10 Characters I Want In Captain America 3

10 Characters I Want In Captain America 3

Steve Rogers has quite a list of acquaintances, associates and enemies. MovieBob compiles a list of characters that should join Rogers in his next movie.

Read Full Article

I like the idea of Captain America going up against a conservative counterpart.

Obscurus comicus lore.

It's always amusing to me that so many super heroes and other associated characters are quite liberal and progressive (especially in the Marvel-verse), yet so many on the morally conservative side (shall we say) seem to hold them up as paragons of "their" America.

Arnie Roths story is a prime example of what I mean.

Like America herself, Cap's greatest foe seems to be his own ideology taken to twisted conclusions.

SnakeoilSage:
Like America herself, Cap's greatest foe seems to be his own ideology taken to twisted conclusions.

That's pretty much how every great superhero works. The Joker isn't a nemesis because he's mean or funny, but because his biggest goal is simply to get Batman to go against his morals. Superman's enemies' greatest strength is putting him in situations where he has to choose to fight through civilians, or other non-justice-ey situations.

The last one especially reminds me of a tumblr post I... can't find

The basic gist of it was that the Cap would basically, realistically, be the darling of the left wing media... since he clearly grew up in the New Deal and thus would likely have a very positive outlook on socialism and welfare to aid the poor.

It then went on to point out that he'd likely quickly become sick of the modern 24-hour news cycle, which would mean that he'd probably mostly appear on things like the Daily Show (Oh god I want to see that) and things like TyT.

Yay! Another List Breakdown!

1) Diamondback: If they bring her in, hopefully there will be at least a partial-rewrite of the character. The "love at first sight" concept is probably something should be dropped in exchanged for a more general romantic tension between the two, culminating in a "you can redeem yourself and I can help you" thing at the climax.

2) William Burnside: They could use him, but they would probably have to drop the racist bit (or, at the very least, have him be quite a bit older). The paranoid jingoist elements, however, could be used as a echo back to the 1980s US shift to a much more cowboy-esque approach to the USSR and the rise of US neo-conservative hyperpatriotism beginning in the late 1990s and becoming the dominant foreign policy of the US in the 2000s. A outright battle between Burnside and Captain America could be regarded as a battle between theories of policy and a Captain America victory would be regarded as an end of the preemptive concept as a whole, not simply the approach. Of course, it sounds like Winter Soldier already does that, but I'll wait until I see it before I rule this concept out, as from the sound of things SHIELD appears to be simply using the New York event for development of their resources (not dissimilar to the US intelligence community in the wake of 11 September 2001), whereas a Burnside-like approach would probably fall more in line with the hypernationalism that fed off the event.

3) Sin: You know what? I guarantee Red Skull had some lover/s while head of Hydra (ego-maniacal leader of a cult of supernazis who could be regarded as the epitome of what they stood for? It would be weirder if he didn't). You could have Sin be the result of coitus, with the effects of the serum creating an abnormally strong and intelligent offspring that doesn't age after 22 (because, why not?), who takes the mantle of Head of Hydra upon maturity. Or, alternatively, you could have her as his granddaughter or even great-granddaughter, with Hyrda experiments trying to keep the Red Skull bloodline strong.

Either way, as head of Hyrda, Sin would probably be a character that infiltrates SHIELD as a prospective agent following the events of Winter Soldier and SHIELD: Uprising, as a recruitment drive to replenish dead personnel glosses over the more opaque elements of her background check. She infiltrates, moves up quickly through the ranks through her intelligence and charisma, and becomes close ally of Captain America as a team leader (similar to Coulson) or as a commander (similar to Hand), possibly even a romantic relationship. Her team and the Captain investigate a pattern of thefts of artifacts and equipment that appear to be connected with some kind of neo-Hydra organization or even Hydra itself with Red Skull at the helm. The entire thing turns out to be a ruse so that the could capture Captain America and bring him to a Hydra base for study and possibly the reverse engineering of the serum, having used the last of them to create Sin. Sin reveals herself as the actual head of Hydra at the climax, before Captain America escapes and sets off the self destruct of the base (because they would totally still have that). Sin escapes (after being presumed dead) with several of the artifacts, but the Hydra operation is so heavily wounded that it is regarded as a victory.

