Iron Man 3 How Captain America in AVENGERS gave the true meaning behind everything IRON MAN 3

I highlighted the flaw in your idea.

You're mostly right, but they never expressed that he perfected/used the Extremis virus on himself.

-R

 

Yep, I was watching TA yesterday and had that realization when I saw the argument scene.

 

That is a good point and for the Extremis on himself....I never got the feeling he did, but when you talk about him figuring out how to adapt and fix it to help Pep, it makes sense if he knew how to use it on himself without side effect.

 

I thought it was made completely obvious in the film, without having been spelled out. After all, Tony does not spell out exactly how he fixes Pepper, just that he does fix her - and he sounds 100% sure she will be fine. So why would he not use a groundbreaking healing method on himself? Ironman 2 makes it clear that he is stuck with the arc reactor as per "actual" medical science - yet in IM 3 he takes it out. Rather than crying plothole, why not pay attention to subtle hints in the plot?

He even says it in the movie - that he fixed Extremis!Pepper and then thought to himself "why stop here?" /hint

 

Tony proved it to himself multiple times in this film.

Spoiler

He stormed the Mandarin mansion and kicked all kinds of butt with nothing more than courage, his wits and $200 of stuff from a hardware store. He put his life on the line for Rhodey, Pepper, the Tennessee town people and even the President.

So, he proved that he could sacrifice it all in Avengers and again here. His daddy issues and link to Cap is subconsciously strong. One line from Cap in a Loki induced rage registered BIGTIME.

 

Fixing and reversing the effects of the virus is an entirely different thing than making himself a super-powered being.

By "fixing Pepper," it is assumed that she was "returned to normal." What you are saying is that he made her a perfect human specimen (an Extremis soldier without the side-effects). That's clearly not the case. Unless we see her later breathe fire...

So -- if The Avengers 2 rolls out and Tony has super strength and healing capabilities, then I'll concede that you are right.

-R

 

I maybe wrong but I think Tony said he already figured out the glitch in the Extremis formula.

 

I don't think the ending means Tony gave himself Extremis superpowers or anything; I think instead it plants the seed for the actual Extremis armor he uses in the comic books. I fully expect to see that roll out in Avengers 2.

 

My problem with this plot device is it's just a throw away excuse. Tony's "genius" shouldn't be so all consuming that he can resolve ANY problem from ANY field. How is it he is suddenly a top rated biophysicist? At some point, I can't suspend my disbelief anymore or even feel engaged because the story doesn't balance intrigue with sufficient explanation. In other words, no matter how fantastic they make the problems, they don't offer clever solutions. It's all "Tony can fix it." To me, if you're going to take that position, you have to at least offer some rationale that explains how or why he would be able to find that resolution. There should be some journey of revelation that explains how he can overcome having a layman's perspective and fix these issues that no expert devoted to the task has ever done. That to me is loading the deck of reason too high.

 

He even said in Avengers that he became an expert "last night" because he IS a genius, he CAN figure things out, he does research and works it out.

 

Tony is by far the most practically intelligent person in the MCU thus far. I agree that if we had Reed Richards, Tony's master of all trades charade would be a little trite. But Since Reed isn't around (and likely won't ever be) I'm okay with Tony taking his spot in that avenue.

 

I really hope even Tony removed his reactor, he continues avengers. Plus, he knows how to design armor with reactor in it. Fingers crossed for Avengers 2.

Avengers without Ironman....cannot think of that

 

I hope that Cap acknowledges what IM did without the suit in The Avengers 2.

 

I could see Tony bragging about it. However I don't expect the "just a man in a suit" argument to continue after Tony tried to save the world at the end of Avengers.

 

they forshadowed it..or hinted it. Tony saying to peper, I'll fix you, then I'll fix myself...I almost figured this stuff out 20 years ago.

and the fact that tony was trying to get therapy in the after credits..AFTER he supposedly leveled off...suggests something is still bothering him, but he doesn't know what.

 

I just hope he can regulate.

 

That could make for a hilarious 'Guess you were wrong there' scene. Sounds like something Tony would do

 

It wouldn't make sense if Cap didn't react to Iron Man in The Avengers 2. I view movie Cap as a man who isn't eccentric.

