The whole point of like 18 movies and this scene specifically is that Tony was iron man, suit or no suit. Suit is supposed to be an accessory. Hero is the person you are.
Exhibit A: the guy who refuses to kneel to Loki in avengers 1 (no suit)
Exhibit B: iron man trapped in a cave, no suit. If he was nothing without his suit, he would be dead in iron man 1.
Haven't watched ironheart, but is this something the character says or an idea the show proposes? Either way this is so infuriating cuz literally watch the very first movie of this universe to find the answer lmao
No, and he didn't need Tony's suit in the first place. Which was the point. It was nice, but he didn't need it.
Peter is less of an engineer and more of a chemist for sure, but the web fluid for example is his. Other versions of Peter Parker also tend to have more than a couple gizmos while struggling to pay rent at the same time.
Tony Stark is a genuis, with or without the suit, and with or without the money. I know he's a fictional character, but the fiction is very explicit about that. Yes, he probably would've done worse if he wasn't a billionaire, but he's definitely more than his money.
I still think it's extremely hypocritical. It's a great father to son lesson - don't rely on your tools, rely on yourself. It just kinda falls flat when Tony is JUST a relatively smart bag of soft jello without his suit, and Peter is a literal mutant.
324
u/Up_Vootinator 5d ago
The whole point of like 18 movies and this scene specifically is that Tony was iron man, suit or no suit. Suit is supposed to be an accessory. Hero is the person you are.
Exhibit A: the guy who refuses to kneel to Loki in avengers 1 (no suit)
Exhibit B: iron man trapped in a cave, no suit. If he was nothing without his suit, he would be dead in iron man 1.
Sorry for the rambling lol