Iron Man 3: 5.2.13

[quote name='whoknows']I don't know who would give you flak for that. You can't really compare the villains from the two movie trilogies since one is far superior than the other.[/QUOTE]

You don't have to be so hard on the Dark Knight Saga.

Note: While I liked Rises more than IM3, overall I like the IM trilogy more.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']
Killian's plan was to own both sides of the war on terror. He had the Mandarin to create a war wherever he wished and the President in his back pocket to pay him to fight that "war". He tells Tony this after capturing him. He needs the money to continue the Extremis program.
[/QUOTE]
But I meant his end goal. Just to make a shitload of money and live like a rock star? Could do that without all the evil shit.

edit- Btw, did anyone else notice at the very beginning that little nod to the first film?
The doctor that saved Tony's life in the cave, he met him at that party.
 
"How Captain America in AVENGERS gave the true meaning behind everything IRON MAN 3"

*Credit to Kobester*

Kind of spoilerish, but if you've seen the movie, read on!

Iron Man 3 is Tony Stark's search for the answer to Captain America's question back in The Avengers: "Big man in a suit of armor. Take that away -- what are you?"

Tony had been holding onto his arc reactor chest piece because he thought it defined who he was.

In the end of IM3, with the help of the Extremis formula on Pepper, Tony could use it and also finally let his arc reactor go because he finally understood that Iron Man is the man who "built" the armor (The Mechanic) and not the armor that wears the man.

That similar meaning is also conveyed between Aldrich Killian and the real meaning behind The Mandarin. Killian was Tony, while The Mandarin was just his suit of armor.

"I am the Mandarin" was what Killian said to Tony during their final battle, which reverberated the last thing Tony said before the end. Because despite that Tony no longer has any Iron Man suits to wear, it didn't matter anymore because like Tony said in the end of the film even without the armor, "I... AM Iron Man".

P.S. On a different sidenote, Killian was the human version of The Mandarin's Fing Fang Foom complete with fire breath - how the roles have changed.



 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Clak']I would. Marvel has done plenty of dark stories in comics, and Warner Bros allowed the recent Batman films to be quite dark. This is a big budget Disney film in essence and they gotta keep it kid friendly. Which explains why a certain character is in the movie as well.;)[/QUOTE]
I agree completely, but if I recall correctly, Pirates of the Caribbean wasn't exactly kid-friendly and lots of people died...especially for a Disney movie.
 
[quote name='dohdough']I agree completely, but if I recall correctly, Pirates of the Caribbean wasn't exactly kid-friendly and lots of people died...especially for a Disney movie.[/QUOTE]

Oh... I thought it wasnt kid friendly because Keira Knightley made it hard for guys to sit straight in the theater.....
 
[quote name='Jcaugustine']"How Captain America in AVENGERS gave the true meaning behind everything IRON MAN 3"

*Credit to Kobester*

Kind of spoilerish, but if you've seen the movie, read on!

Iron Man 3 is Tony Stark's search for the answer to Captain America's question back in The Avengers: "Big man in a suit of armor. Take that away -- what are you?"

Tony had been holding onto his arc reactor chest piece because he thought it defined who he was.

In the end of IM3, with the help of the Extremis formula on Pepper, Tony could use it and also finally let his arc reactor go because he finally understood that Iron Man is the man who "built" the armor (The Mechanic) and not the armor that wears the man.

That similar meaning is also conveyed between Aldrich Killian and the real meaning behind The Mandarin. Killian was Tony, while The Mandarin was just the armor.

And despite that Tony no longer has any Iron Man armors to wear, like Tony said in the end of the film, "I AM the Iron Man


[/QUOTE]

Wow thats a really great connection with the film!

Totally agree.

Makes so much sense. Throughout the movie Tony was trying to prove that he could do things without the armor which is why he went all Jason Bourne.
 
[quote name='Clak']edit- Btw, did anyone else notice at the very beginning that little nod to the first film?
The doctor that saved Tony's life in the cave, he met him at that party.
[/QUOTE]

They also focused on the China-exclusive Dr. Whu
 
[quote name='Jcaugustine']"How Captain America in AVENGERS gave the true meaning behind everything IRON MAN 3"

*Credit to Kobester*

Kind of spoilerish, but if you've seen the movie, read on!

Iron Man 3 is Tony Stark's search for the answer to Captain America's question back in The Avengers: "Big man in a suit of armor. Take that away -- what are you?"

Tony had been holding onto his arc reactor chest piece because he thought it defined who he was.

In the end of IM3, with the help of the Extremis formula on Pepper, Tony could use it and also finally let his arc reactor go because he finally understood that Iron Man is the man who "built" the armor (The Mechanic) and not the armor that wears the man.

