Originally Posted by
Revolutionary_Jack
Agreed.
Totally. I mean that's the thing why is Tony Stark's mistakes treated as a stumble to his personal redemption story while the stuff Vulture and Mysterio do is beyond the pale. Tony's responsible for more deaths, vastly so then these two by a big magnitude and yet their actions aren't treated as part of a larger tragic story of talented or capable being led astray. That's how Pepper Potts and Yinsen saw Tony in the first half of Iron Man after all.
That's not what the original story's about though. In the original story, Vulture attacks Bestman and Spider-Man saves both but he and the police ensure that Bestman will get justice. The story ends up framing Vulture as a tragic victim.
Again why does the movie not extend the same standards to the movie version of Iron Man? How much sympathy and spectatorship to a redemption story can you sustain when several movies keep making Iron Man into a villain-making machine. That's what Kaitou was driving at, the movie asks the audience to apply standards to Iron Man while asking us at the same time to apply different standards to other characters. That strikes me as dubious at best, dangerous at worst because it inculcates terrible morals and poor life lessons to its fans. I mean it's more objectivist than Ditko.
If we go by the comics, you have Hank Pym. And the stories repeatedly insist that no amount of superheroism can excuse all the messed up stuff he is done and is responsible for, either in his marriage, or creating Ultron.