This still annoys me....

Maybe I'm just grumpy, but it still annoys me that Sam basically said Bucky took the serum willingly in Brave New World. I mean its such a core part of Bucky's arc that he \*didn't\* take that thing willingly. Can't the writers at least get that detail corect?

It just seems lazy at this point to keep acting like Bucky walked into a HYDRA base and asked for the serum like a flu shot then asked to be weaponized.

Voir le contenu lié

Commentaires

JyconX2025-09-23 14:02

What are you talking about? I don't recall Sam saying anything like that.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:03

"I wish I'd taken the serum like you and like Steve". Those weren't the exact words but lumping Bucky together with Steve who got it voluntarily is pretty clear.

juances192025-09-23 14:14

> lumping Bucky together with Steve who got it voluntarily is pretty clear.

Ummm no? That phrase isn't implying Bucky took the serum willingly at all, you're making that assumption yourself.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:18

Dude, the whole definitnion of "take" or "to take" means a voluntary action. There's literally no context in which "take" means a person didn't do something willingly. This isn't an assumption its just the English langauge.

DJTLaC2025-09-23 14:24

"I should've took the serum... like steve... like you"

The tone he says it is far different than the way you typed it. At first his entire statement is just "I should've took the serum" and then he follows up with like steve, and then the "like you" part is like he's making sure to include Bucky since he has the serum. He's regretting his actual choice to not take the serum when had a chance, not simply the fact that he doesn't have it. Wording it as "i wish i had the serum" leaves out the regret and makes it seem like a selfish yearning for more power. Regret is the entire point of that scene because he feels like he could've captured Sterns and protected Joaquin if he had made a different choice.

Being bothered by the writing of a casual conversation between friends when one of the characters has no reason to be bothered by the wording seems incredibly silly. Would you have preferred it if he said "I wish i had taken the serum... like Steve, or been forcibly injected with it like you" ??

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:28

Yeah, no. There's a \*lot\* of interpretation required to explain away what Sam is saying here. Even the the word "took" means a voluntary action- and the very fact Sam even thinks Bucky had a choice in the matter kind of says it all.

In fact, all the writers managed to do was try and retcon Bucky's backstory to make it seem like he took the serum voluntarily out a of a selfish desire for more power. So it really has the the same effect. Especially when that was immediately followed by Bucky having to remind Sam that the serum *didn't* give Steve the power to save everyone.

JyconX2025-09-23 14:38

I think it's foolish and too black-and-white to think that each word in any language can only be used to mean only limited amount of thing or be taken in limited amount of contextes.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:41

Sure- find an example of where a character used the word "took" to mean an involuntary action then I guess. Also by lumping Bucky in with Steve Sam's meaning was made all the clearer. He/the writers want us to think Bucky took it voluntarily like Steve.

Just like the writers of TFatWS wanted us to think Bucky was serving HYDRA willingly as well.

JyconX2025-09-23 14:54

You can't seriously think the way people like you interpret certain lines is 100 % exactly how writers want the fans interpret it.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 15:05

We don't need Sam to include Bucky in that line- we already know Bucky has the serum, so why was his inclusion even necessary except to try and make us think he took it voluntarily?

And considering how many people whose first introduction to Bucky was TFatWS left tht show thinking he served HDYRA Voluntarlity for 70 years before Sam saved him, he'd say a lot of people interpret lines as the writers intend.

Odd-Spray-85132025-09-23 15:16

Take a beating.

DJTLaC2025-09-23 15:49

No one is retconning anything. Sam is using AAVE with his use of "took" in that sentence and I genuinely don't get why that's so difficult to understand. If it was a standard, grammatically correct sentence, they would have written "I wish I had taken the serum"

Bucky reminding Sam that the serum didn't give Steve the power to save everyone is PRECISELY why the scene is about Sam's regret and Bucky trying to comfort and quell that regret. It's like you watched the scene and purposely misinterpreted it.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 15:59

or maybe Sam is just a dick with a penchant for victim-blaming who either actually thinks Bucky did all that stuff willingly or doesn't care and likes to just throw it in Bucky's face and fans don't wanna admit it?

No wonder Bucky wants out of that relationship.

DJTLaC2025-09-23 16:04

Thank you for this response because it made it obvious that you're one of "those" types that baby the fictional character of Bucky. No point in replying to you anymore.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 16:07

Lol, so sayng Bucky is a victim is "babying" him. I guess T'Challa was babying him too then?

