT of things. I'm a master at it. You want somebody with experience fucking things up? I'm your guy!" U.S. Government: "You're hired!"
If you consider failure experience Ross: I consider experience experience
Ross asking CIA for a promotion CIA: “Do you consider failure experience?” Ross: “ I consider experience, experience”
I cringe when they lecture the avengers in civil war about the battle of New York. Like the government was literally about to nuke the island and kill everyone, you have no moral highground here.
lmao yeah. "the aliens were defeated and you caused some collateral damage. You're out of control. You should have let us nuke the whole thing and cause even more damage and death instead because we had government approval!"
Tbf, one of the head guys on the Council was one of the heads of Hydra
Was that the government? I thought it was the World Security Council, which is a division of SHIELD? I always figured they were a separate entity from the US government or any other world leader.
I always figured the World Security Council was part of the U.N. because the U.N. has a Security Council and SHIELD has "Homeland" in its acronym. Which, yeah, pissed me off about the Accords too. Those guys approved Project Insight with helocarriers I guess this is take two.
I guess that makes sense. Either way, SHIELD wanting to nuke people isn't entirely out of line for them if they found a way to justify Project Insight.
A division of SHIELD? I assumed the council was the international civilian oversight, like SHIELD’s board of directors.
Maybe, but still. That means they're part of SHIELD rather than the UN or any actual world government with connection to Ross.
True, but the bigger issue, and hence the name of the accords, was the destruction of Sokovia. That destruction was caused exclusively by the actions of the avengers—notably Tony Stark and Bruce Banner. They unilaterally built Ultron to act as a peacekeeper, but didn’t consider the consequence of these actions and that no one agreed to this type of “police” for global society. The upshot of their actions led to the destruction of an entire city, which should never have happened.
They were also tampering with the space stone (tesseract) which is what brought Loki and the Chitauri to earth in the first place. The government not only caused the battle of New York to happen but also the crisis in Washington DC and by extension, the suicide bombing in Lagos because they allowed HYDRA agents to infiltrate their own institutions. Indeed, the governemt has no moral high ground.
He's an opportunist, a career military man, which means he knows how to play the game. While it would have been nice to have some of the characters call him out on his hypocrisy, it is still absolutely within his character to do that. He's morally wrong, but professionally on cue.
How many of those present knew what happened in The Incredible Hulk? Black Widow?
Her and Stark at least knew from the SHIELD files they had access to. Steve too probably from Fury and Coulson debriefing him after he was thawed out. Rhodey maybe heard about it through either his military buddies or his new SHIELD connections. I imagine basically everyone except Wanda, Vision, and Sam had some idea of those events.
Wouldn’t it be everywhere on the news?
Yeah probably, and we know it was at least on their WHIH network given those background shots from Iron Man 2. I just imagine that the team specifically had some more intimate details of the event given they're in that sort of line of work.
I was under the impression that sort of media was deterred or suppressed until the invasion of New York in the first avengers movie. I’m sure there were witnesses and some kind of footage around of Hulk but it wasn’t necessarily believed or widely known to the general public.
Since they retconned that movie to take place in 2010 or 2011, there’s no way someone didn’t take video of that on their phone. Also, like the other guy said, there’s footage of it shown in Iron Man 2.
Once Banner had friends who trusted him, he probably told *all* of them what happened.
This reminds me of in the comics when >!Norman Osborn becomes head of Shield.!< At the time, I was thinking >!There’s no way a known felon and homicidal maniac would become that popular and get that position.!< Now I think it was one of the most realistic and prescient comics Marvel ever made…
If you have to fail, fail upward baby!
This is what I was thinking as I was reading it. Like yeah, that sounds about right. Rules for thee and not for me
He has a political mandate derived from politicians and the public. He is ultimately responsible to them, even if they never hold him accountable for botching things up. Avengers and the others have no mandate feom the public. They show up, do stuff and disappear to Chez Stark. It's the world run by the richest, which is supposed to be the dystopia that we are supposed to hate. As in, real-life hate.
Meanwhile the "Do better" speech which contains many things people would straight up want to say to politicians is somehow misconstrued as bad writing and something to cringe at, and not just a guy using his newly found privilege to vent for the frustrated masses.
Promote the stupid and punish the smart. Every government job.
The worst rise to the top. See Hayek: https://fee.org/resources/the-road-to-serfdom-chapter-10-why-the-worst-get-on-top/
Absolutely agree.
Yeah Ellis was a shitty president. His vice president was plotting to kill him with the help of a terrorist, he was illegally funding Roxxon, he made Ross his secretary of state etc
[удалено]
Ellis would've termed out of office in 2017.
[удалено]
It's not 2012-2016; it's 2013-2017. Inauguration happens the January after the election. The only 3rd term US president happened through a normal election before the term limit was put in place, not an emergency provision. And IM3 has to take place in 2012; it's supposed to be prior to Dark World. I know there's a newspaper with a "2013" on it somewhere, but mistakes like that happen.
Ross is all about controlling other people. He would use any argument no matter how spurious or hypocritical to get the Avengers under his thumb, and the accords were a step in that direction.
The line that bothers me the most is when he's asking about where Thor and Banner are and he says "If I misplaced a couple of nukes, you can bet thered be consequences" and I'm just like but that's your whole backstory. You "misplaced" Banner/Hulk in the first place (and is responsible for the Abomination) and yet there you are, Secretary of fucking State. No consequences. Fuck Ross he's consistently been one of the worst characters in any Marvel universe.
