Iron Man V Captain America - Doesn't matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right.

Rating: 5/10 (13 May 2016)

I have no loyalty to anything other than to a high standard, and what I want out of a film, I have seen everything from DC and Marvel starting with Batman in 1989.
After seeing Iron Man V Captain America: Dawn of Avenging (Civil War) I'm probably one of the few who not only appreciates but prefers the Batman V Superman film over the latest blatantly similarly themed Marvel hero VS hero film. It's not the first time critics have been wrong, or that fans emulated the responses of their beloved critics but it has revealed to me much insight into why they seem to sit on such opposite ends of the spectrum.
I really wanted to like this film more than I did. First having seen Batman V Superman, and then as well as judging it upon its own merit Marvel's entry is everything you would expect (minus maybe Giant Man if you didn't see a trailer with that part in it at the time.) Its straightforward, vanilla, and palatable to general audiences. It reinforces liberal and conservative binary political stereotypes, as well as sanctioning the idea of submission to authoritarian government control. Visually it fits right in with the MCU and the rest of their almost completely forgettable scores.
Nothing sums it up more than when Cap says "If we sign this, we surrender our right to choose"...."We may not be perfect but the safest hands are still our own" never mind that whole "no you move" eulogy speech. However, half The Avengers sign themselves away with the Sokovia Accords without skipping a beat, without question, without even genuine honest discussion among themselves, and rebellious Tony Stark is immediately on board, all because he is guilt tripped by one mother? No one ever speaks up and says "Hey how many more lives would have been lost if we hadn't intervened in NY, Sokovia(Stark's mess), and of course Nigeria?" Don't the Avengers exist to specifically bypass the limitations of governments to take care of threats they can't handle on their own? YES!! But no one mentions that, at all.
Further displaying their wonderfully efficient 'team' dynamic everyone takes their side on the issue after a brief exchange of disagreements and goes off to do their own thing, eventually needing to recruit more people to fight their personal battle for them including a teenage Spider-man, a cool call for movie-goers to enjoy, but arguably another irresponsible call for Stark. What is even more ridiculous is that after realizing he was wrong about Bucky's involvement which sparked the whole thing, Tony still just takes all his pent up anger about his parent's death out on Captain America and Bucky, unrelentingly playing the part Zemo had set up for him, even after being made aware of it. In that case, maybe I do understand why Tony Stark is so willing to submit to control, after poor judgment calls like Ultron and his fit of rage he is more of a loose cannon than anyone else on the team, maybe even the absent Hulk.
How could anyone trust these 100+ countries and their corrupt governments to properly manage and use the Avengers as their will? That's how another Vietnam or Afghanistan or Gaza strip, but worse, begins. How can anyone defend submission to government control in the U.S.(because they know what's best for us?)when the whole country is founded on the idea of choice, and rebellion against an oppressive government? So because a small percentage of the general public and governments especially, fear the power these individuals have they have to respond with their own flex of power? Yes of course there are going to be casualties, whether it be war, any kind of conflict or life in general. I personally would feel safer with the Avengers out there combating villains saving everyone they can, while still in full control and able to put governments in check when they too get out of line.
DC's approach in BvS (without going into too much detail here) is darker, more symbolic and psychological, scratching at the surface, with an emphasis upon questioning ourselves, our beliefs, our perspective, our reality, with great analogical religious parallels. It is visually more arresting, and with a memorable score that enhances the on screen drama.
I know this is sensationalized reality like any comic book story but while Civil War feeds us another easily digestible dose of colorful, one-liners, and fun packaged in what we've all come to expect from Marvel films, which is good. The other challenges established norms, and further invites us to delve into humanities dark psyche, which is better. Personally I will always prefer and find art more relevant when it challenges established thinking and power structures, versus those that mirror or reinforce them. "It doesn't matter what the press says...or the mob says. Doesn't matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right."