The Accords' Introduction Scene
Despite the fact that Tony is coming to show his endorsement of the Accords, which document impacts the Avengers quite considerably, he neglects to mention this. All Vision knows is that Tony is bringing the Secretary of State with him. This is the fact he leaves Steve and Wanda with, so that the audience is in no doubt of Ross’s importance. The meeting then begins with Ross sharing an anecdote. He says, “Five years ago, I had a heart attack. I dropped right in the middle of my back-swing. Turned out it was the best round of my life, because after 13 hours of surgery and a triple bypass . . . I found something 40 years in the Army had never taught me: Perspective.”
Now, the last time Ross appeared in the MCU, in The Incredible Hulk, he did many terrible things. He purposely misinformed Bruce about the project he was working on, which ended up turning Bruce into the Hulk; terrorized Bruce and forced him to constantly be on the run; directly caused Bruce to hulk out several times and thus cause damage to the surrounding area; created the Abomination, who also caused a lot of damage; and even endangered his own daughter by attacking Bruce while she was with him, so that the Hulk ended up having to save her. And on top of all this, it was revealed that he saw Bruce as nothing more than the property of the US government. So Ross was quite definitively established as a villain. Now, even though The Incredible Hulk was not especially successful, and by the time of Civil War it had been nearly ten years since that movie was released, some people would naturally remember it, and others would be curious about the last time Ross appeared since he was a recurring character. Thus, having Ross be the person who presented the Accords ran the risk of tainting their image, and this couldn’t happen because the Accords had already been accepted by Tony, and the movie needed half the audience to support him. Ross’s anecdote is the solution to this problem. It seeks to do two things. First, it aims to make Ross seem more approachable, so that it is easier to relate to and feel sympathy for him. After this, it tries to make Ross trustworthy despite all the atrocities he was responsible for in his last appearance by claiming that his heart attack granted him wisdom he was lacking at the time, even though it’s later demonstrated that it hasn’t. This way, more credibility is lent to the remainder of his speech.
Now, the next part of Ross’s speech actually isn’t too bad. He says, “The world owes the Avengers an un-payable debt. You have fought for us, protected us, risked your lives, but while a great many people see you as heroes, there are some . . . who would prefer the word ‘vigilantes’.” However brief it was, there was an acknowledgement of the fact that the Avengers have prevented terrible things from happening multiple times, at the risk of their own lives. And while it is unfortunate that not everyone sees the Avengers as heroes, that is the reality of the situation, so there is nothing wrong with bringing it up. But then Natasha asks Ross about what he thinks, and the Avengers-bashing begins.
He responds to her, “How about ‘dangerous’? What would you call a group of US-based, enhanced individuals who routinely ignore sovereign borders and inflict their will wherever they choose and who, frankly, seem unconcerned about what they leave behind?” First of all, calling the Avengers dangerous is extremely insulting, considering that they have done nothing but keep the world safe from danger. Second of all, there is nothing wrong with the Avengers being based in the US; they can be based wherever they want. The purpose of this detail was most likely meant to draw attention to the fact that the majority of the Avengers are American: but not all of them are, and even if they all were there would be nothing wrong with that. Being an American does not automatically make someone any less capable of understanding other perspectives, or less trustworthy, than anyone else. The “enhanced” part is just plain inaccurate, though. Ross said the Avengers were US-based rather than saying they were Americans because this way, his point could be made without making an untrue statement: but here he just says “enhanced,” ignoring the fact that a good number of the Avengers are not actually enhanced. This error was necessary, though, because given that the Accords are specifically for enhanced individuals, reminding the audience that many of the Avengers are not in fact enhanced would introduce difficulties the movie does not want to deal with. Regarding the “ignoring sovereign borders,” part, the Avengers are not ignoring sovereign borders; they are allowed to travel, and there is absolutely no indication that they were doing so illegally. Following this is the “inflicting their will wherever they choose,” part. This makes it seem like the Avengers are just going wherever they please and doing whatever they want there, and that the innocent people in that location are powerless to stop them, when in reality they are acting in the public interest by preventing terrible things from happening. And the public knows this: during the Lagos fight, for example, when Steve was pursuing Rumlow, the civilians pointed him toward Rumlow’s equipment, clearly knowing he was there to help. Then comes the last part of the speech: “and who, frankly, seem unconcerned about what they leave behind?” This is clearly referring to the fact that there is a lot of destruction left behind whenever the Avengers are involved in a major battle. And this claim is bolstered by the fact that Ross’s little slideshow immediately follows it. But this is once again pinning the actions of the villains on the heroes. When dealing with situations that are potentially catastrophic, which is what the Avengers were doing, it is quite unrealistic to expect there to be no damage, no matter how careful the heroes are being. The villains certainly aren’t about to go out of their way to avoid causing damage, after all, and in most cases they actively want to be destructive. All the Avengers can do is make a reasonable effort to keep the damage to a minimum, and they did so.
