Iron Man 3

[Smart_alec]

I'll admit that I'm not a big fan of Tony Stark or the movies associated with him. So this is as much mental house keeping as anything else. (I love the fan theories following around most new franchise instalments. It's why I kept up to speed with stuff like Saw or Twilight.)

That said. Can I get a hell yes? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EjG-1U3wqA)

Let's count this out the awesome things appearing in this trailer and they're possible source from the comics:

0.00-0:11 Tony with the living bejeezus kicked out of him. An excellent start.

0:16-0:20 A reference to the Avengers and a context less press shot.

0:21-0:24 Ok that's absolutely massive because it fixes a major problem from the Avengers. The fact that Tony absolutely should have died during the climax of the Avengers has in fact hung over his head and given his decision to commit genocide weight. Though I'm guessing that the film I'll be more focused on the miraculous survival aspect of it because it's a massive leap in tone and hasn't been the focus of the movies advertising.

Post traumatic stress disorder is still a logical extension of his character arc and is probably a better way to go for the bulk audience of blockbuster fare.

However it also includes a shot of apparent telekinetic power which is obviously taken from Warren Ellis's Extremis arc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremis_(comics)) which turned him into a techno-path.

But then, we already knew that. (http://screenrant.com/guy-pearce-iron-man-3-mlee-166533/)

Especially unsurprising given that Iron Man 1 already took part of that arc to act as his movie-verse's origin story.

0:25-0:26 Disassembled armour and insomnia. His lack of tools implies that this is the refinement of his new powers and combined with a new-found compulsion.

Which raises an interesting counter theory to my earlier one. He presumably gained his technopathic abilities during the time that he spent on the other side of the worm hole and his new psychological problems are not in fact from guilt or the fact that he almost died. They haven't helped but what's actually the problem is the massive hormonal imbalance that has occurred from his new abilities is messing with his body. He's also gotten off the sauce recently which means that he's stopped overtly punishing himself.

So his abusive boyfriend (http://marvel.wikia.com/Iron_Man_(Sentient_Armor)) is not an AI glitch this time. Rather it's his own psychy still trying to punish himself and using a mental projection of it's self to do so.

Or Jarvis has taken control over the suit remotely in order to wake up and protect Tony and Pepper from the oncoming fire-storm. (Possible but vastly less interesting so let's drop it right now.)

0:27-0:28 Rhodes.

0:28-0:30 Either a memorial for people he failed to save during the invasion, another more topical memorial for people killed in the Middle Eastern military debacle, people killed by the Mandarin's malevolent machinations or something else.

I'm guessing the third.

0:33-0:34 Guy Pearce (Owner of AIM if I remember correctly.) and the new armour design in motion. Looks as good as I expected it to be. (Much better with all the effects attached to it.)

0:37-0:39 My favourite Iron Man villain coming to visit. [Insert-obvious-demon-in-a-Bottle-reference-here.]

0:43-0:47 Three important shot's in quick succession. Abject destruction. The Mandarin. Someone I don't recognise. But IMDB says that she's Maya Hansen and connected to the Extremis program.

0:47-0:49 The Iron Patriot. Actually a re-skin of Warmachine but apparently with a new pilot. Rhodes is out of the pilot-full-body-harness and replaced by a guy called Eric Dravin. (The sub-psychotic love child of Robocop, the Terminator and Miko Myazaki, in the comics. Which is awesome but I'm guessing it's just a reference.)

0:49-1:04 Lot's of shots in quick succession. None of which are particularly important. However Mandarin is doing his speech to the nation thing and making an obviously veiled threat.

1:05-1:36 Which is apparently blowing up Stark Mansion.

What is interesting about that is that given the lack of storytelling risks in the franchise up to this point, the shot of exploding Iron Man armours earlier and the lack of Pepper in the splash down scenes. I'm guessing that's how they get rid of the sentient armour rather than an actual attack on Tony's life and/ or home.

Which also fit's into standard movie pacing. The destruction of the second act villian being used to kick off an extended third act villian is an example of good storytelling. (Without crossing sub-genera see Spider Man 3 as an example of doing that badly.)

1:48-1:50 Or more likely that Tony then had to rely on the "evil" suit in order to save himself. Which is the most probably explanation of this shot. Tony dragging the now sympathetic and borderline heroic suit through the Red snow after it sacrificed itself to save him.

That took significantly longer than I expected it to.

[Gamerlord]

Is it just me, or does the new villain sound a bit like Bane? I chuckled a bit when he said "tuuururist".

[The Glyphstone]

You'd think Tony would, at some point, get the bright idea of building Pepper a suit of Iron Woman armor rather than constantly mope about how he can't risk losing her and needs to protect her.

(Apparently she does get a suit of armor after Civil War, but I don't know why it took him so long to do it).

[Nerd-o-rama]

You'd think Tony would, at some point, get the bright idea of building Pepper a suit of Iron Woman armor rather than constantly mope about how he can't risk losing her and needs to protect her.

(Apparently she does get a suit of armor after Civil War, but I don't know why it took him so long to do it).

Because comics are the one medium where people are still consistently expected to take "damsel in distress" seriously as a plot device.

Also glad I wasn't the only one who found the voiceover reminiscent of Bane. Well, Bane was by far the best part of TDKRises, so I can't really complain.

[Raimun]

Hell yes.

I'm now really looking forward to this. That's instead of looking forward to this.

[hamlet]

Is it just me, or does the new villain sound a bit like Bane? I chuckled a bit when he said "tuuururist".

It's Ben Kingsly without, as best I can tell, digital modulation or strange face device making him inaudible.

Do not mock Gandhi, man.:smallsmile:

[Brother Oni]

Do not mock Gandhi, man.:smallsmile:

Ghandi also does a very mean East End gangster (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0203119/).

[Dr.Epic]

I'll admit that I'm not a big fan of Tony Stark or the movies associated with him. So this is as much mental house keeping as anything else. (I love the fan theories following around most new franchise instalments. It's why I kept up to speed with stuff like Saw or Twilight.)

That said. Can I get a hell yes? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EjG-1U3wqA)

Let's count this out the awesome things appearing in this trailer and they're possible source from the comics:

0.00-0:11 Tony with the living bejeezus kicked out of him. An excellent start.

0:16-0:20 A reference to the Avengers and a context less press shot.

0:21-0:24 Ok that's absolutely massive because it fixes a major problem from the Avengers. The fact that Tony absolutely should have died during the climax of the Avengers has in fact hung over his head and given his decision to commit genocide weight. Though I'm guessing that the film I'll be more focused on the miraculous survival aspect of it because it's a massive leap in tone and hasn't been the focus of the movies advertising.

Post traumatic stress disorder is still a logical extension of his character arc and is probably a better way to go for the bulk audience of blockbuster fare.

However it also includes a shot of apparent telekinetic power which is obviously taken from Warren Ellis's Extremis arc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremis_(comics)) which turned him into a techno-path.

But then, we already knew that. (http://screenrant.com/guy-pearce-iron-man-3-mlee-166533/)

Especially unsurprising given that Iron Man 1 already took part of that arc to act as his movie-verse's origin story.

0:25-0:26 Disassembled armour and insomnia. His lack of tools implies that this is the refinement of his new powers and combined with a new-found compulsion.

Which raises an interesting counter theory to my earlier one. He presumably gained his technopathic abilities during the time that he spent on the other side of the worm hole and his new psychological problems are not in fact from guilt or the fact that he almost died. They haven't helped but what's actually the problem is the massive hormonal imbalance that has occurred from his new abilities is messing with his body. He's also gotten off the sauce recently which means that he's stopped overtly punishing himself.

So his abusive boyfriend (http://marvel.wikia.com/Iron_Man_(Sentient_Armor)) is not an AI glitch this time. Rather it's his own psychy still trying to punish himself and using a mental projection of it's self to do so.

Or Jarvis has taken control over the suit remotely in order to wake up and protect Tony and Pepper from the oncoming fire-storm. (Possible but vastly less interesting so let's drop it right now.)

0:27-0:28 Rhodes.

0:28-0:30 Either a memorial for people he failed to save during the invasion, another more topical memorial for people killed in the Middle Eastern military debacle, people killed by the Mandarin's malevolent machinations or something else.

I'm guessing the third.

0:33-0:34 Guy Pearce (Owner of AIM if I remember correctly.) and the new armour design in motion. Looks as good as I expected it to be. (Much better with all the effects attached to it.)

0:37-0:39 My favourite Iron Man villain coming to visit. [Insert-obvious-demon-in-a-Bottle-reference-here.]

0:43-0:47 Three important shot's in quick succession. Abject destruction. The Mandarin. Someone I don't recognise. But IMDB says that she's Maya Hansen and connected to the Extremis program.