4) The (non-Fantastic Four) Human Torch: I can see this as a throwback to that original Stark Expo, with a brief scene where Tony Stark develops a new android based on his father's old design, with Jarvis (or some other intelligence) inhabiting the body that uses a plasma field for offensive and defensive purposes. "Yeah, I improved on my dad's old design by putting in an 'on/off' switch so it could be shutdown before the lab incinerated."

5) Captain America as a Werewolf: Eh... Maybe a SHIELD or Hydra experiment get's loose and bites the captain on the way out, requiring a search for werewolf zero (which will probably be Asgardian in nature).

6) Doctor Faustus: Would be great to help Sin recruit some SHIELD members into Hydra (see above).

7) Hate Monger: Haha... no. If there is one thing about supervillain leaders in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it's that they all seem to prefer some element of subtlety. The hate monger most certainly is not subtle...

8) The Bradley Family: I can see this as another "Captain was gone, let's try it again" experiment, with much of the records of it outright destroyed by Bradley in the past (giving him prison time for his troubles and a reason for the Abomination to exist in this timeline). Bradley is now in a retirement home, practically catatonic and close to death from old age, while his son becomes a Vietnam (or possibly Gulf War) veteran and grandson is enlisted into SHIELD.

9) Super Patriot/U.S. Agent: Like I noted before, Captain America was a propaganda figure, and it would be odd for the US government to just let him disappear like that. So insert John Walker as his late-WWII and early-Cold War replacement and expect a story about his time trying to be the captain.

10) Arnie Roth: I can see him as a character, possibly as an aging WWII vet or as a more recent post-thaw friend, but he won't be a driving force in a story. Unlike the time when that story was published, homosexuality is now regarded as a normal occurrence and gay rights as a given in the US and most European countries, making any story that revolves around his sexuality or partner seem way out of place in the cinematic universe. At most, I can see them as cameos in a dinner scene or possibly a pair of SHIELD suits used to emphasize SHIELD's tolerance of interoffice romance.

John Walker, evil? Really? I find that a bit of an overestimation. Misguided and more gung-ho, sure, but not evil.

The Gentleman:
Snip

I find myself feeling so sad, since despite liking Captain America I haven't even heard of a single one of those characters.

I know next to nothing about Cap so I thought this list was fascinating. Of all of them, the Bradley family story sounds like by far the most plausible as the basis for a movie, I really hope they do go with it. It could be amazing.

immortalfrieza:

The Gentleman:
Snip

I find myself feeling so sad, since despite liking Captain America I haven't even heard of a single one of those characters.

Honestly, neither have I. I've read exactly one Captain America comic book. But I can take a few minutes to read the quick paragraph by Bob and the Marvel wiki on the character to gauge how a movie or TV show might be able to tackle the character in a way that makes enough sense for a broader audience to understand.

The Bradley families insertion would be a very clever way of creating the New Avengers and be a lot more topical of the unjust methods and illegal acts of war. It can make Cap grow as a Character and possibly lead to a civil war movie. n=Not that there needs to be one since the source material is squandered.

I am disapointed that the Nomad wasn´t on the list, specially considering Capwolf was there.

I think the Nomad is really underappreciated

Andrew Siribohdi:
I like the idea of Captain America going up against a conservative counterpart.

Than Cap would be going up against himself.... Most people that identify as politically "conservative" are usually more libertarian.. Strong on economic issues, but supportive (or indifferent) to social issues. While many in the "conservative" group are religious or have other issues, that doesn't mean that millions of conservative support, or at least have a "live and let live/keep the government out of _____ issue" about social issues like gay marriage.

Just like the "liberal" group is home to thugs, communists, ect like Bill Ayers, Che, Stalin and Mao, ect.

Brockyman:

Andrew Siribohdi:
I like the idea of Captain America going up against a conservative counterpart.

Than Cap would be going up against himself.... Most people that identify as politically "conservative" are usually more libertarian.. Strong on economic issues, but supportive (or indifferent) to social issues. While many in the "conservative" group are religious or have other issues, that doesn't mean that millions of conservative support, or at least have a "live and let live/keep the government out of _____ issue" about social issues like gay marriage.

Just like the "liberal" group is home to thugs, communists, ect like Bill Ayers, Che, Stalin and Mao, ect.

Uh, I don't know what world you live in, but libertarians are in the "libertarian" political group. Conservatives define themselves on social issues, because they don't have very different economic views than "liberals".

And please, Ayers and Che are communists, I dare you to name one "liberal" politician who is a communist. As for Stalin and Mao, they're quite a bit closer to "conservative" than any "liberal" alive.

