I loved that Natasha was such an equal co-protagonist. I love that she and Steve are clearly fond of each other but not romantically so (and Steve makes clear that he wants her as a friend when she throws out the potential "who do you want me to be?"). When did I last see an M-F pairing who work well together but don't have Romantic Tension? Anyone?
Natasha doesn't know who she is if she isn't playing a role. Steve doesn't know what makes him happy. Not sure which broke my heart more. (Neither as much as Peggy having dementia, and Steve's face as he sits with her.)
I love that the surveillance state is not just an unpleasant outcome of an overly-strong military-industrial complex, but the actual explicit work of evil.
I love the unnamed tech who is the first person to say No after Steve's inspirational speech, and the way their decision triggers Sharon's decision. I love Sam's "did you write that down in advance" line. (No, Steve learned how to deliver rhetoric on USO tours, at least in my headcanon.)
Sam! Sam is the one who seems most settled in himself at the start of the film and at the end he's basically chucking everything in to follow Steve.
Oh, and the bit where they don't even bother showing how they retrieved Sam's wings ("behind three locked doors and a 12-foot fence" or whatever it was) because it's just too routine for Steve and Natasha to get through that kind of security.
I was faintly disappointed when the kickass Jenny Agutter turned out to be Natasha in disguise, because TWO BADASS LADIES would have been SO AMAZING. I wish Sitwell hadn't been evil.
Marvel is still running the overt theme of "teamwork: it's great!" which goes right back to Iron Man and Tony needing Pepper just to survive. Less overtly, they really don't seem to trust organisations, and there doesn't seem to be any concept of a group somewhere between "handful of heroes" and "vast untrustworthy organisation".
I've seen it twice and I want to see it again, but no idea when I will have time.
Peggy has dementia? That is not how it came across to me at all.
I love that the surveillance state is not just an unpleasant outcome of an overly-strong military-industrial complex, but the actual explicit work of evil.
She has a sensible conversation with him, giving some wise advice. Then she coughs and he brings her water, and she looks at him like she's never seen him (in the 21st century) before and says "Steve! You came back!"
My grandmother had dementia for the last decade or so before she died, and we had a lot of conversational resets like that. She could fake it amazingly if you didn't know her well, if you hadn't had that conversation with her a dozen times already. That's how I read the second part of that scene, and Steve's reaction "couldn't leave my best girl" with a pasted-on smile.
At least for Peggy, she is constantly rediscovering the delightful news that Steve is alive. For most people in her age and condition, if their carers / visitors are not careful, they are constantly rediscovering that people they love are dead. This is less fun.
Ah, okay. That's a different read on that scene than mine. (I saw it as "her being stoic and sensible and thoughtful, since Steve has come to her for advice/told her about a problem she has information on, and finally she just has EMOTIONS and they have to come OUT somewhere and her stiff upper lip crumbles, as it does periodically around him, into grief and joy, and they are both wishing he'd come back sooner.")
I definitely read it as Peggy having dementia. I feel like Steve's reaction to it was very grin-and-bear-it, but in the moment it happened you could see his face fall.
Except that it really only tripped slightly, instead of falling. It could be that Evans is remarkably subtle, or it could be that he's just not that great of an actor. But all of his reactions where he just reacted A LITTLE or wasn't as sad as I wanted him to be, I realized: Wait, no, this is Captain America, and Captain America would never show anyone how sad or upset he really is, because it's always about other people and never himself.
But anyway, the scene can definitely be read in multiple ways.
And I'll admit, I walked INTO the movie with a heavy emotional investment in Peggy being mentally lucid.
But yes, oh god, you're right; Steve just does not ever let people see how hard on him it is. He's very grin-and-bear it. So when Sam went, "It's the bed, right?" the counsellor in me went, oh come ON, he's probably heard that schtick so many times he'll bounce you off cynically. And then I realized... no, probably not. Fury probably wants to keep him operational and is therefore deliberately engineering Steve's self-perception as America's Hero (because that museum display is great for the public, sure, but I've got this sneaking suspicion that it was constructed for Steve's eyes alone).
So the intimacy and vulnerability of that early-morning run... that Steve sees this guy's power and weakness, that he's strong and tough and vigilant, that he relaxes when Steve announces his presence from behind and then swears to cover it up, is part of why Sam can slip that powerful bit of empathy in. Sam lets himself be totally seen, keeps his defenses down, just stays in that moment, because he can put up with Steve lapping him, and still keep going; he can measure himself against Captain America and not feel diminished; so even by the time they sit down Steve has a sense that this guy is safe enough to let in.
