Iron Man
I guess it’s not surprising now that the war has been unpopular for a couple of years, that Marvel releases Iron Man as a film, instead of say, Spiderman (2002). The franchise is about an arms manufacturer tycoon, Tony Stark, who has a change of heart after nearly dying himself. I was always fond of the comic as a kid, but never gave the premise much thought. (If you consider just how predictable the film is, it is surprising how entertaining it turns out to be).
By the end of the film, it is truly not controversial as the message is essentially, “It’s better to kill only the bad guys than to kill bystanders as well.”
In modern war, the problem with missiles is that they never really are accurate enough to spare innocents. We don’t see the results so much, but the first gulf war made us think such warfare is completely humane.
It is consistent that most people consider the victims of suicide bombers to be tragic, while those dead from our bombs, are an unfortunate consequence of war.
Does the film Iron Man confront this? I’m not sure.
It also gives all of us the chance to exclude ourselves from its moral questions. None of us own a weapons manufacturing enterprise, so we need not face this dilemma.
Perhaps the film can be read as a change of heart for the whole country, concerning our consistent war-waging. But I think it really is just an inevitable theme for a film that comes out now that it’s cool to be against the current war.
I don’t expect a blockbuster to confront viewers really in any way, but maybe the sequel will ask more questions.