That similar meaning is also conveyed between Aldrich Killian and the real meaning behind The Mandarin. Killian was Tony, while The Mandarin was just the armor.

And despite that Tony no longer has any Iron Man armors to wear, like Tony said in the end of the film, "I AM the Iron Man


[/QUOTE]
Nice ideas, but I think you're putting meaning where there isn't any.
 
[quote name='whoknows']Nice ideas, but I think you're putting meaning where there isn't any.[/QUOTE]
Not exactly. That specific connection to Avengers is more coincidental, but that theme is the one that the movie was marketed as having since the beginning.
 
[quote name='giantqtipz']I think its better to expect wolverine to be an entertaining movie, rather than an epic one. Otherwise, youd feel disapppointed.

I expected iron man 3 to be epic. Bad mistake.

I expected Dredd to be entertaining, and the movie turned out pretty darn deep. Its a really good movie[/QUOTE]

Well the trailers made it look epic/dark and it made you think that the Manderian was going to be a real threat to Stark...
 
[quote name='dohdough']Not exactly. That specific connection to Avengers is more coincidental, but that theme is the one that the movie was marketed as having since the beginning.[/QUOTE]

I must have missed that since that's not at all what the trailers lead me to expect. In fact, the trailers aren't at all what the movie is like.

[quote name='giantqtipz']I think its better to expect wolverine to be an entertaining movie, rather than an epic one. Otherwise, youd feel disapppointed.

I expected iron man 3 to be epic. Bad mistake.

I expected Dredd to be entertaining, and the movie turned out pretty darn deep. Its a really good movie[/QUOTE]

Dredd doesn't get enough praise. It's one of the best comic movies ever easily. Was better than both of other two huge comic movies of last year IMO and I wasn't expecting that at all. It's what a comic movie should be.
 
[quote name='dohdough']I agree completely, but if I recall correctly, Pirates of the Caribbean wasn't exactly kid-friendly and lots of people died...especially for a Disney movie.[/QUOTE]
I guess it's different when it's wet in the past for some reason. Getting killed by a sword or musket must be different to them somehow. Less realistic maybe?
 
[quote name='giantqtipz']Im really curious though,
What will tony wear in Avengers 2 if all of his suits were destroyed in the clean slate??
[/QUOTE]

The Bleeding Edge armor. It comes from Nanites within Tony's bloodstream. It's the armor he currently uses in most of the books, except the space suit he uses in GotG.

Plus, he can just build more suits. He still has the sensors that can summon the suits to him.
 
[quote name='Clak']I would. Marvel has done plenty of dark stories in comics, and Warner Bros allowed the recent Batman films to be quite dark. This is a big budget Disney film in essence and they gotta keep it kid friendly. Which explains why a certain character is in the movie as well.;)[/QUOTE]
After how big of a flop Batman and Robin was, DC/Warner Bros had to separate itself from that film as far as possible. I Think Shane Black himself said it was better to explore the Demon in a Bottle storyline in Iron Man once the franchise is on it's last knees. Otherwise there's no reason to change the formula now when it's making all this money.
 
Going back, anyone else notice that Killian was the human version of The Mandarin's Fing Fang Foom complete with dragon tattoos and fire breath.
 
As soon as he went Breathe of Fire I kinda zoned out. That was one of the more ridiculous scenes.
 
[quote name='Clak']As soon as he went Breathe of Fire I kinda zoned out. That was one of the more ridiculous scenes.[/QUOTE]

I really liked the movie, that was one scene I wish had been left out. It was a completely throwaway moment that added nothing to the larger story and only took away from the movie.
 
I honestly wish they'd left the whole Mandarin concept out, changed Killian's name, and basically made him MODOK. Not the fat head dude in a hoverchair, but just an awesomely brilliant mind who could go toe toe with Tony. It would have made more sense since they used A.I.M as well. Because honestly they turned Mandarin into a joke, a "twist" that wasn't really needed.
 
Well I am sure Marvel is not too worried about upsetting the comic fans after seeing IM3 already at $50 million more than IM2 made worldwide. $500 million overseas already. Comic fans will just need to accept the Marvel Cinematic Universe is going to cater to the largest group of movie goers and that not the die hards.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']Well I am sure Marvel is not too worried about upsetting the comic fans after seeing IM3 already at $50 million more than IM2 made worldwide. $500 million overseas already. Comic fans will just need to accept the Marvel Cinematic Universe is going to cater to the largest group of movie goers and that not the die hards.[/QUOTE]

Let's be clear, there ain't as many diehards as the internet would have you believe. If all these people were actually reading comics on a regular basis Marvel would have been the one buying Disney.

