Source: Koimoi 2024.09.29
Iron Man: Did You Know The U S Government Forced A Major Plot Change In The MCU Film? Here’s How Tony Stark Went From Anti-Arms Dealer To Arms Dealer!
But this wasn’t just a matter of dialogue; it was about the entire portrayal of Tony Stark. Originally, the script depicted Stark as an anti-arms dealer—outraged by how his technology was twisted into destructive weapons. In his own words, he was trying to “save lives,” not destroy them. However, the Pentagon wasn’t on board with that narrative. Given their routine dealings with arms manufacturers, they pushed for a rewrite, forcing Stark to become an arms dealer himself.
Isn’t Iron Man being an arms dealer canon? I thought part of his whole thing was the creators seeing how unlikable they could make a superhero that people would still buy comics for. Arms dealers having a particularly bad reputation at the time because of the Vietnam war.
Is he really a dealer though? More a manufacturer.
Did he not stop manufacturing of weapons in the first movie? That’s how Obadiah ousted him from the company.
Yeah I’m confused by this article, the movie was clearly anti arms dealers and the whole evolution of his character was about moving away from war profiteering. Not to mention it’s the whole reason he doesn’t willingly create war machine in the second movie.
I guess they could have been even more critical about arms dealers, but I wouldn’t really expect more aggressive messaging in a super hero action flick.
