Iron Man #1

[drice6900]

Ok, I wasn't aware of this, but now Iron Man's origin has been retconned? Apparently Tony Stark got his shrapnel to the heart in Afghanistan due to an Al Qaeda/Taliban attack?

 

Artwork was cool, but I'm not sure I saw enough to keep me buying.

[tilleycs]

Yes, it's been retconned...again. As a result, I've decided to get rid of all my Iron Man vol. 2 and 3 books. I have zero interest in keeping up with this nonsense. I'm headin' back to the SA Iron Man!

[rob_react]

Ok, I wasn't aware of this, but now Iron Man's origin has been retconned? Apparently Tony Stark got his shrapnel to the heart in Afghanistan due to an Al Qaeda/Taliban attack?

 

Artwork was cool, but I'm not sure I saw enough to keep me buying.

 

It's the same origin, I guess Ellis just felt he needed to move it up timewise and place it somewhere that made sense in terms of recent history or else he couldn't reference it with any semblance of intelligence. He's 30ish not 65 and Indochina (or wherever it was originally) isn't the hotbed it was in the 60s.

 

After reading it, while I enjoyed it immensely, I can't imagine a lot of hardcore Iron Man fans will enjoy this take. Re- envisioning the book as science fiction with political and moral overtones might not work for the average IM fanatic.

 

Not that I know anything about how Iron Man has been written for the past twenty years...

[Foolkiller]

but isn't the problem with doing this then that the "old" vol. 1 Iron Man stuff is now being ignored.

 

It's like Crisis, without the friggin' Crisis.

 

If Marvel wants to do this, then just do what DC did, have your own Crisis type event and explain it. God only knows it would sell, make a lot of fans happy and clean up some of the mess they've made where new readers and old readers alike would need SOMETHING to latch on to.

 

If Marvel is listening, please do something to at least streamline your once brilliantly cohesive universe.

[Tango 'n Cash]

There is no continuity at Marvel anymore. Once you realize that, you can enjoy all these non-Marvel Universe tales a lot better.

[rob_react]

but isn't the problem with doing this then that the "old" vol. 1 Iron Man stuff is now being ignored.

 

It's like Crisis, without the friggin' Crisis.

 

True, and I can see where there'd be frustration with it. But this is a specific case that was obviously tricky for Marvel once Ellis' pitch came in. IM's TOS origin is SO "cold war" and is SO dated politically that it's just silly at this point if it's meant to be used as a plot point. Referencing it, as it stood in any sort of politically aware sense would have made the writer look delusional

 

Even if they have cold war elements (like the Hulk) none of the other major Marvel origins would even need to be tweaked in the way that this one did.

 

I'm not saying it was the best thing to do, I just can't see any other way around it if they were going to let Ellis do what he plans with this book.

[Foolkiller]

yeah, I'm not even really criticizing it Rob. It's just that I would like to see this storyline but with Marvel making an effort to pull their universe together again cohesively. They can do all these whacko things they want, just put the regular Marvel Universe in a somewht updated fashion.

 

I know, some people will, well, that's the Ultimate Marvel Universe. I'd rather see it more as taking the old origins, old storylines and simply putting it in modern context but streamlining the history so that all these other add ons to the history actually make some sense.

 

Ultimates is kinda uber real. I don't mind updated origin, and like ellis's idea, I just want Marvel to make an ATTEMPT to make some sense.

[blowout]

True, and I can see where there'd be frustration with it. But this is a specific case that was obviously tricky for Marvel once Ellis' pitch came in. IM's TOS origin is SO "cold war" and is SO dated politically that it's just silly at this point if it's meant to be used as a plot point. Referencing it, as it stood in any sort of politically aware sense would have made the writer look delusional

 

Isn't that where 'Ultimate Iron Man' comes in? Marvel should stop screwing with the regular universe.

[rob_react]

 

Isn't that where 'Ultimate Iron Man' comes in? Marvel should stop screwing with the regular universe.

