MERGE: Civil War Postgame Analysis Megathread

[hyzmarca]

First of all, I seriously doubt Reed's a Skrull. His actions have all been pretty par for the course to his usual self,


Well there's the rub. The last time superhuman registration came up, he was totally opposed to the idea. In fact, he singlehandedly defeated the bill by creating a machine that proved that several Congressmen were, in fact, "superhuman", though they themselves were unaware of the fact.

The real Reed Richards firmly believed any such registration to be both immoral and impractical. The most plausible explanation for his 180 is skrull replacement, followed a close second by mind-control.

[jackolover]

See, a whole lot of you people are clutching at straws trying to give excuses for Sue not continuing the CW after Caps surrender, (as I have), but the reality remains that Sue was adament that Reeds side was totally wrong. It had nothing to do with Sue trying to or save the anti-regs side. When Sue and Johnny defected, they defected to the right side. The side that should have won; but it didn't because Sue was hamstrung by having her children in the firing line. And I'd say all the anti-regs were in the same boat, having family scattered throughout the city, equally at risk if the CW escalated out of control.

It really was a very civilised war. People basically fought with one hand tied behind their backs

[DaeJi]

Here's a question: how could the anti-regs win? I mean, they lost before they even began; if they had beaten up Ironman and his forces all that would have happened is that S.H.I.E.L.D. (and by that I mean Maria "I'm so totally a Skrull" Hill) will get their crack at the heroes. And unlike Ironman they would use lethal force (the whole Clor killing Foster wasn't intential).

I think after Cap surrendered Sue realized this, and came back knowing that nothing could be solved by more fighting.

[Your Imaginary Pal]

Sue saw her husband shot in the back(by someone who was on his side...a villain.) I guess none of it really made sense, no weapon the task master had should mean harm to Reed, so it's sort of a moot point, but who wants to see their spouse shot.(other than OJ and Barretta) Sue stopped fighting really within #7 and started trying to protect the innocent. I'm thinking she realized both sides were crazy and decided to just be a superhero.
as for why she didn't continue the war, Reed is a brilliant poet who can write one heck of a love letter.

[Omega Alpha]

Well there's the rub. The last time superhuman registration came up, he was totally opposed to the idea. In fact, he singlehandedly defeated the bill by creating a machine that proved that several Congressmen were, in fact, "superhuman", though they themselves were unaware of the fact.

The real Reed Richards firmly believed any such registration to be both immoral and impractical. The most plausible explanation for his 180 is skrull replacement, followed a close second by mind-control.

No, the most plausible explanation is to stop whining and read Fantastic Four, where he explains exactly for what reason he thinks the SHRA was his only choice. Not that i agree with his reasons, though. Also, do you know any Skrull that would make the Mad Thinker and Henry Pym be amazed by it's intelligence? Me neither.

[jackolover]

Here's a question: how could the anti-regs win? I mean, they lost before they even began; if they had beaten up Ironman and his forces all that would have happened is that S.H.I.E.L.D. (and by that I mean Maria "I'm so totally a Skrull" Hill) will get their crack at the heroes. And unlike Ironman they would use lethal force (the whole Clor killing Foster wasn't intential).

You have a point, and I have made it myself on occasion, that the CW was won before it started. I know Shield couldn't have gone Nuclear in NY, but I'm sure the humans had some final solution up their sleeve. Either Sentinels, or secret cells if the superhumans won. By that, I mean like Namors Sleeper cells, only an underground cadre, or assassins, that would pick off the heros, like snipers. If push comes to shove, I can see Mark Millars villian death squad eliminating heros, as a slow attrition.

But that's beside the point. I still see Sue Richards enforcing a superhero edict on NY if the Initiative falls apart, because all Sues issues have not been resolved. If Project Wideawake starts, then I see Sue Richards lead the superheros in taking over NY.

[hyzmarca]

But the various alternate realities in which certain anti-reg heroes went completely insane show that S.H.I.E.L.D. could not possibly stop them if they actually cut loose.

[jackolover]

But the various alternate realities in which certain anti-reg heroes went completely insane show that S.H.I.E.L.D. could not possibly stop them if they actually cut loose.

Then why all this Tony/Reed paranoia? Maybe Tony knows something, we don't because he was National Security Adviser?

Anti-reg heros cutting loose may not be a reality, because of the danger to their relatives, unless their relatives are targeted, and all rules are thrown out the window. Then your alternate realities option may come into effect.

[Expletive Deleted]

From Tom Brevoort's (http://www.marvel.com/blogs/Tom_Brevoort/entry/814) blog on Marvel.com:

FAO Tom Brevoort, Editor

The Marvel Civil War
12-Part Maxi-Series

Mark Millar and Steve McNiven
Covers by Michael Turner

16th September 2005


INTRO:

Okay, this is the skeleton structure, but I need to see the bones before I can hang the meat. This is a tight breakdown of where I see this going, the characters I’d like to use and some suggestions about where we go from here as a company. Any comments would not only be welcome, but very much appreciated. If anything doesn’t smell right let me know because you guys know all the smaller characters much more than I do. I’d rather hear about an inconsistency or a repeated idea here than on a message-board ten months down the line. Be as picky as you like.

Continued (http://www.marvel.com/blogs/Tom_Brevoort/entry/814).

It's interesting to see what might have been. Crossovers, subplots, and all that stuff. It's funny, but I think this actually sounds like it would've been more like a traditional superhero comic than what we actually ended up with.

[notyetbreathing]

that was short lived, its already gone

[Expletive Deleted]

Uh . . . it is?

[notyetbreathing]

Sorry there is no entry with that id.

thats what it tells me

[StoneGold]

It might be a problem with CBR linking. The site is going all crazy for me, anyways. But after clicking once or twice, the blog link works.

[notyetbreathing]

ok its back up now

[scratchie]

Wow. I'm only up to issue six (of twelve) and it's already twice as good as the real Civil War. What happened??

[StoneGold]

Interesting that they bring up WWH (although still referred to as a part of Planet Hulk) this early.

[Raker Q.]

I like it!...Would have been nice to see the 97lb weakling walking off into the sunset....oh what could have been....

[Kefky]

I wonder how people's reactions would've been different if they had just killed Happy?

Although I liked the Stamford idea much better personally.

[Kevinroc]

Looking at that outline was really interesting. I was especially interested in scenes that were very close to what we ended up seeing in Civil War. But that's not to say some of the stuff totally removed from the project wasn't worth reading about. I think the Gravity as Captain Marvel thing might have been an interesting way to go. I think Millar's comments about Thor were right on the money. He's the middle-ground between Captain America and Iron Man. It's a shame we didn't actually see the real Thor in this project.

The "Hulk War" portion of the outline (as they were calling it at the time) was certainly a very strange direction. I notice that some comments were actually removed for fear of spoiling something in World War Hulk.

[StoneGold]

I wonder how people's reactions would've been different if they had just killed Happy?

Although I liked the Stamford idea much better personally.

The Happy thing might have made it more individually personal for Tony, but overall, nuking a grade school has a more devastating effect for the rest of the country. And much better for getting on the real life evening news, at the very least.

[Adam C]

Wow, with the exception of the Hulk thing and the ending involving the Senator, the entire pitch is a much more well structured and much more logical than the actual comic that came out. How the hell did they manage to mangle that one so badly?

[DannyV_El_Acme]

No, the most plausible explanation is to stop whining and read Fantastic Four, where he explains exactly for what reason he thinks the SHRA was his only choice. Not that i agree with his reasons, though. Also, do you know any Skrull that would make the Mad Thinker and Henry Pym be amazed by it's intelligence? Me neither.

That's exactly my point. Sure, a Skrull could impersonate Reed's looks, powers and personality, but his INTELLIGENCE? I mean, sure, for us average joes, he'd still seem light years ahead in the IQ department over us, but peers like Hank Pym and Tony Stark would DEFINITELY notice it.

[Cthulhudrew]

Frankly, I'm not sure that the Pitch sounds much better than the actual product- in some ways it sounds worse.

I think it starts out okay (though a lot of the suggestions by Tom B. about motivation were spot on), but peters out by the 6th issue proposal, with the strange subplot about some friend of Speedball's and his kid. After that, things become gradually more vague and meaningless (I especially find myself in agreement with Tom's comments after Tony breaks into tears, where he asks- "How do we resolve it? Where do the pieces end up at the end?" asking questions that are handwaved away in the proposal, seemingly as if they were self-evident which they aren't.)

Plus, the bit about the Hulk-Babies and the sappy 90-pound Cap saluting Nick Fury as they wander off into a world that is new and amazing just seem really dumb- especially that last bit, which stands in stark contrast to so much of what the earlier parts of the proposal actually represent.

[Monty_Cristo]

That's exactly my point. Sure, a Skrull could impersonate Reed's looks, powers and personality, but his INTELLIGENCE? I mean, sure, for us average joes, he'd still seem light years ahead in the IQ department over us, but peers like Hank Pym and Tony Stark would DEFINITELY notice it.

why wouldn't there be a Reed-level genius (or close) on the skrull homeworld? aren't they supposed to be technologically advanced? plus Pym and Stark are kind of preoccupied, as it is.

[Omega Alpha]

why wouldn't there be a Reed-level genius (or close) on the skrull homeworld? aren't they supposed to be technologically advanced? plus Pym and Stark are kind of preoccupied, as it is.

No, there wouldn't. First of all, because we know Marvel won't create a Skrull genius smarter than Reed and Doom. Second, the Skrulls have been defeated by FF all the time because Reed was smarter than they all are, and like i said in another topic:

Hey, that would be an even better plan: send your greatest genius to a planet in which if he's caught, he's toast, make him impersonate a man who has thousands of extremely powerful enemies, the #1 a guy who was able to beat the Silver Surfer, has a family and several close friends who would notice if there was something different, and make him forget he's a Skrull; how can that possibly go wrong?

[Christopher O]

The only thing about Millar's pitch that I found superior to what actually happened is the idea of it being twelve issues. My only real problem with Civil War is that it was almost completely broad strokes. It needed those extra issues to address those more intimate character moments. Sue Storm, Spider-Man, and Iron Man all had like one apiece, and they all should've had more. Captain America should've had some too, along with many others. Instead, we were forced to go to the tie-ins for those, which were all, for the most part, of lesser quality.

[StoneGold]

The only thing about Millar's pitch that I found superior to what actually happened is the idea of it being twelve issues. My only real problem with Civil War is that it was almost completely broad strokes. It needed those extra issues to address those more intimate character moments. Sue Storm, Spider-Man, and Iron Man all had like one apiece, and they all should've had more. Captain America should've had some too, along with many others. Instead, we were forced to go to the tie-ins for those, which were all, for the most part, of lesser quality.