0:47-0:49 The Iron Patriot. Actually a re-skin of Warmachine but apparently with a new pilot. Rhodes is out of the pilot-full-body-harness and replaced by a guy called Eric Dravin. (The sub-psychotic love child of Robocop, the Terminator and Miko Myazaki, in the comics. Which is awesome but I'm guessing it's just a reference.)

0:49-1:04 Lot's of shots in quick succession. None of which are particularly important. However Mandarin is doing his speech to the nation thing and making an obviously veiled threat.

1:05-1:36 Which is apparently blowing up Stark Mansion.

What is interesting about that is that given the lack of storytelling risks in the franchise up to this point, the shot of exploding Iron Man armours earlier and the lack of Pepper in the splash down scenes. I'm guessing that's how they get rid of the sentient armour rather than an actual attack on Tony's life and/ or home.

Which also fit's into standard movie pacing. The destruction of the second act villian being used to kick off an extended third act villian is an example of good storytelling. (Without crossing sub-genera see Spider Man 3 as an example of doing that badly.)

1:48-1:50 Or more likely that Tony then had to rely on the "evil" suit in order to save himself. Which is the most probably explanation of this shot. Tony dragging the now sympathetic and borderline heroic suit through the Red snow after it sacrificed itself to save him.

That took significantly longer than I expected it to.

Honestly, I didn't like that trailer. It showed way too much. Now the actual shock of seeing these things happen in theaters is gone. What? They attacked Stark's home. That'd be a twist if it wasn't in the trailer. Also, Ben Kingsley as the Mandarin; I have my doubts about that casting.

[Dienekes]

Honestly, I didn't like that trailer. It showed way too much. Now the actual shock of seeing these things happen in theaters is gone. What? They attacked Stark's home. That'd be a twist if it wasn't in the trailer. Also, Ben Kingsley as the Mandarin; I have my doubts about that casting.

Agreed on the trailer, but what's wrong with Kingsley? The man is a fantastic actor and can play evil/smug pretty damn well.

[Karoht]

I think casting Kingsley is interesting. Not necessarily good or bad, but interesting.

I remember him from black comedy mostly. Part of me is unsure if he can actually do comic book villainy without over selling it or under selling it. There is a certain balance of seriousness and tongue in cheek that goes with being a comic book turned movie villain.

I'm still psyched to see this trailer when I get home from work.

PS-The wiki has some spoilery reveals on bad guys who are NOT Mandarin. Worth a look, but spoilery all the same.

[Mando Knight]

You'd think Tony would, at some point, get the bright idea of building Pepper a suit of Iron Woman armor rather than constantly mope about how he can't risk losing her and needs to protect her.

(Apparently she does get a suit of armor after Civil War, but I don't know why it took him so long to do it).

Partly because the Tony/Pepper thing isn't as strong in 616. And Tony kept to the "no really guys, I'm not Iron Man" thing a whole lot more, playing the "No, see, I retired from being Iron Man for realsies this time, the current Iron Man really is my bodyguard now, honest" card more than a few times.

[Dr.Epic]

Agreed on the trailer, but what's wrong with Kingsley? The man is a fantastic actor and can play evil/smug pretty damn well.

I don't know. I just have heard he's been in a lot of bad films. I'm just going off what I've heard.

Also, I loved the part where Stark's dragging his armor through the snow. It reminded me of Stallone working out in Rocky IV. Please tell me Iron Man fights Ivan Drago at some point in this film. That'd be awesome!

[erikun]

I don't know. Iron Man 1 was good. It wasn't an excellent movie itself, but it presented itself as an action-movie with character motivations and based on a comic book. It did all that and more, and was definitely worth watching.

Iron Man 2 was meh. The movie felt like it caught the standard sequelitus bug of "Let's do the same thing but again!" It really wasn't interesting, and felt more like a cashgrab between IM1 and the Avengers movie.

For Iron Man 3, it is good that they're using it to follow up on the events in teh Avengers. It means that the movie is (more likely) focused on progressing the story than adding another title to the franchise. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much upping the stakes will make the movie any better. This sounds just like the plot of IM2, except with more destruction mimicing Dark Knight Rises.



Honestly, I didn't like that trailer. It showed way too much. Now the actual shock of seeing these things happen in theaters is gone. What? They attacked Stark's home. That'd be a twist if it wasn't in the trailer. Also, Ben Kingsley as the Mandarin; I have my doubts about that casting.
This is another good point. For IM1, we saw some exciting tidbits but not really enough to piece together the big fights. For IM2, we basically saw the highlights of the big fights because it felt like that was all there was to that movie.

This trailer feels more like the big highlights of the upcoming movie. Perhaps it's just the newest Holloywood style to spoiler stuff like this in the trailers, but it doesn't fill me with much confidence.

[Dr.Epic]

This is another good point. For IM1, we saw some exciting tidbits but not really enough to piece together the big fights. For IM2, we basically saw the highlights of the big fights because it felt like that was all there was to that movie.

This trailer feels more like the big highlights of the upcoming movie. Perhaps it's just the newest Holloywood style to spoiler stuff like this in the trailers, but it doesn't fill me with much confidence.

Not all modern films have trailers like that though. Cowboys & Aliens - regardless what you thought of the actual film - had a trailer that showed little more then just the first half hour. Its trailer didn't spoiler anything. Also, I heard Looper - a film I think is still in theaters - does reveal all that much either (though I haven't seen it and am just going by what I heard).

[Axolotl]

This trailer feels more like the big highlights of the upcoming movie. Perhaps it's just the newest Holloywood style to spoiler stuff like this in the trailers, but it doesn't fill me with much confidence.That's not really new, Hollywood has been doing that pretty much since they started makng trailers. It seems to fit for a comic based movie since that industry has a tendancy to announce any big plot twists several months in advance.

Also am I the only person who thinks The Mandarin sounds like Carl Sagan in this trailer? Because that's what I hear.

[Smart_alec]

Because comics are the one medium where people are still consistently expected to take "damsel in distress" seriously as a plot device.

W (http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/8/2010/08/340x_taken.jpg)a (http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120728050440/twilightsaga/images/a/a4/Bella-306318_429619423747956_93621998_n.jpg)i (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120729234645/aceattorney/images/5/56/Maya_Close_OA.jpg)t (http://www.fireflywiki.net/img/river23.jpg) w (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20061202004317/24/images/7/71/Kim_Bauer_Season_5.jpg)h (http://images1.fanpop.com/images/photos/1500000/Turn-Left-Promo-Pictures-Rose-Tyler-rose-tyler-1558012-1126-1600.jpg)a (http://www.shrunkencinema.com/cinema/bond/crabs.jpg)t (http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/characters/images/peach/peach.jpg)? (http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110727113624/cavestoryfannon/images/f/f2/Cave-story-3d-sue-sakamoto-character-artwork.jpg)


Honestly, I didn't like that trailer. It showed way too much. Now the actual shock of seeing these things happen in theaters is gone. What? They attacked Stark's home. That'd be a twist if it wasn't in the trailer.
Yea that seems to be in vogue at the moment. Probably the biggest offender would be the absolutely awful Rise of the Planet of the Apes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-syO1KdlPA&feature=relmfu) trailer. (Which I'll admit is an excellent short film.)

This isn't as bad as all that though because it set's up a contextless climax without showing it's instigator or it's solution. So it's still something to overcome.


For Iron Man 3, it is good that they're using it to follow up on the events in teh Avengers. It means that the movie is (more likely) focused on progressing the story than adding another title to the franchise. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much upping the stakes will make the movie any better. This sounds just like the plot of IM2, except with more destruction mimicing Dark Knight Rises.
Because The Dark Knight Rises is something worth aping.

I'm not sure what you mean though. Could you elaborate?

[Selrahc]

(Apparently she does get a suit of armor after Civil War, but I don't know why it took him so long to do it).

Because Pepper wasn't a part of the Iron-Man comics for... a long time. The story arc played out. She quit Stark Enterprises, married Happy. The two were some very occasional guest characters.

She got reintroduced as a more important character following the Iron Man movie, and they fairly callously killed off Happy to open her up as a potential love interest again too.

[Mordar]

Biggest gripe about the trailer (which is for a movie I'll be seeing and 99.9% likely enjoying, so it really is a nit pick)...

Tony Stark, playboy genius philanthropist ultimate-weapons-designer has a virtual AI at his house...and it doesn't have the wherewithal to detect three commercial/public helicopters flying in and launching "post-factory modification" weapons and deploy counter-measures? After he has freely and frequently announced his identity? And is worried about Pepper's life?

Ugh, come on...at least tell me there was some sort of high-tech hijinks employed by the bad guys...

Otherwise it is just a case of "Heroic Stupidity to Advance the Plot".

