Iron Man movie - thoughts? (WARNING, MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS)

Fysh

So I just got back from seeing the Iron Man movie tonight and figured it would be interesting to see what comic fans made of it, and whether you think it'll have an effect on the overall direction of Marvel movie adaptations.

Personally, I'm a bit disappointed. Robert Downey Jr was spot-on as Tony Stark, and was a great core to the film; Gwyneth Paltrow was mostly decent as Pepper Potts, and Jeff Bridges as Obadiah Stane was a decent villain. The guy playing Jim Rhodes could possibly make the role his own if he ever takes that stick from out of his ass, but didn't really sell me on it so far.

The action sequences were mostly very very good, the humour in the film was mostly very funny (aside from the god-awful "wink wink nudge nudge"-style joke about S.H.I.E.L.D.'s ignorance of the concept of acronyms) and, in fact, it all goes swimmingly until about 2/3rds of the way through, where apparently the original screenplay writer was fired and replaced with, I don't know, one of the guys behind the Scary Movie franchise, perhaps? Someone quite fond of Generic Blockbuster Tropes, at any rate.

So Stark spends all of 2 minutes flirting with Pepper Potts, who then suffers a terminal case of Bimbo-itis; the villains throughout most of the film (the terrorist types) are almost casually wiped away and no more is said about either them or the people they were terrorising whom Stark had started to be concerned about; Obadiah Stane magically has a bunch of engineers of far less intellectual mettle than Stark put together what amounts to a Hulked-up Iron Man suit; and the final fight sequence lacks the length, scale, and conclusion required to make it feel satisfying. (Oh, and playing Pepper Potts as a romantic interest as well as his PA was a bit rubbish; I'd have preferred a Mrs Arbogast type to be the head secretary and Pepper Potts as his PA, it would have made it less weird to watch her switch from flirting with him to mothering him so often...)

The good bits were great, but as it is I almost wished I'd stopped watching it after the conclusion of the sequence where Iron Man attacks the terrorists. It's a good film, certainly miles better than the likes of Punisher or Daredevil, but it's still not up to the standard of Batman Begins, for example.

Now that I've gotten the crankiness out of my system, what did you lot make of it? Most reviews seem to be pretty positive, which I'm curious about - am I just being fussy about the final 3rd of the movie? And did nobody else think James Rhodes' character was a bit crap?

Gambler

I loved it! Knew going into it that it was going to be more of a setup movie (like Spiderman, the first xmen etc.) so I was prepared for it to be quite slow overall.

Did you wait till the end of the credits? If not you have to go back and see it again! There is a clip at the end that totaly made the whole movie for me (and reinforces what a good idea it was for Marvel to setup their own studio!)

Samuel L Jackson appears in Starks house as Nick Fury. He wants to talk to him about the Avenger Initiative

bombidol

EVERYONE KNOWS ABOUT THE BIT AFTER THE CREDITS.


Sorry. Getting a pain in me hoop with people thinking its the biggest secret ever and only they know about it.

Gambler

Eh, no need to shout! To be fair I'm a big comic and movie but but I didn't know about it. I only stayed on in the hope that they would have something and on the basis that they may not have known I posted it here..

I also would assume most people know about it but I saw no comment about it in the first post (especially in the spoilers) so I commented about it in the interest in stimulating some discussion about what that means for future marvel movies

For example, will the same thing be expanded to the Thor movie when it makes it to the cinema and are they going to time the sequence of releases so that when they do release the avenger movie they can skip all the character setup and just get started with the action

You may be getting a pain in your hoop but there's no need to waste database space with a post like that!

subway

i didnt know about it and left before the credits had finished rolling

ahh, its on the youtube, interesting...

Doctor DooM

If they're clever, they'll use shield as a running thread through all the new films.

I actually thought it was very good, I did feel the last 3rd felt a bit tacked on but I can see why they did it- they needed to conclude "THE ORIGIN STORY."

BTW I read an interview saying the idea behind the iron monger being so large was not that it was hulked up, but that in order to produce something as powerful as the Iron Man without the genius of Stark, it needed to be that big.

Bear in mind Stark was purposefully weakened in that fight to make it more exciting. I felt it was clear he would probably have thrashed him otherwise.

