Captain America Civil War Best Buy Exclusive Steelbook

I really want to give this movie one more star, because I think the Russo brothers did a great job making this a serious movie and avoiding the silliness and wisecracks that are typical of mainstream superhero movies. It is believed, I suppose, that if a fantasy/superhero movie were made as a serious drama, it wouldn't be any "fun." Or, because of the subject matter, it's impossible to make serious dramas out of such movies. M. Night Shayamalan's Unbreakable proved that wrong a long time ago, and the Dark Knight trilogy made it "ok" for filmmakers/fans/reviewers to take these movies seriously. Anyway, hats off to the Russos for that choice.Unfortunately, despite the parade of excellent Marvel movies that we've seen over the last 15 years, I have significant issues with this film (even though I do think it is a good movie). First, the minor concerns. I feel like the fight scenes are over-choreographed. A lot of times it looks like the characters are dancing instead of fighting. There's a general lack of "grittiness" in the combat. Unless one hero is fighting one of the other heroes, no move ever really seems to fail and no punch ever misses (kind of like Legolas in The Lord of the Rings). And during the face off at the airport, I think the Russos show a lack of courage in the way they directed the fight. Every dramatic or interesting move, it seems, gets undone. Iron Man has a trick up his sleeve to get Captain America's shield--enter Spider Man who snatches it away. Great move! Except Cap gets it right back. Let's see some consequences--make Cap fight without his shield. Spidey binds Cap's hands together with webs. No problem--Cap holds up his hands and Hawkeye shoots off the webs, like it never really happened. Whenever one of team Iron Man is about to deal team Cap a significant blow, suddenly Scarlet Witch puts a stop to it out of nowhere. You can't make a really good battle out of mostly thwarted moves. Also, the Russos didn't have the balls to have a member of team Cap actually take down Rhodey, which would have potentially led to future animosity and, more importantly, character motivation. They made it accidental friendly fire from Vision, and therefore, completely forgivable--Total bait and switch from the advertising campaign which showed Tony holding Rhodey in his arms as if he were dead, making it appear as if Cap or someone on his team was responsible for it.A more significant concern I have is that the plot (and I know the source comes from the comics, but still...) very much resembles the plot of X-Men 3 when the heroes have to take sides on the issue of whether mutants should have to be registered and whether the mutant "cure" should even exist.Also, I'm confused about the way the characters were represented. In the comics, superheroes have widely varying levels of power. Some are clearly more powerful than others. In this movie (with the exception of Vision and Scarlet Witch), the heroes all seem roughly equal in their abilities. Look, Captain American is a great character, but he's only a human--albeit, a human at the peak physical abilities possible for a human--with a shield. If he were punching Iron Man like he does in the movie, he would break his hands. Tony Stark's armor is not tin foil. And yet, Tony's suit warns him during one particular fist fight that "you can't beat him hand to hand!" The interesting aspect of Captain America isn't his powers, it's his character. His real powers are his leadership, courage, and vision. But for someone who is supposed to be a great leader and decision maker, he makes some really poor decisions, which leads me to my next criticism...The directors said they wanted to show the heroes finishing up a character arc, but the problem is, the characters have become the opposite of what they once were. That's not an arc, that's a mis-interpretation or misrepresentation of the characters. Cap was right to oppose SHIELD when he found out it was infiltrated by HYDRA, but it strains belief that he would turn out, in this film, to be pro-vigilante! Am I to understand that he would really, for example, violate the sovereignty of other nations if he personally felt it was a good idea? That he would defy a government that might ask specifically that he not get involved? Again, the reasoning strains credibility. His