Ironman 3 Spoiler/Figures Discussion

[fedsparkles]

IM3 was a disappointment. Not enough suit time at all. The kid was annoying and the jokes made weren't as funny as the previous movie. I was truly trying to scratch my head how IGN gave this a 9/10.

 

[dedguy]

A lot of people (professional critics and otherwise) really liked it. I very much enjoyed it as well. It had a much more cohesive story than either of the previous films and after two films of Tony either building or being in suits it was a nice change of pace to see him not doing that.

 

[Intruder04]

doubt they could and keep the rating.

With

Spoiler

Happy getting burned, Trevor playing with two semi-naked chicks, Savin getting a hole thru his torso, Tony cutting off Killian's hand etc

, IM3 got a U/A. So I don't think adding those scenes would've had the censorboard hacking it.

A lot of people (professional critics and otherwise) really liked it. I very much enjoyed it as well. It had a much more cohesive story than either of the previous films and after two films of Tony either building or being in suits it was a nice change of pace to see him not doing that.

Respectfully disagree.

 

[Mix Master]

IM3 was a disappointment. Not enough suit time at all. The kid was annoying and the jokes made weren't as funny as the previous movie. I was truly trying to scratch my head how IGN gave this a 9/10.

dude its IGN, they give call of duty games 9's every year, if you go to ign for reviews then you are coocoo for cocoa puffs.

OT: i think iron man 2&3 endings were, anti-climactic

 

[JonWes]

dude its IGN, they give call of duty games 9's every year, if you go to ign for reviews then you are coocoo for cocoa puffs.

OT: i think iron man 2&3 endings were, anti-climactic

I agree I don't generally trust IGN for much. I've heard a lot of rumors that they are more than willing to accept "gifts" for a good score. Not sure if that's true, but some of their ratings are head scratchers.

I actually think IM3 had the most climactic ending of all the films! They put on a pretty big show. Was it on a pretty stereotypical end-of-movie setting? Sure. But I thought it crescendo'ed nicely.

 

[NSJ23]

I agree I don't generally trust IGN for much. I've heard a lot of rumors that they are more than willing to accept "gifts" for a good score. Not sure if that's true, but some of their ratings are head scratchers.

I actually think IM3 had the most climactic ending of all the films! They put on a pretty big show. Was it on a pretty stereotypical end-of-movie setting? Sure. But I thought it crescendo'ed nicely.

I agree, I disliked the endings of both 1 and 2, they felt tacked on, but i enjoyed the end of 3

 

[gunm]

I enjoyed the film a lot. All 3 are fun to me, with 2 probably being the weakest of them IMO.

One thing about 3, I think it's possible they could've done without Rebecca Hall's character, as much as I like her as an actress...

 

[FeMan]

Ha ha! CBM used me as a reference! Better than anything else I've accomplished at work today.

 

[rego]

With

Spoiler

Happy getting burned, Trevor playing with two semi-naked chicks, Savin getting a hole thru his torso, Tony cutting off Killian's hand etc

, IM3 got a U/A. So I don't think adding those scenes would've had the censorboard hacking it.


Respectfully disagree.

its not the fact they allows "some" its how much they had of it. when they rate these movies they not only go on content but how gratuitous it is in length as well as material.

"extremis" in this movie was already being used as a work around to get passed showing human forms getting blown away (hey they get back up when the good guy shoots them, its ok kids!), i would imagine it was walking a very thin line with keeping what they absolutely did not want to lose.

 

[Femtech]

The battle at the end of 3 was cool, but other than that, I don't think any of the Iron Man films had much action at all. Other than Killian, Tony breezed through his enemies, and the fights didn't feel fulfilling. And I'm left confused when some people say that it was nice that IM3 focused on Tony as a man more than him as the Iron Man, considering how the prior films had already committed to showcasing Tony way more than the suits. My favorite installment of silver-screen IM is still The Avengers. TA encapsulated Tony's persona and didn't shy away from showing his tech in action. Fulfilling action.

 

[dedguy]

What they mean is that it showed Tony as a man who's a hero rather than a suit of armor and a pile of money. The point is showing that it's his brain and adaptability that make him formidable not his money and machines.

