'Iron Man 3' Reviews *SPOILERS*

Figured we'd get some people seeing this, so here's a place to talk about it.

And with some reactions I'm reading, I've got a bad feeling about this....

We're supposed to go see it in IMAX Sunday evening with friends. Already got the tickets. But why the apprehension from what you read? I thought this was supposed to be the best Iron Man ever. I haven't yet checked out fan reaction but is it that bad?

The first one is hard to top. The second one didn't do so, that's for sure. But I really liked Iron Man 3. Seems like everybody either really enjoyed it or really hated it. Not seeing too much in between. It's a fun ride though.

I did briefly check out some fan reaction at SHH & I forget who but some idjit said that Iron Man 3 in so many words was gonna top MAN OF STEEL at the box office & that all the movie sites were saying the same thing! Is that really so?! I'd like to know where duh idjit got his info. I mean, IM3 is doing awesome business, no doubt about it but if it's as divisive as it sounds from your post, then that may be to MOS' advantage. I read some more comments & it seemed that some fans are falling out over the Mandarin. I guess it just didn't live up to the comics or something. Still, anything that will boost MOS sales, bring it on! I expect MOS to be both the sleeper hit and the big hit of the summer.

non_amos wrote:I did briefly check out some fan reaction at SHH & I forget who but some idjit said that Iron Man 3 in so many words was gonna top MAN OF STEEL at the box office & that all the movie sites were saying the same thing! Is that really so?! I'd like to know where duh idjit got his info. I mean, IM3 is doing awesome business, no doubt about it but if it's as divisive as it sounds from your post, then that may be to MOS' advantage. I read some more comments & it seemed that some fans are falling out over the Mandarin. I guess it just didn't live up to the comics or something. Still, anything that will boost MOS sales, bring it on! I expect MOS to be both the sleeper hit and the big hit of the summer.

I have to laugh because I seriously doubt anybody knew about or gave a shit about the Mandarin prior to this movie. The people having the biggest meltdown seem to be hipsters wanting to prove they were there first or something. Fuck them. I know enough about the Mandarin to know this movie took a royal shit all over him but I'm fine with it. Couldn't care less. I know jackshit about the Mandarin and I dug the movie. Why? Because it ultimately put Tony Stark at risk. Stark was the one with the problems, Stark was the one who had to struggle to overcome them and Stark was ultimately the winner. That's what made the first Iron Man so good. Iron Man 2 was basically another Iron Man vs. His Own Technology story that we'd already seen in the first movie (which isn't necessarily bad) but without the first movie's emphasis on Tony (which is bad). Iron Man 2 is ultimately a fun ride too but it's simply not on the same level as Iron Man 1. But Iron Man 3 IS.

Yeah, I realize I'm the dickhead who always whines and cries about fidelity to the comics but since I'm abjectly ignorant about Iron Man comics, I have no stake in fidelity to the source material. And I seriously doubt the loudest whiners are much more familiar with the source material than I am.

As to whether IM3 does bigger business than MOS, I'd be more worried about that if I had some profit participation going or bragging rights at stake. But as things stand, all I care about is that MOS is (A) the badass Superman movie we've all dreamed about for years and (B) it therefore turns a HUGE profit. The summer of 2008 is proof (as if we need it) that the public can fall in love with several different movies and make blockbusters out of all of 'em. There's plenty of room for everybody so long as it's a quality product. It's movies like Singerman Returns To Stalk Kate Bosworth and Scott Pilgrim who need to worry.

Okay, it's been seven hours as up for the date shown above this text since I arrive home from the theater and let me just point out that IM3 even though not quite the kind of movie I was expecting but I still find it as a what you might called an OKAY movie, not BAD but also not GREAT either just OKAY!

The part with the Mandarin is what everybody seem to be complaining about after seeing the movie in which...

Spoiler:

But if there was something that the film done right was answer the question that was asked in the film's synopsis which was "Does the man makes the suit or does the suit makes the man?" and it accomplish this with...

Spoiler:

Although there is one plot-hole in the film that still baffles me and thats...

Spoiler:

That part I would like to know!

And thats my two cents on this!

