jye4ever
Broke and happy
That was the best scene with the remote suit.
Iron Man 3 Discussion Thread
- Thread starter The Mike
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
jye4ever
Broke and happy
jye4ever
Broke and happy
The Avengers is better than Iron Man 3 but that opening sequence IMO is not better than the whole IM3 movie. Different strokes for different folks.
Just for the record, that statement came from Irish.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 35,160
- Reaction score
- 2
We're entering the age of Nerd Rage.
Just for the record, that statement came from Irish.
I know. I'm just tossing my worthless two cents in.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 32,452
- Reaction score
- 3,162
I loved the plane sequence too.
Okay, yeah, he ends up not being in there but HE still saved those people. HE was the one that was controlling it. HE is IRON MAN. Does that make it any less exciting that he wasn't in there?
Now don't get me wrong, I don't want future films having him using remote drones in every scene from here on out. I understand the importance of having him be in the tin can, but I don't think it was this huge travesty having him use that type of technology in this film. They decided to change things up and have fun with the drone idea. It's not like we never got a scene with him in his suit. We've had three frickin films with him in there!
Like Tony says in Iron Man 2, "the suit and I are one". When he fools Potts with the suit while he's down stairs, that might as well have been Tony, voice recordings, gestures and all. Does the suit make the man, or does the man make the suit?
Okay, yeah, he ends up not being in there but HE still saved those people. HE was the one that was controlling it. HE is IRON MAN. Does that make it any less exciting that he wasn't in there?
Now don't get me wrong, I don't want future films having him using remote drones in every scene from here on out. I understand the importance of having him be in the tin can, but I don't think it was this huge travesty having him use that type of technology in this film. They decided to change things up and have fun with the drone idea. It's not like we never got a scene with him in his suit. We've had three frickin films with him in there!
Like Tony says in Iron Man 2, "the suit and I are one". When he fools Potts with the suit while he's down stairs, that might as well have been Tony, voice recordings, gestures and all. Does the suit make the man, or does the man make the suit?
Brandoloneous
Super Freak
It's really difficult not to rage when buffoons say IM3 was better than The Avengers and the first Iron Man.
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Avengers 2 will have 500 remote Iron Men. 
There is not a single ounce of "rage" in my take on this film. If anything, I'm totally apathetic toward it already (as I am with TDKR). I was just making that observation.
- Joined
- May 31, 2011
- Messages
- 19,883
- Reaction score
- 291
jye4ever
Broke and happy
That was no catnip.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 32,452
- Reaction score
- 3,162
So Iron Man isn't being Iron Man unless he's physically inside the suit?
I can see people arguing that Bruce Wayne was a POS in his movie and barely Batman in it. We literally see him in the first half of the film doing NOTHING and he simply doesn't care. He's in his pajamas, he's taken up archery, etc. But Stark is proactive. He's building armor, he's obsessed, he's investigating, he's hunting down the Mandarin, he's building things from scraps and covertly taking out guards with leathal, homemade weapons. He's AT the location of the action for crying out loud!
So if Iron Man isn't Iron Man unless he's in the suit and that's a negative, who were those people saved by then? A possessed suit of armor? I don't see the difference. It's not like Tony was back at home in New York, with multiple youtube tabs up, bidding on ebay, ******* to porn, posting on sideshow, all while controlling the Iron Man suit. All of his attention was focused on getting those people to safety.
HE WAS IRON MAN!
Now I sort of understand the gripe, but it is pretty petty me thinks. Is not being in the suit, while controlling the suit that big a deal that it takes away from the entire film and what it's trying to say? We've had Stark in the suit for three whole films and seen him in action numerous times. Hell, we'll see him again in it I'm sure. Is it really that bad that they gave this scientific guy a story where he has technology that enables him to control the suit without being the suit in a film that's theme is "take away the suit and what is Tony Stark?" Is it really that awful as a one off?
I can see people arguing that Bruce Wayne was a POS in his movie and barely Batman in it. We literally see him in the first half of the film doing NOTHING and he simply doesn't care. He's in his pajamas, he's taken up archery, etc. But Stark is proactive. He's building armor, he's obsessed, he's investigating, he's hunting down the Mandarin, he's building things from scraps and covertly taking out guards with leathal, homemade weapons. He's AT the location of the action for crying out loud!
