Why Iron Man changes side on Civil War

[Yeryis]

Hi there,I'm a beginner comic-book reader ,and I started reading Civil War recently. At Spider Man #531 Tony Stark is clearly against the superheroes registration system,he even pays Titanium Man to attack him in order to make the politics guys change their mind about that law. Correct me if I miss any detail at some point of the whole plot,but this thing has been confusing to me. Thanks.

[Mighty Roman]

Hi Yeryis, Welcome to CBR (and the world of comics in general). Have you read the main series of Civil War yet?
After a villain called Nitro destroys the town of Stamford in Civil War #1 (including a school full of children), the government really begins to crack down on superhumans. In Civil War, Tony tries to act as a superhuman ambassador to the registration act, just so the government don't just ban superheroes all together. After all, registration is a better compromise than making superheroes outlaws. Plus, Tony eventually believes that training new heroes is a good idea anyway, to avoid further catastrophes. That said, Tony's motives throughout the War are pretty complex. Hope this helps.

[Yeryis]

I read the #1 of the main series,well that kinda explains it,so I guess,paying Titanium Man was just a waste of money for Tony Stark

[Mighty Roman]

I read the #1 of the main series,well that kinda explains it,so I guess,paying Titanium Man was just a waste of money for Tony Stark

Yeah. But considering how rich Tony is, I doubt it mattered that much to him. Both Tony and Captain America's motives are explained in the one-shot Civil War: Casualties of War: Iron Man/Captain America (collected in Civil War: Iron Man)-it's an amazing story, which I'd highly recommend. It definitely explains a lot about their motives, and the conflict between Cap and Tony.

[MichaelC]

He changed sides because the plot needed a villain and Marvel didn't care about Stark pre-movies. So they threw him to the wolves.

[Yeryis]

Yeah. But considering how rich Tony is, I doubt it mattered that much to him. Both Tony and Captain America's motives are explained in the one-shot Civil War: Casualties of War: Iron Man/Captain America (collected in Civil War: Iron Man)-it's an amazing story, which I'd highly recommend. It definitely explains a lot about their motives, and the conflict between Cap and Tony.

Thanks,I'll keep it in mind

[Mary Jay]

He changed sides because the plot needed a villain and Marvel didn't care about Stark pre-movies. So they threw him to the wolves.

I wouldn't say they made him the "villain" exactly. If you look at the early motivations and the bigger picture of what they were trying to accomplish, as Mighty Roman cleverly stated, those are noble goals. I always got the feeling that power got to Richards' and Stark's heads, and they started focusing too much on their goal and not enough on the immediate consequences it brought on their friends. The end started to justify the means for them, and maybe at that moment they stepped on the threshold of villainy.

Although I don't agree with a lot of what they did, I can't deny that at the beginning, it seemed like a good idea. It just got way out of hand as time went by. It wasn't as much of a black-and-white story as some still think it was.

[Derek Metaltron]

Mark Millar clearly wanted nether side to be right or wrong and have both sides make mistakes but also have value, and that came out best in the main series and the Causalities of War one-shot. But the problem lied in the fact that too many writers were siding with the Anti-Regs. Even characters like She Hulk who was Pro-Reg during Civil War was immediately betrayed by Tony in the stuff leading to WWH and switched sides. And Iron Man's comic ended up only having two issues to explore Tony's position because the previous story had taken so long to wrap up.

Civil War should have really tired to make elements of the Pro-Regs more sympathetic and also given the Anti-Regs more dubious decisions besides 'let's have Punisher kill two would be anti-reg villains just because' stuff.

[Wren]

Mark Millar clearly wanted nether side to be right or wrong and have both sides make mistakes but also have value, and that came out best in the main series and the Causalities of War one-shot. But the problem lied in the fact that too many writers were siding with the Anti-Regs. Even characters like She Hulk who was Pro-Reg during Civil War was immediately betrayed by Tony in the stuff leading to WWH and switched sides. And Iron Man's comic ended up only having two issues to explore Tony's position because the previous story had taken so long to wrap up.

Civil War should have really tired to make elements of the Pro-Regs more sympathetic and also given the Anti-Regs more dubious decisions besides 'let's have Punisher kill two would be anti-reg villains just because' stuff.

This is all true.

Another thing I noticed was missing was, I never understood the anti-reg's side's plan exactly. They didn't seem to have one, aside from non-compliance with registration, they didn't even discuss the problem of reckless superheroes or civilian perception or anything. That made it hard to root for them (for me).

