Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Well, yesterday I saw the movie in question.  Wasn't awful.  Wasn't particularly memorable either.

What I remember 24 hours later:  the skydiving scene was nicely done (and I was happy to find out via the credits that at least part of it was done practically).    Ben Kingsley was fun to watch, and  I liked SuperPepper even though that was telegraphed so hard I got a little impatient waiting for the payoff.   And at least the climax didn't involve the destruction of another major city.

Other than that, all the going-through-the-motions of telling a story were completely wasted - it might have worked if they were actually going to commit to this idea that Tony will never put on the suit again.  But everyone over the age of six knows he's going to put the suit on again until Marvel movies stop turning a profit.

Bottom line, Shane Black now joins Joss Whedon in the category of filmmakers who could make really interesting stuff, but are making these soulless McSpectacles instead.   But maybe one or both of them will use the Soderbergh playbook and use their new clout to make a few challenging projects in between tentpoles.  We'll see.

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

As of an hour ago Shane Black is directing Doc Savage, another comic book movie, so ya....
Though I guess at least it isn't a sequel to anything.
Really wish he'd make another R-rated action movie though.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Trey wrote:

Bottom line, Shane Black now joins Joss Whedon in the category of filmmakers who could make really interesting stuff, but are making these soulless McSpectacles instead.   But maybe one or both of them will use the Soderbergh playbook and use their new clout to make a few challenging projects in between tentpoles.  We'll see.

Joss Whedon is about to release a black-and-white Shakespeare adaptation, so I think we can take his name off that list.

"The Doctor is Submarining through our brains." --Teague

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Better than nothing, yes, but he shot that at his house with some friends. 

True, his clout helped it get limited distribution - but what I'm talking about is arm-twisting the studios to put some decent (not exorbitant) money into smaller, more personal projects in between the tentpoles, the way Soderbergh did.  Or the way Nolan alternated Batman flicks with harder-to-sell-but-much-more-interesting projects like Prestige and Inception.

I'm happy to accept more Avengers movies if it means we can also look forward to more interesting, offbeat releases a la Serenity or Cabin in the Woods.

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Trey wrote:

soulless McSpectacles

Nicely phrased. Totally unmemorable. Like Technoir said earlier, I can see no reason to revisit this - there were no must-see scenes due to VFX, cinematography, direction, story, production design, or any other reason.

And it seemed like Black realised that with the suit on, Iron Man is too invulnerable, so every BS reason was concocted to keep him from using the full suit. They've got a Catch 22 situation for future instalments. Use the suit, and suck all the tension out, don't use the suit, and it's not Iron Man.

not long to go now...

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

avatar wrote:

And it seemed like Black realised that with the suit on, Iron Man is too invulnerable, so every BS reason was concocted to keep him from using the full suit. They've got a Catch 22 situation for future instalments. Use the suit, and suck all the tension out, don't use the suit, and it's not Iron Man.

But the whole point of the movie is that he's Iron Man whether or not he wears the suit! The movie was constructed to keep him out of the suit for as much time as possible, so that we understand what makes Tony Stark so special in the first place. He doesn't need the suit. The suit needs him.

"The Doctor is Submarining through our brains." --Teague

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

And in fact any time he's not in the suit is the best part of the movie

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Doctor Submarine wrote:

But the whole point of the movie is that he's Iron Man whether or not he wears the suit! The movie was constructed to keep him out of the suit for as much time as possible, so that we understand what makes Tony Stark so special in the first place. He doesn't need the suit. The suit needs him.

Well I look forward to Iron Man 4: Noth'n but Tony Snark. That'll take the franchise in a new ballsy direction.

Last edited by avatar (2013-05-08 01:16:26)

not long to go now...

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Doctor Submarine wrote:

He doesn't need the suit. The suit needs him.

I promised myself I'd be nice.

The end sequence of the film suggests this isn't the case. Without the suit, piloted by him or not, Tony is of no use in a stand-up fight. His girlfriend had to save his life. War machine had to save the president. Without the suit, Tony is just Q.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

I wonder if all this Iron Man 3 discussion will prompt a commentary for a film with Shane Black. Here's my recommendation:

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7pgro9w071qfr6udo2_400.gif

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Dave wrote:
Doctor Submarine wrote:

He doesn't need the suit. The suit needs him.

I promised myself I'd be nice.

The end sequence of the film suggests this isn't the case. Without the suit, piloted by him or not, Tony is of no use in a stand-up fight. His girlfriend had to save his life. War machine had to save the president. Without the suit, Tony is just Q.

He can trying saving the world with nothing but wise-crack'n sass.

not long to go now...

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Dave wrote:
Doctor Submarine wrote:

He doesn't need the suit. The suit needs him.

I promised myself I'd be nice.

The end sequence of the film suggests this isn't the case. Without the suit, piloted by him or not, Tony is of no use in a stand-up fight. His girlfriend had to save his life. War machine had to save the president. Without the suit, Tony is just Q.

But the very end of the film suggests that this is exactly the case. That's the symbolism of him getting the arc reactor removed from his chest while saying "I am Iron Man." That's why he was jumping in and out of suits during the finale. The suits aren't the superheroes, they're just tools that Tony Stark, the real superhero, uses to fight the bad guys.

Now, nothing you've just said is wrong, per se. But ultimately it's Tony's resourcefulness that allows him to get to the bad guy, beat him, and save the day.

"The Doctor is Submarining through our brains." --Teague

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

It was his resourcefulness that allowed him to *create* iron man. The suit, not the pilot, is the hero. Pepper in a suit? She becomes iron man and saves Tonys life when the building collapses. Military guy in a suit? He becomes the super hero War Machine, and saves the president.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Blakes 7 had a similar problem (old British 1970s SF). The Liberator ship they had was too powerful. It could outrun, outgun any Federation ship, so the writers had to concoct situations to make them vulnerable.

not long to go now...

