Iron Man How comic accurate is this movie?

[ZeroCorpse]

Here's where I come in to point out that the movies are not the comics, and are more like a separate Marvel Universe. I like to refer to the Marvel Studios Universe as the "323" Universe (ala "616", but using the Hollywood area code as the number). Keep in mind that the 323 universe is different from the Sony Pictures Marvel Universe(s), and the individual TV show universes.

Anyway, they are inspired by the comics, but they don't need to be slavish to the story progression because they're in a different universe. No need to worry about where story elements came from, or how close they were. It's nice they use the comics as a template, but some changes are necessary for a movie. Iron Man did a great job of being loyal to comics, yet still being unique.

The "323" Universe is a lot like the Marvel Ultimate Alliance universe (the videogame). It's a combination of elements from both Ultimate Marvel and 616 Marvel. Thus we have Ultimate Nick Fury, but Tony Stark seems to be an updated version of the 616 Tony Stark (and he's not as much like the Ultimate version as I'd thought he'd be). The conflict of choice isn't Viet Nam, or World War II, but the wars in the Middle East. The armor goes through three designs before Tony outs himself as Iron Man.

It's all just little changes to make it flow better and compact many years of storytelling into one movie. Most films screw this up, but Iron Man nailed it.

Once Marvel Studios adds more movies to their list, we'll have a full-on Marvel Universe on the movies for the first time ever. I think that's rather awesome. The only trouble is getting actors to reprise their roles--- but even that's not a huge problem. Having a new actor for a character is kind of like when an artist takes over a comic and draws the characters WAYYY different than they were previously portrayed (Just recently, I noticed such a change with Moonstar in Avengers The Initiative; She had huge boobs. Danielle has ALWAYS been drawn almost flat-chested and she even talked about it on several occasions. I'd equate this radical change to getting a new "actress" to play the role of Moonstar in the comic.)

Anyway, my point is that when I go to see Marvel Studios movies, I don't want to see the 616 or Ultimate universes related EXACTLY as they are in the comics. I want a NEW story that just happens to focus on these characters. There's room in the multiverse for the movie Iron Man, Ultimate Iron Man, and 616 Iron Man.

I will say this, though: The movie Iron Man isn't near as much of a jerk as the 616 version. I think he acts more like the Ultimate Iron Man, but has origins closer to the 616 version.

 

[spiderfan970]

Yeah, I've never really liked Iron Man a whole lot, but I loved his character in this movie. If he were like that all the time he would definitely be one of my favorites. I actually would rather read more about that Iron Man than any of the ones currently in comics. Are there any versions very close to Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal?

Also, what comics specifically would you say they drew influence from in terms of plot and substance. For example, Shadowboxing said that the end was based off of Invincible Iron Man #200. Any more parallels like that to be drawn to the comics?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Yeah, I've never really liked Iron Man a whole lot, but I loved his character in this movie. If he were like that all the time he would definitely be one of my favorites. I actually would rather read more about that Iron Man than any of the ones currently in comics. Are there any versions very close to Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal?

Also, what comics specifically would you say they drew influence from in terms of plot and substance. For example, Shadowboxing said that the end was based off of Invincible Iron Man #200. Any more parallels like that to be drawn to the comics?

Well, let's see. The origin happened in Tales of Suspense #39. I'd say the first half of the movie chronicles the events of issue 40 and 48 of that same comic series. In those issues he switches to gold armor then red and gold armor respectively. Also those early issues (in Tales of Suspense) are mostly where the stories of his love triangle with Pepper Potts occur. Aside from that the Obidiah Stane issues could be taken from Invincible Iron Man #163, and #200 as I mentioned. Since Stane doesn't appear until the alcholism in the comics, his takeover in this movie was heavily retconned, also his pressence in the origin itself is for the most part new, but he did try to kill Tony in the comics for much the same reasons.

As for the ending itself, it could be qualified as new, although Stane really did die, just by different circumstances. He shot himself with the Iron Monger repulsor ray. However, this ending loses meaning without them establishing that Stane's father, a compulsive gambler, died playing Russian Roulette.

 

[Cain]

It's fairly accurate. Kind of a condensed version of the mythology, but what movie isn't? They sort of bypassed the whole "Iron Man is Tony Stark's bodyguard" angle, which went on for years in the comics. I think they're in a hurry to get to his Avengers phase.

Considering where he is at currently in the comics it makes sense to ignore the old status quo plus it gives the superhero movie a very fresh dynamic to play around with instead of the typical "I must conceal my identity crap". I was actually blown away by how accurate this movie was when compared to the comics I expected some accuracy but not to the level that it presented it, that made me enjoy the film even more.

 

[Sardaukar]

This film might disappoint big fans of Obadiah Stane, though I doubt there are many out there (I know I'm not one). It basically reinvents the character. But that's okay. He's not a major villain, so who really cares?

I'm just really impressed by how close this film was to Iron Man's actual origin, especially when you consider how complicated it is. It's possibly the most accurate translation that Marvel has done in this regard.

 

[Darknightnomis]

what about his revelation at the end??? that certainly isn't part of the comics

Tony Stark reveal himelf as Iron MAn in the comics about 10 years ago.

