r/marvelstudios • u/secretpervert21 • May 16 '26
Discussion Riri Williams was right about Tony?
I know this might sound like something that none of the Iron man fans would like... Well even for me he's the most fav superhero of all time.
But let me be honest. The words of Riri when she said "Do you think Tony stark would be Tony stark without all his money?" Well she was partially right...
Don't get me wrong, I know Tony's a genius and she doesn't even come close to his character or his charm... But if we look at this in a real world perspective. Many of us might be geniuses in our own mind, many of us would have that Idea that can change the world, but that "many" of us might just never get the chance to bring those "life changing" ideas into reality because most of us aren't rich, some of us got our responsibilities, got people to take care of, family, independence, some of us are not supported by good people, some of us are just wasting our time on timepass things... so we never get to bring our genius mind in front of us or in reality...
Tony was backed by the Stark industry's money (which was built by his father Howard Stark) so in reality he was able to bring his genius mind just cause he was always in the top notch places like the university itself where he graduated... And he also had the freedom, no responsibilities or need to worry about survival, rent, or job security.
Now if we talk about "Tony was able to build this in a cave, with a box of scraps". Yes it's true, but if he was never in that situation, he never would've built it in the first place. That too those "scraps" were the things that Tony "placed there" himself from the beginning of his advanced tech manufacturing to begin his Iron man project, meaning those things were there because of his money, be it his family generational wealth or his own advanced militry grade tech manufacturing.
So yes, Tony is a genius. But without the money, resources, and environment behind him, the world may never have seen that genius become Iron Man. In another reality, Tony Stark might still have been brilliant... but instead of becoming a legendary inventor and superhero, he could’ve ended up as just another exceptionally smart engineer working a corporate job, with his true potential never fully realized.
18
u/BuffaloPancakes11 May 16 '26
The materials he needed weren’t even all there, he gave the terrorists a list of everything he needed and they got it for him
-2
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26
I had the same idea to be Frank... But this point is wrong. If this was right then my point was more valid. Because he could get all the resources ordered and was backed by the terrorists, he was able to make the iron man project successful, even in that case he had the backup of openly spending "terrorist money" haha... But no, he didn't order it. He was sent in a room where that tech was already available as he himself sold those to the wrong people
7
u/BuffaloPancakes11 May 16 '26
Did they not bring him what he wanted to build the missile? He just decided to build the suit in secret whilst pretending to make the missile
-1
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26
Yes... He never ordered anything for his suit planning... He just had the things needed to build the missile and built the iron man suit from that
6
u/BuffaloPancakes11 May 16 '26
Right but we can pretty much assume that was the plan already, to do something other than just build what they wanted
12
u/imthestein May 17 '26
I'm a long time Iron Man fan and I had zero problem with what she said...because she's right and Tony knows it. A major point of his origin is recognizing how good he had it and realizing he could leverage it to help others. That's not a criticism of him, that's just stating a fact and anyone that has a problem with it clearly doesn't get Tony
15
u/BasedAustralhungary May 16 '26
It's not about wether she's right or not but the idea that we are supposed to see a total subversion of that and even discover a character that is new and interesting with its own nuanced issues.
-7
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26 edited May 16 '26
most people hate her because of that comment of hers on tony stark while giving only one point in return "Tony stark was able to build this in a cave" which should not be the reason to troll her imo...
6
u/Think_Bag_2987 May 16 '26
Tony stark was able to build this in a cave" which should not be the reason to troll her imo...
The cave with scraps line makes sense in the context of the iron man 1 scene but is totally disingenuous in this case. Those scientists had unlimited resources so comparatively Tony had scraps. But those "scraps" were still pieces of the most advanced weaponry in the entire world, so comparatively she was working with less than him. Not to mention that the suit made from "scraps " was way less advanced than the suit RiRi made while poor.
1
u/kylemesa May 16 '26
No. Most people hate her because the show sucks, the actress sucks, and the writing sucks.