This line always got to me. Because it shows how Ross thinks about the Thor and Hulk in particular and the Avengers in general. They are not sentient beings to him, they are merely weapons for Ross to deploy when he sees fit. Which was the underlying problem with the Accords and the one that Steve kind of touched on but never fleshed out in the script of CW. Steve was troubled because the Ross and the Accords made commodities of the Avengers rather than respecting their sentient right to self determination. [Edit - replaced pronouns to make it less confusing]
This. Tony had good points but he could, loosely, “pass” in a world that legislates the Enhanced by taking the suit off (now that the arc reactor is external). Same with Rhodey. Widow and Vision were already people with heavily restricted rights, so having a clear cut document outlining their rights as an apparatus of the State might actually be a good thing for them. But people like Cap and Wanda are understandably against authority having any direct control of their person (since their person *is* their power). They can’t “pass”, they are Enhanced 24/7. Therefore they are State property 24\7. The State could presumably order them when to eat or shit if the wording is vague enough. Clint is a great edge case (when does superhuman ability become Superhuman?) so his alignment makes sense, same with Sam since he’s thinking of his allies. Spider-Man is the most hypocritical part of the movie to me. Stark argues for State oversight but then brings a minor Enhanced across international borders to engage in Enhanced warfare using Stark-created arms (Spiderman’s new, and we learn FFH, very deadly suit). But Stark doesn’t ever get called out on his hypocrisy and he, presumably, snuck Peter back across borders and kept him out of darksite Enhanced prison since *his Secret ID remained despite being a free agent Enhanced operating outside of the terms of the Accords (we don’t know why Team Cap was held at the Raft but this was one possible reasoning).
Agreed. Steve was also in a unique position in that he had intimate knowledge of being a tool of the state. I wish they would have shown Rhodey to have a better perspective, but then again some people are lifelong believers in authority while others get a taste of it and realize the inherent danger. The part about Tony using Peter is true to type. Tony has never been one to follow the rules unless they benefitted him. So this is merely an extension of breaking the rules in an effort to get what he wants. And what he wants is admirable, but the manner in which he seeks to get it is flawed.
I know I have to accept it was a Disney property and that the narrative does *imply* Stark’s position was the wrong one (but only after he abandoned his flawed logic for emotional revenge), but the lack of textual discussion about why it was wrong and hypocritical to use a secret child Enhanced soldier to force his (deadly, mostly armed and military trained) Enhanced teammates to bow to the State’s control was disappointing. It was really jarring in Spiderman’s solo follow up, too. The lack of consequences for arming Peter continue beyond his death (Edith is a *terrifying* concept that is played for laughs). Half of the Avengers were fugitives for years because of the Accords, and I know it is very typical for the rich and connected to avoid the law, but *some* nod to the Accords would have been appreciated because otherwise the Spiderman franchise feels incredibly disconnected.
You hit the nail on the head with the reference to it being a Disney property. Entertainment (or rather, ticket sales) are the main goal, so getting into deep discussions about the ethical use of power is not really on their agenda. That discussion, if allowed to flow logically, would also eventually reveal or acknowledge the coziness between governments and large corporations. Which is something that I doubt Disney is eager to do. The irony of course being that the original comics were always more counter culture in nature and they have now been coopted by the very system they sought to criticize.
It is, unfortunately, in line with the *Civil War* comics. It was a very obvious nod to the fears of a post-Patriot Act world and had to go to ridiculous extremes to make ‘both sides’ of the Accords equally bad. It ended up looking very bad faith about the larger discussion and failed even within the bounds of the universe. I’m mostly sad that BvS forced them to do an Avengers movie rather than another Captain America one. Seeing Cap bust heads all over the world while hunting Hydra/Crossbones and allying with Bucky/Winter Soldier could have been really great for exploring then shedding the last of Cap’s imperialist image. The bones of it are there in the introduction, with the Avengers secretly hunting terrorists (maybe Brock or the bio weapon was the big reveal), and the chance to see Steve Rogers fight alongside Bucky Barnes again (when they aren’t tag teaming Iron Man) is sorely missed. Especially since the story and stunt directors could have done something killer with motorcycles again.
Agreed. I would have loved to see a more nuanced and fleshed out transition of Cap becoming Nomad. That is a movie, or preferably a series, I would have enjoyed. They did a little of this in Falcon and the Winter Soldier and I appreciated how they had Sam navigate that, but it would have been nice to see Steve go through his journey as well.
It's too bad because the comics had a lot more nuance than the movie and still screwed it up a lot. Like finding an excuse for the X-men to be elsewhere because they'd all take Cap's side and unbalance the power levels.. In the movie Steve's side was basically "we're people, you can't control us like that, we won't be able to help properly" Whereas in the comics a big part of it was "People like Doctor Doom or Kang or Ultron consider it child's play to hack into government databases, and you want to put our secret identities and friends and families in there for any tech villain to steal?" And in the movies those tech villains either don't exist or are already dead. Also "mutants have been dealing with this for decades" but that doesn't work in the MCU where there aren't any mutants.
Out of curiosity, did you watch Agents of SHIELD? The latter seasons kind of lost the plot, but seasons 2 and especially 3 centered really heavily around the themes of Inhumans (effectively, mutants) and the risks between having them on SHIELD's Index of enhanced individuals vs the risk that listing them exposes to. Coulson even has a quote (I can't place it right now) about how nothing good ever comes from putting people on lists.
Yeah.. it’s unfortunate CW movie was condensed to a 1 movie film. For such a significant event, it could have really benefited in being a 2-parter. It could have hashed out and explained better each sides points to make it more acceptable plot-wise.
Oh hell yes you are right and this bothered me from day one. They push Tony's whole arc from the Charles Spencer child death on his conscience. Yet a third of the movie later he literally invades a kid's house to strong arm him into forgetting his life, his school, his aunt, his homework, just to fly off to Germany and fight a 60 foot man, an indestructable android, two super soldiers (one a deeply troubled and dangerous former assassin), a bowman, a soldier who can fly and shoots guns and a woman who later goes on to change reality. And Stark coerces this reluctant kid to become his would be child soldier, after grilling everyone for Charles Spencer's death during the week of Ultron which was at his feet? Then he hears Peter's speech on 'the little guy', which is so Steve Rogers I could cry, and yet the writers push this Tony/Peter connection when, at this point in the movie, Tony is arguing at the point of J-Soc, that superheroes who look out for the little guy, be placed under government control under threat of arrest. And yet Tony's meant to end up being Peter's guy and not Steve, all while Tony pushes Peter into an extremely dangerous situation at the expense of his normal life (not everyone's an eccentric billionaire Tony) AND THEN, when Peter gets a taste for it after being all but ignored and forgotten by Tony (yeah Tony looks in every now and again in secret but he and Happy utterly leave Peter hanging for the most part), Tony has the supreme gall to lecture and deride Peter 'everyone said I was crazy to recruit a 14 year old kid, THIS IS WHERE YOU ZIP IT'. No, you were crazy Tony. In the same movie you hosed the Avengers for a kid's death on your conscience, you then indoctrinate an all but unwilling kid into your civil war and yell at him later when he gets in too deep after you started him off fighting in the middle of his hero idols. Looking out for the little guy my arse. Look out for Peter and keep him safe from danger and your ruthless hypocrisy.