- M

[erikun]

Because The Dark Knight Rises is something worth aping.

I'm not sure what you mean though. Could you elaborate?
About upping the stakes? I am referring to movie sequels that just replay the same storyline again but with higher stakes and acting like it is something significantly different. Iron Man 2 was about a terrorist scientist who wants to attack Tony and destroy stuff. Iron Man 3 seems to be about a terrorist scientist who wants to attack Tony and destroy more stuff.

As I said, this sounds exactly like the plot of Iron Man 2 but with citywide destruction along the scale Dark Knight Rises.

[Avilan the Grey]

Agreed on the trailer, but what's wrong with Kingsley? The man is a fantastic actor and can play evil/smug pretty damn well.

It reeks of white-washing to me. I was really looking forward to see what Asian actor they would cast in the role.


Because The Dark Knight Rises is something worth aping.

Meh. I am one of the few that truly was feeling "meh" about the new Batman trilogy. But then I have never really liked Bats (even in the comics).

[Soras Teva Gee]

Tony Stark, playboy genius philanthropist ultimate-weapons-designer has a virtual AI at his house...and it doesn't have the wherewithal to detect three commercial/public helicopters flying in and launching "post-factory modification" weapons and deploy counter-measures? After he has freely and frequently announced his identity? And is worried about Pepper's life?


Given that in the few seconds before we see Tony and Pepper looking at the attack it seems they were noticed

I also think putting a CIWS on his back porch would probably be beyond even Tony's legions of lawyers to get him. And would ruin the feel of the balcony, which is totally reason enough for Tony Stark.

And then you'd just get to see it fail anyways.


It reeks of white-washing to me. I was really looking forward to see what Asian actor they would cast in the role.


The man was born Krishna Pandit Bhanji

[LaZodiac]

Biggest gripe about the trailer (which is for a movie I'll be seeing and 99.9% likely enjoying, so it really is a nit pick)...

Tony Stark, playboy genius philanthropist ultimate-weapons-designer has a virtual AI at his house...and it doesn't have the wherewithal to detect three commercial/public helicopters flying in and launching "post-factory modification" weapons and deploy counter-measures? After he has freely and frequently announced his identity? And is worried about Pepper's life?

Ugh, come on...at least tell me there was some sort of high-tech hijinks employed by the bad guys...

Otherwise it is just a case of "Heroic Stupidity to Advance the Plot".

- M

The Mandarin is a wizard he cast an invisible spell.

Look, the point is, there WILL be a reason. As you will see once you watch it once it comes out.

[Jang Pettigrew]

The Iron Man 3 trailer was totally epic. My mind was blown and I was completely sold by it. I'm looking forward to seeing it next Spring with my brothers. Oh, and I love Sir Ben and Guy Pearce.

[kpenguin]

It reeks of white-washing to me. I was really looking forward to see what Asian actor they would cast in the role.

But... Ben Kingsley is Asian. Granted, not the Han Chinese the Mandarin is generally depicted as, but neither was the movie version of Yinsen.

[Smart_alec]

Iron Man 2 was about a terrorist scientist who wants to attack Tony and destroy stuff. Iron Man 3 seems to be about a terrorist scientist who wants to attack Tony and destroy more stuff.

As I said, this sounds exactly like the plot of Iron Man 2 but with citywide destruction along the scale Dark Knight Rises.

You may be confluxuating (conflating? confluxation?) Killian (That's a great name.) and the Mandarin. Especially given that neither of them have an established role in story or a motivation yet.

I see what you mean but it's too early to tell. I'll be honest though. I'm not getting that vibe.

Meh. I am one of the few that truly was feeling "meh" about the new Batman trilogy. But then I have never really liked Bats (even in the comics).
If I may go off topic for a mom-



It reeks of white-washing to me. I was really looking forward to see what Asian actor they would cast in the role.

The man was born Krishna Pandit Bhanji

And the only racial specifics that exist in the Mandarin's backstory (and they're NEVER going to refer to him as that in the movie. Unless it's said in the back ground by an obviously racist talk show host or something.) is that he's a desendant of Genghis Kahn. (Diluted enough that it really should mean nothing.) So he really could fit into any racial background.

Also: Armoured Adventures intentionally portrayed him as a racially ambiguous teenager born to overtly Asiatic parents. So I'm going to say that this is something of an improvement.

[erice924]

What suit and villain do you want for Iron Man 3?
I wonder what villain and suit should be in Iron man 3.

[Brother Oni]

Unless it's said in the back ground by an obviously racist talk show host or something.) is that he's a desendant of Genghis Kahn. (Diluted enough that it really should mean nothing.) So he really could fit into any racial background.


You do realise that about 8% of the male population in Asia (or about 0.5% of the world's population) can also claim descendancy from Ghengis Khan (link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_from_Genghis_Khan)), so it's less that it's diluted enough to mean nothing and more that lots of people are descendents.

With descendency, you're either related or not - technically speaking the British Royal Family is related to the Prophet Muhammad (via the Moorish kings that ruled Spain).

[Aotrs Commander]

Eeeh.

I must admit, this trailer doesn't do anything for me.

Probably because I'm so completely and utterly sick of the whole "blow up the protagonist's stuff/family whatever/generally screw over the protagonist, protagonist Has Revenge" thing; especially in contrast to the exceptional Avengers, which was, in my mind, what superheroes should be essentially all about - super-powered individuals in bright costumes kicking the living crud out of bad guys. Blowing up the base is really no better than killing off the characters when it's just done to go "lookit, the stakes are really high!" Even the otherwise extremely good Young Justice has gone down that route... Coming as this does at the height of my apathy for the direction superhero comics are taking, I really have to say my first impressions leave me with a pause to wonder whether or not I actually want to see this movie. I probably will, in the end, but it's done exactly the opposite job of what a trailer is supposed to do, and has lowered my expectations quite considerably.



Is it too much to ask that, modern media (yes, all of you, comics, cartoons, movies, TV, anime, manga and everything else), for once, we can stop with the endless one-sided fights? Villain-beats-hero-then-later-hero-beats-villain; it's so utterly predictable - and while it's a common formula for a reason, like everything repetition weakens it. Could we not have, for instance, something like when a villian tries something like this, they actually don't succeed all the way until the eleventh hour? But actually, y'know, have something go wrong, and see them sweat a bit? Maybe, have THEM do the "get-over-confident, get-arsed-kicked, realise-not-to-be-over-confident" arc for a change? It might be fun to see the villain realise they have to actually get serious, because if they don't they will lose and have them having some stakes as well. Not all the time (because that would get old fast too) but, you know, just once in a while? For varity's (and not-holding-the-idiot-ball because plot-says-so's) sake?

[Soras Teva Gee]

But... Ben Kingsley is Asian. Granted, not the Han Chinese the Mandarin is generally depicted as, but neither was the movie version of Yinsen.

Specifically British born of mix ethnicity.

Interesting note the comics Mandarin is himself of mixed ethnicity, his mother was apparently English.



And the only racial specifics that exist in the Mandarin's backstory (and they're NEVER going to refer to him as that in the movie. Unless it's said in the back ground by an obviously racist talk show host or something.) is that he's a desendant of Genghis Kahn. (Diluted enough that it really should mean nothing.) So he really could fit into any racial background.

Also: Armoured Adventures intentionally portrayed him as a racially ambiguous teenager born to overtly Asiatic parents. So I'm going to say that this is something of an improvement.

I'll say anything is an improvement over a green lizard man personally. Though aside from the Mandarin there's not a well established real name for the character so it will be interesting to see. Best guess is Temujin.

Compare:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bc/1000_Tugriks_-_Recto.jpg

that's a Mongolian banknote. Guess who?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b2/Mandarin_in_Iron_Man_3.jpg

That's Kingsley in costume.



And going by what has been hinted at in the previous movies its clearly a modified take anyways, kinda doubtful a guy with ten alien-tech rings at the power level of the comics was running around being called a terrorist.

(Though alien tech is a bit more likely post Avengers)


You do realise that about 8% of the male population in Asia (or about 0.5% of the world's population) can also claim descendancy from Ghengis Khan (link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_from_Genghis_Khan)), so it's less that it's diluted enough to mean nothing and more that lots of people are descendents.

The genetics backing that though is only of 2003 vintage. Much later then the character.

Also given that its believed to come from laaaaarge harems leaves open claims of direct legitimacy to have a complex over.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Color me interested. Not sold, but interested.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Eeeh.

I must admit, this trailer doesn't do anything for me.