The cinematography of Ross’s speech is also worth examining. When Ross says, “dangerous,” the camera cuts to Sam, Vision, and Wanda, but Wanda is the only one completely in focus. Vision, who is sitting right next to her, is noticeably blurred. The movie thus plainly suggests that she specifically is dangerous, and the subsequent presentation does its best to support this idea. Additionally, this suggestion helps introduce the idea that enhanced individuals—at least those who don’t support Tony and the Accords—are threatening. Also revealed is a continuation of the anti-Steve propaganda campaign, as well as Tony promotion. Right as Ross says, “perspective,” the camera cuts to Tony, as if the film is suggesting that, like Ross, Tony has also gained perspective, through his experience with Ultron. (Even though this is later shown to be just as false.) But throughout the entire section where Ross says, “ignore sovereign borders, and inflict their will wherever they choose,” the camera is focused on Steve, as if to imply he is especially guilty of Ross’s charges. And the movie really wants to drive this home, for this is the longest single shot of any Avenger throughout the entirety of Ross’s tirade. The film thus wordlessly endeavors to enhance Tony’s credibility while brutally demolishing Steve.
Right on the heels of Ross’s speech is his ridiculous slideshow. While it is frustrating to watch due to the fact that none of the Avengers are allowed to do anything except look guilty, it is also sort of funny. Because if you look beyond the surface of the presentation, all of Ross’s examples actually run counter to the argument he is trying to make.
The first thing that is shown is footage from the Battle of New York. After a quick shot of a Chitauri ship chasing Tony and a soldier firing at the Chitauri, the footage cuts to the Hulk jumping from building to building: and he jumps onto a building directly above the camera, and a small bit of dust and debris falls down and covers the camera. There is much to go over here. First off, it is extremely interesting that the Chitauri ship chasing Tony was not shown causing any damage, despite the fact that in The Avengers the Chitauri ships chasing Tony did cause damage. The bias toward him is so strong that even when the movie is trying to tear down the Avengers as a whole, it is specifically sparing Tony. As for the Hulk, sure he caused some damage, but as the footage ironically showed, it really wasn’t even that severe. And any damage he did cause was in prevention of much worse. For example, at one point during the Battle of New York, the Hulk smashed through an office in order to take out a Chitauri ship. While he did completely mess up the office and shatter the window, he prevented the entire skyscraper from being demolished, which would have been much more devastating. There is also the fact that this is the first thing shown after Ross’s little “unconcerned about what they leave behind,” comment, but seriously, once an alien army complete with massive warships descends from the sky, there is no way to completely avoid damage, and expecting otherwise is ludicrous. Had people started screaming at the Avengers during the battle for causing damage, it would be quite clear how unreasonable the accusations were; here the Avengers are doing everything within their power to fend off an alien invasion, and people are attacking them for damage they aren’t even responsible for. Yet this is the attitude that Civil War chooses to endorse.
Then there is how this example actually harms Ross’s argument. The movie carefully forgets it, but the government’s plan for winning that battle was sending a nuclear bomb at New York City, at a time when the Avengers had the situation reasonably contained, no less. If the Avengers had just sat back and allowed the government’s plan to be enacted, there would have been an enormous amount of civilian casualties, as well as significant environmental damage: and on top of this, the bomb would probably not have even stopped the Chitauri. So the Avengers disobeying the government’s wishes actually dramatically improved the situation. This helps show that the Avengers being able to act autonomously is quite beneficial, but because that would not inspire people to support the Accords and thus Tony, the minimal amount of damage that the Hulk caused is emphasized instead.
Ruby-Took also brought up an exceedingly good point:
The battle in New York City against Loki being included in a presentation that is supposed to illustrate why the Avengers should need authorization before joining a battle or whatever is especially ridiculous, because, um, the Avengers had authorization in that case. From SHIELD, who brought them together specifically for the fight against Loki. . .Some of them (say, Bruce, for example) would very much have preferred not to be involved. The only time during that fight they went against orders from higher up was when they stopped the nuke, and surely, we’re not supposed to believe that that was the wrong call, are we? So if anything, this proves that the Avengers being able to make their own decisions is in fact vital. . .But anyway, if a battle with authorization, with the Avengers specifically going where they were told to go and doing what they were told to do, didn’t go down without casualties, what exactly is any other authorization supposed to do, exactly? What difference would it make to how those fights actually go down?
And instead of anyone being able to stand up to this nonsense or point out the hypocrisy, all that happens is Rhodey looks guilty, and turns to look at Natasha. She at least remains stoic, but isn’t allowed to say anything.