 

[rego]

i honestly liked it and thought it was a well put together movie, but as far as wanting to re watch it again i have no real desire to as i did with the first two.

 

[Femtech]

What they mean is that it showed Tony as a man who's a hero rather than a suit of armor and a pile of money. The point is showing that it's his brain and adaptability that make him formidable not his money and machines.

I fully understood that. Unfortunately, I can't help but view the filmmakers' decision to show Tony more than the suit(s), whatever narrative theme they use to justify doing so notwithstanding, as a budgetary motivation first and foremost. Sure, RDJ is expensive, but complex, extensive CGI (or even practical) sequences cost more than a MK 42 arm and leg.

OT: Are you going for Nage on Bamba today?

 

[dedguy]

No, I'm waiting for the the "right" TK for me to get another one. In particular I'm looking forward to seeing some sort of archer.

Back on topic, I don't think it was a budgetary concern. Maybe it was, I don't know, but there seemed to be more effects in this than any of the other Iron Man films. There was a very clear and well established theme and arc for Tony's character in this and all of the pieces are there for it. It's not like the previous two films where it's largely a collection of only loosely associated scenes that are fairly interchangeable.

I really love those first two films as well but they're entirely different sorts of films structurally. This third film is much more of a continuous narrative.

 

[Mix Master]

another beef i had was no hints for another marvel movie, thats BS

 

[dedguy]

I think that just has to do with it's production being started before much if any planning was done for anything else. I was happy enough to know that Stark and Banner are hanging out. I also would like to think if Avengers had already been released when they started pre-production on IM3 Banner would have been in IM3.

 

[Femtech]

I'm looking forward to seeing some sort of archer.

Mos' 'def.

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

another beef i had was no hints for another marvel movie, thats BS

That was the best. It was all about Iron Man and was not messed about to advertise other movies.

 

[TheGDBatman]

That was the best. It was all about Iron Man and was not messed about to advertise other movies.

Yeah, going into it I really wanted a Guardians tease at the end but when it came down to it I was more than happy with the Banner tease.

Overall I really loved this movie and it is getting me invested in Marvel far more than the Avengers. Now I'm just doing what I can to not buy all the figures! So far just ordered Tony as he represents the movie and the character the best to me. I also have a long time to decide on the mk42.

 

[The Mike]

I think both Evans and Hemsworth are signed through Avengers 2. Black Widow and Hawkeye aren't necessary for the sequels, especially if they replace those characters with new heroes, i.e. Falcon, Vision, Ms. Marvel, etc. I have no doubt they'll get the major cast together for Avengers 2 and most likely 3, but I would be surprised if we get anymore solo films for the time being.

Evans signed on for Avengers 2 during his signing for Captain America but Hemsworth is not signed to anything.

Marvel is negotiating with Hemsworth, Downey, Johanssen and Ruffalo. I believe that they are with Renner but no one expects him to balk much and SLJ hasn't reached the end of his nine picture deal.

Here is the thing. Marvel is already threatening recasting. They've used that threat on both Hemsworth and Johanssen and even threatened it towards Evans to try and get him out of this huge group attempts for more cash.

Downey is hanging the carrot optioning both Avengers 2 and Avengers 3 but is reportedly not even beginning to discuss an Iron Man 4 which probably means he wants a separate negotiation because he'll have Marvel by the Cherries. Either they agree to his terms or put off recasting Iron Man until possibly 2019 once he rides out the Avengers.

Kevin Feige plainly doesn't give a **** and has thrown around recasting a ton of times and Hemsworth has even been quoted as saying he isn't looking forward to the Thor training again anyway.

I kind of agree that Marvel is producing themselves into a hole with some of these movies. Guardians of the Galaxy? Wasn't the failure of Green Lantern enough of a warning about trying to mess around with that kind of Sci-Fi-oriented super hero flick?

I fully believe some of what is driving GotG is the idea that they can do what WB/DC couldn't. If it's successful it cements them ahead of WB once and for all and opens up a huge library of characters. They went for lesser starpower actors and even a less "leveled" director because there is so much risk but if it is a hit then they are in this Avengers mess again because they'll all want to get paid.

Disney is notoriously stingy with the $$$ and Feige's head is huge off of the Marvel Studios' successes which are all bad things for negotiation purposes.