Disney+'s WandaVision (2020) 6 6

[theCapraAegagrus]

3 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I didn't say Monica was a reliable "judge," though she is the show's moral compass. Monica is a reliable "witness". When she recounts events in the show, we know she isn't lying. She's a reliable witness. So when she says she can ascertain Wanda's intentions because she was in her head, we know Monica is telling the truth. Therefore, we know reliably that Wanda is not a terrorist in the federal legal sense of the word. Terrorism is the unlawful use of violence and intimidation against civilians or public property for political aims. Wanda is not a terrorist in the legal federal sense of the word. Wanda is only guilty of mass unlawful restraint. Yes, I'm sure it's punishable for up to 10 or 20 years or whatever, but nobody's throwing the Scarlet Witch in jail, as I said.

Her moral compass is corrupt if she empathizes with a psychological terrorist. She's not a "reliable" anything. Wanda is the definition of a certified psychological terrorist.

"Nobody's throwing her in jail" doesn't justify anything.* Doctor Strange would be righteous if he straight-up disintegrated her. She's a threat with no compunction.

*Nobody was throwing Thanos in jail, either.

Edited March 22, 2021 by Angel of Death

[@therealsilvermane]

41 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

Incorrect. As the Director SWORD, the Sokovia Accords actually give him the authority to eliminate super-powered terrorists. Also incorrect, as Albino Vision is a new entity without free will. An FBI Agent that violated such accords by going rogue? Treason, you mean?

It doesn't. Hayward's not Congress, he's not the President, he's not even Thunderbolt Ross. He's just a soldier in a temporary position of leadership over one government agency. It doesn't give him the authority to violate international Accords. In Episode 6, Agent Woo even says that Hayward is "going way beyond his provisional authority."

Hayward himself gives his traditional "villain" speech in Episode 9 to an unlawfully detained FBI Agent Woo, where he even admits he's going to pin the revival of White Vision on Wanda once the original Vision destroys the Westview Vision. Right there, Hayward knows he broke the law. Hayward obviously has issues with super-powered beings to the point he will break the law to take them out if they get out of line. And he also doesn't care about what's right in a universal sense when he violates Vision's living will not to be brought back online to be used as a weapon.

Edited March 22, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[@therealsilvermane]

14 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

*Nobody was throwing Thanos in jail, either.

Steve Rogers also became a Nomad on the run from the U.S. government at the end of Civil War and busted Sam and Wanda out of SuperMax prison. Some Avengers, like Wanda, who always skirted the line anyway, make their own rules, but they're still heroes.

[@therealsilvermane]

On 3/15/2021 at 3:58 PM, TupennyConan said:

Wanda is an absolute villain of the highest order. She may be sympathetic but needs to be sympathetic from prison, not out in a sweet cabin, in a comfy hoodie, with a warm cup of joe, studying deadly black magic. 

She kidnapped & tortured [raped?] some 3K folks. 

Hayward was right. How exactly does he qualify as a bad guy or deserve FBI arrest?

So long as he was acting in his mandate, under legal authority when using the killer drone & WV, what crime did he commit?

Was it trying to kill the magical children? What is a jury supposed to do with that? Ladies & gentlemen of the jury, he pulled the trigger on two magical children...who were protecting their mass-rapist, slaveholding mom with reality altering powers.

Don't kill Wanda, Hayward, it might kill the 3K hostages & torture victims. Do kill Wanda Hayward, failing to do so now may mean the HEX will engulf the planet tomorrow. 

Send in as many WV's as possible and hurry, before she gains the Darkhold and reality itself is screwed. 

Thor went for the chest, then head; was he wrong? 

Hayward was right.  

Hayward was directly and immediately guilty of Section 36B of the Sokovia Accords by bringing the original Vision's body back online and using him as a weapon. Hayward was also guilty morally by going against Vision's living will to become anyone's weapon. Besides all the other stuff like handcuffing an FBI agent and throwing him in a jail cell as well as shooting at Wanda's children and at SWORD agent Monica Rambeau as she tried to protect them, Hayward is guilty as...fudge.

Hayward's not Congress, he's not the President, he's not even Thunderbolt Ross. He's just a soldier in a temporary position of leadership over one government agency. It doesn't give him the authority to violate international Accords. In Episode 6, Agent Woo even says that Hayward is "going way beyond his provisional authority."

Hayward himself gives his traditional "villain" speech in Episode 9 to an unlawfully detained FBI Agent Woo, where he even admits he's going to pin the revival of White Vision on Wanda once the original Vision destroys the Westview Vision. Right there, Hayward knows he broke the law. Hayward obviously has issues with super-powered beings to the point he will break the law to take them out if they get out of line. And he also doesn't care about what's right in a universal sense when he violates Vision's living will not to be brought back online to be used as a weapon.