Probably because I'm so completely and utterly sick of the whole "blow up the protagonist's stuff/family whatever/generally screw over the protagonist, protagonist Has Revenge" thing; especially in contrast to the exceptional Avengers, which was, in my mind, what superheroes should be essentially all about - super-powered individuals in bright costumes kicking the living crud out of bad guys. Blowing up the base is really no better than killing off the characters when it's just done to go "lookit, the stakes are really high!" Even the otherwise extremely good Young Justice has gone down that route... Coming as this does at the height of my apathy for the direction superhero comics are taking, I really have to say my first impressions leave me with a pause to wonder whether or not I actually want to see this movie. I probably will, in the end, but it's done exactly the opposite job of what a trailer is supposed to do, and has lowered my expectations quite considerably.



Is it too much to ask that, modern media (yes, all of you, comics, cartoons, movies, TV, anime, manga and everything else), for once, we can stop with the endless one-sided fights? Villain-beats-hero-then-later-hero-beats-villain; it's so utterly predictable - and while it's a common formula for a reason, like everything repetition weakens it. Could we not have, for instance, something like when a villian tries something like this, they actually don't succeed all the way until the eleventh hour? But actually, y'know, have something go wrong, and see them sweat a bit? Maybe, have THEM do the "get-over-confident, get-arsed-kicked, realise-not-to-be-over-confident" arc for a change? It might be fun to see the villain realise they have to actually get serious, because if they don't they will lose and have them having some stakes as well. Not all the time (because that would get old fast too) but, you know, just once in a while? For varity's (and not-holding-the-idiot-ball because plot-says-so's) sake?

I agree one of my biggest complain with Youn Justice (and many types of media) is that apparently the only ones who really struggle are the good guys, most of their victories are either short lived or pyrrhic . I want to see the heroes delivering a big enough blow that the villains/antagonist really feel it.

More on topic, I am not sure what to think about the trailer, I do have to agree it looks awesome visually; but since I am not that knowledgeable about Ironman I can't get much of the plot. And I was quite surprised they re-painted the WarMachine to look like Iron Patriot, is that something that actually happened in the comics? Or is it just a nod to the Dark Avengers' storyline?

[Karoht]

@Iron Patriot
Check out the wikipedia if you want some spoilers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man_3
Firepower and Radioactive Man are also featured supposedly.
"Asked whether his character would wear armor in the film, Cheadle stated "I do suit up. There are some different iterations that War Machine goes through, in this film. I don’t want to give them away, but it’s fun to see those things morph and shift."[6] Rhodes' armor will take on an American flag-inspired color scheme in the film, similar to the Iron Patriot armor from the comics."

Rhodes might have a bit of an escalation of firepower in order to combat Firepower. Maybe? Just a theory. Firepower and Rhodes might make up the "B" story.

[Dr.Epic]

Going back to the trailer, I know I said that it spoiled some things, but either way I don't think I would have cared that much. The Iron Man films have been my least favorite films in the Avengers series. Honestly, the only upcoming superhero film I really looking forward to - like really REALLY looking forward to - is the sequel to X-Men First Class. You may think fire benders and blood benders are badass, but they're nothing compared to a Fassbender.:smallwink:

[Karoht]

The next 2 X-men related films are "The Wolverine" next year, and "Days of Future Past" in 2014.
And a Deadpool film is supposed to have entered production by the end of this year.
I recall reading that a First Class sequel is not currently in the works.
Also, from wiki:

In March 2011, Shuler Donner revealed that the film was in "active development at Fox," saying, "We took the treatment to Fox and they love it... And X4 leads into X5".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men_films#Potential_sequels

So maybe Days of Future Past deals with the same era as First Class, maybe not.


Make of that what you will.

Props for the joke Dr Evil.

[The Glyphstone]

Another Wolverine movie? Apparently Logan's regeneration has gone meta, if he's being rebooted AGAIN.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

The next 2 X-men related films are "The Wolverine" next year, and "Days of Future Past" in 2014.
And a Deadpool film is supposed to have entered production by the end of this year.
I recall reading that a First Class sequel is not currently in the works.
Also, from wiki:

In March 2011, Shuler Donner revealed that the film was in "active development at Fox," saying, "We took the treatment to Fox and they love it... And X4 leads into X5".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men_films#Potential_sequels

So maybe Days of Future Past deals with the same era as First Class, maybe not.


Make of that what you will.

Props for the joke Dr Evil.
I'd need to hunt around, but I recall hearing that Days of Future Past was the sequel to First Class.

[Dr.Epic]

Props for the joke Dr Evil.

Number A: my name ain't Dr Evil so please don't call me that.:smalltongue:

And two: glad someone got my joke. I was worried it might go over people's heads. Fassbending: it's like metal bending but more awesome!:smalltongue:


I'd need to hunt around, but I recall hearing that Days of Future Past was the sequel to First Class.

Yeah, that's what I read too.

Back to Iron Man 3, at least the trailer didn't spoiler one major aspect of the film:
We still don't know what Stan Lee's cameo will be. Unless at the very end the Mandarin pulls off a mask and it's revealed to have been Stan Lee this whole time!:smalleek:

[Avilan the Grey]

Going back to the trailer, I know I said that it spoiled some things, but either way I don't think I would have cared that much. The Iron Man films have been my least favorite films in the Avengers series. Honestly, the only upcoming superhero film I really looking forward to - like really REALLY looking forward to - is the sequel to X-Men First Class. You may think fire benders and blood benders are badass, but they're nothing compared to a Fassbender.:smallwink:

Taste is different indeed.

The Iron Man movies are by far the best superhero movies ever made, period. Miles ahead of any Batman movies. Captain America: First Avenger was decent, Thor a snorefest (I really did fall asleep watching it)... Avengers is, after the Iron Man movies, the best.

And as much as I once enjoyed reading about X-Men (80ies and early 90ies) I just never got into the movies. Especially not First Class, for some reason.

[Eldan]

Hm. I'd rate them...

Avengers
Thor
The Dark Knight
X-Men: First Class
Batman Begins
Iron Man 1
The Dark Knight Rises
Iron Man 2
Captain America

Best at the top. I probably missed some. Captain America was incredibly, incredibly boring.

[Eurus]

Thor was that good, huh? Hmm, I never saw it... Also, where does The Hulk fall in that list?

[VanBuren]

Thor was that good, huh? Hmm, I never saw it... Also, where does The Hulk fall in that list?

Eh, I would go:

The Dark Knight
Iron Man
The Dark Knight Rises
Batman Begins
The Avengers
Captain America: The First Avenger
X-Men First Class
The Incredible Hulk (2008)
Thor/Iron Man 2 -- Both kinda meh, IMO.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Tony Stark, playboy genius philanthropist ultimate-weapons-designer has a virtual AI at his house...and it doesn't have the wherewithal to detect three commercial/public helicopters flying in and launching "post-factory modification" weapons and deploy counter-measures? After he has freely and frequently announced his identity? And is worried about Pepper's life?


I'm so completely and utterly sick of the whole "blow up the protagonist's stuff/family whatever/generally screw over the protagonist, protagonist Has Revenge" thing; especially in contrast to the exceptional Avengers, which was, in my mind, what superheroes should be essentially all about - super-powered individuals in bright costumes kicking the living crud out of bad guys. Blowing up the base is really no better than killing off the characters when it's just done to go "lookit, the stakes are really high!" Even the otherwise extremely good Young Justice has gone down that route... Coming as this does at the height of my apathy for the direction superhero comics are taking, I really have to say my first impressions leave me with a pause to wonder whether or not I actually want to see this movie. I probably will, in the end, but it's done exactly the opposite job of what a trailer is supposed to do, and has lowered my expectations quite considerably.

Is it too much to ask that, modern media (yes, all of you, comics, cartoons, movies, TV, anime, manga and everything else), for once, we can stop with the endless one-sided fights? Villain-beats-hero-then-later-hero-beats-villain; it's so utterly predictable - and while it's a common formula for a reason, like everything repetition weakens it. Could we not have, for instance, something like when a villian tries something like this, they actually don't succeed all the way until the eleventh hour? But actually, y'know, have something go wrong, and see them sweat a bit? Maybe, have THEM do the "get-over-confident, get-arsed-kicked, realise-not-to-be-over-confident" arc for a change? It might be fun to see the villain realise they have to actually get serious, because if they don't they will lose and have them having some stakes as well. Not all the time (because that would get old fast too) but, you know, just once in a while? For varity's (and not-holding-the-idiot-ball because plot-says-so's) sake?

Both of these completely seconded. It looks like Iron Man 3 will feature the trifecta of bad superhero cliches: the hero and/or villain holding the idiot ball and not stopping something they should have seen coming a mile away (literally, in this case), the villain being inexplicably superior to the hero until he exploits the villain's one weakness in the final act (not guaranteed for this one, but it was the same way in the previous two), and depowering the hero. Depowering the hero (technically de-mansioning and de-wealthing for Iron Man) is just a crutch for bad writers who either can't think of a way to raise the tension and/or want to fill time with a mopey "woe is me, I'm so alone and have lost everything" storyline.

