Revenge of Birdman! - Review of Spiderman Homecoming

“After the blazing success of Birdman, Michael Keaton returns to don the wings and become the

feathery super character once more, with this sequel...”

“Wait, what is this?”

“What? It’s the review for Birdman 2.”

“There’s... no such movie. What’re you smoking?”

“But Michael Keaton plays this winged bird-like character, in New York City? So I thought, naturally... Birdman, you know...”

“It’s Vulture, goddammit!! And it’s the villain in SPIDERMAN: HOMECOMING, a SUPERHERO film in the MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE!! Get your head out of your bugle! Sheesh!”  

“... My bad.”

 

So Kevin Feige presents us with the 16th installment under the MCU with a completely new film on a superhero we’ve... seen before. 2 of them, as a matter of fact.

So... what’s new and improved over the predecessors?

EVERYTHING! <almost>

Like we all know, Peter Parker is a high school student who was bitten by the radioactive spider and became extra sticky and whatnot, and eventually dons the red and blue to prevent crime in New York City. But being a high school student in the 2010s, especially in the super-advanced Marvel Cinematic Universe, the character and his world needed some upgrades. Technical, and cultural. Being a millennial high school student, Peter Parker has finally been tailormade as one.

The film starts with the video chronicle created by Peter Parker (Tom Holland) while fighting #TeamCap in Civil War, self-bragging about his adventures after being temporarily being recruited by Tony Stark, up until the point where Tony drops him home in Queens with a high-tech spidey suit with the veiled promise that he ‘might’ be called upon to be an Avenger. The rest of the story covers his journey as a high-school student who must try and fit his alter ego somewhere between his ordinarily complex life.

Being one of the most successful superhero names of all time, and the company mascot for Marvel, AND being a original member of the Avengers, it was about time that Marvel inducted the character into their current Avenger universe. Where Spiderman: Homecoming rises above its predecessors, is realising and poking fun at some of the most obvious questions that have been asked by the prudent fans since a long time, such as –

·         How effective a superhero would he be in the suburbs, where there is an obvious lack of tall buildings to swing from?

·         How effective a superhero would you be on a boat, WHERE there is an obvious lack of any structures whatsoever to swing from?

·         How the heck is he able to avoid all sorts of nosey questions about being missing without explanation from crucial social situations?     

The most commendable feature of this movie is that at no single point, does it dwell. Like I said, it starts off by the video chronicle by Peter, and the rest of it is told in the same way as a teenager verbally recounting his far-fetched experiences after an exciting day, and though the same tends to get boring, it works extremely well here because we’re able to grasp the visuals of that story, with no unnecessary extra detail, and moving on with rambunctious energy toward the next sequence. Sometimes this pace is too fast for comfort, but it works mostly.

The narrative and the characters are like a sitcom at so many places, they could actually rename this movie as “Spidey and Friends”. Marisa Tomei as May (no more ‘Aunt’, because younger and hotter), Zendaya as Michelle Jones and Tony Revolori as Flash Thompson provide quick, random and wacky comic relief reminiscent to the side characters in some television sitcom.

Fans get introduced to a new side of Tony, who seems to be nurturing a mentor-protege relationship with Peter, who he can’t simply drop back into his world upto his own devices, after using his help in Civil War, and knowing the possibilities and extent of Peter’s Powers, and the situations the latter could find himself stranded in without the proper training and guidance of a veteran (not that Tony himself is a golden example, but anyhow).

Getting to the new Spiderman, Tom Holland, all praises fall short to express the good time that this guy provided as the titular character. The young English actor and dancer completely drowns himself into the character Spiderman, quite literally, performing nearly all the stunts and action sequences himself, and having fun at his job with boisterous, energetic and youthful appeal. To be able to steal the show surrounded by a cast of industry veterans is a feat that requires no validation.

Speaking about the villain, Birdman... sorry, ‘Vulture’ who is quite aptly named, considering the fact that he literally lives off the alien and robotic scraps from the battles involving the Avengers in New York (Avengers, 2012) and Sokovia (Age of Ultron, 2015) that he salvages and sells as high-tech black-market weapons (to street thugs?), Michael Keaton looks good as the same. Though his performance more-than-often verges on textbook-comic-book-supervillain, he possesses a natural element of intimidation that works pretty well, particularly in the scenes involving him and Peter. His characterisation is quite spot-on as it combines the stereotypical comicbook sense of evil, but lacking the megalomaniacal attitude, and having the grounded reasonability of Willem Dafoe’s Norman Osborn (Spiderman, 2002).

