Jordan Iacobucci is quite excited about Ironheart’s move away from using nanotechnology in its recent Marvel Comics Universe (MCU) television adaptation. From Iacobucci’s July 7, 2025 article for CBR (self-proclaimed World’s Top Destination for Comic, Movie & TV News), Note: Links have been removed,
After years of delays, Ironheart is finally streaming on Disney+. The six-episode series follows up on Dominique Thorne’s Riri Williams a few days after her adventures with Shuri and the Wakandans during the events of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever as she returns home to Chicago in hopes of building something “iconic.” Though she must navigate several trials and tribulations, Riri finally succeeds in her goal, completing a brand-new version of her Ironheart suit.
As Ironheart wraps up its run on Disney+, fans have plenty to break down, from its groundbreaking finale to its surprisingly great visuals. Many fans may find that the series is much better than they may have anticipated, especially after review-bombing tried to dismiss Ironheart before it even premiered. The series fixes several long-standing issues with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, including one particularly annoying trend that has plagued the franchise since Avengers: Infinity War
The MCU Uses Way Too Much Nanotechnology
Fans Aren’t Fond of the Nanotechnology Trend in the MCU
It all started in Avengers: Infinity War. During a confrontation with Ebony Maw and Cull Obsidian, Tony Stark debuted his new nanotechnology, which spread out across his body from a small compartment on his chest to form a new suit of armor.
Iron Man’s “Bleeding Edge” armor was only the beginning of the MCU’s love affair with nanotechnology, particularly when it comes to superhero suits. Infinity War also gives Spider-Man his own nanotech suit, the Iron Spider armor, which he wears for the remainder of the film and in his next several MCU appearances. Since then, almost every masked MCU hero has upgraded to similar costumes, from Black Panther to Ant-Man. As impressive as the technology may be, fans aren’t fond of the nanotech suits.
Nanotech suits make sense from a practical standpoint. If a hero can cause their suit to form around them with the press of a button, then they don’t have to worry about being caught off-guard by an emerging threat. Though these upgrades make sense, viewers lose something special as a result. The “Bleeding Edge” Iron Man armor and other nanotech suits lose the tangibility of previous MCU superhero costumes.
With nanotech, viewers are never made to feel as if the hero is really wearing a suit. This is largely because the actor isn’t wearing the suit on set. Often, nanotech is implemented as an excuse to use CGI to cover or uncover an actor’s face with their superhero mask at any given point in a scene. As a result, however, the suits themselves feel less real, looking more like images composited in a computer than something that someone would wear while fighting crime.
This issue gets worse when a particular film or series doesn’t allow its graphics team enough time to complete their animation processes. Films like Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania are horrible examples of this trend, featuring suits that sometimes look as though they were cobbled together on a laptop an hour before the movie hit theaters. Fans have been vocal about their distaste for nanotech suits for years, but Marvel has only doubled down on this trend since Infinity War–until now.
..
Iacobucci’s July 7, 2025 article goes on to wax rhapsodic over the return to ‘real’ technology,
…
The Ironheart armor feels real–much more real than any of the new nanotech suits introduced in recent MCU projects. In place of nanotechnology, Ironheart uses real technology to build her suit, and her series is so much better for it. It is much more visually appealing for viewers to see a tangible suit of armor on set with the actors.
…
Iacobucci has a point in that, while nanotechnology is a real technology; the nanotechnology in Iron Man is not (at this time).
So, what about the science in science fiction?
Officially launched in 2008 by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the Science and Entertainment Exchange (see its Wikipedia entry), is one of the programs that filmmakers and others can consult when producing a science fiction piece. This March 16, 2022 article by Marian Caballo for The Science Survey delves into the topic of the science in science fiction, Note: Links have been removed,
Science is the backbone of our world, which means that it inevitably underlies the plots of many popular films and television shows. As an avid cinephile and biology research student myself, I often catch myself trying to break down characters’ scientific name-drops, or pausing to examine the scribbles of equations on background blackboards.
For example: in Don’t Look Up, an original Netflix movie that depicts the danger of a comet hurtling towards Earth, scientists lay out a plan to warn the world of its impending doom. In The Amazing Spider-Man, Peter Parker accidentally helps to create villainous mutant lizards with his solution to the “The Decay Rate Algorithm,” a fictional derivation of the Gompertz–Makeham law of mortality. Avengers: Endgame features an elaborate time travel plan involving Deutsch propositions, eigenvalues and inverted Möbius strips. None were technically real scientific developments, of course, but how do they sound so real?
