Since casting news of the film has picked up, thought I'd jot down what some may or may not know. A few months ago it was announced that Iron Man 3 would be the next Marvel film and filming would start in early May.
It was also announced not too long ago that Shane Black(the first guy killed in Predator) would be directing and Ben Kingsley would also be starring. Given his Asian heritage, many speculated he'd be playing the Mandarin.
A few days ago, it was announced that Guy Pierce would be playing Aldrich Killian.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118052904
Despite the director on record saying the characterization of the Mandarin was racist, Andy Lau was cast as a Chinese friend of Tony Stark who represents a Chinese Technology sector.
http://www.g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/blog/post/723176/iron-man-3-possible-details-on-mandarin/
Sounds like they were hinting on the Extremis storyline... Which would be a little weird. IMO.
Anyway, thought I'd start a thread.
It's also been reported that Scar Jo will not be returning to the series, so you won't be getting your third dose of Black Widow unless she has a spin-off movie.
TBH, she was the one saying now that the bar has been set with The Avengers, it'd be kind of weird for other characters to NOT show up in each others movies. Maybe we'll get other cameos.
I don't think the Mandarin is happening for a couple of reasons. First, Iron Man 3 is going to be filming in part in China, and China is pretty touchy about being portrayed in a bad light. Second is, you know, the racism....
I've also heard that after Avengers, Iron Man 3 is going to be a little less superhero-y and a little more science fiction-y; the Extremis storyline would work with that.
Quote from: Previsionary on April 26, 2012, 03:03:06 AM
It's also been reported that Scar Jo will not be returning to the series, so you won't be getting your third dose of Black Widow unless she has a spin-off movie.
Or Avengers 2!
Quote from: Talavar on April 26, 2012, 03:34:00 PM
I don't think the Mandarin is happening for a couple of reasons. First, Iron Man 3 is going to be filming in part in China, and China is pretty touchy about being portrayed in a bad light. Second is, you know, the racism....
Ehh, I don't really think it would be that hard to create a Mandarin character who isn't racist. I mean, they had already laid the groundwork for the guy to just be a criminal mastermind in Iron Man 1, with the Ten Rings and all. Just don't have him be a Kung-Fu master, take one of his later costumes, and I think it'd probably be okay.
I wish we would see him as a villain. I'd like that.
You know I think it'll be unfortunate if they do another Iron Man Movie and The Mandarin NOT be the villain in some fashion. From what I'm hearing from the links above and others is that
Spoiler
"The Mandarin" is to be a criminal organization lead by Kingsley's character. Since he isn't Chinese and the organization could POSSIBLY be a multi-ethnic organization fighting against Chinese elements(Lau's character), then that could avoid any possible racism or mischaracterization of the culture.
I dunno. I just think it's really possible to do and considering the movie IS using Chinese/Asian characters in an Asian setting, how could they actually avoid using an Asian character?
Maybe I missed something somewhere, but how is the Mandarin racist? Does that mean that Luke Cage is now racist? Who's doing the complaining? I'll admit, some of the portrayals back in the day of characters that weren't American Caucasians living in a major north-eastern city were poorly thought-out and executed, but that's no reason that it has to be that way if done in a movie now.
I also don't understand the whole "racist" thing. Just keep it simple: Iron Man/ Tony is all about tech. The Mandarin is anti tech and uses magic, that's it!
Shane Black said that the Mandarin is a charicature of an Asian villain. I can't say if that was the case when the character was first written, but it's got to be significantly better than the buck-tooth or fanged Japanese villains Captain American fought in WWII.
Either way, this article gives a bit more light on it. I certainly hope they do go in this direction, instead of a lightly veiled hint.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=58556
A chinese character doesn't have to be depicted in the worse way. Or stereotypical. Or apparently even Chinese.
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on April 27, 2012, 08:55:50 PM
Shane Black said that the Mandarin is a charicature of an Asian villain.
Honestly, if that's what he thinks, then he's horribly isolated, and probably being fed that opinion to him by someone else. It almost sounds like he's taking old references out of context, and not even attempting to modernize the character away from that, while still staying true to the core of the character. And if he wasn't the current director of the movie, I don't think anyone would give two "movements" about his opinion on the subject. Ok, that's my two cents.
So question, guys:
Mandarin was the main villain in season one of Iron Man: Armored Adventure, and he's still around in season 2. He's Chinese in the series. For those that watch it, do any of you think he comes off as "racist" or a caricature? If not, then.... I just think they don't want to deal with the character, and if that's the case, then they should just say that
Quote from: Panther_Gunn on April 27, 2012, 10:56:00 PM
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on April 27, 2012, 08:55:50 PM
Shane Black said that the Mandarin is a charicature of an Asian villain.
Honestly, if that's what he thinks, then he's horribly isolated, and probably being fed that opinion to him by someone else. It almost sounds like he's taking old references out of context, and not even attempting to modernize the character away from that, while still staying true to the core of the character. And if he wasn't the current director of the movie, I don't think anyone would give two "movements" about his opinion on the subject. Ok, that's my two cents.
I think that sums it up nicely PG. Yeah, when the Mandarin first appeared, he was definitely a caricature, but most early comic book characters were in one way or another. You could easily tell a story that didn't have him practicing kung-fu and the like. It seems like the real issue is that Marvel doesn't want to risk getting censored or banned altogether in China. Heaven forbid there be a Chinese villain.
Guys, I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but I do feel like you're glossing over a lot of legitimate concerns about the Mandarin character. Even if you strip out the kung fu, as well as any other trait that might possibly be considered a stereotype of the Chinese population, we're still talking about a Chinese villain named "The Mandarin" which, on top of being Chinese for "Official" or "Officer," is also the name of the most common dialect of their language. And it doesn't help matters that the character was perhaps the most well known and obvious use of anti-Asian propaganda in the original Iron Man books (Whether it was conscious or not, a huge portion of Iron Man's rogues gallery was made up of Chinese or Russian characters).
Remember guys, Iron Man 1 received criticism even here on FR because it kind of maybe portrayed Muslims in a bad light (I don't share that belief, but I do remember seeing debates about it). And that was just based on an Arab looking faction of a multinational group working in an Arab country... the Mandarin is essentially the comic book version of DBZ's Mr. Popo. I could spend about 20 minutes typing up about how the character was influential to the original dragonball for training Goku and that he wasn't
just a stereotype black servant dude, but at the end of the day that's how most people remember him (and they ARE both stereotypes, you can't seriously deny that). Clearly someone involved in the first two films had a plan for the character, and it's a shame that probably won't pan out now, but you can't fault the current director because he doesn't want to risk that sort of controversy right out of the gate.
However, that's all moot in this case. From everything I've heard, IM3 will be based on the Extremis miniseries, which IMHO, is actually one of the better Iron Man stories in general, and one that falls in line with the narrative established in the first two movies. However, one of the overall conflicts of the Extremis storyline was innovation vs tradition... are we better for the changes in society as a result of changing technology, or should we destroy it all in favor of a more simple, cleaner lifestyle. Since the Mandarin is just as much a proponent of new technology as Tony Stark is, having him as the villain in this storyline would negate one of the fundamental issues of the original narrative.
At the end of the day, the purpose of having a villain in a movie is to add to the overall conflict. In this case, if the movie truly is going to be based on the Extremis series, the Mandarin would not be able to add anything to the story other than pointless fan-service. So even if they did smehow find a way to avoid the stereotype issues, shoehorning the character into a story he has no place being involved in would be a complete disservice to the character and you all know it.
Edit:
Quote from: Previsionary on April 28, 2012, 02:27:56 AM
So question, guys:
Mandarin was the main villain in season one of Iron Man: Armored Adventure, and he's still around in season 2. He's Chinese in the series. For those that watch it, do any of you think he comes off as "racist" or a caricature? If not, then.... I just think they don't want to deal with the character, and if that's the case, then they should just say that
I wanted to address this, because the point Prev brings up here is valid and it ties into a lot of what Benton was saying about how the Mandarin character in the comics having developed beyond his propaganda roots. The problem, unfortunately, is that a movie has a much wider audience and is under much more scrutiny than a TV show... film makers would be walking a much finer line than IMAA did. I'm not saying it can't be done, but there are going to be people crying "racism!" even under the best of circumstances.
I think Tony Stark is a resist caricature of white Americans:
A rich guy with no respect
Goes to other countries and kills Muslims
"Stark" can be a negative term for plain, referring to his skin color.
He forces a black guy into a separate but equal humvee at the back of the line.
He drinks health smoothies
He's a race
Quote from: BWPS on May 03, 2012, 11:29:50 AM
I think Tony Stark is a resist caricature of white Americans:
A rich guy with no respect
Goes to other countries and kills Muslims
"Stark" can be a negative term for plain, referring to his skin color.
He forces a black guy into a separate but equal humvee at the back of the line.
He drinks health smoothies
He's a race
seriously what ever you are drinking/snorting/smoking, STOP TAKING IT
UE, you're just mad that Tony Stark is a resist.
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on May 03, 2012, 01:45:44 PM
Quote from: BWPS on May 03, 2012, 11:29:50 AM
I think Tony Stark is a resist caricature of white Americans:
A rich guy with no respect
Goes to other countries and kills Muslims
"Stark" can be a negative term for plain, referring to his skin color.
He forces a black guy into a separate but equal humvee at the back of the line.
He drinks health smoothies
He's a race
seriously what ever you are drinking/snorting/smoking, STOP TAKING IT
I thought he was using sarcasim to make a point myself but OK.
I personally don't see how a Chinese man dressing as a Chinese emperor, feeling he is destined to rule as being racist...It's one man, not a whole race.
Show some normal Chinese civilians in an attack that he makes on a city or show that the Chinese government is trying to stop his plans of conquest too (working with Iron man, maybe?) or something...problem solved.
Dana
crap...i'm white. guess that puts me in the same category as Doctor Doom, Red skull (cause i have a German heritage), and even Galactus cause white people are devouring the world. oh yeah...being white also means i'm into bullying. sound dumb? talk about racism...people look at me as a world destroying oppressor and slave owner because of stupid crap hundreds of years ago. please people, flip off that shoulder chip and quit pointing fingers. i saw this thread and it said "Ironman 3". started reading and i thought i was gonna puke. this is whats wrong with OUR world. :doh:
Iron Man I made terrorists and arms dealers look bad, not Muslims...How can anybody not see that?
Dana
People with an agenda and a chip on their shoulder. Look how "The Muppets" somehow had controversy tossed onto it. It only takes one person with a powerful enough voice to spark trouble.
Sad, ain't it?
Dana
Quote from: Previsionary on May 06, 2012, 09:36:22 PM
People with an agenda and a chip on their shoulder. Look how "The Muppets" somehow had controversy tossed onto it. It only takes one person with a powerful enough voice to spark trouble.
Wait, what? How in the world did
the Muppets stir up controversy?
:EDIT: I just looked it up.....ohh my goodness...what is wrong with people? Seriously?
Hi, I'm political correctness gone batsh*t crazy. I've been the giant elephant in the room for ages, but I'm glad to see that you're finally noticing me NOW.
Seriously guys, nothing discussed here is in ANY way new or surprising, as it's been the status quo for my entire adult life. Everything that gets put in front of a larger audience is subject to often ridiculous scrutiny for any assault, real or perceived, against a particular nationality. As I mentioned, Iron Man 1 even sparked someone to complain about Muslims being portrayed as villains or helpless victims... it's not a position I agree with AT ALL, but it was brought up at the time.
Now, I'm going to confess something to you all: I'm a white dude. Like, a REALLY white dude. Like, so white I'm practically a double for Deadman. And not only am I a REALLY white dude, my dad's side of the family were Germans who came over to the USA after WWII. My Paternal Grandfather was just about as racist as it is possible to be without donning white hoods, and it is only because my Father isn't a moron that the cycle didn't continue with him. If I wallowed in guilt over what my ancestors were like, I'd never leave the house just out of shame. However, just because I don't feel any guilt over what my moronic ancestors did, that doesn't mean I'm not empathetic to those who have dealt with racism.
That said, I really do think the situation with the Mandarin is one that should not be taken lightly. The early Iron Man books were notorious for Anti-Asian/Anti-Communist propaganda (Don't believe me? compare the number of major Chinese/Russian IM villains with those of any other nationality during Lee's original run on the book.) and the Mandarin is the most overtly racist creations of the bunch (his name is the most common dialect of the Chinese language, for goodness sake). Can you honestly tell me that if YOU were an Asian American, either growing up dealing with or had family members who dealt with the very REAL racism resulting from Iron Man and similar Cold War Propaganda, that a major comic book franchise promoting a villain called the MANDARIN wouldn't raise red flags with you?
Can it be done properly, without offending Chinese people? Absolutely. I feel like the writers on IM1 had clearly set the groundwork for something truly awesome, and I'm sorry that it may not come to fruition under the current director. But it's a lot of work and thought to put into an Iron Man villain who isn't really on Joker/Loki/Red Skull levels of arch-villainy anymore, and I cannot fault the new director for his opinion on the matter. We can go on and on about how Mandarin has transcended beyond his origin, but it's still something you'd need to justify for the audience of a multi-billion dollar film.
