I think what made it the absolute worst was seeing the way Steve and Tony's friendship had developed by
Ultron. They were still snarky at each other, but there was clearly a genuine bond between them and it was lovely and fun. (Also, I

hard at Natasha's remark at the end that she was waiting for them to stop making goo-goo eyes at each other.) And then to watch it all come crashing down in
Civil War was just...so...horrible. Tony's vision in
Ultron made that all worse. I don't think it was a coincidence that it was Steve's death that was in focus in that vision, with the shield broken by his side, and then Steve blaming him. It was an obvious pointer to the friendship.
Ultron was actually a bit of a nothingburger of a movie, IMO. It was more filler that set things up for later, though I still liked the way the movie was paced and the characters. I loved the scene where they all try and lift Mjolnir. I think I'm going with the fan theory that Steve
could lift it but chose not to in order to spare Thor's feelings. It would be really easy to blame Tony for - well, everything - in that movie, but IMO that's a bit of a shortsighted view given what we know of Tony's PTSD and deep-rooted fear of not being able to protect everyone he loves. The thing is, Tony obviously keeps that side of himself well hidden, so the others really don't understand his viewpoint.
I wasn't a huge fan of the new characters in
Ultron. I thought Vision is a bit much of an overpowered what (plus I like Jarvis better than Friday). And the twins' heel-face turn felt a bit forced and rushed to me. I was still pretty sad when Pietro died. Overall I enjoyed that Hawkeye actually got loads more screentime in this one and his character and motivations were fleshed out a bit. It was nice to see the development of the relationship between Natasha and Bruce as well.
Civil War was a much stronger movie. The conflicts were so real, so grounded in how humanity might actually react. And Zemo was a fricking
amazing villain because he was so sympathetic. He had real, genuine motivations and a solid plot. Huge kudos to Daniel Bruhl for playing him with empathy and coldness in equal measures. He really brought the man with nothing left to lose to life. (Mandatory:
Daniel Bruhl was robbed because he wasn't even nominated for an Oscar for his turn as Niki Lauda in Rush those elitist highbrow snobs at the Academy suck)
My view: Steve and Tony were both right, and they were both wrong. About the Accords, Steve was more right. In fact, he was bang on the money. Giving control of the Avengers to a bunch of slimy, worthless, corrupted politicians? Yeah, sounds like a brilliant idea. As he said, agendas change. What if they were needed and some corrupt politician wouldn't let them go? Plus, we all saw what happened in New York when politicians intervene - they decide to
fcuking nuke New York. But Tony was also right, in a way. The Avengers needed to take more responsibility for the collateral damage and think more carefully about the way they went into missions. But making them register and sign and be criminals if they didn't was absolutely the wrong way to go about it.
Steve was an idiot not to tell Tony about his parents. Of course Steve didn't know it was Bucky who did it, but he still should have told Tony. He didn't have enough faith in him. Tony's reaction was completely understandable and he clearly wasn't thinking.
Mostly I was really sad for poor Bucky who it seems will never escape his tormented past. Maybe in some future Marvel movie we'll get a happy recovered Bucky, but I doubt it will be the 4th Avengers movie. It was also my first introduction to T'Challa/Black Panther and I really enjoyed him too. Plus,
Civil War had
way more Sam/Falcon, which is always a plus, and I like that we were given a little glimpse into a friendship between Sam and Rhodey (poor Rhodey). Spiderman/Peter was a fricking hoot. Tom Holland strikes just the right note as him.