Next up on Ross’s preposterous presentation is the destruction of the Insight helicarriers. Following a glimpse of people running away from the distantly visible helicarriers and the Triskelion smoking, a helicarrier is shown crashing into water, engulfing people who are trying to run away and screaming. Now, the chance that such an event would even have occurred is extremely low. As The Winter Soldier showed, the helicarriers did not get very far from their initial launch point; one crashed into the Triskelion, and the other actually fell straight back into the launching area. While we were not shown the fate of the third, it would have landed somewhere nearby, over water, as the screen showed after Maria Hill caused the helicarriers to target themselves. So the helicarriers would have been visible to the surrounding area for some time before they fell. And any civilians seeing the launch would most probably flee; the first portion of the footage showed people running when the helicarriers were nowhere near them, so it is extremely unlikely that any people near to the liftoff would not immediately do the same. And if three huge helicarriers suddenly appearing would not be enough motivation to flee, there was also a battle raging around them as Steve, Sam, and the loyal SHIELD agents fought to keep them from deploying. Then, shortly afterward, the helicarriers started destroying each other: and they battered each other for some time before they started falling. Therefore, the probability of any civilians being in the area when the two water-bound helicarriers fell is exceptionally small.
Even putting this aside, though, this incident was no more Steve and his friends being unconcerned about what they left behind than the Battle of New York was. It’s true that bringing the helicarriers down resulted in at least the destruction of the Triskelion, but there is no way to completely stop three massive helicarriers falling from the sky from causing some damage. And once they were in the air, the options were to bring them down or let twenty million people be murdered. Steve and the loyal SHIELD agents tried everything they could to prevent the helicarriers from lifting off in the first place, but it happened despite their best efforts. In fact, the resistance was so strong that in order for the launch to occur, the Hydra agents had to murder multiple SHIELD agents. The movie could not bring this up, however, because it would not fit the narrative Civil War needs to present. It needs to make it seem like everything would have been better if Steve and his friends hadn’t been there, but just like the Battle of New York, without them even more damage would have occurred; if the helicarriers had been able to deploy, there is no way that the extended slaughter of twenty million people would not cause mass destruction.
Indeed, the only thing the movie cares about is making Steve and his friends look bad. And this lack of care for anything else is quite clear. Because while Sam is shown guiltily looking down despite the absence of any wrongdoing, hilariously enough this is actually the worst possible example Ross could have shown. While the film eagerly brought up this particular case because it occurred in what was actually a Captain America movie, and the chance for anti-Steve propaganda was far too ripe to ignore, the helicarrier incident undermines Ross’s argument even more than the Battle of New York did. Because as 1-1 Marines had Steve point out, “In this case, the problem was not a group of enhanced individuals operating without government supervision or oversight. The problem that led to the fall of SHIELD was that those responsible for oversight proved incompetent or were outright complicit in Hydra’s efforts to establish a unified world order under their control.” The New York incident demonstrated the importance of the Avengers being able to act independently by making it clear what could have happened if they had been prevented from taking action, but the helicarrier fiasco highlighted the fact that authority is not infallible, and cannot always be counted on. So in a display meant to convince the Avengers to unconditionally submit to authority, Ross showed a situation that occurred because the authority was thoroughly corrupted.
Following this is Sokovia. The footage for this consists of a very shaky shot of people running, a view of Sokovia being lifted into the air, and a building collapsing. Now, unlike the previous two examples that were shown, the blame for this incident rests largely on Tony, because if he had not allowed Ultron to be created, none of the destruction Ultron subsequently caused would have happened. And while the film does cut to him during this footage, it only does so after a building collapses. This may seem innocuous, but during an anti-Avengers tirade Tony has later, he says, “we dropped a building on him while we were kicking ass.” So by having the footage that appears right before the camera cuts to Tony be a building falling, it allows Tony to later look like he actually noticed and cares about all the civilian casualties Ross falsely accuses the other Avengers of ignoring, even though he was actually the only one who didn’t really care that much about civilian casualties in the first place. But this is not the movie’s only effort to protect Tony: despite this small acknowledgment of Tony’s accountability for Sokovia that only occurs to bolster his image later, it is extremely interesting to note that unlike the prior footage of the helicarrier incident (which, it must be remembered, Steve is not at all responsible for), no people are directly shown coming to harm. Just like the inaccurate footage of the Chitauri ship, the clip is careful to separate Tony from the horrors the film is pinning on the rest of the Avengers.
And just as carefully as the movie spares Tony, it attacks Wanda. Directly after the footage of Sokovia ascending, the film cuts to her, as if to remind the audience that she is the reason why it fell, since she abandoned her post guarding the machine control after Pietro died. First of all, it’s not exactly like there was a mechanism on Ultron’s machine for bringing Sokovia safely back down; he had no reason to include one. The plan for stopping him was to blow Sokovia up all along, so it would have happened regardless of what Wanda did, and all the civilians had been evacuated by the time it fell. But secondly, she abandoned her post when Ultron killed her brother, in order to make Ultron pay. And right after Pietro died, her grief caused her to release an enormous wave of magic that utterly obliterated all the robots in the area, so there weren’t any robots in the area when she left; a broken robot crawling in from somewhere triggered the machine. While it’s true that no robot would have been able to do anything if she had been there, the devastation Pietro’s death caused her was clear. Her twin brother, her only remaining family, who she was very close with and even had some sort of telepathic connection with, had just been taken from her: and when one is so massively grief-stricken, it is difficult think clearly. So what she did is completely understandable, and it is hard to blame her for it. Also, while the film so ardently defends Tony from incrimination, it’s worth noting that had a similar situation happened to Tony, if Tony had been guarding the machine and he found out that Rhodey had died, it is unlikely that his reaction would be any different. After all, he thoughtlessly shot someone who wasn’t even responsible when Rhodey was merely injured.