 

Traditionalists arguing FOR Ultimatizing. I never thought I'd see the day .

 

I guess you're advocating ditching 616 Iron Man, then? Or just ignoring the credibility breaking setting of his origin?

[Silver Surfer]

Ok, I wasn't aware of this, but now Iron Man's origin has been retconned? Apparently Tony Stark got his shrapnel to the heart in Afghanistan due to an Al Qaeda/Taliban attack?

 

Artwork was cool, but I'm not sure I saw enough to keep me buying.

 

Are you serious? Joe Q must go. He is destroying 60 years of history and respect that Marvel has enjoyed in the industry all in the span of one year. What a clown. If a writer approached me with that -script I would have threw him out of my office. Just when I thought I it couldn't get worst, they do it to us again.

[Silver Surfer]

IM's TOS origin is SO "cold war" and is SO dated politically that it's just silly at this point if it's meant to be used as a plot point. Referencing it, as it stood in any sort of politically aware sense would have made the writer look delusional

 

Even if they have cold war elements (like the Hulk) none of the other major Marvel origins would even need to be tweaked in the way that this one did.

 

I'm not saying it was the best thing to do, I just can't see any other way around it if they were going to let Ellis do what he plans with this book.

 

Whether its dated or not it is what it is and it should be left alone. Tweekin it just so Ellis can write a story line for the next 12 months hardly seems like a good enough reason to even consider redoing the origin. Its just brutal. Joe Q and his arse kissing writers with another feable attempt to be cutting edge. What will they do in 10 years, change it to reflect turmoil in Africa. I will continue to email Marvel to let them know that they are going in the toliet fast, Thor, Iron man, Avengers debocale, etc, etc.

[rob_react]

Even after Ellis leaves the book it's not going to magically make sense for a 30 year old man to have been injured in Vietnam. If blind adherence to tradition for tradition's sake means that writers are forced to ignore certain elements of a character's origin for fear of looking stupid, that's a good thing?

 

Should Iron Man still be fighting communists, too?

[ninanina]

 

If Marvel wants to do this, then just do what DC did, have your own Crisis type event and explain it. God only knows it would sell, make a lot of fans happy and clean up some of the mess they've made where new readers and old readers alike would need SOMETHING to latch on to.

 

If Marvel is listening, please do something to at least streamline your once brilliantly cohesive universe.

 

Something like "Heroes Reborn"?

 

...just kidding....

 

Not a bad idea. This industry needs a HUGE shot in the arm. What if DC and Marvel combined the universes for a couple years to re-write everything. This would make Crisis look like a 4-issue mini-series. Don't think that's gonna' happen though, 'cause DC seems to be pushing the right buttons.

 

Just Venting.

[Silver Surfer]

The issue of trying to prolong these SA characters lives so that we are not really looking at a 70 year old Tony Stark must be in the back of the writers mind but there must be a better way. I'm sure they will eventually have to deal with all characters, especially those like Stark who has no super powers to extend his life span. Would have made more sense to give Stark some kind of super strength like Captain America because he is just too important a character to write off or mess around with his orgin. Speaking of which, how would you feel if they did the same with Cap? Just throw the 40's and SA revivial in the 60's out the window and make up some hokie story about him fighting Sadam and Bin Laden just to keep things current.

[rob_react]

Cap is a perfect example of what I was talking about earlier in that most of the Marvel heroes don't have the same difficulty with being pegged to a specific time. There's NO PROBLEM with Cap's origin in terms of it being dated. The basics are timeless: he was in WW2, went into suspended animation and was revived. That's exactly the origin The Ultimates used and that's set "right now." As Millar proved a writer can revisit that and there's absolutely no credibility problem. Most of the major Marvel origins are perfectly fine in that same basically timeless way and wouldn't cause the same problems that Iron Man obviously did.

 

Keep in mind, the "past" in the 616 universe is a moving target. In the context of the books, the events in FF1 weren't forty three years ago. They were more like ten or twelve. It's only in a case like this where the event it so closely pegged to a certain period in time that there's a problem.

