Like worth it for them to have done? They can't go back and change anything unless they put in time travel, and that would really piss people off.

Reading it? Yea, I enjoyed it. Not earth-shaking but still a fun read IMO.

Not worth buying, no.

I think it was one of the best Marvel events they've put out. I recommend picking it up.

This (I think it was the best of the decade).

Civil War has about a bazillion tie-ins that don't really add up to anything at the end of the event. I won't give away any spoilers, but outside of one big scene, Civil War's finale was very unremarkable. It's basically a marketing ploy to segue new teams and characters to make readers buy more of their comics. Marvel was very successful with it too, because the issues that followed Civil War were more interesting and entertaining then anything that happens in Civil War, IMHO. That wouldn't normally bother me, because I don't read events just to get to the end. It's the journey to the end that I find entertaining, so if the end is lackluster, it usually doesn't bother me. But I found Civil War to have a very boring series of events that came to a very uninteresting conclusion. If you only read the 7 issue main series, it will probably be more entertaining of an experience then I had, because I invested into pretty much every tie-in there was and I felt really let down by the end.

I would recommend checking out the cosmic events that were happening at the same time as Civil War like Annihilation. It has several tie ins too, but they were all written to conclude at the end of the main event with a great finale. The epic amount of stories doesn't collapse on itself like Civil War did.

It was AWEFUL!! Not even the nice art saved it! Really, all the Bendis written events were horrible.

I liked it, so I guess it's worth picking up. I'm honestly not too big on Marvel events but I think you would like it.

The tie-ins aren't worth it, but since you're talking about the 7 issue miniseries, I would say that it's worth it.

@blackdog2009 said:

Civil War was actually written by Mark Millar.

I think it is definitely worth it. Although i agree with tparks about the ending being a bit of a letdown, as a whole the series was a lot of fun and had major ramifications in the Marvel Universe for years to come. One of the best and most successful (creatively) of the 'event' comics and one of the few where you don't really need to read anything outside of the main seven issues to understand what's going on (and i also agree with @tparks about the Annihilation series being WELL worth reading).

@blackdog2009: A. it was written by mark millar, so your opinion on the matter dropped significantly. B this is awful art? really? go troll marvel somewhere else.

@turel_hash_ak_gik: sorry, yeah it was Millar, and it was still terrible and I loved the art, never said it had bad art.

I would buy that for a dollar.

no, its to big of a series .

no it sucked.

I read all the tie ins and everything involved in the event and I found it tedious and full of lousy justifications.

I passed on it when I found out spiderman was way out of character and gave up his name on tv.

Absolutely! It is a game changer.

It was the worst thing marvel ever put out, with wildly out of character moments, a kindergarten level understanding of the US legal system, a complete disregard for anything approaching reasonable discussion and unfortunately it sold so we've been getting the same poorly written events ever since. I'd have rather the company closed down and stopped publishing instead of putting out civil war. The editorial was about as bad as editorial can be. They didn't even bother to try and keep track of what was going on.

@feebadger: I think it would have been better if Millar had any idea what characters that he was writing. I don't think he did, I think he and Bendis have the luxury because of sales and reputations to be able to craft stories where the character's history doesn't matter as much as the shock value of having them stab each other in the back. Civil War got me to hate Iron Man, think of Captain America, She-Hulk as idiots and regard Carol Danvers for ever more as a fascist hypocrite.

@mark_stephen: Can absolutely see where you're coming from. I think when they introduced the 'Marvel architects' concept, they basically acknowledged that they considered their creators more important than their characters. I think that's when Bendis and the rest began to take massive liberties with characters as the editors became subservient to their views as opposed to doing their jobs and stepping in. Still, having said that, i did still love Civil War due to it being something which seemed very genuine in it's approach (if not it's execution at times) to making some very real changes to the Marvel Universe for the better.

Yea, but I'm not sure the changes were for the better. As you note it was the start of the authors ascendency and the editors demotion into spell checkers, if that.

To me it was a case of everyone who did something wrong was rewarded. Carol Danvers prior to civil war was a B-list heroine so desperate for attention she hired a publicist. After civil war she was given her own SHIELD task force, Helicarier and made head of the Avengers. None of that would have happened if she hadn't hunted and beaten other heroes so that they could be thrown into prison for life. Worse a negative zone prison. She mad her rep being Tony's enforcer and she never went after villains like she went after heroes. Reed lied to everyone, helped design the prison, consulted with the Mad Thinker on his theories and for all of that his punishment was to go on a second honeymoon with Sue so she'd stop being mad at him. Sue, Ben and Johnny really rolled over and played for him. Young people with powers were drafted into a harsh military style training camp and pushed so hard that one of them was driven to murder. Stature was being trained by the man who attempted to kill her father. What did that tell those kids about the nature of right and wrong? Tony Stark broke so many laws I lost count, wired up Norman Osborn with mind controlling nannies, cloned Thor, committed financial embezzlement on a massive scale and was rewarded by being put in charge of SHIELD. I can't think of much that Norman Osborn did as head of HAMMER that Tony didn't do first as head of SHIELD. For that matter I couldn't tell the difference between a SHIELD agent, a HAMMER agent or a HYDRA agent. They all did about the same things.

To me the marvel writers decided in civil war that being the bad guy was the only way to get things done and when you became the bad guy for the right reason there were no real consequences. The ends justify the means. I don't agree with that and to this day when I see a marvel hero going against a marvel villain I know that it's a flip of the coin who's actually on the side of the angels.