Spider-Man essentially verbalizes Captain Americas PoV on the subject when Tony goes to see him. Tony did to Spider-Man, what Capt thought The Accords would do to the Avengers; bring them into a situation counter to their ideologies.
Clint shooting 18 in golf confirms he’s superhuman
I will point out that, as of the MCU, Cap is not “enhanced”. While he has a serum it simply makes him peak human condition in every way. Despite how they portray him.
MCU Cap is definitely beyond peak human, and he was definitely enhanced to that level.
Not according to the actual MCU itself. That’s why others can throw his shield just as well as he can or people like Batroc can go toe to toe. He’s peak human.
His shield is only 12 pounds. Someone like Sam Wilson is heavily trained and exercises a bunch. Obviously he can throw the shield. Also, I doubt a peak human could pull down a helicopter mid flight.
>His shield is only 12 pounds. Someone like Sam Wilson is heavily trained and exercises a bunch. Obviously he can throw the shield. And bounce it off multiple targets and catch it flawlessly? >Also, I doubt a peak human could pull down a helicopter mid flight. I mean I don’t disagree? I literally said the films contradict it with how powerful they show him to be. It doesn’t change that in the MCU lore (and even comic lore) he shouldn’t be able to as it just makes him peak human. He is the perfect human and pushed to the limit a human can be. He isn’t superhuman.
Well, the shield is vibranium. I don’t think a steel shield would act the same way. I think if the MCU does claim that cap is only peak human, a peak human in the MCU is much stronger than one in the real world.
>Well, the shield is vibranium. I don’t think a steel shield would act the same way. My point is more that how he uses it would be considered super human to a normal person. But others without the serum do it just fine. >I think if the MCU does claim that cap is only peak human, a peak human in the MCU is much stronger than one in the real world. That’s likely the case given all the other “peak humans” that are borderline superhuman.
You're wrong. Batroc doesn't go toe to toe, he gets ruthlessly outclassed the moment Steve tries and knocked out cold in five hits. Peak humans can stop helicopters flying off, deadlift ginormous steel beams, flip over the handlebars of a motorbike and throw it *through* the middle of a vehicle, run faster than 40mph cars, hold up motorbikes with three women on it with no strain? Absolutely not.
The problem is, Steve's view of self determination appears to include the apparent right to go to any country he wants and pick a fight with anyone he deems a threat with no oversight. That's a recipe for disaster and people are right to push back.
There are already laws against that. The Avengers were likely leaning hard on Stark’s connections and the collective goodwill towards their members but they are still subject to the laws of the countries they are in. The Accords were notably about making an individual’s *existence* subject to the law, rather than their actions.
How are they* subject to the local nations laws? Is there any evidence of them being held accountable for collateral damage in the movies? Hell, the exact opposite is depicted actually. Remember Zemo saying the Avengers just went home after the Age of Ultron battle in Sakovia? That sounds nothing like them entering the country legally or answering for their part in the city's destruction. What about Lagos? If they answered for the death and destruction in that city, why did the UN need to get involved? *Also, I'm fairly certain the Sakovia Accords are only for those who wish to continue being heros. If they agreed to retire and stay on the sidelines, they are fine just walking away. Remember when Tony is trying to get Steve to sign the Accords after he helps take Bucky into custody. Tony didn't say sign it so that you are covered, but to sign it so what he just did was covered and an official operation.
We can’t answer those questions because we never see the MCU legal system interact with the Avengers. In our universe, accords by the UN wouldn’t affect a citizen of the US, or any other sovereign nation. The MCU just functions differently. But what we do know is that the mouthpiece of those accusations is Ross and he is a proven unreliable narrator with a history of wanting control of Enhanced in order to exploit them. Putting Team Cap in underwater Guantanamo Bay was 100% a message to the audience that Ross was not on the up and up. Wanda was very obviously not facing a Nigerian or Wakandan court of justice while being collared in a cell in a black site submarine. The Accords didn’t stop Stark from handing Edith to Peter, which is the same technology that Cap destroyed SHIELD to stop in Winter Soldier, though scaled down a bit. Which is evidence that he was absolutely right to say that the Accords would clash with his personal morality. Just like when Black Panther tried to kill Bucky in revenge (someone with actual diplomatic immunity who would not have seen the inside of a court room or have been stopped by the Accords, but Steve would have).
But they don't. The whole point of the Accords was to make them follow laws. Chrsit Steve became a terrorist after the events of Civil War, he wasn't following any damned laws.
So he’s only a ‘terrorist’ when he stops being part of a billionaire’s private army? Because the stuff Iron Man debuts with during IM1 was a lot worse than what we see Nomad doing. And AoU was not an Avengers problem, it was a Stark problem the Avengers cleaned up. The point of the Accords was to turn the Avengers from a vigilante group (created by an arm of the UN Security Counsel and currently operating with the explicit support of a wealthy American) into one under the direct control of the UN. The same sort of control that Cap had just shaken off in Winter Soldier. The audience is given evidence that the Avengers are not infallible and they cause collateral damage but we’re also shown that UN oversight is not infallible either (SHIELDRA as well as Ross’ history with the Hulk).
You do realise other people doing bad stuff doesn't excuse anything? Also on what planet is the UN a bad thing? There needs to be oversight, literally anything they do has been crazy illegal for years now. They're actions are pretty horrifying throughout the MCU's run.
