Iron Man 2 Fridge Logic Fixer

[blue-underwing.livejournal.com]

I was wondering if you guys know of any fic (or commentary, or whatever) that addresses the Fridge Logic issue I have with the premise of Iron Man 2. Now, I like the movie, but I keep slamming into this one gaping plot-hole, and it interferes with my enjoyment. I was hoping there is a fic out there that fills in the gap.

Let me explain (Warning, Fridge Logic Ahead):

It's demonstrated in the suit removal sequence at the Expo that the suit is run on its own reactor, not the one in Tony's chest. This is important because it means later when JARVIS says using the suit is accelerating Tony's health issues, it's because of the activity, not the mass power draw on his reactor. That fixes one issue, because if it was the power draw, the immediately obvious thing to do would be to run the suit of a different reactor. Oh wait, he did.

However, this opens up another can of worms. If he doesn't need it to power the suit, why does Tony need a reactor in his chest at all? It's established in IM1 that the reactor is massive overkill, and car battery level power will do just fine. So why keep the reactor in his chest when he could hook the electromagnetic up to a laptop battery or something? For that matter, why keep the reactor IN his chest? Why not use a longer wire and keep the reactor in his pocket? That would be a lot less heavy metal exposure than having it in his chest.

Anyway, I keep trying to fan-wank a decent explanation for this, but have had no luck. Anyone know of one? I expect if it exists, it would be a conversation between Tony and Bruce. Or maybe Coulson?

Thanks

Comments

[teyke.livejournal.com]

I vaguely recall reading a fic where Pepper points this out, Tony is like '...' and then agrees to use the battery while not wearing the suit. But that still has Tony being a complete idiot (and not in a way that would actually be in-character), so probably doesn't meet your definitions... and I can't recall where I read it, anyway.

OTOH, perhaps if you made a post about this at metavengers you'd get some meta?

[blue-underwing.livejournal.com]

Thanks! I did not know about that com.

And yes, I find "he didn't think about it" a bit overly OOC for a genius who can build a particle accelerator from stuff he has around his (granted, impressively technological) house. :)

[teyke.livejournal.com]

Haha, yeah, that whole movie I just sorta sighed whenever they tried to actually explain the 'science' and tried to enjoy the tech-porn. But I do hope you'll make a post at that comm! I'd be really interested in reading meta/discussion about it - and participating, too, but my brain's not up to that tonight :P

[whizzy.livejournal.com]

I'd totally follow there for meta. The reactor/core issue in the second movie drives me crazy. (Fix-it recs also welcome.)

[blue-underwing.livejournal.com]

Posted to the meta. I'll see guys there. :)

[blue-underwing.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I manage to 'explain' some of that away with "marvel universe has different physics" but it should at least be consistent.

Glad you share my issue. I've posted to the meta. :)

umm Now I'm confused....

[katwriter9084.livejournal.com]

ok so I could wrong about this cause I'm fairly new to the marvel universe but I was under the impression that while they never really gave a very good explanation in the comics, in the first movie it is said the Arc Reactor was acting as a magnet to prevent pieces of shrapnel from reaching his heart and tearing it to shreds. That what I remember and I've seen it reiterated in several fics.

Re: umm Now I'm confused....

[blue-underwing.livejournal.com]

That rightish but...

The arc reactor is *powering* the electromagnet that is stopping the shrapnel. But there is nothing in the movies to say there is any reason why the power for the electromagnetic needs to come from the arc reactor rather than some other more conventional power source. In fact, the opposite is true since in Iron Man 1, the magnet is first powered by a car battery, before Tony invented the reactor (ostensibly to improve mobility, but really so he can use it to power the first suit. It is WAY overkill on the power needed for the magnet).

So since the the ARC REACTOR (not the magnet it is powering) is poisoning Tony in Iron Man 2, the obvious thing to do is switch to a more conventional non-poison power source for the magnet.

That's the fridge logic.

Nyxelestia over at Metavengers has laid out a very satisfying (to me) fanwank of why Tony sticks with the reactor:

http://metavengers.livejournal.com/12263.html?thread=168935#t168935

Obvious isn't it?

[(Anonymous)]

I always thought the answer was obvious? How long does a laptop battery last? How often would Tony have to completely stop what he's doing so he can literally recharge while leaving himself restrained to a wall socket? Batteries hold power, not generate it and they all run out eventually, even car batteries. The arc REACTOR generates electricity much the same way as a nuclear reactor. It is it's own self sustaining energy (explained as such in all three movies IM1,IM2, & Avengers). Why would Tony get rid of something that allows him complete mobility and flexibility without worrying about something like an electrical blackout or being held captive/trapped. As for keeping the reactor at a distance like in a pocket, that leaves too many chances for either his wire to be severed accidentally or on purpose in a sticky situation without his suit and increases the chances it could get stolen (pickpocketing and such). As for the palladium poisoning increasing with suit usage, it is a plot hole but I'm going to draw slightly from the comics to cover this one. The original Iron Man suit was an over glorified pacemaker. The shrapnel had already embedded itself into Stark's chest and the chest piece of the original suit was meant to literally keep his heart beating. Considering how quickly Tony started "dying" in IM1 when Stane stole his reactor, I assume the movie had meant the pacemaker plot-line was true for movie-verse as well. This means that the more active Tony is, the more his pacemaker would have to pump his heart, the more energy would be required, the more palladium would be used creating more of the toxic waste discharge that poisoned him.

Re: Obvious isn't it?

[blue-underwing.livejournal.com]

Hi Anonymous! I guess we'll just have to disagree a bit here. My feeling is:

1) He wouldn't need to keep recharging the same battery, he could keep a charged stash on hand and swap them out in a few seconds.

2) If there was a black-out, he could still recharge the batteries from the arc-reactor: just 'cause it's not in his body doesn't mean he couldn't use it at all.

3) I think definitely dying from palladium poisoning is worse than than maybe dying from the reactor or battery going missing.

But hey, if it works for you, that's great! The point is to enjoy the movie. And I really like your heart-beating-faster reasoning.

BTW: Nyxelestia on metavengers laid out some really good logic regarding magnetism issues that really worked for me, if you're interested

http://metavengers.livejournal.com/12263.html?thread=168935#t168935

Re: Obvious isn't it?

[nekkedking.livejournal.com]

I do belive Obvi-anon had everything correct. The logic your using might just be a bit to straight forward, for your point number one you say he could keep a stash of charged batteries and continuously swap them out once they depleted, but that's extremely risky in the case of a super hero, because as I believe the other person pointed out, what if he was kidnapped for an indefinite amount of time again? A very real fear for someone who has been kidnapped before. I don't suppose any villians would just randomly let Iron Man keep his source of life on him if he carried spare batteries.

Also for point number two you had, the arc reactor has been mentioned as a highly sought after piece of mechinary, as it seems that before IM1 the only other reactors were massive, so him having created a miniaturized arc reactor is pure engineering genius and could revolutionize the world or destroy it in the wrong hands, so keeping it as close to his person as he can seems the wisest decision instead of having it locked somewhere that he might not be able to protect at all times.

Lastly for number three that brings us back around to part of my answer for number two, if he has this spectacular thing, he's not going to risk it over his health, also he's a very prideful and mindful engineer I think he'd rather die of palladium poisoning than a dead battery, he's Tony Stark.


Other then that all I was going to point out was all the things the first comment did, you had the same thoughts on this that I did. :)