The New Iron Man is a Woman!

[Hypestyle]

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2016...w-iron-man-a-black-woman-named-riri-williams/

From Comic Book Resources:

Marvel has announced that a new "Invincible Iron Man" #1 is on the way. As part of their Marvel NOW! initiative, the series -- announced via Time -- will follow newcomer Riri Williams as she dons the Iron Man armor. Brian Michael Bendis, the writer of the current "Invincible Iron Man" series, will stay on board for the relaunch; joining him is artist Stefano Caselli ("All-New Inhumans").

The new series will see Stark step down as Iron Man and Riri Williams take his place. But just because we know that Stark will pass on the Iron mantle after "Civil War II" doesn't mean we know the event's ending. "I can tell you just because we’re hearing what we’re saying doesn’t know you mean how 'Civil War II' ends," said Bendis to Time. "We’re not telling you the end, at all."

Originally introduced in full in "Invincible Iron Man" #9, Riri Williams is a 15-year-old M.I.T. student who took it upon herself to build her own set of Iron Man armor. Riri's role in the post-"Civil War II" Marvel landscape looks to be a big one; in addition to starring in "Invincible Iron Man," she also stood at the front of one of the groups in the Marvel NOW! teaser image.

Bendis also notes that Stark is aware of who Riri is and he might just realize that she may be better than him. "He’s also aware that this young woman is flying by him in terms of how quickly she’s doing it," said Bendis. "Her brain is maybe a little better than his. She looks at things from a different perspective that makes the armor unique. He can’t help but go maybe I should buy her out."


Discuss

 

[psylockolussus]

Well, in my opinion, why couldn't they just create a new character that doesn't have to take the mantle of an established character, because its easier to sell and Market? And if its not someone completely new, its some who have been around for years or decades taking the name of Captain America, Wolverine, Star Lord, Ms. Marvel to name a few. It just feels lazy to me.

 

[KevanG]

So... Iron Woman?

 

[BLACKVULCAN]

Boo! The dude who should be iron man is pushing daisys and some new chick outta nowhere gets the armour? She could destroy us all with that thing!! (Stark for being a genius isn't too bright!) and what !! The dude who should have it gets whacked and they create another black person? Does marvel have alimit on black people or something? And so now it's "Iron- Girl!" Just my 8 1/2 cents! Hehe

 

[chamber-music]

Well, in my opinion, why couldn't they just create a new character that doesn't have to take the mantle of an established character, because its easier to sell and Market? And if its not someone completely new, its some who have been around for years or decades taking the name of Captain America, Wolverine, Star Lord, Ms. Marvel to name a few. It just feels lazy to me.

Pretty much.

For whatever reason comic readers rarely pick up books featuring new original heroes which is why they just create characters to take over pre-existing identities.

I can't say I'm a big fan of this approach but I understand why the comic companies do it.

 

[BoredGuy]

"He’s also aware that this young woman is flying by him in terms of how quickly she’s doing it," said Bendis. "Her brain is maybe a little better than his"

The part about Legacy heroes I dislike the most is.... why do they always have to make it out like the new character is so much better/smarter/cooler/more capable than the hero they replaced? For Instance, Jane Foster knowing how to use Mjolnir's powers better than the God who has been carrying the thing for multiple Millenia.

I liked Bucky as Cap because they focused a good amount of attention on his weaknesses and how he was trying to compensate for not being quite as strong or fast as Steve.

 

[Shikamaru]

Seems silly to me.

1. Rhodes and Pepper already cover the "black" and "female" Iron Man roles with War Machine and Rescue, respectively, so this seems redundant. Why not make this girl her own armored character?

2. We know Marvel never sticks to any legacy changes they make, so why should we care this time?

3. The fact they're going for the "bigger and badder" effect shows it's a marketing gimmick before it's anything else.

 

[The Apocalypse]

So... Iron Woman?