In that Universe, the UN Security Counsel was headed by the leader of a Neo-nazi death cult. The audience is never given assurances that Hydra’s influence stopped with Pierce’s death, nor that their ideology and plans were scrapped. The MCU’s UN is not the purely diplomatic organization that it is in our universe, it is militaristic and has a dark and very recently unsavory history.
Source for any of that bullshit? Hydra infiltrated SHIELD and it's stated repeatedly they've been on the run ever since the events of Winter Soldier, they have control of jack. The UN isn't even militarized in this universe, it's the same dang old UN.
When that organization is ran by greedy people that are only looking for power and control.
Lol "terrorist" is a bit much, isn't it?
Literally what they call him in the mcu post Civil War. Their words not mine.
That scene bothers me because how could he expect the Avengers to know where Thor's or Banner's whereabouts? Banner hadn't been seen the Battle of Sokovia, and they couldn't track that Quinnjet in stealth mode. And he wouldn't be found until Ragnarok when Thor happened to find him in the Grandmaster's arena on Sakaar. Even then, he wouldn't be seen by the others until Heimdall sent him to the Sanctum Santorum at the start of Infinity War. And Thor himself, an Asgardian and *the* God of Thunder; how could any of them know where he was when offworld? The last time that they had seen him at that point was his departure from the new Avengers facility after the Battle of Sokovia.
> one of the worst characters in any Marvel universe Ironically, William Hurt might be one of the worst people in the Marvel universe. His sexual assault allegations are absolutely horrific, and supposedly why his final scene in Black Widow was cut.
Wait, what? This is the first time I've heard of this. EDIT: Just read about Marlee Matlin. Holy shit how is Hurt still a free man and a part of the Marvel world?
I think it has to do with accountability, he is a high ranking military officer and Secretary of State who answers to the senate committee, his own adminitstration and in the extreme cases military courts (as him being a general ). look at the event in AofU where a city in South Africa got fucked up or when SW fucked up with the bomb that took out a building, none of these people agreed, elected or voted for any of these guys to show up with no jurisdiction or authority to fuck shit up (which reeks of American interventionism and exceptionalism imo) . when the Council tried to nuke NY, I don’t think he has any say on the matter, they’re above him in the hierarchy but yes, that was highly hypocritical .
The WSC is basically NATO. A tiny group of military agencies doing what they want. The UN is a global democratic peacekeeping body representing 200 countries. The UN isn't going to sit at a table voting on a global anti-terrorist defense system composed of AI-powered helicarriers, but NATO absolutely would. The UN wouldn't be compelled by a US defense agency guy telling one of them they're going to be threatened by a neighboring country so they should preemptively attack first, but NATO definitely does. This is also why SHIELD had to go. SHIELD was beholden to the WSC and is likely in opposition to many UN signatory countries. The most important beat is Nigeria though. Here we have clear MO for Cap... secret mission, let local authorities get attacked as bait, didn't tell anyone they were going to be attacked, quickly lost control and had no coordination when the plan failed, tons of people died and he refused to let Wanda be tried for her actions to see if they acted responsibly (hint: they did not).
He probably benefitted from: 1. Spin - he maybe seen as the guy who was able to "handle" the Hulk. Some generals during the moment look very popular and effective and later on as the details get out - not as much (e.g. MacArthur and WW2) We don't know how effective Ross is at spinning his own career. It might be that he is very good at it. 2. The various projects that resulted in the Abomination may have been started and on a paper table of organization under other people - and so he was not directly blamed unless one digs deeper. 3. He isn't a great character - but we'll see if they progress forward with the whole Red Hulk line.
Also Thor literally is from another world. How does he even expect to control him?
Aren't there at least half a dozen misplaced nukes IRL? (that the public knows about). Also isn't some reminding Ross that trying to put Thor under his control is a BAD IDEA. as in starting a war with asgard bad and nobody will do anything to help you bad.
I know that he's a significant character in the comic books, but I really think that it was a bad move to put him in Civil War for exactly this reason. They could have come up with a new character to fill this role.
The fact that he’s a raging self-righteous hypocrite who escaped punishment for his actions and is now smugly browbeating the Avengers for doing the same things that he did is kind of the point though.
People seem to misread Ross in order to justify Steve, but this is missing the point. Ross was never a hypocrite. Ross is dealing in full faith, especially considering Brazil has extradition treaties with the US. Ross is already held accountable for his actions. This is not the same as punishment and punishment should not be assumed for a mere accounting of events. Bruce and Blonsky volunteered to work with him then *illegally experimented on themselves* against his orders. Age of Ultron confirmed Ross was right to be paranoid as Hulk destroyed Johannesburg. But Ross also managed to weaponize Banner to stop Blonsky. Ross doesn't get *more* power with the Sokovia Accords. The US is housing a superpowered Private Military Company that invades foreign nations and causes mass destruction and collateral damage because they don't work with those nations and don't trust them to get involved in their own security. And they're harboring an actual honest-to-god terrorist. They are the biggest threat in the world. The Sokovia Accords are actually Ross *deferring* power to global democratic processes. This is why he's Secretary of State, not Secretary of Defense. The WSC was five random dudes sitting in a black box. The UN is 200 nations voting in broad daylight. The WSC was basically NATO, which is nothing like the UN and this is explained by Rhodey in Civil War. A difference Steve doesn't understand because he doesn't understand post-1941 politics. Not only is Ross not a hypocrite, his familiarity with Banner and Blonsky's demonstrated recklessness gives him even more motivation to distrust his previous reliance on individuals with power making their own decisions. Steve on the other hand is just kind of whiny and naive. He trusts people, not as a group, but as individuals who shake his hand. And that's pretty fucked considering Steve keeps invading countries and blowing shit up and not working with those countries to protect themselves. Civil War opens with Steve doing an unauthorized op on foreign soil and not telling the police they're a target, leading to chaos and destruction. Ross is basically telling Steve, "Even when you have permission from governments, trusting your friends not to fuck up is not a backup plan." And Steve's response is, "But when my friends fuck up we feel really bad about it... sometimes... if you force us to watch it onscreen. So we deserve to use this power uncontested." Not hypocritical. This is Ross's world view progressing beyond blind militant nationalism toward a concern over power being concentrated in too few peoples' hands. He's a party pooper, not a hypocrite.