I think the humour was excellent, the film was very comfortable with its comic origin, and unlike other "funny" comic book films it didn't resort to taking the piss out of its premise for humour.

Brimmy

You're the first person I've seen to actually view the film as bad. It was actually one of the best if not the best pure comic book film I've ever seen. It seemlessly blends the elements of fantastical and reality into one dynamic and fast moving plot narrative and ties up nicely leaving the posssibility for a few sequels (

and cross movie franchises open

)

Fysh wrote: »

Gwyneth Paltrow was mostly decent as Pepper Potts

Mostly decent? The character has little screen time and is nicely fleshed out in the scenes that she has, her role is as a secondary background character and a foil for Stark to act against which is performed perfectly. I'm not a big fan of Paltrow in general but she played the part perfectly and with no sense of naivity or idiocracy that someone like Holmes or Dunst did (whom I'm a huge fan of as well)

Fysh wrote:

The guy playing Jim Rhodes could possibly make the role his own if he ever takes that stick from out of his ass, but didn't really sell me on it so far.

Again I don't think we ever read the same comic because whenever I've read any depiction of Rhodes in the early days he always came across as a reserved by the books type which Stamp did a good job at conveying.

Fysh wrote: »

[The action sequences were mostly very very good, the humour in the film was mostly very funny (aside from the god-awful "wink wink nudge nudge"-style joke about S.H.I.E.L.D.'s ignorance of the concept of acronyms)QUOTE]
The action sequences where beautiful, the level to detail in the suit and physics of flight were a joy to watch and riveting. The constant switching between the 3rd person and fps of Stark added a whole new dynamic to the scenes as well that I thought did a good job at drawing in the audience and involving them in the heat of battle.

Strategic Homeland Intervention, Engagement and Logistics Division is a government agency and played to the stereotype that these agencies don't have a sense of humour, which although an old joke is still funny and was played for cheap laughs, which worked with the tone of the film as it was nestled in with amazing humour.

In relation to your spoilers:

She doesn't become bimbofied but rather they bring hte underyling sexual tension to ahead with the scene and she plays on that. It's clear from the opening scenes that while both care affectionately for eachother there are stronger feelings under there with both even admitting they're all the other has.

Re: the terrorists - Served their purpose as nameless villains to establish and propel the story to give Obadiah a means and motive that would resurface later in the story. It also allows for a convenient way of gaining the MKI as opposed to him just sending out men to find it and fleshed out his character more as a ruthless psychopath. And casually wiped away? What else did you expect, they were caught offguard by a stronger force and eleminated. It was a clear demonstration of power and ambition that allowed for the real enemy to surface.

The final fight I actually liked and I don't see your reasons not for. The length was sufficent when compared to other comic book movies although it's not going to have anything on (****HULK SPOILER****) 20/30 minute fight between Hulk/Abomination that Leterrier has promised (****END HULK SPOILER****) the scale of it was huge ranging from New York streets to the stars and crashing back down to Earth again with a huge exploison, pretty spectacular really.

Fysh wrote:

I think you're just being incredibly fussy with your opinion. I think you went in with high expectations of what to expect and should have known that you weren't going to get another Nolan/Batman from this but for what it is light, fast with and dynamic it has a depth of subsstance that allows the script to keep a sense of brevaity and humour something that Nolans dark and series Batman couldn't have.

Ps: Rhodey was awesome especially his line

when looking at the MkII, "Oh I'm gonna have to get me one of those soon!"

was awesome, and had me and my friend punching the air in joy! Can't wait for the sequel and the

hinted at Hulk/IronMan film

Fysh

Brimmy wrote: »

Mostly decent? The character has little screen time and is nicely fleshed out in the scenes that she has, her role is as a secondary background character and a foil for Stark to act against which is performed perfectly. I'm not a big fan of Paltrow in general but she played the part perfectly and with no sense of naivity or idiocracy that someone like Holmes or Dunst did (whom I'm a huge fan of as well)

Paltrow's performance wasn't the problem; I had more of an issue with the way that after about 2 minutes of Tony Stark flirting with her she seems to lose her smarts and become a lot more ditzy (eg

the joke with the SHIELD agent's explosive device to get into sector 16, which requires her to : a) not have any idea about how digital lockbreaking equipment might work despite working in probably the world's most advanced technology company and being the PA to its best engineer, and b) not have the foresight to get one of the maintenance and security teams to accompany them and open the doors

).