I'm feeling that too. Well, that and no one gets pissy about Clor, but that's something else. Although 12 parts might have been too long. I dunno, what this really means is one guy with total control over the crossover, instead of the too many chefs in the kitchen approach that turned really made the pro side look wacky.

[Omega Alpha]

"
THE UPSHOT:

Winter Soldier as Cap for a year before Steve gets the call and gets revitalized for the movie. "

Heh, i'm surprised no one has commented on it yet.

Anyway, i prefer the version that came out. Although there were some good ideas, such as Thor's return and him being the middle ground between Cap. America and Iron Man.

[bulbasteve]

Well not only did Sue learn about Reeds psychohistory plans late in the war, which at least led her to give him a second chance once it ended. But currently is learning more about all of his utopian ideas that even Stark doesn't know about and Reeds promise that she and the rest of the family would have a say in all of it.

[jackolover]

After reading that Tom Brevoort blog 'Civil War Memorial', it was so chauvanistic, as to not mention Sue Richards (or Johnny Storm for that matter). The whole thing was framed as the formation of the Registration act, that Cap and Tony fought over, then Cap lost his powers, and went on a road trip, while Tonys Initiative started up.

It really was a guys affair, to just to move the MU along in another direction. The only rectification back to non-registration mode, was after WWH, when all the heros came back together to fight Hulk, and then it stayed non-registration. There really was no room for the CW to have continued, or for the anti-reg side to have won, in this first draft of the CW by Mark Millar. It was just a major coincidence that Sue Richards played such a prominent part in the show, in the final version, because of the death of Goliath, and, she seemed to be this ghost of conscience floating around the books.

CW had so many ways it could have panned out, from the raw begginings that Mark Millar submitted, that you could write another version, with just the mearest of twists, and it would still be a great read. For criticism of the first draft version, I see that many changes occurred to accomadate sensationalism into the books, and, tie-in to all the other titles, in this complicated web, that made it sometimes difficult to follow. But as an overall event, I think Tom, and the team of creators did a splendid job, of coming up with a version that captured the spirit of the first draft, and, made the event lengthy and engrossing enough to be the best event to come out of the Marvel Stables.

[Magneto Rocks]

Well according to Dwayne McDuffie she knew why Reed did what he did after 542, so she was already half convinced before the final battle.

[Magneto Rocks]

Not even CLOSE to as good as the real thing. I was fine up to issue 8, there were some moments there that could have been very cool, but the Hulk War stuff was totally unnecessary and out of place- even though written by Millar it would have been superior to the actual WWH.

Their description of the eighth issue sounds exactly like what "The Initiative" should have been. Millar had to cram it into about 6 pages, but that's what it should have been- new heroes, revamped ideas, more on the FSI, etc rather than the rubbish we got for an Initiative special.

Although now I wish Cap hadn't died just so we could get the awesomeness of him returning to lead them to triumph against the Hulk. And I really wish we HAD got Thor back.

I'm still giving the actual CW a 9 or 9.5 out of ten, that pitch gets maybe a six. Although some elemts were cool- like Tony waking up to find Cap (that sounded wrong...) and such.

[myslead]

So many things, so many things.

Either way, it’s a bit hypocritical for Tony & Co to condemn him for innocents getting caught in the crossfire when it’s happened to Iron man multiple times. Something to think about and finesse—each character can have a slightly different shading on the events.

yeah ... (they're talking about Speedball btw)

How great will it be when he can yell “it’s clobberin’ time,” in French

It wasn't ...

I’d really like to see the Hulk attack Earth and bring with him small, five foot versions of the Hulk called Hulk Babies who are just as powerful and dangerous, but the spawn of the Hulk after he’s bedded a hundred thousand alien chicks.

this is just priceless ... it screams awful on every level yet the dude's excited about it ...

I also like the last couple of lines.

and who we’d want to kill off or mutilate in this thing. If Speedball is the best we’ve got, it’s time to pack it in

and they killed Bill Foster lol ... right.



ps. nobody made comments on the Captain America thing because everyone knows that it's actually coming into play.

ps2. I also find odd the fact that Nick Fury seems to be really present in the story, they must have pitched that story years ago ...

[Kefky]

One thing that I find odd is that even in this original draft where Fury's the leader of SHIELD, they're the ones who point a gun at Cap first when he refuses to go along with the draft. Clearly, Millar thinks there's absolutely nothing wrong with that situation. Crazy.

[DannyV_El_Acme]

why wouldn't there be a Reed-level genius (or close) on the skrull homeworld? aren't they supposed to be technologically advanced? plus Pym and Stark are kind of preoccupied, as it is.

To my knowledge, it is pretty much assumed that Reed's the smartest living being alive. The only ones that could surpass him are cosmic beings who are omniscient, like Living Tribunal, Galactus, etc., and THOSE guys didn't STUDY for their knowledge, they just have it as part of their place in the cosmic order. Galactus may build every machine imaginable, but he already has a complete understanding of the universe just for BEING Galactus. Reed's understanding of the universe is based on intense study and experimentation. Not only that, being a regular human being gives Reed a much more intimate perspective on how his knowledge may affect humans and other "lesser" beings, a perspective that the higher cosmic beings simply are not capable of.

As fro Hank and Stark being preoccupied, well, they're kinda worried because a fellow supergenius and founding architect of the SHRA has left the planet on a second honeymoon while leaving BLACK PANTHER in charge of his team. Yeah, if I were them, I'd be preoccupied too.

[Magneto Rocks]

Well said, DannyV!

[Adam C]

I think it starts out okay (though a lot of the suggestions by Tom B. about motivation were spot on), but peters out by the 6th issue proposal, with the strange subplot about some friend of Speedball's and his kid.

I mostly agree that it's worst after that, but mostly because I think Millar hit his climax point right around the blow-up point following the hero's suicide. Adding WWH and the story about the senator using the depowering machine just added too much onto the story for it's own good.

Still I think it's quite a bit more logical than what came out. For one thing the pro-Reg's most egrerious sins in the series are pretty much absent, save for using the villains against the heroes. As a result the ending isn't completely illogical where we are meant to accept that Tony Stark is right, in spite of acting like an dyed-in-wool authoritarian throughout the series. The leaking (granted he'd have to use Breevoort's suggestion in the pitch about a villain killing one of the registrees' families) of identities also gives the anti-reg side a lot more weight, which was something lacking in the original series.

[Starscream]

hmm some bits of it sound better then the real deal and others just sound to much like a really bad movie.

im especialy happy that they didnt go with the hulk baby thing. The current Warbound is perfect.

[Christopher O]

Well, that and no one gets pissy about Clor, but that's something else.
I love the whole idea of cloning a god. I think it was a plot point with loads of potential and possible ramifications, both spiritual and ethical. Unfortunately, there was no real follow-up, and I hate that we have to wait for issue 3 or 4 of the new Thor series to get a little bit. It's one of the many decisions that should have followed Tony, Hank, and Reed everywhere, at least for a time.
Although 12 parts might have been too long.
You might be right, but I think at least another issue or two would've gone a long way.

[Frank]

Not even CLOSE to as good as the real thing. I was fine up to issue 8, there were some moments there that could have been very cool, but the Hulk War stuff was totally unnecessary and out of place- even though written by Millar it would have been superior to the actual WWH.

Their description of the eighth issue sounds exactly like what "The Initiative" should have been. Millar had to cram it into about 6 pages, but that's what it should have been- new heroes, revamped ideas, more on the FSI, etc rather than the rubbish we got for an Initiative special.

Although now I wish Cap hadn't died just so we could get the awesomeness of him returning to lead them to triumph against the Hulk. And I really wish we HAD got Thor back.

I'm still giving the actual CW a 9 or 9.5 out of ten, that pitch gets maybe a six. Although some elemts were cool- like Tony waking up to find Cap (that sounded wrong...) and such.

Actually I think it would have been better. More fights + Tony would not have been a villain.

[xarathos]

Civil War, I shake my head when I hear those words. It was like watching Titanic go down with everyone on board this time. I can't think of how many lame things were in it. I knew they were going to kill Cap because he didn't fit into the Quesada verse. I still don't know who Goliath was and don't care. Spidey wasn't spider-man anymore. They'd stripped the character of what shred of credibility he had left.

Millar wasn't the person to write it for sure, he writes stuff like maybe a begginning, leaves out most of the middle, then just ends the thing.

That was my take on it.

[Majinlex]

I've always thought of Cap as Marvels Superman, but Punisher being equal to Batman? That's interesting. It makes me want to see more of these 2 guys put side-by-side.

[jackolover]

"
THE UPSHOT:

Winter Soldier as Cap for a year before Steve gets the call and gets revitalized for the movie. "

Heh, i'm surprised no one has commented on it yet.

Anyway, i prefer the version that came out. Although there were some good ideas, such as Thor's return and him being the middle ground between Cap. America and Iron Man.

I prefer what came out, too, but I'm now feeling a little spoiled by the first draft story, because it bescmirches the end product, because of the original intension. I would have much prefered I didn't read the first draft.

Looking back at the CW we did get, it rang with a resonence similar to Avengers #4 - the Cap return issue. It was clean, emotional, with crisp art, and very serious drama involving deaths, destruction of friendships, and a total war at the end, with dirty tricks that would made Nixon look as innocent as a girl scout. I can't think of anything that contained the complexity of character and motivation, of something that held a whole reading audience in it's thrall, in modern memory.

There were so many changes they had to make so Winter Soldier went, so did Cap riding off. Thor was a victim, as was the WWH part. Once they had to incorporate all the tie-ins, remove Thor, cut WWH, and make it 7 issues, they radically had to change the plot. It was a first draft. Once the problems with it, arose, the re-write was inevitable.

[Alpow]

[TB -I don’t quite buy this. I don’t think Cap would either surrender or retire—especially if that’s going to be the payoff at the end of the series. ]

Says it all really, they identified the key problem right there and never fixed it.

[Christopher O]

Says it all really, they identified the key problem right there and never fixed it.
He should've died. That's the ending the story was calling for.

[myslead]

Says it all really, they identified the key problem right there and never fixed it.

they identified alot of stuff that was not great at all and still went ahead with them.

at least we didn't get Hulk babies ... but then again WWH is just 1 issue in ... or is it 2 now?

[Magneto Rocks]

Right but Alpow, things changed since then. In the final one, Cap saw that he had become exactly what Tony was warning against- an out of control metahuman. That doesn't come across so strongly in this first draft.

And if Tony had killed Cap in #7, it would have sucked, being both incredibly predictable and the exact OPPOSITE of the narrative. The series was leaning MUCH MORE in the opposite direction the entire ways, fans were shouting that Tony had to kill Cap and trying to force it into their own viewpoint, into a world where that made ANY sense at all beyond a pipe dream.