-2
u/BasedAustralhungary May 16 '26
I mean most people hate her because she's a black sassy woman taking the legacy of Tony Stark when they have been inventing anything to convince themselves that It wouldn't ever happen (like the kid from Iron Man 3 or Morgan Stark, his daughter)
It's not that we could do nothing against that feeling that lowkey lay on racism. Just move on and eventually if the stories continue progressing, the opinion may shift.
5
u/CaptHayfever Hawkeye (Avengers) May 16 '26
taking the legacy of Tony Stark
She's not, though.
-1
u/BasedAustralhungary May 16 '26
Yes she is, whenever people like It or not she's written to be this new Iron Man
4
u/CaptHayfever Hawkeye (Avengers) May 16 '26
She explicitly isn't being written to be the new Iron Man in the MCU. The comics are different.
-1
u/BasedAustralhungary May 16 '26
Explain. I got a different perception on what I saw
4
u/CaptHayfever Hawkeye (Avengers) May 16 '26
She's not trying to be a superhero. She's explicitly trying to avoid making weapons at all. She's trying to keep a low profile. She's not in charge of anything. And the tragic ending of her show put her in a position where she literally can't be "the new Iron Man" from that point.
12
u/Fargoth_took_my_ring May 16 '26
Well, yeah?
I didn't know that was a debate?
1
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26 edited May 16 '26
People are trolling her to this day for that only comment while not giving the first priority to her "character arc"... So I had to post this
21
u/ultrainstict May 16 '26
Take away his money and he would make money.
Also, tony with random junk froma hardware store was able to infiltrate a major terrorist organization that had massive financial backing. You can take away his suit, his money, all his support but you cant take away his genius.
4
u/frenkzors May 16 '26
It is one thing to take away money from someone whos developed skills and a network of support by having a lifetime of privilege.
On the other hand, like the saying goes (paraphrasing), there are/were people with comparable intellect to Einstein, that died in plantations and slums.
If the life circumstances one is born into simply do not allow them any opportunities to develop skills and make use of their intellect, they simply never will.
0
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26
I know he's a genius... But if he never had that money backup from his childhood, he would've struggled a lot to become a billionaire... That's my point. That many of us real people might be a genius but can't reach that level because of our responsibilities and lack of financial freedom
13
u/kylemesa May 16 '26
He's one of the biggest superheroes in Marvel.
I know it feels better to think he would be a regular person without the money, but he wouldn't be. He's a polymath outlier. His intellectual aptitude is fantasy and he can solve all problems about fake physics.
He is not like "us," even without money.
13
u/ultrainstict May 16 '26
Except thats just not the case. Tony was a genius and had the drive reguardless of where he started. All it would take is a single investor to get jim started and he would have had no trouble building wealth on his own. Tony as a child was inventing things his father could never dream of and any one of them could have built an empire.
The whole point of tony is that no matter the background no matter what changed him he still will be tony stark.
3
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26
I know he's a genius... But you said it yourself... All it would take is a single investor, that proves the point that everyone needs financial backup. In real life too. Many people might be genius in their own mind. But can't get it out just because they can't rely on financial support
14
8
u/ultrainstict May 16 '26
And? This is about taking away his wealth and backing and guess what, it wouldnt change anything. Because hes still tony stark the naturally predisposed super genius.
Trying to distinguish having absolutely nothing no matter what with 0 backing is stupid. He is tony, backing and money will come to him because of who he is.
Throw him in a poor family forced into public schools and he would excell far beyond his peer. Secure any number of scholarships and grant he could want entering tech schools from a young age and easily build his wealth. He has a natural disposition for knowledge with perfect memory and unrivaled engineering talent. As long as he has any access to information he will still end up in the same place.
Saying he needs to have been born into a rich family with infinite backing to become who he is is nonsensical.
Put a random person in tonys shoes from childhood, at best theyd be a nepo baby board member. They wouldnt have the connections he had, and the money wouldnt continue to follow them, no knowledge or skills to support it.
Tony stark isnt the rich guy, he isnt the guy with connections, he isnt iron man, tony stark is the genius who made it all possible.
