Iron Man 3

[Tomato]

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.

[Shogunn2517]

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.

[hoss20]

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.)

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Well, this kind of ethnic mismatching is extremely common in TV and movies and no one ever complains about it.

[Tomato]

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.

[Previsionary]

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. 

[Shogunn2517]

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.

[Previsionary]

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*

[Shogunn2517]

Totally wasn't paying any attention to iPad's auto-spell.

Sorry about that.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

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.

[BlueBard]

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.

[JeyNyce]

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.

[Panther_Gunn]

or 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!

[cmdrkoenig67]

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

[Tawodi Osdi]

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?

[MJB]

Possible Spoilers & curse words...

Spoiler

First Set pics from Iron Man 3 show what looks to be the Iron Patriot suit.

CLICK ME

[thalaw2]

Pssst...MJB....you might wanna mention that there is profanity there.

[MJB]

*shrugs*

*edits post*

[Shogunn2517]

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/

[deano_ue]

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.

[Previsionary]

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.

[oldmanwinters]

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.

[Talavar]

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.

[BlueBard]

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.

[deano_ue]

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.

[Previsionary]

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.

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.

[cmdrkoenig67]

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

[murs47]

Even though it looks like Iron Patriot, I'm pretty it's Detroit Steel.

[Talavar]

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.

[hoss20]

The 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:

Even 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.