I'm sorry if admitting he was a victim of torture and mind control ruins your toxic male power fantasy of the Winter Soldier.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:46

>Would you have preferred it if he said "I wish i had taken the serum... like Steve, or been forcibly injected with it like you" ??

An alternative is that he could've just said "like Steve" and left Bucky's name out of it.

But there seems to be a concerted effort to retcon Bucky's story to seem like he was doing eveerything voluntarily from the get-go.

JyconX2025-09-23 14:51

Saying only "like Steve" would've totally ignored the fact that Bucky had the serum. No matter whether Bucky got the serum volutarily or involuntarily.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 15:03

We don't need to be told Bucky has the serum- we know that already. The circumstances in which he got it are hardly irrelevant and shouldn't be ignored unless the intent is to decieve.

MentalCouncil2025-09-23 14:10

The whole point is to show Sam’s frustration about doing the job as a human. Sam is struggling and in his own inner turmoil he was disrespectful or insensitive to Bucky.

Implying that is on purpose by the writers but a mistake for Sam to do, but goes to his state of mind having to carry the title of Captain America as a normal dude

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:15

I'm not sure it was a mistake for Sam TBH. He spent pretty much the entirety of The Falcon and the Winter Soldier treating Bucky like he volunteered to be HYDRA's weapon too. Plus the show pretty much outright says Bucky was doing it willingy the whole time so I wouldn't be surprised if the writers of BNW just picked that up and ran with it, so to speak.

MentalCouncil2025-09-23 14:17

I don’t think anyone made it seem like Bucky did it willingly, but he did that stuff. Bucky is fighting the trauma of his action because regardless of him being brainwashed he actually was mentally present when doing it. Having Bucky work on his mental health isn’t victim blaming, is a semi-realistic approach to dealing with his character.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:24

Sam said Bucky was an "enabler", and "amends" are for people who knowingly and willingly do bad stuff. Even Bucky himself called HYDRA "my people" and talked about the power he "gave" to people as though he was calling the shots.

He wasn't so much working on his mental health as being made to atone for all HYDRA's sins whilst HYDRA operatives walked free.

Real life therapists have actually watched the show and say its absolutely victim-blaming and doesn't acknowedlge Bucky wasn't in control at any point.

PenguinWithShoes662025-09-23 14:15

you’re totally on point! Bucky’s arc is all about unwilling manipulation, not him turning into some eager juice junkie. It’s like the writers didn't even read their own lore...smh 🙄 More nuanced storytelling, plz! Can't do our metal-armed bro dirty like that.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 14:19

"Juice Junkie"- lol.

Odd-Spray-85132025-09-23 15:20

It probably annoys you because you are overly scrutinizing something and coming to an incorrect conclusion.

Nobody says Bucky did this willingly. No, simply saying "you took the serum" does not imply that he even wanted it.

Just because he did not specifically call out hydra manipulation every time the serum is mentioned, does not mean that Sam suddenly forgot the whole reason he saved his ass in the first place.

Take your lumps.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 15:49

Just like its not actually victim blaming unless Sam expressly uses the term "blame" in a sentence, huh? -

>
Just because he did not specifically call out hydra manipulation every time the serum is mentioned, does not mean that Sam suddenly forgot the whole reason he saved his ass in the first place.

The writers forgot and want the audience to forget- and Sam never saved Bucky. That was Steve.

Odd-Spray-85132025-09-23 15:56

Idk why you're so pressed about this, chill out lil bro.

No the writers did not forget, you are trying to force a narrative that does not exist. Your only evidence is that someone said Bucky "took" the serum? That's flimsy at best, and bad faith at worst.

And the entire civil war movie was about Sam helping Steve saving Bucky. Sam knew why and how.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 16:06

I \*very much\* doubt you understand what the "bad faith" actually means or involves. No, it doesn't just mean someone disagreed with you.

I'm literally just giving the actual clear and simple interpretation of Sam's words, without the mental gynnastics required to exonerate him of saying Bucky took the seurm willingly. This is part of a consistent pattern of behavior on Sam's part wich began in TFatWS and the intent of which was actually explained by the Director of the show herself.

>And the entire civil war movie was about Sam helping Steve saving Bucky. Sam knew why and how.

Which he didn't want to do, lets be FR.

Odd-Spray-85132025-09-23 16:12

You are doing the opposite lol, it's bad faith because you are trying to force a narrative that you know doesn't exist.