I just watched it. To get it out of the way, I am not familiar with Iron Man in the realm of comic books. First time I heard a movie about it was being made I thought it would have been a minor hit and that it was nice to see RDJ get his own shot at a summer tentpole after so long. Five years later, Iron Man has pretty much trumped Spider-Man as Marvel's biggest heavy hitter. So that's a great achievement. But back to my main point, I don't know the comics so I approach these films as they are. All that matters is if it engages me as a summer spectacle should, but with a little more to it than an average Will Smith tentpole.

The two Jon Favreau flicks were entertaining but they never quite grabbed me. Initially I wasn't into Jon Favreau's celebrity rock star approach, whether that suited the character or not. But RDJ was the right guy to really elevate those flicks and it's safe to say he was the big draw for most people. Despite all the complaints I've heard about IM2, I still found that entertaining and in many ways think it could have easily been better for the first. The only thing that kept that down was that it in some ways felt like it was constricted to be an AVENGERS build up flick rather than be its own IRON MAN film. I understand that was sort of tacked in the middle of production which is why it doesn't quite feel organic. IRON MAN 3 feels much more focused and I'm kind of glad that they decided to make it more of its movie without feeling like a slave to AVENGERS, but with a few nuggets I'm sure will be explored later, particularly the ending. I was excited to hear Shane Black was involved, and in some ways it starts to feel like LETHAL WEAPON during the climax for obvious reasons. The rock star element Favreau feels almost nonexistent, so it kinda feels more like a traditional superhero film in a sense than the first two IRON MAN flicks were, for better or worse. In the end, I felt very engaged throughout the flick and I'd say it's probably the best one yet. Again, this is just coming from someone who's only familiarity is with the films. Having looked further into The Mandarin, I can see why many might make a HUGE stink out of this. I wasn't expecting that twist either, but since I didn't have much attachment with the source I didn't feel too cheated. It's pretty reminiscent of the BATMAN BEGINS twist, for better or worse.

My MARVEL Cinematic rankings...

IRON MAN 3
THOR
CAPTAIN AMERICA
THE AVENGERS
IRON MAN
IRON MAN 2
THE INCREDIBLE HULK

Strange that the next MARVEL entry won't come out until November, instead of a summer date. Whatever they think works best, I suppose.

Just watched 'Iron Man 3' a few hours ago.....

Boy were my feelings WRONG.

Easily the best of the 'Iron Man' films, with the first right behind it and 2 a distant third. All the bitching about The Mandarin had me thinking we were going to get one of these scenarios:

Iron Man confronts The Mandarin, takes him to task for all the destruction and death he has caused, when from behind you hear a voice say "No, I am THE MANDARIN!" as Guy Pearce steps into the room. DUN-DUN-DUN!!!!

And that would have SUCKED. But they didn't go that route. Stark took it upon himself to bring The Mandarin down, WITHOUT his armor, and he uncovered the truth. Yeah, ruining the character's usefulness in any other RDJ 'Iron Man' films sucked for some, but it didn't bother me at all. It served the plot and THAT'S what matters. And really, I don't seem to recall ANYONE putting The Mandarin in the same category as Lex Luthor, The Joker, Loki, Bane, Darkseid, Thanos or any other big-named villain.

Gwyneth Paltrow NEVER looked better either. Aging gracefully, she is. But Favreau? Yikes... Cheadle actually owned the Rhodes role this time out too. Much better than the way he came across in 'Iron Man 2'.

Shane Black nailed the kid character. That boy went toe-to-toe with RDJ and never seemed over his head. And I'm glad they didn't got the predictable route and have him walk into a room with a big bag full of money waiting for him. He instead encouraged him to keep inventing, to keep building. And that was awesome. The new sports car for mom wasn't bad either.

Honestly, I can't wait to see it again. Next time in IMAX. But screw 3-D, that shit just causes eye-strain for me.

I just got back from watching it in IMAX but IMAX is in 3-D. I'm not aware of any 2-D showings for IMAX unless there's something I'm not aware of. The one in my area was 3-D all the way for this film. They do show some films in 2-D like the Nolan Bat-films but that seems to be the exception.