Quote from: BentonGrey on May 06, 2012, 09:56:58 PM
Quote from: Previsionary on May 06, 2012, 09:36:22 PM
People with an agenda and a chip on their shoulder. Look how "The Muppets" somehow had controversy tossed onto it. It only takes one person with a powerful enough voice to spark trouble.
Wait, what? How in the world did the Muppets stir up controversy?
:EDIT: I just looked it up.....ohh my goodness...what is wrong with people? Seriously?
Never underestimate the lengths to which the "News Cats" will go to create a controversy! :banghead:
I saw Avengers and I think Iron Man was the only main character that looked good in 3D especially his HUD. Therefore, I wouldn't mind seeing this movie in 3D.
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on May 03, 2012, 01:45:44 PM
Quote from: BWPS on May 03, 2012, 11:29:50 AM
I think Tony Stark is a resist caricature of white Americans:
A rich guy with no respect
Goes to other countries and kills Muslims
"Stark" can be a negative term for plain, referring to his skin color.
He forces a black guy into a separate but equal humvee at the back of the line.
He drinks health smoothies
He's a race
seriously what ever you are drinking/snorting/smoking, STOP TAKING IT
morning coffee all over the keyboards. :lol: wow that was funny. thanks
Quote from: Tomato on May 06, 2012, 10:36:10 PM
Now, I'm going to confess something to you all: I'm a white dude. Like, a REALLY white dude. Like, so white I'm practically a double for Deadman.
I probably laughed way too hard at this..
(http://cdn-www.mania.com/content_pics/000006/29/68/f436d290d15c7171_large.jpg)
James Badge Dale will play Savin (aka Coldblood-7), a villain in Iron Man 3. Robert Downey Jr stars and Shane Black is directing. Badge Dale just finished The Lone Ranger for Disney, and will next be seen in the Robert Zemeckis-directed Flight with Denzel Washington and World War Z with Brad Pitt. Marvel Studios gets underway with the film later this month. Ben Kinsgley has been rumored as The Mandarin, and Gwyneth Paltrow and Rebecca Hall are also in the film.
You probably know him as Lepke in HBO's The Pacific or Chase in 24, Day 3.
If the Mandarin is a man and not an organization, then get a real Asian man to play him...Having the character portrayed by a non-Asian man (the rumored Kingsley) is more offensive than anything.
Was there an outcry to the Mandarin on the Iron Man cartoons? I still think there isn't an issue, if you have a variety of Asian characters to play the one power-mad Asian man against (civilians, military, etc...)
Dana
I kinda think you're underestimating the capacity of the human race to be stupid and/or politically correct to the point of near-insanity.
Prev actually brought up the subject of cartoons before, but the underlying problem with cartoons is that you're usually talking about a much narrower audience. A film like Iron Man 3 has to appeal to a global audience to be successful, and quite a large chunk of that is China and other Asian nations. As such, it's not unreasonable that movie studios would be reluctant to introduce a villain likely to urine those countries off.
Again, it's not that I don't think it's possible to do it right, it's more that it's going to take more work to do right than it would with a lesser known character that WASN'T created as a racist steriotype.
Quote from: cmdrkoenig67 on May 18, 2012, 05:28:03 PM
If the Mandarin is a man and not an organization, then get a real Asian man to play him...Having the character portrayed by a non-Asian man (the rumored Kingsley) is more offensive than anything.
Was there an outcry to the Mandarin on the Iron Man cartoons? I still think there isn't an issue, if you have a variety of Asian characters to play the one power-mad Asian man against (civilians, military, etc...)
Dana
Dana, Ben Kingsley IS technically Asian. Well, technically he's English, but his father was born in India. Which is why there was no outcry(actually the exact opposite) when he made his career playing an Asian(Indian) figure, Ghandi. If this is to fly, having an actor with an Asian heritage play a pho Chinese villain actually might be the least offensive route.
In regard to the cartoon, I thought that was offensive to ME and I'm not Chinese. The dude was green. That harkens back to WWII era comics where Japanese were fanged, bucked tooth or tinted green all to look less human. That was probably the intent in the 90s cartoon, but it don't make it less offensive.
Fact of the matter is the Chinese don't like to be portrayed in a negative light. I can understand the feeling. I dislike seeing stereotypical images of young black men in the media. I don't take it to an extreme and make it a governmental policy. But that's them. I'm not going to call them wrong or over sensitive or whatever. They're entitled to how they want to be viewed. I just think A, the character can be done and B, should be done. Its like doing a Superman franchise and not make Lex Luthor a villain.
I can see everyone's point involving this whole mess. The Mandarin should be in the movie and can be portrayed as nonstereotypical as the writers and director want him to be. I also understand the concerns of the Chinese community concerning the depiction of the Mandarin in the past. Honestly, though, how many of the millions of people who are going to see this movie, besides us fanboys, are even going to know who the Mandarin is or how poorly he was depicted in the past?
Now, as far as having an Asian play the Mandarin, of course, that would be wise on all fronts. I'm not sure that having someone who is "technically" Asian is the answer. Personally, I think Ben Kingsley is phenomenal and if any non-Chinese actor would play this part with dignity, it would be him. But, I do have to say, that the probable reason there was no outcry over him playing Ghandi is the fact that his father was Indian. India and China have completely different cultures. Having Ben Kingsley; a half Indian, half English actor playing a Chinese character because he's also "Asian" is like having Tom Cruise playing Pancho Villa because he's also "North American".
Sorry to rant, gang. It's late and I need to get something to eat. I guess I'm thinking that maybe we should all just wait for an actual official statement on whatever the heck is going on with this movie before we all start firing away on things like racism. We have enough racist garbage going on in the real world to deal with without making potential racism in this movie a subject of conjecture.
(Shogunn: I didn't mean anything directed towards you personally. I kind of went off on the whole Ben Kingsley thing.)
Well, this kind of ethnic mismatching is extremely common in TV and movies and no one ever complains about it.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 20, 2012, 04:01:51 PM
Well, this kind of ethnic mismatching is extremely common in TV and movies and no one ever complains about it.
Since when? People complained about black kingpin, complained about Heimdall, and have basically complained about any change in ethnicity ever.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on May 20, 2012, 04:01:51 PM
Well, this kind of ethnic mismatching is extremely common in TV and movies and no one ever complains about it.
lol. Nice one, cat. I assume you're joking right now. ^_^
Hoss, no offense taken. You make a very valid point.
Previous/Tomato, even if Cat isn't joking perhaps he's referring ethnically similar actors playing ethnically similar characters. A Korean playing a Japanese or a Persian or Indian playing Arab or an English playing American and vice versa.
I don't know who Previous is, but I don't like him... so never mention him again to me. Rude. Even going that route is not safe as people complain all the time about stuff like that. I'll point you to English Superman and all the disdain people have for Americans playing Brits. Oh, and then there's Aang and the entire "Last Airbender" fiasco... and that kid was actually of the right heritage, at least partially.
*disappears in a barrage of bats*
Totally wasn't paying any attention to iPad's auto-spell.
Sorry about that.
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on May 21, 2012, 05:21:34 PM
Hoss, no offense taken. You make a very valid point.
Previous/Tomato, even if Cat isn't joking perhaps he's referring ethnically similar actors playing ethnically similar characters. A Korean playing a Japanese or a Persian or Indian playing Arab or an English playing American and vice versa.
This. Okay, maybe there is some grumbling I haven't heard of. I know there are very famous actors who never play their own ethnicity. Lou Diamond Phillips for example who is--well a little bit of everything I suppose--has played everything from full asians to Native Americans. The actor who player Sulu in the new Star Trek Movie was Korean, and so forth. Not talking about a white actor playing Johnny Rico or anything nuts like that.
EDIT: I suppose Phillips is a bad example since he basically has ancestors from all those ethinicies. You can't really peg him anywhere in particular, which is perhaps a good thing.
Quote from: hoss20 on May 20, 2012, 06:08:40 AM
Now, as far as having an Asian play the Mandarin, of course, that would be wise on all fronts. I'm not sure that having someone who is "technically" Asian is the answer. Personally, I think Ben Kingsley is phenomenal and if any non-Chinese actor would play this part with dignity, it would be him. But, I do have to say, that the probable reason there was no outcry over him playing Ghandi is the fact that his father was Indian. India and China have completely different cultures. Having Ben Kingsley; a half Indian, half English actor playing a Chinese character because he's also "Asian" is like having Tom Cruise playing Pancho Villa because he's also "North American".
I've only got a few points to make here.
1. Makeup could easily make Ben Kingsley look "more Oriental". They'll probably do a little bit of that, but not make him Chinese outright.
2. If he's supposed to be the leader of an Asian terrorist ring who uses Starktech to build their own supervillains (for example), why is it necessary that he be Chinese? As it has been pointed out, there are more nationalities in Asia than just the Chinese.
3. Or even if he is Chinese or part-Chinese, turn him into a violent dissident from one of the minority subcultures who's trying to overthrow the Chinese government. Surely the Chinese government would be rooting for Iron Man to kick his butt then.
4. We have no real control over the plot for this movie so we might as well wait until we see it before we actually start criticizing it. It would be about like criticizing the Avengers for their unfavorable portrayal of Scandinavian gods and illegal aliens before the movie ever screened.
Honestly, I can't see the point of making another Iron Man Movie. After seeing the Avengers, I want to see them together more now. I hope at least one of the other guys make a cameo or better yet a Marvel team up.
Quote from: JeyNyce on May 22, 2012, 04:00:14 PMor better yet a Marvel team up.
Now, you should know better than that. You know we won't be getting any of that until Marvel gets Sony to let go, and that's about as likely as getting 20th Century Fox to let go so we can get a Two-In-One!
;)
Quote from: BlueBard on May 22, 2012, 12:55:38 PM
1. Makeup could easily make Ben Kingsley look "more Oriental". They'll probably do a little bit of that, but not make him Chinese outright.
Uh....So, the equivalent to Chinese black face (And I really hope you mean "more Asian", not "more Oriental")? I would hope they don't go that route, because putting a basically Caucasian actor in Asian "black face" is even more offensive then
just having Kingsley playing a Chinese man.
Dana
I was considering not taking part in this discussion because there are so many directions to go. First, I am opposed to political correctness. That is not to say that I think people should say ethnically insensitive things, but there is a trend in political correctness to be over-sensitive to the point that worthwhile debates are becoming nearly impossible because to much is considered off topic. The end result is that communication, and therefore conflict resolution, is breaking down, and we are slowly converting to a kind of Ingsoc caused by the loss of words, phrases, and definitions, and we are losing our ability to employ fruitful conversation to overthrow lies and find the Truth.
Whether to use or not use a particular character should be dictated by the Truth and the story needs. It should not be based upon over-sensitivities based on perceived false wrongs, and the fact that certain nationalities and ideologies are opposed to having their ideals questioned in an open forum should play no part. After all, isn't one of the main purposes of art is to promote the discussion of ideas? If there is a view that Chinese communism or radical Islam are bad things, should it not be brought out for reasoned consideration? Likewise, if they are good things, should they not be tested by the same reasoned consideration?
Possible Spoilers & curse words...
Spoiler
First Set pics from Iron Man 3 show what looks to be the Iron Patriot suit.
CLICK ME (http://www.toplessrobot.com/2012/05/what_the_is_going_on_in_iron_man_3.php)
Pssst...MJB....you might wanna mention that there is profanity there.
*shrugs*
*edits post*
Villain news:
Spoiler
"Here's what we can CONFIRM as true (and not from some guy working security on an off-lot shoot): The Mandarin (as played by Ben Kingsley) is a villain in the 'Iron Man 3,' but he's more a veiled threat as a silent partner to Guy Pearce's Aldrich Killian. Killian is the man inventing Extremis and putting it into his "Extremis army" of multiple super-powered individuals."
http://latino-review.com/2012/05/30/exclusive-iron-man-3-villain-details/
seriously how the hell does that even work
Spoiler
the iron patriot was osborns middle finger to stark and rogers, thats the whole concept to pervert they're image in the public, just sticking some random villain in the suit makes no sense.
Why exactly would it not make sense, UE? They can take the general purpose of the suit, have someone else under it, and still accomplish the same goal. Osborn is NOT a major Tony Stark enemy even to this day, and it won't be the first time the movie verse repurposed something.
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on May 31, 2012, 06:48:42 PM
seriously how the hell does that even work
Spoiler
the iron patriot was osborns middle finger to stark and rogers, thats the whole concept to pervert they're image in the public, just sticking some random villain in the suit makes no sense.
I can't help but think that Iron Man might suffer from the notorious "Third Movie Curse." Having a new director usually doesn't help one's case either (X-Men: The Last Stand, anyone?).
What Marvel did with their Avengers build-up was truly impressive and an unprecedented feat for something of that scale. But "Phase 2" will be even more difficult to pull off. They are gonna need at least three more movies (IM3, Thor2, CA2) to lay the groundwork for Avengers 2, which everyone assumes (but not with confirmation) Whedon will still direct. Thus, each character movie's director will probably need to have some idea where Whedon wants to take Avengers 2 even though I don't think he's even sure of it himself; cameos and references to the events of Avengers 1 will be assumed by the movie-watching public; AND each film needs to advance the specific storyline of the title character from the previous installment in the series.