Andrew Siribohdi:
I like the idea of Captain America going up against a conservative counterpart.

Well, strictly speaking it's a matter of comics being part of the media which has been heavily leaning left since the 60s. To be honest though Bob doesn't flat out say it but USAgent is pretty much a super hero and was a key element of teams like "Force Works" (when it ran) as well as one of the guys replacing Steve after his death. I believe there was even a line at one point about how "you were never really Captain America" followed by acknowledgement much later on that he was.

It should also be noted that William Burnside's Bucky later donned the identity of "Nomad" (which was itself held by Captain America at one point). He also at one point took the identity of "Scourge".

It should also be noted that Captain America isn't always right, in many cases he tends to act as a sort of face of the liberal point of view in comics, and that side ultimately winds up prevailing, oftentimes by the wave of a magic wand. HOWEVER it's noteworthy that in some storylines like "Civil War" it was always a lot more ambigious, despite some attempts to try and ruin it by trying to make a "right" and "wrong" side and an increasing analogy to modern politics which arguably ruined an entire event that took a decade or so to build and involved having a ton of people in The Marvel Universe acting out of character. The climax of "The Civil War" is when Captain America finally manages to turn things around against Iron Man's "Pro-Registration" movement by getting the help of Prince Namor and his army, however on the eve of his victory he more or less surrenders when he sees the damage being done to the city. The point more or less being that in the course of fighting he pretty much became exactly the threat guys like Iron Man were concerned about. I suppose his surrender counts as "being right" but I tend to see it as a sort of admission that as much as he liked his principles he had to admit he had been wrong.

Civil War also involved some more controversial moments as well, for example for a while you had "Cap" hiding out with none other than "The Punisher" and the two have differences due to Cap being willing to basically "pardon" any super villain that wanted to side with him against Registration (which conversely the other side was willing to do for villains that came forward and registered as well). The Punisher was using Cap's banner as a way of luring in scumbags so he could execute them, which caused a falling out. In a way raising the question as to how much of a good guy could Cap be if he's willing to pretty much team up with anyone, no matter how vile, in order to defend the right of these guys to remain anonymous (among other security related issues). In a sort of irony part of the point seemed to be that "The Punisher" in the end remained the most pure of the bunch because as lethal as he was he remained on target
for things being "Good vs. Evil" as opposed to a political slap fight. The most morally ambigious "hero" in the Marvel Universe arguably being one of the few heroes that was still doing his job and remembering who the bad guys actually were.

Eh, considering the political climate we're currently living in, I'd advise against the "Captain America: Gay Rights Hero!" story. Not that it's a bad story, far from it. I just think that it'd come across as a very ham-fisted "gay rights agenda" movie. That and the fact that more and more it's becoming the case where being opposed to gay rights is what gets you shunned. Just look at this Mozilla CEO business.

If this was back in the 90's, I'd say go for it, but like I said: I just don't think it's a story that needs to be told today.

And yes, I'm fully aware that there's still plenty of people out there opposed to gay rights, but that's also why I say that it'd come across as a ham-fisted gay rights movie.

Then again, as MovieBob pointed out in his review of the new Cap'n movie, that one was a pretty thinly veiled chastising of the Bush Administration's reaction to 9/11. So screw it, let's just make all our super-hero movies political. Why the hell not. :P

Captain America is always on the right side.

Except during Civil War, when he wasn't. At least, not according to the writers, who claim that the Pro-Registration side was in the right.

Yeah, doesn't help that they still ended up making the Pro-Reg side look bad.

RJ 17:
Eh, considering the political climate we're currently living in, I'd advise against the "Captain America: Gay Rights Hero!" story. Not that it's a bad story, far from it. I just think that it'd come across as a very ham-fisted "gay rights agenda" movie. That and the fact that more and more it's becoming the case where being opposed to gay rights is what gets you shunned. Just look at this Mozilla CEO business.

If this was back in the 90's, I'd say go for it, but like I said: I just don't think it's a story that needs to be told today.

And yes, I'm fully aware that there's still plenty of people out there opposed to gay rights, but that's also why I say that it'd come across as a ham-fisted gay rights movie.

