Future crime? You confront them, not detain them. You go and say "we got eyes on you, stop what you're doing"
If they're a normal person by being there you scared them off doing what they were about to do, and if they're a supervillain you have other charges to detain them for.
Boom, fixed.
Why did nobody in the whole book think of that?
>"This is Bendis at his best."
Because then you couldn't have a cool story about heroes fighting heroes.
It wasn't about future crime, it was about preventing disasters.
You know the plot is great when it only works when you consider everyone involved is retarded
Because Minority report didn't do that
That's nearly every event ever.
Well, certainly all the "heroes fighting heroes" events.
>"Minority Report as written by a guy with 90IQ"
but really the person who should feel bad about this is Chuck Austen. That dude fucked up once and he was made a pariah of the industry and Bendis has built a 20 year career off his cuck fantasy self-insert getting buttfucked by Luke Cage. It's not fair.
keep the future aspect, but make it about a continually changing message from the future. subject to wild speculation. every event seems to worsen the outcome, while obvious events could stop parts of the message. for example, tony stark could have seen stark tech on part of a piece of shrapnel in the future message, so he stops production of what he believes the shrapnel was, but ms marvel's command center is stark-technology, leading for a piece of her ship breaking off when iron man smashes it accidentally. eventually, it blooms into an all out conflict between ms marvel, who wants to remain passive until the "event" happens, then coast it out with the knowledge they have now, and iron man, who actively tries to prevent things that may not even be part of the event, or only loosely related.
Bendis was the guy who got Austen back into doing comics in the first place
Better moral dilemma that's not retarded:
Precog predicts that heroes saving the day will inadvertently lead to greater deaths in the future. Do the heroes allow a tragedy to happen now so that mass death won't happen later?
Think America nuking Japan so they could hasten the end of the war so they wouldn't have to invade by land, only maybe more indirect.
In this case, who will be on what side?
All I know is Dr Strange will absolutely be on the “let it happen” side
you're basically saying to make an entire marvel event out of the trolley problem
Yeah. At least it's a real problem. Good luck finding Bendis' bullshit in a first year ethics textbook.
you never read the comic
Where's Captain America?
How did Yea Forums feel about this scene?
i think a solid step to improving civil war 2 would be to remove the scene where thanos shows up with a gun for no reason
Honestly what would actually be a justified reason for a superhero civil war?
Accurate.
reminds me that crossover events were a mistake
It's the perfect moment to capture both the essence of this event and SJW thought process in general: vapid claims of victory over pop culture non-issues while ignoring historical parallels that point out real problems with their behavior and endorsements.
Based Carol, fuck Magneto
Pretty much this. SJWs think not throwing wrongthinkers in gulag will lead to the next Hitler; red pilled people know that it's censorship that will lead to the next Hitler.
Because it would be boring. Besides the series was about preventing disasters and the loss of a massive amount of life. Did you even read the series?
Everybody knows that this series only exists because they were releasing a movie.
Why do people either deny or forget that synergy is/was a thing?
Who denied it? I don't remember the last time marvel didn't release something out of trend/hype/bandwagon.
>Carol doesn't go full insane despot and have a Superior Captain Marvel run after this point and everybody just acts like what she was just another wacky weekend
Wasted potential.
seething conservatards
Holy shit I never noticed that until now. Just the thumbnail of this cover pisses me off.
That line came from a review for the first issue, and that was one of only three positive reviews the Newsarama reviewers had when they reviewed Civil War II individually.
Lmao what's savage
Who roasted him?
Civil War III
-We can highly likely assume that the UN headquarters were blown up by Steve Rogers
-That's preposterous! Do you have any proof?
-Proof is irrelevant. We know it was you.
-That's some bullshit writing there
-Stop breaking the 4th wall and confess already!
Carol's the only one stupid enough to say that to a holocaust survivor.
Carol
Civil War 3
Reed Richards creates Skub.
Doctor Doom is against Skub
>brainlets still think it was about "muh precogs"
The whole exists because Stark's a whiny faggot who got assblasted that he wasn't the one in charge of Ulysses, and would have to play second fiddle to Carl Manvers.
Wouldn't YOU hate having to answer to queen cunt?
>Carol's the only one empowered enough to say that to a holocaust survivor.
FTFY
ms marvel had fuck all to do with civil war 2
So does Minority Report just not exist in 616 or?