Which film handled the theme of superhero accountability better? Captain America Civil War or Batman v Superman?

when fighting saying they shouldn't put people in danger, the Avengers were messing up an international airport

did Vision know there wasn't anyone in the control tower he destroyed?

and Cap was saying how we should be held accountable for our actions, but he should be able to go anywhere he wants and have no accountability to superiors, also Buckys his briend, nobody touch him

I'll go BvS

BvS outright called out Superman for the destruction that was basically unavoidable collateral damage and carried on with that theme for majority of movie. Civil War had just one, albeit good, discussion about a rookie mistake and then threw it all out of window to focus on Bucky. I loved CW, but BvS definitely did it better.

Pretty Much.

@rbt: That was an unusual decision on the Russo's part. I feel like it would've been better if they just choose a reason for The Avengers turning on each other as opposed to trying to do everything at once. Still, loved the movie and enjoyed it more than BvS. But there lack of focus on what caused the "Civil War" is a valid criticism.

BvS. Most of what Superman dealt with was distrust from the government because of what went down in MoS.

Bvs flat out called Superman to court. bvs for sure.

Civil War is more realistic. Who dafuq would take Superman fo court?

Yeah, I liked CW a tad bit more as well.

Definitely BvS.

They both drop the ball in that respect at points. But CW

Zemo did everything he did because of Sokovia. The Accords were brought forth by Tony creating Ultron.

Any major plot point instigated by the events in MOS are ruined by film's end.

Beata

batman vs superman is a masterpiece - (denial people)

It was a culmination of many things that caused the Civil War.

Beata

Civil war did better. They had a meeting with the secretary of State on this matter. They were literally forced to join the government because of their mistakes. There was also a court type of meeting with not just one country but the entire U.N. They made a prison for super powered individuals as well. The airport was abandoned like the port the trinity was in.

Definitely Civil War. Batman v Superman was more of a philosophy lecture than anything else. Civil War really presented superheroes confronted with realistic legal and ethical questions.

I agree.

Captain America: Civil War

This shouldn't even be a thread. They called superman out and did what exactly??????

The UN basically told the avengers they run shit and actually took action.

CW since the repercussions will be felt for multiple films, or should be felt for multiple films. Still liked BvS (by that I mean the UE) more though.

Civil War. BVS had the same amount of repercussions as a high school drama play.

CW

Batman v. Superman. I can't take the government seriously when they blame the Avengers collateral damage, but they were also going to nuke an entire city hoping that would somehow end an alien armada.

@the_man_with_questions:

Technically it's SHIELD who ordered nuclear strike not government.

@nightmare52: It was actually the world security council.

BvS thanks to the opening scene alone.

Honestly it's a solid tie for me on this one. Both movies were basically saying, nah you can't just wreck **** and not face consequences whether it was your fault or not, if you if you perform the illegal act of vigilantism: there will be consequences.

Um in Batman v Superman they took him to a senate hearing because they thought he murdered some African Warlord and his henchmen. What do you mean collateral damage? Cause they didn't take him to court over the first movie(although that would have made more sense.

That was the old regime of Shield that was going to nuke the city, not the government they were dealing with in civil war . Furthermore when the government does something it's a sanctioned act by you the voter, when an individual does something rouge it's illegal. The government employee cop can shoot a suspect in the head if he feels he is a threat. You the individual cannot point blank shoot someone in the head and expect there not to be consequences(not trying to be snarky, just saying).

Neither. Civil War placed the theme on a backburner to a stupid convoluted plot about Bucky Barnes that simultaneously made Baron Zemo the most generic, nonsensical villain ever. Besides a throwaway line or two, the theme was mainly used as a premise to set up giant action set pieces. BvS was incoherent trash as a whole, so obviously the theme of accountability was lost in it as well. The sad thing is is that a Superman movie would be one of the best places to actually explore the theme properly, as the comics have done frequently (Kingdom Come, Red Son, All Star Superman, etc).

If Marvel wants to explore the theme, I would like to see it done by Sony, not Disney. Mainly because Sony has a better track record with semi-serious storytelling, and also because the theme has been an interwoven stalwart with the X-Men franchise since its inception. Civil War was mainly a thinly veiled allegory on gun control (which for some reason decided to turn Tony Stark into a Nazi because subtle storytelling is for people who don't want to make money) that had an interesting premise but ultimately fell flat in execution. Interestingly enough though, I actually thought Tony Stark's personal series tie-in with that event (the Civil War: Iron Man series) was actually pretty impactful. Maybe if they had done Civil War in an Iron Man movie instead of a Cap one it would have been better.