argument is basically, "if I feel like I should get involved, I'm going to." From what I can tell, the only thing that was being asked of the Avengers is that they refrain from getting involved unless specifically requested by the military/government/country...whatever. It seems like a rational middle-ground that a person like Captain America would be particularly receptive to, especially considering that the argument in favor of the regulation rests on the fact that the Avengers are responsible for untold damage and probably thousands of deaths. Also, there's nothing saying that if the regulating bodies are destroyed or are too overwhelmed to request help, the Avengers couldn't step in. Moreover, since much of Cap's value is in his decision making ability, he sure lets his emotions dictate his actions a lot, very unlike someone who is known for rational thinking and keeping a cool head. In Civil War he's like the cliched character who always says "I'm going with you!" on missions, against all good advice because of his personal emotional investment. Falcon is also strangely pro-vigilante considering that he's also a military man, like Cap, invested in a command structure. Presumably, though, he's with cap mainly because he's Cap's friend.As for Tony Stark, the Russos have made another incomprehensible change, but this one doesn't show Stark acting quite as much out of character as Captain America. Still, he's ends up in a place basically the opposite of where he started, going from vigilante in Iron Man 1 & 2, in which he tells the government flat out that they can't have the Iron Man technology, to strict anti-vigilante in Civil War. However, his change is presaged somewhat in Iron Man 3, when he is seen backing away from his personal need to play the superhero and save the day. He also seems to have grown a little weary of the responsibility of being Iron Man. There is also a brief scene when he is informed that the actions of the Avengers in Age of Ultron resulted in the death of a small innocent boy. It's rather obligatory and not entirely convincing as a motivation for Stark to change his worldview.And the other characters, well... It's never entirely clear what their motivations are with regard to fighting one another. In the marketing, the premise seemed to be that the characters were fighting because they had taken different sides in the debate over the Sokovia Accords. However, the character motivations are quite varied...Stark's desire to keep Scarlet Witch under wraps doesn't make much sense, and Scarlet Witch's need to need to get out RIGHT NOW! doesn't make much sense either, so her motivation is that she's a brat basically. Vision is fighting on Team Tony because he's already allied with Tony, I guess. Spider-man is with Tony because Tony went to meet him and Spidey wants to impress Mr. Stark. What are Peter Parker's views on the accords? Rhodey is a military man, who has faith in a governing body, so his motivation is pretty natural, actually. Black Widow makes an argument in favor of the Avengers being under some sort of oversight, but then she turns against Team Tony, helping Cap and Bucky Escape. I have no idea why Scott Lang/Ant Man is there. I don't know why Hawkeye is fighting except that, according to Jeremy Renner, Cap called him before Tony did. Bucky is only trying to clear his name. T'Challa is only there to kill Bucky. Almost none of it has to do with the differing political opinions. The premise would suggest that this whole "civil war" is about one group of superheroes fighting against another group that has different beliefs, but as it turns out, all of these people are fighting because of the convictions of only a few of them.The movie just doesn't have a good coherent premise. One side of the argument over the accords is pretty clearly right. The request by the government is pretty reasonable. It's not as if they're requiring all the Avengers to be microchipped or something. And it's hard to believe any of these people should be allowed to Assemble and use their powers whenever and wherever they feel like they should. But also, there are only a couple of characters who have really strong feelings about the issue, but the movie makes it seem like that's what the whole "civil war" is about, when it's really just about a guy manipulating them all into fighting each other.