Whedon said he wants to make Avengers 2 "smaller. More personal, more painful... By being the next thing that should happen to these characters, and not just a rehash of what seemed to work the first time. By having a theme that is completely fresh and organic to itself." Even Whedon will have a hard time making the sequel "smaller" because everyone and the studio will surely demand the addition of more heroes and more villains (Thanos!). So if he can't make it smaller in scale, then he'll have to settle for something "more personal" and "more painful."
Here's my crazy idea on how to establish such a situation for Tony Stark in IM3...
Kill Off Pepper Potts.
It's a horrible notion considering how much movie audiences really like the relationship and on-screen chemistry of Paltrow and Downey, but it's exactly the sort of thing that would leave Tony in a dark place going into Avengers 2. His alcoholism and personal demons were touched upon in Iron Man 2, but we've yet to see him truly down-and-out thus far. Eliminating Pepper from his life would do the job as nothing else could.
Quote from: oldmanwinters on May 31, 2012, 10:34:32 PM
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on May 31, 2012, 06:48:42 PM
seriously how the hell does that even work
Spoiler
the iron patriot was osborns middle finger to stark and rogers, thats the whole concept to pervert they're image in the public, just sticking some random villain in the suit makes no sense.
I can't help but think that Iron Man might suffer from the notorious "Third Movie Curse." Having a new director usually doesn't help one's case either (X-Men: The Last Stand, anyone?).
What Marvel did with their Avengers build-up was truly impressive and an unprecedented feat for something of that scale. But "Phase 2" will be even more difficult to pull off. They are gonna need at least three more movies (IM3, Thor2, CA2) to lay the groundwork for Avengers 2, which everyone assumes (but not with confirmation) Whedon will still direct. Thus, each character movie's director will probably need to have some idea where Whedon wants to take Avengers 2 even though I don't think he's even sure of it himself; cameos and references to the events of Avengers 1 will be assumed by the movie-watching public; AND each film needs to advance the specific storyline of the title character from the previous installment in the series.
Whedon said he wants to make Avengers 2 "smaller. More personal, more painful... By being the next thing that should happen to these characters, and not just a rehash of what seemed to work the first time. By having a theme that is completely fresh and organic to itself." Even Whedon will have a hard time making the sequel "smaller" because everyone and the studio will surely demand the addition of more heroes and more villains (Thanos!). So if he can't make it smaller in scale, then he'll have to settle for something "more personal" and "more painful."
Here's my crazy idea on how to establish such a situation for Tony Stark in IM3... Kill Off Pepper Potts.
It's a horrible notion considering how much movie audiences really like the relationship and on-screen chemistry of Paltrow and Downey, but it's exactly the sort of thing that would leave Tony in a dark place going into Avengers 2. His alcoholism and personal demons were touched upon in Iron Man 2, but we've yet to see him truly down-and-out thus far. Eliminating Pepper from his life would do the job as nothing else could.
I think exactly the opposite is going to happen - word from Marvel was that, after Avengers, the sequels to the various stand-alone franchises would be more independent, not less-so, and that most of the set-up for Avengers 2 would come from the next round of movies to be optioned for films (characters yet to hit the big screen). Whedon could easily make the movie "smaller & more personal" by having the villains set out to destroy the Avengers directly, rather than come into opposition to them as part of a plan to conquer the world. If you had the Masters of Evil, let's say, take on the Avengers personally, that could easily fit Whedon's statement.
I think the idea behind Iron Patriot works very well whether Norman Osborne is piloting the suit or not. You can still have it used as a thumb at Tony Stark, it just can't involve Normy.
Quote from: cmdrkoenig67 on May 22, 2012, 05:30:50 PM
Quote from: BlueBard on May 22, 2012, 12:55:38 PM
1. Makeup could easily make Ben Kingsley look "more Oriental". They'll probably do a little bit of that, but not make him Chinese outright.
Uh....So, the equivalent to Chinese black face (And I really hope you mean "more Asian", not "more Oriental")? I would hope they don't go that route, because putting a basically Caucasian actor in Asian "black face" is even more offensive then just having Kingsley playing a Chinese man.
Dana
And you're expecting Hollywood to forego extra makeup?
And knowing the diversity on the Asian continent, I meant the word I used. Kingsley isn't playing Ghandi this time around.
Quote from: Previsionary on May 31, 2012, 10:23:29 PM
Why exactly would it not make sense, UE? They can take the general purpose of the suit, have someone else under it, and still accomplish the same goal. Osborn is NOT a major Tony Stark enemy even to this day, and it won't be the first time the movie verse repurposed something.
look prem i'm not getting into the usual prem/ue argument where you ask my opinion, i tell it and you ignore me and tell me i'm wrong. i just feel that the use of this character is an extremely dumb idea and really misses the point of the existence of the character from the comics story
the whole point of the IP character was osborns way to pervert the legacy and public image of both iron man and captain america, for use in his own twisted avengers. the whole concept of the suit was to be a symbol to the public for the wearers new position of power
just throwing random C rate iron man villain number 247 inside the suit takes away form the entire concept on why it exists in the first place
the only way this could work and even then its very thin, is if its the actual american government that is behind the suit and trying to take down stark.
Firstly, I don't now what you're talking about other than you're doing a similar thing you constantly try to go at Benton and C6 for, so perhaps you should lay off that. Interesting that you completely ignored Talavar's similar opinion. :P
Iron Patriot is not an integral part of Norman Osborn and the very idea behind that armor can be used by others. It is not like his alternate identity of Green Goblin, which was all-encompassing as far as Norman was concerned. Iron Patriot armor was a tool to meet an end. It was a weaker version of Tony's suit painted over that Norman used to alter public perception and to threaten those he felt were weaker than him when he wasn't putting on a show. Under those circumstances, anyone with enough clout could fulfill the role. You're just stuck on the idea of it from the comics as Norman is one of your faves. That's fine, but Norman's position, power, plans, and intimidation didn't stem from that armor at all. That was just back up. His perversion of the superhero notion and the government itself came from who he was as a person and what he had done before and the armor ADDED to it. His role in Dark Reign was essentially a larger scale version of his role in Thunderbolts where the very notion of Green Goblin was an effective tool to keep people at bay.
Quote from: BlueBard on June 01, 2012, 12:53:18 PM
And you're expecting Hollywood to forego extra makeup?
And knowing the diversity on the Asian continent, I meant the word I used. Kingsley isn't playing Ghandi this time around.
The term Oriental, when used for peoples of Asian is usually derogatory/offensive, that's why I questioned your use of the word. I have no issue with make up in movies...I do have an issue making basically a Caucasian actor look Asian via make up (I thought I was quite clear on that), when there are plenty of great Asian (specifically Chinese, if they are playing a character called the Mandarin) actors that could play the part.
Dana
Even though it looks like Iron Patriot, I'm pretty it's Detroit Steel.
Quote from: murs47 on June 01, 2012, 09:12:42 PM
Even though it looks like Iron Patriot, I'm pretty it's Detroit Steel.
Interesting if true. In recent Iron Man comics storylines, Detroit Steel has been used by the government/Hammer to basically make Tony look bad. It definitely seems like something similar will be happening in Iron Man 3. Whether they call the character "Iron Patriot" or "Detroit Steel," it seems like it's someone's (the government's?) attempt to steal Tony's popularity and maintain some kind of similarly-augmented operative.
Given earlier rumours about the use of the Extremis storyline, which has zero armoured Iron Man opponents, I wonder how all of this is going to come together.
QuoteThe term Oriental, when used for peoples of Asian is usually derogatory/offensive, that's why I questioned your use of the word.
Dana, I'm actually on your side in this whole mess. I just want to point out why I also completely agree with what Tawodi Osdi said. Now, I recognize that the term "Oriental" is now deemed derogatory to those of Asian heritage. But, why should the term "Asian" be any different? There are so many varying cultures and ethnicities indigenous to the continent of Asia (India, Mongolia, Pakistan, Indonesia, Afghanistan, let alone all of the countries of the former Soviet Union) why is it accepable to pigeon-hole all of these different peoples under a description that now functions to describe those we used to label as, and I truly don't mean to sound racist, "Oriental"?
I have a black girl friend (I'm pale white, by the way). We dated for a number of years and we're still very close. She hates it when black people are referred to as "African American". She always says, "I've NEVER heard anyone I know refer to themselves as African American. We're Black. Unless you just came over from there, or your parents did, you don't need to be using that term."
I'm really in line with what Tawodi said. Racism, or discrimination in any form, makes me physically ill. There's no excuse for that kind of crap. This PC stuff has just gone overboard. With things constantly changing, it's impossible to keep up with what's "proper" and what's not. Using the "wrong" term with no harm intended can set off fireworks. Just look at this thread. We're discussing a comic book movie, for crying out loud!
Sorry, for the derail. I actually promised myself that I wouldn't be checking this thread anymore. So, let's get back to arguing about the merits of Norman being/not being Iron Patriot.
Oh, and Murs:
QuoteEven though it looks like Iron Patriot, I'm pretty it's Detroit Steel.
We know you're gorgeous, but shouldn't there be a period in there somewhere. People are going to think you're full of yourself.
"Oriental" is said to be offensive by some to Asians because it refers to furniture and has been used to insult and stereotype/group entire cultures together. I had an Asian friend who was actually very offended by the word when it was used innocently in regards to Asian culture, specifically hers. I feel like it may be an over-sensationalized thing in American culture because elsewhere, it seems to be used without problem. Even here, it's not always seen as a pejorative. It's not really in the same boat as "African American," imo.
Oh, and Murs IS full of himself. He has to be to do the work he does. ^_^
Oh, I agree, Prev. I always thought that "The Orient" was also a phrase used by the Western world almost as a trade term to describe that area of the world. So, to be known by another culture's term, especially one that exploited Asians, would definitely be offensive.
I should have added a descriptor or two for my explanation of my girl friend's statement. The example isn't the same at all, like you mentioned. My friend isn't offended by the use of "African American", she just thinks it's inaccurate and, therefore, beyond silly. I guess I was just trying to show that even in our attempt to be politically correct, one sometimes has to wonder who is coming up with the "acceptable" terms when even those we're trying not to offend don't like the term.
Grah... TUE, as much as I hate to say it, Prev is r... prev is riii... *cough**gag**splutter*
Mk, in this specific instance he's not being... himself. Iron Patriot exists as a perversion of Tony's established image, and that can be accomplished just as easily with one of his actual foes as it could with Norman Osborn... Heck, MORE easily, since legitimate foes of Iron Man usually have more deep-seated reasons to WANT to pervert his image publicly (whereas Norman has less a personal issue with tony and more political motivation).
Quote from: Talavar on June 01, 2012, 01:07:36 AM
I think exactly the opposite is going to happen - word from Marvel was that, after Avengers, the sequels to the various stand-alone franchises would be more independent, not less-so, and that most of the set-up for Avengers 2 would come from the next round of movies to be optioned for films (characters yet to hit the big screen). Whedon could easily make the movie "smaller & more personal" by having the villains set out to destroy the Avengers directly, rather than come into opposition to them as part of a plan to conquer the world. If you had the Masters of Evil, let's say, take on the Avengers personally, that could easily fit Whedon's statement.
That's a good point, Talavar.
I keep hearing talk about an Ant Man (& Wasp?) movie, but I'm just skeptical that something like that could ever succeed. Heck, DC can't even get people interested in a Green Lantern movie, and he's one of their heavier hitters. Still... Marvel's pretty hot right now, so they might be able to pull it off.
Quote from: oldmanwinters on June 02, 2012, 03:30:52 AM
Quote from: Talavar on June 01, 2012, 01:07:36 AM
I think exactly the opposite is going to happen - word from Marvel was that, after Avengers, the sequels to the various stand-alone franchises would be more independent, not less-so, and that most of the set-up for Avengers 2 would come from the next round of movies to be optioned for films (characters yet to hit the big screen). Whedon could easily make the movie "smaller & more personal" by having the villains set out to destroy the Avengers directly, rather than come into opposition to them as part of a plan to conquer the world. If you had the Masters of Evil, let's say, take on the Avengers personally, that could easily fit Whedon's statement.
That's a good point, Talavar.
I keep hearing talk about an Ant Man (& Wasp?) movie, but I'm just skeptical that something like that could ever succeed. Heck, DC can't even get people interested in a Green Lantern movie, and he's one of their heavier hitters. Still... Marvel's pretty hot right now, so they might be able to pull it off.
Ant-man is in development, but as a lower-tier (ie. lower budget and smaller expectations) film than those out so far. Dr. Strange & Guardians of the Galaxy are two more heavily-rumoured projects from Marvel, but I don't think anything has been officially announced.
Quote from: Talavar on June 02, 2012, 04:53:09 AM
Ant-man is in development, but as a lower-tier (ie. lower budget and smaller expectations) film than those out so far. Dr. Strange & Guardians of the Galaxy are two more heavily-rumoured projects from Marvel, but I don't think anything has been officially announced.
