No, it wasn't. You just got the wrong idea. Avengers 2 was already planned at that point and there was no way Tony wasn't going to be armored Iron Man in Avengers 2. Just like there was no way he wasn't going to be armored Iron Man in Avengers 1. See a pattern?
The future of the character was never in doubt... except among the credulous.
He was literally in contract negotiations at that point. Nothing was guaranteed.
And Avengers 2 is infamous for having a rather haphazard development. As in ‘literally being rewritten whilst filming.’
But sure man. Keep being ‘incredulous’ by...clinging real hard to the idea that Marvel has never improvised and changed their ‘plan.’
In other words, the exact same place he's in at the end of the first film. So I guess that one's a "send-off" too. Why not?
Nope. And yes. He wasn’t at the same point, but it was complete enough to act a possible send-off. Marvel didn’t know how well it would do.
But I’m not sure how someone misses that Tony’s decision at the end was meant to be short-sighted and arrogant, explicitly to differentiate him from the usual responsible and humbled heroes. Its not like sequels (and even the movie’s own stinger) didn’t keep coming back to it, and hammering it in that he really wasn’t thinking of anyone’s but himself.
Yeah, an ultimately pointless gesture designed to appease his girlfriend. Fragile masculinity, remember?
Yeah, nah. Although funnily enough, this comment smells a bit of it.
To see it as an effort to ‘appease’ Pepper, you’d have to:
(1) Ignore what Pepper was saying throughout the movie
(2) Ignore what Tony was saying at the end. Which is a task, considering it was a pretty blunt monologue to the audience. (Or so we thought.)
And just kinda assume that he really wants to get laid.
Because that's what audiences came to see, right? If they can stay awake, that is. Though I guess more trips to Wal-Mart could have been entertaining.
1. The Avengers are not an Iron Man movie.
2. All of Tony’s plot contributions in Avengers 2 happen out of the armour. They’re very much Tony Stark problems. He could easily have not used it at all, and everything would essentially be the same. Especially with War Machine being present during the climax.
So...no. That apparently wasn’t what the audiences paid to see.
(Although, funnily enough: I’m sure certain tie-in merch featuring an armoured Iron Man has caused a few trips to Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart does sell toys, doesn’t it Americans?)
And... saving the world through empathy?
![]()
Err, yeah? You may not have noticed, but not all heroes are motivated by the same thing.
For eg. Widow is on a penance quest.
Punisher is vengeful.
Hulk just likes to smack things that irritate him. And sometimes protects the people he’s close to. Depending.
And up to that point Tony has largely been pushed by personal motivations and ego. He appointed himself to police the entire world, because he wanted to hunt down the terrorists who kidnapped him and killed his friend.
He kept it up, because he didn’t personally consider himself answerable to anyone, nor was anyone else capable of doing ‘his job.’ To the point where even the branch extended to Rhodey was on his terms.
Even though Tony had proven time and again that he wasn’t truly responsible enough for all that power either, Meanwhile, his personal privileges and resources (both the suit, and in general) guaranteed that no one else could do anything to change the situation.
That’s done by the end of 3. He finally gained humility.
(Also, advice from an Australian? Don’t use a gif of Karl Stefanovic to try and be condescending. Especially if it’s a clip from the Morning Show, and in reference to anything Avengers related. It’s incredibly self defeating.)
Last edited: