Mavel Comics at it again...Tony Stark out as Iron Man

Sorry, that looks pretty cool to me. They say for some reason he steps away. I'm sure down the line he will jump in the suit again.
 
"As part of Marvel Entertainment’s Marvel NOW! relaunch this fall, the inventor of the Iron Man armor will find his place taken by Riri Williams — a teenage genius who built her own version of the Iron Man suit in a dorm room at MIT."

Miles Morales, Kamala Khan and now this. Great. And yet we're still waiting for a mainline East Asian.
I mean, "Teenage genius at MIT" but not Asian? C'mon. LOL.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate to tell them but this isn't impressing a lot of black folks, more than a few have said they'd rather see original black characters than just changing an established one. This is marvel trying to pander and given the mess they have after they turned Cap into a Nazi maybe they need to start firing folks. I'll stick to 30 year old back issues in trade paperbacks at this rate. Marvel's become a joke.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/tony-stark-to-be-replaced-by-black-woman-as-172307955.html


Diversification is great. Just do it with new characters. If you have to, de-emphasize some old ones, but stop repurposing old characters to look more PC.

I really wish more people would see that this doesn't help their cause. it just shows that the studios think an ORIGINAL character like this isn't worth taking a shot on.

but sadly, it must STILL work, even only for short term, or else they still wouldn't keep on trying it.

White Baxter Stockman, Black Wally West, Black Iris, Jenny Olsen. Black Jimmy Olsen.....

That's not diversity, that's pandering and fear that you think something won't work on it's own. i 'm amazed static shock was even given a chance to succeed as something new.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/tony-stark-to-be-replaced-by-black-woman-as-172307955.html


Diversification is great. Just do it with new characters. If you have to, de-emphasize some old ones, but stop repurposing old characters to look more PC.

I have to agree--are they that creatively bankrupt that they can't create original characters to capture whatever audience it is that they are hoping to reach?

On the other hand, Iron Man will always be Tong Stark in popular culture. I am certain he will be back.
 
IMO it is just business sense like other media. Iron Man has reader base. Change it up and diversify. Tony Stark will still be in the comic. He'll come back. Less risk more reward. And yes, this type of diversity is still helping.
 
Wow black AND a woman? really trying to hit all the PC hot points aren't we?

But that said I just think it's dumb and BTW James Rhodes was Iron Man for awhile when I was a kid,so not the first time somebody stepped in for Tony.
 
Im all for a Wondor Woman Rebot with Shia Labeouf. Hell, as long as were going there...... why not have Mind Quad as her sidekick.
 
The reason they're putting a black woman in the Iron Man suit is the same reason they have put RDJ in the suit for like 5 movies now. Everything Hollywood makes must work within an existing big franchise now. There was a time when RDJ might have appeared in 5 unique new summer action movies instead.


Having said that, you guys better watch your mouths. Haven't you seen the ruckus over the Ghostbusters female cast? We've been informed that if a studio says their minority casting is not a gimmick then it's not a gimmick. Even if they fill the movie with gimmicks related to it & spend the whole marketing campaign beating on that point and nothing else, it's not a gimmick unless they say it is. How dare you be racist/prejudiced/etc and complain?
 
It would be admirable and a noble aspect if it wasn't so blatantly obvious that they change Iron Man to appeal and address a current social commentary in an extremely cumbersome manner. It's like them making Hulk Chinese or whatever, and to a further extent, Ultimate Spidey being Miles Morales, now; in the end, none if it matters. What is the ultimate pay off for them being a minority in the long run? It really adds nothing to their overall arc as a character other than their origins. They still wind up getting the same silly super powers of the original characters and wind up fighting the same silly super villains who need to have the same silly level of intellect/gimmicks to stand up to them. The most that might come out of these would be the occasional story where, I dunno, Ult. Doc Ock would call Ult. Spidey a ****** or something (if they have the balls to do it) or Hulk getting called a chink by Modok and they'd go off and sulk about "Oh, even as super heroes, I can't escape racial discrimination" or something equally lame.

Back in the day, when Spider-man stories were addressing current topical subjects like, say, the rise in heavy drug use in New York during the 70's and 80's affecting youth, he didn't need to be turned into a impoverished minority trying to make ends meat in the Projects and winds up getting addicted to drugs because he's trying to escape depression. That character would make a great one-shot of its own or a limited series of its own but had that been Spider-man's "reboot", that would come off as pandering as these current token changes to the Marvel universe in an attempt to redesign it as a Coca-Cola, let's-all-hold-hands-and-sing-together, it's-a-tiny-world-after-all hug fest and, in the end, go back to what they were doing before. Rather than play the fickle game of playing "Let's Re-dress the old people", just make new people!

If they want true progression, real progression, it's ironic that the best way to go about it is in the least obvious, sympathy-fishing direction; almost not even addressing the issues of the day. Just make a good character and have good stories about them without needing to broadcast "They're Hispanic AND a genius!". If they're properly fleshed out, it wouldn't matter if they were gay, Black, Asian, blue, green, pink, etc. If the character itself is interesting and worthy of admiration, then what does it matter who they are racially or physically? People will like them regardless. Just turning a well-established character into someone from a minority group, and this is speaking as a minority myself, whenever I see stuff like this, it comes off as more offensive in the sense that it's like patting a child on the head and going "It's okay; here's your turn to play the hero". It may not be meant to come across as patronizing, it may very well come from a sincere place, but it is patronizing. "Here's something you don't have and get to play with for a bit before I take it back. Don't you feel better because I'm so nice?"

For instance, rather than see the same story of Batman's origins of him going off and learning skills from across the globe but now with painted on slanted eyes, how about we learn about the other people he was sure to meet on his adventures that warrants them being what/who they are already? Like, the people he's met in the League of Shadows. Surely there were Asians. Or women, even! They'd probably have a rich and storied history to fill out a whole series on their own. What events lead up to them joining and where did they go afterwards? What were their adventures? I'd be much more interested in reading those stories than having to suffer through one that was only slightly different to start with, only to wind up with them turning into some established character for a limited time, before the whole non-sense continuity is "rebooted" back to where it originally started.

That's another thing, if they want to have this be taken more seriously, just scrap the whole notion of continuity. You have established characters, treat arcs as serials; no need to bother doing all the cumbersome cross-overs and bother trying to establish a continuity with all of them. Having done that for the last near 70-80 years has put the comics industry in the state of mess that it's in now trying to desperately draw readers with hot-button issues because doing-over the "canon" 4-5 times now created an esoteric reader-base that just scares would be readers away.
 
This thread is more than 7 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top