And it's the fact that all these lesser Marvel hero films are still in the "development" process that makes me think they'll just run out of time releasing them before the studio demands Avengers 2. Obviously, we'll get another Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor movie before that happens, but unless those other characters can get their own movies before summer of 2015 (which is when I expect Avengers 2 will open), then they might lose their window of opportunity.
Just thought of this, but what if the big reveal at the end of Avengers was not for Avengers 2, but a Guardians of the Galaxy movie!? :blink:
Quote from: XStream on June 02, 2012, 03:01:46 PM
Just thought of this, but what if the big reveal at the end of Avengers was not for Avengers 2, but a Guardians of the Galaxy movie!? :blink:
I thought of that myself. The idea of a cosmic-altering Thanos battle didn't seem to mesh with Whedon's vision of doing the sequel "smaller & more personal." I think it's entirely possible the Thanos angle might be explored in one of the Phase 2 spin-off/set-up films rather than in the Avengers sequel.
Ant-Man movie is being done by Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg together and is rumored to start filming right after they finish The World's End (the third of their Epic Trilogy - Shaun Of The Dead & Hot Fuzz being the others in that series). Marvel has said they are putting some major money into doing the special effects for this film and come up with some very unique set designs and action scenes "that would make films like Honey I Shrunk The Kids look like low budget drive in B-Films".
- CQ
Quote from: crimsonquill on June 02, 2012, 11:37:33 PM
Marvel has said they are putting some major money into doing the special effects for this film and come up with some very unique set designs and action scenes "that would make films like Honey I Shrunk The Kids look like low budget drive in B-Films".
Kind weird that they would use an early 90s movie made for kids as the gold standard of special effects, set designs, and action scenes.
Oh well. <_<
HIStK actually was a pretty impressive movie from a visual standpoint.
Quote from: oldmanwinters on June 02, 2012, 11:41:18 PM
Kind weird that they would use an early 90s movie made for kids as the gold standard of special effects, set designs, and action scenes.
Oh well. <_<
HIStK actually was a pretty impressive movie from a visual standpoint.
I think that Marvel press person probably couldn't think of a bigger example of a film with characters surviving in a world being only an inch high and riding around on Ants. Sure it's not state of the art film making compared to modern films but they did the majority of the giant sized sets with practical effects instead of CGI which had been a huge crutch with movies these days. Comic book fans that held Avengers to such high levels of scrutiny for accuracy will probably not live with Ant-Man and Wasp moving around in a environment that is completely cheesy and looks like something that would be a ride in a Disney park.
- CQ
Behind the scenes photo spoiler...
Spoiler
http://www.toplessrobot.com/aimmx.jpg (http://www.toplessrobot.com/aimmx.jpg)
Yahoo did a pretty cool review of each Iron Man suit seen on film thus far:
http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/iron-man-suits-gallery-slideshow/iron-man-suit-gallery-2012-photo-1338838147.html
And now the new suit!http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album.php?aid=46933 (http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album.php?aid=46933)
Spoiler
I would be interested in the story that leads to this suit. The biggest departure that I see is less red and more...is it still gold? The pics are kind of hard to tell. From the back it reminds me of the next to most recent suit (before black suit, with the glowing orbs or whatever spread around....)
Quote from: XStream on July 16, 2012, 03:36:59 AM
And now the new suit!
http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album.php?aid=46933 (http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album.php?aid=46933)
Spoiler
I would be interested in the story that leads to this suit. The biggest departure that I see is less red and more...is it still gold? The picks are kind of hard to tell. From the back it reminds me of the next to most recent suit (before black suit, with the glowing orbs or whatever spread around....)
Spoiler
Coloring-wise, it almost looks like a gold version of the briefcase armor, as seen behind him.
The color scheme for that new suit is kinda awful.
Ewww
Isn't the colour scheme the same (ie. red and gold) as previous armours? Just with the relative proportions of those two colours reversed?
Wow. That looks horrible. Even if they tried reversing the red and gold, I could understand, but the upper arms and thighs are still predominantly gold, so that didn't even work. Plus, I'm sure that when Marvel went to the red and gold look decades ago, they looked at a gold torso, gloves, and boots with red arms and legs and decided against it for good reason. The arms might look decent with this armor if they left the shoulder pieces red. You would think that with the armor being broken into so many different segments, that they could have experimented with a number of different red and gold combinations and come up with something better than this. This all just looks like a 'change for the sake of change' kind of deal and it fails miserably.
Teaser
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=askHCPHNRsM
Old rumors about the Iron Patriot...OR Detroit Steel
http://latino-review.com/2012/05/30/iron-man-3-include-iron-patriot/
Here's a crazy though: Could it be a new War Machine armor?
It's not crazy. It was confirmed weeks ago that the Iron Patriot looking suit would be a repaint of the War Machine suit, with Rhodes still inside.
Is it just me or does the suit look more silver in the teaser than the previous images...?
Pics:
http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/173293-new-photos-from-iron-man-3-released?utm_campaign=facebookfan&utm_source=facebookfan&utm_medium=referral
Yaaaaaaay! :thumbup:
So, what the heck? I'm confused, excited, but confused. We heard everyone saying that the Mandarin WASN'T going to be in this movie, but here we have the first trailer, and who should we see? Well, I'm super excited, and very glad to hear that rumor was incorrect.
http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/marvel/ironman3/
Quote from: laughing paradox on July 16, 2012, 04:53:43 PM
The color scheme for that new suit is kinda awful.
I'm not liking it much. But that won't keep me from watching the movie when it comes out :)
Quote from: BentonGrey on October 23, 2012, 03:31:10 PM
So, what the heck? I'm confused, excited, but confused. We heard everyone saying that the Mandarin WASN'T going to be in this movie, but here we have the first trailer, and who should we see? Well, I'm super excited, and very glad to hear that rumor was incorrect.
http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/marvel/ironman3/
See that's what they call misdirecting the fan base... like Nolan shouting "No Robin" from every rooftop and then giving us robin in movie 3. To be fair, we have known about mandarin actually being in it since they started talking about the armor wars stuff.
Holy crap, again?
Marvel Studios is the best invention since agriculture.
Why does Mandarin sound like a muppet?
Well, Marvel Studios knows how to create a coherent movie universe with a diverse cast of characters, and get them all to work. It's never been done before, so that's no mean feat.
I like how they are immediately tying it into the Avengers movie and no just ignoring or briefly acknowledging the events of the movie and moving on. I'm also happy to see that the Mandarin appears to be the main villain rather than just a background figure liked I had presumed from some of the things being said. How they fit him into the Extemis storyline, I do not know, but I have confidence in Marvel. They have yet to fail.
They sure know how to make you wait for it....April?!?!?!?! Great trailor though. I can't wait to see the movie.
says may 3 on mine.
Ooops! I meant May. heehhehehe
A friend just pointed it out to me:
53 seconds into the trailer, Cap shield is tattooed on Mandarins neck. What's the deal with that?
Quote from: JeyNyce on October 24, 2012, 12:48:21 PM
A friend just pointed it out to me:
53 seconds into the trailer, Cap shield is tattooed on Mandarins neck. What's the deal with that?
Interesting!
http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/10/24/iron-man-mandarin-avengers-tattoo/
I wonder if it's an Easter Egg for another Captain America movie?
Quote from: thalaw2 on October 24, 2012, 03:32:11 AM
They sure know how to make you wait for it....April?!?!?!?! Great trailor though. I can't wait to see the movie.
It's April in the UK.
Anyway, that trailer got me really psyched up for it.
I don't know if I have been more excited from a trailer...
I believe it is mostly because Marvel has been on a role with its movie properties. Fantastic stuff. I can not wait for this movie. This trailer has me asking so many questions, that I was on the edge of my seat unrealistically hoping the trailer would give me an answer.
Can't wait until May...or April...is it May?
The UK gets it earlier just like with Avengers. Though it's been confusing for them since in their version of the comic books, Iron Man is called Alumininium Chap, Captain America is called Leftenant Yankee Doodle, The Hulk is The Green Meanie, Nick Fury is known as Monocle Mick, Thor is actually King Arthur, Hawkeye is a talking mouse and Black Widow is called The Duchess of Spiderbury. Every issue tends to devolve into a goofy chase scene and the plot is usually forgotten. Which is odd because their Donald Duck comics tell extremely dramatic adventure stories with deep philosophical themes.
True story.
Dude, you always make me snort.
Marvel only seems to be having trouble with the Hulk, but everything else so far has been a nicely intertwined universe. Its kind of interesting that DC's movie universe would be the one to have to reboot, a lot.
Dana
Quote from: cmdrkoenig67 on October 25, 2012, 11:51:18 PM
Marvel only seems to be having trouble with the Hulk, but everything else so far has been a nicely intertwined universe. Its kind of interesting that DC's movie universe would be the one to have to reboot, a lot.
To be fair to DC, Marvel has had some of their other properties go stinkeroo in the movies. Ghost Rider... Daredevil... Elektra... Punisher... Spider-Man 3... Rise of the Silver Surfer... Not to mention some of their animated projects were far, far departed from the regular Marvel-U. And that they still haven't managed to reclaim some of those properties from Sony and Fox.
Fortunately for Marvel, they were able to form Marvel Studios to produce Iron Man and the rest of them leading up to Avengers.
DC being owned by Time-Warner, they should have been able to get very good movies through Warner Bros. The fact that they didn't tells me that the creative types at DC didn't have enough input on the screenplays and the executive types didn't know how to pick the right directors.
Well let's be fair on that score though: When Disney bought Marvel, they could have very easily taken Marvel Studios down the same road that DC's in-house studio is currently mired in: too much oversight, not getting the right talent, etc. To Disney's credit, they've more or less taken a very hands off approach: They fund the Marvel Studios projects with the oodles of dollars they need to make the movies properly, in return for a certain return on their investment. They don't mandate the types of projects that come out of Marvel, they don't dictate directors and producers, they just sit back and let the money come in.
Yep, but apparently (and surprisingly) the suits at Disney are actually smart enough to learn from history and example.
Marvel has more than earned my trust. I'm super excited about Iron Man 3, and I can't wait for Thor 2. I am looking forward to pretty much everything they are putting out. :D
I second Benton's remarks. I did not see Thor in the theatre, but watched it on DVD. I was blown away with how masterfully they brought the God of Thunder to the big screen (even though I watched it on my 37").
I will go see anything they put out at this point including Guardians of the Galaxy.
Yeah...Guardians of the Galaxy...I haven't the faintest idea how they're going to make that work, but they've definitely go the benefit of the doubt as far as I'm concerned.
Ironically, I was a DC guy growing up and was never a fan of either Iron Man or Thor, but I love the movie franchises now. I think they are the best super hero based projects out there. I think they are even better than the Captain America franchise, and I have always been a fan of Captain America.
I... I can't read the above post.
Quote from: Reepicheep on October 28, 2012, 07:33:47 AM
I... I can't read the above post.
Yeah, it wasn't something that needed reading.
(to avoid confusion, I had a long drunken now deleted rant, not Tawodi's comment )
Quote from: BentonGrey on October 26, 2012, 08:02:15 PM
Yep, but apparently (and surprisingly) the suits at Disney are actually smart enough to learn from history and example.
I'd be willing to bet they (Disney) learned their lesson with Pixar as the example. They would have been certifiably nuts to mess with that formula.
Previous management would have screwed it up, I think.
So why is Warner getting it wrong? 'Mato, you alluded to DC being saddled with directors (and presumably screenplays) outside their control? Why is that?
Quote from: BlueBard on October 29, 2012, 02:06:06 PM
Quote from: BentonGrey on October 26, 2012, 08:02:15 PM
Yep, but apparently (and surprisingly) the suits at Disney are actually smart enough to learn from history and example.
I'd be willing to bet they (Disney) learned their lesson with Pixar as the example. They would have been certifiably nuts to mess with that formula.
Previous management would have screwed it up, I think.
So why is Warner getting it wrong? 'Mato, you alluded to DC being saddled with directors (and presumably screenplays) outside their control? Why is that?
I think believe it's because Marvel was independent, and created their own film studio, all of which was then bought by Disney. DC has been a wholly owned subsidiary of Warner Bros for years. Marvel, despite the Disney ownership, is still making its own movies, while DC has very little involvement or control over what Warner Bros chooses to do with their properties.
Yep, basically, empty suits who have no attachment to, love for, nor knowledge of the characters and worlds of DC are calling all the shots. They are the WB executives, and they control DC's movies.
Marvel Studios was formed precisely because Marvel was sick of what studio executives were doing with their properties. They had quite a large number of properties not licenced out, so they decided to just make their movies themselves their way and who cares what the suits thought cause they wouldn't be involved anyways. It worked.
Unfortunately, they have not recovered all of their licenses back, so recent and upcoming X Men/Wolverine/other mutant groups and Spider-Man movies have nothing to do with them. They did recover the Fantastic 4 license recently, however, so that's promising.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 29, 2012, 04:44:16 PM
Marvel Studios was formed precisely because Marvel was sick of what studio executives were doing with their properties. They had quite a large number of properties not licenced out, so they decided to just make their movies themselves their way and who cares what the suits thought cause they wouldn't be involved anyways. It worked.
