It is certainly arguable that Captain America Civil War demonstrates a laudable and notable divergence from other contemporaneous Marvel Films through its augmented, centralized focus on the interpersonal dynamics and ideological disparities which individually motivate members of the Avengers. The film’s primary antagonistic force, as eponymously implied, deviates from a world-threatening entity and is instead dependent on the threat of widening the capacious schism forming between the Avengers themselves. Foundational to the crumbling façade of unity are the incompatible mentalities of Tony Stark and Steve Rogers, representing the subjugation of the Avengers to external regulatory bodies and independent self-governance, respectively. Each perspective is presented with commensurate strengths and fallibilities to instill complexity to the determination and disentanglement of this predicament facing the Avengers, and the side chosen by every member elucidates their personal experiences and history with the organization. Steve, for instance, is intimately cognizant of the failures of bureaucracy and the supposed impregnability of powerful associations, such as S.H.I.E.L.D., that seek to retain control over the deployment and development of weaponry or “super-human” beings. Tony’s position, conversely, is inextricably related to the profundity of his guilt and sense of responsibility at the helm of the Avengers, which he desires to alleviate through foisting integral decisions onto a conglomerate of governing bodies. Though the establishment and explication of Tony’s remorse is effectively conveyed throughout the introductory moments of the film, the culmination of his arc and the residual implications of his internal tribulations were essentially abandoned and remained incompletely resolved by the film’s conclusion.
Guilt, as the predominant motivator impelling the actions of Tony Stark, was shown to originate with the realization of the devastating collateral impact incurred by the rampant, unregulated behaviors of the Avengers during their missions. Regardless of the general mitigating effect their influence has over the overarching predicament, each personal loss has individual significance and weighs heavily upon Tony’s conscience. In addition, compounding this prodigious remorse for the unintentionally harmed, Tony experiences latent guilt and trauma over the final interactions he had with his parents before they died. The film specifically expounds upon the nature of this moment and its importance to Tony, who creates three-dimensional visualization technology to simulate this final conversation and allow for him to respond with the kindness and love his original reactions were devoid of. The ardency of Tony’s efforts to mollify the synthesis of this insurmountable grief and regret translates into his devotion to relinquish control of the Avengers and subject them to the decisions and caprices of the U.N.
The eventual exculpation of Bucky Barnes for acts of terrorism and the acknowledgement in the failures and misdirection caused by external authorities erodes Tony’s austerity towards the opinions and actions of Rogers. He accepts the veracity of Rogers’ words and offers his assistance in the apprehension of the true mastermind, Helmut Zemo, until Zemo attempts to permanently fracture the solidity of the Avengers through the reveal of Barnes’ responsibility for the death of Tony’s parents. The ideological dissonance existing between the two manifests as a final physical confrontation, which culminates in the apparent severance of their tumultuous, tenuous relationship. Within the context of this film, in isolation from the continued arcs and storylines present in subsequent entries in the Marvel compendium, this resolution insufficiently completes the arc of guilt and pain Tony experiences that impels his actions throughout the film. In a sense, he was cognizant that Barnes was mind-controlled and logically could not be at fault for the death of his parents, therefore, the ferocity Tony displays seems to imply a deeper origination to the emotion he releases against Barnes and Rogers. Essentially, Tony’s intensity transcends both the discovery about his parents and the ongoing philosophical differences, and appears to have its derivation from his projection of personal guilt and ability to corporeally punish Barnes and Rogers in substitution for himself. Perhaps Rogers could have recognized this during the course of their fight and implored Tony to also admit to the truth underlying and inciting the needlessly violent physicality of their interaction. Without a layered rationale emboldening the nature of Tony’s response, it simply appears as if inflicting pain when in a momentary state of incomparable anger is a viable reaction and means of temporarily dissipating conflict between parties. Instead, the immeasurable encumbrance of responsibility and regret which define Tony’s impetuous and belligerent behaviors should have their culmination in the realization of this projection of blame. Only upon the acknowledgement of these actions would Tony finally be able to forgive Rogers, Barnes, and, most importantly, himself.