WC
There’s a school of thought that suggests that despite the ramifications of Infinity War and the potential for the destruction of the MCU at the snap of Thanos’ fingers, that Civil War should have been the event at the end of Marvel’s Phase 3. It is arguably the single biggest event in Marvel’s comics vault that can also claim to have some sort of mainstream appeal (and it’s a damn-sight more accessible than a giant space warrior trying to seduce death by wiping out existence) and it is made for cinematic adaptation.
FragHero writes: "Wondering which among the 28 Marvel films are the best? Well, here's all of the MCU Marvel movies ranked from worst to best!"
Daily Video Game writes: "The online retailer Amazon is offering up to 60% off on DC 7 Film Collection, RoboCop: Trilogy Collection, and CAPTAIN AMERICA 3-MOVIE COLLECTION Blu-ray sets right now!"
Captain America 4, starring Anthony Mackie's Sam Wilson, will reportedly explore racism in the United States.
My main problem is that it shouldn't be Captain America, I feel like it should have been a stand alone movie just before Infinity War.
Civil War for me was told from two perspectives, Starks and Caps however my problem with the comic is that they seemed to make Stark come off as a little evil instead of showing these two heroes facing each other because they believe their choice is in the right...they still have peoples interests at heart. Now it seems like with it being Captain America 3 the focus is obviously going to be on Captain Americas side...making Stark look like the bad guy despite the fact it should of been neutral so fans could make up their own mind what side they are on (leading to some good marketing in the process).
I would have liked to see a two parter
Avengers: Civil War Part I - Showing Iron Mans side
Avengers: Civil War Part II - Showing Captain Americas side.
So for example in Iron Mans story you might see them get attacked by Captain Americas side while in Caps film you would see the build up to it and why they did it.
"Marvel should have brought back Toby Maguire and have him unmask, before handing over the Spider-reins to Asa Butterfield for the rebooted franchise"
I would be fine with this to be honest. Just make it known that they are loosely basing this version of Spiderman off the first trilogy, meaning they can make changes like ignoring the third film. Older Peter Parker, he's unmasked and then he's served his purpose.
I really hope that kid won't actually be Spiderman, he looks nothing like him and he's far too young looking.