Brimmy wrote: »

Again I don't think we ever read the same comic because whenever I've read any depiction of Rhodes in the early days he always came across as a reserved by the books type which Stamp did a good job at conveying.

I'll be perfectly honest with you, I'm not so versed in Iron Man history as to have charted the progression of secondary characters or know which issues they first appeared in. The furthest back I've ever read would be a few issues from back in the red & silver armour days, where James Rhodes may have been a bit more reserved but appeared to have more to his personality than Generic By-The-Book Military Person. The military aspect of Rhodes is fine; I never really understood where their friendship would have started though, since we're shown one short sequence in which the two of them are after a few drinks and he has actually relaxed somewhat. Presumably this will be expounded on in future films, but I wanted to have some basic explanation of it in this film.

Brimmy wrote: »

The action sequences where beautiful, the level to detail in the suit and physics of flight were a joy to watch and riveting. The constant switching between the 3rd person and fps of Stark added a whole new dynamic to the scenes as well that I thought did a good job at drawing in the audience and involving them in the heat of battle.

I'm with you on this part, and I suspect that Adi Granov's involvement is in no small part responsible for this. (I was strongly reminded of Granov's work on the Extremis storyline during the action sequences, which is good as that was a great storyline with lush artwork).

Brimmy wrote: »

Strategic Homeland Intervention, Engagement and Logistics Division is a government agency and played to the stereotype that these agencies don't have a sense of humour, which although an old joke is still funny and was played for cheap laughs, which worked with the tone of the film as it was nestled in with amazing humour.

The "no sense of humour" thing I can buy, but every other similar agency has an acronym. Seriously, if your agency is being discussed in the same breath as the FBI, CIA, ATF, and then it turns out your name is long and unwieldy, using an acronym is really not that hard an idea to come up with; thus the joke just isn't very funny. I got the feeling watching it that it was one of those "placate the fanboy" jokes where it may as well have been delivered with a knowing wink. Considering how good the rest of the film's humour was, they could have just skipped the joke and

instead integrated the Sam Jackson "Come join the Avengers Initiative" scene into the main body of the film

.

Brimmy wrote: »

In relation to your spoilers:

She doesn't become bimbofied but rather they bring hte underyling sexual tension to ahead with the scene and she plays on that. It's clear from the opening scenes that while both care affectionately for eachother there are stronger feelings under there with both even admitting they're all the other has.

To me it read that the screenplay writer wanted her to switch arbitrarily between being Mrs Arbogast and being Generic Romantic Interest, and it didn't work very well at all.

Brimmy wrote: »

Re: the terrorists - Served their purpose as nameless villains to establish and propel the story to give Obadiah a means and motive that would resurface later in the story. It also allows for a convenient way of gaining the MKI as opposed to him just sending out men to find it and fleshed out his character more as a ruthless psychopath. And casually wiped away? What else did you expect, they were caught offguard by a stronger force and eleminated. It was a clear demonstration of power and ambition that allowed for the real enemy to surface.

I have to disagree.

Firstly, the level of international interest in the terrorists varied as often as the tide - one minute nobody can find them even though they've attacked members of the US Military and kidnapped the foremost american technologies, the next minute everyone's aware of the fracas involving Stark's escape using the Mk1; this attention continues with international news attention on their evil antics so that Stark can return using the Mk2 and kick some ass, but then magically disappears after Stane has retrieved the Mk1. We're expected to believe that there would just be no comment from the international press about how that awful awful gang who were so well equipped a few days ago have suddenly disappeared? No follow-up stories from the press other than the initial conference where Rhodes trots out the "training mission"? And as for the "casual wiping-away", maybe it would've been more believable without the massive bloody hints about how the leader of the gang is actually the Mandarin.

