The Falcon & Winter Soldier

[Spacewolf]

Because decieving and hitting on her great-aunt's boyfriend while secretly being an undercover agent is so heroic.

You mean doing her job in a way that doesn't hurt anyone and flirting with a guy who is obviously into her who she later had a relationship with.
I mean if you want to try twisting things that much let me give you caps "villainous" actions, dating someone who is much younger than him as she was grieving for the death of her family member and using that to pressure her into breaking the law to the point she had to leave her home behind then never contacting her again, leaving her in a position of destitution and driving her into crime before he left to date her aunt. See how easy that was? But also see how against what we know of the characters actions it is?

[Tyrant]

Every where I go in Phoenix, I see girls between the ages of 7 and 13 or so wearing captain marvel shirts. Everywhere. That's my basis for saying they hit it out of the park on that movie. Regardless of however many 40 year old white men find "issue" with it.

Hyperbolic anecdotes? Surely that will change people's mind. I don't see anyone, regardless of gender or age, wearing Captain Marvel shirts aside from occasionally at conventions. Also, how does them being white matter at all to the non-issue at hand? Just accept that there are people who don't like this movie and move on. Not everything needs to become a persecution complex.

[Rakaydos]

You mean doing her job in a way that doesn't hurt anyone and flirting with a guy who is obviously into her who she later had a relationship with.
I mean if you want to try twisting things that much let me give you caps "villainous" actions, dating someone who is much younger than him as she was grieving for the death of her family member and using that to pressure her into breaking the law to the point she had to leave her home behind then never contacting her again, leaving her in a position of destitution and driving her into crime before he left to date her aunt. See how easy that was? But also see how against what we know of the characters actions it is?

She was in Shield. Project Insight wasnt a dealbreaker for anyone until Captian showed up, because Hydra didnt want goody twoshoes up in their bisness.

Switching to being an upstanding citizen while Cap is around is just more camouflage.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
I also can't say that I have seen folks of any age wearing Capt Marvel merch, or cosplaying her.

Originally Posted by Tyrant
I don't see anyone, regardless of gender or age, wearing Captain Marvel shirts aside from occasionally at conventions.

I haven’t been to a convention in many years, so can’t speak to that aspect of the fan base.

But like the above, I haven’t seen anyone wearing a Captain Marvel shirt out in the ordinary world.

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
Harley Quinn? Popular as hell, despite my dislike of her movie.

As a very general impression, it does seem that Harley Quinn is hella better known than Captain Marvel.

Spoiler: Harley's Movie

Show

Tyndmyr, do you mean S****** S****, or the Birds of Prey movie?

I’ve been tempted to rent Birds of Prey just for the mindless fun, but I have a feeling that the clips I’ve seen on YouTube are probably all the best parts.

[Tyndmyr]

Amazing. A hyper sexualized skimpy dressed batman villain sells well to the portion of the audience that goes to conventions, but not a female-empowerment figure dressed in a conservative full body suit who is routinely derided and dismissed by a certain vocal-male-dominant element (who largely are convention goers) because of the very qualities that make her appeal to a different target of the audience.

Never would've imagined. I wonder if we could figure out why.

If you're arguing it's just a gender thing, there is absolutely no shortage of cosplay as Harley either. So, whatever it is about the character appeals to both. Not a character that I particularly care for, and you may not either, but what is popular overall isn't about one's personal preferences. Objectively, there's an awful lot of Batman, Harley, Iron Man, Star Wars, various anime , a dash of stuff like Warhammer 40k, and so on. Some things catch the imagination, some don't.

It's not quite so simple as showing skin, as characters who show skin in comics are honestly not rare, and yet many of those characters also do not become popular. Also, more retro takes on Harley are not particularly revealing, and are also fairly frequent.

Spoiler: Harley's Movie

Show

Tyndmyr, do you mean S****** S****, or the Birds of Prey movie?

I’ve been tempted to rent Birds of Prey just for the mindless fun, but I have a feeling that the clips I’ve seen on YouTube are probably all the best parts.

Editing this in, because I never miss a chance to rip on either film.

Spoiler

Show

Either, honestly. Birds of Prey is the worse film of the two. Suicide Squad is a very rough film to watch, but...one at least can watch it. Mostly to mock it granted, but there's at least small nuggets of promise. Deadshot is engaging when he's the focus character. Diablo has potential even if it's mostly wasted...in Birds of Prey, there's legitimately almost nothing redeeming. Most of the experience is just waiting for it to end. Even by the standards of DC, it's really, really rough.