Sam (to carry on the identity discussion below) is the master of changes, the gatekeeper; he can be all of himself at once. His secret identity is a natural part of his civilian one, and vice-versa. And what do we see him doing at his job? Teaching heroes to transition into civilians.
So I see Sam and Steve turning into a beautiful relationship.
Edited (I don't even know where I am anymore. Lost in the land of squee. ) Date: 2014-04-05 02:53 am (UTC)
He's very grin-and-bear it. So when Sam went, "It's the bed, right?" the counsellor in me went, oh come ON, he's probably heard that schtick so many times he'll bounce you off cynically.
I do think he's grin-and-bear it, but not in a faking-it kind of way. I mean, even if Steve didn't have a sense that this guy is safe to let in, I still think that Steve would think, "Ah, this person is attempting empathy with me, and ever though a part of me just wants to say 'that's not gonna work', that would be a rude counter to this genuine offer of empathy, and therefore I will share a bit of myself even though it's not what I need--because that's what this person wants from me." You know?
've got this sneaking suspicion that it was constructed for Steve's eyes alone
That's interesting. I never would have thought of that.
he can be all of himself at once
Can he, though? Because what he really seems to want to do is pal around with Cap and put himself in terrible danger, and he can't really do that at the same time as the life he had. He'd put Falcon away, and when he picked it up again he dropped a lot of ground he'd gained. At least that's the way I read it.
I commented this below, but I want Sam and Steve living together as friendly roommates (or as a ship! not picky!) because they've both Been There Done That with war, nobody's stepping on anybody's triggers, and there can be breakfast and workouts forever.
and Steve makes clear that he wants her as a friend when she throws out the potential "who do you want me to be?"
Oh man. I'm so glad you pointed that out! Because it made me think about the fact that she's not exactly interested in him in a romantic sense, but maybe Natasha feels like she can't be interested in anyone in a romantic sense, because she doesn't know who she is. So she seeks people to define her or define herself against, and for her it's this really unhealthy codependent thing. But Steve knows that about her, which is why he won't tell her who to be, and that's why she cares about him and needs him, because he expects her to be her own person.
I feel so conflicted about that scene, though. It's everything I wanted from Natasha, but I didn't really want it stated blatantly. I wanted to have to figure that out about her; I wanted that to be something she can't/won't reveal about herself. So I loved the revelation but one of the few things that disappointed me about this movie was how blatantly all the things I wanted about her were just laid out there so obviously, and she was the one doing the laying down. (Though it speaks a lot for who far she's come, and who she's becoming. WE JUST NEED A BLACK WIDOW MOVIE SO WE CAN SEE THE PROCESS KTHX)
Neither as much as Peggy having dementia, and Steve's face as he sits with her.
That killed me also. The catch in his voice when he says he couldn't leave his best girl. Ugh.
I love that the surveillance state is not just an unpleasant outcome of an overly-strong military-industrial complex, but the actual explicit work of evil.
That disappointed me, though. Why did you love it?
I love Sam's "did you write that down in advance" line.
I feel like Steve doesn't like speeches, and knows that he's not lyrical or hifalutin or anything; he just says exactly what he feels without any frills. But it's that straight-forward honest approach that makes everyone just fall at his feet, and he doesn't really understand it.
Sam is the one who seems most settled in himself at the start of the film and at the end he's basically chucking everything in to follow Steve.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've read some reactions that talk about how this movie is about identity and self-questioning and self-defining and that Sam seems to be the most stable of the main characters and I am just like WHAT. He was the one who had it all together and then just THREW IT AWAY the second he could return to that life. And maybe it makes sense in his head, like this is for this cause he believes in now and knows is wholly good, whereas before things were grayer and more complicated--but man the fact that he just instantly reacts like that says so much about him NOT knowing who he is/was.
the bit where they don't even bother showing how they retrieved Sam's wings
HAHAHAH this was so awesome and hilarious.
I was faintly disappointed when the kickass Jenny Agutter turned out to be Natasha in disguise
No. What? You couldn't possibly have three women who care about justice and can kick ass. All you get is Natasha and some Maria Hill. But we're not going to show you Maria Hill's face for the first five minutes she's in the scene because who cares about Maria Hill. (Seriously I did NOT understand the cinematography in the scene where Fury is dying. They show Maria coming up and she's talking and people are talking to her, but they don't show a clear shot of her face or name her. Srsly this choice makes NO sense to me.)
a group somewhere between "handful of heroes" and "vast untrustworthy organisation".