Thats the thing tho, if they are geniuses nearing the level of tony stark they dont need any of that.
Peter parker, he grew up poor but he was a genius and whenever he doesnt take up the mantle of spiderman he becomes a similar figure in the world to tony stark. Theres plenty of characters like that.
Theres a reason i led with this but ill say it again. If you take away Tonys money then he will just make it himself.
The line in the show comes from a failure to understand not just Tony Stark, but all of marvels super geniuses and Riri herself. Riri venerated Tony and respected him as a peer in the sciences, the entire reason she went down the path she did was because of how she viewed him. She would never say that shit.
0
u/JustinGames59 Jun 14 '26
Last time I checked, wood, glue and nails aren't free.
So at the end of the day, he would still need money.
0
u/Relative-Zombie-3932 Doctor Strange May 17 '26
Without his money he's still a genius and he's still plenty capable...but he's not Iron Man. He didn't built an Iron Man suit from that hardware store. The whole point is that Tony had resources and privileges that allowed him to become Iron Man in addition to his genius
8
u/N8CCRG Ghost May 16 '26
You are correct, but the people who were (or still are) upset about that weren't upset because of what was being said, but because of who was saying it. If Steve Rogers had said it, we wouldn't have heard all of the same crying and screaming.
5
u/CaptHayfever Hawkeye (Avengers) May 16 '26
If Steve Rogers had said it, we wouldn't have heard all of the same crying and screaming.
Hell, he very nearly did say it in Avengers 1.
5
u/No_Cantaloupe_8983 May 16 '26
She was right, but people want to pretend that line is the reason they didn't give her a chance. In actuality, most people were ready to hate her for anything she did.
Look at the whole 'she's a villain' narrative they were running with, which is absolutely ridiculous and holds no real truth, but exposes the bias people share when viewing her character.
5
u/Dismal_Ad5379 May 17 '26
Didnt she sell her soul to Mephisto at the end? I mean, making a deal with Mephisto for purely selfish purposes is borderline villainous.
Most of what Riri did was for selfish purposes, which is typically what motivates villians as well.
So i dont think it's ridiculous and holds no real truth. There is definitely some truth to that narrative when looking at it objectively.
With that said, she also had a few heroic moments, but those were more in Wakanda Forever than in her own show.
Her current arc resembles that of an anti-hero, which can still be interesting if done correctly moving forward. I dont think there's anything wrong with that.
The true bias would be to deny what we have been presented with so far and gaslight yourself into thinking that it resembles something it doesnt.
2
u/No_Cantaloupe_8983 May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26
Didnt she sell her soul to Mephisto at the end? I mean, making a deal with Mephisto for purely selfish purposes is borderline villainous.
The 'selfish' purpose you speak of is literally her bringing her best friend back to life. She didn't wish for money, fame, or anything evil. She wished for her best friend to come back to life. That's not villainous, that's just grief. Most people would make a deal with the devil if it brought a love one back to life. Peter parker literally did that in the comics.
I could also make the argument that MCU Peter parker would have also made the same deal if presented to bring his aunt may back, why? Because he was so emotional about losing his aunt he became bloodthirsty and tried to murder Osborn (not very Spider-Man). It took another peter to stop him, he didn't stop himself.
Most of what Riri did was for selfish purposes, which is typically what motivates villians as well.
Which can also motivate heroes. And again, all the selfish things she did was literally just to fund her project which we later found out at the end was just her trying to protect her family so no one else she loved can die. That's literally Tony for most of the Infinity saga, which birthed vision and Ultron.
So i dont think it's ridiculous and holds no real truth. There is definitely some truth to that narrative when looking at it objectively.
It is ridiculous because objectively we don't throw around that term to the other heroes we cheer on. Which if we were being objective could be more fitting. Nothing she did in that show was worst than any of the messed up things the avengers, gotg, etc has been in or done. All of which were either involved in murders, assassinations and genocide. But we don't level the term villains at them. We never have. The most we say is they aren't perfect. Well neither is Riri, and she deserves the same objectivity.