I'm completely fine with things being different, even wildly different for the simple fact that: A) the look and plots of comics are often too fantastical for movies and B) I want some variety in my stories otherwise I'll never be surprised.
 
So what did everyone think of the Special Effects? I think the trailers ruined all the good fx shots...for example Stark's house getting blown up and falling into the sea. There wasn't anything in my mind that stood out as "WOW" as much as the first one.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']Let's be clear, there ain't as many diehards as the internet would have you believe. If all these people were actually reading comics on a regular basis Marvel would have been the one buying Disney.

I'm completely fine with things being different, even wildly different for the simple fact that: A) the look and plots of comics are often too fantastical for movies and B) I want some variety in my stories otherwise I'll never be surprised.[/QUOTE]

Oh I agree. I was perfectly fine with how the set up the story. I saw it twice this weekend and liked it even more the second time. Some people complained it was too much Stark and not enough suit but I actually loved the stuff with Tony out of the suit. It fit the theme of the third film perfectly.

I agree though. The diehards are not in the numbers their voices on the internet portray.
 
[quote name='ITDEFX']So what did everyone think of the Special Effects? I think the trailers ruined all the good fx shots...for example Stark's house getting blown up and falling into the sea. There wasn't anything in my mind that stood out as "WOW" as much as the first one.[/QUOTE]

The Extremis effects were pretty cool (not mind blowing) and since I do not remember any of that showing up in a trailer it was nice surprise. The plane rescue scene was pretty well done also.
 
The plane rescue scene actually very little special effects outside of Iron Man's suit. That was done with trained skydivers.
 
[quote name='batman1939']One thing I saw was (not a plot thing but will spoiler anyways)
when last fight is going to start Tony is wearing an AIM shirt. Did he find it on the boat and just wanted a new shirt or what? Thinking about it now I wear promo shirts as under shirts sometimes, maybe just over thinking it.
[/QUOTE]

He got it from the guard guy he knocked out to steal the uniform from.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']The plane rescue scene was pretty well done also.[/QUOTE]
Thank you sooooooooooo much for reminding me of that stupid sequence. I had repressed it until now lol. Of all the things I never thought I'd see in an Iron Man movie, that one was probably at the top. That kind of corny shit belongs in bad movies, like Green Lantern.
 
[quote name='Jodou']Thank you sooooooooooo much for reminding me of that stupid sequence. I had repressed it until now lol. Of all the things I never thought I'd see in an Iron Man movie, that one was probably at the top. That kind of corny shit belongs in bad movies, like Green Lantern.[/QUOTE]

I actually compared those two movies as well oddly enough, but in a different way.

Both movies had amazing trailers that hyped me up, but the actual movies ended up being disappointing and nothing like the trailers.
 
I'm spoilering things that most of us probably know but people unfamiliar with the comics may not. Don't want to ruin future happenings in the movies or what people may read. When it comes to the villian situation of the movie they were really stuck. Iron Man has a very disappointing rogues gallery, especially when it comes to using them for movies. The first movie used the Stane stuff. The second movie uses the "other guy with a suit" and the Hammer stuff. Without using "other guy in a suit" they were really only left with the Mandarin and the use of people as smart as Tony. I find Mandarin stories in the comics some of my favorite so I'll admit that I was disappointed by the movie Mandarin
just being an actor playing a part and not having someone with the ten rings.
I can see why they did it though in the sense of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, if they were going to use the Mandarin. They are laying out Thanos for the Avengers 2, so
you have the Infinity Gauntlet coming into play. In the case of the Mandarin you have alien technology in rings giving great power.
Comic book people know those are different items and completely different stories but the general public would see Thanos as something that would've been done already if they used the Mandarin story completely. The other problem with the Mandarin is the character is that he is much better with over-arching schemes. If they were going to use Mandarin they would have been better off alluding to the Mandarin in the first movie (yes the terrorists were the "Ten Rings", more substantial than that) and doing more building of the character in the second movie with the third movie being the big plan/final showdown. Honestly they would've been better off leaving that character out all together if they weren't going to do something along those lines.

People talk about how they should have used the alcoholism story for this movie, and while I think RDJ would've done it great justice, they did a very small allusion to it in the second movie with the blood poisoning and recklessness. To an extent they cleared it up by the end of the second movie, sort of, so using the full blown story for the third movie wouldn't have worked as well as people hoped. Others have expressed disappointment in Tony
having the panic attacks about New York and the level he is playing on now. I actually see this as perfectly justifiable. In the heat of the moment during Avengers he doesn't blink and just goes along with the fight and what's happening. When he looks back at the fact he is just a man in a suit fighting aliens, gods and things way beyond his understanding he loses his shit.