Additional talent includes Jennifer Connolly who voices Karen, the Artifical Intelligence in Peter’s suit.

<FUN FACT: Jennifer Connolly is the wife of Paul Bettany, who voiced J.A.R.V.I.S. and played the Vision>

VERDICT: 3  and a half/5 toots of the bugle

Keep hangin' in there, Pedro!

Marvel Studios maintains its impeccably premium track record with Spiderman: Homecoming. With a wee bit room for growth.

P.S. As is usual with any Marvel movies, you don't want to miss the end-credit cookie by Captain America! At. Any. Cost. 

In the name of all things Wonderful - Review of Wonder Woman

The people at the helm of the DCEU can finally take a collective sigh of relief, because finally they will be able to salvage some of that competitive dignity that they lost with Man of Steel and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. And after 2 pathetic attempts at making films on female superheroes, with Catwoman (2005) <ugh> and Supergirl (1984), they finally gave us Wonder Woman, AND AM I GLAD! And should YOU be! And that's a lot of ands. And I should stop. And you should read on ... and so. 

However, not getting carried away, there are both pros and cons of the movie: PROS in terms of the story’s consistency, comic timing, acting and background score; and CONS in terms of what is the bane of every DC movie till date. Rest assured the PROS outweigh the CONS.

It is quite a task to take one of the hottest comic book superheroines and render them on screen in such spectacular fashion, because it’s easy to hire an attractive actress to fit into the stereotypically tight clothes of a typical comic book superhero, but it’s absolutely another task to make her look so convincing in the role, it’s as if she was born into it. 

Words fall short in praise of Gal Gadot, or as I call her, “DC’s gift to the cinematic world.” Gal Gadot flirts very gracefully with the line that defines Wonder Woman as a pin-up girl on one side and as a symbol of female empowerment on the other. This is not the first role the Israeli girl is known for though , who you may remember behind the driving wheel in the multi-million dollar Fast & Furious franchise, in a comparatively lesser significant role. She perfectly fits the bill as the curious young Amazon demigoddess trying to come to terms with the reality of her birth and the extent of her powers. Superman and Batman have us used to a particular dark, grim brand of superheroes. Gal Gadot as Diana restores an inherently childish and grounded element of humanity into the DCEU that was much, much required after their last 2 offerings (not saying that those were bad films, those were some pretty good, mildly underappreciated (okay, quite underappreciated) films) which had been trying to establish themselves in the shade of the massively successful and ingeniously rooted Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The movie explores the origin story of Diana, the Princess of a race of Greek women warriors that live on the island of Themyscira, who are hidden from and exist for the destruction of Ares, the Greek god of war. When fate lands American spy Steve Trevor (played by Chris Pine) on the beaches of Themiscyra followed close behind by a fleet of German soldiers, Diana comes to know about men, and starts on a journey of rediscovering a world embroiled in World War 1, and the true purpose of her mysterious birth.  

A beautiful spectacle of a film, with fluid fight correctly timed fight sequences, choreographed to a power-packed background score by Junkie XL and Hans Zimmer, DC and Warner Bros. have provided a grounded film that sticks as close as possible to its comic book roots, with classic forgotten villains and yet dissipates information in a way that even a layman audience getting introduced to Wonder Woman for the first time can tune into.

The only CON that seems to have become a running disease for every DC movie, is its cinematography and green-screening. Bringing in the MCU at this point, it must be pointed out how realistic all of their films appear, making it very easy for a viewer to imagine those same characters in front of themselves in reality, because that’s how close to reality their sets and their world is. DC has this penchant for featuring fights in the dark, something one can observe even in the trailer of the upcoming Justice League.  And not wanting to be harsh, but DC’s cinematography is more like a video game rather than a film. This becomes a huge problem, even with a movie like Wonder Woman, who has a monumental build-up to a climactic reveal, to feature a boss-fight in a night-sky that looks so artificial, it very nearly kills the entire momentum it had built up till that point.

VERDICT – 4  /5 toots of the bugle 

Probably the best thing by DC after the Dark Knight trilogy, in the name of Hera!!

Gal Gadot is truly a Wonder Woman for one of the most earnest and immersive performances of her career, and for restoring faith in the DC universe, one which is hoped shall not diminish with Justice League. 

Have a taste of Tisca Chopra's 'Chutney'.

What is a short film, I ask you? 