Then again, as MovieBob pointed out in his review of the new Cap'n movie, that one was a pretty thinly veiled chastising of the Bush Administration's reaction to 9/11. So screw it, let's just make all our super-hero movies political. Why the hell not. :P

your logic doesn't make sense. you're saying that being anti-gay rights get you shunned, so logically being pro-gay rights gets you accepted. yet, you're saying NOT to include cap as a pro-gay rights figure.

presenting a villain that has an anti-gay agenda wouldn't get the movie the kind of scorn Mozilla just got, quite the opposite, considering the good guy's view. of course, it would be rallied against by the anti-gay rights people, but fuck those people anyways.

now more than ever is when this story needs to be told, when we're on the precipice of enacting real, wide, sweeping change. it would absolutely serve to have that subplot in the zeitgeist of that agenda.

martyrdrebel27:

RJ 17:
Eh, considering the political climate we're currently living in, I'd advise against the "Captain America: Gay Rights Hero!" story. Not that it's a bad story, far from it. I just think that it'd come across as a very ham-fisted "gay rights agenda" movie. That and the fact that more and more it's becoming the case where being opposed to gay rights is what gets you shunned. Just look at this Mozilla CEO business.

If this was back in the 90's, I'd say go for it, but like I said: I just don't think it's a story that needs to be told today.

And yes, I'm fully aware that there's still plenty of people out there opposed to gay rights, but that's also why I say that it'd come across as a ham-fisted gay rights movie.

Then again, as MovieBob pointed out in his review of the new Cap'n movie, that one was a pretty thinly veiled chastising of the Bush Administration's reaction to 9/11. So screw it, let's just make all our super-hero movies political. Why the hell not. :P

your logic doesn't make sense. you're saying that being anti-gay rights get you shunned, so logically being pro-gay rights gets you accepted. yet, you're saying NOT to include cap as a pro-gay rights figure.

presenting a villain that has an anti-gay agenda wouldn't get the movie the kind of scorn Mozilla just got, quite the opposite, considering the good guy's view. of course, it would be rallied against by the anti-gay rights people, but fuck those people anyways.

now more than ever is when this story needs to be told, when we're on the precipice of enacting real, wide, sweeping change. it would absolutely serve to have that subplot in the zeitgeist of that agenda.

To give you context on where I'm coming from, I'm one who doesn't like heavy political overtones in my movies, especially when they're blatantly obvious ones such as with Elysium. That's actually why I really don't go to see very many movies these days since the trend seems to be coming more and more to politicize the subject material.

It's because of that trend that I ended my post with "why the hell not". It's what everyone else is doing.

RJ 17:

martyrdrebel27:

RJ 17:
Eh, considering the political climate we're currently living in, I'd advise against the "Captain America: Gay Rights Hero!" story. Not that it's a bad story, far from it. I just think that it'd come across as a very ham-fisted "gay rights agenda" movie. That and the fact that more and more it's becoming the case where being opposed to gay rights is what gets you shunned. Just look at this Mozilla CEO business.

If this was back in the 90's, I'd say go for it, but like I said: I just don't think it's a story that needs to be told today.

And yes, I'm fully aware that there's still plenty of people out there opposed to gay rights, but that's also why I say that it'd come across as a ham-fisted gay rights movie.

Then again, as MovieBob pointed out in his review of the new Cap'n movie, that one was a pretty thinly veiled chastising of the Bush Administration's reaction to 9/11. So screw it, let's just make all our super-hero movies political. Why the hell not. :P

your logic doesn't make sense. you're saying that being anti-gay rights get you shunned, so logically being pro-gay rights gets you accepted. yet, you're saying NOT to include cap as a pro-gay rights figure.

presenting a villain that has an anti-gay agenda wouldn't get the movie the kind of scorn Mozilla just got, quite the opposite, considering the good guy's view. of course, it would be rallied against by the anti-gay rights people, but fuck those people anyways.

now more than ever is when this story needs to be told, when we're on the precipice of enacting real, wide, sweeping change. it would absolutely serve to have that subplot in the zeitgeist of that agenda.

To give you context on where I'm coming from, I'm one who doesn't like heavy political overtones in my movies, especially when they're blatantly obvious ones such as with Elysium. That's actually why I really don't go to see very many movies these days since the trend seems to be coming more and more to politicize the subject material.

It's because of that trend that I ended my post with "why the hell not". It's what everyone else is doing.

movies are a form of art, art is representative of the culture and mentality of the era it's from. the best of art from all types of media is art that reflects a view on subjects of relevance, that takes a stand for something, that is part of a larger conversation than itself. the kind of world you would seem to like would be filled be boring, bland movies built solely for consumerism. that sounds like a hellishly oppressive dystopia to me.

i don't mean to come off as attacking, and certainly hope that i'm not, i just disagree that avoiding any subject of importance is a good move or would improve anything.

martyrdrebel27:
Snip.