BvS

BvS started really well. There was intense discussions, debates on how everything changes when superman appeared. our place in the universe, how superman should act, on whose authority. There were talks about the casualties of war. In contrast, the MCU doesn't even debate how everything changed when Thor a God/Alien appears on earth. They are just too happy to join Nick Fury's boy band. The gov't doesn't have much say in matters of Shield. Off course there's the world security council but there's no mention of how the Genral public feels about the Avengers. Only when the earth was on the brink of global extinction due to Tony Stark's stupid decisions (seriously he's making AI robots and doesn't even inform the World Security council or UN). In the DCEU, the govt seems to be powerful. The army knows stuff about superheroes, the secret identities. Look at Amanda Waller.

But then by the end both movies kinda went jar jar binks on the concept of accountability. BvS became a movie about philosophy, journalism and courtroom politics and civil war just ignored the concept and let Avengers destroy an airport in a battle of egos. that's like millions of dollars of public property.

Neither.

Almost literally half of BvS was about the accountability of Supe's, building up to it with the news, interviews, politicians, public opinions etc and that whole theme was scraped away by an exploding wheelchair.....Boom....problem solved...no more need about talking about accountability any more, even though half the film was based upon that film gg.

The Airport scene happened. Nuff said. Though the Govt. did take action already with the sub prison so good job.

I wasn't talking about court scene specifically. Majority of movie was focused on collateral damage that happened during MoS. How Clark was dealing with it and how others were.

@rbt: Outside of Batman and Lex Luthor's personal grudge, the movie (IMO) actually spent more time on asking should Superman be saving people when each time he interferes it has political and economic consequences. Zack Synder himself said this in interviews. This movie was a direct follow up to those collideral damage questions, but I don't think the movie was really focused on that. Especially considering that Batman himself wrecks a bunch of **** and Lex creates a wrecking **** creature. So I don't think the movie or Superman's main character opposition cares about the collateral damage so much as they cared one person had all that power.

Batman killing left and right was also questioned in the movie. By Clark Kent. And there was a news telecast outright saying that Batman is pretty much killing criminals by branding them.

Batman's grudge was the focal point of the story.

@rbt: Yes, that's my point Batman's grudge had more importance, not questions about collateral damage.

Batman's grudge originated from the collateral damage that happened in MoS.

@rbt: But, he really doesn't care about the idea of collateral damage. He only cares because people he personally knew died. That's what I mean by the movie didn't care about collateral damage.

He did though. The scene with him and the little girl that he didn't know was there to show that he wasn't pissed just because of death of people he knew. He was pissed because of every death that was caused indirectly by Superman.

@mrnoital: uh, yes, vision did know

Considering it was literally stated that the entire airport was y'know, evacuated?

@mike_fowler: when? I really don't remember that, who said it?

Vision was causing hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage when he could physically stop Cap and Bucky no problem, and he was supposed to be on the responsible side

Civil War, but neither of them handled the themes as good as they could of been handled.

@mrnoital:

It was said right before the battle started when Cap first meets Ant-Man IIRC, that's how they realize that Tony and the others have arrived.

The responsible side were the ones that evacuated the area before the battle began. Collateral damage like that isn't a problem because

A) Civilian casualties were avoided

B) They were government-sanctioned to do it.

@mike_fowler: but they also cause millions in damage, hundreds of thousands was underestimating it

and the one that caused it could have stopped them without causing that damage, he could have flown over there and just take them down, but instead he destroys a control tower, that didn't even work

and he could have still went after them after seeing that damaging an important part of an international airport didn't work , really Vision is most responsible for Cap and Bucky getting away

@mike_fowler: Vision used his powers irresponsibly and caused public damage and almost killed Rhodey, and if he his Flacon he probably would have died from the fall

he did everything they were supposed to be preventing

He did that cause he let himself be distracted (which he admitted to), and no, falcon wouldn't have died. He would've glided down (that's what Vision was aiming at and Rhodey told him to "make Sam into a glider")