 

I'm disappointed with pretty much everything you guys are saying. You're telling me Stark didn't already perfectly answer Captain America at the end of The Avengers ?

It's like you guys are taking too much at face value.

When Cap asked "...take your armor away and what are you ?" Tony answered him by showing he was willing to die to do the right thing. He laid himself down on the proverbial wire to let the other guy (Manhattan and the other Avengers) crawl over him. He did something where he expected the armor to be of little to no help at all. Flew into another dimension not expecting to return, effectively rendering the armor useless.

That's what he is without armor. THAT answered Cap perfectly. If he was just the armor and nothing more on the inside why not say "Hey Thor I have this nuke, you can survive in space I can't with just my armor. Kindly deliver this bomb to the Chitauri mothership." He certainly had the time to set something like this up with Thor. But it didn't even occur to him, with his genius mind. He chose not to "...cut the wire".

No, he said armor or no armor I am a hero, I AM Iron Man, eat crow Cap.

For Shane Black to rethread that topic in the way he did in IM3 just seems redundant at this point. I hear they did it to show how resourceful and heroic he can be without the armor but who at this point did not already know he's a Macgyver on steroids ? Who still doubted that this is a smart and heroic man who can get out of a pinch ? No one that's who.

So they strip him of his armor and what does he become ? A man with some sort of nailgun, electric glove, bombs, a real gun, weapons also found in his armors. He then gets captured and only escapes with the aid of what ? Thats right, his armor, albeit in bits and pieces. I wanna facepalm my head off at that point. So to get out of a pinch he apparently DOES need his armor. Whatever point they were trying to make about him not needing his armor to be a hero is severely weakened at this point if not completely ruined.

The armor is just a tool he uses, like the weapons he used to storm the mansion. But without the heart of a hero what good are any of those ? Notice how without the armor he's either running or backing away from Killian.

He can build a miniature arc reactor and Mk1 armor in a cave, with a box of scraps.

You're telling me Iron Man and The Avengers hadn't already nailed these aspects of Tony Stark to perfection ?

 

I would hope to see a more deeper connection between the Avengers in TA2 though. The first one played well with the clash of personalities and bickering, and I still hope to see stuff like the usual banter between Cap/IM and Thor/Hulk, but I would love it if they explore the individual relationships a bit more in this one.

 

Great post, and I agree. I didn't feel like I saw or learned more about Tony Stark in IM3 than what I already knew. That's why I fail to see why his journey in IM3 was so meaningful, especially at the end, which made little to no sense to me, and really disappointed me.

 

That's still a huge difference from his armor, or do you mean to say that Captain America's serum powers and shield are irrelevant since he uses guns as well? Tony is far more vulnerable without his armor and the point isn't that he can do everything just as well without it (it would be incredibly stupid if he could, so I strongly disagree with you about the escape), it's that he can still do a lot without it. He finds the parts within him that really separates him from his armor. It's both the anxiety of not being enough for what's out there and getting lost within the Iron Man persona and I like that it wasn't as easy for him to just become a Cap style hero as to just do one big sacrifice.

I think the point gets across and if they had made it into a story where the suit wasn't needed it would have gone into extreme cheese levels, as well as not making sense since it would kill off Iron Man.

 

In Iron Man, Tony learns that he has to be accountable and responsible, that not everything revolves around money, and that the things that give him fame and fortune actually cause pain and suffering to others so he has to set that right, and he does.

In Avengers, Steve questions his motivations in being Iron Man. Is he doing it because of the fame it brings him, or is it because he's a hero? We learn that Tony is a real hero like Steve.

In Iron Man 3, he thinks he cannot deal with superheroic stuff and other problems without the suits since in Avengers, he wouldn't have been able to save the day without the suit. That created trauma and anxiety in Tony, thinking he is nothing without the suit. We find out that Tony can be superheroic without the suits. The question in IM3 isn't about Tony's motivations like in Avengers(whether Tony is a hero or not), it's about his skills/abilities/self-confidence/capabilities (whether he needs the suits or not in being a great superhero).