It comes down to personal tastes, my friend, and I have little desire to defend my own as I find such discussions to be rather pointless. Suffice to say I simply don't like mixing politics with my movies, and that hasn't stopped me from enjoying a great number of movies that have no such political tie-ins (edit: or at least ones whose political tie-ins are strongly veiled -end edit). Quite contrary to the notion you suggested in the snipped post: I find movies with political overtones to be the most boring ones to sit through. I'm an escapist (in general, beyond just being a member of this website :P), and as such I watch movies and games because I don't want to be hassled with the current goings-on of the world around me.

RJ 17:

martyrdrebel27:
Snip.

It comes down to personal tastes, my friend, and I have little desire to defend my own as I find such discussions to be rather pointless. Suffice to say I simply don't like mixing politics with my movies, and that hasn't stopped me from enjoying a great number of movies that have no such political tie-ins (edit: or at least ones whose political tie-ins are strongly veiled -end edit). Quite contrary to the notion you suggested in the snipped post: I find movies with political overtones to be the most boring ones to sit through. I'm an escapist (in general, beyond just being a member of this website :P), and as such I watch movies and games because I don't want to be hassled with the current goings-on of the world around me.

well, it seems we are at an impasse. haha. and you absolutely don't need to defend your tastes, sorry if i came across as demanding as such, though as a final point, i'd recommend watching moviebob's Winter Soldier review where he discusses the inherent political nature of a movie and character named and designed after a nation. Captain America is inherently a political character, and anything involving him is naturally going to have a level of political subtext. moviebob states in more succinctly, but the point remains the same.

as a point of concession, i will admit that the reference beginning this post was from The Princess Bride, a movie I LOVE with no political or social agenda. even the king who feels it's his right to get the girl gives up when faced with the fact that she doesn't want him, a point where they could have made a statement about the corrupting influence of absolute power, and chose not to. so i too enjoy movies with no agenda, maybe i was just being reactionary to what i felt was a call to whitewash a character by asking him to be un-political when, as stated above, he's an inherently political statement. in fact, that had to be it, because as i think about it, there's a whole other statement movies i enjoy also make, not tied to politics at all, but rather the statement of personal struggle and existentialism. movies like clerks, the virgin suicides, american beauty. i think where i faltered there is that somewhere inside, i overreached and politicized existential struggle, because i see the struggle with the self and identity as a symptom of a larger problem, the problem with The System, and the culture of adulthood that demands crushing the personal identity in the name of being a Proper Citizen. and this is a sentiment i full-heartedly believe in, but again, as far as statements in films go, its an over-reach to politicize the internal struggle, no matter how intrinsic The System is to feelings of alienation.

martyrdrebel27:
well, it seems we are at an impasse. haha. and you absolutely don't need to defend your tastes, sorry if i came across as demanding as such, though as a final point, i'd recommend watching moviebob's Winter Soldier review where he discusses the inherent political nature of a movie and character named and designed after a nation. Captain America is inherently a political character, and anything involving him is naturally going to have a level of political subtext. moviebob states in more succinctly, but the point remains the same.

as a point of concession, i will admit that the reference beginning this post was from The Princess Bride, a movie I LOVE with no political or social agenda. even the king who feels it's his right to get the girl gives up when faced with the fact that she doesn't want him, a point where they could have made a statement about the corrupting influence of absolute power, and chose not to. so i too enjoy movies with no agenda, maybe i was just being reactionary to what i felt was a call to whitewash a character by asking him to be un-political when, as stated above, he's an inherently political statement. in fact, that had to be it, because as i think about it, there's a whole other statement movies i enjoy also make, not tied to politics at all, but rather the statement of personal struggle and existentialism. movies like clerks, the virgin suicides, american beauty. i think where i faltered there is that somewhere inside, i overreached and politicized existential struggle, because i see the struggle with the self and identity as a symptom of a larger problem, the problem with The System, and the culture of adulthood that demands crushing the personal identity in the name of being a Proper Citizen. and this is a sentiment i full-heartedly believe in, but again, as far as statements in films go, its an over-reach to politicize the internal struggle, no matter how intrinsic The System is to feelings of alienation.


But back to the matter at hand, a bit more context is that I've never really liked Captain America specifically because you can't do a story about him without politicizing it.