Now, while Sokovia does not clash with Ross’s argument quite as dramatically as the first two examples did, it still shows why the Accords would be a bad idea. The Sokovia incident commenced quite suddenly; when a short time earlier Pietro warned the Sokovian police that the city was under attack, they initially did not believe him, and he had to make a commotion to get them to do anything. And the Accords make it such that any mission the Avengers go on has to first be approved by a UN panel. So if Age of Ultron had happened under the Sokovia Accords, it is quite possible that the mission would not have been approved, and there would have been no one there to stop Ultron and save the civilians.
The final example shown on Ross’s outrageous slideshow is Lagos. Following a shot of the bomb-damaged building smoking, a few injured people are shown: and then the camera lingers on a dead person, filling the whole screen with this image, and crying can be heard in the background. The effort to tarnish the Avengers’ image here is quite intense. Unlike the footage of Sokovia that showed no civilians directly being harmed, or even the helicarrier incident which showed the harm as it happened, an actual dead person is shown, to incite the maximum amount of outrage: and to add even more emphasis, it is punctuated with the sound of someone crying. And the camera cuts to Wanda right after this is shown, to helpfully remind the audience that the bomb she was unable to completely contain is what caused this destruction. The movie is pulling out all the stops on this final example, to really drive home the idea that the Avengers are reckless, and incriminate Wanda and Steve specifically, since they were the ones directly involved in that incident.
But just like the other three examples, the Lagos fiasco was not the Avengers being unconcerned about what they left behind. Quite the opposite, in fact: though the movie is really emphasizing the destruction that happened in Lagos, as footage was seen on the news report Wanda was watching earlier in addition to this, it does not change that fact that the combined efforts of Steve and his friends prevented a lot more destruction from occurring. And without Wanda, the damage that did occur would have been much worse. All the people who were crowded around Steve and Rumlow—of which there were quite a few—would have been killed, as well as anyone else nearby, and possibly even more if the explosion had caused any of the nearby buildings to collapse. Because Wanda was able to contain the bomb for a few seconds and get it mostly out of the way, she reduced what was easily going to be several hundred casualties down to only eleven; none of the others who were there could have lowered the casualties that significantly. However, instead of making any effort to convey this, the camera zooms in on a dead person, to underscore the fact that Wanda was unable to save absolutely everybody, in order to turn the audience against her and her friends.
Lagos no more supports Ross’s argument than any of the other examples did, though. Nothing about the situation would have improved if the Avengers had not been there, and in fact it would have been much worse. There would have been nobody who could immediately deal with the situation in the Institute of Infectious Diseases without being hampered by the gas, no one who could clear the gas from the building or contain the bomb, no one who could so efficiently keep the terrorists from accomplishing their objective of escaping with a bioweapon while minimizing casualties. The largely successful outcome of the mission depended on Steve and his teammates being able to respond quickly to the situations they encountered, and the Accords would most definitely provide significant obstruction. If Steve and his team had been forced to wait on a UN panel to go after Rumlow, he and his crew might have escaped with the bioweapon, and an untold number of civilians would have perished.
That is the entirety of Ross’s attempt to portray the Avengers as irresponsible and reckless. While this is the narrative the movie enthusiastically pushes, if one looks beyond the surface, the presentation actually reveals the complete opposite. None of the damage shown was easily avoidable (except for Sokovia, because if Tony had just not messed with the scepter, Ultron would never have been created), and for multiple events in which the civilian casualties could easily have been in the millions, according to the slides only 300 total civilians died. Also, for all Ross’s fussing about how destructive the Avengers are, literally none of the situations would have turned out better had the Avengers not been there, and in fact they would have been much worse. In the Battle of New York, there would have been no one to get rid of the nuclear bomb or figure out how to close the portal; Project Insight would have been successfully launched before anyone realized how much of a problem it really was; Ultron might have been successful in his plan to cause mass destruction; and Rumlow would have escaped with a biological weapon. And the Avengers saved quite a lot of civilians in all these instances. However, the movie needed this spectacle to happen so that more people would support the Accords and thus Tony, and be more likely to see Steve as irrational when he refused to sign his rights away.
But the real kicker to this entire farce is that the one situation that did actually feature unnecessary damage and preventable civilian casualties wasn’t shown: the Johannesburg incident in Age of Ultron. Why wasn’t it shown? Because the blame for that one falls squarely on Tony Stark.