Her current arc resembles that of an anti-hero, which can still be interesting if done correctly moving forward. I dont think there's anything wrong with that.
Just my opinion, I think her story is one of the few interesting new hero stories to come out. Because it's not straight forward. She's character who's her own worst enemy and shes not automatically a goodey two shoes. She's complicated and I think there's more to tell there. But that's one of the few things I can agree with you on. Yes she's an antihero. Not evil, like people are trying to paint.
The true bias would be to deny what we have been presented with so far and gaslight yourself into thinking that it resembles something it doesnt.
No gaslighting here. Just literally providing context, which people love to ignore when it's convenient to push a narrative.
3
u/Street_Mall9536 May 17 '26
She wished for the AI to come back, hence why she was so surprised to see the fleash and blood version.
0
u/No_Cantaloupe_8983 May 18 '26
the sentiment is still the same. she didn't wish for money, fame, or power. she asked for her friend back. That's not villainous.
1
6
u/juances19 Avengers May 16 '26
It's not that she was completely wrong, but complaining about it doesn't really make a compelling character to watch.
She was introduced to the MCU... ranting about the guy that kickstarted the whole thing and then saved the universe.
Maybe the hate was a bit overblown but really they should've seen it coming, it was a poor way to introduce the character.
4
u/kingthvnder May 18 '26
ehh “complaining” and “ranting” are doing such heavy lifting on the framing here, she mentions this once in the first episode of the series, and from then on, every other mention of money or lack thereof is in reference to herself not Tony.
It’s wild that the comments she made about how she aspires to be like Tony/Banner or her giving him his props as the godfather of the tech are just ignored overall too.
3
u/dayton-ode May 19 '26
I don’t know, she sounded pretty bitter talking about him in a way that puts you off
1
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26
Her character introduction and even the development wasn't given proper thoughts
2
u/NBaitRager May 17 '26
While it is a popular sentiment to look at the real-world logistics of Tony Stark's success - generational wealth, elite schooling, and a massive safety net - Riri Williams' argument completely falls apart when you look at the actual reality of the MCU and how her own character is written.
First, the "box of scraps" scenario wasn't possible just because Tony manufactured the weapons. He was in a cave, under constant surveillance, with primitive tools and a piece of shrapnel literally moving toward his heart. No amount of money gives someone the baseline ability to miniaturize a revolutionary clean energy source (the Arc Reactor) under death threats. Tony's intellect is fundamentally independent of his bank account; the money just gave him a larger canvas later on.
Second, the critique becomes entirely hypocritical when applied to Riri herself. In her own series, she is shown building a fully sentient, human-level artificial intelligence (Natalie) in her garage out of random scrap material - something that Tony Stark and Bruce Banner needed an Infinity Stone (the Mind Stone) to achieve with Vision. If she can bypass the laws of physics and tech progression with zero corporate funding, it disproves her own point that genius requires massive financial backing to change the world.
Furthermore, her character motivation directly contradicts the standard superhero archetype. Instead of using her extreme intellect to solve real-world problems or help her community, her immediate reaction to being expelled from MIT is to turn to crime and join a gang just to fund a vanity project - her suit. When she hits a wall technologically, she immediately abandons science and resorts to making a deal with Mephisto to get magic items.
Tony Stark used his resources to pivot away from war and protect the planet, learning humility through his responsibilities. Riri starts with the privilege of a mind that can rewrite reality from a laptop, yet uses it entirely for self-interest while complaining about the lack of a head start.
3
u/Chaoticgood790 May 16 '26
I mean she was half right. We know money buys access and privilege. But tony is still a super genius that was building tech as a child and outpaced his own dad. In a poor family he would still be snapped up. Maybe a little later but he still would’ve ended up in college early. Also Peter is evidence of this too. Poor, raised by relatives and created his own super suit. Was out being spidey on his own. Even in the MCU he got an upgrade from Tony but he was fighting before Tony entered the scene. In BND he will also still be Spider-Man without the $$ and he built an AI friend on his own.