If filmmaking is a drug, a short film's cocaine <Eric Clapton crooning in the background>. 

Today I seize this opportunity to analyse and applaud something I never ventured to consider for an opinion before, since it used to lie outside a comparatively more mainstream market of the conventional 'movies' which preemptively meant Hollywood or Bollywood. Short films fleet past us because they are small, both in length and project size, and are much less promoted than theatrical cinema. But this medium has grown to become a powerful storytelling medium, owing to strong, taut narratives, perfectly unsaturated in the stimuli to which they desire us to react.

Today I came across Chutney, a 16-minute long short film produced by Tisca Chopra who also co-wrote it with Jyoti Kapur Das, the director. A few lines ahead, is provided an analysis into some plot and character points that I believe make this project stand out unlike any recent cinematic indulgence.

Before you read any further, please first see 'Chutney' in the link below, if you haven't already, and then read on and express how much you're able to relate with the write-up: 

Done? Seen it? Okay.

Moving on then, to the first question that crossed me while seeing this: CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT IS TISCA CHOPRA IN THE LEAD? We have witnessed some amazing character development in some really amazing films, and one is just left awestruck to see Tisca portraying in such a raw, beautiful manner. But here, the reason that her entity here stands out, lies much in the physical persona of Tisca's character i.e. the Ghaziabadi Didi (we shall refer to her as 'Didi' henceforth' considering the character's name isn't revealed) serving the eponymous chutney. Due credit to Prem Singh and Mithu Santra, the makeup and hair guys behind this.

Didi oozes such innocent, earthy and dangerous elements which can be easily be understood as the very embodiment of the evils let loose upon the world from Pandora's box. The entire story develops to send a spine-chilling message to a woman, played by Rasika Dugal quite evidently hitting it off somewhat objectionably with Didi's husband Virji i.e. Adil Hussain. 

The narration of this tale can be called nothing short of a play straight out of Tarantino's style of filmmaking, though it is more elucidative, with backstory sequences leaving nothing to the viewer's imagination, and simply serving up a dish merely for the tasting (ergo: Chutney). With an extremely well matched group of actors, including the supporting female Rasika Dugal, this is one well made dish (I love how this film's title plays with my habit of comparing films with food). 

An element in the story I wish to comment upon exclusively, is one which would have gone largely unnoticed by the majority viewership - the servant. Not Bhola, the boy brought up by the lead couple and then buried unceremoniously by Didi. Not him.

I refer to Munna. Yes Munna, who hurls food into his masters' and guests' trays, who spits in their drinks, who smokes in their presence, and sings 'Lollipop lagelu' behind the backs of female guests. Superficially off-putting, and seemingly inconsequential, he is quite in contrast to Bhola, the shy boy who served dutifully and made delicacies for his masters.

But is the entity of Munna merely a servant, a simple manifestation of the negativity lingering around the household in the film? What if it is the continuance of the entity that was Bhola, which has found refuge in Munna's facade?

All the while, alongside Didi's tale of Bhola, Munna's antics are a running device, which are subtly drawing a comparison between his self and the picture of Bhola being painted by Didi. Bhola is shown as a hardworking boy, who provides a heartfelt service to his masters and acts humbly and always in a manner seemingly expected from a good servant. If one observes Munna's actions, they aren't merely of some character who is twisted just for the fun of it, but of someone who has been scorned at the hands of the people toward whom he behaves so i.e. Didi and Virji. 

The food of the house, and the chutney are made from items grown in the house itself, specifically on the Bhola's grave. Stands to reason, the food is soiled in the negativity with which Bhola died, and contains a part of him. Munna's character exists as a specimen, a victim even, of this food, who subconsciously houses the scornful side of Bhola, which reflects all too well in his callous attitude, specifically apparent at 8:15 in the video above, where though Munna abuses Bhola, at closer observation, it seems to be more of a self reprimand by his subconscious Bhola.

Sumit Gulati, who plays Munna must be careful though. After a portrayal or 2 more of such sleazy, disgusting servant type characters, I genuinely hope he doesn't get typecast as one. For those who couldn't guess, this is an absolute compliment toward his acting skill, which we have been subject to earlier in movies such as Talvar (2015). 

What are your opinions and observations about the plot, the characters, and other elements of this little film? Do you agree, disagree or are you just <meh>? Do share with me below.