[Wild Card13]

See, I agree Cap should have died in the pages of Civil War, but I don't think it should have been Tony. In fact, I honestly would basically just transpose the courtroom scene onto the end of Civil War, the very last panel being the shot of Steve prone on the ground in his own blood.

[Adam C]

There were so many changes they had to make so Winter Soldier went, so did Cap riding off. Thor was a victim, as was the WWH part. Once they had to incorporate all the tie-ins, remove Thor, cut WWH, and make it 7 issues, they radically had to change the plot. It was a first draft. Once the problems with it, arose, the re-write was inevitable.

Nah. The original draft already had a good cut-off point with the punch up after the hero's suicide. What came after that was just needless, clunky padding. Cutting off WWH and Thor wouldn't have been necessitated a re-write of the rest of the story that came before.

Right but Alpow, things changed since then. In the final one, Cap saw that he had become exactly what Tony was warning against- an out of control metahuman. That doesn't come across so strongly in this first draft.

It doesn't come across strongly in the actual mini either. The closest we get is Captain America temporarily teaming up with the Punisher (which duly ends with Capt attacking Frank for killing those two lower-tier villains) and Capt neglecting the damage being caused by the fighting in New York. But even that is poorly emphasized, there's no lead-up to it, and on top of that we have to accept this conclusion against the pro-registration side's abhorrent behaviour throughout the crossover.

In any case the solution for the finale is obvious: following the original story outline, Capt goes with his group to confront Tony following the heroe's suicide. Capt's furious and Tony's trying to calm him down, but Capt snaps and attacks him and a fight breaks out. Then you come to the conclusion where Capt stands over a beat Iron Man to stare at the scared faces of the crowd and realises how far he has gone. Furthermore it should be built up by the anti-side making a series of seemingly small, reckless mistakes that foreshadows the punch-up.

[Alpow]

Right but Alpow, things changed since then. In the final one, Cap saw that he had become exactly what Tony was warning against- an out of control metahuman. That doesn't come across so strongly in this first draft.

Is that what Cap realises?

He seems pretty clear that i just thinks he wasn't going the right way to win the argument not that Stark was right (not matter what Millar believes or some such as yourself would like).

In any case the draft essentially lays out the ending exactly

"They recognize the more sensible argument and it’s only at that precise moment that Cap realizes he no longer has the faith of the people. [TB -Cool.] And he’s horrified. He represents America and yet now finds himself representing an eccentric elite who dress up in costumes and get involved in violent situations."

That pretty much sums up out of control meta-human (with some extra anti hero bias heaped on top).

And if Tony had killed Cap in #7, it would have sucked, being both incredibly predictable and the exact OPPOSITE of the narrative. The series was leaning MUCH MORE in the opposite direction the entire ways, fans were shouting that Tony had to kill Cap and trying to force it into their own viewpoint, into a world where that made ANY sense at all beyond a pipe dream.

Tony shouldn't have killed Cap, to be honest there was no way to end civil war satisfactorily, I pointed this out way back in the beginning, that the only options were Cap quitting (which wouldn't happen) or Cap dying and his troops just giving up (which also wouldn't happen).

They wrote themselves into a hole which it probably wasn't possible to escape from, it is just a little sad that they did so with their eyes open to the fact (and made Cap a moron to boot).

[Alpow]

He should've died. That's the ending the story was calling for.
What would that have solved thoguh?

Would Sue Storm just have decided to go back to Reed because Cap was killed by Pro Reg forces?

Would Falcon register because of it?

The Young Avengers?


Cap dying wouldn't have resolved the story(unless the pro reg lost because of it), the civil war would have continued because Cap's followers wouldn't have laid down their arms.

I pointed this out a while back (I think we were at issue two or three), the only plausible ways to end the story were for Cap to win (courts overturn the SHRA, pro reg force defects entirely and the government caves etc) or for all of the anti-reg heroes to spend a considerable time in 42 (until the next big cross over required them to be freed).

What we got was the best way of contriving an ending but it came off quite clearly as contrived and thus left a bad taste in the mouth.

[Big Red Spider]

So it's been mentioned that CW was part I and WWH is part II. It seems to me that part III is the Skrull Invasion 2008.

I like the part with the depowered Steve Rogers that was funny.

[jackolover]

Well according to Dwayne McDuffie she knew why Reed did what he did after 542, so she was already half convinced before the final battle.

No, I think Sue whimped out. After Sue saw 542, it didn't really change things, because she was still on the anti-reg side in the fight in CW #7. And even after CW, she was still unconvinced, and Reed had to make a big effort to smooth things over, and that's what undermines Sue Richards as an individual and a leader in the face of challenges with great dilemas, like CW. She is stuck as a mother, and not an individual.

[Crimson]

To be honest, the Speedball leading to one kid's death thing was weak... so was the idea of a friend not turning up for a teamup. We go the better starting point. At this point in the game one death in the MU is nothing, and Tony going hole hog over it wouldn't make him look any better then him feeling responsible for hundreds of people's deaths.

I do like the idea of "Register or just disapear". I didn't like what we got where everyone gave up the fight and were forgiven. If the fight that was that important that they went up against the government and their friends/family they wouldn't back down that easy.

It's interesting they mention the new Captain Marvel. It just shows how late the resurrection of the old Marvel was planned, as well as the scrapping of the Gravity plan.

I'm glad they didn't tied Hulk into it.

The ending is pretty weak too... it seems like the war disapears and they just kick Hulk's ass.

The Bucky taking over as Cap thing is interesting seeing as that's what alot of people are saying will happen now.

I think, while we got a few hiccups (Clor, delays etc) we got the better deal. This pitch doesn't have the epic feeling and it's all wrapped up by the end of it. Half of the sub-plots seem to go no where as well.

[Expletive Deleted]

Today, Tom posted a bit of Millar's first stab at a script (http://www.marvel.com/blogs/Tom_Brevoort/entry/818) for CIVIL WAR #1, based on the above pitch.

[Crimson]

One thing is clear, Happy was screwed from the get go.

[tavella]

One thing that I find odd is that even in this original draft where Fury's the leader of SHIELD, they're the ones who point a gun at Cap first when he refuses to go along with the draft. Clearly, Millar thinks there's absolutely nothing wrong with that situation. Crazy.

None of them, editorial or writers, see anything wrong with it, which is part of why CW ended up so broken for anyone who some vague idea of how the law or the military actually works. To them, Cap was in the wrong the moment he didn't submit quietly to be tranked... for refusing a job enforcing a law that wasn't actually passed yet. Yeeeeeaaaaah.

[Expletive Deleted]

Today's Blah Blah Brevoort (http://www.marvel.com/blogs/Tom_Brevoort/entry/821) has an early planning document for the crossover elements of the event. It's a little further along in the development cycle, so things like Stamford are set and things like the Hulk's return and the evil Senator have been dropped.

There's some more good stuff, here. There were going to be one-shots dealing with Nitro (CIVIL WAR: THE FUGITIVE), the New Warriors (CIVIL WAR: THE ACCUSED), and the SHRA bureaucracy (CIVIL WAR: THE AGENCY). Marvel Boy and Captain Marvel were originally slated to have their storylines occur in the main series. And there's yet another different ending for Captain America.

[Cthulhudrew]

This part cracks me up:

Cap, exhausted, finally puts Tony down in the cleverest way possible. It’s over.

Putting a lot of thought into that big, dramatic part of the story, I see. :p

[Frank]

Right but Alpow, things changed since then. In the final one, Cap saw that he had become exactly what Tony was warning against- an out of control metahuman. That doesn't come across so strongly in this first draft.

And if Tony had killed Cap in #7, it would have sucked, being both incredibly predictable and the exact OPPOSITE of the narrative. The series was leaning MUCH MORE in the opposite direction the entire ways, fans were shouting that Tony had to kill Cap and trying to force it into their own viewpoint, into a world where that made ANY sense at all beyond a pipe dream.

It would have been something had the opposite happened: Cap kills Tony or Tony is killed during their fight. That way, the fans are happy that the bastard got killed off and it gives strength to the registration wave and Initiative program. So Mark Millar and Marvel's plan of creating a new Marvel from the ashes could be have been implemented. Cap goes to prison. Tony's dream happens, Cap's old world views dies. Of course because of the 12 pardons, Cap goes free afterwards. But leaves the super-hero bizz, setting up a huge (and possibly exciting) race to find a new Cap.

I talking about the early Civil War compared to the final form it took with a friend of mine last night and he came up with an interesting solution in the whole Hulk thing. We concluded that the way Civil War, it made Tony looked too much like a mastermind and after the last page it felt like the villains had won. The Millar early draft, the way the two sides come together and everybody is redeemed it's by seeing having the great menace created by the coming of Hulk and the appearence of the kid of the dead hero at the end. Well I'd agreed that the presence of Hulk was too much. But the idea was what was needed to have a great resolution. So my friend suggested tying Civil War and Annihilation. So that instead of Hulk making his invasion it would be Annihilus' forces. Everything is there from the Negative Zone breach to having prisons in the place, where Annihilus resides. Instead of Nova and his group defeating the bad guys, you have them rethreat to the Negative Zone where they discover the prisons, so you have Annihilus like a kid in a candy store picking super-human prisoners left and right to join his cause.

The direct link to Civil War occurs when near the end with Cap and Iron Man fighting, Nova crashland in front of them, killing Tony. Stunned and bruised, Nova tells Cap and the others that he came as a warning that Annihilus is coming. With the end of the CW and Ann events, it creats the CW-Annihilation crossover where it's everybody fighting the invading forces. It would be a nice way to reinforce the Fantastic Four relationship and makes Reed Richards look better as a hero since Annihilus was their enemy with the FF going toe-to-toe with him at the end.

[Brian M.]

I would have killed to have seen that scene McNiven draws of Cyclops and the X-Men showing up to fight.

[Expletive Deleted]

Aaaaaand still more pre-CW planning material (http://www.marvel.com/blogs/Tom_Brevoort/entry/822) courtesy of Tom.

Nothing earth shattering here, since it looks like they're starting to get the basics of Civil War in order, but there are still some interesting "what might have been" bits scattered through the e-mails.

[Bryson the Red]

I don't know if there is a better place to ask this, but are there any plans to collect Civil War in hardback format?

[Expletive Deleted]

None have been announced.

[botch]

Sounds like a post rock band (Godspeed You! Black Emperor) but I have finished reading most of civil war and that is all I wanted to say.

I'm with Starscream.

[1WEBHEAD]

I was one of the few who liked the Civil War event and how it turned out but if you really want something great to read, Read ANNIHILATION.