The Johannesburg incident was where Wanda gave Bruce a nightmare-vision, as she did to all the Avengers except Clint, who managed to stop her. This caused the Hulk to come out, and he ended up in Johannesburg, and terrorized the people there in his rage and confusion: so Tony took his Hulkbuster suit there to stop him, and they had a big fight. Now, the situation itself was nobody’s fault. While Wanda did give Bruce the vision, her experience with her powers was that they made people catatonic, as was demonstrated by the other Avengers: so she had no reason to think that Bruce would be any different. Additionally, she left the shipyard immediately after giving him the vision, so she had no chance to see its effect: and Johannesburg was over three hundred miles from where she initially triggered him, so she could not have imagined he ever would have ended up there. As for Bruce, he of course cannot always control when the Hulk comes out, and he also could not control how the Hulk would react to the vision, so the situation was not his fault either. Even Tony’s decision to go and try to stop the Hulk was not in itself a bad choice. The problem was the way he handled the situation.
Unlike any of the examples Ross showed, Tony was needlessly reckless numerous times during the fight. For instance, at one point when the Hulk punched at him, instead of simply blocking it, he countered it with a punch of his own, to show off how strong his suit was. This generated a shockwave that was shown shattering glass and knocking multiple people off a balcony, quite probably to their deaths. Also, toward the end of the fight, Tony smashed the Hulk through a mostly-constructed skyscraper. While he did scan the building itself to make sure nobody was inside, he did not bother to check and see if the streets below were empty. And they clearly weren’t, as the Hulk saw after he surfaced from the rubble. So Tony’s careless action injured and killed an untold number of civilians. But even as the movie seeks to tear down the rest of the Avengers, it endeavors to spare Tony; it wants to make it seem like Tony noticed all the civilian casualties that the others were supposedly missing, while simultaneously sparing him actual association with them. Therefore, unlike the slideshow examples in which the small amount of unavoidable civilian casualties was emphasized to make the Avengers look unfavorable, there were no clips of people being pulled from the rubble of the collapsed skyscraper, or of the camera zooming in on one of the people Tony knocked off the balcony with crying audible in the background. The needless damage Tony caused is purposely left out of the presentation to allow him to look better than everyone else.
And in this flamboyant display attempting to show how the Avengers disregard civilians’ lives, the fact that the Avengers’ lives are also in danger whenever they face down a threat is completely forgotten. Ross did mention that fact at the beginning, in a sentence that was not even completed before he started undermining their credibility, but the movie carefully ensures this is not brought up again, and after such a furious onslaught of propaganda it is unlikely to be at the front of anyone’s minds. That doesn’t make it any less true, though. Now, at the time of Civil War, the only Avenger who had died was Pietro—who is entirely ignored due to the serious problems he would pose to the movie's carefully manufactured narrative, especially since he died saving a civilian—but the only one present at the meeting who did not have any close brushes with death was Vision, an exceedingly durable vibranuim synthezoid armed with an Infinity Stone. Nobody else had such luck. Both Tony and Steve could both have easily died before they even became Avengers. Tony, for example, could have perished in Afghanistan, when he had his arc reactor ripped from his chest, or if Nick Fury had not given him the chance to find a cure for his palladium poisoning; Steve, meanwhile, could have been killed at any point during the raids on the Hydra bases, the battle on the plane, or crashing the plane.
The Avengers could also have easily died in any of the situations Ross showed. In the Battle of New York, for instance, Steve received a serious blow from a Chitauri weapon that could have proved disastrous had Thor not been there, and Tony only narrowly avoided being stuck in space after he flew the nuclear bomb through the wormhole. Steve, Natasha, and Sam all almost died multiple times throughout the whole Project Insight incident. In Zola’s bunker, for example, Natasha was knocked unconscious, so that Steve feared for her life, and had to carry her to safety. All three of them were in serious danger during the attack on the overpass, and would have been murdered when they were subsequently captured had Maria Hill not rescued them. The whole stopping Project Insight business also resulted in several near misses with death; Natasha might have been killed if Nick Fury had not reacted fast enough when she defied Alexander Pierce, Sam could easily have been killed while he was fleeing the Triskelion’s destruction, and Steve would have drowned if Bucky had not rescued him. As for the Ultron incident, Wanda definitely would have died in Sokovia’s fall had Vision not gone back for her. And in Lagos, Natasha could have perished if the disease vial had broken while she was right next to it, while Steve might have been killed by Rumlow if Wanda had not been there to stop him. This alone is quite an extensive list, and there are plenty of other near-misses that were not mentioned here. But not a single one of these instances is brought up. For this would risk the audience having the realization that the Avengers’ lives are even more endangered than the civilians’ during a major event, since they are the ones actively trying to combat the threat. It would also throw into sharper relief the fact that it isn’t always possible to save everyone, since it isn’t even a given that the Avengers will always be able to save themselves. Therefore, in the hope that the audience will forget the brief acknowledgment Ross gave, Pietro is forgotten and the Avengers’ struggles are ignored. And while Tony does actually get a chance to allude to one of these instances during the subsequent debate over the Accords, none of the other Avengers get to mention all the risks they’ve taken.
Back to the scene. Wanda is understandably upset at being shown the Lagos footage, since she was already devastated that she was unable to save everyone even before seeing direct casualties, and Steve sees this and tells Ross to stop the presentation. Once it’s stopped, Ross continues, “For the past four years, you've operated with unlimited power and no supervision.” First, it’s worth noting that the Avengers never abused any of the power they were given. But framing it like their power has been completely unlimited is altogether inaccurate; they have been wanting for power several times. For example, Steve and Natasha literally had to go into hiding while Hydra was looking for them, as did Sam when he joined them. And in Age of Ultron, the Avengers had to lay low in Clint’s farmhouse while Ultron was on the loose. So unlike Ross’s allegation, the Avengers have been in disadvantageous situations multiple times, regardless of their status. Now, supervision. Ross places emphasis on that part of the sentence, and the camera focuses on Steve make sure to incriminate him specifically, but it’s no truer than the unlimited power part. The press supervises the Avengers; it has done so since the Battle of New York. Providing oversight in instances where there would otherwise be none is the entire point of the press. The UN, for example, has no other supervision either. And this purpose is even exploited in Civil War: due to the fact that no positive news reports were allowed, the press was able to present the narrative that the Avengers are dangerous quite effectively, so that the Avengers were given an appearance of needing restraint, and the Accords would seem more acceptable when they appeared. The goal of this scene is to make the Avengers seem irresponsible and reckless, though, and a supposed lack of supervision reinforces this idea. It gives the impression that the Avengers have been doing things that they would not do if someone was watching them. It also sets up an apparent problem for which a solution can be offered.
After emphasizing that the governments of the world are unhappy with the Avengers, which again would only be due to the deluge of twisted stories, Ross says, “But I think we have a solution,” and produces the Sokovia Accords. Now, introducing the Accords this way is very deceitful. By saying “I think,” Ross is implying that the Avengers have a choice of whether or not to accept the Accords, and that there is room for negotiation. However, this is clearly not the case. As is presently revealed, the Accords are already set to be ratified, and the Avengers will be punished if they don’t give their unconditional support. This is not a choice; this is an ultimatum. If what Ross said was accurate to what he really meant, he would have told the Avengers, “You will accept this solution or else.” But if he actually said that, it could reveal how much of a power grab the Accords were, and then the Avengers who rejected them would not seem so unreasonable. So, to ensure that there is not too great a risk of too many people supporting Steve, the Accords are portrayed as a gentle suggestion.
Ross then explains them: “The Sokovia Accords. Approved by 117 countries, it states that the Avengers shall no longer be a private organization. Instead, they'll operate under the supervision of a United Nations panel, only when and if that panel deems it necessary.” The first thing mentioned about the Accords is that 117 countries approved it, and Ross places great emphasis on this fact. However, just because a lot of people support something doesn’t necessarily mean it’s right; there is such a thing as bandwagon fallacy. And already, even from just a brief overview, one can tell the Accords are a terrible idea. Forcing the Avengers to get permission before deploying is extremely unwise. The success of every single one of the missions shown, also counting Johannesburg, relied on a rapid response: and having to wait for a UN vote before deploying would slow the response time considerably. Such a stipulation thus provides an unnecessary obstruction to the Avengers keeping the world safe. And it’s not even like there is any basis for having such an arrangement. That requirement would only make sense if the Avengers constantly showed up in places where they weren’t needed, and that isn’t the case at all. Every one of the situations the Avengers responded to greatly benefitted from having them there. So this entire thing is just one big mess. But since Tony is on the side of the Accords and needs all the support he can get, the movie works vigorously to prevent the audience from realizing how bad the Accords are. The scene does everything in its power to make the Avengers look bad and downplay their accomplishments, and appear to be in need of reining in, so that a document whose main purpose is to do that seems reasonable. And due to Ross highlighting an imagined lack of supervision, the Accords appear to be a solution to a problem rather than a detrimental complication.
Now, after this introduction, Steve does actually get a brief opportunity to stand up to this nonsense. He says, “The Avengers were formed to make the world a safer place. I feel we've done that.” It is distinctly evident that they have. But even when Steve is allowed to defend himself and his friends, the movie focuses on downplaying it as much as possible. For starters, Steve mentions this point while looking down. This makes it seem like he’s not at all confident in his claim, and ashamed to be bringing it up. So even the delivery seeks to undermine his argument. Now, Steve’s point is extremely problematic to the narrative the movie is trying to construct, so it needs to try to prove him wrong. However, because it really can’t, since the Avengers have fended off numerous threats that would have been seriously devastating had they not been stopped, with much less damage than there otherwise would have been, it also needs to make sure the point is not given too much focus. Therefore, while Ross does try to counter Steve’s argument, he does so in a roundabout way that kind of changes the subject, which he then twists into trying to make himself look better than the Avengers. And Steve is not allowed to insist on an actual response to his comment, to ensure it is more easily forgotten. The movie thus does everything in its power to diminish Steve’s argument, to prevent Tony’s side from looking bad.