The answer: scientific consulting. This hidden field is dedicated to scientific advising in the entertainment industry, and it’s an exciting way for STEM [science, technology, engineering, and mathematics] professionals to become engaged in the world of fiction. These interactions connect Hollywood (writers, producers, directors), “with top STEM experts to create synergy between accurate science and engaging storytelling,” said Emilie Lorditch, founder of Real2Reel Science, a science consulting service for writers.
Media greatly impacts the public’s perception of science. According to The Pew Research Center, 81% of U.S. adults say they watch media involving criminal investigations, hospital/medical settings, or science fiction. The average American watches 84 movies a year. By placing STEM professionals on movie sets, scientists can not only assist in executing a narrative vision but also aid in sharing more engaging portrayals of STEM.
“The Hollywood, Health & Society program at USC [University of Southern California] has worked with multiple TV shows to develop storylines about organ donation, and has studied the impact of the plot on viewers’ knowledge, attitudes, and behavior,” said Lorditch, who believes science advising fosters mutual exchange. The USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center’s longitudinal impact studies focus on providing — then studying the impact of — information about health, safety and security in Hollywood projects.
While many science consultants work independently or through institutions like USC, the science advising wing of Hollywood primarily stems from The National Academy of Sciences’ Science & Entertainment Exchange. Founded in 2008, the Exchange aims to improve the science that appears in narrative mainstream media through a “soft-sell” approach. The Exchange has completed more than 2,300 consultations on projects such as A Wrinkle in Time, Watchmen, and various Marvel Studios films. The organization essentially serves as a direct hotline for filmmakers to reach researchers, medical professionals, and more — as befits the Exchange’s actual phone number, 1-844-NEED-SCI.
However, it isn’t a scientific consultant’s job to make sure films are 100% accurate. Science fiction is called science fiction for a reason, and scientists aren’t keen on incorporating factual science when it comes at the expense of compelling storytelling. “The story always comes first. Period,” said Jennifer Ouellette, founding director of The Science & Entertainment Exchange. She now covers science and culture as a senior writer at Ars Technica, and has published several science-related books.
Ouellette always made sure to advise scientists working on their first Hollywood films to not just shake their heads when presented with a script. “They should think about what needs to happen in that scene, and come up with an even better scientific explanation. That makes it a win-win,” said Ouellette, who cites The Expanse as some of the best science representation in film and TV.
Insisting that science/scientists should only be portrayed in a positive light is not a solution, either. “Scientists are flawed human beings just like everyone else, and those flaws are what make us interesting and complex characters,” she continued.
Ouellette’s husband — theoretical physicist Sean M. Caroll at the California Institute of Technology — has served as a science consultant himself, helping to devise Tony Stark’s famous time-warping plan in Avengers: Endgame. He also advised one of Ouellette’s favorite science TV moments: an episode of BONES, when a physicist represses his grief over his gymnast daughter’s death. Caroll spent days on set writing a series of physics equations on blackboards. But he wasn’t developing hard science for the sake of science.
By the end of the episode, the characters learn that “each equation represents a moment in his daughter’s life: learning to walk, then run; doing her first backflip; a vault; and so on, until the final equation, showing her finally at rest. The writers turned it into a poem written in equations, and it remains one of the most amazing moments I’ve seen on television in a long time,” said Ouellette.
On top of the fundamental fact that science must be in service of the story, the science doesn’t always have to be precise. “In the world of STEM, precision is crucial but for the majority of the public, not so much,” said Lorditch. Most viewers would agree. Spring Lin ’22 ignores “slightly questionable” scientific explanations, claiming they don’t interfere with the cinematic experience. “When there are no obvious wrongs in a movie, I usually don’t question it,” said Rita Chen ’22.
Science advisors also lurk on a surprisingly wide range of sets — whether it is on reality TV such as MTV’s Teen Mom, or behind the scenes of The Simpsons. …
If you have the time, do read Caballo’s March 16, 2022 article.
The Science & Entertainment Exchange can be found here.
Iron Man and nanotechnology tidbits from years gone by
I have three previous posts about Iron Man’s nanotechnology, the earliest being from 2012.
- Iron Man 3. nanotechnology, Extremis armor, and Rebecca Hall (May 11, 2012 posting)
- Emory University’s Shuming Nie discusses Iron Man 3 and nanotechnology and researchers develop an injectable nano-network (May 6, 2013 posting)
- Exploring the science of Iron Man (prior to the opening of Captain America: Civil War, aka, Captain America vs. Iron Man) (April 28, 2016 posting)
Enjoy!