It's collected in 3 hardcovers and is worth every cent.

There, this thread isn't a total waste of space.:)

[Brian M.]

Do you know what Facism is?

[Calybos]

Yes, and it's a pretty on-target description of Stark's attitude and behavior in Civil War.

[SnakeEater]

chronogically where does Ghost Rider's casualties of war fit in. i know it takes place after cw 5 but where exactly. are there any references to other events in the series in the entire 4 part story?

[1WEBHEAD]

chronogically where does Ghost Rider's casualties of war fit in. i know it takes place after cw 5 but where exactly. are there any references to other events in the series in the entire 4 part story?

It really doesn't matter since that tie-in had very little to do with Civil War but I'd say it takes place between the end of Civil War #5 and the start of #6.

It's just a guess, Way didn't drop that many clues.

[Magneto Rocks]

Yes, and it's a pretty on-target description of Stark's attitude and behavior in Civil War.

For the 14245234242nd time...

The Fourteen defining characteristics of Facism:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism -
Does Stark Display?: NO. The most that can be said is that there are occasional posters advertising Registration, but certainly no strong nationalism has been advocated.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights -
Does Stark Display?: NO. No torturing has taken place, no executions, no assassinations, and the heroic prisoners were incarcerated for mere weeks.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause -
Does Stark Display? DEBATABLE! One could argue the Atlanteans but if so, it was a pretty weak effort as he took almost no action on it and didn't seem to care that it never really worked and was probably nothing more than a vague idea. One could also make the case for the Hulk but that's an even weaker attempt.

4. Supremacy of the Military -
Does Stark Display? Not a hope.

5. Rampant Sexism -
Does Stark Display? Not in the slightest- Hell, one of his two second in commands is a female and he has a female leading the Mighty Avengers!

6. Controlled Mass Media
Does Stark Display? Again, not a hope.

7. Obsession with National Security
Does Stark Display? Again, a big fat no.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
Does Stark Display? You know most of these, the most rabid anti-Tony,bile spitting users would probably try to make some sort of case for but I don't see how JMS himself could try to spin this one.

9. Corporate Power is Protected
Does Stark Display? Not in the slightest so far. In fact, one could arguie that considering he RUNS a corporation, he's done surprisingly well at NOT doing this.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed
Does Stark Display? Er... you know, again, I can't see anyone making a case for this.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Does Stark Display? Arts, not as far as we know, intellectuals- well, 90% of the magree with him and he's shown little disdain so far.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Does Stark Display? Again, clearly not given his habit of routinely pardoning and getting amnesty for anyone who defies the law.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Does Stark Display? I have no doubt people will try to spin this but again, I don't see how. Corruption? How? He certainly hasn't siphoned off any cash for himself or pals or anything from SHIELD. And Cronyism? Um.... pardoning heroes, does that count? Except that's not even him doing it... yeah, I got nothing.

14. Fraudulent Elections
Does Stark Display? Interesting to see anyone spin that one.

So basically, anyone who does ANY research into facism at all and indeed knows much about it beyond "Facism = Bad" can hardly say Stark displays a SINGLE ONE of the factors to identify facists, meets the criteria in exactly 0 ways, and basically, much as you may like to degrade him, is pretty definitively not a facist.

[Shyft]

For the 14245234242nd time...

The Fourteen defining characteristics of Facism:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism -
Does Stark Display?: NO. The most that can be said is that there are occasional posters advertising Registration, but certainly no strong nationalism has been advocated. apart from rousing the entire nation into supporting a possible war with Atlantis.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights -
Does Stark Display?: NO. No torturing has taken place, no executions, no assassinations, and the heroic prisoners were incarcerated for mere weeks.There was still no due proccess, we havent actually seen what happens to heroes who still refuse to sign and get caught. And was what happened to the THuderbolts like community service or something?

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause -
Does Stark Display? DEBATABLE! One could argue the Atlanteans but if so, it was a pretty weak effort as he took almost no action on it and didn't seem to care that it never really worked and was probably nothing more than a vague idea. One could also make the case for the Hulk but that's an even weaker attempt.Oh come on man, Frontline showed that he very purposefully ochestrated the whole thing, and he looked pretty upset when he was busted by sally and ben, so that shows some investment in the plan

4. Supremacy of the Military -
Does Stark Display? Not a hope.Not when hope of a new force of superheroes is in every state basically doing police work but answerable to the military chain of command?

5. Rampant Sexism -
Does Stark Display? Not in the slightest- Hell, one of his two second in commands is a female and he has a female leading the Mighty Avengers!
didn't he totally use She-HUlk?

6. Controlled Mass Media
Does Stark Display? Again, not a hope.fair enough

7. Obsession with National Security
Does Stark Display? Again, a big fat no. are you serious?! The whole POINT of the SHRA is national Security!

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
Does Stark Display? You know most of these, the most rabid anti-Tony,bile spitting users would probably try to make some sort of case for but I don't see how JMS himself could try to spin this one. fair enough

9. Corporate Power is Protected
Does Stark Display? Not in the slightest so far. In fact, one could arguie that considering he RUNS a corporation, he's done surprisingly well at NOT doing this. fair enough

10. Labor Power is Suppressed
Does Stark Display? Er... you know, again, I can't see anyone making a case for this. fair enough

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Does Stark Display? Arts, not as far as we know, intellectuals- well, 90% of the magree with him and he's shown little disdain so far. fair enough

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Does Stark Display? Again, clearly not given his habit of routinely pardoning and getting amnesty for anyone who defies the law. debatable id say, seeing he is constantly spewing "its the law, you have to obey the law" as one of his main points for the SHRA

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Does Stark Display? I have no doubt people will try to spin this but again, I don't see how. Corruption? How? He certainly hasn't siphoned off any cash for himself or pals or anything from SHIELD. And Cronyism? Um.... pardoning heroes, does that count? Except that's not even him doing it... yeah, I got nothing. fair enough

14. Fraudulent Elections
Does Stark Display? Interesting to see anyone spin that one.fair enough

So basically, anyone who does ANY research into facism at all and indeed knows much about it beyond "Facism = Bad" can hardly say Stark displays a SINGLE ONE of the factors to identify facists, meets the criteria in exactly 0 ways, and basically, much as you may like to degrade him, is pretty definitively not a facist.[/QUOTE]

he meets the criteria in several ways, but he definately isnt an ACTUAL Fascist. All your rebuttals have massive spin, and some of them ignore completely the actual events!

[Magneto Rocks]

For the 14245234242nd time...

The Fourteen defining characteristics of Facism:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism -
Does Stark Display?: NO. The most that can be said is that there are occasional posters advertising Registration, but certainly no strong nationalism has been advocated. apart from rousing the entire nation into supporting a possible war with Atlantis.

Hardly, in fact he took steps to ensure there wouldn't be a war, and even then one can hardly argue that he's promotiong nationalism, especially when taking charge of an INTERNational agency.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights -
Does Stark Display?: NO. No torturing has taken place, no executions, no assassinations, and the heroic prisoners were incarcerated for mere weeks.There was still no due proccess, we havent actually seen what happens to heroes who still refuse to sign and get caught. And was what happened to the THuderbolts like community service or something?

The Thunderbolts all agreed and consented, of their own free will. And right, we haven't seen what happens- but there's some strong implication they do get their trials and due process.

Oh come on man, Frontline showed that he very purposefully ochestrated the whole thing, and he looked pretty upset when he was busted by sally and ben, so that shows some investment in the plan

Not really, in fact he took NO steps towards it outside Frontline and I think his being upset was more because everything was being sprung on him than anything else.

.Not when hope of a new force of superheroes is in every state basically doing police work but answerable to the military chain of command?

It's not answerable to a military chain of command, I don't have a clue what you're talking about. It's certainly not promoting the military- not from Stark anyway.


didn't he totally use She-HUlk?

That in itself is debtable but you're going to argue it was because she was a woman? Because that is what this point is about.

7. Obsession with National Security
Does Stark Display? Again, a big fat no. are you serious?! The whole POINT of the SHRA is national Security!

The whole point of the SHRA is accountability to the people, actually. But the Iniative is a national security program- yet Stark's hardly shown to be obsessed with it given that he's director of an INTERNATIONAL agency.


12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Does Stark Display? Again, clearly not given his habit of routinely pardoning and getting amnesty for anyone who defies the law. debatable id say, seeing he is constantly spewing "its the law, you have to obey the law" as one of his main points for the SHRA

But "Punishment" is a major part of that, and again he seems to relish the chance to pardon everyone he can reach, I don't think one could call it an obsession.

he meets the criteria in several ways, but he definately isnt an ACTUAL Fascist. All your rebuttals have massive spin, and some of them ignore completely the actual events!

Well I'd say he doesn't meet the criteria any more than Namor or whoever- well, less actually but we can agree to disagree on most since we can agree on the key point that he's not a facist. (Not to mention the whole 'Facism requires one person at the top of the chain' thing which doesn't fit.)

Nevertheless, even you could only argue for eight of the points, one of which you yourself said was debatable and I think you'll have to definitely concede on the sexism thing, which means he meets at MOST- and this is by your logic, not mine- 50% of the criteria. But when there are FOURTEEN definitive characteristics, one would assume a facist should be reaching a good twelve or so at minimum.

[jackolover]

There was this story in FF volume 3, where Reed Richards ended up in Dooms body, and Reed started having these megalomaniac ideas about saving the world. The FF had to get Doom to reclaim his own body and push Reed out before Reed came to his senses. Now I always thought that Reed got this world saving fixation because of the Doom suit, and when Doom got his suit back he eluded to it by saying something like, only Doom can where this suit.

So this makes me think about Reeds behavior in Civil War, where he says to Sue, how excited he is about all the ideas Tony and Hank were having, and this then makes me feel it wasn't the Doom suit from that vol 3 story, that maybe it was Reeds true fixation, and nobody appreciated it, especially his own family. That's why Reed kept the plans for the Initiative a secret from the FF, for all those 100 point plans, because Reed knew Sue and Johnny and Ben would think Reed was crazy again.

So heres the thing. Was Reed manipulated into behaving like when he was in the Doom costume? Was he honestly taken up by the enthusiasm for Initiative by Tony and Hank? Or does Reed have a delusional side to his character, like Sue when she becomes that Emo chick? (And do Johnny and Ben have similar dark sides as well?).

[CMBMOOL]

Now let me ask you all this, did Reed little equation perdicted the return of the HULK ? :(

[jackolover]

Now let me ask you all this, did Reeds little equations predicted the return of the HULK ? :(

No. Reeds predicting equations only extend to the evolution of social dynamics, and not to specifics, like when will Thor return, or Cap return, or Hulk either. The equations only plot the course of social change, and are very general in nature.