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Dave wrote:

It was his resourcefulness that allowed him to *create* iron man. The suit, not the pilot, is the hero. Pepper in a suit? She becomes iron man and saves Tonys life when the building collapses. Military guy in a suit? He becomes the super hero War Machine, and saves the president.

True, and I guess Tony does spend the whole movie trying to repair his suit. But thematically, the movie is about Tony growing beyond the need for a suit, dramatized in his panic attacks and his obsession with both building suits and using them to keep others at arm's length.

"The Doctor is Submarining through our brains." --Teague

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

But that's a false resolution. We know that the suit is what's important, it's shown time and time again. Without a suit, there is *no iron man*, Tony turning up in a sports car to fight aliens achieves nothing.

The movie doesn't understand what the core of the character is about. This is a big part of my frustration.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Dave wrote:

The movie doesn't understand what the core of the character is about. This is a big part of my frustration.

Of course it does! The core of the character is Tony Stark's intellect and resourcefulness. Without those, he never would have built the Mark I in an Afghan cave, and Iron Man wouldn't even exist. Iron Man 3 puts the focus back on those aspects of his character, which was sorely lacking in Iron Man 2. It's spelled out explicitly in The Avengers!

Steve: "Big man in a suit of armor. Take that away, what are you?"

Tony: "Genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist."

"The Doctor is Submarining through our brains." --Teague

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Dave wrote:

But that's a false resolution. We know that the suit is what's important, it's shown time and time again. Without a suit, there is *no iron man*, Tony turning up in a sports car to fight aliens achieves nothing.

The movie doesn't understand what the core of the character is about. This is a big part of my frustration.

His resourcefulness couldn't even help him escape from some cable ties. The suit literally flies in to the rescue like a D.E.M. not once but several times. But the movie is half-hearted here - most of the time it's a partially functioning suit, a prototype, a glove only, not fully charged, the flight power not working (like the Millennium Falcon's hyperdrive malfunctioning).

not long to go now...

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Ewing wrote:

I wonder if all this Iron Man 3 discussion will prompt a commentary for a film with Shane Black. Here's my recommendation:

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7pgro9w071qfr6udo2_400.gif

If this doesn't get Teague to finally watch Predator I don't know what will

edit: I love that he's reading a Sgt.Rock comicbook

Last edited by bullet3 (2013-05-08 01:57:33)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

I've been trying to get this crowd to do Predator and/or Lethal Weapon since the day we started this monkeyfarm.

Along with Die Hard, that's the damn Holy Trinity of '80's action and still - no luck.  Kids today.  Meh.

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

avatar wrote:

Blakes 7 had a similar problem (old British 1970s SF). The Liberator ship they had was too powerful. It could outrun, outgun any Federation ship, so the writers had to concoct situations to make them vulnerable.

They were always fine if they just stayed out of the way. It was Blake's idea of attacking the Federation that got them into trouble. A ship is only as powerful as the person giving the orders smile

I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

bullet3 wrote:

As of an hour ago Shane Black is directing Doc Savage, another comic book movie, so ya....
Though I guess at least it isn't a sequel to anything.
Really wish he'd make another R-rated action movie though.

Doc Savage is pulp, not comic book, although there have been some comics based on the character. We've yet to get Savage in a good movie, but I don't know if that's possible anymore. Those old characters often don't update well, or seem palatable to modern viewers if you leave them as period pieces. You're almost going to run into the same problem they had with John Carter, as nobody knows the stories anymore...

I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

avatar wrote:

His resourcefulness couldn't even help him escape from some cable ties. The suit literally flies in to the rescue like a D.E.M. not once but several times.

One could almost say he was very resourceful in summoning the suit. One could also say that he was resourceful in advance to have built such a suit, in case he were ever to find himself in such a predicament.

The way I see it, if the suit is the hero then Stark is also the indirect hero. He built it. He used his resources and his super-dee-duper brain power. He fashioned himself an amazing tool, and only he could have used it in such a way that would help him save the day and his own life on all those ridiculous occasions.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Sam F wrote:
avatar wrote:

His resourcefulness couldn't even help him escape from some cable ties. The suit literally flies in to the rescue like a D.E.M. not once but several times.

One could almost say he was very resourceful in summoning the suit. One could also say that he was resourceful in advance to have built such a suit, in case he were ever to find himself in such a predicament.

The way I see it, if the suit is the hero then Stark is also the indirect hero. He built it. He used his resources and his super-dee-duper brain power. He fashioned himself an amazing tool, and only he could have used it in such a way that would help him save the day and his own life on all those ridiculous occasions.



Put it like this. What would an Iron Man movie without any suits be? What would Tony do? How would he earn the title of hero?

As far as I can see, he'd either build other weapons instead of suits, or help with intelligence in a sort of "central command" role. I don't think anyone would come out of a movie like that and say "that was an Iron Man movie". It was a movie about a guy who knows technology. Tony would be a slightly more hands-on, verbose and articulate version of Bruce Wayne. Not saying it would be bad, but it would not be Iron Man.

Last edited by TechNoir (2013-05-08 08:38:07)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: Let's discuss Iron Man 3. [SPOILERS]

Sure, but I never really cared about Iron Man to begin with, and Tony Stark without the suit is way more compelling. In an ideal world, we'd get an action movie with Downey where he was just a guy, you know, the way action movies used to be. Any time Downey is just running around with a gun in this movie is my favorite.

Thumbs up Thumbs down