This has become a kind of standard in Marvel. The same is happening now with the incursions: only one side has a plan.

[Derek Metaltron]

This is all true.

Another thing I noticed was missing was, I never understood the anti-reg's side's plan exactly. They didn't seem to have one, aside from non-compliance with registration, they didn't even discuss the problem of reckless superheroes or civilian perception or anything. That made it hard to root for them (for me).

This has become a kind of standard in Marvel. The same is happening now with the incursions: only one side has a plan.

Ultimately with me I was Pro Reg during Civil War, even if I didn't agree with all the decisions Tony and Reed made during and after the event, and I remember getting tired of so many writers wanting to have their characters yell or fight Iron Man because they considered him the 'bad guy', which granted with some stuff he was, but at least as you say he had a strategy, and I liked how Millar had little views of the fact that Registration was actually working and crime was coming down.

Ultimately I think the What If they did with Civil War where Tony and Steve talked about it and Tony told Steve that since it was the concept of certain groups having access to identities which rubbed him the wrong way most, he should be the one to have primary access to them. If the actual Tony and Steve had managed to talk and done that things would have gone much better for everyone.

[Dayle88]

Those events in Spider-Man show Tony properly. He fights it until it's inevitable and then gets in front of it to make sure it doesn't get out of hand. Nice to see someone who has read those issues before hand, they've seemingly been forgotten along the way.

Unfortunately the main Civil War story goes too far against the "pro" side. Although, ironically, it's Reed who makes most of the really bad choices but Tony gets the blame.

There are other things that really bug me too. Stark and Carol Danvers chasing their friends to the point of causing a dangerous car crash with kids involved. It was all too far for the sake of action. Way past the point of out of character.

[Wren]

Civil War depended heavily on which books a person read: reading a certain subset gives the impression Tony is a raging monster, another subset could paint him as a saint.

Ultimately with me I was Pro Reg during Civil War, even if I didn't agree with all the decisions Tony and Reed made during and after the event, and I remember getting tired of so many writers wanting to have their characters yell or fight Iron Man because they considered him the 'bad guy', which granted with some stuff he was, but at least as you say he had a strategy, and I liked how Millar had little views of the fact that Registration was actually working and crime was coming down.

Ultimately I think the What If they did with Civil War where Tony and Steve talked about it and Tony told Steve that since it was the concept of certain groups having access to identities which rubbed him the wrong way most, he should be the one to have primary access to them. If the actual Tony and Steve had managed to talk and done that things would have gone much better for everyone.

Yeah same here pretty much I was pro-reg, for the reasons you listed.

I think that "if the two sides had had an adult conversation most of this could have been avoided" is the answer to like 50% of events these days.
Hell it was always that way, I remember in the 60s comics every crossover issue the two teams would freak out and start fighting only to realize they actually had no reason to...

I never read that what-if. I'll keep an eye out for it it sounds interesting.

[Agent Z]

Mark Millar clearly wanted nether side to be right or wrong and have both sides make mistakes but also have value, and that came out best in the main series and the Causalities of War one-shot. But the problem lied in the fact that too many writers were siding with the Anti-Regs. Even characters like She Hulk who was Pro-Reg during Civil War was immediately betrayed by Tony in the stuff leading to WWH and switched sides. And Iron Man's comic ended up only having two issues to explore Tony's position because the previous story had taken so long to wrap up.

Civil War should have really tired to make elements of the Pro-Regs more sympathetic and also given the Anti-Regs more dubious decisions besides 'let's have Punisher kill two would be anti-reg villains just because' stuff.

See I've heard different. Millar said in some interviews he really didn't care about writing a complex story were both sides had merit; he just wanted to show superheroes fighting. Marvel editors and writers have also given interviews that said the pro-reg side were supposed to be the ones audiences rooted for all along and the story line ended with Steve turning himself in.

[BlitheringToot]

Whatever the writers' original intentions, I believe Tony did end up as the bad guy in "Civil War," and although that enraged me at the time I realize after further reading that it really wasn't out of character. Look no further than "The Armor Wars" to see how disastrous Tony's knee-jerk reactions can be (chasing down and incapacitating an innocent Stingray, attacking the Vault Guardsmen even though he's the one who gave them their armor in the first place). Most of the time, Tony's a great hero, but he's wayyyyy too impulsive for his own good.

[Grapeweasel]

Good comics tailor the stories to the characters.

Bad comics tailor the characters to the story.