But Reed only used his social equations as a vehicle for his future plans. Reed argued that because his equations predicted certain events, that he was driven to counter those events, by his logic. Reed convinced himself that the analysis' results was a certainty, and so, he had to act by making Clor, the Negative Zone prison, and siding with the government instead of what his logic should have told him in the first place - that superhuman heroes did not require legislating against. All Reeds instincts were suspended, when he allowed Mathematics to control his reasoning.

[CMBMOOL]

No. Reeds predicting equations only extend to the evolution of social dynamics, and not to specifics, like when will Thor return, or Cap return, or Hulk either. The equations only plot the course of social change, and are very general in nature.

But Reed only used his social equations as a vehicle for his future plans. Reed argued that because his equations predicted certain events, that he was driven to counter those events, by his logic. Reed convinced himself that the analysis' results was a certainty, and so, he had to act by making Clor, the Negative Zone prison, and siding with the government instead of what his logic should have told him in the first place - that superhuman heroes did not require legislating against. All Reeds instincts were suspended, when he allowed Mathematics to control his reasoning.

And this was why the Hulk kicked his butt in WWH. :D

[jackolover]

And this was why the Hulk kicked his butt in WWH. :D

Amen to that.

[jackolover]

Sue Richards was naive about Civil War. All the supers were naive. They thought, just because they saved so many people, that merely legislating against heroes was unenforcible. The heroes thought they were immune from the implimentation of the law, because the heroes falsely thought the government was powerless against super powers. But the reality is, the little wins by the heroes, are nothing, in comparison with the savagery of the Human animal. In WWH Frontline #4, Ben Urich admits it, when he says the Earth wasn't invaded by aliens, because how can you be invaded if you're exactly the same as they are?

Nothing is as strong as the Human Race, when it is determined. And Heroes, for all their bombast, caved when confronted with the loss of confidence in them by the government. Nothing. Nothing survives the rampant Human animal, or its instrument, the elected body - the government. Not even the Hulk defeated his home governments apparatus. Hulk had to slink away and be content to settle in a small territory in the wilds, away from civilization.

Sue Richards and her compatriate renegades, failed to realise there is no challenging the Human Race. Though the heroes are a component of it's structure, the heroes are just an arm of the same species they are subject too.

[niall mc cann]

As for your comment about Sue being more dedicated to her husband than to Cap's cause... NO S**T. Sue is, IMHO, the ultimate mother figure in the Marvel U(only Aunt May is more of a mother than her), and also the most dedicated and loving wife. Sue trusts her husband: even if his actions might have seemed a tad excessive, she KNEW that he was doing it for good. And fighting is part of being a couple, especially when it's two strong personalities like Reed and Sue.



Totally agree.

It's just not in Sue's character to become some badass rebel soldier. It's not what she's about. Her (undeniable) talent as a superhero comes from completely different sources within herself.

[jackolover]

If I had been a hero during the CW and had a family to take care of, I would definitely have registered. Yes, Cap's side was morally the better side, but Tony had a point with registration, and registration is DEFINITELY in the best interest of any hero with a family to protect(this was Spidey's line of thinking when he registered).

The FF had already looked at placing their children in the care of the government during the Hulk LA rampage, and tested the government with a false locality of their children. The house the kids were supposed to be in got blown up, and the government then realised they couldn't protect the FF's children. Why should the FF register?

And as for the reason Spiderman agreed to register, it wasn't because he thought it was the best thing. He thought it was wrong, and when he revealed his identity in public he spewed his guts out. Then he took Tony by the shirt and said, 'if anything happens to my family, I hold you responsible'. And you know where that lead. A bullet in Aunt May. I don't know what Tony and Reed were thinking, that the Registration was a good thing. It was idiotic.

[Adamantium_Avatar]

At it's most basic maybe she saved those others from Clor because she is a superHERO

Besides.. The pro-registration side was in the wrong.

[jackolover]

Totally agree.

It's just not in Sue's character to become some badass rebel soldier. It's not what she's about. Her (undeniable) talent as a superhero comes from completely different sources within herself.

Sue Richards, in that Frightful Four on Titan storyline, was too easily overpowered, and it could have been so simple to put a gun to her head, and blam! Since Sues stint on the CW Renegades team, she has lapsed back into the role of the 4th player, again. She is helpless, and too easily surprised. She has lost that edgyness that she had when fighting with Cap, because Reed has lulled her into a false sense of security, and Sue has reset that mother role, again. She operates at a quarter of her capacity in the FF.

[Zacharius]

Heros were doomed to failure in stopping Registration

They were doomed to fail because American readers want Humanity as Dominant no matter what.

If government had lost, result is superhuman dictatorship and then fan boys will scream: "This is Iron Age;they are no heroes any more;we can´t stand humanity
as doormats-model"

It´s company policy,that´s all.

If superhumans actually existed, normal joes would be enslaved.

[jackolover]

They were doomed to fail because American readers want Humanity as Dominant no matter what.

If government had lost, result is superhuman dictatorship and then fan boys will scream: "This is Iron Age;they are no heroes any more;we can´t stand humanity
as doormats-model"

It´s company policy,that´s all.

If superhumans actually existed, normal joes would be enslaved.

Not just American readers, but look at what happened the to Reed and Bens millions. After Reed attacked Latveria, the government stripped him of everything. When Ben left the US because of the Civil War the government froze all his money. When the human government can strangle an individuals assets like that, it doesn't matter how powerful that hero is.

[Zacharius]

it doesn't matter how powerful that hero is.

When it comes to power levels, Thor alone could overthrow U.S.Government.

After Reed attacked Latveria, the government stripped him of everything.

FF never actually tried to beat up government and they could.Reed created long ago the means of boosting FF´s powers by a factor of 20.

Check out this: http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/reviews/107181290141316.htm

Superhumans capable of dealing with intergalactic civilizations supposedly thousands of years ahead of Earth would not be stopped by U.S.military.

"They have nukes, big deal.Our most powerful enemies have planet-busting weapons."

It´s Status Quo policy; readers do not want to read about superhuman dictatorships.

That´s why House of M, Age of Apocalypse and Thor´s Reigning had to be reversed and Defenders/Order couldn´t conquer Earth.

[TotalWorldDomination]

When it comes to power levels, Thor alone could overthrow U.S.Government.

I'd argue against that, mostly because heroes would stand with the US goverment to oppose his efforts. If thor was in the real world and tried to take over the US goverment (read: no other superhumans) I imagine the US would Nuke Washington Back to hell rather then let some Norse God run the country. And dispite posturing that most enamies that Marvel Heroes face have world distroying weapons rather then city distroying weapons, I highly doubt any of them could withstand being nuked.

It´s Status Quo policy; readers do not want to read about superhuman dictatorships.

Unless they read the Athority... :D


As for Sue Richards, she's a stupid tramp and she should die a horrible death for constantly abusing her poor loving husband. Wait. What was the question?

[XPac]

I'd argue against that, mostly because heroes would stand with the US goverment to oppose his efforts. If thor was in the real world and tried to take over the US goverment (read: no other superhumans) I imagine the US would Nuke Washington Back to hell rather then let some Norse God run the country. And dispite posturing that most enamies that Marvel Heroes face have world distroying weapons rather then city distroying weapons, I highly doubt any of them could withstand being nuked.



Unless they read the Athority... :D


As for Sue Richards, she's a stupid tramp and she should die a horrible death for constantly abusing her poor loving husband. Wait. What was the question?

Thor actually DID suceed in pretty much taking over the world though in the Reigning story arc. So he has actually already proven he can overthrow the US government.

[jackolover]

If we look back at the Civil War from 3 years away, what will survive as the lasting effects of the event? It won't be the death of Cap, as that will be retconned. It won't be the death of Bill Foster, because that is a minor event. I think people may remember that Peter Parker was forced to unmask Spiderman because of the Civil War. And I think people will remember that Tony Stark changed radically the way superheroes went about their business. I think the shift from freelance heroing, to monitored heroing, will also be something people will remember.

[Magneto Rocks]

They'll remember it as a MASSIVE story.

And trying to say they won't remember the death of Cap is silly. Either he'll still be dead in 3 years- very possible- or it will be remembered as a BIG event. Maybe not death of Superman big, but still pretty damn big. People will remember it for that, and for the fighting in general, and I'd say the entire Marvel Universe will still be driven by it.

If we still have two Avengers books, there'll be that too, plus the whole changes to super herodom in general.

[StarLord88]

all i can say is three years from now i want cap to still be dead. there is no reason he should be back and also they need to stop all this tribute and past stories of him bull crap. i think people will remember spideys unmasking. hopefully it will still bite him in the butt.

one thing i do hope is that there remain unregistered and registered superheroes, the divison of them i think creates a better and more realistic world inside comics.

now heres a real question what will people think of world war hulk? hopefully nothing

[jackolover]

now heres a real question what will people think of world war hulk? hopefully nothing

Start a new thread StarLord88, and I'll tell you.

[jackolover]

They'll remember it as a MASSIVE story..

I don't know, Mags. Civil War may just be a fadded memory in 3 years time. Someone might say, 'Oh yeah. That was that time the heroes fought over something, wasn't it? About some lame law'. I suspect you're right, that the event will have a lasting quality, but it's just that from 3 years away, it's hard to tell what kind of lasting. Will CW become classic storytelling, or, be an event that gets filed away as something similar to the first Secret War - very well thought out, but dated, now.

And trying to say they won't remember the death of Cap is silly. Either he'll still be dead in 3 years- very possible- or it will be remembered as a BIG event. Maybe not death of Superman big, but still pretty damn big. People will remember it for that, and for the fighting in general, and I'd say the entire Marvel Universe will still be driven by it..

Why would the Civil War death of Cap be remembered as big? Steve has died in the past and it wasn't remembered as big. There would have to be something tangible about his death that survives, like the humiliating way he was assasinated, or, the way he caved in at the end of CW #7.

If we still have two Avengers books, there'll be that too, plus the whole changes to super herodom in general.

Yeah I wonder if New Avengers will survive the passing of time. Mighty Avengers has that classical fell about it. New Avengers is like a clandestine Shield subsidiary, that works under the radar. I think it will be a driving force for the Skrull Invasion story, but after that, it could fade.

And I wonder if the registration will even be a conscious consideration by the authorities after World War Hulk showed up how ineffective super teams can be, with a real dangerous threat.

