It feels like this line of thinking has a lot to do with Civil War not having a traditional superhero villain or at least one that we've been conditioned to recognize. If Tony wasn't Tony and was more typical antagonist for Cap and pursuing him, that would have changed the outlook of the movie. But I'm still not…

The only reason you'd include Mar-Vell is because of some weird dedication to comics continuity and that doesn't make a ton of sense. Boiling down Carol's origin is just her contact to the Kree.

I'm pretty sure he got the confirmation he needed through the dude's ledger.

They'd be different if they were still in their early 20s.

I guess the issue is that if you position Cap as one of the main poles of an ever expanding Marvel Universe, it's very hard at this point to give an entirely solo movie (because big things are going to happen) and not involve everyone else.

Well, I mean, one of the points with Cap is reassuring despite things like the passage of time that he's not an out of touch person. Also, coming to conclusion that your values are generally still decent despite the systems that you continue to put faith in crumble around you has been a theme since the First Avenger.

I find it vaguely hilarious people bring up Mar-Vell (or rather if they're going to introduce him) in regards to Carol Danvers getting a movie. This is a character who died in 1982 after his own solo title had been canceled.

Kurt Busiek did a break down of how troublesome sticking to the origins of Dr. Strange and Iron Fist is in this context. Dr. Strange for instance was drawn by Ditko with very stereotypical Asian features that got (for lack of a better term) whitened several issues later when they assign an origin to him. And this is…

The cover of the issue he was married in (or at least the announcement) sure as hell looked that way.

Right, Peter's outlook is fine when he's between 15 and 22 but becomes a bit of nuance when he's doing this kind of shit and pushing 30. Balancing his life when he's younger is just something kids do with a lot of things because in the grand scheme of things, nothing should necessarily hold all encompassing…

Well, the arguments they lay out when Ross shows up with the Accords isn't really what the conflict is about (nor is Bucky for that matter) and it's more a question of control. Steve's argument eventually isn't that they're a bad idea in theory but more who gets to make the decision about what the Avengers do and…

He's more upset that it wasn't a discussion but instead Tony unilaterally deciding what was best for Wanda and if she wasn't being clearly reprimanded, it's also something Tony is doing directly against her will.

I mean, he kind of did in his opening segment commenting on how Trump is still here despite him (Oliver) "destroying [Trump]" or other variations.

"You know, though today was the worst day of my life, I learned many things. First, the world looks a lot different when you're six inches tall and covered with feathers. Second, two heads are definitely not better than one. And finally, you can lay eggs and still feel like a man."

I've done this before, trying to get Tick's rants verbatim is difficult stuff.

The mouse is on fire?

This would seriously break Fox News…they'd still be dissecting how "awful" and "dangerous" the video is right now.

I mean, it happens in public too. It's not really about anonymity but more where a certain type of person feel comfortable making really terrible statements because they genuinely feel there will be zero repercussions. Hell, this election cycle should certainly prove that it's not really an Internet problem.

3a.) Showing her tits.

I think an important point to make also is that they're not asking for input. People like Feig and Whedon are getting these kinds of for just creating something and not because they opened up some option for conversation. It's this weird idea that because they are public after a fashion that that inherently opens…