I am with Matt on this but I am on my iPad and can't tl;dr with the backup here. But, yeah.

Sorry, I don't think you get to be the hero when you say "I don't care that someone wasn't responsible for his actions; I'ma kill him anyway."

Yeah, well, if Steve had seen a video of Rhodey going back in time and holding a pillow over Mrs. Roger's face in the sanitorium until she stopped moving, I question whether his first response would be, "I wonder what external factors brought Tony's BFF to this point? Perhaps I should explore further before reacting."

One of the major plot points was a villain manipulating T'Challa and Tony to break up the Avengers. He was good at it. That doesn't excuse Tony, and T'Challa is easily the hero of the movie because he got past it first and best. But there are limits to how much I'll hate on Tony for reacting to having his buttons pushed so well.

One thing I've questioned throughout is why the heck they're trusting the UN. It's a major plot point that Hydra has infiltrated deep within governmental power structures. Was there some massive de-Hydration at the UN that occurred between movies? 'Cause I wouldn't trust a single governmental or supra-governmental entity to run a group of superheroes without it. And Tony would be stupid to trust them, no matter how tired he is of having the responsibility for their actions.

One of the major plot points was a villain manipulating T'Challa and Tony to break up the Avengers. He was good at it. That doesn't excuse Tony, and T'Challa is easily the hero of the movie because he got past it first and best. But there are limits to how much I'll hate on Tony for reacting to having his buttons pushed so well.

Agreed, 100%.

Yeah, well, if Steve had seen a video of Rhodey going back in time and holding a pillow over Mrs. Roger's face in the sanitorium until she stopped moving, I question whether his first response would be, "I wonder what external factors brought Tony's BFF to this point? Perhaps I should explore further before reacting."

To go apples to apples, if Steve already knew that Rhodey had been tortured and brainwashed/wiped/frozen for nearly 70 years before doing so, I don't think he'd have reacted the way that Tony did to the video. Tony knew who Barnes was and knew what he'd been through.

Tony's reaction is very much an expected Tony reaction, but it's absolutely a reaction coming from the worst parts of his personality, much like his reaction to blasting Sam after Rhodey fell. Which is even less excusable, frankly. Given the givens and the situation and OMG, so wrong of Tony. Appallingly wrong of Tony. As Matt says:

From a perspective of potential harm, siccing Vision on the opposing team was a bigger blunder. He's the one that was knocking down whole buildings, and used a ranged attack on a normal human that was capable of disabling an Iron Man suit.

He's not even an antagonist, not really, IMO.

He is, though. A sympathetic one, and one where we're supposed to see that many of his points are valid, but he's still an antagonist in the movie.

One thing I've questioned throughout is why the heck they're trusting the UN.

Just based off the actual factual UN, I had that question, myself.

Randomly, What I keep feeling gets left out of the discussion WRT to CA:CW, and this isn't really about anything we've been talking about here, more about almost two years of Captain America Discussion: Civil War elsewhere (and, man, I was merrily over in my Cap side of the MCU fandom and had no idea how fucking BATSHIT many of my long-time not-here friends were about Tony, all of them talking about it through the lens of their identification with him, and holy fucking shitballs, wow), is that Steve, who we actually saw reading through the fucking accords and studying them before he got the text about Peggy, who wasn't against oversight as a concept, but was against oversight as spelled out there, was going to effectively retire (I mean, LBR, he would have continued the hunt for Bucky, probably intervened in an unofficial capacity if necessary, and I wish they'd kept the scene where he and Sharon are explicitly talking about his future lack of plans) until the UN bombing.

His initial motive after that was "there's a kill order out on my best friend who was brainwashed and tortured and I can't let that happen, FFS, due process, damn it". Not "fuck them, I'm back in the game with no supervision!"

Ahem. ANYHOW.

One of the major plot points was a villain manipulating T'Challa and Tony to break up the Avengers. He was good at it. That doesn't excuse Tony, and T'Challa is easily the hero of the movie because he got past it first and best. But there are limits to how much I'll hate on Tony for reacting to having his buttons pushed so well.

I don't hate Tony! I just think that he was in the wrong for ways that make sense for the character, including the part where he suffers from thinking he knows better than anyone about anything, therefore he knows what's best for everyone than anyone, and won't listen to anyone else as a result, especially when he's emotionally compromised.

Actual tactical planning, especially on the fly tactical planning, is not a strength for him, especially when he's emotionally compromised. (It is for Steve, even when he's emotionally compromised, perhaps especially when he's emotionally compromised--see First Avenger--because Steve Rogers is a tactical thinker who lacks any sense of self-preservation.)

This was the short version.

Note: my collection I was making for a while with random snippets of My Thoughts on Civil War was well over 4k.

He's not even an antagonist, not really, IMO.

He is, though. A sympathetic one, and one where we're supposed to see that many of his points are valid, but he's still an antagonist in the movie.

I guess I could accept that, but calling him a villain is a bridge too far for me. (I know that you didn't call Tony a villain, Plei, but Gris and Matt did, and I really just don't see that.)

I'm with Teppy.

Matt called out a couple of Tony's specific actions as befitting of a bad guy, and I don't disagree. What he did with Wanda was beyond the pale.

Ugh. On phone! Just had a thought re: their personality differences and how they define justice and ::hands:: I can't work if out here, and I would have to rewatch all the solo movies, but it also ties into some 616 stuff and, yeah.

I started a kerfuffle!

Sorry. I honestly don't like Civil War enough to have thought it through this much, so feel free to solidly ignore my opinion. I definitely meant antagonist more than villain, though.

Actual tactical planning, especially on the fly tactical planning, is not a strength for him, especially when he's emotionally compromised. (It is for Steve, even when he's emotionally compromised, perhaps especially when he's emotionally compromised--see First Avenger--because Steve Rogers is a tactical thinker who lacks any sense of self-preservation.)

To give credit where credit is due, I think Tony's actually quite good at on-the-fly tactical planning (see: saving the Helicarrier, blowing up that leviathan, and redirecting the nuke in Avengers and figuring out how to disintegrate Sokovia before impact in Age of Ultron). What he's terrible at is overall strategy and allowing for other people's input when determining objectives.