[jackolover]

From the credits for #5:

Writer - Stuart Moore
Penciller - Cliff Richards
Inker - Joe Pimentel
Colorist - Sotocolor's A. Street
Letterer - Cory Petit
Cover - Dave Ross & Frank D'Armata



#4 - "Letters Home" - is my favorite of the bunch. Cap is the sole Avenger, as the rest of the team is spending the holidays with loved ones. Hydra has taken over a military sattelite. Besides having a weapons system, the sattelite is also used for Soldiers and their loved ones to send e-mails to and from overseas. To stop Hydra from using the weapon, and make sure the Soldiers e-mails get through, Cap enlists the help of the Silver Surfer, Ghost Rider, and, reluctantly, the Punisher. Stuart Moore also wrote this one, and each characters storyline was done by a different art team. The story is told through the various heroes' "letters" to their loved ones.

For more information on these you can visit http://www.freewebs.com/marvelmilitaryspecials/index.htm

This puts a whole new perspective onto why Marvel wrote Civil War to end like it did, with Cap defeated. You'd think Marvel would not hang out to dry, the symbol of America. But considering that Marvel is taking the conservative line in backing the government, it seems there has been a political agenda in the Marvel editorial.

[atomic_monkey316]

I search previous threads and discovered dozens concerning the Civil War, but none dedicated to the specific point I want to make. If I'm mistaken, I apologize for starting a new thread. Anyway...

I had high hopes that the Civil War story would not be black and white. Stories that present both sides of an argument as being valid are realistic and intellectually satisfying. I wanted both sides to be presented as noble heroes who had legitimate arguments for their actions. No good guys or bad guys, just real people having different, but valid, points of view. That didn't happen. As the story went on, pro-registration characters, like Tony Stark, were painted as fascists. A clear example is the treatment of the captured anti-registration forces in the Negative Zone prison.

When the writers started going down that path, it was as though they were acknowledging that they personally agreed with the anti-registration side, but rather than debate the facts of the issue, they’d take the easy way out and malign the character and motives of the pro-registration forces. This particular troubles me because I’m a political analyst and see the same thing everyday in DC. Politicians rarely debate the actual facts or merits of a policy. Instead, they question the character or motives of their opponent. I've always considered that an implicit acknowledgement that a politician knows he's/she's wrong -- if someone truly believes that the facts speak for themselves and support his/her side, they will stick to the facts. Marvel writers, like politicians, didn’t stick to the facts and portratyed people with different beliefs as the bad guys.

Anyone agree, or am I on my own in this one?

[Expletive Deleted]

I think a lot of that was down to the individual writers. Mark Miller writing the main series . . . yeah, subtletly and nuance tend not to be his strong suit. And Straczynski and Jenkins didn't even try.

I thought Bendis did a nice job making both sides somewhat sympathetic in his NEW AVNGERS tie-in issues and his CONFESSION one-shot. He was just about the only one, though.

[Don Quixote]

I think Ed Brubaker did a really good job at portraying Tony Stark well in Captain America. That was after Civil War, though. But he really captured the idea that Tony is trying to do what he thinks is right, but is just out of his depth.

The fact is, though, a lot of the anti-reg heroes were the more likeable ones. Captain America, Spidey (eventually), Iron Fist, Luke Cage. Whereas the pro-reg side had people whose flaws have often been exploited in stories, and who sometimes have 'dickish' reputations. Iron Man, Reed Richards, Hank Pym. That alone will influence writers. and readers, in their perceptions.

[rZi]

The sides were not portrayed equal to someone like me for example who only read the title itself and ASM tie-in issue. Tony was a villian in ASM for sure..wether this was simply JMS making peter look more hero like as a result i don't know but it wasn't a very pro-reg book at all.

[atomic_monkey316]

And Straczynski and Jenkins didn't even try

I agree that, for the most part, Staczynski didn't even try. But there was one issue of ASM (532 or 533?) where, to my surprise, he did give a pretty fair argument for registration. When Peter protested that revealing his secret identity to his enemies would endanger his loved ones, Tony Stark pointed out that Federal agents, prosecutors and judges reveal their identities to bad guys and put risk their families, but they don't argue because they think it's the right thing to do. I don't think I had seen that very important point made in any other books (though, admittedly, I didn't read everyone).

[atomic_monkey316]

I think Ed Brubaker did a really good job at portraying Tony Stark... he really captured the idea that Tony is trying to do what he thinks is right, but is just out of his depth...

The fact is, though, a lot of the anti-reg heroes were the more likeable ones.

Those are examples of the writers intentional bias. They wanted to subtlely get the point across that the pro forces were wrong, so they portray the leader of the pro forces as being out of his depth, and they choose to make all the likely heroes on the anti side.

The story would have been more interesting if Tony would have been portrayed to be in his depth (or it could have been balanced by making Cap out of his depth). And it would have been more interesting if more likely good guys were on the pro side, so that readers would be more conflicted.

[RobertM]

Wow, such a long thread! Having just recently finished reading most of the issues in my Civil War DVD (CW, Front Line, New Avengers, Amazing Spider-Man, Ms. Marvel, Wolverine, Iron Man, most of the Capt. Americas, Fallen Son, IM/CA), I think I'm a little late for any discussion... :)

My thoughts, though, FWIW: I think the issue that kinda summed the whole thing up was (incoming huge title) Civil War: "Rubicon": Iron Man/Captain America: Casualities of War No. 1 (Feb. 2007) To be quite honest, I think what happened in the contents of that issue--Iron Man and Cap debating the SHRA--would honestly have been the most a real SHRA would have come to. Open fighting? I'm skeptical. Well, I guess because it's a comic book and everything has to be solved by fighting, you've got to expect that... But still, I'm not sure I totally bought the whole thing coming to blows. Especially as rapidly as it seemed to.

Further, I'm not sure I bought Cap's surrender. After being portrayed as so hardline against the SHRA, having him surrender seemed counter to everything he'd done prior to that. If they'd showed the CW slowly erroding his will to keep fighting, I might have bought his surrender. But it was too sudden. It felt too much like the writers/editors saying, "There's really no good way to end this. So let's just have Cap surrender."

As far as my opinion of the SHRA (which I'm sure no one cares about :) )... I think it was a long time coming. Real-life vigilantes are not given the freedom to do as they please and enforce justice on their own terms like Marvel's heroes are. In reality, I don't think any government would long tolerate rogue law enforcers running around handing out justice. In truth, I doubt they'd get it right 100% of the time, too. As Iron Man says to Cap, they're accountable to no one. Because of their secret identities, if Spider-Man accidentally punches out the wrong guy when he jumps into a fight (see Ultimate Spider-Man #1/2), can the guy he punches press charges if he wanted to? Nope. How long would law enforcement and politicians tolerate that sort of mockery of the law by "superhumans?" Not long. Believing they would requires too much suspension of disbelief for me. So, IMO, it's a good thing.

If you want to "fight crime," you're basically going to become a super-cop or you can expect to do your crime-fighting underground with legitimate law enforcement breathing down your neck, even if they more or less like what you're doing.

[TotalWorldDomination]

Is it wrong I get terrified every time I see this thread? Welcome to the Pro-Reg camp RobertM. We have a lovely compinsation package that includes hazard pay for having to defend yourself every 10 minutes from accusations you're a Nazi. Just ignore everything Mikekerr says and look out for XPac's verbal traps and you'll do fine.


I think a lot of that was down to the individual writers. Mark Miller writing the main series . . . yeah, subtletly and nuance tend not to be his strong suit. And Straczynski and Jenkins didn't even try.

I thought Bendis did a nice job making both sides somewhat sympathetic in his NEW AVNGERS tie-in issues and his CONFESSION one-shot. He was just about the only one, though.

...You think he made the pro-reg side sympathetic in New Avengers? are you having me on? There were 5 issues, 3 devoted to Anti-Reg characters, and 2 devoted to pro-reg characters.

In the Anti-Reg issues you had Luke Cage's indignant screaming match with Tony where for some reason he and Carol could'nt come up with a SINGLE argument to counter Cage's. You had Cap try and talk to Hank Pym who likewise could not create a single pro-registration sentence. You had Jessica Drew's issue that was... well I can't remember much about it other then Jessica getting shot at lots.

Then we had the 2 pro issues. Issue one was the sentry hanging out on the moon. 2 pages of the issue actually dealt with Civil War. It was mostly about how sentry, like most men in the MU, had banged Crystal. The tony stark issue centered on a character (retconned as an old friend) trying to kill tony stark because he could'nt stand what he had become and Maria Hill. So where is the strong Pro-Reg sentiment to balance out the vitriol spewed by Luke Cage?

As for the confession, he made stark "sympathetic" but he also clearly made him wrong. Why can't writers make stark and the other pro-reggers sympathetic without making them violate the sancity of there own ideas?

I don't mean to sound shrill, but the severe lack of balance during civil war and continuing to this day bothers me intensely.

[RobertM]

Is it wrong I get terrified every time I see this thread? Welcome to the Pro-Reg camp RobertM. We have a lovely compinsation package that includes hazard pay for having to defend yourself every 10 minutes from accusations you're a Nazi. Just ignore everything Mikekerr says and look out for XPac's verbal traps and you'll do fine.

Oooh, neato. Do I get a badge? I think Deadpool got one... ;)

Don't get me wrong--if the government actually attempted to force the Marvel superheroes to just be part of an imperialistic military force or a police state's law "over-enforcement," they would have a good reason to fight the system. But at the time the SHRA was created--at least from what we saw--they had nothing to bitch about yet. Certainly nothing to resort to violence over. I mean, to this day, I cannot tell you what legitimate defense Cap and co. offered for opposing the registration. "It's worked this way for 40 years!" is not a good argument. It's just an "appeal to tradition." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition)

Meanwhile, in the Road to Civil War stuff, the senators in Amazing Spider-Man didn't present many good arguments either. Spider-Man was "crushed" by their counter argument and "proving their point," when I didn't feel like they had really proven much of anything. (I think it's just a reflection of JMS's shortcomings as a comic writer, but whatever. :) )

The best argument for the SHRA? Superheroes, as citizens of the United States, are not above the law. Vigilantism is not legal, hence, if they wish to practice it, they must face the fact that what they are doing is illegal.

Ya know, I never really felt like the legal ramifications of superhero vigilantism were ever really hit home. It is, IMO, the best argument in support of the SHRA. Instead, we get the repeated appeals to, "it will make the American people feel better" and "it will make people feel safer." Who gives a hoot what people "feel?" (And, to be honest, I'm not sure I buy public sentiment turning that far against the established superheroes like the FF and Captain America who have literally saved the planet a number of times. People can be fickle, but I don't think they'd be that fickle. People like that are more apt to have a cult of personality around them than anything else.)