Suicide Squad: A Lesson in genius marketing, and suicidal storytelling

When you – hell, the whole world - wait for something for over a year, you expect it to be sky-blazin’ amazing. Suicide Squad was riding on a zeppelin of expectations. Shame, that it had to crash and burn the way it did. Time for an autopsy of the most highly anticipated comic book film of the decade.

Let’s start with a disclaimer - Suicide Squad is actually a decent time spent at the theatre. It has all the elements of a quintessential summer action flick – a looming apocalypse, high octane gun-toting action sequences, a hot girl, Will Smith and general Hollywood stupidity. Plus, it has cameos by Batman and the Flash to boot. But then again, this isn’t some brawny ‘Murican film we’re talking about here, because if we wanted that, Bruce Willis is still alive and kicking ass all Yippee Ki-Yay. Director and writer David Ayer has written stuff like 'Training Day' and 'Fury'. But then he even wrote the farce that was 'Sabotage' starring Schwarzenegger, so my bets weren't really on him.

Frankly, if the movie could be described in 2 words, they’d be ‘Stupid’ and ‘Superficial’.

The film starts off post the death of Superman in Dawn of Justice. There’s little that the trailers left to the imagination of the viewers with regards to the plot – Amanda Waller (Viola Davis), a high-ranking U.S. government official assembles a covert team of ‘Bad Guys’ (like there’s actually a category like that) called Task Force X to execute dangerous life-threatening missions where if successful, the members would be given time off of their sentences. However, if they fail or try to escape, they’d be killed through ‘nanite explosives’ implanted in their necks (Hence the name Suicide Squad). The members are Deadshot, Harley Quinn, Digger Harkness a.k.a. Captain Boomerang, Killer Croc, Enchantress, El Diablo, and Slipknot led by Colonel Rick Flag.

Apart from the Joker and Batman, this is the first time any of the characters are appearing on screen. So one would actually expect some introduction into their pasts, something more than a two-line snippet, something DC botched up grandly to save up on the length of the movie, and something which if shown a bit more in detail, could have provided much more depth to it. 

I suppose this is how the studio decided upon the intro sequence -

“This is Harley Quinn. Used to be a psychiatrist, fell in love with the Joker, went dangerously mad. Now candidate for Task Force X.”

“Okay. How’d she fall in love with that psychopath? Could you show a bit more of..”

“No we ain’t got time. We got 4 more to present here. NEXT.”

“No I know that, but still, you could offer some detail into their...”

“NEXT!!!”

Without their proper story, the star attraction of the film, i.e. the bad guys that are going to do some good, just fall limp. The film trailers were more sympathetic to their identities rather than the film itself.

Without giving any spoilers, I can say that the entire film was actually about Amanda Waller sending in this Squad to cover up for some major ‘oopsies’ she pulled along the way. ‘Oopsies’ that could well result in global destruction. And it’s actually fine. It’s a pretty spot on portrayal of the ambiguity of the intentions that people in power profess.

Speaking of power and supervillains, where were the likes of Batman and Wonder Woman all this while? It would have been pretty sensible if they’d bumped into the Squad in the midst of this entire charade. But no, not one Batarang flying anywhere close to where it was actually and reasonably expected.

That was about the story. Coming to the characters, special appreciation is due to Margot Robbie for her maniacal portrayal of Harley Quinn. Be it the crazy laughs, the unpredictable insane antics, or the PDA with the Joker, she pulls it pretty much down to a T. But even she gets suppressed in the general noise of the movie and the lack of a solid back-story justifying her character transition, and some might even agree that her character’s been over-sexualised at numerous instances.

Will Smith as Deadshot does what he knows how to do best – be Will Smith, and I can’t complain. He’s the sanest member of the squad, which is otherwise mostly a motley crew of ‘antisocial freaks’ as very aptly put by squad leader Rick Flag (Joel Kinnaman). Thankfully for him, his character has received marginally extra attention which helps to establish his humanity better, basically making him the pseudo-mascot of the squad.

Someone who really surprised me was Jai Courtney as Captain Boomerang. Judging his previous flat performances that include ‘A Good Day to Die Hard’, and ‘Terminator: Genisys’, it is quite a treat watching him as the comic, edgy and loony boomerang expert Digger Harkness. He and Margot Robbie are the true embodiments of the 'crazy' element of the movie.

And now onto the Star Disappointment of Suicide Squad. I present to you the Joker.