This is interesting. Housemate and I had a conversation about Natasha's words at the end, where she says at the hearing, "You need us." Housemate pointed out Natasha is still saying "Robert Redford was obviously evil but we're good which is why we're okay while he was not." I pointed out that I thought she was saying, "You still need individuals with the capacity for incredible destruction, even though we all now agree that vast organizations with the capacity for incredible destruction might be a bad thing." I find this interesting in that the first part of the statement is still problematic, and was not addressed by the film--or in fact was addressed, in the sense that it was validated. However I have to go ponder this a bit more to understand what I think about it. I HAVE TOO MANY THOUGHTS.
Speaking of which I loved all your thinkings; never stop!
[apologies for long delay to reply, I was unexpectedly without internet for most of a week]
My love for the surveillance state actually being the work of evil was basically a visceral reaction of joyous validation (as someone who has donates to campaigns against surveillance, has campaigned, has helped develop party policy against it), a feeling like "YEAH, we TOLD you that was DANGEROUS". There wasn't much critical analysis going on there :-)
Outside the over-the-top atmosphere of a superhero movie, I can see the ways blaming it all on Hydra is a copout. On the other hand, if you can't tell the difference from the outside between something that is the WORK OF EVIL and something that is the more banal outcome of systems that cater to our more selfish instincts ... maybe it'd be better not to have it anyway. (And also to work on making our systems less awful, but Marvel is even worse on systematic problems as it is on organisations and politics; as I think coffeeandink has said a couple of places, it'd be nice to see political positions other than fascism vs libertarianism.)
I think, a bit like Iron Man 3 challenged lazy views of threats to the world, CA:WS challenges lazy solutions to those threats (surveillance, drones, supersoldiers/perfect soldiers) ... as much as either film can do so while still being the product of vastly rich US corporations, and where the subject matter is SUPERHEROES. (We're all very lucky in Steve's utter goodness, and that whatsisface the bully from CA1 didn't get the serum instead. I prefer systems that don't depend on people being utterly good in order to avoid evil outcomes.)
Sam is my favorite now and forever. I want a lot of Stam and Steve buddy interactions, possibly in a "platonic living together" AU where they become roommates and eat breakfast and go work out and kick ass.
OMG Falcon. He was just so . . . like, I've seen a lot of posts referring to how much this movie is about identity and people finding themselves (or realizing that they'd lost themselves), and several of them say that Sam knows himself better than the others, like he's the most stable one in this movie.
HE IS NOT.
Like, this guy totally has it all together and has a life and has found a way to deal, and then danger drops down at his door and all he can say is, "Yes, please, take me, I'm yours." It's like a drug he has been craving and he was able to resist before but it's Captain America and "just say no" to Captain America does not compute. And he thinks this is a good thing and the healthy thing and that this is just another way of coping which makes it okay. And maybe it is okay and what's best for him, but I do not think that this man is not questioning his identity; he just hides it better than the rest. Ugh. I love him so much; he was the best of them all.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lettered's journal
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 09:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 07:26 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 09:21 am (UTC)I thought it was wonderful, and delightfully subversive, and I loved Natasha in it so much.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 07:26 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 11:54 am (UTC)Natasha doesn't know who she is if she isn't playing a role. Steve doesn't know what makes him happy. Not sure which broke my heart more. (Neither as much as Peggy having dementia, and Steve's face as he sits with her.)
I love that the surveillance state is not just an unpleasant outcome of an overly-strong military-industrial complex, but the actual explicit work of evil.
I love the unnamed tech who is the first person to say No after Steve's inspirational speech, and the way their decision triggers Sharon's decision. I love Sam's "did you write that down in advance" line. (No, Steve learned how to deliver rhetoric on USO tours, at least in my headcanon.)
Sam! Sam is the one who seems most settled in himself at the start of the film and at the end he's basically chucking everything in to follow Steve.
Oh, and the bit where they don't even bother showing how they retrieved Sam's wings ("behind three locked doors and a 12-foot fence" or whatever it was) because it's just too routine for Steve and Natasha to get through that kind of
security.
I was faintly disappointed when the kickass Jenny Agutter turned out to be Natasha in disguise, because TWO BADASS LADIES would have been SO AMAZING. I wish Sitwell hadn't been evil.
Marvel is still running the overt theme of "teamwork: it's great!" which goes right back to Iron Man and Tony needing Pepper just to survive. Less overtly, they really don't seem to trust organisations, and there doesn't seem to be any concept of a group somewhere between "handful of heroes" and "vast untrustworthy organisation".