Only in the Iron Man/Captain America one shot did I really feel like good pro and con reasons were addressed. The first half of Confession was good, too, for Iron Man while the second half was good for Cap (and baffled me by making Tony Stark seem entirely too petty compared to every other portrayal of him in the CW). But, in the end, the anti-SHRA side never seemed to present entirely convincing arguments. You do not, in America, have, among your civil rights, the ability to personally pursue your vision of justice. As Max Weber, the famous sociologist, once more or less said, the government has a monopoly on legitimate use of force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_the_legitimate_use_of_physical_force); in this case, for law enforcement. (As someone who is more or less a pacifist, I don't believe the government ought to use offensive force as a part of its foreign policy, but that's not relevant to this discussion. :) )

Anyway, I don't know if this is truly the SHRA debate thread, but there's my arguments. I'm sure someone else in this long thread said the same things, but there they are. FWIW. :)

[LungerTony]

I would be really upset if the SHRA/CW was retconned somehow. I would honestly considering phasing out the generic Marvel/DC titles.

I don't think they have plans to phase out SHRA though. I think it's here to stay, and hopefully for good.
I don't see why Marvel would be incompatible to it. DC heroes have been essentially known to the government since I can remember.

[mikekerr3]

I would be really upset if the SHRA/CW was retconned somehow. I would honestly considering phasing out the generic Marvel/DC titles.

I don't think they have plans to phase out SHRA though. I think it's here to stay, and hopefully for good.
I don't see why Marvel would be incompatible to it. DC heroes have been essentially known to the government since I can remember.

I don't know if the Genre can stand being turned into a police procedural though.

The goverment in the DC world is not portayed as being quite so bigoted and evil.

The MU goverment is quite often the primary bad guy in some books.

[RobertM]

I don't know if the Genre can stand being turned into a police procedural though.

The goverment in the DC world is not portayed as being quite so bigoted and evil.

The MU goverment is quite often the primary bad guy in some books.
It will, IMO, probably be ultimately ignored for the purposes of many stories. The Avengers, FF, etc. will all probably continue to operate as usual with the background idea that they're technically governmentally-registered.

Solo superheroes, OTOH... That could be different. Technically, the superheroes registered with the government, so it could be explained that they more or less continue to operate as before but are now accountable for their actions.

Having not read anything but the few Initiative issues included on my Civil War DVD, I don't actually know how it played out. :)

[akumasan]

I agree that, for the most part, Staczynski didn't even try. But there was one issue of ASM (532 or 533?) where, to my surprise, he did give a pretty fair argument for registration. When Peter protested that revealing his secret identity to his enemies would endanger his loved ones, Tony Stark pointed out that Federal agents, prosecutors and judges reveal their identities to bad guys and put risk their families, but they don't argue because they think it's the right thing to do. I don't think I had seen that very important point made in any other books (though, admittedly, I didn't read everyone).
Wasnt that aunt may who said that?

As far as my opinion of the SHRA (which I'm sure no one cares about :) )... I think it was a long time coming. Real-life vigilantes are not given the freedom to do as they please and enforce justice on their own terms like Marvel's heroes are. In reality, I don't think any government would long tolerate rogue law enforcers running around handing out justice. In truth, I doubt they'd get it right 100% of the time, too. As Iron Man says to Cap, they're accountable to no one. Because of their secret identities, if Spider-Man accidentally punches out the wrong guy when he jumps into a fight (see Ultimate Spider-Man #1/2), can the guy he punches press charges if he wanted to? Nope. How long would law enforcement and politicians tolerate that sort of mockery of the law by "superhumans?" Not long. Believing they would requires too much suspension of disbelief for me. So, IMO, it's a good thing.

If you want to "fight crime," you're basically going to become a super-cop or you can expect to do your crime-fighting underground with legitimate law enforcement breathing down your neck, even if they more or less like what you're doing.I agree with you and I am apart of pro-reg as well. Im in Real estate for a career and since i represent people who currently has homes on the market right now. Let's say some clown destroys their home. Now im going to receive alot of calls from my client about this. Of course ill ask "do you have any superhero insurance?" and most people will say no. So my clients will want to get paid and since i represent them i expect payment too. Sorry cyke or even peter (but that be a waste of time). As for tony stark since he is head of shield now you better believe that im coming for his ass.

For example
Dr. Doom threw the Incredible Hulk into my house and then the Hulk threw my car at Doom...

That ruined my credit...

PRO-REG FOO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RobertM]

For example
Dr. Doom threw the Incredible Hulk into my house and then the Hulk threw my car at Doom...
This is precisely why I think, if so many superheroes congregated in NYC as they seem to in the Marvel universe (and why is that, anyway???), you'd see a huge number of people leaving NYC so that they don't have to live in the middle of a war zone constantly.

That ruined my credit...

Well, it might not ruin your credit, but how are you going to get another car if you can't get another car loan since you're still paying for your first car/projectile? :)

Ultimately, I don't think most economies could withstand real knock-down, drag-out superhero fights for very long. I imagine Marvel-NYC would end up having the economy and mentality of the Gaza Strip before long. (I don't actually know what the economy of the Gaza Strip is, but I can't imagine it invites a lot of investor/business confidence given the political tensions and violence there.)

[akumasan]

This is precisely why I think, if so many superheroes congregated in NYC as they seem to in the Marvel universe (and why is that, anyway???), you'd see a huge number of people leaving NYC so that they don't have to live in the middle of a war zone constantly.



Well, it might not ruin your credit, but how are you going to get another car if you can't get another car loan since you're still paying for your first car/projectile? :)

Man that would be a pain in the ass. Imagine filing that police report.

[atomic_monkey316]

I am definintely pro-registration. But I really wouldn't have minded if the writers came down on the anti-registration side if they would have done it in a different way. They should have expressed their point of view by giving the anti-reg heroes a solid argument, not by depicting the pro-reg heroes as facist.

Making the pro-reg heroes into facists made a lot of readers become anti-reg. But those readers were anti-reg NOT because of some flaw in the logic underlying the Act, but because some people were too aggressive in the enforcement of the Act. That's a huge difference.

The course taken by the creative team begind Civil War (i.e. making the pro-reg heroes facsist) was artistically and intellectually lazy. Think how much more mature, realistic, and interesting the story would have been if the pro-reg forces were depicted in a noble way, forcing the reader to choose his/her side based on a thoughful debate about civil liberties and the proper role of government.

[Magneto Rocks]

Is it wrong I get terrified every time I see this thread? Welcome to the Pro-Reg camp RobertM. We have a lovely compinsation package that includes hazard pay for having to defend yourself every 10 minutes from accusations you're a Nazi. Just ignore everything Mikekerr says and look out for XPac's verbal traps and you'll do fine.

To be fair, hazard rates have gone down in the last year since number of hostiles has decreased significently, though their attacks remain frequent. ;)

I am definintely pro-registration. But I really wouldn't have minded if the writers came down on the anti-registration side if they would have done it in a different way. They should have expressed their point of view by giving the anti-reg heroes a solid argument, not by depicting the pro-reg heroes as facist.

Exactly. I wouldn't even mind writers being biased towards the anti-reg side if they had both sides give arguments but say, the anti-reggers' arguments are a bit more convincing. Ideally, there'd be balance, but I'd even take this. Where things get ridiculous is when writers decide that it's impossible for readers to get their point unless they make the guys who disagree into fascists.

The course taken by the creative team begind Civil War (i.e. making the pro-reg heroes facsist) was artistically and intellectually lazy.

Here's the only place I disagree with you. I have no problem with the creative team behind Civil War itself. The main CW miniseries was not particularly biased. Yes, it gave us Clor, but it also gave us the FSI presented as the great idea it is, and it gave us the Negative Zone prison as a good idea, which it is, and it presented pro-reg characters as sympathetic.
Teams like those of ASM and Frontline were undoubtedly lazy, as you say. But it varies from book to book.

My respect for Brian Reed rose ENORMOUSLY through Civil War, because he was a self-confessed anti-reg person writing a pro-reg character, and he managed to make arguments for both sides while explaining believably why his character was pro-registration and without making EITHER side look inherently corrupt or stupid or evil. Likewise, it's clear Ed Brubaker believes Cap was right, yet he never once portrays Tony Stark as being corrupt or stupid or interested in anything but doing the right thing.

And sometimes, I guess we're so busy ragging on the guys who screw it up- be they Bendis (Though he's gotten a *BIT* better), JMS or Jenkins, that we don't appreciate the guys who get the balance right. Reed, the Knaufs, Brubaker, Millar, McDuffie, Gage, Nicieza- the writers who wrote a balanced story, and didn't allow their own politics to override the characters.

[RobertM]

I am definintely pro-registration. But I really wouldn't have minded if the writers came down on the anti-registration side if they would have done it in a different way. They should have expressed their point of view by giving the anti-reg heroes a solid argument, not by depicting the pro-reg heroes as facist.

Making the pro-reg heroes into facists made a lot of readers become anti-reg. But those readers were anti-reg NOT because of some flaw in the logic underlying the Act, but because some people were too aggressive in the enforcement of the Act. That's a huge difference.

The course taken by the creative team begind Civil War (i.e. making the pro-reg heroes facsist) was artistically and intellectually lazy. Think how much more mature, realistic, and interesting the story would have been if the pro-reg forces were depicted in a noble way, forcing the reader to choose his/her side based on a thoughful debate about civil liberties and the proper role of government.

Good points. I think that Spider-Man was a hypothetically good character for this. He was pro-reg because he thought the SHRA wasn't completely wrong, but became anti-SHRA by its so-called "fascist" enforcement. And since the point of the Civil War seems to not have truly been a debate about civil liberties, the role of government, and superpowered vigilantism but rather, "It would be cool if the Marvel heroes fought each other!!!!!" Thus we have our results. We needed to sort of give a reason for Iron Man and Captain America (among others) to punch each other.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't dislike the Civil War stories as a whole. But I thought they were highly underdeveloped. Too plot-driven and not character-driven enough. Since the plot was relatively weak, IMO, the resulting product suffered as a consequence.

[RobertM]

And sometimes, I guess we're so busy ragging on the guys who screw it up- be they Bendis (Though he's gotten a *BIT* better), JMS or Jenkins, that we don't appreciate the guys who get the balance right. Reed, the Knaufs, Brubaker, Millar, McDuffie, Gage, Nicieza- the writers who wrote a balanced story, and didn't allow their own politics to override the characters.

FWIW, I was trying to keep a list of the writers I particularly liked in the CW stories I read and the writers I didn't much care for. What I came up with was that my favorites were...