Anyway, not quite sure where to rank this one yet. Definitely better than the 2nd one but not quite sure I want to rank it ahead of the 1st one. Besides RDJ the original film also worked because of the great acting of Jeff Bridges which the villains since then just don't seem to quite compare to. The original also had 'heart' if you will. Not saying that the new film doesn't, it just might take time to sink in. But the twist with Tony Stark at the end has me wondering what will happen next especially considering that RDJ's contract is up & he recently expressed that he might quit playing the character. Where will that leave Avengers 2? Still really enjoyed the movie though & time didn't seem to be a factor like with some boring film so yeah, it works.

Read somewhere negotiations are under way for Downey's new contract. He likes the character and the universe, the role reinvigorated his career and, let's face it, these movies are tons of fun. Methinks he'll renew for at least a couple more. Marvel has a lot more capital now. They're not "just a start up" anymore and Downey is bankable. It only makes sense to pay him whatever extra money he wants, profit participation, oversight on directors or whatever else, just give it to him.

thecolorsblend wrote:Read somewhere negotiations are underway for Downey's new contract. He likes the character and the universe, the role reinvigorated his career and, let's face it, these movies are tons of fun. Methinks he'll renew for at least a couple more. Marvel has a lot more capital now. They're not "just a start up anymore" and Downey is bankable. It only makes sense to pay him whatever extra money he wants, profit participation, oversight on directors or whatever else, just give it to him.

Yeah, Marvel Studios has been notorious for giving people the ax whether actors or directors. I was even nervous that they wouldn't bring Joss Whedon back for AVENGERS 2 but they did. I guess they saw that it was worth the investment. Ditto for RDJ. And remember Marvel, RDJ will pump up that next Avengers box office also.

Like MARVEL has expressed, I am totally fine with the idea of someone else taking on the role. However, I'd still like to see RDJ do at least a few more. I think IRON MAN 3 would have made the perfect send off for RDJ as a solo film, if it had to be his last film. Again, I'd still like to see more of him. Perhaps play it out like this:

AVENGERS 2 (2015)
IRON MAN 4 (2016)
AVENGERS 3 (2018)

I think 2018 would be perfect for him to take a final bow, as that would mark the 10th anniversary of the first Iron Man film. Then give the character a break for a bit, maybe five years and then introduce the new actor for a solo film in 2023.

Likely won't play out like that, but it's the one that makes most sense to me at this moment.

non_amos wrote:Yeah, Marvel Studios has been notorious for giving people the ax whether actors or directors. I was even nervous that they wouldn't bring Joss Whedon back for AVENGERS 2 but they did. I guess they saw that it was worth the investment.

Yep. Whoever opposed that decision at Marvel (if anybody) really should find a different line of work. I mean, if Avengers had "only" $400 million in the US, there's an argument that Whedon could be replaced. I wouldn't make that argument, mind you, but somebody else could. But shit, $623 million domestic? Pay the dude whatever he wants and bring his ass back.

Makes you wonder who could replace Downey if it came to it though. The day will come sooner or later. So who's it going to be?

Besides that, somebody (Arad? Feige?) said there will be no reboots of Marvel films so one thing I've wondered about is (A) how long they can keep any particular character going and (B) how long it will take for them to begin creating new villains after the comic book ones have run their course.

thecolorsblend wrote:(B) how long it will take for them to begin creating new villains after the comic book ones have run their course.

That would be interesting if they decided to take that route, not using a villain from the comic books but rather make up new ones. I think it has only been done rarely in the entire genre (Ross Webster, Nuclear Man, Max Shreck). I'm not against it if MARVEL decides to give it a shot. They'll have to at least for Iron Man if he keeps killing them off.

The thing is though is that there are so many villains in either the respective Marvel or DC universes that they really haven't even scratched the surface. I know that Joker & Luthor get their fair share of treatment but there's a lot more than that. I see no real need to start inventing characters, just stop killing off the ones they use all the time. And I'm no Iron Man expert at all or his rogues gallery but you know what kind of Iron Man movie I'd like to see? Cut all the terrorist crap. We have enough of that in real life. Instead have Iron Man square off against another Marvel villain. Who? No idea at this point but just come up with a slam-dunk traditional comics film no-holds-barred.