If you watch it, you're mostly just confused as to how Harley hasn't died yet, and kind of rooting for that to finally change. If you do opt to watch it, I'll be curious as to your reaction.

[Psyren]

In terms of audience reviews, Rotten Tomatoes puts the film at 45% fresh on the audience score.

Yeah, I'm sure all of that is due to the film's objective quality, and has nothing to do with the very vocal contingent of the internet that despises Brie Larson personally and was coordinating review-bombs of the movie before it even released. No issues with the audience score whatsoever. *eyeroll*

Only if you insist that dollars equal quality, which is dubious.

1) Are you measuring quality or popularity? Based on quality you have no objective evidence, only subjective (and anecdotal) opinions. And based on popularity, dollars absolutely speak to that.
2) It's no more dubious than the opposite, which is that it's "bottom half" based on no evidence beyond "I personally don't know anyone who likes it." Well, I do.

[Tyndmyr]

Yeah, I'm sure all of that is due to the film's objective quality, and has nothing to do with the very vocal contingent of the internet that despises Brie Larson personally and was coordinating review-bombs of the movie before it even released. No issues with the audience score whatsoever. *eyeroll*

The review does only tell you that people expressed dislike, not exactly why. Personal dislike of the actors/actresses can be a factor, sure.

That said, it has been quite some time since release. Most of the egregious bad data has probably been caught if it's ever going to be. How much you do or don't think the reviews are fair is up to you. If I had to rank it myself, I'd put it above Thor 2, I think. Thor 2 felt remarkably bland to me, and I think audiences overrated that.

I also tend to think people give actors too much credit/blame for good/bad movies. A *lot* of that is on the writing. It's really hard to find an amazing actor that hasn't been in some truly terrible films, and it feels a bit unfair to put all that blame on them. People almost invariably end up bashing the visible face when they hate a film.

That's not wholly fair, but it doesn't excuse the film, either. For Star Wars Ep 8, yeah, the movie sucked, but the actress playing Rose had pretty much zero responsibility for that. I think it's fair to rip on the movie, and to recognize that probably a lot of the hatred directed at individuals is...misplaced. Perhaps earned in some manner, but necessarily not by the target. If you want to bash Disney for a bad film, have at it.

So, to at least some degree, if everyone hates the film enough to bash it, you have to stop and wonder why. Just because you don't care for the reason doesn't entirely invalidate the dislike. And perhaps the enunciated reasons for the dislike are poorly thought out, or don't accurately describe the problem with the movie, sure. Still, dislike does not translate to popularity.

1) Are you measuring quality or popularity? Based on quality you have no objective evidence, only subjective (and anecdotal) opinions. And based on popularity, dollars absolutely speak to that.

Dollars do matter, but are you going to honestly argue that Iron Man 1 is the bottom of the MCU films? It is ranked #19 by international box office, after all.

It had a relatively smaller box office because it is early in the MCU, but it represents a *massive* step forward relative to when it was released. Just lining up dollar values doesn't accurately capture that. What matters is what it did relative to the state at the time.

IM #1 more than doubled the results of the only preceding MCU film, the Hulk. That's a huge movie to movie gain. If we're going by changes, that rates IM 1 as well liked.

Infinity war clocked in north of 2 billion dollars, anything following that was going to do at least decently well. Even if you insist that the crossover movies are a different class than the solo films, there's a bigger percentage wise dropoff from Infinity war to Captain Marvel than there was from Avengers to Iron Man 3. That's about as apples to apples a comparison as you can get, as IM 3 was also weak, and was also following a super popular film. There's a roughly 20% dropoff from Avenger to IM 3, and there's about a 55% dropoff from IW to Capt Marvel.

[Tyrant]

If you're arguing it's just a gender thing, there is absolutely no shortage of cosplay as Harley either. So, whatever it is about the character appeals to both. Not a character that I particularly care for, and you may not either, but what is popular overall isn't about one's personal preferences. Objectively, there's an awful lot of Batman, Harley, Iron Man, Star Wars, various anime , a dash of stuff like Warhammer 40k, and so on. Some things catch the imagination, some don't.

It's not quite so simple as showing skin, as characters who show skin in comics are honestly not rare, and yet many of those characters also do not become popular. Also, more retro takes on Harley are not particularly revealing, and are also fairly frequent.

