Why the Tony is adopted theory doesn't work
So, a lot of people are peddling this theory. A few "scoopers" are now picking this up as fact.
First, this theory of Tony being adopted first came to prominence a while back from someone posting that theory on here before any of the scoopers ever said anything.
They stated that Tony looked at Howard funny in Endgame when they were talking about Maria's pregnancy. They also stated that the dates don't line up.
Yes, they do. Tony was born in May 1970. They want back to April 1970. The dates line up. There is no inconsistancy here.
Secondly, the whole adoption theory, and that it was manipulated by Kang and that Tony was aways Victor, is just too complicated to explain to the general audience, most of whom will not have watched the Disney+ shows. It also feels like a big copout to the millions of fans of Iron Man.
Plus, if Tony was adopted by Howard and Maria, why did they cast someone who could pass as Tony's biological father? If Howard and Tony are not related, why do they look alike??
Kang has been dealt with. I really doubt he is going to be mentioned - maybe as an offhander comment by Scott - and it'll be explained the TVA hunted down his varients and got rid of them, which is pretty much confirmed in a scene in Loki S2.
Retconning Tony to be a varient of Doom just wouldn't sit well with thd general audience. Nor would it sit well if Doom was an evil Tony Stark from another universe.
RDJ, despite what people may think, would be very protective of Tony. That was the role that made him. The Russo Bros have also said in previous interviews that RDJ was hesvily involved in crafting Doom's backstory so RDJ has done his research.
In terms of a simple explaination that is general audience friendly: there will be no link between Tony and Doom, or it will be a simple Doom has taken over Tony's body and is using him. This body-swap still fits the criteria of RDJ playing Doom, plus still allows him to be Tony as well.
In conclusion, they are not going to use a over-complicated adoption theory to retcon Tony to never having really been Tony Stark but was always Victor Von Doom. It would not sit well with the general audience or the majority of fans.
First, this theory of Tony being adopted first came to prominence a while back from someone posting that theory on here before any of the scoopers ever said anything.
They stated that Tony looked at Howard funny in Endgame when they were talking about Maria's pregnancy. They also stated that the dates don't line up.
Yes, they do. Tony was born in May 1970. They want back to April 1970. The dates line up. There is no inconsistancy here.
Secondly, the whole adoption theory, and that it was manipulated by Kang and that Tony was aways Victor, is just too complicated to explain to the general audience, most of whom will not have watched the Disney+ shows. It also feels like a big copout to the millions of fans of Iron Man.
Plus, if Tony was adopted by Howard and Maria, why did they cast someone who could pass as Tony's biological father? If Howard and Tony are not related, why do they look alike??
Kang has been dealt with. I really doubt he is going to be mentioned - maybe as an offhander comment by Scott - and it'll be explained the TVA hunted down his varients and got rid of them, which is pretty much confirmed in a scene in Loki S2.
Retconning Tony to be a varient of Doom just wouldn't sit well with thd general audience. Nor would it sit well if Doom was an evil Tony Stark from another universe.
RDJ, despite what people may think, would be very protective of Tony. That was the role that made him. The Russo Bros have also said in previous interviews that RDJ was hesvily involved in crafting Doom's backstory so RDJ has done his research.
In terms of a simple explaination that is general audience friendly: there will be no link between Tony and Doom, or it will be a simple Doom has taken over Tony's body and is using him. This body-swap still fits the criteria of RDJ playing Doom, plus still allows him to be Tony as well.
In conclusion, they are not going to use a over-complicated adoption theory to retcon Tony to never having really been Tony Stark but was always Victor Von Doom. It would not sit well with the general audience or the majority of fans.
Commentaires
Ideal scenario is that Doom never takes off the mask. I know they probably won't do that
The latter would retcon pretty much the entire MCU. The former is an interesting reinvention of a new (to the MCU) villain which is easily reversed in the impending reboot.
And it's still unlikely.
i still think they're going to pull a Trevor in Iron Man 3. make us think this is Doom and then the real Doom shows up, revealed to be using an actor's face being ashamed of his own.
Like, I wouldn't mind if the specific version of Doom that RDJ is playing is somehow a variant of Tony Stark (provided that down the line they introduce another version of Doom). Though honestly it's already established in the Marvel multiverse that variants of *different* individuals can have the same/similar face - for instance a Johnny Storm variant who looks like 616 Steve Rogers (both played by Chris Evans!) so they don't *need* to delve too much into it.
But Tony Stark is the very foundation of the MCU and he's a character with a clear beginning, middle and end. I *really* don't want them to tamper with *his* mythos. And also, Tony being a Stark, and Howard Stark, have become such integral parts ofthe MCU (moreso than even in the comics) that I generally don't want any sort of "Tony was adopted" reveal, even if it's currently the case in the comics.
Like the Human Torch and Steve Rogers.
I think they didn't hire RDJ for his acting (he's good but there are plenty of good actors who can portray Doom) or his very large paycheck. There has to be a reason.
My dead uncle is not a comic book character that need to be translate well. Especially after having 2 bad adaptations.
>There has to be a reason.
Yeah, sell the movie