 

[SurfDUI]

The biggest misstep was Rhodey's development.
The circumstances of how they met, of course there's still room for the friendship to grow. We never saw him pilot anything, or fix anything, or be anything other than high ranking official. I mean he ditches the service to work for Tony in the Layton run, but there was only one scene where he circumstantialy ponders the idea of helping instead of harming as a soldier. He kind of was a prop, which in the 616 they've always been really close. I just hope they don't jump right into giving him a suit. He's bailed him out of a lot of jams, saved his life after he gets shot. This is all minor though as none of the true development can be seen in a live action project.

Like the way Alfred was portayed in BB. He just wasn't some dude, he knew what was up and Nolan showed that pretty well. I thought w/ Favreau's usually good friend dynamic in his other films this one would have been a little deeper.

 

[TheVileOne]

Tony Stark reveal himelf as Iron MAn in the comics about 10 years ago.

Divide that by about 2. 10 years ago was around Heroes Return time-ish.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

This film might disappoint big fans of Obadiah Stane, though I doubt there are many out there (I know I'm not one). It basically reinvents the character. But that's okay. He's not a major villain, so who really cares?

Not a whole lot though. Stane was a partner of Howard Stark in the comics, the only major difference is he started his own company after Howard's passing, whereas this one stayed on with Stark Industries. In both incarnations, however, Stane still wanted to take over the company (Stark Industries) and still attempted to destroy Tony in the process with the Iron Monger suit.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Divide that by about 2. 10 years ago was around Heroes Return time-ish.

Actually Tony's revealed himself many times, even back in his early days. But, with the rash of chronic amnesia that tends to plague the Marvel Universe, people forgot.

 

[Cain]

The biggest misstep was Rhodey's development.

I brought this up in another forum but I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who felt that way. It was the only beef I had with what was otherwise a near perfect movie. The backbone the character has (especially during the Byrne era) just wasn't present. In many ways Tony and Rhodey are equals but here he just felt like a sidekick not a leader who stands out on hiw own. But it wasn't enough to hinder the rest of the movie for me but it definitely did stick out to me.

 

[Sardaukar]

I brought this up in another forum but I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who felt that way. It was the only beef I had with what was otherwise a near perfect movie. The backbone the character has (especially during the Byrne era) just wasn't present. In many ways Tony and Rhodey are equals but here he just felt like a sidekick not a leader who stands out on hiw own. But it wasn't enough to hinder the rest of the movie for me but it definitely did stick out to me.

In the Michelinie/Layton books, I got nothing but a sidekick vibe from Rhodey. In fact, he's more of his "own man" in this movie, imo.

 

[Sardaukar]

Not a whole lot though. Stane was a partner of Howard Stark in the comics, the only major difference is he started his own company after Howard's passing, whereas this one stayed on with Stark Industries. In both incarnations, however, Stane still wanted to take over the company (Stark Industries) and still attempted to destroy Tony in the process with the Iron Monger suit.

True, but I'm also referring to the whole plot of Stane destroying Stark both personally and professionally and then actually succeeding in taking over the company. Plus the whole Chessman angle was left out, and that was a significant part of the character...not that I particularly mind. But it was left out.

 

[SurfDUI]

In the Michelinie/Layton books, I got nothing but a sidekick vibe from Rhodey. In fact, he's more of his "own man" in this movie, imo.

Well I've got them all-that run lasted the better part of a decade, there's plenty there past the two or three issues you might be looking at.

 

[Sardaukar]

Well I've got them all-that run lasted the better part of a decade, there's plenty there past the two or three issues you might be looking at.

I'm focusing only on the first comic book appearances of Rhodey, in which he literally was Stark's employee and, yes, for all intents and purposes, also his sidekick.

In the film, when we first meet Rhodey, he's already a close confidant of Stark's and has a high-up position in the military...more of an equal than in the comics where his main job (originally) is driving Tony around while saving his ass occasionally.

 

[ultimatefan]

Like all great superhero movies, it´s not obsessed with every detail of the comics canon, but It gets the important things right and, just as important, makes them work on the screen.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

True, but I'm also referring to the whole plot of Stane destroying Stark both personally and professionally and then actually succeeding in taking over the company. Plus the whole Chessman angle was left out, and that was a significant part of the character...not that I particularly mind. But it was left out.

Well I believe we do see a chess board on his table in his house, but that's beside the point (I suppose you also noticed he rocked his bling bling, lol). You could say he "destroyed" Stark, granted not as thoroughly as in the comic, but he managed to oust Stark from any decision making over his own company, basically rendering him no more than a mere puppet.

I also have to wonder, watching it again whether that's truly the last we see of Obidiah Stane. I mean SHIELD indicated he was dead, but how reliable is SHIELD on those things.

 

[fallenAngel]

I also have to wonder, watching it again whether that's truly the last we see of Obidiah Stane. I mean SHIELD indicated he was dead, but how reliable is SHIELD on those things.

I thought about this too. I mean Tony survived and we just saw him fall. It would be kind of cool if he wasn't.. Jeff Bridges was awesome. But then I'm not sure how much there would be for him to do if he did return. I'm not a real Iron man comic enthusiast though and am not really familiar with the character.

 

[The Navigator]

Pretty sure only Ultimate Fury looks like Samuel L. Jackson.