For all those in line for a monumental Jared Leto performance, burn your tickets. Firstly, the Joker is not a lead attraction; he is merely in the film because Harley Quinn is. The promotions of the film have been riding on Mistah J and Leto’s star value, when the truth is that he’s ornamental, ordinary, artificial and not-even-galactically close to the hype. All the while I was thinking, “This is what Leto came up with after his methodical ‘deep dive’ into the role? An amateur in Improv class could have cooked that up!” Talk about doing justice to Heath Ledger.

Gotta give it to the studio though, rarely has a film received the level of marketing and promotion that Suicide Squad was subjected to. What with all the trailers, accompanied by tracks like Bohemian Rhapsody and Ballroom Blitz; a kickass soundtrack featuring original songs from names like Skrillex, Rick Ross, Imagine Dragon, Lil Wayne, Wiz Khalifa, and Twenty One Pilots;s and a year’s worth of PR. So despite all the shred-by-shred analysis into the structure of the film, one can bet good money that Suicide Squad might even cross BvS in terms of revenue. 

VERDICT - 2/5 stars

DC is following an awkward trajectory with their films, which seek to explore substance, in a grim manner sticking true to the comics’ roots, but get tangled up in messy plot-lines, restricted time frames resulting in a pace faster than a bullet train, and a vision for the future of the DCEU which seems to neglect the needs of their current projects.

Suicide Squad is a stylish testament that there is actually something called ‘excess promotion’. Despite all that , nothing can take the spotlight away from the fact the future of the DCEU seems pretty bleak. 

How Civil War is the Quintessential MCU film and not : Op-Ed Article

<WARNING : SPOILERS AHEAD>

Oh Captain! My Captain!! I’m on #TeamIronMan. Yeah, since the latter half of the past year, this and the #teamCap hashtag has been trending on the entire bloody internet. Way to build up steam for the grand opening. With memes, jokes, tweets and the hotlot making the rounds, Captain America: Civil War opened to some roaring fanfare, albeit late, in the Indian market.

Through this piece, I am not trying to appraise the Russo brothers in any out-of-the-way manner. I believe the tweets and facebook posts have done enough of that. Whatever I wish to state, and any opinions regarding the Russos, shall be substantiated through the elucidations of this post.  

Civil War is the most serious and matured entry of Marvel till date (after Jessica Jones and Daredevil), in all fronts possible. After the events of Avengers: Age of Ultron, and a mission against Crossbones that went sideways, the Avengers are obligated to sign the Sokovia accords, an agreement which would take away their autonomy, and screen the situations that require their presence. This divides the team into two factions, one pro-accords and the other against, led by Tony Stark and Steve Rogers respectively. Add to that, a conspiracy by a victim of the Avenger’s past exploits and the presence of Bucky Barnes a.k.a. the Winter Soldier, worsens the team fabric.

Civil War is the typical Marvel film, with more age and more wisdom added to the mix, despite defaulting in numerous instances in the rather comical slapstick-ish way typical of Marvel (Note: Usage of the word ‘typical’ twice should denote the weight of this statement). The film wins sweet points in performances, story (most of it at least), character development, and the political realism that it enters.

The film is basically centering around the polar change in the outlooks of Captain America and Iron Man. Cap’n is still the same old ‘Murican soldier, ‘who probably can’t live without a war’ as so aptly put by Ultron, but time and experience have brought out a new facet of his patriotism to the forefront: one by which he is ready to forsake any chains of order (which he used to be the embodiment of) to be able to protect the Earth as per his self-righteous terms, as well as his old friend who’s apparently innocent as his activities were being controlled by the rogue organisation HYDRA. We witness a metamorphosis in Rogers’ identity, from a soldier, to a symbol of structure and order, to an insurgent who believes that giving away the Avengers’ autonomy under Oversight would result in the failure of the very purpose of their existence.

On the other hand, Tony Stark faces a completely new angle in life. We see a bit of the old Tony return from the first Iron Man film, who after facing the ground reality of his weapons industry had shut it down in hopes of making the world a better place. After witnessing the aftermath of New York and Sokovia, Tony starts doubting the very autonomy that Rogers seems to uphold, and believes that the Avengers, like any other government entity require some sort of regulation, and this signs to the accords. Unlike the usual Tony Stark that the Marvel films have us used to, Civil War presents us with a much more calculative, much more pragmatic Tony, one who is ready to adapt to survive as well as develop, as an individual and a team.

The Stark-Rogers turmoil couldn’t be a more beautiful picture. Over their years together, the Cap’n and Iron Man have reached a spot, where their collective ideology has become similar, with a few still opposing facets. It’s like their 2 personalities trapped in 1 body, hashing it out to see whose definition of right and wrong is valid.