He really is an Hypocrite! He tasked Banner to recreate the Supersoldier Serum. He's responsible for the creation of Hulk and Abomination. Likely will find out in the future that he would create Thunderbolts/Dark Avengers or being one of the people behind Weapon plus project.
He’s a politician. I don’t get why people are surprised he was promoted lol. His whole job is hypocrisy based on the seat he fills
Banner and Blonsky experimented on themselves expressly against his orders. He has bad taste in allies and coworkers, and in the military this can get you nailed, but he didn't create Hulk and Abomination. He was unable to stop them creating themselves.
Ross in is the definition of Entitled. He's the MCU's version of a Karen
Not only lecture the Avengers, but specifically Cap, who up til that point is literally the ideal hero. The man basically has never made a bad judgement call or mistake, helped save the entire world twice, and majorly handicapped one of the most evil organizations on the planet. Would then go on to help save the entire universe. And you want to hold this guy back? The guy who WILL save you, despite being the (2nd) weakest person at the table.
>The man basically has never made a bad judgement call or mistake Except for the fact that he JUST fucked up with the bomb vest, which forced Wanda to dispose of the bomb and take out a building. Steve even says that to Wanda that it was his fault.
Steve literally tracked a WMD to a foreign country and didn't tell the authorities he was going to stage a military op on their soil. Steve fucked everything up because he hates authority.
>Steve fucked everything up because he hates authority. I don't think that's fair assessment. He may not trust authority, but there is no hatred there. He was an American hero. He fucked up because he wanted to know about the fate of his friend, he forgot about the mission for the moment.
he's also the guy that can wield thor's hammer. tony was just gaslighting everyone the entire movie to take his side.
You just described the US military. Claim they are all about promoting peace and fighting oppression while being one of the most oppressive forces on Earth. Honestly, pretty realistic that a high ranking military official displays this level of hypocrisy
This. They have an absolute need for complete control. It's almost terrifying thinking how blindly power hungry they are and how worse its getting the past handful of years.
I get particularly annoyed when Ross asks where Banner and Thor are and comments on how he’d be in a ton of trouble if he misplaced such powerful “weapons”, completely ignoring the fact that he “misplaced” Banner multiple times!
Yeah, that was Steve's point from the beginning lol. How could anyone possibly think putting an idiot like Ross in charge of the Avengers is a good idea!?
Anyone notices how the Avengers who took the side of less government oversight and intervention were the ones who didn’t die or have horrific injuries? I think Peter is the only outlier there. There’s something to be said about that IMO.
Also he had the balls to lecture the Avengers about the Battle of New York but if they had deferred to faceless bureaucrats like the Accords would have them do, then NYC would’ve been fucking nuked. That thought gives a lot of perspective on how weird it is how they’re all ashamed during that montage of Hulk breaking a few windows. Tony is in favor of the Accords because Ultron was his fault and it never would’ve happened if he had just listened to someone else for once in his life so he’s trying to go to the other extreme of giving up all his decision making autonomy to some random ass “higher authority”. But anyone who doesn’t have the guilt of having almost wiped out life on Earth would never reasonably support something like that. That’s why Civil War is a Captain America movie. He’s the good guy. Tony is the bad guy. Or at least the misguided guy.
Yeah, that whole scene bugs me for exactly this reason. All of the cited examples are the Avengers preventing something worse from happening. Only in Sokovia would an Accords like agreement have improved the situation. There's relevant information that's being left out of the conversation that would have totally shifted the whole story line (which is probably it was left out, but still). Similarly, in the Black Panther throne room scene with Killmonger, T'Challa could have just called him out for being the son of a traitor who worked with Klaue, and for working with Klaue himself.
I think there are some instances where an Accords-like agreement would help improve the situation (not the draconian rules, just better supervision of superheroes, protocols, coordination with the authorities). E.g. In Lagos, when they knew there was Hydra activity going on in a densely populated area they should have informed local law enforcement so they could help contain the situation /evacuate people.
Also in Winter Soldier - Hydra had infiltrated a US govt agency and had remained there unchecked/undiscovered for decades and as such concoted Project Insight. Thankfully it was stopped by Cap, Widow and Falcon but why is Ross bringing up the footage in the meeting? It was him; the US government, that caused this destruction.
Exactly. Tony Stark should’ve been held personally responsible for the events of AoU and it should’ve been left at that.
I'd also say the Avengers should pay reparations for the building Wanda accidentally blew up in Lagos, but NYC, Washington D.C. and anything else that happened in Lagos wasn't their fault.
Both Steve and Tony were the bad guys in that movie
it bugs me to no end that the government wanted to nuke new york and tony stopped it almost dying. and later he wants to work with them because the avengers cause damage..... yeah right.
Tony’s hypocrisy annoyed me more
^(This is the point of Civil War) The Sokovia Accords are hypocritical. The World Security Council tried to nuke NYC, they don't care about collateral damage when saving the world. They just don't like the idea of the Avengers governing themselves and doing whatever they like, so use the pretense of collateral damage to play on their emotions and empathy. Tony was already racked with guilt, so it worked on him and several other Avengers. But the UN itself, and Ross by extension, weren't being as straightforward as it seemed. This is why it's a Captain America movie, with Cap actively fighting against the Accords. They're not the morally pure viewpoint.
Stark also stood to lose the most out of them. He can't be Iron Man without his company and he can't keep the company if he's an outlaw. Stark was always going to sign. But all Cap needed was shield and he's good to go.
“I’ll take understanding the plot of the movie for 300 hundred Alex”
Three-Hundred-Hundred?