The reply Ross gives is, “Tell me, Captain, do you know where Thor and Banner are right now? If I misplaced a couple of 30 megaton nukes, you can bet there'd be consequences.” First, this shows that Ross still thinks of enhanced people as weapons. His little anecdote earlier tried to make it appear that his heart attack enlightened him, but this comment proves quite clearly that it hasn’t. In The Incredible Hulk it was revealed that he saw Bruce as nothing more than the property of the US government, and his beliefs have evidently not changed a bit. And the movie espouses this viewpoint, because Tony demonstrates similar beliefs several times later, and this is never challenged. But comparing two living, breathing people—who have dedicated their powers to protecting others—to inanimate weapons is extremely inaccurate and disrespectful. It is also profoundly disgraceful to imply that Thor and Bruce are dangerous, so dangerous that the world is threatened when their exact locations are not known. Ross needed to provide some sort of rebuttal to Steve’s defense, though, and since there really isn’t any, this was the best he could do. The movie also means to continue what it started by insinuating that Wanda was dangerous, to promote the idea that if an enhanced individual is not safely restrained by the Accords, they are a serious threat. This is simply not true, however, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Avengers being unsure of where Thor and Bruce are. They are not required to know where every single one of their teammates is at all times. Thor and Bruce are both grown adults, and they have a right to go about their lives without constantly informing their teammates of their whereabouts. All of the Avengers have this right. And it’s worth noting that Tony was afforded this privilege; when he told Steve of his intention to retire at the end of Age of Ultron, Steve accepted it without demanding to know where he was going. Neither he nor any of his friends knew where Tony was until he showed up at the Avengers bashing session. But Tony isn’t enhanced, so in the movie’s eyes, his exact location not being constantly established is perfectly acceptable.
But as for Ross’s second sentence, that’s actually not true. Now, if somehow Ross did actually manage to lose track of real nuclear missiles, he probably would be punished. In this case, though, he’s blaming the Avengers for not knowing where Bruce and Thor are, so we’ll view his comment from that lens for a moment. In The Incredible Hulk, Ross’s entire mission was to capture Bruce: and while he did manage to briefly apprehend Bruce at one point, he ultimately failed to capture him. Even as Ross makes that statement, he still doesn’t know where Bruce is. And on top of this, all of his failed apprehension attempts resulted in a lot of damage, and quite probably civilian casualties. But not only was he in no way punished for any of this, he also managed to become Secretary of State. Ross claims he would face consequences to make it seem like he is already part of a system of accountability, and the Avengers need to get with the program: but this is clearly not the case.
Now, as Ross says, “you can bet there’d be consequences,” the camera is focused on Tony, as if trying to imply that Tony, too, would face consequences if he did irresponsible things. This is absolutely laughable, however, because it’s quite clear that’s not true. Tony straight up plugged an alien artifact into the internet (about which the only thing he knew was that it was evil) and thus unleashed Ultron, who ended up causing a lot of destruction, but faced absolutely no consequences for this. Based on the fact that the document is called the Sokovia Accords, it appears that all the Avengers are taking the blame for that incident, even though only Tony and Bruce, who helped him, are responsible for any damage that occurred. And even the Accords themselves, which Tony appears to have had some sort of influence on, for the most part do not apply to him. Even where they do, he just ignores them, also without consequences. However, Tony needs to appear somewhat righteous in order to garner support from the audience: so the movie focuses on him while certain words are being said, in order that his image can be boosted without the requirement of actual support for this flattery.
After Ross is extremely disrespectful to Thor and Bruce and deceitfully tries to gain moral high ground over the Avengers, he continues, “Compromise. Reassurance. That's how the world works. Believe me, this is the middle ground.” This is pure propaganda. Because no, the Accords are not a middle ground. They are not any ground, in fact; they are a blatant attempt by politicians to gain control of the Avengers. But the Avengers were clearly never consulted about the Accords, so their side was never taken into account. And it is not a middle ground when one side is completely left out of the equation. However, by saying that the world requires compromise and reassurance, the movie is trying to set up the idea that any Avengers who reject the Accords are unwilling to compromise. And it outright insists that this one-sided blatant power grab is some sort of middle ground, to try to prevent any other beliefs. This way, the audience is more likely to accept the idea that the Accords are fair without questioning it, since they were specifically told it was so.
Once Ross finishes his attempt to brainwash the Avengers into accepting the Accords, Rhodey brings up a great point. He says, “So, there are contingencies.” Asking Ross if there are any. But the answer is no, so instead of admitting this and potentially preventing a good deal of the audience from supporting the Accords and siding with Tony, Ross doesn’t acknowledge Rhodey’s question at all. Just like Steve’s point that the Avengers have kept the world safe, because the film finds Rhodey’s question problematic, it does its best to ignore it, in the hope that it will be forgotten. And not only does Rhodey not seek an answer to his question, he also ends up supporting the Accords later.
