Summary
- Iron Man’s involvement in Captain America: Civil War was crucial and removing him would have ruined the movie’s adaptation of the comic.
- The fight between Iron Man and Captain America was one of the most significant and compelling moments in the movie, adding depth to the narrative.
- While the movie strayed from being a faithful recreation of the comic, removing Iron Man would have made it a full-on Captain America sequel, which could have fixed a complaint about the film.
The original plan for the story of the MCU Captain America: Civil War movie would have removed Iron Man entirely and probably ruined the movie. Despite not being an Avengers film, Civil War featured a who’s-who in the MCU timeline as its heroes hashed out their differences in opinion over the Sokovia Accords, which were drawn up to regulate the “enhanced individuals” that comprise the Avengers, with their fists, gadgets, and superpowers. Leading one side of the fight was Captain America, while Iron Man headed up the other; but despite how crucial the rift it formed between them became in the overarching story, Tony Stark nearly wasn’t involved at all.
This is according to a bombshell revelation (spotted by CultureCrave) within the book MCU: The Reign of Marvel Studios by Joanna Robinson, Dave Gonzales, and Gavin Edwards. The book delivers an unauthorized behind-the-scenes look at the rise of the MCU through interviews with myriad individuals involved with the studio over several years. Through these, it was revealed that Marvel, to the chagrin of the movie’s directors, had allegedly intended to make the Civil War involve superheroes vs. super-soldiers, flying in the face of Captain America: Civil War‘s comic book origins and removing Tony Stark’s crucial involvement in the battle.
Removing Iron Man From Civil War Would’ve Destroyed Its Comic Ties (& Strongest Moments)
The Civil War run in Marvel Comics is among the most celebrated, demonstrating what could happen when superheroes harbor irreconcilable differences and let loose at one another instead of villains. While the stakes were a little higher in the comics, even culminating in the death of one hero, and comprise a larger story that could be revisited in the MCU, Captain America: Civil War was a solid recreation of its most significant story beats. Among these is the fact that the two sides’ de facto leaders were Tony Stark and Steve Rogers, two characters who found their relationship sundered by conflicting ideals.
In the movie, this was perfectly condensed, creating some of the best MCU moments committed to the big screen. The heart-wrenching fight between Stark and Rogers culminating in a rift being formed between them just as the threat of Thanos loomed closer than ever was one of the most integral, and not to mention compelling, parts of the narrative that had to be told. Removing Iron Man from Captain America: Civil War entirely would have removed the significance of its conflict, and risked turning the film into a comic book adaptation in name only; a sin committed by the less well-received Avengers: Age of Ultron.
The Plan To Remove Iron Man From Civil War Could Have Fixed Its Final Complaint
With that being said, making a movie decent doesn’t require it to be a faithful recreation of its comic book namesake. In fact, it has been argued that the first half of the Captain America: Civil War title ended up being the misleading part instead. The movie feels a lot more like Avengers 2.5 than an out-and-out Captain America movie, and Iron Man is the co-star. Removing Tony Stark entirely, therefore, would have easily made it a full-on Captain America sequel – though what was created in the end was more than acceptable either way.
Source: @CultureCrave/Twitter