[theCapraAegagrus]

35 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

It doesn't. Hayward's not Congress, he's not the President, he's not even Thunderbolt Ross. He's just a soldier in a temporary position of leadership over one government agency. It doesn't give him the authority to violate international Accords. In Episode 6, Agent Woo even says that Hayward is "going way beyond his provisional authority."

Hayward himself gives his traditional "villain" speech in Episode 9 to an unlawfully detained FBI Agent Woo, where he even admits he's going to pin the revival of White Vision on Wanda once the original Vision destroys the Westview Vision. Right there, Hayward knows he broke the law. Hayward obviously has issues with super-powered beings to the point he will break the law to take them out if they get out of line. And he also doesn't care about what's right in a universal sense when he violates Vision's living will not to be brought back online to be used as a weapon.

He's the Director of SWORD. Dealing with Wanda falls under his purview, much like the World Security Council and SHIELD before him.

Hayward is the good guy; Wanda is the bad guy.

[theCapraAegagrus]

26 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Steve Rogers also became a Nomad on the run from the U.S. government at the end of Civil War and busted Sam and Wanda out of SuperMax prison. Some Avengers, like Wanda, who always skirted the line anyway, make their own rules, but they're still heroes.

Steve Rogers never terrorized a single person, let alone thousands. Captain America is a hero; Scarlet Witch is not.

[@therealsilvermane]

30 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

He's the Director of SWORD. Dealing with Wanda falls under his purview, much like the World Security Council and SHIELD before him.

Hayward is the good guy; Wanda is the bad guy.

Being the head of a government agency doesn't give that person the right to be an authoritarian dictator who plays by their own rules or to get jobs done by any means necessary including murdering people, unlawfully detaining people from other government agencies, or violating international treaties. Agent Woo knows what he's talking about when he says Hayward "is going way beyond his provisional authority." Woo's the same guy in Ant-Man and the Wasp who had a friendly educational chat with a child by reciting verbatim the provisions in the Sokovia Accords her dad violated. Woo has been established as an anal retentive rules guy. If Woo says Hayward broke the law, he broke the law.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Just now, @therealsilvermane said:

Being the head of a government agency doesn't give that person the right to be an authoritarian dictator who plays by their own rules or to get jobs done by any means necessary including murdering people, unlawfully detaining people from other government agencies, or violating international treaties. Agent Woo knows what he's talking about when he says Hayward "is going way beyond his provisional authority." Woo's the same guy in Ant-Man and the Wasp who had a friendly educational chat with a child by reciting verbatim the provisions in the Sokovia Accords her dad violated. Woo has been established as an anal retentive rules guy. If Woo says Hayward broke the law, he broke the law.

Director, not Dictator. Don't get the positions confused. As Director of SWORD, it is under his purview to deal with a psychological terrorist as he sees fit. He deserves a Medal of Honor for going up against such a high-powered villain and surviving. His interventions saved all of those who were tortured under Wanda's control.

Agent Woo works for the FBI. He has no clue what he's talking about. It's above his pay-grade.

[drotto]

Wanda caused these people long term phycological damage.  The entire town is going to have PTSD.  When Vision was waking people up, they were saying they wanted to die and were being highly traumatized.  Losing Vision and her kids (who will be coming back) is not a long term punishment.  Wanda will eventually be "good" again and in typical comic fashion will be quickly forgiven. She was the Vilnian in the story.  There really were no true hero's other than Vision.  For the most part you had villains and bystanders. 

 

[drotto]

2 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

Director, not Dictator. Don't get the positions confused. As Director of SWORD, it is under his purview to deal with a psychological terrorist as he sees fit. He deserves a Medal of Honor for going up against such a high-powered villain and surviving. His interventions saved all of those who were tortured under Wanda's control.

Agent Woo works for the FBI. He has no clue what he's talking about. It's above his pay-grade.

You can take the view that he had the duty to place Darcey, Woo, and Monica under arrest.  In a military chain of command there are certain rules that must be followed.  Your superior gives you an order as long as it is reasonable and not treasonous, you are obligated to obey that order.  You can argue conscientious objector, but at the time of the arrest those criteria had clearly not been met. If you violate chain of command and essential start a mutiny, your superior can detain you. 

[@therealsilvermane]

3 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

As Director of SWORD, it is under his purview to deal with a psychological terrorist as he sees fit.

Yes, he's director, not creator of the rules, laws, and regulations. His job is to direct the actions of a government agency to get a job done within their authority and within the law. He doesn't get to deal with anybody as he sees fit. He had the right to kill Wanda, but not the right to bring Vision back online and use him as a weapon. Right there, he violated Section 36B of the Accords while trying to blame Wanda for the same act which she didn't do. Hayward also didn't have the right to shoot Wanda's children or to shoot at Agent Monica Rambeau. If you're a soldier in another land, you're allowed to shoot enemy soldiers in combat but you're not allowed to shoot innocent civilians. We expect the military to get the job done in the name of national defense, but they can't simply do whatever they want. Neither can Hayward.

