It really couldn’t be anyone else now.
It actually makes more sense for Captain America to be for registration and Iron Man - given the personality established for Tony Stark - to be against it.
Very interesting that Hollywood would be sponsoring, so to speak, a debate on government regulation. Also interesting to me is that Stark famously thumbed his nose at the government in a showy Congressional hearing in Iron Man 2, proclaiming himself The Private Sector Peace Solution or something like that. I wonder if anybody in the movie will point that out.
That said, most of those guys need to carry about half a trillion in casualty insurance each. You see one of those guys out your window, you might as well start looking for a job in another state.
Though brainless, in fact Winter Soldier was relevant —touched on themes of World Gummint, domestic spying, etc.
To my amazement, Hollywood seems a little conflicted about the super Stalin-esque stuff.
For something like Civil War, you need more than 10 or 12 Superheroes to be meaningful.
~Spartan
Join the 300 by donating $100!
click the pic
Not dissing you or the thread...
My panties will never dry.
When is this ...movie ...coming out?
Sorry I will be in the shower...
Or re watching Magnificent Seven.
That cover art leaves a lot to be desired. Is that supposed to be Spider-Man in the middle?
I wish Gweneth Paltrow won’t be in it.
Let's take a look at how superheros would play out in real life. Tony Stark is a private citizen who made his own personal weapons and carries them around with him. His armor has what the BATF would classify as destructive devices (the repulsors, the explosive missiles, etc). His armor allows him to fly high in the sky, and the FAA doesn't bother him about that. Billionaire or not, does anybody here think that the feds wouldn't put somebody like that in jail?
Meanwhile, what's Captain America got? He's strong and fast (no laws covering that) and he's got a shield (no law against that).