Domestic- $175,300,000
Foreign- $504,800,000
Worldwide- $680,100,000

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=ironman3.htm

Again, pay Downey whatever the hell he wants so he'll do a few more.

non_amos wrote:The thing is though is that there are so many villains in either the respective Marvel or DC universes that they really haven't even scratched the surface. I know that Joker & Luthor get their fair share of treatment but there's a lot more than that. I see no real need to start inventing characters, just stop killing off the ones they use all the time. And I'm no Iron Man expert at all or his rogues gallery but you know what kind of Iron Man movie I'd like to see? Cut all the terrorist crap. We have enough of that in real life. Instead have Iron Man square off against another Marvel villain. Who? No idea at this point but just come up with a slam-dunk traditional comics film no-holds-barred.

I'm also sick of corporate villains. Yes yes yes, corporations suck, the evil 1%, whatever, take your Occupy These Nuts shit outside, nobody cares, it's been done to death and from the bottom of my cold, black, dead Republican heart, I'm sick of it. Not to go off topic but this is one reason why I'm not really happy about the corporate Luthor ever making it to the big screen.

thecolorsblend wrote:

non_amos wrote:The thing is though is that there are so many villains in either the respective Marvel or DC universes that they really haven't even scratched the surface. I know that Joker & Luthor get their fair share of treatment but there's a lot more than that. I see no real need to start inventing characters, just stop killing off the ones they use all the time. And I'm no Iron Man expert at all or his rogues gallery but you know what kind of Iron Man movie I'd like to see? Cut all the terrorist crap. We have enough of that in real life. Instead have Iron Man square off against another Marvel villain. Who? No idea at this point but just come up with a slam-dunk traditional comics film no-holds-barred.

I'm also sick of corporate villains. Yes yes yes, corporations suck, the evil 1%, whatever, take your Occupy These Nuts shit outside, nobody cares, it's been done to death and from the bottom of my cold, black, dead Republican heart, I'm sick of it. Not to go off topic but this is one reason why I'm not really happy about the corporate Luthor ever making it to the big screen.

But I thought you liked that version of Luthor as rebooted by John Byrne & as I suppose somewhat portrayed in Smallville? Definitely as opposed to, "Are we going to Addis Ababa again Mr. Luthorrr?!"

Ya know what sticks out to me about IM3 though? This 'Killian' dude reminds me too much of the same type of character like they had in IM2, the 'Sam Rockwell' character I believe. Sure, that guy didn't have super-powers but it was still like he was the real power & manipulating others such as Whiplash from behind-the-scenes. And the ultimate reveal that he was the villain. So it kinda makes you wonder, why did they do something so similar again?

non_amos wrote:But I thought you liked that version of Luthor as rebooted by John Byrne & as I suppose somewhat portrayed in Smallville? Definitely as opposed to, "Are we going to Addis Ababa again Mr. Luthorrr?!"

That's the thing, I do like it. It was very innovative in it's day. But these days every fucking movie (superhero or not) has some corporate titan as the bad guy. Newsflash- most business owners just want to be left the fuck alone to run their company. Not even .5% of them are up to no good.

Political stuff aside, there is an alternative to the corporate Luthor that Byrne did and the used car salesman Donner favored. Why not do the renegade scientific genius? Skip the corporate stuff for once and do the version of Luthor that arguably hasn't been done since Lyle Talbot back in the 40's.

non_amos wrote:Ya know what sticks out to me about IM3 though? This 'Killian' dude reminds me too much of the same type of character like they had in IM2, the 'Sam Rockwell' character I believe. Sure, that guy didn't have super-powers but it was still like he was the real power & manipulating others such as Whiplash from behind-the-scenes. And the ultimate reveal that he was the villain. So it kinda makes you wonder, why did they do something so similar again?

...

That's a damn good point, actually. But I let it go because IM3 is so good. It does everything right that IM2 didn't quite nail.

I never made that connection with the Sam Rockwell character, mainly because Sam Rockwell is literally a one of a kind. Found him way more interesting as a potential villain than whoever the hell Rourke was playing.

As for Luthor, for me there is no one true definition. Much like Batman having a campy and darker side, there are versions of Luthor that are just as legitimate as long as they have a consistent core to them. Whether he's a mad scientist, a swindler or a corporate figure, he should always have that ambition to try to have mankind soar and sees Superman as something that compromises it in his eyes. That was one of the disappointing things in SR for me. From what I remember, in the early drafts it was Luthor instead of Lois who had people turn against Superman for leaving and became a hero of the people when he was away, becoming a giant figure that Superman could hardly match with. I think only a few remnants survived into the final product, particularly that whole "bringing fire to the people" speech of his in the beginning. Lex is always more interesting when he actually believes he's the good guy, just doing necessary evil for the better of humanity in his eyes.

