Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
All those instances of Tony are him killing someone who is either a) trying to kill him, or b) trying to kill someone else, which makes it self-defense/defense of others. The laws he's breaking are things like entering a country without a visa or smuggling weapons.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:18:52 PM by RavenWilder
Which again, makes the Netflix shows' aversion to death even in self defense, and treatment of Punisher as wrong for doing so, rather dissonant.
The main, headline heroes of the franchise have no problem killing whoever they think need to to resolve a situation, essentially giving themselves the license to kill. But Daredevil has a problem with it, and the lack of consistency reflects poorly.
Like I said, the difference is the form of escapism each portion of the universes uses. Earlier, maybe in another thread, I also mentioned that the larger than life nature of the different characters also lends themselves to it. Iron Man is not killing people portrayed as normal (if horrific) criminals.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:26:19 PM by KnownUnknown
Punisher's intentions are the same as Tony's were, at first: to punish the people who hurt others (in Tony's case, who hurt others explicitly using his technology). You can make the case for both that neither (at least not at first, in Tony's case) were completely following the mission specifically to protect people, but to avenge themselves. Tony, in particular, has a bit of a problem in his own series about primarily going after people who hurt Tony Stark and his friends.
Honestly, if we're seriously making the case that a private citizen gearing up to kill people is okay if they're bad and you can reasonably construe it as self defense (and the fact that it's premeditated in both cases almost certainly disqualifies a lot of it as self defense anyway), then the fact that Punisher does it execution style whereas Tony goes for the quick "jump in, shoot everybody" approach seems moot.
Tony taking prisoners doesn't really make it better, because it's still him arbitrarily deciding who gets to be a prisoner and who doesn't.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:35:44 PM by KnownUnknown
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:43:47 PM by alliterator
and Tony stops does guys....by murder them.
"It's a classic action movie convention that, honestly, writers and fans alike are right to criticize if writers are going to start using it in situations with an actually serious moral standing. Which the films don't, but the Netflix shows definitely do. " Civi war try to follow and it look weird as result
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"Tony's intention is the first movie is to kill those who have and are hurting others, and also to get his stolen tech back, and the movie doesn't specify whether he's doing either - only that he's really obsessed with it either way.
Tony's mostly fine in the second movie, which tries to go lighter by having him mainly fight robots and one really insane guy who definitely can't
His initial motivation in the third movie is to kill the guy who hurt his friend. The Mandarin's current actions concern him, but while he pitches the idea of doing something he doesn't actually get off his ass to do something until it personally involves him. Then he gets kidnapped, and his motivations cease to matter since he's trying to survive.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:47:15 PM by KnownUnknown
Let's make this real clear:
Tony's intentions are to help people. Even if it means killing bad guys, all he wants to do is help.
Frank's intentions are to kill people. He doesn't care about helping people, he doesn't go out and stop muggings or anything. If he sees one happening, sure, but his intentions are to kill as many criminals as possible. Even if he has to invade a hospital to do so.
That is the difference between the two.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:46:49 PM by alliterator
The first movie is the best case for why trying to construe this is as self defense is really iffy. He built a weapon for the sole purpose of hunting down and killing dangerous international people, which he does so by throwing himself into actively dangerous situations. The only situation in which we're seen him doing so involves civilians in that warzone, but his stated intentions don't specifically tie that to being what he's after. In any case, his actions in the first movie are definitely premeditated, even if they're in the defense of others, and it's not a very easy situation for legality to sort out.
Luckily, the government owed him a favor.
It's the same reason why, even in the comics, Batman's actions are often criticized as questionably legal and moral. In the comics Batman doesn't even kill, and it's still a plot point for it.
So it's okay for them to do the same things, premeditated in both cases, as long Tony's heart is in the right place? If Punisher was doing exactly what he was doing, but we got a blip about how the people he was after were going to actively sell drugs to minors and Frank wanted to stop that, would his subsequent actions be okay? Would Danny's criticism of those actions be wrong?
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:51:22 PM by KnownUnknown
Between Tony Stark and The Punisher, who was deliberately framed and shot in such a way as to evoke the imagery of a mass shooter?
My various fanfics.Punisher, because he's the antagonist and the plot sets him up that way. But that's the narrative framing of their actions (minus the end, where the plot just throws its hand up and lets him gun down ninjas because its cool).
The point that started this conversation in the first place is that, without those lenses, without the moralistic perspective of Danny driving Daredevil's plot, or the gung-ho action movie perspective driving the Iron Man plot, the both of them aren't all that different.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:55:42 PM by KnownUnknown
Another thing very much worth noting is that Punisher is and for most of his history has been a deliberate, intentional deconstruction of this very idea.
Especially since the dark ages of comics, he's been an attempt to show what a guy who makes it his mission to gear up to go out and hunt down criminals without remorse would really look like. Does what he does protect citizens from the villains' actions? Sure. Is it still a good thing that he's doing it? Does the fact that he's killing bad people make his crusade any more justifiable than it already is? That's the underlying question to his character.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:58:28 PM by KnownUnknown
I didn't want to use the word warzone, because that makes it even worse and gets us into war crime territory. Tony went into a warzone and killed off the side he decided was wrong, in a situation where his own government was not interfering.
edited 2nd Jun '17 9:00:45 PM by KnownUnknown

Which, as Pepper noted, was expected to have killed whoever was on that roof. And Tony, telling her to go ahead anyway, was well aware of the idea that it would do so. He was fully willing to kill Stane, and the action of doing so resulted in his death.
No jury in the world would accept that as "totally not technically murder." It's akin to clubbing someone upside the head with a bat, watching them fall down a bunch of stairs, and then claiming you're off the hook because it was the stairs that killed them and not the initial injury.
Tony explicitly kills several mooks and at least two elite mooks in that movie, without counting the possible body count of the House Party Initiative raining hell upon the rest of AIM's forces.
To note, even Tony himself seems to be regretful of his prior "kicking ass and taking names" attitude come Civil War - though to be fair he was mostly concerned about the consequences for civilians.
This, I think, is the center of the escapism here. "These are people we think ought to die, so Tony is morally sound in defying the law to kill them all." It's a classic action movie convention that, honestly, writers and fans alike are right to criticize if writers are going to start using it in situations with an actually serious moral standing. Which the films don't, but the Netflix shows definitely do.
Escapism in superheroes used to be "takes it upon themselves to stop the people society can't," which is already iffy and got tons of parody before the modern era even started, but along with superheroes becoming the headliner action movie stars, it has evolved into "takes it upon themselves to kill the people society won't," which - while it didn't start with them - is moreso.
We tend to accept it in the films because, well, it's an action movie. Everybody in-universe, and the universe itself, is constructed such that that sort of thing is deemed acceptable and the audience's Willing Suspension of Disbelief isn't set off, but I'll definitely agree that with Daredevil being against it in his series, introducing a character whose mission isn't all that different from what Tony used to do (Punisher's temperament is, but then Iron Man 1 Tony is kind of creepily obsessive too), and the rest of the Netflix characters being more traditional supers in general (with even Jessica Jones' series being averse to killing with the bittersweet ending being that Jessica has lost so much that the kill is all that left) makes that portion of the universe dissonant from the rest of it. They don't have those same action movie trappings.
edited 2nd Jun '17 8:08:00 PM by KnownUnknown