But allow me to try and clarify something from my original post here. I think it'd be a ham-fisted and overly politicized movie if it specifically focused on Cap'n trying to save his friend's lover. Put that in as a subplot to another Cap'n movie or something and I'd be more accepting towards it.

RJ 17:

martyrdrebel27:
well, it seems we are at an impasse. haha. and you absolutely don't need to defend your tastes, sorry if i came across as demanding as such, though as a final point, i'd recommend watching moviebob's Winter Soldier review where he discusses the inherent political nature of a movie and character named and designed after a nation. Captain America is inherently a political character, and anything involving him is naturally going to have a level of political subtext. moviebob states in more succinctly, but the point remains the same.

as a point of concession, i will admit that the reference beginning this post was from The Princess Bride, a movie I LOVE with no political or social agenda. even the king who feels it's his right to get the girl gives up when faced with the fact that she doesn't want him, a point where they could have made a statement about the corrupting influence of absolute power, and chose not to. so i too enjoy movies with no agenda, maybe i was just being reactionary to what i felt was a call to whitewash a character by asking him to be un-political when, as stated above, he's an inherently political statement. in fact, that had to be it, because as i think about it, there's a whole other statement movies i enjoy also make, not tied to politics at all, but rather the statement of personal struggle and existentialism. movies like clerks, the virgin suicides, american beauty. i think where i faltered there is that somewhere inside, i overreached and politicized existential struggle, because i see the struggle with the self and identity as a symptom of a larger problem, the problem with The System, and the culture of adulthood that demands crushing the personal identity in the name of being a Proper Citizen. and this is a sentiment i full-heartedly believe in, but again, as far as statements in films go, its an over-reach to politicize the internal struggle, no matter how intrinsic The System is to feelings of alienation.


But back to the matter at hand, a bit more context is that I've never really liked Captain America specifically because you can't do a story about him without politicizing it.

But allow me to try and clarify something from my original post here. I think it'd be a ham-fisted and overly politicized movie if it specifically focused on Cap'n trying to save his friend's lover. Put that in as a subplot to another Cap'n movie or something and I'd be more accepting towards it.

I think a good way to support gay rights without forcing the issue is not to make it a sub-plot but to normalize gay relationships in the film universe. So a plot focusing on saving a gay character, or defeating a homophobic villain isn't the way to go. Rather, something like in the establishing scenes before the big initial incident, have Cap visit his gay friends for a regular social event, the gay couple shows they are together (something as simple as one casually pecking the other on the cheek or something) and then not have any sort of reaction to it at all (at least beyond what one would have to a heterosexual couple). Then get on with the movie.

Jimalcoatl:
I think a good way to support gay rights without forcing the issue is not to make it a sub-plot but to normalize gay relationships in the film universe. So a plot focusing on saving a gay character, or defeating a homophobic villain isn't the way to go. Rather, something like in the establishing scenes before the big initial incident, have Cap visit his gay friends for a regular social event, the gay couple shows they are together (something as simple as one casually pecking the other on the cheek or something) and then not have any sort of reaction to it at all (at least beyond what one would have to a heterosexual couple). Then get on with the movie.

That's exactly what I was trying to get at and express. I'd have absolutely no problem with something like that. They're not focusing on it, they're not beating you over the head with it, they just play it off like "Yeah, Cap'n has a gay friend and he's perfectly fine with that. No big deal."

Therumancer:

Andrew Siribohdi:
I like the idea of Captain America going up against a conservative counterpart.

Well, strictly speaking it's a matter of comics being part of the media which has been heavily leaning left since the 60s. To be honest though Bob doesn't flat out say it but USAgent is pretty much a super hero and was a key element of teams like "Force Works" (when it ran) as well as one of the guys replacing Steve after his death. I believe there was even a line at one point about how "you were never really Captain America" followed by acknowledgement much later on that he was.

It should also be noted that William Burnside's Bucky later donned the identity of "Nomad" (which was itself held by Captain America at one point). He also at one point took the identity of "Scourge".

