A couple of months back, I wrote a post explaining why
I didn't think Spider-Man should be included in Captain America: Civil War. Simply put, I didn’t believe that
justice could be done by including him as a secondary character in a larger
story.
Having seen Civil War,
I have been proved wrong.
 |
| "Avengers: Civil War" |
Titling the film Captain
America: Civil War is a little bit of a misnomer. Really it should have
been called Avengers: Civil War. But
I imagine Disney simply didn’t want to draw attention away from the upcoming Infinity War films. Besides, what would a
cinematic portrayal of the Avengers be without Chris Hemsworth’s Thor or Mark
Ruffalo’s Hulk?
This is, perhaps, the most mature film to have emerged from
this series. Rather than dealing with cosmic entities and alien invasions, Civil War attempts to present a
realistic approach to governments dealing with super powered beings. At the
same time, the film does not become trapped by the seriousness of this premise.
The Marvel Cinematic Universe has always effectively balanced realism, plot,
and entertainment without being bogged down in any of them, and Captain America: Civil War is no
exception.
The movie has some major plot holes, and in many places one
can clearly see characters being guided by the writers’ omnipotent hands. Some of
the action scenes are over the top, and I find it hard to believe that Iron Man’s
armour only would only begin to show damage when it provides the most dramatic effect.
Martin Freeman’s American accent is about as believable Tom Cruise playing a Nazi
colonel.
I refuse to take Falcon seriously as a member of the
Avengers.
Yet, despite the number of things one could say was wrong
with this movie, it does something very right. As with all of the MCU’s films
to date, the undeniable problems with Captain
America: Civil War are eclipsed by some intangibly endearing quality.
Unlike many comic book adaptations that attempt to transcend the genre, Civil War succeeds because it firmly embraces
the best aspects of its source material. In its aesthetics, its narrative, and
its action, Captain America: Civil War
thrives as a comic book movie.
Civil War’s combination
of entertainment value, quality casting, and pure heart allows – no, demands – that the viewer simply forget its
problems and embrace its better aspects. In its ability to do this while
tackling mature and realistic themes, Civil
War is arguably the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s best film yet.
Also, there’s an undeniable pleasure to watching our
favourite superheroes duke it out.
But what about Spider-Man?
As some of you may recall from my previous post, I was
rather skeptical about whether Civil War
could do justice to Spider-Man’s MCU introduction. Among so many top notch
characters, how could the directors accurately capture the heart of what makes
the character so uniquely endearing?
Apparently the Russo brothers understood these concerns, as
the film seemed to consciously address them. The choice to cast Tom Holland as
a high school Peter Parker, true to the original source material, was an
effective method of distinguishing his portrayal from those before him. This
Spider-Man’s age is very apparent in his actions and his dialogue. Though his
screen time is short, the banter he engages in with other characters is
incredibly amusing, one of the film’s most endearing aspects.
The choice to make Spider-Man so distinctly innocent, a kid
who’s stumbled into this world of super powers and epic battles, gives him a
huge degree of relatability, which has always been Spider-Man’s best quality.
As an admirer of the Avengers, just as the viewer is, this Spider-Man finds
himself thrust into the middle of battles he is only just beginning to
understand, forced to engage in combat with people he admires.
The best depictions of Spider-Man embrace the character’s
coming of age story, and I’m willing to say that this seems like no exception.
Skipping the origin story did little to hinder his introduction – though I’d
like to see the loss of his uncle dealt with in the upcoming standalone film –
and Tom Holland provides a unique performance to distinguish him from previous
portrayals. Visually and stylistically, the character fits into the tone
already establish by the MCU.
I really love the paternal relationship introduced between Peter
Parker and Tony Stark. The two actors have some great chemistry, and I think
there’s some great potential here. I’d love to see many more “I’ll call Aunt
May” jokes.
At the same time, this dynamic lends another layer of
thematic significance to the film. As I noted, Spider-Man is young and impressionable,
a teenager struggling to come to terms with his new identity. Tony Stark,
arguably, takes advantage of this, as Captain America notes during the film
when Spider-Man insists that he “has to impress Mr. Stark.” Tony Stark uses the
young Parker’s admiration to compel him into a fight where he has no real
stakes. This situation poses some questions about the morality of manipulation,
an added layer of significance to a film that already questions the extent that
one should go to do what is right.
Overall, I was highly impressed with Captain America: Civil War. The film’s ability to handle mature
themes without losing entertainment value gives it a rare place among the ranks
of comic book movies. Spider-Man’s introduction exceeded my highest expectations,
and I’m really looking forward to seeing his follow up movie, as well as that
of Black Panther.
Some of the action sequences are predictably over the top, and
there are a few big plot holes, yet the film embraces its comic book heritage in
a manner that one can’t help but like. Arguably, this is the MCU’s best film
yet.
I’ve never liked arbitrary numerical ratings, yet I know that
many people do.
8/10
No comments:
Post a Comment