Overall it's not the best movie in the world by any means but it's a good popcorn movie that I enjoyed and had fun with. It's a nice bookend to the RDJ Iron Man movies and it's not near as rage worthy as the mouth breathers on the internet have been making it out to be.
 
[quote name='giantqtipz']Ben Kinglsey is a phenomenal actor but man is his talent wasted lol[/QUOTE]


Kingsley is undoubtedly an exceptional talent, but he is far from selective of his roles.
 
[quote name='Chase']Kingsley is undoubtedly an exceptional talent, but he is far from selective of his roles.[/QUOTE]
I really think he picks some roles just for the fact it'll screw with people's heads.
 
Considering how freaked out the events in Avengers made Tony, I kinda feel like his alcoholism would have made more sense in this film than the second. They could have made it so that he was using alcohol to deal with his panic attacks.
 
[quote name='Clak']Considering how freaked out the events in Avengers made Tony, I kinda feel like his alcoholism would have made more sense in this film than the second. They could have made it so that he was using alcohol to deal with his panic attacks.[/QUOTE]

Then again, he was dying in IM2, so drinking your worries away there was understandable too.
 
[quote name='DNukem170']Then again, he was dying in IM2, so drinking your worries away there was understandable too.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it worked then too, I just think it would have been better if they'd held back. Personally if the shit from Avengers ever happened IRL, I'd be drunk as hell...
 
[quote name='Clak']Yeah, it worked then too, I just think it would have been better if they'd held back. Personally if the shit from Avengers ever happened IRL, I'd be drunk as hell...[/QUOTE]

Now that I think about it...IM2 overall would have worked much better AFTER Avengers. Tony's PTSD combined with him dying and drunk, the government going after his suit, and an alien invasion would have all complimented each other, making Tony and Rhodey's fight all the more poignant. And Tony's "rebirth" all the more powerful
 
For those with issues with the Mandarin,
I think that people are taking the title too literally. Despite Killian saying that he's The Mandarin, he means it in the figurative sense; not the literal one. He's basically a subverted version of Nolan's Batman as an idea/ideal. Killian has no social or political goals nor is he ideologically aligned with the image of the Mandarin that he wants everyone to see...it's all theatricality just like Kingsley's character says it is.

Or at least this is my interpretation.
 
Is liking kingsley the new hip thing to do? I've never heard anybody praise this guy, is it because he's in such a bad movie?
 
[quote name='dohdough']For those with issues with the Mandarin,
I think that people are taking the title too literally. Despite Killian saying that he's The Mandarin, he means it in the figurative sense; not the literal one. He's basically a subverted version of Nolan's Batman as an idea/ideal. Killian has no social or political goals nor is he ideologically aligned with the image of the Mandarin that he wants everyone to see...it's all theatricality just like Kingsley's character says it is.

Or at least this is my interpretation.[/QUOTE]

That's 100% correct. I'm surprised people are taking it literally, he's obviously not "The Mandarin."
 
[quote name='dohdough']For those with issues with the Mandarin,
I think that people are taking the title too literally. Despite Killian saying that he's The Mandarin, he means it in the figurative sense; not the literal one. He's basically a subverted version of Nolan's Batman as an idea/ideal. Killian has no social or political goals nor is he ideologically aligned with the image of the Mandarin that he wants everyone to see...it's all theatricality just like Kingsley's character says it is.

Or at least this is my interpretation.[/QUOTE]
I haven't actually seen it yet, but from the first time I heard about the complaints about Mandarin this is what I thought.

[quote name='GUNNM']Is liking kingsley the new hip thing to do? I've never heard anybody praise this guy, is it because he's in such a bad movie?[/QUOTE]
Not at all, guy's a great actor he's just not picky about his roles at all. He will be in some of the absolute shittiest shit ever just for a paycheck. Especially over the past 10 years or so. It's kind of ridiculous when you look at his IMDB and just see terrible things.
 
[quote name='tcrash247']That's 100% correct. I'm surprised people are taking it literally, he's obviously not "The Mandarin."[/QUOTE]

They should have called him something else then.
 
[quote name='tcrash247']That's 100% correct. I'm surprised people are taking it literally, he's obviously not "The Mandarin."[/QUOTE]

Exactly. It blows my mind that people can't wrap their heads around this concept.
 
[quote name='GhostShark']Exactly. It blows my mind that people can't wrap their heads around this concept.[/QUOTE]
Shoulda called him obama bin laden or something else why the mandarain.

Hey guys joker will be in this movie. Nah its just a guy who paints his face like a clown the real bad guy is angry guy at batman for not talking to him a party
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top