Not to turn this into a Luthor thread but I could dig somewhat the 'mad scientist' aspect especially if it looked like this:



That would be awesome in the sequel to MOS but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it but who knows? Since TPTB seem to be drawing more so from the comics now for inspiration then maybe it could happen? But when doing my search for that image I came across an interesting one from INFINITE CRISIS apparently that sorta mirrors our concern with which Luthor:



As for James Stocks' comment about Luthor thinking he is the hero, ain't that just like SMALLVILLE? In that show Lex's concern seemed to be with the 'alien invasion' & how to stop it so it sorta makes him patriotic even. But he also wanted to uncover Clark's secret. And in the show he seemed genuinely hurt that 'Clark didn't trust him' with his secret. Then knowing his secret drives home the first point.

But since this is an Iron Man thread ya know, whatever, but just had to respond to that. But would 'battlesuit Luthor' be perceived as an Iron Man rip-off?

James Stocks wrote:I never made that connection with the Sam Rockwell character, mainly because Sam Rockwell is literally a one of a kind. Found him way more interesting as a potential villain than whoever the hell Rourke was playing.

Just as a quick reminder Sam Rockwell's character is Justin Hammer who happens to be an actual character from the comics and Mickey Rourke's character is Ivan Vanko a.k.a. Whiplash, an actual antagonist also from the comics.

Just thought you should know!

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:

James Stocks wrote:I never made that connection with the Sam Rockwell character, mainly because Sam Rockwell is literally a one of a kind. Found him way more interesting as a potential villain than whoever the hell Rourke was playing.

Just as a quick reminder Sam Rockwell's character is Justin Hammer who happens to be an actual character from the comics and Mickey Rourke's character is Ivan Vanko a.k.a. Whiplash, an actual antagonist also from the comics.

Just thought you should know!

I don't know how he couldn't make the connection. To me it was very obvious even just hours after leaving the theater. I didn't even remember that the character was 'Justin Hammer'. I just remembered the name 'Sam Rockwell'. Anywho, in both films you have a supposed villain wreaking havoc while there's really some corporate creep behind-the-scenes financing things & pulling the strings. The fact that both characters also had blond hair doesn't exactly help matters either. To me the comparison was very blatant. But is this the first time something like this has been done? No. Funny that 'Max Schreck' was mentioned earlier because that's a similar comparison from Batman Returns. The Penguin was the real villain but ol' Maxie baby was 'behind-the-scenes' pulling the strings.

Ya know, you'd think someone would come up with something original for a change?

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:

James Stocks wrote:I never made that connection with the Sam Rockwell character, mainly because Sam Rockwell is literally a one of a kind. Found him way more interesting as a potential villain than whoever the hell Rourke was playing.

Just as a quick reminder Sam Rockwell's character is Justin Hammer who happens to be an actual character from the comics and Mickey Rourke's character is Ivan Vanko a.k.a. Whiplash, an actual antagonist also from the comics.

Just thought you should know!

I know they're from the comics, I think you're confusing my post under the context of a different subject, particularly the one about original villains. My point was that I found Rockwell and Pearce so different performance wise that the similarities between them didn't occur to me.

non_amos wrote:Ya know what sticks out to me about IM3 though? This 'Killian' dude reminds me too much of the same type of character like they had in IM2, the 'Sam Rockwell' character I believe. Sure, that guy didn't have super-powers but it was still like he was the real power & manipulating others such as Whiplash from behind-the-scenes. And the ultimate reveal that he was the villain. So it kinda makes you wonder, why did they do something so similar again?

Actually, it's nothing like 'Iron Man 2'.

In 'Iron Man 2', Sam Rockwell thought HE was the one running things from behind the scenes. That HE was the one pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. It wasn't until War Machine was over-ridden and the drones started attacking people did he realize that "Whiplash" was REALLY the one in control. Hence him freaking out when Pepper Potts confronted him and called the 5-O.

So no, Whiplash revealed HIMSELF as the real villain at the end. Which, going on what had already transpired, means he was the villain he started out being.