Spiderman 2, Dark Knight Rises, X-Men 3, Thor, now Iron Man 3...you don't need to take away their powers/base/gadgets/etc. and see how they'll react. We already know how they feel about their powers, what they're like as a person underneath, and so forth, because that's already a part of their character regardless of where they fall on the "I just wanna be normal" to "playboy billionaire genius philanthropist" spectrum. And even if we didn't have that already established, watching them go from Square 1 to Square 2 to Square N and then back to Square 0 only to work their way back to Square 1 is boring and overdone. Spiderman didn't come up with any fancy new powers after his crisis of faith; Batman being out of shape and losing a bunch of fancy gadgets didn't really impact anything because he had his techno-legs and batcopter; the only thing Thor got out of his jaunt to Earth was a girlfriend and the realization that he shouldn't be an impulsive and we all saw that coming from the beginning of the movie.

What I would like to have seen happen in the Stark Mansion attack would be to have Jarvis notify Tony of an incoming attack, have Pepper freak out, and then have Tony remote-control some spare suits (they're borrowing from the Extremis arc already, might as well throw in some Argonauts) to take down the choppers without getting up from the couch. That would be a logical thing for a paranoid super-genius who is Batman-prepared enough to make suitcase-sized Iron Man suits for emergencies and who is worried enough about his friends and his stuff to talk about it in voice-overs predicted an attack to do: make some plans, station the suits in strategic locations ahead of time, and generally not be so totally bafflingly incompetent as to let an enemy steal his stuff and kidnap the love of his life with it from the very bed he's sleeping in!

[Dr.Epic]

Taste is different indeed.

The Iron Man movies are by far the best superhero movies ever made, period. Miles ahead of any Batman movies. Captain America: First Avenger was decent, Thor a snorefest (I really did fall asleep watching it)... Avengers is, after the Iron Man movies, the best.

And as much as I once enjoyed reading about X-Men (80ies and early 90ies) I just never got into the movies. Especially not First Class, for some reason.

Really?:smallconfused: I've always seen the Iron Man films as popcorn films: flawed, but fun. But better than the Dark Knight? Really? I guess, different taste then like you said.

[Dienekes]

Thor was that good, huh? Hmm, I never saw it... Also, where does The Hulk fall in that list?

Do you want to watch a tall muscular blonde man have a romance with a geeky cute girl who's bad at driving? If this story is of interest to you, then you will like Thor.

I thought Thor was pretty boring. The visuals in the beginning are interesting, but as soon as Thor reaches Earth... ugghhhhhh.

Anyway cause we're listing supes movies. Limiting myself to live action and recent movies, cause if I allow myself to go animated I could never actually complete a list. Anyway this is all likely to change tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day.

1) The Dark Knight. One of my personal favorite movies. This isn't just a good super hero movie, this is a good movie period. The villain is engaging, the threat seems real, and it manages that perfect blend of dark and hilarious that makes a good Batman film, or just in general a film that I would enjoy.

2) The Dark Knight Rises. Like The Dark Knight, but pushes a bit too hard. The villain is not nearly as engaging as the Joker (duhh), but I have to give Tom Hardy props for acting entirely through his eyes. That's got to be hard. I heard someone say that this movie should have been called Gotham, and I think that's right actually. It's a movie about the heroes of Gotham, not just the Bat and I think, overall, it works. As an aside, did you see the scene where Bane and Bats fight in the sewer? That was awesome!

3) Avengers: This is probably higher than it should be. It's a pretty flawed movie. The Shadowy League of Ambiguous Politicians holds an idiot ball the size of the moon. It uses the "monster turn off button" plot which I absolutely despise. And half the movie is the heroes beating their chests and trying to out macho each other. Overall I never really felt that there was a real threat in this, and if somehow an alien invasion feels like a weak threat something seriously has gone wrong. So why is it so high? The snark man, despite everything this movie is fun.

4) Dredd: I like violence. This movie had a lot of violence, real interesting visual effects and is just all around fun. Nothing really pops out as annoying me like Avengers, but it's lower because overall the fun bits of Avengers is more fun than the fun bits of this movie. Again giving Karl Urban props for acting entirely through a frown.

5) Captain America: The First Avenger: Whhhhhheeeeeen Captain America throws his mighty shield. Alllll those who choose to oppose his shield must yieeeelllld! Surprisingly very fun movie. It's easy to mess the Cap up as a bland Mary Sue, especially when one of his defining characteristics "a man out of time" doesn't even come into play. But I think it works, definitely on the lighter side of things though.

6) Iron Man: Uhh, there's only so many times I can say, flawed but fun. I never really got a threat from Obediah Stane, well except the one scene where he kills his terrorist underling. And he gets really campy at the end. But anyway, fun.

7) X-Men: First Class: Surprising good movie. Taking away the Wolverine from the series was the best decision ever.

8) Spiderman 2: Other than the campy and obligatory New York stands up for Spidey that seems to show up in every, single, freaking, Spidey movie it's a fine movie. Nothing too disappointing about it, but nothing incredibly memorable either.

9) X-2: Yes it focuses on Wolverine, but I don't hold it against it. Very good movie, with a great performance by the cast, especially liking the use of Nightcrawler (a favorite of mine from when I actually read X-Men), also Brian Cox playing what he's best at: an evil bureaucrat with delusions of grandeur.

10) Batman Begins: Good movie but does not hold up as well under repeat viewings. Nolan hadn't quite learned how to shoot fight scenes yet, and it shows.

And the worst not in any particular order

The Hulk (2003): I honestly don't remember what was wrong with this movie. I just remember leaving it almost a decade ago rather unimpressed.

The Punisher: Thomas Jane was a good casting, but the movie itself didn't really get the feel of the Punisher until the very end, where he faced as his first villain... Travolta. Yeah.

The Punisher: War Zone: What are you doing? You're Titus ****ing Pullo. You can act better than this. And what's up with Jigsaw's face? He should look like a monster not a cartoon character.

Thor: I don't care if you want to bang Natalie Portman, get back to the interesting stuff

X3:Ughhhhhhhhh

Spiderman 3: Count the ways this movie messed up. The entire Harry plot. MJ holds onto the idiot ball for dear life. Dance, Peter, dance. Eric Foreman is the villain? Really?

Green Lantern: It was just dull, and it seemed rushed. Also it was set up wrong. Why was Parallax the first villain? Why did Sinestro take up the yellow ring after he saw Green>Yellow? Why did they suddenly bring up that Hammond knew Hal and the girl? Shouldn't that have been developed earlier to increase tension?

Ghost Rider: Nicholas Cage as Ghost Rider. Nicholas Cage. He can only be fantastic or terrible. Guess which one it was?

Thanks for reminding me Aotrs Commander.

Superman Returns: Just a boring movie without any of the wonder of the original. Also, to whoever thought it would be a good idea to have Superman be an absentee father, and Lex to seduce dying woman, I have only one thing to say to you. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McAeQiLmEYU)

X-Men Origins: Wolverine: A complete mess of a film trying desperately to cache in on Wolverine and tossing in fan favorites even when it doesn't make sense or when they're just going to butcher them to the point they're unrecognizable from the characters people are interested in seeing. Not to mention how ridiculously cliched and just half-hearted the story is.

[Dr.Epic]

2) The Dark Knight Rises. Like The Dark Knight, but pushes a bit too hard. The villain is not nearly as engaging as the Joker (duhh), but I have to give Tom Hardy props for acting entirely through his eyes. That's got to be hard. I heard someone say that this movie should have been called Gotham, and I think that's right actually. It's a movie about the heroes of Gotham, not just the Bat and I think, overall, it works. As an aside, did you see the scene where Bane and Bats fight in the sewer? That was awesome!

Am I the only one that thought Dark Knight Rise had major flaws and wasn't that good? (sorry to derail the thread even more, the thread's kind of taken this new direction)

[The Glyphstone]

Am I the only one that thought Dark Knight Rise had major flaws and wasn't that good? (sorry to derail the thread even more, the thread's kind of taken this new direction)

It's my least favorite of the trilogy due to said major flaws, but I still think it's a good movie.

[Dr.Epic]

It's my least favorite of the trilogy due to said major flaws, but I still think it's a good movie.

I thought it was at least okay or average - 5/10.

[Dienekes]

Am I the only one that thought Dark Knight Rise had major flaws and wasn't that good? (sorry to derail the thread even more, the thread's kind of taken this new direction)

Nope, when it came out the official thread for it was basically a back and forth about it's flaws and folks enjoying it. Personally, it's flaws didn't bother me nearly as much as Avengers flaws did, and some of the flaws that are pointed out to me don't bother me at all.