Rather than give Rhodey an answer, Ross continues, “Three days from now, the UN meets in Vienna to ratify the Accords.” The fact that the Avengers were only given three days to try to come to a decision about the Accords is very telling. They were just presented with what clearly is a very dense document, but are allowed an extremely limited amount of time to examine it. Three days is nowhere near enough time to properly understand such a substantial document. This indicates that there is a lot of material in there that the people who are promoting the Accords know the Avengers won’t support: so by springing the Accords on the Avengers and giving them insufficient time to make sense of the document, they are hoping that the Avengers miss any problematic stipulations, and sign away their rights without question. Having such a small amount of time to comprehend the Accords also helps prevent the Avengers from having an opportunity to make suggestions about how the Accords could be improved and actually made fair. This way, the Accords’ supporters do not have to worry about the compromise and reassurance Ross demanded the Avengers provide.
Now, after Ross says this, a silent exchange happens between Steve and Tony. Steve turns and looks at Tony, as if to say, “We only have three days to try to understand this document, but you’ve known about it for way longer than that, haven’t you.” Tony looks down, because he clearly has, and it really is despicable that he gave his teammates no warning. But as Steve continues to look at him, he looks up and meets Steve’s gaze, as if to say, “What? No, I don’t have anything to be ashamed of.” Having received his answer, though, Steve looks away in disappointment.
Steve is sort of able to call Tony out here, but not really. It is definitely worth pointing out that Tony never told the others about a document that profoundly impacts them when he clearly had advance knowledge of it. But the film energetically defends Tony from any criticism, and this instance is no different. Instead of being able to verbally call attention to the fact that Tony hid the Accords from them, Steve is reduced to having a silent exchange with him that really could be interpreted as many other things. And any problems Steve might have with Tony’s betrayal are reduced to a brief look of disappointment.
Thankfully, at this point the disinformation campaign is almost over. Following Steve’s mostly stifled calling out of Tony, Natasha asks, “And if we come to a decision you don’t like?” To which Ross replies, threateningly, “Then you retire.”
Ross’s final words in this scene are the last piece of the three-part plan this scene enacts to keep the Accords from looking too bad. The first part was making the Accords seem like a choice, the second part was portraying them as a middle ground, and this last part is deemphasizing the fact that the Avengers will be punished if they don’t comply. By instead emphasizing that the Avengers have the option of retiring if they don’t want to sign the Accords, the film aims to make it seem like they have an easy way of avoiding any conflict if they disagree with the Accords. This way, anyone who refuses to sign but doesn’t end up retiring looks unreasonable. However, it’s not that simple, given that the Avengers’ job is keeping the world safe. So since the Accords mean they basically can’t do anything without the UN’s permission, retiring would mean that they would just have to ignore any bad situations they encountered, because to help would be to violate the Accords. None of the Avengers except possibly Tony would realistically agree to such a thing. Now, it is obvious that there will be serious consequences if the Avengers don’t comply with these demands; Ross says “Then you retire,” with great menace, to make this clear. But paying too much attention to the fact that the Accords are being ruthlessly forced on the Avengers has the potential to cause the audience to realize how bad the Accords are and sympathize with the Avengers: and since the entire scene up to this point has been striving valiantly to prevent those things from happening, the movie cannot risk throwing away all its hard work. Therefore, Ross never actually states what those consequences will be. Not only does this help draw attention away from the fact that the Avengers are being coerced, it also spares Ross from having to reveal that the consequence involves being locked in a rights-violating underwater super prison. In this manner, the possibility of the unsaid punishments being tolerable remains open.
Natasha’s reaction to Ross’s threat is to smirk, as if to say, “Ha—as if you could make us.” This is quite in character, for it echoes the beliefs she made clear in The Winter Soldier. Tragically, though, this is the only allusion the movie gives to the fact that Natasha would not actually be on Team Iron Man. For the rest of the film, even including the part where she switches sides, she acts extremely out of character and backs the Accords with Tony.
Kraykraykat55 had an excellent observation about the ridiculousness of this entire situation: “The Guardians are criminals and [y]et when they saved the world, their government pardoned them and gave them credit for their bravery; here on Earth, when superheroes do what no one else can or even tries to do, they get punished for the lives they couldn't save, instead of [being recognized for] the ones they did, what logic is that?”
As is evident, there is a positively mind-boggling amount of propaganda in this scene designed to stir up animosity against the Avengers and Steve in particular. There is also quite the effort promote the Accords and make Tony look as good as possible. It really is disgusting, especially since it is done in such an underhanded way. Unfortunately, only an extremely meek resistance is permitted to all of this manipulation, and it continues unabated throughout the rest of the movie. In this film which the creators have the audacity to call a Captain America movie, the bashing of Steve and his friends is only beginning.