It should also be noted that Captain America isn't always right, in many cases he tends to act as a sort of face of the liberal point of view in comics, and that side ultimately winds up prevailing, oftentimes by the wave of a magic wand. HOWEVER it's noteworthy that in some storylines like "Civil War" it was always a lot more ambigious, despite some attempts to try and ruin it by trying to make a "right" and "wrong" side and an increasing analogy to modern politics which arguably ruined an entire event that took a decade or so to build and involved having a ton of people in The Marvel Universe acting out of character. The climax of "The Civil War" is when Captain America finally manages to turn things around against Iron Man's "Pro-Registration" movement by getting the help of Prince Namor and his army, however on the eve of his victory he more or less surrenders when he sees the damage being done to the city. The point more or less being that in the course of fighting he pretty much became exactly the threat guys like Iron Man were concerned about. I suppose his surrender counts as "being right" but I tend to see it as a sort of admission that as much as he liked his principles he had to admit he had been wrong.

Civil War also involved some more controversial moments as well, for example for a while you had "Cap" hiding out with none other than "The Punisher" and the two have differences due to Cap being willing to basically "pardon" any super villain that wanted to side with him against Registration (which conversely the other side was willing to do for villains that came forward and registered as well). The Punisher was using Cap's banner as a way of luring in scumbags so he could execute them, which caused a falling out. In a way raising the question as to how much of a good guy could Cap be if he's willing to pretty much team up with anyone, no matter how vile, in order to defend the right of these guys to remain anonymous (among other security related issues). In a sort of irony part of the point seemed to be that "The Punisher" in the end remained the most pure of the bunch because as lethal as he was he remained on target
for things being "Good vs. Evil" as opposed to a political slap fight. The most morally ambigious "hero" in the Marvel Universe arguably being one of the few heroes that was still doing his job and remembering who the bad guys actually were.

Second most morally ambiguous hero in the Marvel Universe, because Moon Knight takes first place. My favorite event in all of Civil War is Cap visiting Moon Knight and telling him that he is the only reason he has any doubts about fighting the Superhuman Registration Act.

RJ 17:

martyrdrebel27:
well, it seems we are at an impasse. haha. and you absolutely don't need to defend your tastes, sorry if i came across as demanding as such, though as a final point, i'd recommend watching moviebob's Winter Soldier review where he discusses the inherent political nature of a movie and character named and designed after a nation. Captain America is inherently a political character, and anything involving him is naturally going to have a level of political subtext. moviebob states in more succinctly, but the point remains the same.

as a point of concession, i will admit that the reference beginning this post was from The Princess Bride, a movie I LOVE with no political or social agenda. even the king who feels it's his right to get the girl gives up when faced with the fact that she doesn't want him, a point where they could have made a statement about the corrupting influence of absolute power, and chose not to. so i too enjoy movies with no agenda, maybe i was just being reactionary to what i felt was a call to whitewash a character by asking him to be un-political when, as stated above, he's an inherently political statement. in fact, that had to be it, because as i think about it, there's a whole other statement movies i enjoy also make, not tied to politics at all, but rather the statement of personal struggle and existentialism. movies like clerks, the virgin suicides, american beauty. i think where i faltered there is that somewhere inside, i overreached and politicized existential struggle, because i see the struggle with the self and identity as a symptom of a larger problem, the problem with The System, and the culture of adulthood that demands crushing the personal identity in the name of being a Proper Citizen. and this is a sentiment i full-heartedly believe in, but again, as far as statements in films go, its an over-reach to politicize the internal struggle, no matter how intrinsic The System is to feelings of alienation.


But back to the matter at hand, a bit more context is that I've never really liked Captain America specifically because you can't do a story about him without politicizing it.

But allow me to try and clarify something from my original post here. I think it'd be a ham-fisted and overly politicized movie if it specifically focused on Cap'n trying to save his friend's lover. Put that in as a subplot to another Cap'n movie or something and I'd be more accepting towards it.

oh, shoulda said that from the beginning haha. because i definitely agree that if that were the main plot of the story, it would seem rather hamfisted, unless (which i think should be the standard these days) a huge deal isn't made over the fact that they're a gay couple. it should be treated just as any other couple, it just happens to be two guys, whatev. I think that no matter how good the intentions are, putting a flashing sign over it saying GAY COUPLE! does more harm than good because it subconsciously set in your mind that their relationship is different than a "normal" relationship, that it requires extra attention. i dunno, it's a complex issue, and having just gotten back from CapAm2WinSol, (i got mad abbrev skills) i'm still high on that bit of awesomeness.

i'll also say that i also never really cared for captain america, but not for the same reason as you, i just think he is the most boring of all the avengers.

p.s. my name is inigo montoya, you killed my father now prepare to die.