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 minute ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Yes, he's director, not creator of the rules, laws, and regulations. His job is to direct the actions of a government agency to get a job done within their authority and within the law. He doesn't get to deal with anybody as he sees fit. He had the right to kill Wanda, but not the right to bring Vision back online and use him as a weapon. Right there, he violated Section 36B of the Accords while trying to blame Wanda for the same act which she didn't do. Hayward also didn't have the right to shoot Wanda's children or to shoot at Agent Monica Rambeau. If you're a soldier in another land, you're allowed to shoot enemy soldiers in combat but you're not allowed to shoot innocent civilians. We expect the military to get the job done in the name of national defense, but they can't simply do whatever they want. Neither can Hayward.

He appropriately directed SWORD to eliminate a psychological terrorist. He did the right thing, hence why the show doesn't explain how he's a "villain".

Wanda's children were never real. Can't commit a crime with no victim.

[drotto]

5 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

He appropriately directed SWORD to eliminate a psychological terrorist. He did the right thing, hence why the show doesn't explain how he's a "villain".

Wanda's children were never real. Can't commit a crime with no victim.

He was a villain because the show needed him to be so Monica could get her heroic moment.  Nothing more.  Him shooting at the children does not even make narrative sense, he knew they were not real, and he knew the situation was winding down. Hayward is the definition of lazy writing. 

Edited March 22, 2021 by drotto

[HighVoltage]

22 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

Steve Rogers never terrorized a single person, let alone thousands. Captain America is a hero; Scarlet Witch is not.

I think where all this could easily end up is with a General Ross-run Thunderbolts group. Or one possibly supported globally like a NATO type of organization.

Individuals and governments would be/are tired of getting screwed over and/or left to pick up the pieces of their lives and deal with the damage created by super villains and "heroes."
Heroes being in the eye of the beholder here. No one in Sokovia (or nearby) would be a fan of the freaking Avengers. They created Ultron.

Did Steve Rogers technically break the law by freeing people from the Raft? Yes.
Would he be charged and held accountable for that? Probably depends on the administration and their agenda & if the public knew Cap freed them.

The argument that Avengers or super-powered folks get to make their own rules doesn't hold water.
Either people are held accountable for their actions, or you have... chaos. A decay of society.

Even if Wanda couldn't/wouldn't be held accountable in a court of law for criminal actions, you can be darn sure she'd face a civil suit.

As for Hayward - he looks like he was following directive as head of SWORD. Taking out Wanda as a terrorist seems extreme to people who are fans of Wanda and the Avengers (of which I am, btw), but if you look at this from Hayward & the 'everyman's' perspective: You have an unknown phenomenon that has taken over a town by someone who will not stop or negotiate on your soil. What are you supposed to do with that? Do his actions seem extreme? Um - yes. Would if be justified for what he is directed to do? If I'm Joe-average, I'd say yes. Should Hayward be fired or brought up on charges for his actions with Agent Woo & Monica - most likely...

[TupennyConan]

Hayward was a type: the authority figure [aka white male top cop] the culture teaches us we're supposed to suspect, then hate.

Why is it OK for the superheroes to be vigilantes but not Hayward? If he were Matt Murdock sending in WV, we'd all stand & cheer.

#haywardwasright

[theCapraAegagrus]

4 minutes ago, HighVoltage said:

...As for Hayward - he looks like he was following directive as head of SWORD. Taking out Wanda as a terrorist seems extreme to people who are fans of Wanda and the Avengers (of which I am, btw), but if you look at this from Hayward & the 'everyman's' perspective: You have an unknown phenomenon that has taken over a town by someone who will not stop or negotiate on your soil. What are you supposed to do with that? Do his actions seem extreme? Um - yes. Would if be justified for what he is directed to do? If I'm Joe-average, I'd say yes. Should Hayward be fired or brought up on charges for his actions with Agent Woo & Monica - most likely...

I think that this is what emotionally drives people to believe that he's "bad". He isn't a likeable guy. That doesn't make him wrong, though.

Scarlet Witch is a "hero" in the same vain that Joker is a hero (in his movie). Everyone is a hero in their own story. I'm not buying either of their stories, though. They're both bad people.

[the blob]

OMG, you guys are still talking about this?

[@therealsilvermane]

1 hour ago, Angel of Death said:

He isn't a likeable guy. That doesn't make him wrong, though.