Brimmy wrote: »

The final fight I actually liked and I don't see your reasons not for. The length was sufficent when compared to other comic book movies although it's not going to have anything on (****HULK SPOILER****) 20/30 minute fight between Hulk/Abomination that Leterrier has promised (****END HULK SPOILER****) the scale of it was huge ranging from New York streets to the stars and crashing back down to Earth again with a huge exploison, pretty spectacular really.

My reasons for it? It didn't have internal consistency, it didn't establish the kind of scope that had previously been hinted at, and the way it finished was frankly rubbish.

Seriously, the suggestion was made that a dozen men wearing fully-functional Mk1 suits could take over most of Asia. And yet there's, what, some structural damage to the Stark building, a few wrecked cars, and some damage to a road. When the first car chase in the Blues Brothers movie seems to involve as much destruction as your final fight sequence in a superhero film, something's not right. Aside from which, the whole thing about taking out Stane's suit with the frosting-problem only for him to inexplicably survive the fall with no engine power to slow his descent? Crap. The stupid "Push the button" "OMG BUT YOU'LL DIE AND I WANTZ TO HAVE YOUR BABIEZ!" "ARGH BLOODY WOMEN PUSH THE DAMN BUTTON!" "I HAS PUSHED THE BUTTON KTHANXBAI" rubbish with Pepper, the way that the glass on top of the arc-reactor can hold up the weight of a suit that previously went straight through two floors worth of concrete back at Stark's house, the way that Tony didn't go into cardiac arrest when he appeared to have drained all the power from the arc-reactor in his chest...it all just smacked of a fight sequence written by someone who couldn't be arsed maintaining a sense of internal consistency.

Brimmy wrote: »

I think you're just being incredibly fussy with your opinion. I think you went in with high expectations of what to expect and should have known that you weren't going to get another Nolan/Batman from this but for what it is light, fast with and dynamic it has a depth of subsstance that allows the script to keep a sense of brevaity and humour something that Nolans dark and series Batman couldn't have.

Yeah, silly me to have thought that the first film made with Marvel in full control would try and take on board at least some of the elements that made Nolan's Batman Begins such a succesful film :rolleyes:

I went in hoping for a film that would have the same spirit as Warren Ellis's Extremis arc - actually having some intelligence in the film to allow the character's supposed genius to shine, as well as some humour and jaw-dropping action scenes. Instead I got something more akin to generic blockbuster fare, and having seen Batman Begins that's just not good enough. It's probably the best Marvel comics adaptation so far, but as someone not particularly vested in Marvel comics that doesn't really make me think any better of it.

Brimmy wrote: »

Ps: Rhodey was awesome especially his line when looking at the MkII, "Oh I'm gonna have to get me one of those soon!"was awesome, and had me and my friend punching the air in joy! Can't wait for the sequel and the

hinted at Hulk/IronMan film

I've seen that bit referred to as foreshadowing, but foreshadowing is subtle, whereas that bit was just another bit of fanservice. I wasn't keen on Rhodes' part as a whole but maybe he'll grow into his own over the trilogy.

I'm still disappointed, though. This film could have been so much better than it was, but it's just staple superhero comedy/action fare with no real depth to it. (And no, "I finally know what I have to do" doesn't count as depth...)

Jack B. Badd

I had pretty high expectations of this going in (given the hype created by Marvel, it'd be hard not to) and was disappointed with the film overall. The last third of it turns what could have been a really decent film into a "jam tomorrow" enterprise and the lack of a really kick ass final battle left me feeling cheated.
Ultimately, I think the film was weakened by pandering too much to the fanboy element; "OMG, they mentioned

S.H.I.E.L.D.

and alluded to

War Machine

! I know what those things are!! Both this movie and I are the bestest things evar!!!" :rolleyes:
On the plus side though, I thought RDJ was spot on as Stark, the Granov influenced suit style was perfect and the action sequences when Stark was testing the suit looked fantastic.
Unfortunately, the next instalment will probably be a DVD job for me

JangoFett

I really liked it

First time a marvel movie was in the contemporary world, Deals with terrorism in a real way, and how weapons dealers DO provide to both sides and Stark has to deal with that.