Steve: *Leads and then botches a mission in Lagos, Nigeria because he brought an unprepared team member AND totally misread the situation in the first place - leading to 11 people dying and many more injured.*Wanda: *Kills 11 innocent people by not being able to control her powers and being untrained enough for the mission.*Steve and Wanda: *Fluff off the 11 deaths in about two lines of dialogue, plus a couple of furrowed brows during the meeting with Ross.*Steve and Wanda: *Never refer to the screwed-up mission or the 11 deaths again. Doesn’t really seem to bother them.*Wanda: Waaaah! You locked me up in my room! How dare you?? *Proceeds to escalate airport fight to deadly proportions, causing injuries and millions of dollars in damages*Steve: Literally CHOOSES NOT TO DO the Right Thing (which is protecting the many) and runs off to save his one pal instead, becoming the catalyst for many more deaths and injuries and millions of dollars in damages – thus giving up the right to be Captain America (and he knows it; hence his throwing away the shield).Fandom at large: Everything Steve does is right because he’s Captain America! We love Steve and Wanda!Tony Stark (with not too much screen time but making the most of it…): *Takes complete responsibility for all his actions, especially blaming himself for Ultron even though he’s clearly NOT completely responsible. In fact, takes utter responsibility and blame even at the expense of his own health and well-being. Cares probably way too much. Listens to the pain of a mother who lost her son in Sokovia; lets it affect him personally and terribly. Tries to the utmost of his ability to keep the Avengers safe and together. Pays for all their mistakes and embarrassments, including stuff they blow up and destroy – and probably funds an army of lawyers and advisors to pay damages to the people injured and the families of the people killed as collateral damage on Avengers missions. Keeps Wanda SAFE in a SAFEHOUSE because she’s a visa-less foreign national who could be killed by Ross’s goon squads or imprisoned without bond at any time - also because she just KILLED 11 PEOPLE. Feigns going along with Ross even though he doesn’t trust Ross, because he wants to keep everyone safe and together and knows politicians don’t stay in power forever and that contracts can be negotiated. Tries valiantly throughout the story to use reason and rationality, offers of compromise and negotiation, to get Steve to at least listen to his side – because guess what, the Avengers actually do need accountability. Is rebuffed again and again but still tries. Brings Spider-Man to the airport SPECIFICALLY to “web ‘em up” and capture HIS FRIENDS WITHOUT HURTING THEM and finds it’s Cap’s side that escalates the war. Has to endure the grave injury of his best friend Rhodey and no doubt blames himself for that too. Goes to Steve’s side IMMEDIATELY when he gets the evidence that Bucky was not the Vienna bomber, to try to make things right. Bravely goes alone in a helicopter through a raging ocean storm to the Raft, at tremendous danger to himself, to try to find out where Steve is – knowing Ross could lock him up, too, and no one would be the wiser. Is stunned and appalled by what he finds there, but has to play the high-stakes game and get his information and get out if he wants to somehow save the Avengers and help Steve.Has to endure the cruel jibes of Clint, which he hides his feelings about. Escapes the Raft, flies more than 6,000 miles to Siberia, ALONE in the armor, to try to make amends. Almost succeeds– until he finds out his erstwhile friend kept the most terrible of all secrets from him for two years. Reacts as any human would (since he JUST SAW video footage of the murders of his parents, and the murderer is standing right there…).*Fandom at large: Aggghhh! Tony locked up Wanda and brought a child to the airport fight and then he attacked Bucky! He’s a spoiled rich guy with no feelings and no morals!“Civil War” screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (on the Blu-Ray): Steve is better than Tony and a greater moral character.Tony Fans: ………what???The movie, as a whole, was great, but listening to some of the commentary on the Blu-Ray from the Russos and the screenwriters seems to directly contradict how Tony's story arc actually emerged onscreen. Tony was BY FAR the more sympathetic character when compared with Steve - I can't tell you the number of people who have said they went in to the movie as Team Cap and came out solidly on Tony's side.It's pretty clear the Avengers DO need accountability - an idea that Tony, by reason, rationality, and almost pleading, tried to get across to the stolidly non-responsive Steve. If 117 countries say so, then something needs fixing. You can't just imperially say "our hands are the best hands" -- that's a dangerous notion, and says who, anyway?Chris Evans' s Cap, in fact, was a stubborn lump throughout this movie (what the heck WAS his motivation for refusing the Accords - especially when it was clear that they were open to negotiation and discussion??) -- only coming to life at certain times (the church scene was nice...) while RDJ simply blew everyone else off the screen with his emotion-driven arc.I simply found this movie very one-sided, as much as I liked it. Cap's side and his bullheaded stubbornness were never explained clearly, while Tony (with MUCH less screen time) got to portray a fully realized argument and a full range of emotions explaining and illuminating his side and his feelings. Some critics and fans are calling this "Iron Man 4," with very good reason. As one major critic said, it's odd that the movie is called "Captain America" when Captain America is the least interesting character in it.

This movie made me always thinking if this the lost of Avengers movie that should be made it in as an Avengers 3 before Infinity War and lat minutes put in Captain America movieline. Anyway it's really good story telling that never get me bored from beginning till the end and awesome picture quality in 4k HDR.

Brilliant movie

Really happy can have the greatest episode of Captain America with great picture. But unfortunately condition of this item isn't same with the catalogue. There is no sleeve of Iron Man of it, just the ordinary cover. Actually I order it because it has the sleeve of Iron Man but in fact I can't have it as the catalogue is.

It didnt come with the Iron Man limited Edition sleeve, even though it said it would, and the picture had the sleeve.

Great movie and excellent picture and sound.Doesn't quite live up to Captain America: Winter Solider but still deserves a place in your collection.