So, never read the comics and don't know if answers are there, but with the movie alone as a source...I'm confused about a central point.

Stark has an electro-magnet put into this chest to keep the barbs from the missile from entering his heart and killing him. He builds the mini-arc reactor to be more mobile and have more power for the Mk. 1 suit. Once back home, wouldn't he have the barbs removed? Even if that's not possible, the reactor doesn't replace his heart. It merely protects it. If the reactor stops, he wouldn't keel over. The barbs would simply continue to slowly work their way into his body and he'd eventually die from them. So why in the film do we see Stark acting like Superman around Kryptonite when the reactor is removed? Yes, I remember the sonic weapon paralyzing him, but that was temporary. Once recovering from that, shouldn't he simply get up and act fine? What am I missing??

You're not missing anything.

Someone will correct me on this but in the comics, I *believe* the damage to his heart was initially more extensive and the thing keeping it going wasn't just an implant. Originally the entire electromagnetic chestplate is what kept his heart beating and so could never be taken off...so, iirc, Stark wore that part of the armor at all times under his clothes, but later got a new heart or something like that. I think.

As it is in the movie, you're right - rational people ask why wouldn't a billionaire just just go get super-secret, super-fast heart surgery or even a transplant if he needs one? No villian/no story that way, I guess. And why's he suddenly start to keel over once it's removed? Again... *shrug* it's a comic.

Thanks for the confirmation. Despite all that, I really love this film and can't wait to get it on DVD. I just try not to dwell on the inconsistencies.:thumbsup:

And how do you do open chest surgery in a CAVE, and then have your secretary stick her hand into your chest in your workshop, without massive infections. And what was she unplugging? The gizmo was in her hand and the power cord went IN.

oh my...let's just rip fantasy apart. :jest: I guess something just can't be fun.

Well let's have Batman shoot lazer beams out of his eyes, or have James Bond be able to Teleport. It's just fantasy anyway.

Would a car look better with rust spots or without? Would fixing plot holes make it a worse movie?

You gotta look at your source material. Iron Man's origin took all of 7 pages in the original comic. The way the scriptwriter's fleshed it out in the movie was masterful in my opinion. The movie worked and it worked quite well IMHO. That's all that matters.

I agree AND disagree. I love the film as previously stated. Have seen it twice and will be buying the DVD. It's a great film. But that doesn't mean it is exempt from critiques. And it would have been a simple matter to explain things in the writing stage. Say his body changed after prolonged exposure to the reactor. His body was drawing energy from it. He was becoming stronger and his body was also becoming dependent on it. So then, when it's disconnected, it would make sense that he would be dangerously weak. But to leave such a hole (and they HAD to know it was there) is saying they don't care or don't believe the audience will notice. And for the majority of the audience they were correct. Just troublemakers like me.:p

...which will probably be addressed in the DVD issue...deleted scenes or some-such...