[DKB]

Suspending disbelief over the fact that characters that were young 40 years ago are still young now is a part of comics. Its just the way it is. Everyone knows Batman isn't 85. Everyone knows Spider-Man isn't 55.

 

Love Warren Ellis to death, and I'm sure it'll read just fine all on its own, but this is crapping on the past no matter how you slice it. Though, this doesn't make me want to wretch even close to as much as Gwen bearing Norman's children.

[rob_react]

Who knew one panel would cause so much controversy...

[Kevin Boyd]

Tony Stark's origin can be just as timeless.

 

He was a military advisor and munitions manufacturer sent to an unnamed asian country to inspect facilities, there was an accident and a piece of shrapnel imbedded in his chest begins inching towards his heart, but he is captured by guerilla fighters and held captive by their commander along with a leading local scientist who has been missing for some time. Together they rig up a harness using magnetic fields to keep the shrapnel in place until it can be removed by surgery when he escapes, but in order to protect himself from gunfire they forge a metal suit of armor for him to wear. The same magnetic fields used to hold the shrapnel in place have side benefits - he can hover over metallic surfaces, he can repulse other metallic objects. In a sense, the "Iron Man" armor is like a giant magnet - attracting and repulsing metal. Stark escapes, the "Iron Man" armor inspires him to tinker with the design and make it less medieval and more 21st century incorporating jet boots, onboard computers, network connections, radar, waste disposal so he doesn't have to go to washroom, and a "utility" belt's worth of gimmicks built into various components of the armor - like roller blades in the boots when needed. Using the same theories of the original magnetic repulsor armor he develops the repulsor ray which deflects all metallic objects, but he also develops a stun blast that is incorporated into the design.

[rob_react]

Tony Stark's origin can be just as timeless.

 

I don't think so, since in the beginning Vietnam was named by Stan, obviously for "plucked from the newspapers" veracity. So, there's still some retconning to do, even if it's to make the whole thing classified so that you can look at the character in a politically aware way. You also don't mention why he was there. That'd have to go classified as well if you want to reference the purpose (which Ellis did -"[they were] looking for ways to contain Al Qaeda and The Taliban;" versus - "to kill/contain communists.")

 

Otherwise, the ONLY difference between your version, the 60s version and the one panel in the book yesterday are the name of the "asian country" he was visiting "to inspect facilities," which is why I don't really think if this as a big deal.

 

In a sense the switch of venues continued with the spirit of relevancy that Stan had introduced- losing Stan's specifics but keeping his intention: that comics mean something to the people reading them- in this case tying into the world they see in the newspapers and on TV every day.

 

Would making all the real world elements of his origin classified have bothered people?

 

 

 

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a perfect example of a thread where a person ends up defending a position they don't agree with 100% like their life depends on it by strength of numbers alone.

[Kevin Boyd]

I think it has more to do with defending Ellis.

 

It could just as easily be Viet Nam today as it was then... it just so happens that there isn't a war there anymore, but then again, there wasn't really a war there in 1963... I think they still referred to it as a military action.

 

But you remove the words Viet Nam and the country could be Korea, it could be Thailand or anywhere where the US could still be sending advisors in Asia - maybe he could have been part of a UN delegation? Those countries all still exist, they didn't disappear when the US troops left, and many of them are still troubled and most are still run by dictatorships.

 

But lifting the origin and specifically transplanting it to the Gulf War (pres. 1990) and mentioning the Taliban (who were friendly to the US after the Soviets left - they were still send reps to the US in 2001) and Al Qaeda (which as far as I know didn't exist 10 years ago, they were just a gleam in Osama's eye). Now they've transplanted Stark into our history (a mixed up one at best), which won't be beneficial in 2020 when Stark will still be a young man and some writer will have to retcon in that Stark was in Eastern Bungholia (fighting in snow gear) in 2010. All it does is baffle readers of the older material...