I've seen it twice and I want to see it again, but no idea when I will have time.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 06:35 pm (UTC)I love that the surveillance state is not just an unpleasant outcome of an overly-strong military-industrial complex, but the actual explicit work of evil.
YES. YES YES YES.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 07:18 pm (UTC)My grandmother had dementia for the last decade or so before she died, and we had a lot of conversational resets like that. She could fake it amazingly if you didn't know her well, if you hadn't had that conversation with her a dozen times already. That's how I read the second part of that scene, and Steve's reaction "couldn't leave my best girl" with a pasted-on smile.
At least for Peggy, she is constantly rediscovering the delightful news that Steve is alive. For most people in her age and condition, if their carers / visitors are not careful, they are constantly rediscovering that people they love are dead. This is less fun.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 07:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 01:21 am (UTC)Except that it really only tripped slightly, instead of falling. It could be that Evans is remarkably subtle, or it could be that he's just not that great of an actor. But all of his reactions where he just reacted A LITTLE or wasn't as sad as I wanted him to be, I realized: Wait, no, this is Captain America, and Captain America would never show anyone how sad or upset he really is, because it's always about other people and never himself.
But anyway, the scene can definitely be read in multiple ways.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 02:48 am (UTC)But yes, oh god, you're right; Steve just does not ever let people see how hard on him it is. He's very grin-and-bear it. So when Sam went, "It's the bed, right?" the counsellor in me went, oh come ON, he's probably heard that schtick so many times he'll bounce you off cynically. And then I realized... no, probably not. Fury probably wants to keep him operational and is therefore deliberately engineering Steve's self-perception as America's Hero (because that museum display is great for the public, sure, but I've got this sneaking suspicion that it was constructed for Steve's eyes alone).
So the intimacy and vulnerability of that early-morning run... that Steve sees this guy's power and weakness, that he's strong and tough and vigilant, that he relaxes when Steve announces his presence from behind and then swears to cover it up, is part of why Sam can slip that powerful bit of empathy in. Sam lets himself be totally seen, keeps his defenses down, just stays in that moment, because he can put up with Steve lapping him, and still keep going; he can measure himself against Captain America and not feel diminished; so even by the time they sit down Steve has a sense that this guy is safe enough to let in.
Sam (to carry on the identity discussion below) is the master of changes, the gatekeeper; he can be all of himself at once. His secret identity is a natural part of his civilian one, and vice-versa. And what do we see him doing at his job? Teaching heroes to transition into civilians.
So I see Sam and Steve turning into a beautiful relationship.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 06:30 am (UTC)I do think he's grin-and-bear it, but not in a faking-it kind of way. I mean, even if Steve didn't have a sense that this guy is safe to let in, I still think that Steve would think, "Ah, this person is attempting empathy with me, and ever though a part of me just wants to say 'that's not gonna work', that would be a rude counter to this genuine offer of empathy, and therefore I will share a bit of myself even though it's not what I need--because that's what this person wants from me." You know?
've got this sneaking suspicion that it was constructed for Steve's eyes alone
That's interesting. I never would have thought of that.
he can be all of himself at once
Can he, though? Because what he really seems to want to do is pal around with Cap and put himself in terrible danger, and he can't really do that at the same time as the life he had. He'd put Falcon away, and when he picked it up again he dropped a lot of ground he'd gained. At least that's the way I read it.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-06 06:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 06:46 am (UTC)Oh man. I'm so glad you pointed that out! Because it made me think about the fact that she's not exactly interested in him in a romantic sense, but maybe Natasha feels like she can't be interested in anyone in a romantic sense, because she doesn't know who she is. So she seeks people to define her or define herself against, and for her it's this really unhealthy codependent thing. But Steve knows that about her, which is why he won't tell her who to be, and that's why she cares about him and needs him, because he expects her to be her own person.
I feel so conflicted about that scene, though. It's everything I wanted from Natasha, but I didn't really want it stated blatantly. I wanted to have to figure that out about her; I wanted that to be something she can't/won't reveal about herself. So I loved the revelation but one of the few things that disappointed me about this movie was how blatantly all the things I wanted about her were just laid out there so obviously, and she was the one doing the laying down. (Though it speaks a lot for who far she's come, and who she's becoming. WE JUST NEED A BLACK WIDOW MOVIE SO WE CAN SEE THE PROCESS KTHX)
Neither as much as Peggy having dementia, and Steve's face as he sits with her.
That killed me also. The catch in his voice when he says he couldn't leave his best girl. Ugh.
I love that the surveillance state is not just an unpleasant outcome of an overly-strong military-industrial complex, but the actual explicit work of evil.
That disappointed me, though. Why did you love it?
I love Sam's "did you write that down in advance" line.
I feel like Steve doesn't like speeches, and knows that he's not lyrical or hifalutin or anything; he just says exactly what he feels without any frills. But it's that straight-forward honest approach that makes everyone just fall at his feet, and he doesn't really understand it.
Sam is the one who seems most settled in himself at the start of the film and at the end he's basically chucking everything in to follow Steve.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've read some reactions that talk about how this movie is about identity and self-questioning and self-defining and that Sam seems to be the most stable of the main characters and I am just like WHAT. He was the one who had it all together and then just THREW IT AWAY the second he could return to that life. And maybe it makes sense in his head, like this is for this cause he believes in now and knows is wholly good, whereas before things were grayer and more complicated--but man the fact that he just instantly reacts like that says so much about him NOT knowing who he is/was.
the bit where they don't even bother showing how they retrieved Sam's wings
HAHAHAH this was so awesome and hilarious.
I was faintly disappointed when the kickass Jenny Agutter turned out to be Natasha in disguise
No. What? You couldn't possibly have three women who care about justice and can kick ass. All you get is Natasha and some Maria Hill. But we're not going to show you Maria Hill's face for the first five minutes she's in the scene because who cares about Maria Hill. (Seriously I did NOT understand the cinematography in the scene where Fury is dying. They show Maria coming up and she's talking and people are talking to her, but they don't show a clear shot of her face or name her. Srsly this choice makes NO sense to me.)
a group somewhere between "handful of heroes" and "vast untrustworthy organisation".
This is interesting. Housemate and I had a conversation about Natasha's words at the end, where she says at the hearing, "You need us." Housemate pointed out Natasha is still saying "Robert Redford was obviously evil but we're good which is why we're okay while he was not." I pointed out that I thought she was saying, "You still need individuals with the capacity for incredible destruction, even though we all now agree that vast organizations with the capacity for incredible destruction might be a bad thing." I find this interesting in that the first part of the statement is still problematic, and was not addressed by the film--or in fact was addressed, in the sense that it was validated. However I have to go ponder this a bit more to understand what I think about it. I HAVE TOO MANY THOUGHTS.
Speaking of which I loved all your thinkings; never stop!
surveillance state
Date: 2014-04-13 10:10 am (UTC)My love for the surveillance state actually being the work of evil was basically a visceral reaction of joyous validation (as someone who has donates to campaigns against surveillance, has campaigned, has helped develop party policy against it), a feeling like "YEAH, we TOLD you that was DANGEROUS". There wasn't much critical analysis going on there :-)
Outside the over-the-top atmosphere of a superhero movie, I can see the ways blaming it all on Hydra is a copout. On the other hand, if you can't tell the difference from the outside between something that is the WORK OF EVIL and something that is the more banal outcome of systems that cater to our more selfish instincts ... maybe it'd be better not to have it anyway. (And also to work on making our systems less awful, but Marvel is even worse on systematic problems as it is on organisations and politics; as I think
I think, a bit like Iron Man 3 challenged lazy views of threats to the world, CA:WS challenges lazy solutions to those threats (surveillance, drones, supersoldiers/perfect soldiers) ... as much as either film can do so while still being the product of vastly rich US corporations, and where the subject matter is SUPERHEROES. (We're all very lucky in Steve's utter goodness, and that whatsisface the bully from CA1 didn't get the serum instead. I prefer systems that don't depend on people being utterly good in order to avoid evil outcomes.)
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-06 06:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 06:33 pm (UTC)I feel like Falcon belongs in the vicinity of your "Responsible Science" verse. Srsly.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 01:49 am (UTC)HE IS NOT.
Like, this guy totally has it all together and has a life and has found a way to deal, and then danger drops down at his door and all he can say is, "Yes, please, take me, I'm yours." It's like a drug he has been craving and he was able to resist before but it's Captain America and "just say no" to Captain America does not compute. And he thinks this is a good thing and the healthy thing and that this is just another way of coping which makes it okay. And maybe it is okay and what's best for him, but I do not think that this man is not questioning his identity; he just hides it better than the rest. Ugh. I love him so much; he was the best of them all.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 07:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-04 07:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 06:04 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-05 06:22 am (UTC)