Unfortunately, they have not recovered all of their licenses back, so recent and upcoming X Men/Wolverine/other mutant groups and Spider-Man movies have nothing to do with them. They did recover the Fantastic 4 license recently, however, so that's promising.
I think you may be mixing up Daredevil and the Fantastic Four, cat. Marvel recently got back DD, but the Fan 4 remain at Fox.
Yep, but F4 is in danger of reverting to Marvel before too terribly much longer if they will leave it alone...which they won't. Sadly.
Well said Cat.
http://movies.yahoo.com/video/iron-man-3-theatrical-trailer-030044893.html
New trailer. this one looks so dramatic!
Spoilers via Lego! :D
http://www.themarysue.com/iron-man-3-legos-pepper-potts/
Well, it looks like Rhodey in the "Iron Patriot" armor, so that clears up a lot of that speculation. My resolution was absolutely horrible throughout the clip due to my crappy connection, so I apologize if I got that wrong.
I'm not able to get the links above but I did manage to find a 2min+ trailer that was awesome!
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNTIyODAzNzQ0.html
Same trailer. It's the end of it that has me curious though, namely the
Spoiler
entire squadron of Iron Men
That's actually something those of us on the toy news end of things have known about for awhile. From what I understand, IM3 is pulling the idea from the old iron man stories where Tony has designed different Iron Man armors for different occasions... Underwater Armor, Hulkbuster armor, etc. At some point in the film, either tony will end up using all his armors at once to take down whoever he's facing (presumably Mandarin, but I've been avoiding finer details) or they'll all be turned against him and he'll be forced take extreme measures (*cough*Extremis*cough*) to take out his former tech.
For the record, the "official" Iron Man armor for IM3 is listed on the "Armor Assembler" toy as the "Mark 42"... meaning between Avengers and Iron Man 3, Tony has cranked out 34 new armor types.
Just wanted to tack on something that I was trying to add last night, but was too tired to coherently type out: I suspect that the use of multiple new armors at once, as well as the inclusion of Iron Patriot as a repainted War Machine, was at least partly an editorial mandate. Not from Disney you understand (Disney's been good about being hands off so far), but from Hasbro. In an industry where Mattel's pumping out rainbow batman toys for the kids line to milk any last penny out of the Dark Knight franchise, Iron Man is a property that's pretty much made for toys... you can pump out 20 different versions of his armor and they can all be legitimate.
That said, in the first few movies (and Avengers) there wasn't really time for Tony to make multiple armors, so Hasbro's been going to the comics for variety... the problem being that the new movie armors clash with the more simple armors from those early comic stories. They sold ok (collectors picking up their favorite armors, kids getting the movie toys) but not as well as they wanted, with IM2 toys still peg warming in several of my go-to shops.
With IM3 though, we're getting 2 separate "kiddy" 4" toy lines filled with different Iron Man armors from the movie. They're cheap, sparsely articulated, and not painted very well, but they'll still probably sell better then the IM2 line. Kids will want to have all the different Iron Mans, collectors will probably want them as backdrops for a movie-style "Hall of Armors," and they've got the "Adult" 6" Legends line for the collectors who just want good versions of the core characters.
Multiple armours at once have also been used in several Avengers comics by Bendis in the last few years, so it's not (at least originally) a toymaker's idea.
The trailer seems to show Tony and Rhody leading the iron men armors, so either there's a ton of people in the suits, or the whole Extremis plot will involve Tony gaining the ability to control multiple armors at once. Which could actually work.
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on March 06, 2013, 09:37:25 PM
The trailer seems to show Tony and Rhody leading the iron men armors, so either there's a ton of people in the suits, or the whole Extremis plot will involve Tony gaining the ability to control multiple armors at once. Which could actually work.
While it's always possible that the trailers have misleading editing, from what we've seen I'd say it seems that the latter is the more likely.
Did anyone else notice the Hulkbuster armor at the end?
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on March 06, 2013, 09:37:25 PM
The trailer seems to show Tony and Rhody leading the iron men armors, so either there's a ton of people in the suits, or the whole Extremis plot will involve Tony gaining the ability to control multiple armors at once. Which could actually work.
Based on the teaser and trailer footage, I assume after a rough patch with Pepper because of his obsession with making armors for every possible emergency or situation he ends up working with Maya Hansen on her prototype project. He become the guinea pig for her process and slowly find out that the process has a few side effects (the armor which is stalking Pepper while Tony is sleeping seen in one of the trailers) and after he saves The President and Maya during of one his attacks against Air Force One that Mandarian decides to take dealing with Tony in a major way.. take him and his friends out along with his very precious home before they know what hit them.
Once he is forced to start from ground zero and make a new suit of armor from scraps and learn how to control Extremis, The President decides to take advantage of the disappearance of The Avengers and Tony Stark as an opportunity to take the only hero under military control and make him their poster boy, thus War Machine is reborn as Iron Patriot. Maya probably ends up being ordered to take her Extremis process to AIM to make more soldiers to fight Mandarian... which of course ends up very badly for everyone.
I'm taking a guess that Tony's obsession fueled collection of armors is being held within Avengers Tower which is still under construction.
Quote from: BentonGrey on March 06, 2013, 10:24:05 PM
Did anyone else notice the Hulkbuster armor at the end?
I'm thinking that maybe a cameo of Bruce Banner will occur somewhere at the beginning with Tony and him standing in front of the Hulkbuster armor talking about working on it together and hoping that he would never have to use it. Just a small scene which shows where Bruce went after The Avengers with Tony before he leaves to explore more of his Hulk side.
- CQ
Trailer spec
Spoiler
Yo, you guys think Pepper dies? I wonder if Pepper dies. It seems like she might because she was near some kind of fire, and then Tonistark was like "I'll get revenge on you Ghandi! You killed PEPPPPPAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!" (subtext)
Different interviews have mentioned some kind of strain between Tony and Pepper, but i have high hopes for whatever it turns out to be... to his credit one of the things Downey pushed for was for the relationship between Tony and Pepper to have moved forward since IM2, and I doubt he'd let up on that for IM3.
'Mato, that's really cool. I hadn't heard that.
Joss Whedon mentions it in the commentary (I highly recommend sitting through it BTW, you learn a lot about how the movie came together). To be fair, it had a lot more to do with Downey not wanting to retread the same relationship conflicts from IM1+2, but all that still applies to IM3: whatever DOES occur in this movie almost has to be a new conflict, and that moves the relationship in a new direction.
We know we have heard a lot about how Avengers affected Tony. So I believe it is safe to assume he has become consumed with being prepared for the next fight.
It would explain the heated exchange that must take place in the scene where Tony says he will protect the one thing he can not live without, Pepper. He has become obsessed with being prepared, and thus he has created 34 new suits.
I did notice many of the suits when Mark 42 lowers into its holding area... So are they in the mansion? Or Avengers tower?
Looking like a good continuation of the previous stories. It doesn't feel like an ending to a trilogy. I believe we can expect more Iron Man films without a reboot anytime soon.
I hate to post back to back, but I just came across this image and I do not believe I have seen anyone on here share it. I noticed Tony's armor at the end of the trailer was not the same as the beginning, but that is nothing new. However, this is the first I have seen of... Mark 43?Spoiler
(http://fizmarble.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ironman3concept252013.jpg)
Sorry to disappoint, but that's actually the "Layered Plating Armor," otherwise listed as the Mark 22 by this website (http://screenrant.com/iron-man-3-spoilers-armors-suits/)
Edit: kept reading, and Xstream's right... sort of. It's actually listed on that site as the Mark XLVIII, or 48... but the regular armor is listed as the Mark XLVII by the same site, and it's clearly labeled as "Mark 42" on the action figure and other merchandise. As it is, the basis for that info is speculation based on a post from an "insider" which no one can really confirm is legitimate.
i have watched the new trailer and it is glorious, i still sit here smile on my face and arms raised in joy, even when it was over
dont ask how i typed this
Watching the trailer, it looks to me like it's gonna be another blockbuster hit movie. And knowing that the movie is only just about a month away has gotten me excited for it even more. :)
Spoilers! Click Link at your own Risk!Spoiler
Rescue? No not really, but check it out!
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/03/05/iron-man-3-ign-sees-new-footage-showing-someone-else-in-the-armor-tonys-new-friend-and-more (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/03/05/iron-man-3-ign-sees-new-footage-showing-someone-else-in-the-armor-tonys-new-friend-and-more)
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on March 08, 2013, 12:57:26 PM
i have watched the new trailer and it is glorious, i still sit here smile on my face and arms raised in joy, even when it was over
dont ask how i typed this
:lol: nice
I don't normally post random facebook apps promoting a movie, but This one (https://www.facebook.com/ironman/app_146378445531115?ref=br_tf) gives you a look at some of the different armors leading up to the release of IM3. New armors added daily, I understand.
Also: For anyone who bought into that list of armors an anon released, between the listed numbers for these armors and the fact that the gold armor is specifically NOT the Extremis suit (extremis plays a role, but the Mark
42 armor is what he's using from the start of the movie) that list is mostly invalidated at this point. It might have been an early working copy, or they might have made changes because it came out, but in either case I wouldn't rely on it too heavily going forward.
Lastly, I have the ultimate spoiler. Click through at your own risk.
Spoiler
That was evil, 'Mato... You're a Rotten Tomato.
(Spoiled, get it?)
Hey, it's not like I only put it inside one spoiler and you accidentally clicked on it... you have to work to get that thing all the way open. Also, to be fair, it's not like it hasn't been hinted at in the trailers... there's even a shot of it happening if you're looking for it.
edit: Oh, I almost forgot... if you go to that facebook app I linked before, on top of the "Silver Centurion" and "Shotgun" armors from yesterday, we have "Heartbreaker" and "Igor" (Hulkbuster) armors revealed today.
Quote from: Tomato on March 27, 2013, 04:35:38 PM
you have to work to get that thing all the way open
You can say that again. Did'ya have to bury it THAT deep? That's the evil spoiler I'm talking about! :P
Here's something that you guys state side might want to know:
QuoteMarvel Studios will release a different version of "Iron Man 3" in China and opted against filing for the movie to be a Chinese co-production, Marvel announced on Friday. China is very strict about how many foreign movies it will permit to screen, and its censors are similarly strict over the content of those movies.
more (http://movies.yahoo.com/news/marvel-release-different-version-iron-man-3-china-165335857.html)
I'll be sure to let you know exactly what extra footage I can see here for my $10 ticket.
$5 its a lot of edits to do with the mandarin
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on March 30, 2013, 07:51:24 PM
$5 its a lot of edits to do with the mandarin
Part of the reason deals with Chinese actress Fan Bingbing whose part in the film is being cut from the Non-Chinese release of the film.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-china-iron-man-3-20130329,0,3011023.story (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-china-iron-man-3-20130329,0,3011023.story)
http://thediplomat.com/asia-life/2013/03/fan-bingbing-cut-out-of-iron-man-3-except-in-china/ (http://thediplomat.com/asia-life/2013/03/fan-bingbing-cut-out-of-iron-man-3-except-in-china/)
Interesting note about Fan Bingbing, she is apparently playing Blink in "Xmen: Days of Future Past"
Wow! I didn't know those scenese of Shanghai in Looper were bonus footage. To be honest they were really good and kinda made the ending of he movie seem stupid...cuz he shoulda gone to Shanghai!
I'm really looking forward to this one ... I'm a big fan of Shane Black. The guy is a great action movie writer and acquited himself well as a director with Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. My main issue with Iron Man 2 was the script - it was kind of a jumbled mess.
It'll also be interesting to see how they portray the Mandarin and what aspects of him they choose to keep.
I hardly think that Iron Man 2 was a mess. I thought it was pretty great, but yeah, I'm super excited about 3 as well!
Yeah, it looks like they're painting the Mandarin as a terrorist of some sort, which is an interesting angle. I'm glad he's in the movie,but I'm uncertain about their portrayal of the character. However, at this point Marvel has earned lots of good will on my part.
Quote from: BentonGrey on April 16, 2013, 01:46:29 PM
I hardly think that Iron Man 2 was a mess. I thought it was pretty great, but yeah, I'm super excited about 3 as well!
Yeah, it looks like they're painting the Mandarin as a terrorist of some sort, which is an interesting angle. I'm glad he's in the movie,but I'm uncertain about their portrayal of the character. However, at this point Marvel has earned lots of good will on my part.
No, it kind of was. It wasn't a bad mess, but there wasn't really a clear direction of what they were trying to do. The radiation thing felt forced, the villains weren't fleshed out, and most of the supporting characters turning on Tony the way they did just felt wrong (Pepper I get, but Natasha's job is to watch HIM regardless of her feelings, and there was no reason for Happy to be personally involved based on what was shown).
Again, not a BAD mess (it's a decent film) but it was probably Marvel's weakest showing so far.
Quote from: BentonGrey on April 16, 2013, 01:46:29 PM
Yeah, it looks like they're painting the Mandarin as a terrorist of some sort, which is an interesting angle. I'm glad he's in the movie,but I'm uncertain about their portrayal of the character. However, at this point Marvel has earned lots of good will on my part.