But hey, we're all just giving opinions here, there is no right or wrong answers. Hell I bitch out a movie for daring to actually focus on a romantic subplot, it's all relative.

Unless you liked X3. Then you're wrong.

[Giggling Ghast]

I liked Thor. The romantic sub-plot was a bit forced, but I found it to be enjoyable. Good lead, excellent action sequences, solid villain, got some good comedic mileage from the "fish out of water" scenes in the second act.

I'm finding myself somewhat irritated with Ben Kingsley's narration in the trailer.

"some people call me a terrrrrrorist. I consider myself a teacherrrrrrr. Lesson numberrrrrrr one: heroes. There is no such thing."

Otherwise, it looks good.

[Avilan the Grey]

For me the romantic sub-plot in Thor was the best part. That gave me some smiles. The rest was either boring outright or didn't sit right with me (casting choices, design choices).

[Eldan]

I thought it was at least okay or average - 5/10.

No, that's what I think too. Not bad, really, just not all that impressive.
Captain America, on the other hand... I was close to falling asleep several times. Such an incredibly dull movie.

But, well. My tastes are different from everyone else's quite often, here on the forums. I also thought Ang Lee made the better hulk movie than the one with Edward Norton, which was also pretty dull.

[Devonix]

No, that's what I think too. Not bad, really, just not all that impressive.
Captain America, on the other hand... I was close to falling asleep several times. Such an incredibly dull movie.

But, well. My tastes are different from everyone else's quite often, here on the forums. I also thought Ang Lee made the better hulk movie than the one with Edward Norton, which was also pretty dull.

Strange in that Captain America was my fave of the Marvel movies even more than Iron Man 1

[kpenguin]

Yeah, tastes really do differ. I was entirely overly giddy throughout watching Captain America. It pulled no surprises and hit nearly every point a WW2 set Captain America film should, feeling like a good old fashioned pulp action film in many ways.

[Eldan]

I actually thought the action sequences were especially boring in that one. But then, I have always been very picky about my action. People running and shooting and stuff exploding does not make an interesting scene for me.

[Dr.Epic]

People running and shooting and stuff exploding does not make an interesting scene for me.

Well we now know your real life persona isn't Michael Bay.:smallwink:

[Giggling Ghast]

Whhhhhheeeeeen Captain America throws his mighty shield. Alllll those who choose to oppose his shield must yieeeelllld!

Unless it's a plane! Or a bomb! Or some ice! 'Cause then he'll take a nap, because the ice seems nice!

[Dr.Epic]

Unless it's a plane! Or a bomb! Or some ice! 'Cause then he'll take a nap, because the ice seems nice!

"HA! HA! And what would you have done about it?"

"Are you kidding? I catch falling planes like every other week."

"And I'm Batman."

:smallbiggrin:

[Giggling Ghast]

Thanks for the muscles, but it's too late now! AAAAAAAAAH!

[Aotrs Commander]

Conversely, I didn't think much of the only one of the Dark Knight trilogy I've seen (the first one) and I only saw that long after the fact when it was on pay per view and my Mum was bored one day. Nothing at all makes me interested in seeing the second or third... And I have enjoyed pretty much all the other more recent Marvel and DC superhero movies (yes, X-3, Wolverine, Green Lanturn, Spidey 3 and Superman Returns included!)

Then again, I didn't find Batman Forever to be particularly objectionable, and I still very much think Adam West was among the top three Batmans...? Batmen? (The others being the long-running DCAU Batman and the Young Justice Batman.) Then again, I not a Batman fan at the best of times anyway... I think he works fine as a foil with other characters (the more the better), but on his own... Nah.

(This is true of nearly all the superheroes for me, mind, but it's just Batman stands out to me as being particularly banal on his own.)

[INoKnowNames]

If they can reveal that much in the trailer about Iron Man 3, unless they spoiled everything just then and ruined a hell of a lot of suspense, it's going to be the best ****ing movie -ever-. Robert Downey Jr. needs to stop being an incredibly sexy bastard. I will definitely be camping out for the midnight release.

[Dienekes]

And I have enjoyed pretty much all the other more recent Marvel and DC superhero movies (yes, X-3, Wolverine, Green Lanturn, Spidey 3 and Superman Returns included!)

Yeah, you and I will not see eye to eye on much.

Though thank you for reminding me of Superman Returns and Wolverine to add to my wost comic book movies list. I don't know why I forgot about Supes, but I'm fairly sure I've been actively repressing Wolverine.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I don't think the worst superhero movies have been mentioned yet.

[Avilan the Grey]

I don't think the worst superhero movies have been mentioned yet.

Like what? Pumaman? :smallwink:

[INoKnowNames]

I don't think the worst superhero movies have been mentioned yet.

.... and on this note: I might have been too young for it, but has there ever been an Aquaman movie?

[Devonix]

.... and on this note: I might have been too young for it, but has there ever been an Aquaman movie?

Unfortunately not Because a proper Aquaman movie would be EPIC

Batteling Gods and Demons and Supernatural threats from beyond the Depths. :smallbiggrin:

[Tebryn]

Like what? Pumaman? :smallwink:

I won't let you slander what is possibly one the great movies ever made.

[Karoht]

@Trailers In General

I started a rant. It turned into an open letter to movie trailers.

Dear Movie Trailers,
Why do you have to show us the best and brightest portions of the film?
Sure, it probably ensures you have the best marketing possible, and it does make sense to sell the film based on it's best assets and features. But what about the mystery? Is selling the mystery that difficult?

I know that we don't have context for most of the things we see until we actually see the film, but the lack of context may not necessarily interest people to the point where I want to pay to see the same scene I've witnessed in trailers and other advertising 100 times before I actually see the film.
I know that I'm actually starting to get a little bit annoyed at basically having to dodge teasers and trailers and fast food commercials so that I don't spoil too much of the film for myself.

And while we are on about it, do we have to detail plot in the trailer?
Lets contrast the trailers for Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises. I could piece together the important parts of the film DKR from the trailer without too much trouble. Dark Knight was fairly ambiguous due to the way it revolved around the key players, Batman and Joker. Heck, the fact that Two-Face was involved in Dark Knight was a major surprise, one not spoiled by the trailers, and that was excellent. Why couldn't that happen more often?

Okay Trailers, lets wrap this up.
More like Dark Knight, less like DKR.
More mystery, less reveal. The rule in films is "show, don't tell" but you're "showing" way too much before the actual "show" starts. Sadly, I can think of no analogy which would be acceptable by board standards here. But be a bit less revealing, play a bit more hard to get. Pardon the conservative attitude, but it is genuinely in the best interest of the audience and the film.

Best wishes,
Karoht Stouthorn

[Ramza00]

Iron Man 2 was disapointing but it trailer did some things right. For example the whole suitcase iron-man was badass, wanted to make you see the movie, but didn't spoil much :smallwink:

[Nerd-o-rama]

Unfortunately not Because a proper Aquaman movie would be EPIC

Batteling Gods and Demons and Supernatural threats from beyond the Depths. :smallbiggrin:

Yeah doing Aquaman the way they did Thor (but UNDERWATER!) would be the right way to go for the character.

[Karoht]

I don't think this is too far off topic to mention this, but according to wiki, the Justice League Film is set to release in 2015 and go head to head with Avengers 2.
I should point out that they don't have a screenplay (let alone a script), nor do they have a director attatched yet.
No films to introduce Aqua Man, Flash, or Wonder Woman?
I see trouble ahead.

[Avilan the Grey]

I don't think this is too far off topic to mention this, but according to wiki, the Justice League Film is set to release in 2015 and go head to head with Avengers 2.
I should point out that they don't have a screenplay (let alone a script), nor do they have a director attatched yet.
No films to introduce Aqua Man, Flash, or Wonder Woman?
I see trouble ahead.

Not interested... what made Avengers unique is the groundwork laid down with each unique franchise. JLA won't have that. Plus, I have yet to see a decent movie made about any of these characters (except Bats) (And yes, I never liked any superman movie).

[Soras Teva Gee]

Like what? Pumaman? :smallwink:

I was thinking more like the Cap and Nick's earlier ventures. Or those other Superman movies that are directly responsible for Returns being a failure.


And while we are on about it, do we have to detail plot in the trailer?
Lets contrast the trailers for Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises. I could piece together the important parts of the film DKR from the trailer without too much trouble. Dark Knight was fairly ambiguous due to the way it revolved around the key players, Batman and Joker. Heck, the fact that Two-Face was involved in Dark Knight was a major surprise, one not spoiled by the trailers, and that was excellent. Why couldn't that happen more often?

