I'm not completely convinced that Pepper thinks the nature of the original business was wrong though.
Why "though"? I argued that she doesn't think that at all.
re: Rhodey, not only didn't he have trouble with Tony manufacturing weapons, he seems to have felt Tony was letting the side down when Tony stopped in IM1. Which brings me to:
The IM movies weren't exactly strong on people who thought differently than Our Hero having a valid outlook.
Well, there are some, in addition to Tony being meant to be in the wrong as an active arms dealer at the very start of the movie. I would say the narrative is with Rhodey in his "you don't respect me or yourself" speech re: Tony's behavior at the Vegas event, it's again with Rhodey in IM2 re: Tony's behavior there, and Nick Fury comes across as speaking with authorial voice re: Howard (my reason for believing we're supposed to take Nick's impression of Howard over Tony's is that the movie immediately validates Nick's by letting Tony find that old movie with a post mortem message to himself and figure out that his fat, her had hidden a discovery for him in the Stark Exhibition model); later, Nick's acid assessment on Tony Stark as opposed to Iron Man at the end of the movie (or rather Natasha's assessment as recited by Nick) is also meant to be dead-on.
Now I grant you, the villains in all three IM movies are shown as being in the wrong, and one of the many reasons why IM2 is the weakest of the lot is that the comitee investigating Tony at the start is written as unsympathetic straw men (complete with one senator who later turns out to be Hydra), but critique of Tony's behavior coming from non-villains is usually always validated.
Anyway, going back to Rhodey, he also gets the last but one word in Civil War (other than Steve's voice over letter and of course the post credit scenes), so one can argue that the MCU likes to use him in a "not always our hero's pov, but valid" manner.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2016-05-05 04:16 pm (UTC)Why "though"? I argued that she doesn't think that at all.
re: Rhodey, not only didn't he have trouble with Tony manufacturing weapons, he seems to have felt Tony was letting the side down when Tony stopped in IM1. Which brings me to:
The IM movies weren't exactly strong on people who thought differently than Our Hero having a valid outlook.
Well, there are some, in addition to Tony being meant to be in the wrong as an active arms dealer at the very start of the movie. I would say the narrative is with Rhodey in his "you don't respect me or yourself" speech re: Tony's behavior at the Vegas event, it's again with Rhodey in IM2 re: Tony's behavior there, and Nick Fury comes across as speaking with authorial voice re: Howard (my reason for believing we're supposed to take Nick's impression of Howard over Tony's is that the movie immediately validates Nick's by letting Tony find that old movie with a post mortem message to himself and figure out that his fat, her had hidden a discovery for him in the Stark Exhibition model); later, Nick's acid assessment on Tony Stark as opposed to Iron Man at the end of the movie (or rather Natasha's assessment as recited by Nick) is also meant to be dead-on.
Now I grant you, the villains in all three IM movies are shown as being in the wrong, and one of the many reasons why IM2 is the weakest of the lot is that the comitee investigating Tony at the start is written as unsympathetic straw men (complete with one senator who later turns out to be Hydra), but critique of Tony's behavior coming from non-villains is usually always validated.
Anyway, going back to Rhodey, he also gets the last but one word in Civil War (other than Steve's voice over letter and of course the post credit scenes), so one can argue that the MCU likes to use him in a "not always our hero's pov, but valid" manner.