He was already set up as a terrorist in the first movie. The terrorist group Tony was captured by was called Ten Rings, the leader shown had a large prominent ring, and I believe there was reference to a higher leader, so yeah, intended from the start.
Great movie ... has anyone else seen this yet? The Mandarin was ... interesting.
Seen it last night and honestly I don't know what to think, on one hand it was a well filmed movie with decent to some great action sequences.
On the other some elements sucked and sucked hard. Seriously the way a lot of the story elements played out it seems they just copied the play book from the dark knight rises( I'm not a nolanite in anyway)
The stuff I really just can't say I liked
Spoiler
the whole thing with the mandarin was ********, seriously if you are going to pull that why even use the character if you are going to do that, it's like if the joker was just a stand up comedian hired by black mask, seriously the mandarin making fart and ole ole jokes
Why the hell blow up the remaining armours, or why not just get the armour that he had hidden once the mk47 was up and running again
Pepper Potts takes out the villain, umm look I'm not looking for a damsel in distress but I thought this was an iron man film
The surgery to save him, ummm I thought the idea of this was impossile, seriously if it could be done why wait this long
It was an alright movie but it just seems like so much that doesn't feel right
As for the much looking forward to stinger
Spoiler
sorry this is the first marvel stinger that was just poor and did nothing to drive the mcu forward at all.
Was really looking forward to a gaudarin of the galaxy or ant man, he'll I would even taken another Thor teaser
Maybe if I think about this more but it seems like much like tdkr, and many other comic films 3 seems to be a huge roadblock. I can understand why people will like it I really can but I just don't know the film just didnt click with me.
Wow TUE, that doesn't sound promising. You know how much I love Nolan and TDKR...
I was hoping this would break the cycle of the 3rd movie sucking :(
*shrug* I'm going to see it either way, so I'll reserve judgement until I personally see it. I have kooky tastes anyway (I still defend Wolverine and Green Lantern as being ok films) so I might enjoy it more then TUE did.
Well, to be fair - Iron Man 3 is currently at 93% positive on Rotten Tomatoes, so I don't think we need to write Iron Man 3 off as just for those with kooky tastes yet anyway. No offense to TUE, but one bad review does not a bad movie make.
do not get me wrong guys there some great things about thsi film, its well shot and the action is great. the cast is superb as usual and RDJ is tony personified.
there are just elements and twists within the story that left me cold. and judging buy a lot of the response you will either love these elements or hate them.
personally i know there are a few members on here that will blow a gasket
and talavar to be fair a lot of the great reviews are looking at this as a film on its own not as an adaption of a long running comic series so they would not see the elements that have annoyed a lot of fans, but then again i just have kooky tastes :rolleyes:
look i'm going to post the twist that just didnt sit with me. i warn you
DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO KNOW A MAJOR KEY PLOT POINT TO THIS FILM SERIOUSLY Spoiler
ben kingsley is not the mandarin, the whole advertising of this movie has been a bait and switch. when tony get into the aim mansion when the mandarin is hiding he finds 2 women in a bed, when he hides the "mandarin" enters from the bathroom shouting and i quote "bloody hell i wouldnt go in there for about 20 minutes"
it turns out that kingsley is actually playing a character named tevor and out of work drug addicted stage actor who is being used by the head of AIM Aldrich Killian(guy pearce) to be a face for a great American boogeyman to keep the government distracted from what he's really planning
I think it might actually be my favorite of the three.
Although its not quite as connected to the MCU as I would've liked it does a quite interesting job of dealing with the aftermath of The Avengers.
*******BIG SPOILERS BELOW********
Spoiler
The Extremis/war vet/PTSD angle was really interesting in my opinion. You have these people that feel like their country had given up on them, even though they had given their bodies for the country. Then you have the reluctant warrior whom is seemingly invincible trying to come to grips with the utterly insane predicaments he's gotten himself and his loved ones into. It's a much more mature look at Tony's struggle with creating his own demons
Anyway, this movie also had some of the funniest bits of all three movies too.
About the Mandarin
Spoiler
The Mandarin reveal was fantastic, and even referenced himself in a way with the story of the fortune cookie.... The fact is, it would be completely racist and irresponsible to go the whole Asian terrorist route (see Olympus has Fallen) this was a much more engaging way of showing evil, and allowing Ben Kingsley to just chew up the scenery in two very different ways.
Detourne I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree with you on this.
While I agree that in no way could they have went with the over the top fu man chu aspects of the early comics. In no way did the films marketing or the first 40 minutes portray that they were. He'll the mandarin didn't even have a middle eastern accent.
i'm not a mandarin fan boy of any means with my only experience of him is the god awful 90's cartoon
i wasnt a fan of the twist for 2 reasons
Spoiler
1. the mandarin is iron mans big bad. he's green goblin, his joker, his red skull it seems like they have just changed it to be ohh edgy. that and though i may not agree 100% with it the idea idea he was changed to protect possible revenue in certain markets for the film, may have some elements of truth to them, as its been well reported that marvel was wary about the character to begin with
2. what we had up until the reveal was really interesting. kingsley was looking to be this great dark evil overlord that has been pulling the string for years and if you have seen him in other films where he's that bad guy eg sexy beast he could have been amazing if they went the full role. which in sadly they didnt and we ended up with another rather poor ticked off scientist bad guy
I completely understand your point of view man,
Spoiler
I'm just tired of seeing asians as only bad guys. I also think that Marvel and Disney are pretty hip to the fact that the international market rakes in tonnes of money for them. For example, theaters have been packed all over seoul for IM3. I didn't pre-book a ticket so i had to go to a cheaper place. probably going to try the 4DX experience on friday though. It was fantastic for movies like Fast and the Furious and Life of Pi
I saw it last week and to be honest...didn't really enjoyed it that much. It's ok i guess.
Spoiler
Maybe it was because i was expecting IronMan to fight the real Mandarin and that I was not familiar with the story behind Extremis at the time. I found the action scenes somewhat lacking too and like TUE it didn't feel that awesome when Pepper Pots defeated the main bad guy. She managed to finish the guy rather quickly. But i suppose maybe the guy was already at a very weakened state by that time.
I've read some harsh reviews from others that have watched it...quote..
Quote"What is this sh1t? Disgusting...I am shocked to my frelling core. Shane Black has done to Iron Man what Bret Ratner did to X-Men.
I went to the cinema looking forward to see Ben Kingsley play a ruthless Mandarin. Instead, it all turns out to be a joke, and the Mandarin, Iron-man's arch-nemesis turns out to non-existent. So much for all the hype in the trailers. The writers probably thought they were smart in putting such a drastic plot-twist, but instead I left the cinema feeling deceived and disappointed. As someone already mentioned, they should just have just stuck to the established storyline.
If that was not enough, there were a host of other things wrong with this movie. The one-liners got painfully annoying. Loud explosions are expected to compensate for half-thought out action scenes.
The plot was half-baked at best with a lot of holes. First AIM is selling Extremis to the Mandarin, then it turns out he wants to create supply and demand to sell it to the government, and next he's killing the president and "moving on". As many others have mentioned, then Iron Man who was able to withstand Thor and his lightening melts in 3000c heat. War Machine gets disabled because a woman touched his hand. The iron suit, which is supposed to be powered by the arc reactor, a limitless power supply, needs to be charged like your iPhone."
Spoiler
Guy Pearce was a terrible character so it didn't make up for The Mandarin being a phony. That said, I liked that twist and the character. I just think a real terrorist is more interesting than a less cool Sam Rockwell redux, I have no idea what the villains motivation was at all. Breathing fire didn't help.
The movie is fine, it's funny and has some sweet action, but it's not up to the standard set by the other two and Avengers. It lacks depth and plot and I really thought it was going to deliver Nolan levels of both. Jon Favreuau should have completed the trilogy.
But mainly all the armors at the end should have fused into one giant armor. I don't know what that would have accomplished but it would have been sweet.
Just saw it earlier today. I liked it, not sure how much though. It might be my least favorite of the 3. RDJ is great in it, and I liked Cheadle as well.
A couple of specific points:
Spoiler
The Mandarin thing didn't bother me. It's a perfectly reasonable story element, if they didn't use the Mandarin for the role it wouldn't be controversial.
I've never really liked any of the main villains in the Iron Man movies, but Killian was probably my favorite of the three.
Didn't like that Rhodey doesn't really do any fighting in the Iron Patriot armor.
Wasn't big on the whole jumping from suit to suit to suit Iron Man thing. It made the Iron Man armor seem cheap and disposable. I'm happy he blew them up at the end, now he can build something a little more substantive.
Odd that Tony is out of the suit for so much of the movie. I'm not sure if I liked or disliked that element. Probably take me another viewing to decide.
Really happy that Happy had a decent role and survived the film. With Favreau no longer directing I thought he might just be a cameo, and the trailers implied he would die.
I think at the end of the day my biggest concern right now is that nothing really stood out. I just saw it and I'm not really replaying favorite scenes or lines over in my head like I will in a movie I really liked.
Quote from: Podmark on May 04, 2013, 10:30:59 PM
Just saw it earlier today. I liked it, not sure how much though. It might be my least favorite of the 3. RDJ is great in it, and I liked Cheadle as well.
A couple of specific points:
Spoiler
The Mandarin thing didn't really bother me. It's a perfectly reasonable story element, if they didn't use the Mandarin for the role it wouldn't be controversial.
I've never really liked any of the main villains in the Iron Man movies, but Killian was probably my favorite of the three.
Didn't like that Rhodey doesn't really do any fighting in the Iron Patriot armor.
Wasn't big on the whole jumping from suit to suit to suit Iron Man thing. It made the Iron Man armor seem cheap and disposable. I'm happy he blew them up at the end, now he can build something a little more substantive.
Odd that Tony is out of the suit for so much of the movie. I'm not sure if I liked or disliked that element. Probably take me another viewing to decide.
Really happy that Happy had a decent role and survived the film. With Favreau no longer directing I thought he might just be a cameo, and the trailers implied he would die.
I think at the end of the day my biggest concern right now is that nothing really stood out. I just saw it and I'm not really replaying favorite scenes or lines over in my head like I will in a movie I really liked.
I pretty much agree with except I'm not undecided about disliking some of the elements you were unsure of. Its the first of the recent Marvel movies I have no desire to own on DVD.
pretty dissapointed with iron man 3. Anxiety attacks really? your freaking Iron man thats all i was thinking about. The only thing i did like was the Manderin and that whole twist but man the little kid though was annoying ill tell ya.
Well, I certainly understand what TUE was saying now. I saw it, and I was somewhat disappointed. I enjoyed it, the movie was pretty good, but there was a lot about it that troubled me. I'll have more substantive comments coming soon.
I saw the movie and I really enjoyed it. Mine you, this wasn't a Iron Man movie, but more of a "Let's get to know more about Tony Stark" movie. I understood the Anxiety attacks. He still getting over the events that happen in the Avengers and he's under pressure to be ready if something like happens again. Some people make feel that this movie was a bit incomplete, but I think Marvel is using this as a setup for their "phase two". We all know that there will be an Avengers 2, so something going to happen that will make Tony build another suit. This will also give Marvel to introduce a new suit in the comics and then in the movies.
Iron Man 3 was pretty great. Significantly better than Iron Man 2, possibly as good as Iron Man 1. There; now that's out of the way, I'll address some specific points:
Spoiler
1. The Mandarin twist was pretty awesome, particularly since it wasn't spoiled at all so far as I was aware, unlike the Talia Al Ghul one in Dark Knight Rises. The traditional Mandarin is a terrible character, a racist Asian caricature, and also a poor match-up to Iron Man as a combatant. Sure, he's got his magic/alien rings which are great at offence - what happens if Tony just shoots him? It's well established at this point that movie Iron Man kills. I'll leave it at that; if you're major objection to Iron Man 3 was the Mandarin twist, I don't think I have any common ground on movies there.
2. Iron Man having PTSD/anxiety attacks - this was very well done. Marvel heroes have always had feet of clay, and this is a great response to what Tony's been through. Up to Avengers, he was always the smartest, always had the highest technology - then he was put up against alien super-technology and nearly died despite his cutting edge super suit. Living through that, and having to live up to that success if/when the Avengers are needed again would take a toll.
3. Pepper finishing off the villain - seriously, this is a complaint? Tony defeats all the Extremis goons, and helps save the president with Rhodey (is that okay, by the way?), but Pepper getting in the final blow is somehow stealing his thunder? I personally thought it was great after all the damsel-in-distressing, but I also like that the villain basically lost due to his own hubris - it was Extremis and his injecting Pepper with it as a threat that made their victory possible.
4. The plot. I didn't see any major holes here. Guy Pearce has a formula for making super-soldiers, except sometimes they explode. By politicizing those random explosions, he creates a need by the government to buy said super-soldiers in bulk. He wants to eliminate the president to cement the reputation of his terrorists, but also to have the new president be someone in his back-pocket who is sure to play ball.
5. 3000 degrees Celsius melting the armour when Thor's lightning did not. Now, this is some serious nerd-quibbling here, but let's address it. Lightning produces heat because of the resistance of the mediums it passes through - poor conductors means more resistance which means more heat. Most metals are very good conductors, which means not that much heat compared to other materials, and the lightning does visibly damage the armour while getting redirected & absorbed.