I don't know about you but I very distinctly remember Harvey Dent being advertised both in posters and with a very clear line from the Joker.

Its not exactly a weak guess that he'd go nuts and get his face messed up in the movie, just saying the name invokes that outright.

The only surprise was that they resolved it in that movie instead of setting him up for the third. (And frankly the movies suffered for it. There's effectively an unwritten chapter needed)


Okay Trailers, lets wrap this up.
More like Dark Knight, less like DKR.
More mystery, less reveal. The rule in films is "show, don't tell" but you're "showing" way too much before the actual "show" starts. Sadly, I can think of no analogy which would be acceptable by board standards here. But be a bit less revealing, play a bit more hard to get. Pardon the conservative attitude, but it is genuinely in the best interest of the audience and the film.


I don't think they really showed anything more. The only plot point revealed is that Bane cuts off the city by blowing up bridges, which is no twist or important secret. Its just letting John Q. Public know that this is going to be even bigger in scope. There's almost nothing about the real meat of the plot to be found, certainly not the twist you wouldn't expect from Bane because its new to the movie.

Did you happen to think that the Avengers let too much away by showing the invasion? Frankly they didn't, that's the movie's basic premise right there "Loki unleashes alien invasion!" so instantly know that gee this is something where even Thor and Hulk on their own aren't going to be enough... so team-up!

Trailers need to tell you what sort of movie it is so you can decide to go see it or not.


I don't think this is too far off topic to mention this, but according to wiki, the Justice League Film is set to release in 2015 and go head to head with Avengers 2.
I should point out that they don't have a screenplay (let alone a script), nor do they have a director attatched yet.
No films to introduce Aqua Man, Flash, or Wonder Woman?
I see trouble ahead.

Yeah wasn't that supposed to be 2013 once upon a time? I believe its happening when they start shooting and not before. Warner Brother has proven so hilariously and terribly inept at this so far I'm still mildly amazed Man of Steel is happening. I only hope the Avengers made it clear that someone should have been fired a long time ago. (The idiot that let Whedon slip away namely)

However it is something of a fallacy that you need set up movies. I would point to how say the Justice League cartoon didn't bother with much and has a perfectly serviceable opening episode. I've yet to hear anyone complain about how Hulk is suddenly Mark Ruffalo, or how Edward Norton's reboot gave us some opening credits and that was it then went right along with the story. Somebody needs to tell them to just go with it.

[Dienekes]

Not interested... what made Avengers unique is the groundwork laid down with each unique franchise. JLA won't have that. Plus, I have yet to see a decent movie made about any of these characters (except Bats) (And yes, I never liked any superman movie).

If you have not, go watch Wonder Woman and Superman verses the Elite, DC Animated Movies. They might change your mind, though the Supes movies art style takes some getting used to.

As to the JLA movie revelation though, yeah, I have my doubt on how that will turn out. It's not impossible to make a good movie without all the groundwork that Avengers had, Hell how many posters have said they don't want to watch origin movies? But I'm worried without them a JLA movie will turn into rushed origin stories and exposition.

[Aotrs Commander]

or how Edward Norton's reboot gave us some opening credits and that was it then went right along with the story. Somebody needs to tell them to just go with it.

That, indeed, deserves special mention for NOT doing the tired old origina story again. (That's also one of the reasons I liked Superman Returns, because it WASN'T an origin story, and I consider that a sufficiently large point in it's favour (along with being a sort of nearly sequal to Superman 2 (ignoring 3 and 4 existed, not unwisely...!) that it outweighed the other somewhat... odd choices.)

And I absolutely and whole-lack-of-hearted support the sentiment; origin stories are not mandatory, especially for big, well-known superheroes that have been around in the public consciousness for fifty (and plus) years. People now who aren't young children (who don't care about origin stories anyway) who don't know who Superman is are unlikely to be the sort of people who go to see superhero movies as a matter of course, one would have thought.

(Excepting perhaps ex-patriots from non-Western countries where they have their own (or no) mythos, maybe, but they are not likely to be a numerous proportion of the cinema-goers.)

[Soras Teva Gee]

That, indeed, deserves special mention for NOT doing the tired old origina story again. (That's also one of the reasons I liked Superman Returns, because it WASN'T an origin story, and I consider that a sufficiently large point in it's favour (along with being a sort of nearly sequal to Superman 2 (ignoring 3 and 4 existed, not unwisely...!) that it outweighed the other somewhat... odd choices.)


I must admit that, though I think the Returns was very lackluster specifically because it far too much from the first films thematically and as a result became something far worse then merely bad... it was boring.

[pita]

I disagree with the point about origin stories. Captain America was only really good when it focused on the origin. As was Iron Man, which was why Iron Man 2 was so bad (at least in my opinion). While some movies got a lot better because of the lack of origin story, I think it depends on which movie you're talking about. X Men First Class is possibly one of the best superhero movies out there, and it's entirely origin story. You can contrast it pretty well with X Men 2, which is entirely plot and action, only a little bit of screen time given to Logan's origin, and is just as good. As with everything, it depends how it's done.

[Dr.Epic]

Like what? Pumaman? :smallwink:

Pumaman was hilarious. I don't know what you're talking about.

[Ramza00]

I don't know about you but I very distinctly remember Harvey Dent being advertised both in posters and with a very clear line from the Joker.

Its not exactly a weak guess that he'd go nuts and get his face messed up in the movie, just saying the name invokes that outright.

The only surprise was that they resolved it in that movie instead of setting him up for the third. (And frankly the movies suffered for it. There's effectively an unwritten chapter needed)

It was very advertised that harvey dent was going to be in the movie for there were many posters such as this

http://batman.wikibruce.com/images/4/4f/Dent.jpg
http://heatherdyan.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/poster_posterexclusivoomelete5.jpg

Pretty much "I believe in harvey dent" and "Why so serious" were the viral advertisings that the the Dark Knight pulled quite successfully prior to the movie. Harvey Dent also was heavily used in the trailers for the movie and even had the epic line about if you live long enough you will become the villian.

That said prior to the movie I expected to see two-face in the third movie not the second, with the second movie just being the fall of Harvey. I was not expecting Harvey Dent to actually die in the second movie just merely be injured.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I disagree with the point about origin stories. Captain America was only really good when it focused on the origin. As was Iron Man, which was why Iron Man 2 was so bad (at least in my opinion). While some movies got a lot better because of the lack of origin story, I think it depends on which movie you're talking about. X Men First Class is possibly one of the best superhero movies out there, and it's entirely origin story. You can contrast it pretty well with X Men 2, which is entirely plot and action, only a little bit of screen time given to Logan's origin, and is just as good. As with everything, it depends how it's done.

First Iron Man 2 was not bad. You may not have liked it but it was a still an at least adequately crafted film.

I think the first is probably on balance a bit better too, I know its one of the few films I went to see in theaters more then once. The second I enjoyed, but it wasn't as mind blowingly awesome. I do think it had a better villain mix, better use of the supporting cast, and juggled more elements then the first rather well... but looking back I think the center piece (Tony) is a misfire. He ends up retreading a lot of the same territory and doesn't change as much as a result. Unfortunately I think Downey Jr may have done such an incredible job the character is trapped because Movie!Stark simply can't loose that signature charismatic jerk, limiting what he can show he's learned.

I find myself asking whether anything in IM2 actually carried over to the Avengers except some details. This is not really anything to do with the first being an origin story though.

Now First Class as an origin story though would rather enhance my point that you do not need them, because it is 5th in the franchise. The first film that kicked off the whole craze really doesn't go into origins that much. It uses the introduction angle of newcomers to an existing team and has you roll with it, that's perhaps a workable way to do a Justice League movie.

It not so much about which are good and bad, but the perception that you somehow need that first movie to go through one as has been the standard model.

Not that it isn't sometimes a good idea. I'd perhaps say Cap is an exception because his real origin is the entire arc of WWII. Its got essentially a lot more meat on its bones then say freak accident in a science-y context.

Looking at say the Big 7 Leaguers, I'm not sure I see that same potential aside from with Diana. Not their origins mind you. (And Supes and Bats DON'T need it)




That said prior to the movie I expected to see two-face in the third movie not the second, with the second movie just being the fall of Harvey. I was not expecting Harvey Dent to actually die in the second movie just merely be injured.

Yeah I think that the obvious conclusion. And even what was delivered. Then we got a Scouring of the Shire style post-script subplot instead of a full movie.

I can only guess that somewhere along the road Nolan changed his mind on where he was going with the grand arc, but too late to restructure DK while not willing to do four movies. Maybe I needed to watch the second one again but I know for sure that the third definitely didn't feel set-up right, there's a missing chapter to bridge between the Joker and Batman having been spiritually broken enough to retire. (NolanVerse Bats is easily wimpiest Bats evar for that!)