So if Iron Man isn't Iron Man unless he's in the suit and that's a negative, who were those people saved by then? A possessed suit of armor? I don't see the difference. It's not like Tony was back at home in New York, with multiple youtube tabs up, bidding on ebay, ******* to porn, posting on sideshow, all while controlling the Iron Man suit. All of his attention was focused on getting those people to safety.
HE WAS IRON MAN!
Now I sort of understand the gripe, but it is pretty petty me thinks. Is not being in the suit, while controlling the suit that big a deal that it takes away from the entire film and what it's trying to say? We've had Stark in the suit for three whole films and seen him in action numerous times. Hell, we'll see him again in it I'm sure. Is it really that bad that they gave this scientific guy a story where he has technology that enables him to control the suit without being the suit in a film that's theme is "take away the suit and what is Tony Stark?" Is it really that awful as a one off?
- Joined
- May 31, 2011
- Messages
- 19,883
- Reaction score
- 291
I think it's just having Tony be in danger, in the suit. That's what people missed on this one.
jye4ever
Broke and happy
My wife liked it better the 2nd time.
I'll say one thing, not since TDK Joker haz I been enamored with a villain like the way I was with Da Mandarin.
Both in appearance and character.
I want more of him.
I'll say one thing, not since TDK Joker haz I been enamored with a villain like the way I was with Da Mandarin.
Both in appearance and character.
I want more of him.
I honestly just don't care enough about the movie to respond in kind to that long, thoughtful post, Difabio.
But I'll say this: I'm glad you and others enjoyed that stuff. It just didn't appeal to me at all, either on a personal level or a "that's a badass hero I wanna be when I grow up" kid level. But it was entertaining, competently made, and isn't nearly as crap as some say. Just like TDKR.
That plane sequence though... it really, really hurts the film for me. People harp on the Mandarin thing, but the reveal that Tony was really chilling on a boat after one of the coolest Iron Man hero moments in any movie is where this one lost me. Worse still, it's completely unnecessary. He could have been in the suit there and lose it again some other way easily, and it wouldn't have undermined the "Tony Stark IS Iron Man! blah blah blah" stuff at all. It seems, to me, it's there simply for yet another sight gag of the Mark 42 falling to pieces. Meh. No thanks.
But I'll say this: I'm glad you and others enjoyed that stuff. It just didn't appeal to me at all, either on a personal level or a "that's a badass hero I wanna be when I grow up" kid level. But it was entertaining, competently made, and isn't nearly as crap as some say. Just like TDKR.
That plane sequence though... it really, really hurts the film for me. People harp on the Mandarin thing, but the reveal that Tony was really chilling on a boat after one of the coolest Iron Man hero moments in any movie is where this one lost me. Worse still, it's completely unnecessary. He could have been in the suit there and lose it again some other way easily, and it wouldn't have undermined the "Tony Stark IS Iron Man! blah blah blah" stuff at all. It seems, to me, it's there simply for yet another sight gag of the Mark 42 falling to pieces. Meh. No thanks.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 35,160
- Reaction score
- 2
He learned in the end only he can do what he has to do. Not a suit. Not a program. Him.
Gotta agree with this. It is interesting that some cite Tony himself not being peril himself as reasons for not liking an action scene they really enjoyed just seconds beforehand, calling the suit a drone as if it was Jarvis saving those people not Tony, that Tony was just chilling on a boat with a tropical drink in hand while the suit did everything. I agree with those that thought the suit probably wouldn't fall apart upon truck impact (don't the pieces lock together?) but it didn't ruin the sequence for me or make Tony less heroic in my eyes. The story ran with the idea of how Stark and his armor relate in various ways, physically & psychologically, starting with the telekinetic combination of the MK42 and the suits for all seasons, stripping all that away and ending with the destruction of the suits and removal of the "machine" from the man, arriving at the idea that he doesn't need the armor to be Iron Man. The remote controlled suit I saw a part of that suit/man separation. I can see how some don't like that direction or idea, especially if they had a hard-on for a Kingsley Mandarin fight.
Last edited:
Similar threads