The SFX were top notch, very fluid and realistic. Paltrow was really good, great in fact, a very controlled performance, not over the top and not too under the radar, she plays the "unnoticable quiet secretary" to a T! Almost girl next door-esque!

I'm looking forward to Iron Man II in a big way, it'll be cool to see how they deal with a hero who openly admits his secret identity. First time thats on screen, very nice! And an Avengers movie, oh man, gets me hot just thinkin about it lol

I really think they did the best job they could have done and it paid of with an excellent movie!

AngryBadger

Loved it!
Loved it! Loved it! Loved it!

Finally, a superhero movie for grown-ups

constitutionus

i loved it too.

what got me was just how close it was to the original comic in terms of tone and attitude.

for instance starks NOT a bruiser. a poster was bemoaning how underwhelming the final battle was but thats EXACTLY how tony would take him out. with smarts , not weapons. war machine wouldve gone all guns blazing at the end but the way ironmongers taken out in this is tony's style all the way.

updating the origin to afghanistan works very well and even the missile he had to build was a credible weapon (i always thought being forced to build a missile in the original comic was a bit lame, i mean its just a missle) and its nice to see characters like tsun (spl) there as in the comic origin too. the idea of jarvis being tony's AI is inspired as it allows him to still fulfill the butler role with out the obvious comparisons to batman. in fact it could be a really interesing dynamic between tony and the suit. i really liked how tony seemed more attached to his machines than the people around him.

its probably the best origin film to date what with it taking him a fairly long time to get the suit done and theres a nice twist in how the suits powered. someone else mentioned that the ironmonger looks deliberatly hulked up but its just like that in the comics too . starks real genius is miniturisation, none of the others scientists could make it that small hence the bigger size. if he was functioning at full power it wouldnt have stood a chance.

the real treat in this film is the acting though. as mentioned the guy who plays rhodie is probably the weakest link but the rest are brilliant. bridges as stane was fantastic, really came off as a creep when he dropped the charade and theres a lovely scene where he appropriates a certain device from tony thats practically horrific. paltrow had some lovely lines (my fav being the line about "trash" ) and brought alot to pepper who to be honest was never really an incredibly deep character. she set up a nice dynamic with downey wherein you actually think they care for each other. funnily enough i think the " will they dont they" thing could work very well in future iron man films. mainly from how pots has seen how tony treats women, theres the guts of a "never to be romance" there i.e he's too fcuked up to commit and shes got too much respect for herself. but its downy jr that steals the show. his protrayal of stark as a loveable asshole is spot on and you actually do buy that this bloke never thought about how his weapons affect the world and is completly wrapped up in his own little hedonistic little playpen. good to see at the end

he goes public just like in the modern comics, hopefully that bodes well for a more political slant to the avengers film

i'll admit its not perfect, but its damn close. the action scense are amazing, i particularly liked all the stuff in afghanistan, and the witt and humour was sprinkled throughout with aplomb. in fact this is the first film this year that im going to go see again, i enjoyed it that much.

oh and to the thing at the end. i didnt know about that either and neither did the audience i was with that night as i was the last out. i like the little touches like that but i wish they'd do it like transformers and intersperce it during the credits instead of having to wait till the very end.

that said its a hell of a teaser

AngryBadger

constitutionus wrote: »

its probably the best origin film to date what with it taking him a fairly long time to get the suit done

YESSS!!! I loved that, I was actually talking to one fo the guys I went to see it with about how cool it was that Downey actually spends waaaayyyy more time out of the armour than in it> I appreciated that, it felt liek they put a lot of time and effort into actually making Stark a proper 3-dimensional character. i mean they could easily have had him in the suit within the first 20 minutes, and spent the rest of the film blowing **** up. But they didn't, which was pretty ballsy!

constitutionus wrote: »

as mentioned the guy who plays rhodie is probably the weakest link

I actually thought he was ok, a little more screen time would have been good, but he struck me as very similar to Rhodes in the comic, he's not exactly a big talker, and he's very much a military man.

constitutionus wrote: »

bridges as stane was fantastic, really came off as a creep when he dropped the charade and theres a lovely scene where he appropriates a certain device from tony thats practically horrific.

Bridges was awesome, I'd NEVER have envisioned him playing that kind of characters. He pulled it off beautifully!