Reason #45 I don't take Bob seriously as a movie critic: He seriously suggests a chick who's sole purpose is to have sex with Captain America, a strong black man with the mind of a child, werewolf Captain America, and fucking Hitler in a mask as possible movie characters.

"You know what this movie needed? A villain that turned out to be Hitler." -said no one ever.

The only one I heard of on this list was Diamondback because of her run in with Cable & Deadpool while she was part of B.A.D. Girls Inc. Man, that was a really wacky story. Okay, well so maybe the rest of C&D was too. COMICS. ARE. WEIRD!

irishda:
Reason #45 I don't take Bob seriously as a movie critic: He seriously suggests a chick who's sole purpose is to have sex with Captain America, a strong black man with the mind of a child, werewolf Captain America, and fucking Hitler in a mask as possible movie characters.

"You know what this movie needed? A villain that turned out to be Hitler." -said no one ever.

Well Diamondback has been around for a while, and even if one argues that she was a shoehorned love interest (which a case can be made for) she's still a reasonable choice. That said I think it's a little redundant with where they are going with the movie version of Black Widow in this last one.

I can't see "Hate Monger" in the movie continuity, it's just too silly. What was cool in a comic book when your not thinking about it too much isn't going to translate well to a movie series like this. Hitler took himself extremely seriously and believed he was doing the right thing, calling himself "Hate Monger" and literally spreading hate doesn't really hold up to prolonged examination. That said if they DID want to do something similar and bring Hitler into the picture it would be doable, and would help tie up loose ends, since the Nazis were apparently out there, but the focus of the stories shifted entirely to Hydra. Perhaps if they decide to bring "Red Skull" back (or more accurately WHEN they decide to do it) perhaps to rebuild Hydra after Von Strucker eventually goes down, they could always do something where The Red Skull was saved and perhaps imprisoned by the Nazis under Hitler or whatever, which is why he's around, unknown to the rest of the organization. Of course that wouldn't be the same as actually having Hitler show up in a costume and acting like a super villain.

Capwolf is just... dumb.

Bob doesn't seem really interested in a "black man with the mind of a child" so much as the whole background it brings into the picture, since it gets multi-generational (he mentions them wanting to use the family). It fits Bob's personal politics and social leanings, and you can almost hear him drooling when he mentions "The Muslim Captain America". To be honest with you other than the political points there doesn't seem to be a lot about these characters to really recommend them, they are there mostly to be seen and to go "look at how liberal and PC this is". There are worse things but for the most part to really explain this over the generations would derail your average two hour movie when people are there to see "Captain America". That might be worth it if the characters were cool, but when you consider Patriot's most relevant moment was needing to be rescued for protesting the mutant registration act, there isn't a lot to recommend here.

Bob's suggestions are a mixed bag to me, but really this is an opinion piece, and this is his opinion, and it's not especially surprising given his over all leanings.

To be honest though it might be interesting to do some variation on USAgent, I was originally thinking that we were going to see something similar in "Agents Of Shield" on TV, without the entire "mantle of Captain America" aspect of things and worrying about doing the whole "anti-hero, to hero" angle. That would also open the door for Battlestar:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlestar_(comics)

To be honest I had suspected the guy they turned into Dethlok might have been a version of Battlestar given how he was asking if his records were as good as Captain America's.

Wow, that list of 10 characters Bob wants to see is almost a list of 10 characters I don't want to see. The several spots taken by a pseudo-Captain America could be interesting but still require plots I've seen overplayed. The other spots are incredibly dated or just out of place. Maybe the Human Torch would be an interesting side plot and Sinthea would be a natural progression of the red skull plot but I've grown tired of the 120 lb girls who can kick 250 lb men through walls mechanic. I find it just as silly as the notion of Steve Rogers punching hulk through a wall. But hey, sin has a gun and we all know fast bullets through the skull are kind of the Capt's kryptonite.

Arnie Roth sounds like he was an important character when he came around but today? You might as well have a time traveling slave walk up to Steve Rogers and have Steve go on a discourse about how slavery is bad. "No duh, Cap, you just wasted everyone's time with the obvious." Maybe just as a supporting character then? I didn't think he was particularly memorable otherwise. His big thing was just that he was gay. Is that really shocking anyone anymore?

Anyone taking bets that they bring in Sin as the next villain in order to keep the Hydra/Red Skull ties, and portray her similar to the way that Artemisia was portrayed in 300 - Rise of An Empire?

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here