The way it's done in this movie, it's actually a better allegory. Captain America is the American government, and in his zeal to "protect", he refuses to be bound by the UN, and as a result, ends up doing a whole lot more harm than good - and if he'd just trusted the others properly, they could have gotten out of the situation diplomatically.

It's possible that Bucky represents Israel.

I could construct an entire analogy between the movie and real world political stuff, but I'll leave it there.

Not exactly.  The super soldier serum puts Steve Rogers at the peak of human potential.  In the comics, that means being able to bench about 800 lbs, but in the ultimate universe he's significantly stronger and was able to stand toe to toe with hulk..  In the movie universe, they never exactly explain how strong he is, but it seems that across the movies, he's been consistently stronger than Spider-man. Speaking of Cap and Spiderman, they were able to take down the Hulk together. So if Cap and Spider-man can take down the Hulk, Winter Soldier and Cap taking out an emotionally disturbed Iron Man doesn't seem like a stretch.

Cap should have had an easy time with Spidey in this movie.  Strength difference aside, Spider-man is still young, and not a trained fighter.  He mentions specifically how he's overwhelmed by his senses.  Captain America is far more experienced in combat.  And btw, Captain America did fight Spiderman in the Civil War Comic and he came out of it ok.

Cap has consistently been shown to be a match for Iron Man.  He's far more skilled, and like we saw in the movie, he can target specific parts of the armor.  Plus, he wasn't alone in the fight as he had Bucky with him. If you don't like that, you'd have to blame the source material rather than the movie.

That's really besides the point.  Yes, he knew that it was a Hydra Agent, but why couldn't an agent of Hydra, or some other organization, infliltrate the UN?  And in fact, that is almost exactly what happened in the movie.  Zemo infiltrated the UN and turned Bucky all Winter Soldier again.  That's just one instance, but why couldn't that happen higher in the hierarchy?  Remember SHIELD is an organization specifically designed for espionage, and even they became compromised.  The UN is far less prepared for something like this than SHIELD was.

And Cap didn't want to be the one to take Bucky in just cause he was awesome, or entirely to keep Bucky safe.  Cap also recognized that Bucky was incredibly dangerous, and likely being mind controlled.  However, even when being controlled, Bucky saved Cap in the last movie, something we were reminded of.  Cap thought he had the best chance of being able to reach him as opposed to others who may be killed in the struggle.  There are several factors involved.


As for your main complaint, how do you suggest they work it out?  You're ignoring the fact that Tony and Cap shaking hands and agreeing to disagree wouldn't have solved much.  There were other forces at play.  If Iron Man says "hey you're right Cap" then they're all fugitives from the law, and their are going to be a lot of people after then, not least of all the US government (Ross tends to be very stubborn on these things) and the Wakandan army (which has crazy technology and just had two national tragedy involving Avengers members).  Then the Avengers spend time running from the government instead of doing anything productive.  With 170 nations against them

Cap agreeing would mean that Bucky dies, and the Avengers are controlled by an unweildy at best and compromised at worst organization.  If there's anything Cap's shown over the years is that he's principled and loyal. 

I just kind of don't see the compromise here.  At best they could temporarily put their differences aside till they deal with Zemo (which makes Tony Stark and the rest of his team accessories to a crime), but that wouldn't be a long term solution.

No offense, but it seems like you didn't really want to like this movie.  In your OP, you say that Captain America was a mediocre character, then you're complaining about Captain America doing the kinds of Captain America stuff he does in the comics.  So, it seems pretty likely that you weren't going to like this. 

MC : fromm 88 to 74 WTH HAPPEN? xD

I take none. And I really wanted to like this movie, especially after what TAoU was. But YOU do much a better job at getting points explained than the movie ever tries to, so my view stands.

Not surprised a bit. Its sad that we live in a day and age when marvel movies of these caliber can generate excitement, but oh well, until DC steps up their game big time, this will be the go-to universe for most fans.

The reason I do a better job of explaining things than the movie does is because... I'm not a movie.  I don't have to be exciting and engaging at all times, I don't have a plot to convey in a limited amount of time, I don't have to make sure my dialogue flows naturally, and so on.  I don't have to be the least bit subtle about it.  My only job is to explain it to you.  If Iron Man and Captain America sat their spitting out exposition, it would make for a really clunky and boring film.

But, I didn't have some special ability or anything that allowed me to get these points.  I think that they were all pretty easy inferences to make from the film.  It's far better when movies show you instead of telling you, and respect their audience enough to not bludgeon them with exposition.

First off, Aunt May was way sexier in the Sam Raimi version.

Other than that, the points seem minor, except for the last one.

On that note, there is a big difference between changing Zemo and changing characters like Batman or Superman.  The difference is that nobody really gives a fuck about Zemo.

Nobody came to the movie thinking "man I really can't wait to see Baron Zemo on the big screen"!  Baron Zemo is nobody's favorite character, except for like one weird German dude.  Fans don't give a shit about them changing Zemo, because nobody gives a shit about Zemo.

Batman and Superman are different.  Lots of people give shits about them.  People came to see that movie specifically because they wanted to see Batman and Superman.  These are arguably the two most iconic characters in comicdom, and they have very passionate fans.  

In short, the reason people care about Batman killing people and not about Zemo not being all ugly and purple is the same reason that you complained about Baron Zemo but didn't complain about the changes made to Miriam Sharpe (the black woman in the movie who lost her son).  It's not the principle of changing things, it's just that we care about certain characters and how they're portrayed, and we don't care about others.

That's a very good question, Rol.

I liked some superhero movies as pop corn flicks in the past, but now, they are hardly entertaining. Not because the quality dropped, it's just that I don't find pop-cron flicks entertaining anymore. I may still be entertained by Spider-man 2. I thought Watchmen was great and not just entertaining when I watched it years ago. I can only think of these two because they left a stronger impression than the rest.

Recent, I caved in and gave up to the hype of recent Marvel superhero movies; Avengers, CA: Civil War & Guardians of the Galaxy. Let's just say they left zero impression on me, I already forgot most of Civil War and I watched it last night. 

I was actually competing Zemo to Luthor.  He's one of Cap's biggest and most recognized villains.  I think only red skull is more recognized.  He was even Citizen V, leader of the Thunderbolts.

But yeah. People don't read comics so I see what you're saying. They just complain about what they think they know about comics. Basically, they want what they're familiar with. Marvel gives people what they want to see and that works out pretty well for them.

I put that post together in seconds. I barely tried. I could tear the film a new ass with inconsistencies and such but, truth be told, I loved it. I love most comic book films. I grew up in the 90's! I appreciate what we have, now!