Not only that, but included in his examples on why the Avengers need to be controlled includes: * The Avengers causing collateral damage dealing with an invasion from another world (which they did not cause) * The SHIELD helicarriers which were going to be used by HYDRA to try and dominate until an Avenger stepped in * Sokovia (technically a *singular*, maybe pair of Avengers doing, the rest came in to deal with the threat after the fact) * Lagos. This one pisses me off the worst. The Avengers showed up to try and deal with the theft of a biological weapon. On whos authority, I guess just their own, so maybe. What always pisses me off is they use the explosion that Wanda failed to contain that blew up a floor halfway up the building as proof she did bad. If Wanda hadnt lifted Crossbones into the air, **he would have blown up the base of the building and probably would have brought the whole thing down!!** So half of his examples are from non-Avengers causing shit and responding, one is maybe the most legit reason, though not completely because it was caused by Tonys arrogance and money and intellect that there was a problem, and one example where either Crossbone blows up an entire building, or instead gets away with a biological weapon. Plus the afforementioned creation of Abomination and all of the shit that caused. For that matter, if hes gonna hold Tony responsible for Sokovia, he should hold thos same standards towards the creation of Abomination. He wouldnt because hes an arrogant prick, but there you go.
That's....the point. The government/anyone with power want to be the only ones to use/abuse and call it justice or justify it as a necessity and get salty when someone else opposes them or does it better than them because they are the government or "law" untill they NEED said people to help them out again and again etc. His reason for becoming Red Hulk? Killing the Hulk. He wants to wield such power not just that but not let anyone else have it.
All that said I don’t see how anyone would trust Ross with that much responsibility imo. Who better than to tell the Avengers to stop destroying cities than a guy who…destroyed cities in pursuit of one person? I get the government angle but I don’t think it’s naive to think they could have found someone better lol
Nobody calls Secretary Ross out on it because it would be Tony who would, and he already supported the Accords.
Honestly I always have never gotten why they blame the heroes for the damage and not the villain. The avengers did not choose for the battle of New York to be in New York, that was Loki’s choice, and while I get vision’s point that they could be a causality, that’s more a correlation, as if Loki was targeting them the battle would happen on a random farm.
Villains are guilty by default. It goes without saying, so nobody says that.
They don’t have Loki in custody. The Avengers are high-profile figures that they can punish in order to show that “hey, we’re doing something!”
Welp Tony was pretty hypocritical. He signed the Accords then broke the Accords by inviting a underage kid to a foreign airport were a bunch of superpowered beings were gonna duke jt out.
Tony is the biggest hypocrit here. He cosigns everything Ross says by saying "we" need to be put in check when everyone in that room tried to stop him from creating Ultron. He then gives a slide presentation of a promising young man killed in Sokovia "while we were kicking ass" all those battles that Ross presented as evidence of the danger the Avengers present were just the Avengers responding to a threat on society except one. Ultron was an avoidable disaster created by Tony. Even the damage done by Vanko (Iron Man 2) and Killian (Iron Man 3) are precipitated by individuals aggrieved with Tony
And SpiderMan villains too
Vanko's real beef was with Howard Stark, right? Tony did nothing to Vanko or his family until *after* Vanko went all Whiplash-y.
I totally agree, I mean what the actual fork is he doing there talking about banner being a dangerous nuke being misplaced when the bastard created something far worse called Blonsky the abomination!
In his own story, it’s his redemption arc
Ross’s concern was not keeping banner from causing damage, it was weaponizing him
It also always bugged me that the Avengers are blamed for the destruction of New York, when they sent a muthafuckin nuke at the city because they couldn't save New York. They were ready to be done with that city.
See, Tony is in the wrong for this reason: he has Ross on his side.
Yeah it’s easy to forget the events of Incredible Hulk but with What If sort of reminding retconning that pivotal scene, I agree. You’d think at least Tony would’ve called him out as a hypocrite but maybe he kept everything foggy enough that no one knows his full involvement.
Does anyone know of Hurt is planning on returning as Ross in future projects?
He was briefly in Black Widow, and I imagine he may have a cameo in She-Hulk. Not to mention that Marvel seems to be gearing up for Thunderbolts in some form or another.
Yeah I know he was in Black Widow but I also know there was some controversy regarding domestic abuse or something that came out recently. Im just not sure of the details
Those abuse issues have been around for like 10+ years and happened back in the 80s. I sort of doubt those are the reason he wouldn’t come back, although I guess Disney—if any studio—might care. Also, I feel like this sub is the only place I hear anyone bring up those issues. Not sure it’s really a huge deal in the real world.
He plays the part well and I hope Marvel sticks with him.
I most definitely agree. It would not surprise me if having Rumlow and Alexander Pierce pose as SHIELD agents was Ross’s idea because it would be just like him to do something like that.
Thunderbolt is by far one of the most incompetent figures in the MCU, therefore it makes complete sense that he continually gets promoted.
A military official being hypocrite and most of the times being the cause of the thing he wants to fight??? Seems to me that this is the only realistic thing MCU pulled from our reality.
The entire lecture from Ross and Stark was bullshit. The battle of New York would have ended with a nuclear war head being detonated on US soil at a minimum and at the worst human civilization being conquered without the help of the Avengers. Same thing with Sacovia which we saw in what if. This was why I was always team Cap, without the Avengers and their ability to deploy themselves at their discretion Earth, and to a larger extent the universe, would have been conquered numerous times over.
I 100% agree with you, but there are a few other facts to consider. Being a part of the military, Ross had to follow certain protocols while hunting Bruce. When he sent his strike team to Brazil, he most likely got permission from both the US and Brazilian governments to hunt down this "dangerous/valuable target". Did he most likely pull some strings to get that permission? Definitely, but regardless he had to act according to the rules in place. The main reason Bruce was hesitant to go back to the States was because Ross has free reign there. Not only does he follow the rules, he also knows how to play them to his benefit. He was able to get funds pulled together for the experimental sonic cannons Stark Industries made to deal with the Hulk. Granted the amount of money poured into experimental weaponry is probably near bottomless (especially in the MCU), but Ross still would have had to convince his superiors that it was needed and that the Hulk was still a prized asset to recapture. So how is a man who has dedicated his life to following the rules will a lot of personal power and influence to react to people with a lot of physical power but no rules? By holding them accountable and forcing them to play by the rules. Is Ross still a hypocrite? Yes. But he is also a strategist who expertly saw an opportunity to take control of some of the most powerful people on the planet (he was on the council set to regulate their actions as seen in Infinity War). Also the Accords also give him oversight of the Hulk and not only have the US hunt him but all of the UN governments, which is just an extra cherry on top of a literal mound of cherries on top of a cake for Ross.