JangoFett

I though Rhodes was brillaint, Military man but Stark's buddy first, the scene in the plane for example, that was hilarious!! Shows that they're just a pair of dudes like, I really liked it. Their dynamic worked so well that I can't wait to see Rhodie in the War Machine armour

ztoical

finally got round to seeing iron man last night and for the most part I was entertained. Went with a bunch of people ranging from comic fans to no interests in comics whats so ever [and who weren't happy I made them stay till the end of the credits for the uber fanboy teaser] Everyone [6 of us that is felt the first 2/3 were great - good action, good effects, nicely paced, some great one liners blah blah enough for the comic nerds and then casual cinema goer but everyone also thought the last 1/3 felt really rushed. Its a shame as they did well to hold themselves back at the start and pace the film well and then it just felt like they went "O **** we've run out of time and we need to end the film" the opening section could have been edited tighter and cleaner and 10 mins added in just before the big final battle to balance out the film.

RDJ was fab and I've never been a huge fan of his. Gwyneth Paltrow had a great first scene and then just turned into such a bimbo dear god

that bit with the door "O what is that? is that something to unlock the door" in annoying high pitch voice and then the shoes - yes I know its a film and blah etc but shes wearing stupidly high stilettos and then runs full force arcoss a grated walkway without one stumble - I'll buy most things from superhero movies - that a guy will build a big metal suit to go flying around the sky in but the women libber in me will not take [a] the wearing of those shoes and the running over a grate in them

Rhodes is pretty blah - doesn't add anything but doesn't take anything away either. Jeff Bridges was a surprise - I really didn't think I'd like him in the film at all but he was quite good. Little annoyed towards the end were

he just gets in the suit and uses it with little issue but most people in the cinema seemed annoyed at that and its more down to bad editing then bad acting

Overall I thought it was a good adaption - would I rank it as one of the best comic adaptions? honestly no, firstly cus I think a film has to be out longer then a week, repeated viewing is a must for something to make a best list and mainly cus while the film is solid, the acting for the most part good, the effects shinny and flashy I came out thinking "yeah that was two hours well spent, enjoyed that" and not "Must watch again now!"

*do we really need to keep using spoilers? Can we not alter the thread title to say contains spoilers? surely anyone reading this has seen the movie or isn't pushed about reading spoilers.

Fysh

Re: spoilers - thread title amended, anyone posting feel free to have spoilers out in the open

Re: Pepper's high heels - funny you should mention that, Paltrow apparently knackered her knee during filming and was told by her doctors that she should avoid that kind of footwear because it would cause further damage. I guess it was important to the story though :rolleyes: (Although at least they didn't go for the Hollywood favourite idea of having her take off her glasses and then have Tony suddenly realise he'd rather like to ride her...)

Regarding the last third - Mark Millar has claimed that it was his doing to have the scriptwriters move away from using the Mandarin as a villain. Now, while this may be his usual "YES EVERYTHING GOOD WAS BECAUSE OF ME, MY GOD I'M SO AMAZING SOMETIMES I WISH I COULD JUST SUCK MY OWN COCK" style of self-promotion, I think there was obviously a certain amount of intent to have a Mandarin-type villain - from the name of the terrorist group that kidnaps Stark and the massive rings on the hand of the terrorist leader, at least - but maybe they're just leaving that for the sequels...if it is a case of Favreau and the screenplay writers being talked out of it, how come most of the scenes with the terrorists seem to build them up as being a formidable opponent? (I mean, really the only scene that suggests they're out of play is when Stane turns up to claim the Ironmonger suit, and even there the leader's death is off-screen....)

AngryBadger

Fysh wrote: »

Regarding the last third - Mark Millar has claimed that it was his doing to have the scriptwriters move away from using the Mandarin as a villain. Now, while this may be his usual "YES EVERYTHING GOOD WAS BECAUSE OF ME, MY GOD I'M SO AMAZING SOMETIMES I WISH I COULD JUST SUCK MY OWN COCK" style of self-promotion, I think there was obviously a certain amount of intent to have a Mandarin-type villain - from the name of the terrorist group that kidnaps Stark and the massive rings on the hand of the terrorist leader, at least - but maybe they're just leaving that for the sequels...if it is a case of Favreau and the screenplay writers being talked out of it, how come most of the scenes with the terrorists seem to build them up as being a formidable opponent? (I mean, really the only scene that suggests they're out of play is when Stane turns up to claim the Ironmonger suit, and even there the leader's death is off-screen....)

