Printable View
Does anyone, but me find it odd that TONY STARK, the man that had the Extremis, thought of a million plans to safeguard the world, build a supervillain prison in another dimension, and even nearly caused an international incident to push the SHRA is AGAINST the idea of a seer/clairvoyant ?
I mean this is the man that fans labeled the VILLAIN of the previous Civil War and somewhat still do to this day.
Doesn't anyone find it odd ?
No. Because it's easy to argue it was odd he ever did those things. He's supposed to be a free market capitalist. Not a totalitarian government thug.
Plus: Their new direction for Tony is all about making him likeable like his movie counterpart.
Well the writer that pens his current book is writing the event so not really surprised. Anyway this should raise Carol's "profiling" profile a bit than the indifference she has gotten since becoming Captain.
[QUOTE=N'Dare;1716364]Well the writer that pens his current book is writing the event so not really surprised. Anyway this should raise Carol's "profiling" profile a bit than the indifference she has gotten since becoming Captain.[/QUOTE]
Yet wasn't this the same thing as her role in the original Civil War when she was Ms. Marvel?
Marvel won't dare put their new golden boy in a bad light this time around, but it isn't impossible that he can be in the right under the same pretenses.
However, I'm under the impression he's on the side against accountability in this case, which is very different than being pro-accountability the first time around.
One word: Redemption.
[QUOTE=Of Atlantis;1716385]Marvel won't dare put their new golden boy in a bad light this time around, but it isn't impossible that he can be in the right under the same pretenses.
However, I'm under the impression he's on the side against accountability in this case, which is very different than being pro-accountability the first time around.[/QUOTE]
Think I agree.
[QUOTE=Of Atlantis;1716385]Marvel won't dare put their new golden boy in a bad light this time around, but it isn't impossible that he can be in the right under the same pretenses.
However, I'm under the impression he's on the side against accountability in this case, which is very different than being pro-accountability the first time around.[/QUOTE]
Yet wasn't he looking like a villain when he was inverted in the series of events leading into Secret Wars ? :(
[QUOTE=Of Atlantis;1716385]Marvel won't dare put their new golden boy in a bad light this time around, but it isn't impossible that he can be in the right under the same pretenses.
However, I'm under the impression he's on the side against accountability in this case, which is very different than being pro-accountability the first time around.[/QUOTE]
I think we have different views on the definition of "accountability."
[QUOTE=Some Guy;1716401]I think we have different views on the definition of "accountability."[/QUOTE]
The MU has the same problem with accountability in regards to some of its "heroes"
EDIT
I can totally see Tony not trusting a clairvoyant.
Now if *he* had invented a future-crime telling machine... ;)
[QUOTE=j9ac9k;1716420]I can totally see Tony not trusting a clairvoyant.
Now if *he* had invented a future-crime telling machine... ;)[/QUOTE]
LOL Than of course it'd be the safest thing in the universes to use, how could you POSSIBLY be against it? LOL
I don't think it's as surprising at it seems. Tony had his mind rebooted to a time before Civil War occurred, and he was horrified to learn what his actions ultimately led to. His stance in CW2 seems to be a result of what he learned from CW1.
[QUOTE=Some Guy;1716401]I think we have different views on the definition of "accountability."[/QUOTE]
You could be right. The definition may be relative depending on the circumstance. Tony's opinion on accountability clearly means accountable after the deed is done, while Carol's definition means they are accountable before the deed.
[QUOTE=Cmbmool;1716399]Yet wasn't he looking like a villain when he was inverted in the series of events leading into Secret Wars ? :([/QUOTE]
You mean the temporary status quo change that ended up having no lasting impact [I]before [/I]Marvel began their Tony Stark ANAD push?
If you ever watch Minority Report you will see why Tony is on the side he is.
From what I can make out from the teasers, I would/am on team Tony. You cannot arrest someone for something they have not done. A lot of people will disagree with me I know, because it's they idea that they're [I]going to do it [/I]. I don't think the idea of Civil War II is accountability, it's about whether it's right or wrong to use someone to catch people before they commit any crime, I suppose it's accountability in the sense that you're arresting people accountable for what would have been a crime.
But at the heart of it, it seems there is the question of "if they are caught before committing a crime, are they still guilty?"