Point of interest: In terms of story structure, one can actually spot some striking similarities between Civil War and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice – 

Both Tony Stark and Bruce Wayne have gained considerable experience over their years of practiced vigilantism (Tony lesser than Bruce though) (Both the experience and the v, that has led them to become rather precautious, especially with their superior counterparts i.e. Rogers and Clark Kent respectively.

Both the films are building up to a master plan on a galactic level by an alien overlord, i.e. Thanos with his infinity stones, and Darkseid as was seen in Batman’s nightmare (for those who couldn’t catch up). 

Both films’ villains are secretly sowing discord between the 2 lead superheroes who hash it out, and then reconcile later.

Both Iron Man and Batman’s parents, specifically their mothers, are key parameters governing the turn of events in both the movies.

And last but not the least, both films feature a deadly damsel having a mysterious past, bridging the two lead characters (Black Widow and Wonder Woman). 

It’s as if this film was a reply to all those people making the Teletubbies Analysis between the MCU and the DCEU.

I mean, seriously. It’s rather uncanny. And to think DoJ performed rather poorly in the market. Seems like some sort of classroom favouritism, this. No?

Notwithstanding what’s about to follow, Civil War was a great entry by the Russo brothers, who already had the gem that was Captain America: The Winter Soldier in their kitty. Many raised the question that 'Why is this a Captain America film and not an Avengers film? What's the difference?' The difference lies in the principal point of view that the story piggybacks upon, one that is professed through the eyes of a man forged from raw patriotism, compassion, and self-righteousness in the face of harrowing odds 

Some points in this movie though, could really get red spots in the otherwise cool film. Leading the array is the famous Airport fight sequence between #TeamCap and #TeamIronMan at Leipzig.

Don’t get me wrong, it was a good fight. A damn good choreographed one, at that. But in the otherwise serious, mature presentation that Civil War was, and is expected to be considering it’s a ‘Captain America’ movie and not an Avengers movie, it was rather shoddy.

Why in the world are Spiderman and Ant-Man being pulled into a fight that doesn’t even concern them remotely? Scott Lang is a father trying to wean off his criminal past and paying child support for his incredibly sweet little daughter, and somehow he found that being in a brawl at a German airport (which is completely uninhabited, God knows why) fighting alongside a 70 year old science experiment is the solution to all his problems. And he wasn’t even being paid!!!

Same goes for Spiderman, but truly he wasn’t to blame. Really, Peter Parker’s a 19-year old kid. If I can shoot web out my hands and sorta kick ass, and Tony Stark offers me a nice suit, even I would accept the ticket to Germany, which begs the question: what the hell is wrong with Anthony Stark? You’re bringing a high school kid into your private skirmishes?? Just because he shoots white stuff that has high tensile strength??? Damn, and here I am writing paragraphs on how the guy’s matured and everything. WAY TO GO, TONY! <sic>

Keeping the rest of the character lineup aside, I must point out the elephant in the room that is Civil War - Black Panther. Possessing the quintissential anti-hero persona, Black Panther scratches and claws his way into Cooldom. I suppose it’s become a norm of sorts: You have an antihero? You want him to be cool and kick-ass? Give him claws and kitten that bitch up! Possibly the next best antihero after Wolverine and Deadpool, and the next coolest cat after Wolverine and Bagheera, I really don’t see why anyone wouldn’t like him. If anyone doesn’t though, that’s their problem. And his. And his claws' <RED ALERT>.

The typical Marvel film is guilty pleasure, the sort that even most critics aren’t able to run away from. Captain America: Civil War is that and more. Much more (This sounds bad, but is actually good). Through Civil War, Marvel proves its adaptability as well as its conviction, by creating a pragmatic, realistic story around the same goofball, never-seeming-that-serious superheroes, pitting them in a scenario involving real world problems like international law, sovereignty, treaties and agreements; problems that the earlier movies seemed to have a childish disregard for, without completely straying away from its comic spirit by providing a darker, more pessimistic portrayal. We saw how THAT worked out for DoJ (Not that I didn’t like it, but it sure is bad for business). 

The studio has also tried to set the film as a launchpad for future members of the Avengers' which may include a certain adamantium feline (rumours) (Control your breath), and though the intros may be a little fumbled up, it's actually turned out pretty good. Future sees good for all things MARVEL