Iron Maiden

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Yawn. Not sure if anyone else commenting has been reading IIM thus far but this is kind of a drag. I'm not saying this will automatically cause a drop in quality on the book but I've been enjoying the IIM run, it's been highly entertaining, however this just speaks of yet another needless change. Like Shika said, it comes across as more a gimmick than anything else.

 

[Iron_Stark]

I haven't read Iron Man since Matt Fraction ended his run, and it looks like I'll continue to not buy any comics.

This is disgusting and pathetic on Marvel's part. This is nothing more than a gimmick that hopefully backfires on them.

The only good that's coming out of this is the negative backlash from everyone. And I'm glad Marvel writers don't get to give their input in Marvel Studio movies anymore.

 

[C. Lee]

So.....if I get this right....the new Iron MAN is a 15 year old girl.

I guess Marvel's next event will be making the Invisible WOMAN a 98 year old guy.

 

[The Batman]

The part about Legacy heroes I dislike the most is.... why do they always have to make it out like the new character is so much better/smarter/cooler/more capable than the hero they replaced?

This is why I never really liked Connor Hawke or Cassandra Cain.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I haven't read Iron Man since Matt Fraction ended his run, and it looks like I'll continue to not buy any comics.

This is disgusting and pathetic on Marvel's part. This is nothing more than a gimmick that hopefully backfires on them.

The only good that's coming out of this is the negative backlash from everyone. And I'm glad Marvel writers don't get to give their input in Marvel Studio movies anymore.

I haven't ever really had a discussion with you on here but just going by your username/avatar I'm gonna assume you're a big IM fan I've got no real emotional connection or investment in the character however like other characters that fit that bill with me, I am still entertained and intrigued by good quality stories, movies, games, etc. Up until this point the Bendis Invincible IM series has actually been pretty darn good...from a quality standpoint. I can't really compare this to previous incarnations of IM cause I'm not that familiar however I have read the Fraction run and I can say it was at least on par with his series although his obviously is longer. Just sayin' you may at least wanna check out the first 10 issues or so seeing as you are probably a big fan...take it or leave it...it's just my opinion

Still though, I don't really care for this change even if it was hinted at during the previous issues. It's needless imo and really does come off as a cheap gimmick. It's making me, an IIM customer, lose interest and will most likely drop the book.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I haven't read Iron Man since Matt Fraction ended his run, and it looks like I'll continue to not buy any comics.

This is disgusting and pathetic on Marvel's part. This is nothing more than a gimmick that hopefully backfires on them.

The only good that's coming out of this is the negative backlash from everyone. And I'm glad Marvel writers don't get to give their input in Marvel Studio movies anymore.

Really? Disgusting and pathetic that a legacy isn't the same gender and race as the original? If you ask me, that's pretty rediculous. Marvel has some amazing writers, and Bendis' run on Iron Man has been met with wide acclaim. Not that you'd know, since you only came here to complain about a comic you wouldn't have read anyway.

Personally, I feel like Marvel has failed to push "real" diversity, instead taking the easy way out with legacies. But that doesn't make attitudes like this any less damaging.

 

[BatsDC]

I really wish they'd just make some new heroes

It just feels so lazy to implement more diversity by changing already existing characters

Characters like Kamala Khan were hugely successful; why not continue doing that?

 

[Mr. Forest]

 

[Shikamaru]

Really? Disgusting and pathetic that a legacy isn't the same gender and race as the original? If you ask me, that's pretty rediculous. Marvel has some amazing writers, and Bendis' run on Iron Man has been met with wide acclaim. Not that you'd know, since you only came here to complain about a comic you wouldn't have read anyway.

Personally, I feel like Marvel has failed to push "real" diversity, instead taking the easy way out with legacies. But that doesn't make attitudes like this any less damaging.

There's a difference between a marketing gimmick and a characters with actual substance. People aren't stupid; we can generally tell which is the former and what's the latter.

Examples of female/minority legacy characters done right:
Sam Wilson as Cap
Kamala Khan
Rey from Star Wars

 

[Mike Murdock]

Of course, a lot of people have been putting Sam Wilson in the same complaints as this character, though.