That's right. From the first Episode we met Hayward, he came off as a bit unlikable. But as far as we knew, he wasn't wrong. It was only after we found out that he was after Vision that we realized something's not right. Then after we saw him bring the original Vision online in Episode 8 did we realize his intention was to do the exact thing he accused Wanda of doing, resurrecting Vision against the Accords and against Vision's will.

Violating Section 36B of the Sokovia Accords is what makes Hayward a criminal and thus arrestable at the end. But it doesn't necessary make him the villain. Punisher breaks the laws all the time, but that doesn't make him a villain. Batman breaks laws, doesn't make him a villain.

Hayward is a villain because he continuously throughout WandaVision doesn't do the right thing and undermines those characters who do want to do the right thing. More than a criminal, he's an antagonist. Let me count the ways...

1. When Wanda wants to give Vision a proper burial, Hayward won't let her, but not because he doesn't want to put billions of dollars of Vibranium in the ground(which is the reason he gives to Wanda), it's because he secretly wants to put Vision back together again to use as a weapon, in violation of the Accords.

2. In the first mission brief he gives in Episode 5, Hayward falsely accuses Wanda of stealing Vision's body from SWORD and resurrecting him, falsely accusing Wanda of violating Section 36B of the Accords. That sets the entire mission on the wrong foot, when he knows the real intent, and wastes a lot of people's time and taxpayer dollars. Oh, and a false accusation is itself punishable with imprisonment. Right there he has already broken the law in addition to just being villainous.

3. Also in Episode 5, Hayward disguises an 80's missile as a drone so he can kill Wanda, and her family as collateral damage. Regardless of one's feelings about Wanda at that point, it's still a villainous thing to do. The story of Wanda up until this point has been that Wanda is a reluctant hero who has saved the world numerous times. Hayward doesn't care, isn't giving Wanda the benefit of the doubt, and tries to kill her. Or does he know he can't kill her with it and wants to test how strong she is? That seems to be his real intention as revealed in Episode Six. Shady and kinda villainous.

4. In Episode 6, Hayward removes any dissenting opinions to his plan by removing the good guys, Rambeau Darcy and Woo, from the base. He's not interested in team or pulling great minds together, he thinks his plan is the only way. That's characteristic of villainy.

5. And In Episode 8, we learn that Hayward's been lying the whole time, he actually had Vision's body, and he falsely accused Wanda of stealing the body. And we learn that Hayward's master plan was to bring Vision's body back online as a weapon under his control. Both illegal and villainous.

6. Episode 9, we further learn that Hayward's villainous plan also involves being able to keep White Vision as he can blame Wanda for bringing him back to life and there'll be no evidence to prove otherwise. Then he locks up an FBI agent who he has no jurisdiction over. Villainous.

7. Also in Episode 9, Hayward truly reveals his hatred for the super-powered when he attempts to shoot in cold blood Wanda's kids after he sees them harmlessly disarm his troops, after Wanda had just saved them from falling to their deaths or grave injury due to Agatha. That's villainy almost in the same vein of Bolivar Trask who wants to kill mutants because of who they are.

In each of these instances, Hayward is the antagonist undermining the attempts by the good guys, from Wanda in the beginning to Agent Woo, to do the right thing. That makes Hayward a villain.

Edited March 22, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[drotto]

Let's  be clear Wanda is the villain in this show, even if that is not her intention. I am OK with that.  Her arc closely mirrors her comic book arc.  Initially a villain, but had a bad mentor and was manipulated by Magneto.  Then becomes a good guy for a lot of years.  Eventually shown to be mentally unstable, has a mental break and has a very destructive turn in Avengers Disassembled. Followed up by the Avengers and the X-Men actively discussing if they would have to kill her because she had too much power and was too dangerous. Followed by no more Mutants and all the House of X stuff.  Finally she realizes her errors comes to terms with her mental issues and starts her redemption arc.

 

I know this is what they are basically doing.  

 

 

Edited March 22, 2021 by drotto

[@therealsilvermane]

2 minutes ago, drotto said:

Let's  be clear Wanda is the villain in this show, even if that is not her intention. I am OK with that.  Her arc closely mirrors her comic book arc.  Initially a villain, but had a bad mentor and was manipulated by Magneto.  Then becomes a good guy for a lot of years.  Eventually shown to be mentally unstable, has a mental break and has a very destructive turn in Avengers Disassembled. Followed up by the Avengers and the X-Men actively discussing if they would have to kill her because she had too much power and was too dangerous. Followed by no more Mutants and all the House of X stuff.  Finally she realizes her errors comes to terms with her mental issues and starts her redemption arc.

 

I know this is what they are basically doing.  

 

 

Okay, so who's the hero? As in the protagonist? Don't tell me you think Hayward is the protagonist?

Edited March 22, 2021 by @therealsilvermane