My experience is going to GenCon every year since it moved to Indianapolis with a few comic conventions here and there. I saw lots of Harley Quinn well before she was in a movie. At that point, it was her outfit from the Animated Series. I still see that outfit, though it is more the Suicide Squad type outfits that I have seen lately. Movie Mystique is naked. I have seen maybe 3 of her in 16 years of going to GenCon. I believe I have seen more of her comic outfit (the white dress with skull belt, not the black Sarah Connor commando-esque outfit) than I have her movie version.

As for Captain Marvel, by the other outfits I see, there would be more of her if she were more popular. I see a whole lot of lazy costumes that are literally just a body suit. For every person that puts in some effort to make an Iron Man outfit that looks close to the movies, I see several that are a body suit (or in the particular case of Stark, a suit with an open jacket and a blue light under their shirt). Captain Marvel's outfit is just a body suit. It would actually be movie accurate, and easy.

That's not to say sex appeal doesn't factor into these things. If it didn't I wouldn't see multiple Slave Leia costumes every year or a virtually no clothes Poison Ivy every year. But, I see a whole lot of things that aren't that. I see a lot that are very elaborate outfits that have nothing to do with sex appeal or skimpiness.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
Birds of Prey is the worse film of the two.

I…hadn’t thought that was possible.

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
If you do opt to watch it, I'll be curious as to your reaction.

Thanks, but you’ve just saved me $3.99 and two hours of regret.

I tried watching Alien Resurrection a couple nights ago, and that was so unspeakably awful I could barely force my way through the first hour. At least I didn’t pay anything for that one.

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
Thor 2 felt remarkably bland to me, and I think audiences overrated that.

Tastes certainly differ. I really enjoyed Dark World, mainly for the second act. The “dark elves” are utterly ridiculous on too many levels to name, but I still manage to have fun with it.

Originally Posted Tyndmyr
It's really hard to find an amazing actor that hasn't been in some truly terrible films, and it feels a bit unfair to put all that blame on them.

Very much agreed. Case in point, Alien Resurrection. Sigourney Weaver did the best job she could with the material, but every single other actor in the movie was either devoid of talent or catastrophically off their game.

And in fact, although Joss Whedon blamed the acting and directing (which were indeed awful) the fact is that the script for that move was terrible. When you start with a lousy script, or even a weak one, it’s almost impossible to transcend it.

[Gallowglass]

Hyperbolic anecdotes? Surely that will change people's mind. I don't see anyone, regardless of gender or age, wearing Captain Marvel shirts aside from occasionally at conventions. Also, how does them being white matter at all to the non-issue at hand? Just accept that there are people who don't like this movie and move on. Not everything needs to become a persecution complex.

Hyperbolic anecdotes are all anyone is offering yet in this discussion. I don't see why I should be held to a higher standard of proof when I'm at least cognizant that I'm arguing my opinion and not some objective fact. And, in all my years on this forum I don't think I've ever seen anyone change their mind. If so, it's a rare unicorn.

I will accept that there are people who don't like this movie, and move on, just as soon as you accept that there are people who DO like this movie and move on. In fact, the demographics that DO like this movie are more important to the movie maker than the demographic represented by the minority voice prevalent in this discussion. Heck, I'd settle for any sense of comprehension that a personal distaste for it doesn't equal it being objectively bad or that a personal distaste for it does not prove that it is universally, or even majorly, reviled.

The funny thing here is that, for me as a viewer, CM probably _IS_ in the bottom half of the Marvel Movies. I'm pretty sure if I took them all and lined them up, there's at least 10 or more that I liked more than it. However, that doesn't mean that I think its bad. For me, the entire Marvel canon are highly rated, except for a rare few that I don't like. Avengers, Avengers: Age of Ultron, Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3 and Indelible Hulk are probably the only movies I would rank as "bad", (I hated on Joss Wheedon's Avengers movies before it was cool) everything else is high up my spectrum. Even with that, I think Iron Man 2 was far worse than Iron Man 3 which appears to be a minority view amongst the people in this discussion. (and, yeah, I liked Thor: the Dark World if only for the portal fight at the end which was hilarious and well executed)

[Tyndmyr]

I tried watching Alien Resurrection a couple nights ago, and that was so unspeakably awful I could barely force my way through the first hour. At least I didn’t pay anything for that one.

