Quantcast

Who Wants Iron Man Armor? (Part 2)

Oct 21, 13 Who Wants Iron Man Armor? (Part 2)

When we last discussed the TALOS armor, I was in the middle of a rant on the use of exoskeleton suits and combat relevance, the two of which I don’t really think go very nicely together. Sure, it works perfectly fine in films, but I don’t think it has as much usefulness as its creators like to boast. (As a side note, films and science fiction can be wonderful sneak peeks into futures that might just inspire our own.)

Not only this, but our current selection of hardware resources already have a pretty open window from small two man operations to large scale assaults. If anything, a new exoskeleton suit will minimize the need for multiple men in a single operation, which would allow most missions to be completed with a single suit. Even that scenario is too ambitious to predict with the uncertainty of engineering and modern technology.

The very fact that news sites are referring to this new TALOS project loosely as ‘Iron Man’ armor only signifies the truth in my theory; the idea really should stay buried under the layers of imagination that it took to conceive an Iron Man comic.

I love Iron Man. I’m not too keen on the film adaptations of the series (I thought Favreux should have retained full control and ownership/creative authority on the third installation), but I do appreciate the principal behind Iron Man’s usefulness not only as a super hero, but as an aspiring scientist, as well. However, Iron Man isn’t defined solely by the super strength granted to a man inside an exoskeleton, nor is it defined with the ability to fly or shoot energy beams out of your arms. Iron Man is defined by an extremely intelligent guy, Tony Stark, redefining his dependence on his ability to build weapons.

However, most people forget that Stark, like Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent, is addicted to his suit. It’s not just an emotional implication to stay glued to your work and occupation, but also physical dependence to continuously to remain relevant to the world.

Because he made weapons that killed millions of innocent people, Stark publicly branded himself ‘Iron Man,’ welcoming any and all challengers to stop him from saving the world. A superiority complex to saving the day is what drove Tony Stark to build an Iron Man suit, but where is the merit in his action?

Stark has encountered many foes who’ve tried to harness the power and maneuverability of his suit for their own gain, whether it is personal, economical, or simply because they want to watch the world burn. They’ve all been rather intelligent, too, but they all suffer from over ambition and not enough conception on the product.

Will the suit be better optimized for military firefights, or are we also planning on using its strength to help with physical labor? Is its cost effectiveness more relevant with its ability to silence your opponent, or when it is used to move large objects for construction or rescue purposes?

Stark battled with politicians his entire life over the exact same questions, just as his father did before him. Because of this, I urge you to examine Iron Man and try to look beyond the large explosions and two-hour-long run times before you can sneak into another movie theater. Iron Man is a golden example of what happens when human intelligence exceeds human innovation, of which I hardly see with TALOS.

But I’m still not finished yet. More to report on this bit of news in future blogs to come!!!

Image Credit: Marvel Studios / Disney

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Email