Is Ironman a Villian?

[lydamorehouse]

I've been slowly catching up on all the various Marvel titles as I can find them, particularly the CIVIL WAR series. All I can say is that I think that Brian Michael Bendis et. al. are totally setting Ironman up as a villian. And, because of that, every time I see an ad on TV for the new Ironman movie starring Robert Dowing, Jr., I can't help but think it's all part of a government propoganda campaign.

We all know that Tony Stark/Ironman is tight with the current administration, after all. 



I mean, JM Straczinski overtly connects Stark Enterprises (Ironman's corporation) with Halliburton (yes, it's really there. It's on the second page of Amazing Spider-Man #535: CIVIL WAR.) And, there's what, only 30% of the country that doesn't GET that equals evil, right? There are also implications in New Avengers that Tony Stark might have been doing a little insider trading based on the foreknowledge that the Civil War was coming down the pike. He had been broke at the end of AVENGERS DISASSEMBLED, after all, and now...? How are those government contracts working out for you, eh, Mr. Stark????

Plus in CIVIL WAR: Spider-Man Peter Parker asks to see where the heroes are kept who don't comply with the Hero's Reigstration Act (think Patriot Act, as it was precipitated by a horrific attack on a school, not unlike 9/11). Ironman very patiently explains that the heroes are sent to a Negative Zone prison without a trial. For how long? Forever, unless they sign the Hero Registration Act. How is that legal? Spider-Man wants to know. Well, explains Ironman, the Negative Zone isn't on American soil and not subject to American laws.

Sound familiar, anyone? Does anyone think that Guantanamo wasn't wrong???

And, Spider-Man, who's tag line is "with great power comes great responsiblity" and who is arguely one of the most MORAL of all heroes in the Marvel Universe, looks at all this and decides he can no longer support a government that condones these actions. And Spider-Man, after initally going along with the law, decides, along with Captian America before him, to go rogue. Of course, this all ends in the death of Captain America and the end of the superhero civil war.

Tony Stark/Ironman is now the director of S.H.I.E.L.D., a dubious moral position, as well, since S.H.I.E.L.D. exists as the US/UN clean-up crew. We know from New Avengers that S.H.I.E.L.D. is not beyond violating international treaties to mine for weaponizing "vibranium" in the Savage Land.

We also see Ironman actively spy on Spider-Man and "give" Spider-Man a new armored suit, which at first seems generous. The suit protects Spider-Man from the other super-powered heroes he's expected to take down, but we discover Ironman has built a fail-safe into the costume so he can immobilize/control Spider-Man in case he ever does decide to go rogue. Dude. That is just WRONG.

Now I'm reading the latest Captian America issue (#34) wherein Winter Soldier accepts a new Captain America suit/costume made by Tony Stark/Ironman, and I'm thinking... don't you read the other titles, Bucky? Don't trust that man as far as you can throw him, which, given that you kicked his a** in the previous issue, is pretty dang far.

Comments

[oneminutemonkey.livejournal.com]

Welcome to one of the great debates of the past few years. :>

My take on it? Iron Man was horribly, horribly written during Civil War, with the end result being that the left hand (JMS)didn't know what the right hand (Millar) was doing, and vice versa, or else he was planning some "futurist" game that was twenty moves ahead of everyone else.

I honestly think that in his own way, they're trying to keep Iron Man as a hero, but one who's both bitten off more than he can chew, and who's thinking so many moves ahead that many of his actions don't make sense to his fellow heroes. Unfortunately, the writers aren't always good enough to convey this with subtlety and nuance, so he comes off as a, well, jerk to be mild about it.

Let's face it, with the movie coming out, they want him to be portrayed as a hero. And sometimes, they even still succeed. Sometimes. :>

I strongly suspect that, and I hope I'm right, Iron Man doesn't have any plans to screw Bucky over with the new suit, or that Bucky is smart enough to have the suit checked over for tracking devices, sensors, potential immobilizers/incapacitators. But I think that in deference to the original Cap's legacy, Iron Man'll behave. After all, he's already helping to support this unregistered loose cannon.

It's interesting that we've seen, in recent days, some of the biggest enforcers/proponents of the Registration Act - Iron Man and Ms. Marvel - do things that would seem to be -against- their mandate: letting unregistered heroes escape, actively or otherwise aiding unregistered heroes and old friends, bending laws and finding loopholes. And with the next Big Event (Secret Invasion) ramping up, it looks like they'll have to make some hard choices about how far to go when trust becomes an issue within the ranks.

Sorry I got long-winded there, but this is a matter I've been pondering for a while. I still think Iron Man is supposed to be a hero, despite the stuff he's pulled lately (which, some would have you believe, he did entirely on purpose to make things fall as they would to prevent a worse outcome.)

I want a suit of powered armor.

[lydamorehouse]

yeah, I realize I'm a bit late to the show (which is why I didn't put any of this under the cover of "spoilers,) and I certainly haven't been able to read ALL the titles in Civil War, so I'm probably missing half the story (at least!)

But, I don't know. I think Tony Stark has always been a kind of weird hero. I mean, he's a military industrialist billionaire. Like Batman in that other universe, he has no real superpowers other than a brilliant mind for tinkering (in this case) and the ego to think he'd look good in a superpowered suit... which makes his support of the Hero Registration Act make a certain kind of sense. He had no mandate like Captain America who was given the super-soldier formula by the government, after all. Or a freak accident, like Spider-Man. Or a genetic gift/curse, like Wolverine. Stark just woke up one day and said, "damn, I think I'll fight crime! I'm gonna make me a suit."

Okay, he probably didn't say it like that, but...

I just don't trust him. Probably because I don't trust the government, which Stark is clearly part of. But, I think that, in the end, that makes his character interesting. I really loved Straczinski's arguements both pro and con the Registration Act because, like the real discussion about security vs. freedom that we're having in this country, both sides make a certain amount of sense.

[zippyfish.livejournal.com]

"Vibranium"?

I... really?

[evilwhitetiger.livejournal.com]

I have not been keeping up with comics as much as I would like to be, but what you have mentioned here has me wondering. This would not be the first time marvel had Ironman go evil. I am not sure how long ago this was, (10 years ago maybe) but Ironman actually ended up joining up with Kang, the time traveling villain. He helped take down the Avengers, and the only way the Avengers beat him was to go back in time and bring a young Tony Stark forward in time to defeat the old Stark. (Gotta love time travel.) I don't know how they got the Old Stark back as I fell out of reading comics for a while. But the point is they have done it before, so I would not put it past them to do it again.