Resurrection is definitely the weakest of the original Alien quadrilogy, though AvP 2 is pretty frigging rough if we start counting the newer stuff.

Tastes certainly differ. I really enjoyed Dark World, mainly for the second act. The “dark elves” are utterly ridiculous on too many levels to name, but I still manage to have fun with it.

I may have to rewatch that at some point, It's one of the very, very few MCU films I haven't seen twice. Mmm, just that and Hulk, I think.

And in fact, although Joss Whedon blamed the acting and directing (which were indeed awful) the fact is that the script for that move was terrible. When you start with a lousy script, or even a weak one, it’s almost impossible to transcend it.

Script is huge. If nothing in the script makes any sense, the most charming performance has difficulty in redeeming it. Sometimes it is a bit difficult to imagine how someone looks at a script and thinks a movie will work out.

Granted, I know that rewrites, reshoots, editing and all that are a thing, but even so. Some of the really good movies, you can read the script and just chuckle at the back and forth. I'd cheerfully sacrifice a fair bit from the CGI budget of most films for a decent script.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
I may have to rewatch that at some point, It's one of the very, very few MCU films I haven't seen twice.

Jane Foster’s date is hilarious, mainly because of Darcy. If you’re not a Darcy fan, that scene won’t really work.

As for the second act, I enjoy the action well enough, but for me the breathless poignancy of the funeral scene is what gives the movie its real depth. Loki may be a scheming so-and-so, and we never quite trust anything he says, but you can feel that his grieving is real.

And I love the back-and-forth between Thor and Loki. There are moments of depth, and moments of wry humor. And the Warriors Three get to actually do something, and are acknowledged as loyal friends for doing it, which is more than can be said for Ragnarok.

Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
Sometimes it is a bit difficult to imagine how someone looks at a script and thinks a movie will work out.

The shooting script for Alien Resurrection was just…juvenile. Whedon may have written something better at some point, but it never made it to the set.

[Talakeal]

Dunno where the hell they're buying them. I vend conventions, or at least I did prior to covid. I have exactly one Capt Marvel baseball hat in stock. I have sold zero, ever.

I also can't say that I have seen folks of any age wearing Capt Marvel merch, or cosplaying her. There's a *lot* of cosplay at these things, but she's not a popular choice. Again, for any age.

My mom wanted to buy a Captain Marvel shirt after we saw the movie, but we couldn't find any.

[Tyrant]

Hyperbolic anecdotes are all anyone is offering yet in this discussion. I don't see why I should be held to a higher standard of proof when I'm at least cognizant that I'm arguing my opinion and not some objective fact. And, in all my years on this forum I don't think I've ever seen anyone change their mind. If so, it's a rare unicorn.

I don't see anyone else making the claim that "all" of this or that group or "none" of this or that group do or don't like the movie, aside from your claim of seeing people "everywhere" (for the given definition of "everywhere" being Phoenix). I don't have to step foot in Phoenix to know that is hyperbole, so it's pointless. Meanwhile, the primary counter anecdote is coming from someone who narrowed down the venues (conventions) and his objective measure (he sells stuff there). You're the primary source of hyperbole.

I will accept that there are people who don't like this movie, and move on, just as soon as you accept that there are people who DO like this movie and move on. In fact, the demographics that DO like this movie are more important to the movie maker than the demographic represented by the minority voice prevalent in this discussion. Heck, I'd settle for any sense of comprehension that a personal distaste for it doesn't equal it being objectively bad or that a personal distaste for it does not prove that it is universally, or even majorly, reviled.

Move on to what? I never said there aren't people who like the movie. I know a few personally. I imagine there are plenty of others. I'm not the one acting like the only reasons for people to dislike this movie are somehow tied to people's age, sex, and race. Not a good look, by the way.

Also, you're entire claim that they hit it out of the park rests on your personal experience with seeing people wearing clothing, and you're calling out others for not having rigid evidence to back up their assertions that you believe are being backed by nothing but their own projections? That's kind of rich.

[Gallowglass]

I don't see anyone else making the claim that "all" of this or that group or "none" of this or that group do or don't like the movie

Perhaps you should go back and look again.

, aside from your claim of seeing people "everywhere" (for the given definition of "everywhere" being Phoenix). I don't have to step foot in Phoenix to know that is hyperbole, so it's pointless. Meanwhile, the primary counter anecdote is coming from someone who narrowed down the venues (conventions) and his objective measure (he sells stuff there).