6. The kid. I'm sorry, but that was one of the better uses of a kid in an action movie. And superhero fans who complain about stuff for kids, particularly when it's done well, should be allowed to watch nothing but horrible Batman fan-films.
7. Destroying his armours. This one is debatable - it'll depend on what they do next with Iron Man. I don't take it as him quitting, a la Bruce in Dark Knight Rises, for a couple of reasons. First, the film ends with Tony re-affirming that he is Iron Man. Second, the post-credits teaser, which shows Tony talking to Bruce Banner, re-affirming his Avengers connection. I could see the next step for Iron Man be one of reinvention, maybe on the east coast at Stark/Avengers tower.
Following on Talavar's points:
Spoiler
1. As I said above I had no problem with the Mandarin.
2. I liked the anxiety attacks. Nice way to show him reacting to Avengers.
3. I found Pepper defeating Killian a little disappointing. I have nothing against Pepper fighting, just that the main villain should usually be stopped by the main character. That said Tony did nearly beat Killian before so I think it works alright.
4. Yeah I thought Killian's plan was pretty good. Reminded me of a Metal Gear plot.
5. I wonder if these new armors might not be as tough as the Avengers one. They seemed to be destroyed fairly easily in the final battle. Perhaps the whole quick access/assembly thing made them less resistant.
6. I thought the kid was fine. I'd probably have left him out if I wrote the film, but he didn't bother me. And there were a number of dialogue between him and Tony that I enjoyed.
7. I didn't really see anything that said Tony was quitting. Just that he was starting over and getting past his current problems. He's the mechanic, no way he can't build a new armor - he is Iron Man.
Talavar, are you....me?
I completely agree with all your points.
Quote from: detourne_me on May 06, 2013, 11:44:48 AM
Talavar, are you....me?
But Vegeta... I'm me. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=I46XxkK288s#t=140s)
Quote from: detourne_me on May 06, 2013, 11:44:48 AM
Talavar, are you....me?
I completely agree with all your points.
Maybe I am. :lol: Have you ever seen you and me in the same place at the same time?
My thing with the ending
Spoiler
its not the fact that pepper beats him, when she stepped out of the fire you knew she was going to have a hand in it
It's the fact she beats him with such easy and how she does it. Seriously super uppercut and flash kick. She's pulling off martial arts moves that would make black widow to wow. Being injected with a super solider serum doesn't just make you an ultimate hardcase even cap had to go through military training before his.
As I said before I do not want a damsel in distress that's a load of crap but for her to do it single handily was what annoyed me. A better idea would have been if it took pepper and tony a combined attack to take down the villain. Either together or one after the other
Tony hits him a few times gets swatted away pepper moves in attack and repeats until the final blow
It would have made him seem more of a threat and would have cemented the theme that they work better as a unit and as a couple rather than as separate people. Which has been a theme throughout the entire trilogy
This film seems to be black and white with fans you either loved it entirely or were not fond of elements, and sadly like on a lot of other threads if you didn't love every little thing you're in the wrong.
Yeah I think that would have worked better UE.
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on May 06, 2013, 11:23:25 PM
My thing with the ending
Spoiler
its not the fact that pepper beats him, when she stepped out of the fire you knew she was going to have a hand in it
It's the fact she beats him with such easy and how she does it. Seriously super uppercut and flash kick. She's pulling off martial arts moves that would make black widow to wow. Being injected with a super solider serum doesn't just make you an ultimate hardcase even cap had to go through military training before his.
As I said before I do not want a damsel in distress that's a load of crap but for her to do it single handily was what annoyed me. A better idea would have been if it took pepper and tony a combined attack to take down the villain. Either together or one after the other
Tony hits him a few times gets swatted away pepper moves in attack and repeats until the final blow
It would have made him seem more of a threat and would have cemented the theme that they work better as a unit and as a couple rather than as separate people. Which has been a theme throughout the entire trilogy
This film seems to be black and white with fans you either loved it entirely or were not fond of elements, and sadly like on a lot of other threads if you didn't love every little thing you're in the wrong.
Yeah, I agree completely. That really bothered me. There were several moments like that, which just strained credulity and broke the film's own established standards of suspension of disbelief. I'm still going to put together a complete record of my thoughts, but to build on the same thought:
Spoiler
Getting super healing/heat powers doesn't give you super strength. At one point, we see that they're rewriting the genetic code to be able to generate healing, okay, I'm with you. It's a comic book idea, but it works in this universe. Then, they can generate so much energy that they literally 'run hot.' Again, okay, it's far-fetched, but sure. I'm with you. It's an interesting idea. Then we have several fights where the bad guys seem to be just more or less regular folks with heat powers and super healing, then all of a sudden they are stopping punches from Iron Man's armor, cold...er...hot. Being able to melt the armor is one thing, being able to catch and hold him helpless when he's got the power to throw a tank is something completely different. I understand it's a world where the fantastic is possible, but I felt like the internal logic of their universe broke down in some spots.
TUE, I really feel you about the 'if you didn't love if completely you're crazy' thing.
The whole "if you didn't love it completely, you're crazy" thing is bunk. I didn't love it completely. As is too often on the internet, you have to run at full speed just to stand still - in a case like this, you have to defend something voraciously just so people don't talk about it as if it was a steaming pile. Because that's how this thread was trending....
Ehh, I think that was more about history than the present, Talavar. The last two Nolan Batman movies tend to attract rather rabid defenders (not necessarily here, per se), and if you don't think they are the Lord's gift to superhero movies, folks act like you're nuts. I actually just had that conversation with some people at our university.
Yeah, I never got that. I enjoyed the Nolan franchise (they might well be the best "films" even though they aren't the best adaptions) but they had flaws and I inevitably like the Marvel films more with only a few exceptions. I actually had the opposite conversation one time though... some lunatic was trying to say that DB:Origins was greater then TDK and I wanted to punch him.
Quote from: Talavar on May 06, 2013, 03:47:03 AM
Iron Man 3 was pretty great. Significantly better than Iron Man 2, possibly as good as Iron Man 1. There; now that's out of the way, I'll address some specific points:
Spoiler
1. The Mandarin twist was pretty awesome, particularly since it wasn't spoiled at all so far as I was aware, unlike the Talia Al Ghul one in Dark Knight Rises. The traditional Mandarin is a terrible character, a racist Asian caricature, and also a poor match-up to Iron Man as a combatant. Sure, he's got his magic/alien rings which are great at offence - what happens if Tony just shoots him? It's well established at this point that movie Iron Man kills. I'll leave it at that; if you're major objection to Iron Man 3 was the Mandarin twist, I don't think I have any common ground on movies there.
2. Iron Man having PTSD/anxiety attacks - this was very well done. Marvel heroes have always had feet of clay, and this is a great response to what Tony's been through. Up to Avengers, he was always the smartest, always had the highest technology - then he was put up against alien super-technology and nearly died despite his cutting edge super suit. Living through that, and having to live up to that success if/when the Avengers are needed again would take a toll.
3. Pepper finishing off the villain - seriously, this is a complaint? Tony defeats all the Extremis goons, and helps save the president with Rhodey (is that okay, by the way?), but Pepper getting in the final blow is somehow stealing his thunder? I personally thought it was great after all the damsel-in-distressing, but I also like that the villain basically lost due to his own hubris - it was Extremis and his injecting Pepper with it as a threat that made their victory possible.
4. The plot. I didn't see any major holes here. Guy Pearce has a formula for making super-soldiers, except sometimes they explode. By politicizing those random explosions, he creates a need by the government to buy said super-soldiers in bulk. He wants to eliminate the president to cement the reputation of his terrorists, but also to have the new president be someone in his back-pocket who is sure to play ball.
5. 3000 degrees Celsius melting the armour when Thor's lightning did not. Now, this is some serious nerd-quibbling here, but let's address it. Lightning produces heat because of the resistance of the mediums it passes through - poor conductors means more resistance which means more heat. Most metals are very good conductors, which means not that much heat compared to other materials, and the lightning does visibly damage the armour while getting redirected & absorbed.
6. The kid. I'm sorry, but that was one of the better uses of a kid in an action movie. And superhero fans who complain about stuff for kids, particularly when it's done well, should be allowed to watch nothing but horrible Batman fan-films.
7. Destroying his armours. This one is debatable - it'll depend on what they do next with Iron Man. I don't take it as him quitting, a la Bruce in Dark Knight Rises, for a couple of reasons. First, the film ends with Tony re-affirming that he is Iron Man. Second, the post-credits teaser, which shows Tony talking to Bruce Banner, re-affirming his Avengers connection. I could see the next step for Iron Man be one of reinvention, maybe on the east coast at Stark/Avengers tower.
I completely agree with this! As someone who was absolutely wholeheartedly disappointed with Ironman 2, this movie was the best it could have possibly been in my eyes.
Quote from: Talavar on May 07, 2013, 04:01:28 AM
The whole "if you didn't love it completely, you're crazy" thing is bunk. I didn't love it completely. As is too often on the internet, you have to run at full speed just to stand still - in a case like this, you have to defend something voraciously just so people don't talk about it as if it was a steaming pile. Because that's how this thread was trending....
And yes, i agree with this as well.
speaking as the guy who was on his own defending green lantern against the negative reviews it got from FRers(or ToF members, since I think FR was still down at the time) I can respect you guys for standing up for this one, even if it was utter garbage. I mean, did you even SEE that one scene where tony did that thing with the suits and then Mandarin did that other thing. Blah, horrible.
But no, seriously, I haven't seen it yet. I'm kind of an odd duck when it comes to movies (I liked Green Lantern and Wolverine, for example) so I don't really care what you guys think anyway.
Yeah 'Mato...your opinion about movies is no longer valid at all. ;)
Oh this is streets ahead of those two (though I don't think either are without their good points)... STREETS AHEAD
Yeah, in my defense on those two, I'm not head over heels in love with them, I just don't think they're horrible either. They're very flawed, but there are enough elements that I appreciate as a comic or movie fan that I can sit through them.
that said, there are other movies I know some fans like more then either gl or wolverine that I just cannot stand. I cannot sit through either X3 or Ang Lee's Hulk in a single sitting, they upset me so much.
Don't worry, Tomato, I see you man. Green Lantern was okay to me. I didn't much like the big bad villain at the end, but as a concept, I didn't think they got it all wrong. It was a Superhero flick. Pretty much what I got out of it. Wasn't expecting too much from it anyway. Wolverine on the other hand... Ehhhhhhh!!
As far as Iron Man 3 is concerned, I thought it was okay. I described it as a Iron Man movie. Like if it came on FX or something and I wasn't doing much, yeah I'd watch it, just like I do for the other two when they come on.
Spoiler
Do I wish they used the Mandarin right? Hell yes. Will I damn the movie because they didn't? As much as I want to I can't. But trust me, it's a major gripe. How they going to do that to Iron Man's greatest villain? It's LITERALLY like making the Joker into a typical circus clown and making Roland Dagget the big villain. They couldn't at least make the Mandarin concept a REAL threat that Killian was using for his own ends? Like there was a real Mandarin, but Killian found some actor to look like him and do what he wants? I really hoped(beyond hope) that the Mandarin got his hands on tech from the Chitauri invasion and got rings from there. At this point I would have just been happy to have an ACTUAL Mandarin character. Not some fake joke of a guy.
But the other parts of the movie, I thought were good. I liked the entire arch of Killian. I liked the references to the Avengers and didn't mind the panic attacks. I love it when super heroes have real life flaws like that. Loved the introduction of AIM. As out of place he was, I didnt even mind the Iron Patriot as much. As a political operative IRL, I liked the "Trojan Horse" theme they used. I'm glad they hit really relevant political issues like PTSD and terrorism. I really thought the Mandarin was the new Osama Bin Laden. If that didn't scare people, what could. Only to find out Osama Bin Laden is a cab driver and the real terrorist threat was Dick Cheney(actually, this movie is sounding more realist than I originally thought). Overall though, I thought it was okay. Nothing real remarkable, but nothing depressing me like The Dark Knight Rises did.
I finally saw the movie and I wish I had read the spoilers. It had great action, solid story archs, and I would even say it was overall better than IM2. The extra scenes in China were nothing critical and kinda didn't make any sense.
Spoiler
you get a few scenes in Beijing that overlook a construction site and dialogue that doesn't add much to the movie. Looper did it better.
. My student kept wanting to talk about the NBA playoffs throughout the movie so I may have missed some important points just because I was trying to be polite. The move cost $5 so I figured I could always go back to the theater and see it again if I felt so inclined. That said....
I was not happy with the ending.
Spoiler
Why bother with the Mandarin (translated to Ordinary Chinese on screen) anyway if they planned the bait angle? I'm sure there were other villains in IM rogue gallery that could have fit the part. I feel it was cheap. Not even one power ring?!?!!? It was worse than the appearance of Galactus in the FF movie.
Interestingly one of my colleagues buys IM statues but has never read a single comic. He thought there were only 5 suits of armor. I told him well before the IM3 trailers that there were way more suits of armor than that. He thought his collection was complete and is now peeved, because it would cost him a couple thousand more to buy all that armor...lol!