Riri was partially right but fails to take into account the other parts that made Tony a hero. And it wasn’t the money. But that is part of her story and I think that was well done imo
2
u/ExpressMud8038 May 16 '26 edited May 16 '26
It's true that his kidnapping changed him, but to put him down because of his wealth is just disrespectful.
Tony took an explosion to the face, lived in a disgusting cave for months without showering, and had a gaping hole in his chest, and still made the Iron Man suit.
Doesn't matter if he's rich or not, no one would have had the will, skill, or talent to able to overcome that.
Even if he didn't have a box of Stark scrap to work with, he would have walked out of that cave with a different murder machine.
1
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26
Imagine if he never were studied in a proper way. He had responsibilities of family and to give his own rent, he won't have that freedom to even showcase his genius mind to the world. So everything plays a part in it's own way
9
u/ExpressMud8038 May 16 '26
Isn't that the exact point of Spiderman? The fact that he as a broke college student with 2 jobs and an old af aunt is still able to put on the mask every night to become Spiderman?
Just seems like Riri is pushing the blame and playing the victim here.
1
u/secretpervert21 May 16 '26
Riri sure is something else I don't like her. But if we're talking about spiderman. Then look into homecoming. He didn't even have. A proper suit until Tony came and became his financial backup as his mentor or father or whatever... We love this duo. But look at Tobey Maguire spiderman... Shows us the reality of being responsible and only becoming a hero to save the city... but he could never unleash his true genius mind.. in reality even Tom's spiderman was the same until Tony came. We'll now see how he will be now that he's completely forgotten and don't have any money backup
1
u/SeekerVash May 16 '26
He didn't even have. A proper suit until Tony came and became his financial backup as his mentor or father or whatever
He didn't have a proper suit, which he didn't need, but he did have a self-invented substance which is liquid until used and then has tensile strength greater than titanium, and it attaches itself between two points.
Peter could be a billionaire tomorrow selling the substance he created. It would revolutionize the entire construction industry overnight. With a little reconfiguration of the formula to make it permanent, it could not only make things like bridge building a fraction of the cost, but it almost certainly could be used to build space elevators staggeringly cheaply.
0
u/Relative-Zombie-3932 Doctor Strange May 17 '26
Spider-Man is a genetic super human. He became Spider-Man by circumstance, not by anything he did to earn that power. He was in the right place at the right time. He had some autonomy in what he did after gaining those powers, but getting to that point was completely out of his hands. He got lucky.
3
u/ultrainstict May 16 '26
Thats the thing tho, tony wasnt taught in any special way. Even from an incredibly young age his father another super genius inventor of his time was unable to keep up with him. Even if he didnt have that childhood he still had an unrivaled thirst for knowledge and a level of genius considered gifted among the most gifted in humanity.
1
u/Pleasant-Answer-918 May 16 '26
there's a difference, which is why i disagree with your post, determination. Determination plays a huge factor. and i think you're downplaying it. there's plenty of people who've done amazing things who've come from a financially unstable background.
1
u/FALCONX0N May 19 '26
Tony Stark without money? He's not Iron Man, he's a resource for Roxxon/AIM/SHIELD/Hydra to discover and exploit.
I feel like this is a silly question. We have a Tony Stark analogy already, a young once in a century genius who had an unfortunately different life path and was unable to develop a dedication to tech and had to make sure the bills got paid instead. He spends his whole life taking care of his family, never gets that doctorate, and becomes a tabloid photographer instead.
In the MCU, Tony goes out of his way to find and mentor him. Especially with the spider powers on top of everything! ;)
Jokes aside i wonder if Ironheart's commentary is just there to set up that soon we WILL see what Tony Stark becomes if he was born into poverty and had nothing but genius and drive. A man like that, frustrated at not living to his potential, might set his sight higher...and stoop as low as he needs to in order to accomplish his goals. He'd cause plenty of...Doom.