My point, which was clear, is that judging the response of the entire viewing population based on what he sees at conventions is self-limiting because the vast majority of viewers dont' go to conventions

Move on to what?

You are the one who said "move on". Do you not know the answer to your own question when echoed back to you?

I never said there aren't people who like the movie. I know a few personally. I imagine there are plenty of others. I'm not the one acting like the only reasons for people to dislike this movie are somehow tied to people's age, sex, and race. Not a good look, by the way.

Not what I said, not my argument. I'm not going to defend myself against your mischaracterization of what I say.
...I will say that sometimes someone says something they mean to insult you and, based on who says it, you find it feels like a badge of honor....

Also, you're entire claim that they hit it out of the park rests on your personal experience with seeing people wearing clothing, and you're calling out others for not having rigid evidence to back up their assertions that you believe are being backed by nothing but their own projections? That's kind of rich.

And with that, you go back on my ignore list where I should've left you.

[Cikomyr2]

I dunnow. The only MCU movies I thought were more pointless than not were Dark World, IM2 and Avengers Ultron. They are the only movies where I feel getting the clipnotes of the plot (or getting a "previously on The Avengers") just leads to a better experience overall.

Iron Man 3 is not everyone's cup of tea, but it's thematic of "our worst enemy is the enemy we build in our mind" is extremely cohesive between Stark's PTSD and the Mandarin being a chimera of racist tropes.

I feel Age of Ultron plot to carry a lot more the thematic regarding Stark paying for his sins than Iron Man 3. Everyone else were just incidental to the plot, everything turned around Stark, and the movie suffered because of it as an Avenger movie.

Captain Marvel is basically a soft reboot of the MCU, as it introduces the idea that SHIELD already had aliens on their radar for a long time, and sets up a whole new cosmic universe in relation to Earth in a way that GotG just never got around doing since GotG never wants to take itself seriously enough to talk about galactic politics.

Like.. Captain Marvel is to the character what The First Avenger was to Cap America. It's all setup meant to establish the character in the world and the impact (s)he had on humanity before going for a while. I am really looking forward to see what the next CM plot will be, probably the equivalent of Winter Soldier; a huge universe tent pole.

[Psyren]

Amazing. A hyper sexualized skimpy dressed batman villain sells well to the portion of the audience that goes to conventions, but not a female-empowerment figure dressed in a conservative full body suit who is routinely derided and dismissed by a certain vocal-male-dominant element (who largely are convention goers) because of the very qualities that make her appeal to a different target of the audience.

Never would've imagined. I wonder if we could figure out why.

This. And the fact that they consider these comparisons entirely valid is pretty amusing to me.

How much you do or don't think the reviews are fair is up to you.

Indeed; just as it's up to you whether or not you ignore the 79% from the actual critics as an indicator of quality, as you seem to be doing. I can't help but wonder why that is.

You brought up 2008 Incredible Hulk as a point of comparison, yet the audience and critic reception are nearly identical for that one. They are vastly different for Captain Marvel, where we have documented evidence of audience review-bombing taking place. Bombing the critical score is much harder, and the numbers bear this out. So I have plenty of reason to not view the audience score as persuasive.

But if you want yet another reason, the CinemaScore rating for the movie (people actually leaving the theater) was A. That one is also much harder to organize an angry internet campaign around.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

As for the second act, I enjoy the action well enough, but for me the breathless poignancy of the funeral scene is what gives the movie its real depth. Loki may be a scheming so-and-so, and we never quite trust anything he says, but you can feel that his grieving is real.

His mom was awesome and I’m still sad we didn’t get to see much more of her.

Odin’s general disdain for humans seemed a bit out of character from Thor 1 though.

[Ravens_cry]

OK, I mostly liked it, some of Cap 2.0's lines felt a little narmy and overacted, but most worked.
My big problem was in the last episode

Spoiler

Show

where Cap 2.0 AKA US Agent to be just suddenly shows up and now is suddenly much more stable and willing to be OK with taking the flag smashers into custody and isn't so driven by revenge for his partner? The guy frelling murdered a guy publicly and absolutely brutally because he was part of the organization that killed his friend and comrade, claimed repeatedly he was justified in this act, something reinforced by Val, and now he's quoting Lincoln on forgiveness. What did I miss?

[Kyberwulf]

Its simple, the one who actually murdered his friend died. He also isn't a bad guy, just went insane because one of his friends died. Probably his best friend, who if I recall was the only surviving member of his squad. The one were he got all those medald.