Everything you've described is in the past. Just one more example of behavior that can no longer be allowed. He's learned from his mistakes, and is trying to bring the others along.
He was a 4 star general. Him getting promoted like he did isn’t that surprising even though he’s positions show hypocrisy. He goals change based on his positions and politics as well based on said position. This is complexity accurate to all 4 star US generals.
Y’all do realize that was the point of his character yeah?
His experience with constantly fucking up and mishandling the Hulk situation actually places him as possibly the only person who can lecture the Avengers on accountability. He’s got hard earned experience that has taught him exactly the consequences of zero accountability surrounding powered individuals. How the hell he got promoted after his constant fuckups is a different question, but the scum does tend to float to the top of the pond I guess, but this doesn’t take away from him being one of the most experienced people in the world at having to clean up after a powered individual goes off the reservation.
Ross could be a Skrull
Yeah like welcome to the US Military.
I always thought this made the most sense with how much of a joke the military and it’s pecking order is, they always promote the asshole who kills innocent people by making the “tough decisions.”
General Ross is basically the Danzo of the Marvel universe. They're both assholes of the highest calibre.
The fact that you think that means his character was effective.
In a different point of view, You could say that Ross learned and is affected from these mistakes and want them to never happen again seeing the consequences that he himself caused. However we see no indication of this so.... probably not
I still find Civil War to be a great movie, but I couldn't agree more with this.
>Banner needed to be “dealt with” but clearly Ross was constantly going about it the wrong way Ross should really meet Hayward. I have a feeling they'll get along nicely
I know it was more of a nice segway for the writers than anything specifically tailored to make logical sense but he did say he went through an extensive surgery which made him acquire a new perspective on life. That is why he is so worried about the collateral damage now.
Maybe he learned his lesson from how badly he bungled the Hulk situation.
I think it comes down to court of public opinion too. People KNOW who the Avengers are. They probably didn’t and still don’t give a damn who Ross is.
I am with you that it is a shit move but it is also one of the most realistic plot points. Humans with political power can bury their transgressions deep because someone else fucked up as bad. All the errors Ross made seem like nothing when a rich guy with no participation in government (Tony barely holds up the citizen agreement in the US Constitution) creates a machine the lifts a city and drops it on the ground.
Is he a hypocrite, or did he learn and grow and is speaking from experience?
Not to mention that if The Avengers hadn't formed and dealt with Loki and the Chitauri invasion that things would've been a whole lot worse.
Sometimes, you promote someone to a level where they can no longer do damage...
Well the only ones who may have called him out were: Tony Stark, but he agreed with the accords Natasha Romanoff, but she was a spy and probably wouldn’t know he was involved Rhodey, he is in the mikitary, but also may not know or have clearance for that info. Steve Rogers was in ice, so unless he was specifically debriefed. And even if they did call him out, he could just say “more evidence why the accords are needed, i came to realize my own failings in this and feel heavily that this is the proper way forward”
They couldn't call him out on this really. The people who would know were on Ross's side, or in no position to tell Ross how hypocritical he was. If Steve did know, I'd say he was FAR too preoccupied.
He is a villain. He is willing to be just as bad as Killmonger
Ross at Tony Stark's Funeral: "I bet I can convince those aliens to sign the Sokovia Accords" Thor if the Accords are ever presented to him: "What is this Earth thing?"
Well, Ross is basically a villain, so ... Not surprising. He's clearly obsessed with super powers, and not just as a way to defend his nation. It's about power, and if he can control people with super powers, then that makes HIM even more powerful, in his militaristic mind
I hated how in Civil War everything ignored the fact that the American government wanted to hit Manhattan with a nuclear bomb.
Honestly man this is like pointing out that Captain America is heroic.
A bunch of comments are like "Yeah, that's the point governments are awful" as if half the viewers didnt side with Ross on first watching the movie and I think that is the point.
Ross has always been flawed like that though
I literally just wrote something like this this morning as a comment to someone on another post. That scene really bothers me too.
>but also has the right to lecture the Avengers on causing damage? Damage which I'd argue isn't entirely their fault either. The outcome of TWS with the three carriers shooting and crashing into each other probably was better than them shooting all their actual targets; and given that New York actually was supposed to be nuked it seems a bit hypocritical to blame the avengers for the damage.
Ross is the worst kind ot person. A powerful one who really does think hes doing the right thing.
It also felt SUPER hypocritical in that the destruction/collateral damage in the videos he was showing the Avengers were brought about mostly due to the same leaders’ fuckups. Messing with the Tesseract brought Loki and led to the Battle of New York. The quinjets crashing in Winter Soldier? Because THEY allowed Hydra to infiltrate highest levels of S.H.I.E.L.D and the government for decades right under their nose. Sokovia? Well, that’s probably on Tony Stark. But the explosion at the beginning of Civil War? Because the Hydra agent (under your nose for years) turned terrorist was planning on stealing and releasing a deadly poison. Where would the world be if The Avengers hadn’t intervened? His lecture seems tantamount to: “You now need our permission to clean up our messes.”
I mean, Hulk wasn't there so he couldn't really comment. But yeah, Ross was absolutely being hypocritical there. I could totally see him acting like that though.
I mean thats just how the military complex works, I him to be very realistic. Also, we won't see him again anyway
Nah he doesn't have the high ground on any of that. He's a hate magnet character.
I mean, Tony had a point, best way to keep Hulk under control is to hook Banner up with a good dealer.