 

[Havok83]

2. We know Marvel never sticks to any legacy changes they make, so why should we care this time?
.

Thats not true. Kate Bishop for example is still Hawkeye, 10 years later, even in spite of the original returning. The Ant-Man mantle was successfully moved to Scott Lang in the 70s from Pym and he still holds it today

I really wish they'd just make some new heroes

It just feels so lazy to implement more diversity by changing already existing characters

Characters like Kamala Khan were hugely successful; why not continue doing that?

you contradict yourself bc Kamala isnt going around as Kamala or some original name. She took over Ms. Marvel's mantle. That was part of her introduction as she was weaved into the Ms. Marvel mythos and Carol was used to sell her and prop her up early on

 

[Shikamaru]

Of course, a lot of people have been putting Sam Wilson in the same complaints as this character, though.

I think a lot of people think in binary terms when it comes to this sort of stuff. Everything is either a PC/feminist agenda or an example of systemic racism/sexism, or so they say. Personally I look at these things on a case by case basis.

Thats not true. Kate Bishop for example is still Hawkeye, 10 years later, even in spite of the original returning. The Ant-Man mantle was successfully moved to Scott Lang in the 70s from Pym and he still holds it today

The Lang takeover happened in the 70's. Fair point about Kate but most modern legacy characters never stick around. Marvel hypes them up only revert things tp the status quo (and so does DC for that matter).

 

[gohei_]

Huh, his beard is shaped somewhat like Galactus' head.

 

[Havok83]

I think a lot of people think in binary terms when it comes to this sort of stuff. Everything is either a PC/feminist agenda or an example of systemic racism/sexism, or so they say. Personally I look at these things on a case by case basis.



The Lang takeover happened in the 70's. Fair point about Kate but most modern legacy characters never stick around. Marvel hypes them up only revert things tp the status quo (and so does DC for that matter).

maybe for the most part but I wanted to correct your statement that it never sticks when there are occasions when it does. One thing about Marvel now (no pun intended) is that they are changing and have no problem having 2 heroes around with the same codename. In recent times we've had/have 2 Captain Americas, 2 Hawkeyes, 2 Cyclops, 2 Icemans, 2 Beasts, 2 Angels, 2 Spider-Man. Theres no guarantee that when Tony reclaims the IM name, that Riri will necesarily relinquish it

 

[CaptainWagner]

There's a difference between a marketing gimmick and a characters with actual substance. People aren't stupid; we can generally tell which is the former and what's the latter.

Examples of female/minority legacy characters done right:
Sam Wilson as Cap
Kamala Khan
Rey from Star Wars

Exactly. I don't know this girl, since I'm not a huge Iron Man fan I hadn't been following the series. But she sounds like a good character. Unfortunately, there's a very loud group of fans, many who don't read comics anyway, who pop up to whine about anytime their "beloved characters" are affected in a diverse way. I like to think that most of them are just close minded and not racist, but I've had enough experiences to be a bit cynical about it. Because there are a lot of people who still maintain that those three you listed are "no good PC crap" despite any actual evidence otherwise. (And in many cases complete ignorance on the actual quality to begin with)

 

[BoredGuy]

I still don't care for the Sam-as-Cap thing, but that was just because of it's proximity to the still fairly recent Bucky-as-Cap story
And Rey from Star Wars isn't a "legacy" character, so I don't get how that fits the convo

Khamala, on the other hand, is a legacy character done totally right
She admires Carol and chose to honor her with the name, but she is fully her own independent character, even having totally different powers, and she is not just portrayed as "Carol +" (IE. Thor plus new powers! Cap plus Wings! Wolverine plus Foot Claws! Iron Man but even Smarter!)

 

[Hypestyle]

There needs to be spinoff merchandise ASAP: coffee mugs, water bottles, T-shirts, hats, sweatpants, wall décor/posters, and more.

The character can be written into new Marvel cartoons as well as be introduced in the upcoming Avengers MCU films.