Marc Guggenheim - Wolverine
Paul Jenkins - Front Line
Brian Michael Bendis - New Avengers, Civil War: The Confession
Fabian Nicieza - Cable & Deadpool
Christos N. Gage - Iron Man/Captain America

Writers I thought were generally good were:
Mark Millar - Civil War
Daniel & Charles Knauf - The Invincible Iron Man
Ed Brubaker - Captain America

And the weakest writers, IMO, were:
J. Michael Straczynski - Amazing Spider-Man/Fantastic Four
David Hine - X-Men
Brian Reed - Ms. Marvel

This is as much a stylistic judgment as a plotting judgment. The premises of the stories written by the above may have been better than the way they were executed, or vice-versa. For example, Nicieza's Cable & Deadpool is actually a rather moronic story but it was written well enough that it was entertaining. Deadpool is a rather despicable person, but he's funny while being despicable. :)

And for Jenkins with Front Line, these issues were a mixed bag. Some were great and others terribly weak. On the whole, though, I still think his stuff was quite good, if a bit fragmented. Similarly, Millar's CW stuff had some really good stuff and some really weak stuff as well—Cap's initial escape and later surrender being the weakest parts of the whole thing. Ironically, these two points are two of the most important to the whole event, and yet were among the hardest to swallow (for me).

[Magneto Rocks]

I guess it's down to the individual, but I for one despised Frontline. None of the plots were ever particularly strong, but the actions Jenkins had Tony take were wildly out of character and possibly the worst he commited anywhere across Civil War. And that's even without going into the ridiculousness of Sally Floyd owning Cap in an argument, or Ben Urich crushing Reed Richards in a debate about science and maths!

[atomic_monkey316]

Here's the only place I disagree with you. I have no problem with the creative team behind Civil War itself. The main CW miniseries was not particularly biased. Yes, it gave us Clor, but it also gave us the FSI presented as the great idea it is, and it gave us the Negative Zone prison as a good idea, which it is, and it presented pro-reg characters as sympathetic.
Teams like those of ASM and Frontline were undoubtedly lazy, as you say. But it varies from book to book.

I misspoke (or mistyped, I guess). I should have said the Spider-man team was lazy. Most of the books I read were Spider-man and Iron Man. Didn't read much of the main CW series, so I shouldn't have used such a broad brush in my critism. Still, it's my understand that all the teams collaborated, so all of the artist are complict to a degree in things like the treatment of captured heroes in the Negative Zone.

[atomic_monkey316]

\And since the point of the Civil War seems to not have truly been a debate about civil liberties, the role of government, and superpowered vigilantism but rather, "It would be cool if the Marvel heroes fought each other!!!!!"

That's a great way to describe it.

[atomic_monkey316]

I didn't read much of the Fantastic Four, but it's my impression that the made Reed Richards out to be a fascist, like JMS did with Tony Stark. Is that right, or am I off base? Are he and Susan back together now that Civil War is over?

On a related note, I know that Spider-man is still in the New Avengers post Civil War. How is that possible? I know Iron Man is now with SHIELD, not the Avengers, but aren't the rest of the Avengers registered?

[RobertM]

I guess it's down to the individual, but I for one despised Frontline. None of the plots were ever particularly strong, but the actions Jenkins had Tony take were wildly out of character and possibly the worst he commited anywhere across Civil War. And that's even without going into the ridiculousness of Sally Floyd owning Cap in an argument, or Ben Urich crushing Reed Richards in a debate about science and maths!

I came into Front Line not even knowing who Sally Floyd was, FWIW. :)

Anyway, I found the writing generally good. It was basically background information to the main CW plot, and so I took it as such. It did not, in any way, stand on its own--but I never thought it was supposed to.

Having said that, I rather agree that Tony Stark's actions in FL were rather despicable. But I wasn't going to lay that entirely on Jenkins—I never figured it was his idea. The "interview" with Cap by Sally Floyd was, admittedly, a total joke.

I dunno, I just remember liking it when I read it. Maybe on a second read-through on all of these I would share your opinion, but on my first read through, I liked it. The earlier parts more than the later ones.

[prodigy]

*parachutes in*

The registration act is a joke. That's stuff meant for 8 year olds.

Anti-SHRA for life!!!!

[RobertM]

That's a great way to describe it.

Maybe I'm cynical, but when I first heard about the Civil War concept, I more or less dismissed it as something like "BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN!" or "SPIDER-MAN FIGHTS THE FANTASTIC FOUR!!!" The cover to Civil War: Amazing Spider-Man showing PP unmasking himself, though, intrigued me, as did hearing about the fate of Captain America, so I decided to flip through the CW TPB in Barnes and Noble and later bought the DVD with almost every CW issue on it.

Which was really nice, BTW. It'd be great if Marvel did these DVDs more--I loved the cost! :) You can't beat $21 + shipping for 199 comics (http://talesofwonder.com/product-exec/product_id/48487/category_id/34/sc/1,21,34). At 10.5¢ per issue, that's like... 96.5% "off the cover price" (so to speak). Even if I read only like half of them, it was still an amazing deal. Doubt it was completely profitable for Marvel, though. But it sure would make catching up on titles easier. I'd kill for the first 20 issues of The New Avengers for $2.10! :D (Would sure beat the $42 for the HCs that I completely cannot afford. :( )

[RobertM]

*parachutes in*

The registration act is a joke. That's stuff meant for 8 year olds.

Anti-SHRA for life!!!!

Parachutes? You must really be a part of the military-industrial complex! Fascist! ;)

[Magneto Rocks]

I didn't read much of the Fantastic Four, but it's my impression that the made Reed Richards out to be a fascist, like JMS did with Tony Stark. Is that right, or am I off base? Are he and Susan back together now that Civil War is over?

Heh, that's funny. JMS tried to paint Reed Richards as a fascist but fortunately out of 4 issues, Reed only really had a role in #1, so he used one issue to try to do it. (To be precise, he tried to paint Reed as a 'good German' who stood by while atrocities happened). Fortunately, Dwayne McDuffie took over by the end of CW and managed to both believably explain away EXACTLY what Reed was doing and why, and also make it seem like the idiocy he had displayed under JMS was actually out of choice to try to drive his family away so they wouldn't get hurt.

On a related note, I know that Spider-man is still in the New Avengers post Civil War. How is that possible? I know Iron Man is now with SHIELD, not the Avengers, but aren't the rest of the Avengers registered?

The New Avengers are now unregistered/rebel heroes, with Spidey, and the MIGHTY Avengers are registered heroes.

[akumasan]

I didn't read much of the Fantastic Four, but it's my impression that the made Reed Richards out to be a fascist, like JMS did with Tony Stark. Is that right, or am I off base? Are he and Susan back together now that Civil War is over?

On a related note, I know that Spider-man is still in the New Avengers post Civil War. How is that possible? I know Iron Man is now with SHIELD, not the Avengers, but aren't the rest of the Avengers registered?
come to think about it I agree. It was strange of how they made him to be. Also Ben was basically anti-reg in way.
*parachutes in*

The registration act is a joke. That's stuff meant for 8 year olds.

Anti-SHRA for life!!!!
your response is an 8 year old response

[atomic_monkey316]

A few years back I was reading an issue of New X-Men by Grant Morrison where a riot broke out and Jean Grey used her telepathic powers to subdue the crowd. At the time I was thinking how controversial that should be. Sure, her intention was to protect people (and the was the result), but at what costs?

Controlling someone's mind and eliminating their free will is the ultimate attack on personal freedom. Our society decided a long time ago that we should not give up all of our freedom, even if it were to mean greater security. For instance, if the police could search anyone's home or listen in to anyone's phone calls anytime they wanted, we'd undoubtedly have a safer world to live in -- but we'd be less free. That's why we require police to get warrants to undertake those activities. Shouldn't superheroes need warrants, particularly if they are going to control someone's mind?

So long before Marvel announced the Civil War miniseries, I was already thinking that super heroes should be registered with the government and held accountable.

[CyberHubbs]

A few years back I was reading an issue of New X-Men by Grant Morrison where a riot broke out and Jean Grey used her telepathic powers to subdue the crowd. At the time I was thinking how controversial that should be. Sure, her intention was to protect people (and the was the result), but at what costs?

Controlling someone's mind and eliminating their free will is the ultimate attack on personal freedom. Our society decided a long time ago that we should not give up all of our freedom, even if it were to mean greater security. For instance, if the police could search anyone's home or listen in to anyone's phone calls anytime they wanted, we'd undoubtedly have a safer world to live in -- but we'd be less free. That's why we require police to get warrants to undertake those activities. Shouldn't superheroes need warrants, particularly if they are going to control someone's mind?

So long before Marvel announced the Civil War miniseries, I was already thinking that super heroes should be registered with the government and held accountable.

I think a big problem is that some of the writers keep making the SHRA look bad, even when promoting it. Thunderbolts and some elements of the Initiative, for example, have scumbags at the top of the food-chain. Can't there be one SHRA program where the head honcho isn't some former villain or complete douche?

Not every person in a position of power is a creep.

[Shadow ES]

I'm reading CW in the Chronicles format, so I haven't finished reading it yet.

That said, I don't like it much. The only reason I'm reading it is because I feel like I should to understand what led to events happening in books that I do think are good.

A number of characters are written as jerks and/or oblivious. None of them seem to be thinking about what they're doing, they're just acting. It feels very much like the writers were told how it started and how it ended, and they just let the characters move directly from start to finish without providing motivation.

[Excelsior]

Great follow up interview about the rammifications of Civil War.

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=149718

[gorthon616]

And since the point of the Civil War seems to not have truly been a debate about civil liberties, the role of government, and superpowered vigilantism but rather, "It would be cool if the Marvel heroes fought each other!!!!!" Thus we have our results. We needed to sort of give a reason for Iron Man and Captain America (among others) to punch each other.

That's why I call Civil War "Contest of Champions III."

[mikekerr3]

I think a big problem is that some of the writers keep making the SHRA look bad, even when promoting it. Thunderbolts and some elements of the Initiative, for example, have scumbags at the top of the food-chain. Can't there be one SHRA program where the head honcho isn't some former villain or complete douche?

Not every person in a position of power is a creep.

In the Mu everyone in a position of power has been creeps for decades, I haven't ever seen a moral person in power with the MU goverment in anything but a cameo role. The MU goverment is basically a bigotted and corrupt has always been. The SHRA has to be viewed in that light. It goives power to evil people. ONE, SHEILD, The CSA and sSWORD have always been at the best morally gray with the occsional venture into evil. Why would anyone think that the SHRA would change that. The pro-regs would have to be stupid to think that the corruption would magically end. Two of them at least are supposed to be brilliant, so should have realized what whould happen.

[RobertM]

In the Mu everyone in a position of power has been creeps for decades, I haven't ever seen a moral person in power with the MU goverment in anything but a cameo role. The MU goverment is basically a bigotted and corrupt has always