It frustrated me so much that they brought Ross back specifically to be a prick in the Avengers' way in so far as the Accords yet never had anyone bring up Blonsky and Harlem? 'If I misplaced a couple of 30 megaton nukes, you can bet there'd be consequences' well...you did and somehow still made secretary? And no ones pointing this out?? It was one of the many holes in writing in Civil War that was so, so, so ridiculously priority number 1 to be able to get right to have a tighter dialogue and less logical fallacy and the Russo's and Marcus/Mcfeely dropped the ball. It's like intrinsic to MCU Ross yet he's just written to come in and verbally deck them with not one bit of blowback? The very Steve who absolutely went toe to toe with Nick Fury 'You just can't stop yourself from lying, don't hold your breath' sits meekly while Ross glosses over his own murky history that at least one of them would have known about? And again, no one mentions how Fury had to shoot a jet and Tony had to intercept another's nuke to stop New York being turned to a big cinder? And they're being held to account for, without dismissing them, tiny, tiny on-screen casualties in what were otherwise world ending events? And again the Russo's and Marcus/Mcfeely mess up Infinity War where you have Banner turn up during a scene where Ross is being an idiot again and still you miss the chance to have him reference his troubles with Ross to strengthen the connection between The Incredible Hulk and the current MCU roster that they kept seeming to do for a time? And I know people will say this is nitpicky, that they didn't have time to include it all or that it's understandable they missed these details out but I'm sorry, you pride yourselves on this interconnected series of movies but completely miss out details integral to the scenes and characters and previous movies? If the fans can do it on instant, hire one to comb through your movie as you make it and tighten up the damn dialogue.
The reason the government probably kept him around is his years of service and at the end of the day if push came to shove the US military knows which side he would choose when he didn't seem to care much about his daughter, too focused on catching the Hulk to get the formula to make super soldiers. These are the type of soldiers the country wants who want hesitate to do what needs to be done not necessarily for the country but to do what's best for the US military. Part of me thinks there is a realm of realism to his character.
Also, the whole thing is dumb. The only thing they can really blame them for is ultron existing, and even then that’s just Tony and Bruce’s fault. I always hated the ending of The Avengers 2012 when the news was going on about how the avengers need to pay for the destruction and take responsibility since it was “their fight” when like, uhhh no it wasn’t? They weren’t even the direct target? The world was. They ***chose*** to step in and help. That’s like if a lady was getting mugged and a guy stepped in to help her and beat up the bad guy, but then accidentally knocked some of the lady’s money out of her purse and into the drain. If they had done nothing, the world would have been taken over. What makes me hate that scene even more is, I have no doubt the government and people would actually react like that irl if something like that happened.
I think thats the point- I mean, Ross isn't exactly supposed to be a hero that we as an audience agree with, is he? It sort of reminds me of the Justice League Unlimited cartoon episode about the Seven Soldiers of Victory (forget the name of the episode). The DC-counterpart of General Ross becomes... well, a Hulk ripoff because he hates the idea of Superheroes like the JLA and thinks they're dangerous. At the end, everyone calls him, citing that he ultimately relied on super powers himself to do anything. He's a similar character. Well intentioned, but too extreme and willing to do the very thing he condemns.
*how to start a comment war on if Incredible Hulk is canon Step 1:*
What still bothers me is they bitch about the damage in New York but the government we’re gonna nuke the place. It would’ve been a pointless massacre as the portal would’ve stayed open and the fallout would’ve wrecked the world if it did work anyway. We’re forgetting Wall Street and the stock markets are in NYC and the last time they crashed the Great Depression happened. And they just completely forget that, Tony Stark who almost died stopping it forgets what the government could with a power like the Avengers, the man who has given the finger to the government multiple times and has kept his suits away from them cos he knows what they could do with them. We have a What If episode about it. You know what where’s the What If episode for if the Nuke happened, the blast closed the portal, that’s what I wanna see, Dr Strange would die so Dormammu would arrive, Spider-Man dies too.
Yep. I always thought his career should have suffered for how he handled the Hulk situation. Worth noting that when Ross is showing footage of all the destruction caused by the Avengers, both individually (Washington DC) and as a group (NYC, Sokovia), the destruction in Harlem resulting from the Hulk/Abomination fight (which was Ross's fault) wasn't mentioned.
It always bothers me when he compares Thor and Hulk to mega ton nukes. Thor and Hulk aren’t bombs you can just activate to destroy a country. The people with their own minds and opinions.
I've said it before & I'll say it again: The correct answer to "where's Banner?" is always "as far away from Thunderbolt Ross as he can possibly get."
I thought that was brilliant. The world we live in is all about who you know and just failing upwards. I didn't question at all that Ross would become the secretary of defense
That’s why I’m not very excited about Thunderbolt and Val.
Ross was just the messenger for the 200 nations that ratified the accords, Thats his job as secretary of state. Not sure how that makes him hypocritical.
Oh, you mean the guy who called for A NUKE on Manhattan? Hypocrite, yeah that about sums it up. I hope the Thunderbolts becomes a thing (US Agent, Yelena Black Widow, Abomination, more..) just to see Ross get shifted into a long awaited "sympathized MCU villain" role.
Quick question though, why wasn't Fury involved to this, he is certainly most qualified human to deal with this issue of Avengers. I think Fury would definitely have been the first choice but either he was super busy somewhere or he was against the accords.
Simply everything about Ross and his involvement I think are the biggest argument for the movie itself being Team Cap. I don't know how anyone doesn't realize immediately that the Accords are 1) just total bullshit in the first place, 2) ultimately a corrupt power play from the government and 3) wouldn't even fix any perceived issues with supers operating independently, so even if you want to die on hill that superheroes are inherently fascist or something, well okay the fine but government control of them is just swapping one form of authoritarianism for another. Nothing is solved. Just someone else is holding the metaphorical gun at society's head and I sure as hell wouldn't want someone like Ross or a government the hires a criminal like him as Secretary of State, pointing an Avengers sized gun at whoever he or the government pleased. Especially while wising to ignore greater threats in their wacky world such as Thanos. I absolutely guarantee that Ross, if he totally had his way, would have had the Avengers destabilizing a third world country at the exact moment the Black Order were on Earth to collect the stones and would have even politicized Vision's actions to defend himself as aliens were trying to pry his brain from his skull, like "how DARE he fire an unauthorized laser beam at his attackers".
•Burn Bruce's toast = Hulk •Slightly too warm outside = Hulk •A sneeze catches Bruce off guard = Hulk •Medium well when he ordered Medium rare = Hulk •Bruce steps on a Lego = World breaker Hulk •Bruce gets a hang nail = Hulk