The word "took" in and of itself does not imply any will in any direction. If that is your only evidence of this narrative that has never been applied anywhere else at all, then this can be dismissed as the level of claim you make needs a similar level of evidence.

Please produce the part where the director says Sam implied Bucky wanted the serum to do crime and I'll shut up, but so far you have produced 0 other evidence besides your extreme interpretation of the word "take".

Sam was right in line with cap after bucky's escape, idk it seems you have an agenda and are just making stuff up.

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 16:24

>The word "took" in and of itself does not imply any will in any direction.

Doesn't it? Look up the definitions of took. Every single one involves voluntary action.

>accept or receive (someone or something).

>achieve or [attain](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=01924012ee1eb8d4&sxsrf=AE3TifN_NPuXdjkq7GWvuJeBZ9Aejfa_TA:1758636831756&q=attain&si=AMgyJEtDHPMHY3TGUy5vdCxKM122mIyAygOpJ_F3OCHEM4_wcXt2db71BgvULvgeZjpqVpeBEUY8yu2YeItG6EDTNDU6LAD9Pg%3D%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjE-ZTdiO-PAxX4XEEAHTM0EwYQyecJegUINBCZBA) (a victory or result).

>acquire or assume (a position, state, or form).

>consume as food, drink, medicine, or drugs.

>make, [undertake](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=01924012ee1eb8d4&sxsrf=AE3TifN_NPuXdjkq7GWvuJeBZ9Aejfa_TA:1758636831756&q=undertake&si=AMgyJEu0vuRfTngwPFrZh1qV1iGHgctioKH_Qbw91lJ0_nDCytM321Pd2S9lvsmgQP1dkUEQVbzmDL-2B2WEhJLySlUuiq7PoqHAxNgVtCJz9jja8XCHFVA%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjE-ZTdiO-PAxX4XEEAHTM0EwYQyecJegUINBChBQ), or perform (an action or task).

Taking never means to do something involuntarily or not of free will. Which is why we have different words for something done to a person against their will. This reallly shouldn't be controversial.

>
You are doing the opposite lol, it's bad faith because you are trying to force a narrative that you know doesn't exist.

Giving you the official and universally accepted usage and definition of a term is hardly arguing in bad faith. Come on now.

>Please produce the part where the director says Sam implied Bucky wanted the serum to do crime and I'll shut up,

That's.....interestingly specific. Almost like you know Sam is actually saying Bucky took the serum willingly but just want it to be for a specific reason.

However, the Director of The Falcon and the Winter Soldier is on record as saying Bucky needed to "take responsibility" for his actions as the Winter Soldier and was "hiding behind his lack of control".

Odd-Spray-85132025-09-23 16:35

You can receive, acquire, and consume things unwillingly - and every other one of those definitions can be made under duress, thus nullifying any "willingness".

Even if you aren't being intentionally obtuse, your argument is still insufficient for the claim you are making. I said it's flimsy at best, and bad faith at worst...

And none of the directors comments (of what you outline here) imply that Bucky took the serum willingly, just that he has to atone for things he did, despite being hypnotized.

You seem to be very eager to incorrectly parse speech and apply whatever sentiment you want to it. Nothing you say here has any real value when you repeatedly take the most extreme and least charitable interpretations of mundane figures of speech. That's the "bad faith" part. Conversation over

EcksFountain1322025-09-23 16:44

>You can receive, acquire, and consume things unwillingly

You cannot \*take\* them unwillingly though. Good attempt to change the goalposts there.

>Even if you aren't being intentionally obtuse, your argument is still insufficient for the claim you are making. I said it's flimsy at best, and bad faith at worst...

Revealing you still don't understand what Bad faith means or entails.

>And none of the directors comments (of what you outline here) imply that Bucky took the serum willingly, just that he has to atone for things he did, despite being hypnotized.

Despite being robbed of his autonomy and having no control- there I fixed that for you. Quite aside from the aburdity of the notion that a person should be required to "take responsibility" for things they were forced to do, can you name any other character who is made to atone for involuntary actions? I will wait.

>e when you repeatedly take the most extreme and least charitable interpretations of mundane figures of speech. That's the "bad faith" part. Conversation over

I mean saying a mind control victim has to atone for actions committed under duress is pretty uncharitable, but that's *still* not what bad faith means.

Let me help you: it means acting with the dishonest intent to mislead people, generally by employment of logical fallacies. "That's not \*actually\* what Sam meant!" "you'#re not interpreting it correctly!" might thus be seen as bad faith..