Spoiler
Was Peppor Potts DNA put in as an MK42 user? Rhodey couldn't more armor because it was all supposedly for Tony's DNA.
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on May 08, 2013, 05:24:02 PM
Don't worry, Tomato, I see you man. Green Lantern was okay to me. I didn't much like the big bad villain at the end, but as a concept, I didn't think they got it all wrong. It was a Superhero flick. Pretty much what I got out of it. Wasn't expecting too much from it anyway. Wolverine on the other hand... Ehhhhhhh!!
What you have to understand about Wolverine is that it is essentially the "Die Hard" or superhero movies. You go in, shut your brain off, and watch Bru... er, Wolverine kill people. The plot is irrelevant. Deadpool, as much as fans complain, is irrelevant (and is going to be rebooted according to everyone even close to the deadpool movie). The cyclops/xavier thing is irrelevant. Gambit was SUPER irrelevant.
I can't believe folks liked Green Lantern but didn't like Wolverine. I agree Deadpool was irrelevant in that movie....but everything seemed irrelevant in GL, IMO. Best DC hero movie I've seen was Green Hornet....in fact I enjoyed that more than IM3.
Quote from: Tomato on May 09, 2013, 05:46:29 AM
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on May 08, 2013, 05:24:02 PM
Don't worry, Tomato, I see you man. Green Lantern was okay to me. I didn't much like the big bad villain at the end, but as a concept, I didn't think they got it all wrong. It was a Superhero flick. Pretty much what I got out of it. Wasn't expecting too much from it anyway. Wolverine on the other hand... Ehhhhhhh!!
What you have to understand about Wolverine is that it is essentially the "Die Hard" or superhero movies. You go in, shut your brain off, and watch Bru... er, Wolverine kill people. The plot is irrelevant. Deadpool, as much as fans complain, is irrelevant (and is going to be rebooted according to everyone even close to the deadpool movie). The cyclops/xavier thing is irrelevant. Gambit was SUPER irrelevant.
Die Hard is a near-perfect film. It's the Fast and Furious 1 of superhero movies.
Quote from: Tomato on May 09, 2013, 05:46:29 AM
Quote from: Shogunn2517 on May 08, 2013, 05:24:02 PM
Don't worry, Tomato, I see you man. Green Lantern was okay to me. I didn't much like the big bad villain at the end, but as a concept, I didn't think they got it all wrong. It was a Superhero flick. Pretty much what I got out of it. Wasn't expecting too much from it anyway. Wolverine on the other hand... Ehhhhhhh!!
What you have to understand about Wolverine is that it is essentially the "Die Hard" or superhero movies. You go in, shut your brain off, and watch Bru... er, Wolverine kill people. The plot is irrelevant. Deadpool, as much as fans complain, is irrelevant (and is going to be rebooted according to everyone even close to the deadpool movie). The cyclops/xavier thing is irrelevant. Gambit was SUPER irrelevant.
Gotta take issue with your use of Die Hard here - the first Die Hard is, in no way, a brainless action movie.
I meant the Die hard series in general. The original die hard is a classic, but you cannot tell me LFDH was a masterpiece of clever writing.
Quote from: Tomato on May 09, 2013, 09:16:45 PM
I meant the Die hard series in general. The original die hard is a classic, but you cannot tell me LFDH was a masterpiece of clever writing.
No. No I cannot. And I didn't even see the most recent one.
Ï finally saw Iron Man 3 and pretty much agree with Shogunn2517 on his opinion of the film... It was definitely much better then Iron Man 2 but the way they handled The Mandarian should have been done much better. I didn't mind the twist all that much providing it was just a distraction that Killian was using to his advantage.. however still being tied into the Ten Rings terrorist group which has been seeded for the whole trilogy.
Recently, Shane Black revealed that a WHOLE hour and a half of additional scenes were filmed but opted not to use them for the theatrical edition. My theory is that two endings were filmed..
Spoiler
One being, The safe option with Killian being the mastermind behind the fake Mandarian and letting the film company off the hook by revealing that everything was a bluff including The Ten Rings which were terrorists and arms dealers (including Killian with AIM) that all connected back to conflicts with Stark's father (Stane made deals with them and Vanko was brought to America by them to seek revenge on the Stark family).
The second being, The Mandarian was the mega mastermind that all of the commercials and trailers hyped him up to be. Killian and his operatives were a threat but Mandarian was just using the side effect of Extremis to create living bombs to do his dirty work. He has been hiding in plain sight the whole time in America while letting his operatives in the Ten Rings slowly go after Tony Stark because he was just another businessman who needed to be taught a lesson but instead turned out to be a worthy opponent. Mandarian was just using the media to do all his dirty work for him and Killian just provided him all the technology through AIM to achieve what he needed. Sure this take on Mandarian was a non-magical/non-alien but they opted for just not having him just show up in a technological enhanced device of some kind with a bunch of powered rings to take on Tony, Pepper, and Rhodes. It might have been something that Jon Favreau had in mind but Shane Black decided to go with a much different angle.
I assumed they filmed both endings.. allowing them the option of deciding which approach to take for the theatrical version and also gave them room to "hide" the true ending by never allowing anyone to determine which WAS the real intended ending. So many things are spoiled by the toy lines being released early and many of them were spot on but two particular LEGO playsets just seemed to not to be linked with anything... Mandarian in some kind of super-vehicle with weapons all over it and Killian driving an armored speed boat. I'm thinking those toys are linked to the alternate ending.
I could be totally wrong.. but with Black mentioning the large amount of cut footage and that the Blu-Ray release might have a much different story to be revealed. I'm thinking that fans might get to have the option of their own take on Killian and The Mandarian.
- CQ
Just my thoughts
Spoiler
Wouldn't it be funny if the Mandarin was actually a very brilliant mastermind who pretended to be a drug-addicted British actor named Trevor to lure Killian into hiring him? In that way, he could go about his business, cause mayhem in other parts of the world, but allowed Killian to take all of the blame when Iron Man showed up? Not even Killian would know the truth.
This may sound silly at first, as the Mandarin was captured (seemingly by actual policemen), but besides the fact that the police taking him away could have really been his own men, him allowing himself to seem like he was captured (using the media to show that), it would make him a non-suspect for future crimes as everybody would now think that the Mandarin is a fake; a hoax. Not even Tony would think that it would truly be him making his own life a living hell and systematically bringing down the Democratic world.
spydermann93 that's exactly what I was hoping to see. I was so disappointed.
Saw the movie today. I'm gonna be honest, you guys had me going in thinking this would be another IM2, but I gotta be honest... that was a great film. I thought it might be among the best solo films they've done.
I haven't heard anything regarding this but after seeing:
Spoiler
1. Tony blowing up all of his armors
2. The "I'm a different man" statement to end the film
3. The quick, "Oh, yeah, and I got the shrapnel in my heart removed so I don't have to wear an arc reactor anymore" in the wrap up
4. The closing credits showing scenes from all three films
Did anyone else get the feel like this was the final installment of the series?
Well, it's certainly the end of the trilogy, if nothing else. Iron Man is supposed to be back for Avengers (though Downey is at the end of his contract, so.)
From what I understood, RDJ's contract is up and they had not yet decided what to do about it, so they left it so they could retire Iron Man if they wanted to. They have more recently announced that Iron Man will continue to be a part of the universe whether RDJ signs back on or not. It may be the last Iron Man solo film, however.
EDIT: ninja'd
I am neither antimato NOR ponymato... I am... Ninjamato.
:ph34r:
From reactions I got from the crowd in China....Gweneth is definitely out. They want to see someone "younger and more beautiful." We'll see how much sway the Chinese audience has.
Quote from: thalaw2 on May 19, 2013, 01:25:48 PM
From reactions I got from the crowd in China....Gweneth is definitely out. They want to see someone "younger and more beautiful." We'll see how much sway the Chinese audience has.
I'm not Chinese, but I say that Ms. Paltrow is just fine for the role of Ms. Pepper Potts.
spydermann, I agree. However, Hollywood follows the dollars.
Yeah... but I don't think Paltrow is in any immediate danger of being kicked out. I don't care if the Chinese dislike her, Downey's pushed for her pretty consistently. All the politics of Downey's contract negotiations aside, Marvel IS going to do whatever they need to for him to come back... and I'm sure part of that is pushing for her to come back as well.
Quote from: thalaw2 on May 20, 2013, 11:32:22 AM
spydermann, I agree. However, Hollywood follows the dollars.
Sure, and if Iron Man 3 had done poorly, a major cast shake-up could be an issue for future installments. Instead, it's made more than either previous Iron Man, more than a billion dollars worldwide thus far. Keeping the cast responsible for that - including Gwynyth Paltrow -
is following the dollars.
That's funny about China. I've met Korean guys here that now say "I have to find my Pepper" tlaking about finding a girlfriend.
Our home flooded a month ago, so we just found ourselves able to get a babysitter and go to the movies last night. I was very unsure if they could "end" the trilogy of Ironman's solo movies without it feeling like a third movie, and I believe they were successful except for the ten minute wrap up that took place at the end of the movie.
Other than the ending, I felt Ironman 3 was a superb stand alone film. As far as comparing the three films it was far better than 2 and in my opinion might have been better than the first one. I loved that Ironman did not fight another giant suit at the end or need War Machine / Iron Patriot (good running gag by the way) to defeat the villain.
The pace of the movie was much different, but it contained a nice blend of dark and lighter moments. There were so many good scenes in this movie, I am having a hard time separating the experience into good and bad.
I thought Tony forced to work without his suit was a nice element to the movie.
I loved it. There were a few things that I didn't like here and there, but overall this may be my favorite Ironman movie.
I'm a little disappointed they didn't mock all of the plot holes, but this was still a lot of fun:
http://youtu.be/OUYW0JyzydA
Full thoughts of my own coming soon, I promise. :P
Holy crap, that's hilarious! :lol:
I always like those but I laughed out loud.
Just popping in to add that RDJ has signed on for two more Avengers movies, but not any more Iron Man movies. I'm actually fine with that. There are plenty of other Marvel heroes out there and it good that he'll be around for the big teamups anyway.
http://www.toofab.com/2013/06/20/robert-downey-jr-iron-man-avengers/
Yep, that's great news. After Iron Man 3, I don't particularly want any more IM movies. I'll be much happier to see other characters explored, though I'll be thrilled just to get more Avengers movies!
This guy has a really annoying voice but he addressed most of my concerns. I'll add that the Iron Patriot suit was pretty useless also.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgVlGs_eMAQ
Spoiler
The big fight between the empty suits and nameless superhuman minions fell flat for me also other than visually. I really didn't care about any of them and just wanted Tony to get in a suit and be Iron man. I was almost praying for the old hardcase mark 7 to reappear the whole film.
Quote from: BentonGrey on June 22, 2013, 10:46:48 PM
Yep, that's great news. After Iron Man 3, I don't particularly want any more IM movies. I'll be much happier to see other characters explored, though I'll be thrilled just to get more Avengers movies!
The Avengers did so well I think Joss has enough clout to make sure something like Iron man 3 doesn't happen to his next Avengers. Honestly , I'm definitely going to see Thor but I'm so disappointed by Ironman I don't know about the others except Avengers. probably Guardians of the Galaxy but Ant man I'll skip. The character never interested me anyway and theonly reason I would see because ALL theMarvel films have has a minimum of Quality up until now.
Ha, yeah, that video hits most of my own critiques as well. Yeah, I trust that Joss Whedon will honor the characters properly, and I am definitely excited about the new Thor! I love Ant-Man, but I just wish that the new movie was going to be entirely about Hank Pym. I don't care one whit about Scott Lang.
Quote from: BentonGrey on June 27, 2013, 03:08:17 PM
Ha, yeah, that video hits most of my own critiques as well. Yeah, I trust that Joss Whedon will honor the characters properly, and I am definitely excited about the new Thor! I love Ant-Man, but I just wish that the new movie was going to be entirely about Hank Pym. I don't care one whit about Scott Lang.
Yeah, it's a shame Iron Man 3 couldn't have properly honoured the Mandarin. Marvel could have stolen Paula Deen's thunder. :rolleyes:
Yep Talavar, characters never grow beyond their initial inception. It's not like subsequent writers ever expand on their premises or anything.
Quote from: BentonGrey on June 28, 2013, 06:41:16 PM
Yep Talavar, characters never grow beyond their initial inception. It's not like subsequent writers ever expand on their premises or anything.
You'd have been okay with a modern reinterpretation of a character? I think the Devil's going to need some thermal underwear this weekend.
The 70's is hardly what I'd call modern, and they had some decent Mandarin stories that were more than the original 'yellow menace' roots of the character. Even in his humble origins, though, is that which makes him a worthwhile nemesis for Iron Man. The kernel of the idea, the archetypal conflict between East and West, ancient and modern. It was done in a heavy-handed, offensive way...but it can obviously be done better, as it has been. There have been some good stories told with the Mandarin, some in the modern day, some before. It wouldn't be that hard to find something to draw from.
Completely agree there is lots of material . Very good material that goes beyond the "yellow peril" stuff.
Spoiler
It still baffles me they used a Chinese character and turned him into fake super Osama.