Was the only one who was confused when people called it the third Avengers movie?, What about Civil War?...

Was the only one who was confused when people called it the third Avengers movie?, What about Civil War?, It should be the fourth one

Attached: proxy.duckduckgo.com.jpg (1600x1218, 569K)

In civil war they weren't avenging anything moron

You are right OP
You literally need to watch Civil War before Infinity War.

>What about Civil War?
>Captain America movie

It's the third movie called Avengers in the franchise.
What's so hard to understand?
America education is so shit

>Civil War
>Captain America movie

Hurr dont you mean the seventh iORN mAN MOVIE, i'M NOT BASIC i'M NOT BASIC i'M not basic

they were avenging our liberties

We got really cucked from a third Cap movie AND another proper Avengers movie when they decided to adapt that shitshow, huh.

The Avengers were literally fighting each other in that movie. They weren't a team fighting against a common threat. It wasn't "The Avengers" it was "Cap vs Iron Man"

>Captain America: Civil War
>an Avengers movie

Is this some turbo autism?

Attached: 1566769304129.png (1420x1080, 1.21M)

>The Avengers were literally fighting each other in that movie.
that describes at least three movies user

I like how nothing that happened in Civil War really mattered and it went down as one of the most boring MCU flicks.

Like, you'd think the sokovian accords would have a big impact on small time heroes such as Man of Spiders but since he was The Iron Boy I guess he gets a free pass to be an undercover hero, cops wouldn't just shoot him in sight, try to arrest him or lawsuit the everlasting shit of the US.

>that describes at least three movies user
And they weren't titled "Avengers" movies

Black panther was avenging his father, tony was avenging his parents

>Captain America: Civil War
>An Avengers Movie

where exactly do you fall in the autism spectrum

>I like how nothing that happened in Civil War really mattered
If they Avengers never broke up, they would have beat Thanos. How much of a brainlet do you have to be not to get this?

>if they avengers never broke up
>they would have beat Thanos

They wouldn't because the plot of Infinity War demanded that they lose in the end.
Nevermind the fact that even separated between Wakanda and Titan, they were fighting as a single unit. The presence of the whole team in Wakanda or in Titan would just mean that we'd get to see Thanos steamrolling them all in one place without having to use the power of the space stone.

It's a bullshit excuse.

Attached: 1540776378974.png (989x1334, 1.18M)

>They wouldn't because the plot of Infinity War demanded that they lose in the end.
This mentality means that there's no point in any storytelling because there's always a set conclusion.

The Avengers fight each other in both Avengers 1 and Age of Ultron you absolute retard.

...two of them were

It's not that. It's just that to claim that the events of civil war are the reason why the avengers lost is bullshit.
They lost for a myriad of reasons, but in the end they were fighting Thanos together, and they lost. And they would've lost if they didn't broke up, because plot demanded so.
What i'm saying is Civil War should've had a even bigger impact, during the events of infinity war it's just a footnote of why Steve and Tony refuse to talk to each other. That was not the reason why they lost.

Ironically, Civil War events really come to fruition in Endgame, because of Scott Lang, not the Avengers.

>Was the only one who was confused

Yes.

Nothing makes sense. Roll with it.

>War
>Captain America movie