[Cikomyr2]

Its simple, the one who actually murdered his friend died. He also isn't a bad guy, just went insane because one of his friends died. Probably his best friend, who if I recall was the only surviving member of his squad. The one were he got all those medald.

He went insane because of the mental pressure of being Captain America, and he wasn't up to it. Because he was the wrong man for the job.

Walker was the perfect soldier. He obeyed protocols, rules of engagement, acted with valor. But it takes more than being "the perfect soldier" to be Captain America, and Walker didn't measure up to it.

But Walker was also right. He was what the US Military made him to be. Because the US Military doesn't want people trained to measure up to Captain America in their military. So he was put in a no-win situation, and the people who put him there then got to wash their hands and scape goat him as "one bad apple".

Walker, after he took the serum, was everything General Philips ever wanted out of his Super soldier project during WW2. A loyal, obedient soldier who kills the enemy and obey your order without questioning them.

Well, that's a US Agent, not Captain America.

[Dienekes]

Indeed; just as it's up to you whether or not you ignore the 79% from the actual critics as an indicator of quality, as you seem to be doing. I can't help but wonder why that is.

I mean, if we accept critics as an indicator of quality we have to accept The Last Jedi as an outstanding movie with 90% approved quality. Which... I'm not really willing to do. Some might.

But let's be clear here. There is only a very narrow way to analyze the objective qualities of a product, and trying with a snapshot of a single movie is going to be nearly impossible without thorough context. And the context of Captain Marvel movie is difficult because of a lot of factors pulling it in numerous directions.

Ticket data is bad because of its role as a linking film in a franchise that is revving up and the last major movie indicating it as important. Audience criticism is pretty terrible as internet warriors abuse systems to try and make social points. Professional criticism has taken a bit of a hit recently as their views and the audience seem occasionally misaligned.

I'm trying to think of what might be objective data, and the only ones I can think of would be: number of views from a streaming service compared to others. People actually buying the dvd, again compared to other similar films. or whatever the current iteration is called. Bluray or something, whatever I don't buy movies. I expect a lot of people don't, either, but I can't think of how buying/not buying dvds in general would favor any single group.

Or waiting for a sequel that isn't as pushed, and seeing how much audience retention it has.

Really, seeing how much people responded to the movie to want to watch it again or follow the character.

For my own part, Captain Marvel is... fine. It was better than Thor 1 and 2. Worse than Winter Soldier or Black Panther. It's in that big vat of movies that's just, you know, ok. I don't expect to see Captain Marvel to stray to far from the others in terms of data.

But if we're going to make arguments about it's popularity we should at least try to establish what we can accept as fair data. And the above is what I see as probably our best indicator of popularity. Better than what some person sees cosplayed at conventions anyway.

[Psyren]

I mean, if we accept critics as an indicator of quality we have to accept The Last Jedi as an outstanding movie with 90% approved quality.

Why thank you, as a matter of fact I do my point exactly.

But if we're going to make arguments about it's popularity we should at least try to establish what we can accept as fair data. And the above is what I see as probably our best indicator of popularity. Better than what some person sees cosplayed at conventions anyway.

So why does this apply to the folks who thought the movie was good or even fine, but not to the folks who think it is "bottom half of the MCU" with no credible evidence? Shouldn't the lack of reliable quality metrics go both ways then?

[Dienekes]

So why does this apply to the folks who thought the movie was good or even fine, but not to the folks who think it is "bottom half of the MCU" with no credible evidence? Shouldn't the lack of reliable quality metrics go both ways then?

It does. That’s why I am trying to establish a metric that can be agreed upon to find a correct solution.

That’s why I threw some light shade at the convention metric.

[Ravens_cry]

Its simple, the one who actually murdered his friend died. He also isn't a bad guy, just went insane because one of his friends died. Probably his best friend, who if I recall was the only surviving member of his squad. The one were he got all those medald.

Except he killed a guy who didn't kill his friend. And, again, repeatedly claimed he was totally justified. So why, now that the person who WAS responsible is dead is he suddenly A-OK?
It doesn't fit.

[Rater202]

The Super Soldier Serum in the MCU, and it's derivatives like the Hulk Serum, bring out your inner self and make you more yourself.

It magnfiies the good as well as the bad.