We don't actually see the terrorist leader being killed, just putting that out there.....

ztoical

AngryBadger wrote: »

We don't actually see the terrorist leader being killed, just putting that out there.....

true


did anyone else think the Stan Lee cameo was just cringe?

Fysh

Yeah, it's getting really sad now. It was cute at first, now it's just flogging a dead horse. It's not like Stan's had any work worth a damn out in the last decade or two anyway....

AngryBadger

ztoical wrote: »

did anyone else think the Stan Lee cameo was just cringe?

Fysh wrote:

Yeah, it's getting really sad now. It was cute at first, now it's just flogging a dead horse. It's not like Stan's had any work worth a damn out in the last decade or two anyway....

Ah come on, the guy basically created Marvel, I think it's brilliant that he keeps popping up in little cameos!

If they were in some way detracting form the films I'd say "well now...", but I hoenstly don't think they do.

Keep 'em comin'!

Fysh

The thing is though, I don't care. I know he created most of the Marvel stable from the 60s. I know he did work that helped push comics forward. And I have a certain amount of respect for him.

None of that means I want to see his inanely-grinning mug stare at me from every film related to Marvel. It's getting worse, he was in Heroes with a cameo as well.

Part of the annoying thing about the excessive reverence for Stan Lee is that it contributes to this idea that he created the superhero, but he didn't do it alone and there have been several legal battles to do with other people who worked with him getting recognition for the work they did (chiefly Jack Kirby & Steve Ditko).

AngryBadger

Fysh wrote: »

Part of the annoying thing about the excessive reverence for Stan Lee is that it contributes to this idea that he created the superhero, but he didn't do it alone and there have been several legal battles to do with other people who worked with him getting recognition for the work they did (chiefly Jack Kirby & Steve Ditko).

Fair enough, i can see why that's be infuriating, and I'm familiar with what you're talking about. Still though, I'm inclined to agree with his assertion that without the character behing the image there's nothing. But I think that's a discussion for another thread.

Still, as regards him being the "creator" of the superhero, well to some extent there's no smoke without fire. And if he didn't come up with the concept for the very first time, he did create/co-create several of the characters that brought the superhero concept into homes across the world.

I'll happily let the man cameo in every movie for the next 100 years for that. And like I said, I don't see it detracting from the movie, so I don't really see a need to get annoyed about it.

ztoical

Slightly off topic but still Iron Man related check out some of the cool Iron man art over on the Tony Stark: Your go to guy blog

Earthhorse

Went to see this last night. Thought it was great. Properly paced, with a very nice script which was elevated by the excellent performances.

Ironic to praise Batman Begins over it, then accuse it of being a generic action flic in the final third when that is exactly what happens in Batman Begins.

Fysh

Earthhorse wrote: »

Ironic to praise Batman Begins over it, then accuse it of being a generic action flic in the final third when that is exactly what happens in Batman Begins.

The difference being that in Batman Begins the final confrontation is basically two guys punching each other on a train, but the scene has been set such that the scope of the fight and the importance of the outcome is much bigger. Ra'as wants to destroy all of Gotham, Batman wants to stop him.

Whereas in Iron Man we have Stane wanting to...what, exactly? We don't know. He's just evil. Evil in a brilliantly fun way, but with no bigger plan or reasoning other than to kill Tony because "we're ironmongers!" or something. What was he going to do that was so dastardly and terrible? I honestly have no idea. I know he's evil and stuff, and were he to have a moustache instead of a beard he'd no doubt be twirling it while trying to pound Tony into the dirt, but outside of his grudge against Tony he just didn't seem to be a threat.

