So, as many of you know, I am not very pleased with Spider-Man's inclusion in the MCU, and especially Civil War. More specifically, his presence in the ending battle sequence seen in the trailer. I take issue with a number of things, and I wish to present them here.
1. Spider-Man is a child: Peter Parker is 15 years old; not even old enough to join the Army with parental permission. He's still in high school. I find it simultaneously horrifying and ridiculous that a team of the world's most lethal soldiers and assassins, armed with the most powerful weapons, would bring a child onto a battlefield. A battlefield littered with bullets, explosions, and very primal violence. I understand that Parker does this of his own volition back in New York City, but there's a huge difference between what he does there (that can't really be controlled), and purposefully bringing a child into an adult war with massive geopolitical ramifications. To bring a child into a war zone is absolutely morally bankrupt. Who thought that was okay? Who thought that this was legal? Don't the adults feel the need to shelter children from war, especially a powered child for whom this conflict will be extremely formative? Don't they feel they feel responsible for his life? Indeed, he'd need a permission form signed by Aunt May to go to a museum for a school field trip (because the school is the responsible party) but the Sokovia Accords faction (ironically) throws all sense of responsibility out the window? Let me repeat this: He is a child. He should not be allowed to go to war. Again: Where is the responsibility, or the sense of it? Where is the concern for Parker's life? He could be killed! Why does Stark exploit Parker's powers as a trump card when he feels it's beneficial? Why exploit a child to further your own political cause? You can almost tell they don't care a bit about him. Instead of giving him a combat-worthy suit... They have him in a flashy, extremely conspicuous costume. It is neither stealthy nor armored. It may be the one he knitted himself. They really didn't feel the need to tactically rectify this manifestation of teenage creativity? Even real-life child soldiers at least wear some meager camouflage. But they put him up looking less combat-ready than USO Cap; it's ridiculous. The TASM Spider-Man costumes at least had a chain-main look about them. Besides these serious moral questions, I can't help but feel silly looking at this kid. Who would seriously trust him? Not in a loyalist-or-traitor sense, but how can anyone expect him to be of any use on the battlefield? He has had no training. How do they know he's going to follow orders or do what he's supposed to do. How can they trust him with their lives? He's an awkward little kid. Most kids would have a mental breakdown in a situation like this. Plus, if I was on the same team as Parker I would just feel goofy. There's Black Widow, Black Panther, War Machine, and... this pubescent kid in a hilariously out of place costume? I would feel ridiculous; embarrassed even. A squeaky "Hey, everyone" in the middle of microcosmic World War III doesn't help his case, either; it makes it sound like a poorly-written fanfiction high school intramural meet-n-greet, as opposed to the "emotional horror story" Civil War's been marketed as. Am I supposed to take him seriously? What ever happened to immersion, like in Iron Man, The Avengers or Captain America: The Winter Soldier? He doesn't fit the tone of the movie: One of betrayal and bleakness.
2.How the hell did they find him, and why do they think he's more qualified than others?: Spider-Man has a secret identity, and in a world suffering from a massive Inhuman outbreak, why did Spider-Man come to their attention first? Surely there are Inhuman or seasoned Spec-Ops candidates more befitting a spot on Iron Man's team than an (on an Inhuman scale) unremarkable teenager? At least one of them would agree with Stark; that's just statistics. I wonder who looked at Parker, a child, and said, "Yeah. This kid is the man for the job. More qualified than the GSG-9 or SAD. We'll have to schedule our big showdown in between his Chemistry and English classes, though." To me, Spider-Man's inclusion feels shoe-horned in and doesn't address the current Inhuman crisis unfolding on Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. It's funny how "Fox News won't shut up [about Inhumans]," but Stark's attention is directed at grooming an unknown, underage youth from a backwater neighborhood in New York to become a tool to take down the world's greatest soldier and world's deadliest assassin. It feels forced and inorganic.
3.Spider-Man doesn't kill: You can't fight a war without being willing to kill. Everyone else kills. Even Vision; he killed Ultron. Artificial Intelligence counts if you ask me. What's the point of him being there if he is unwilling to make the hard calls? It makes him disadvantageous dead weight. Just knowing he won't kill lowers the emotional stakes of the movie immensely for me.
Feel free to share your own thoughts and opinions. I may add to this list later.