In someone who is mostly good, you get someone who is even better: Steve Rogers being more or less a good selfless person becomes almost Superhumanly Good, which is a contributing factor to those huge shoes that need filling.

Someone evil... Yeah.

Walker's just a normal dude. He's not good, he's not evil, he's just... Normal.

Normal people have both good and bad in them...

So... I wouldn't be surprised if the Serum itself didn't just make him... I dn't want to say bipolar, but if it magnified his good and his bad then... It'd make sense that he'd sort of swing between extremes.

Best friend killed right in front of him, swings to the negative extreme. But when presented with a chance to be a genuine hero he swings to the good extreme

[Cikomyr2]

The Super Soldier Serum in the MCU, and it's derivatives like the Hulk Serum, bring out your inner self and make you more yourself.

It magnfiies the good as well as the bad.

In someone who is mostly good, you get someone who is even better: Steve Rogers being more or less a good selfless person becomes almost Superhumanly Good, which is a contributing factor to those huge shoes that need filling.

Someone evil... Yeah.

Walker's just a normal dude. He's not good, he's not evil, he's just... Normal.

Normal people have both good and bad in them...

So... I wouldn't be surprised if the Serum itself didn't just make him... I dn't want to say bipolar, but if it magnified his good and his bad then... It'd make sense that he'd sort of swing between extremes.

Best friend killed right in front of him, swings to the negative extreme. But when presented with a chance to be a genuine hero he swings to the good extreme

The word you see is "Conflicted"

Walker became more conflicted.

[Psyren]

I'm with Rater on this one; I don't think Walker is evil (yet.) But what makes him far, far more dangerous than Steve, is that he thinks of himself as inherently special and worthy. He did so even before he got the serum, and the serum no doubt is amplifying that self-image even further. He refused to let go of the mantle of "Captain America" even after doing things that at the very least indicate that he should set it aside for a time and show remorse, and his willingness to blatantly lie to Battlestar's family show that he's not even trying to be honest with himself about it.

All that doesn't make him evil, but his thirst for external validation means he is extremely ripe for manipulation by more nefarious forces, and that is almost certainly what we're seeing at the end when

Spoiler

Show

he is for all intents and purposes recruited by Hydra, or whatever shady equivalent Fontaine represents

and which could easily result in a further downward moral slide. I have no doubt that he'll end up opposite Sam again.

It does. That’s why I am trying to establish a metric that can be agreed upon to find a correct solution.

The closest we'll ever come to some kind of objective measure of film quality is critic consensus, since they are by and large experienced with evaluating films on their technical merits. Even that is not totally free of an agenda related to factors outside the movie's merits (e.g. even putting Brie aside, some of the "rotten" critical reviews are criticizing the movie's use as a propaganda tool, as many Marvel movies do) - but I ultimately still put higher stock in that score by far.

[Spacewolf]

I'm with Rater on this one; I don't think Walker is evil (yet.) But what makes him far, far more dangerous than Steve, is that he thinks of himself as inherently special and worthy. He did so even before he got the serum, and the serum no doubt is amplifying that self-image even further. He refused to let go of the mantle of "Captain America" even after doing things that at the very least indicate that he should set it aside for a time and show remorse, and his willingness to blatantly lie to Battlestar's family show that he's not even trying to be honest with himself about it.

All that doesn't make him evil, but his thirst for external validation means he is extremely ripe for manipulation by more nefarious forces, and that is almost certainly what we're seeing at the end when

Spoiler

Show

he is for all intents and purposes recruited by Hydra, or whatever shady equivalent Fontaine represents

and which could easily result in a further downward moral slide. I have no doubt that he'll end up opposite Sam again.

What? His first scene is him agonising over having to live upto being cap. The two people who know him best are making jokes about he's going to throw up he's so nervous. Then he saves Sam and Bucky from being murdered and they tell him that he's basically scum for doing his job. They then let a person who has just burned a building full of people to death have a nice chat directly leading to the death of his partner. He then tries to give the family some closure before trying to do what he promised.

If Sam and Bucky had just helped him the entire series could have been wrapped up by episode three but nope they are happy to let people die to prove a point. If you think Walker is evil Sam and Bucky are far more in the wrong in this series but again you seem to want to paint him in the worst possible light because we've been conditioned to have Protagonist centred morality.

[Psyren]

If you think Walker is evil

I'm with Rater on this one; I don't think Walker is evil (yet.)

At this point I genuinely don't know what you want from me.