(I thought I'd posted my comparison before, but that turned out to be in this post in the Film board thread)

Earthhorse

Well, no, that's not the way I see it. There's a whole lead up to that fight, the background of which is that Stane is a megalomaniac. He wants to steal Stark's technology from under his nose when Tony stops playing nice. Stark is smart enough to know something is up which is why he sends Potts behind enemy lines. When her ruse is rumbled Stane has to abort to plan B which is basically to steal Tony's heart (oh my!).

He returns to the lab to see if this thing will work but is interrupted by Potts and SHIELD. He already knows he has to eliminate Potts and this just presses his hand. The agents and Potts hold him at bay long enough for Iron Man to arrive. Cue kick ass fight.

I'm not saying there aren't some flaws in this. As ztoical pointed out, how come Stane has total control over his machine when it took Stark weeks, maybe months, to master his? This really stuck out to me given how much of a focus there had been on this in the film. But overall I think it fit quite well (though, yeah, it was the weakest part of the film).

brianthebard

My thoughts;

(and no spoiler covers cause we're on page two of a thread with a spoilers warning in the title)

I thought Stark was well delivered and well written, obviously Downey Jr has some experience of being a spoilt rich kid. The two other main characters were pretty 2d. a lot of time was spent on the building of the suit, obviously this is an important part of the origin story but it was a bit laboured. Also agree with the posters who said he seemed to abandon his humanitarian mission in favour of being the cool dude again.

Fysh

I'm not saying there's no build-up to the fight; I'm saying the fight itself lacked any real importance. There was no greater scope to the conflict, other than Stane wanting to carry on making weapons and Stark wanting to stop. Sure, it's established that Stane wants power (same as it's established that the 10 Rings organisation seems to want power, before they're written out of the equation), but we never really know exactly what he wants to do with that power that's so evil. (Well, beyond continuing to manufacture weapons - and I'm not saying this is a nice activity, but at the same time it's presented as something that the world has happily survived him doing for years beforehand so it not exactly mind-bogglingly evil; it's certainly not in the same league as wanting to vaporize an entire city as a way of triggering the economic collapse of a huge chunk of the civilised world).

It wasn't visceral and exciting to me, because it was basically two guys having a squabble while wearing exoskeletons, rather than two guys having a squabble in the middle of a fiendish plan that could bring about the destruction of a major city a la Batman Begins.

sydthebeat

to me the main plus this movie has over some of the other movies in the genre, is that its a lot more character based than others....

Tony Stark doesnt put on the suit and become Iron Man, he simply becomes Tony stark in kick ass technology... the plot is a lot more character based, well TS in the main anyway, whereas in other movies/stories the 'human' face of the character is the lesser, the weaker... eg hulk, spiderman etc....not so in this case.

I agree that the 'baddie' lacks substance..... i dont think Jeoff bridges was best cast in this role... i dont think anyone could have done a good job with such little character background....

Its a good movie, but perhaps it should be considered as a good prelude to an Iron man 2??

JangoFett

First of all, I love Stan Lee's cameos, they're always funny!! And the man IS a legend!!

Iron Man is an excelelnt movie, and someone made a brilliant point that yes, it is Tony Stark in the suit, he doesn't "become" Iron Man". He does however realise he has to change his ways, becoming a better more conscious person

AngryBadger

I think bridges character might have benefitted from some more development, but then again i think his development was solid, and he served his purpose.

The movie was about Tony Stark, not Obidiah Stone. Stone was established early on in the film, personally Ithought it was obvious ewas just milkingTonys genius he was reveaed as the sourceof all the Stark weaponry being sold under the table, and he was tryingto oust Tony from the company.

The only thing I'll conced is that maybe the final showdown could have used more justification. But then again as was poiinted out by Earthorse, Stone is backed into a corner once he is discovered by Potts, but he possesses a weapon which is a more powerful version of the suit Tony used to take out a US fighter plane, and to rumble several heavily armed terrorists. Stane had the upper hand in his view, and he could have spun the attack afterward if he'd won.

Regarding his ability to just pilot the suit immediately. Tony took longer to get that comfortable because he had to figure everything out, Stone's team had the original suit to work with, so half the work was already done fro them. Seems reasonable to me that they would eventually just be handing Stone a complete suit, with an instruction manual, so no need for him to spend the same amount of time aclimatisng to the suit.