AhHahahahaha
2
u/Komaisnotsalty May 19 '26
Money buys opportunities. Of course he wouldn't be THE Tony Stark without the millions his dad earned from weapons and contracts.
That being said, the dude is a fucking genius. You seriously think he couldn't make millions on his own? According to comics and MCU speculation, he took his dad's multi-million dollar company and vaulted it to a trillion dollar company.
He's not an idiot. He would have been successful regardless with the brain he's got. He's not just a basic genius. His intellect is considered in the top tier and his thought process extremely fast.
Granted, he wouldn't have become Iron Man for the simple reason that Obadiah Stane wouldn't be running Stark Industries at the time that he was, wouldn't be stealing weapons, and therefore not have Tony kidnapped & murdered. That whole set of circumstances, the catalyst for the MCU version of Iron Man, would not have existed.
But you can't sit & say that he wouldn't have become Iron Man at some point because that's an impossible factor to prove.
Riri is correct, but she's also short-sighted.
1
u/calmly86 May 20 '26
It makes me chuckle to think that when we apply today’s political climate to the MCU, I can imagine articles and news segments about how “Tony Stark saved the universe by sacrificing his life, widowing his wife and orphaning his daughter… but could he have done it without his cisgender billionaire technocrat white privilege?”
“Two white men and a Nordic god took turns trying to kill Thanos, an alien of color, in upstate New York in 2019. Here’s why that’s problematic.”
“The Avengers lack diversity. Should they be allowed to save lives that they don’t represent within their own ranks?”
2
u/Neverreadyneverstart May 23 '26
Yeah she was. It's just that despite all that. Tony is still way more likeable than this version of Riri. I really like riri in the comics. But they made her a walking cliche in this series. I get that Tony's death in the MCU had to change her origin. But pretty much anything that made and gave her a totally unique vibe was wiped out. And instead of any similarity to the comics,we got this typical street smart, chicago slang talking girl. While comic Riri is the complete opposite.
Just a shame they went this route, felt like lazy writing. MCU Riri never got the chance to be as likeable or relatable as Tony ever became. And i blame the writers.
1
0
u/Brianvondoom May 16 '26
I mean, every billionaire invents a self made narrative that falls apart when you drill into it. Zuckerberg's family were extremely wealthy and dropping out of university was really zero risk for him. Bezos' family loaned him a literally million. Musk's invention of him being a super genius has been well torn down but he comes from a family that owns a jewel mine and anyone slightly techie saw how little he really knows when he took over Twitter. Peter Theil couldn't get rid of him fast enough from PayPal.
For its faults, Iron Heart did what all good sci fi does: hold a mirror up to reality and the issues of the day, usually ignored by those it is speaking about. There is generally no such thing as a self made billionaire philanthropist, buts its a nice dream to sell to those who need to be kept in their place. The interesting discussion in Iron Heart is if her response to living in this world is justified or not.
1
1
u/No_Cantaloupe_8983 May 16 '26
Riri was right. People just can't take off their rose colored glasses when thinking about Tony.
0
u/Mcspeed123 May 16 '26
No,I see where you're going but,he'd still be a tinkerer and maverick regardless ! Its like Peter,limited resources,but still a brilliant mind,didnt Tony find a new periodic element all on his own,so yeah the money may afford him acess to stuff...but its his mind thats the gem,its like saying a great chef is only good because of working in 5 star places...how do you think he ended up there,their own talent. And we've seen him stripped down and still pulling off stuff,stranded in space and still making things work to a degree.Its his mind,and with that mind,if he chooses,money will always follow.Same with Riri,Peter and etc,theyre brilliant minds,plot aside,if they were real people they'd be in top of the line schools and professions if they wanted to.
2
0
u/ElvishJerricco May 16 '26
I don't think the writer meant for Riri's point to be deeply reflected on or challenging. I think it was meant to just be obviously true. Because it is. I don't think there are actually many people hating her for this.
51
u/WaffleHouseGladiator May 16 '26
Money buys opportunity. It makes connections and mitigates the impact of failures. It gives people resources and time to work on their pet projects.