[VanBuren]

First Iron Man 2 was not bad. You may not have liked it but it was a still an at least adequately crafted film.

I'm going to disagree to an extent. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Iron Man 2 was bad, but I'd strongly argue that it wasn't a good movie. Nor do I think that Thor was a good movie either.

I don't think either film was particularly "adequate" in the crafting.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I'm going to disagree to an extent. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Iron Man 2 was bad, but I'd strongly argue that it wasn't a good movie. Nor do I think that Thor was a good movie either.

I don't think either film was particularly "adequate" in the crafting.

Then your standards are excessively high. :smallwink:

[VanBuren]

Then your standards are excessively high. :smallwink:

I dunno. I mean, I really liked Avatar. :smallbiggrin:

[Karoht]

I dunno. I mean, I really liked Avatar. :smallbiggrin:

Airbender or Blue Cat People?

[VanBuren]

Airbender or Blue Cat People?

Cat People. Hated the M. Night Shyamalan movie.

The air was all bent.

[Dienekes]

Then your standards are excessively high. :smallwink:

I don't think so. Now I enjoyed Iron Man 2, enough that it didn't make my bad movie list anyway, but I think it had some legitimate problems. Now note that I'm writing this when I'm exhausted and can't sleep so if it seems illogical, I apologize.

1) They tried to fit a bit too much into a movie and didn't let some of the plot flow organically. Tony being a bigger **** than normal because of the whole dying thing was good, but then the problems that would bring up is never explored how glossed over Rhodes and Peppers reaction is the most glaring. Then SHIELD is involved, Tony is in a donut, and it plods around for a bit until the final fight. We've already seen the Tony vs Self in the first movie and this one brought nothing new to the table other than a reason for Tony to return to being a ****.

2) The villains were really unimpressive. Hammer was a joke, and an annoying one at that And Vanko just seemed rather blandly evil. Now you could make a case that Hammer was supposed to be a poor villain, fine. But he should at least be interesting or entertaining to watch, he was neither. And as to Vanko, I don't know I never felt anything for him, and if you've read my posts you can probably tell, I'm a villain man at heart. A good villain can make or break a movie for me.

3) Natasha Romanoff. For a character that showed up in so many scenes she was given very little to do and almost no personality to speak of. Sure she's a promise for better things to come, but this is the Black Widow here. She's always present but was only given 2 scenes of interest, where she pins Happy (and honestly, who would challenge a girl you just met to a fight anyway?) and in the last scene where she fights off Hammer's men. Both fight scenes oddly, but the problem is, we root for people in fights that we've grown attached to, but the movie gave us nothing to grow attached to for the Widow.

[Xondoure]

In short, Iron Man 2 tried way too hard to be Iron Man 1.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I don't think so. Now I enjoyed Iron Man 2, enough that it didn't make my bad movie list anyway, but I think it had some legitimate problems. Now note that I'm writing this when I'm exhausted and can't sleep so if it seems illogical, I apologize.

Oh it has problems for sure, I can even agree with 1. And 3 to a point.

I however found the villains quite interesting. Yes Hammer was lame, but that was kinda the point he's a wannabe and wouldn't have worked if he wasn't lame. Now Vanko was just fascinating to watch, probably better acted then written but either way works just a guy out for personal revenge who's very smart but grew up lacking Tony's platinum spoon in the mouth. Both serve well as dark mirror's on Tony Stark, especially together.

However yes the weakness of the IM2 is Tony Stark does kinda spin his wheels. Yay I'm being extra jerkish because I'm dying, of now I reforge myself (again) and I'm not. Meh! I still find it entertaining enough though to not drag the movie down. I enjoy it when I watch it, its only when I sit back and analyse after I feel less satisfied. Its like a strong B grade on balance to the first mid/high A grade. That's ultimate, fine, not bad.

[Zevox]

I don't think this is too far off topic to mention this, but according to wiki, the Justice League Film is set to release in 2015 and go head to head with Avengers 2.
I should point out that they don't have a screenplay (let alone a script), nor do they have a director attatched yet.
No films to introduce Aqua Man, Flash, or Wonder Woman?
I see trouble ahead.
I'm going to second the notion someone else gave that you probably don't need films to introduce most of the Justice League. Most people already have an idea who Aqua Man and Wonder Woman are (even if the general public's idea of Aqua Man is colored by the joke that Superfriends made of him), certainly more so than most people prior to the pre-Avengers movies knew who Iron Man or Thor were for example (well, in superhero terms, in the latter case). The Flash perhaps a bit less so, but his backstory isn't particularly extensive - he gets super-speed from a science experiment gone wrong. Easy to explain without needing his own movie.

And of course, two of the Avengers didn't get their own movies prior to that one. Black Widow got a sub-plot - sort of - in Iron Man 2, sure, but all Hawkeye had was a cameo in Thor where they didn't even try to explain who he was.

Now, honestly, Wonder Woman probably should have her own movie anyway, what with her being one of the most well-known superheroes in general, and certainly the most well-known female one, but that's another matter.

Zevox

[The Glyphstone]

She's just going to end up as the female side of a love triangle between Superman and Batman anyways, and if they pay attention to her mythology at all they'll just fixate on her built-in Damsel In Distress ability, so Hollywood's not going to bother wasting money on making her a three-dimensional character with her own movie.:smallyuk:

[Avilan the Grey]

Well Wonder woman had her chance with the TV series that was so awful not even the pilot aired. She is one of my favorite characters of all time, but she gets messed up a lot, not only the TV-series, but the last two reboots of her comic are bad disappointments (first one a throwback to the 90ies costume wise while insisting it was "new" as well as depressing and the new52 one is just too dark and gritty as well).

[Smart_alec]

Am I the only one that thought Dark Knight Rise had major flaws and wasn't that good? (sorry to derail the thread even more, the thread's kind of taken this new direction)
You are NEVER the only one.


Well Wonder woman had her chance with the TV series that was so awful not even the pilot aired. She is one of my favorite characters of all time, but she gets messed up a lot, not only the TV-series, but the last two reboots of her comic are bad disappointments (first one a throwback to the 90ies costume wise while insisting it was "new" as well as depressing and the new52 one is just too dark and gritty as well).
Honestly I was thrilled about the last reboot for one reason and one reason only.

Wonder Woman was finally able to wear pants. It was a great day for feminism. (Until the actual release and they proved to be skin tight latex so there was no functional change.)


I'd need to hunt around, but I recall hearing that Days of Future Past was the sequel to First Class.
I believe it's going to act as the continuity bridge between the two time periods. Which is disappointing given that according to the release schedule X-Men 3 and Origins: Wolverine are back into cannon to Days of Future Past following on from X-Men 3 and their second shot to give Wolverine his own solo series is a sequel rather than a standalone.



Back to Iron Man 3, at least the trailer didn't spoiler one major aspect of the film:
We still don't know what Stan Lee's cameo will be. Unless at the very end the Mandarin pulls off a mask and it's revealed to have been Stan Lee this whole time!:smalleek:

The truth is actually significantly more awesome.

In the same way that Iron Man 2 was the pilot for the rest of the Marvel movies Iron Man 3 will be the pilot for the Sheild spin off tv show and a series of alternate continuity films adapted from various sources. However this time it is through direct plot intervention rather than reference because that's what Iron Man two did.

(The Agents of H.A.T.E. [The Helicopters are destroyed by Miss Marvel and the Machine Man during a punch up.] A Howard the Duck Re-adaptation. [SHIELD Headquarters has been experimenting with the Tesseract enabled wormholes. They then use that tech to get rid of the Mandarin during the climax. Replacing him with a wet and scared ball of feathers.] And Runaways. [The private jet that is attacked by Gold Suited Tony/ Abusive Boyfriend/ Something Else, contains the Pride. Which is how the Gold Suit is eventually busted right the heck up.])

However thats not all. The biggest reveal in the movie is indeed the Stan Lee cameo. The massive terrorist attack teased by the voice over is going to happen despite all the different factors that have rendered Tony entirely impotent and solved all of the other varied problems in the film.

Thousands of fairly nondescript terrorists. (Who are in no way, shape or form Chinese in origin or Communists.) All across the face of America reveal their evil plot. They've all been empowered by the Push Ring into living biological bombs. Able to release massive waves of energy, destroying everything around them but leaving them unscathed.

They're unstoppable. Until...

Checkmate activates the OMAC project. Activating all the Stan Lee sleepers across the world into massive armoured versions of Jack Kirby. Who stick around at the end of the movie thanks to a post credits sequence revealing an incoming invasion of White Martins!

With the stage now set you launch into the inevitably terrible Marvel vs. DC/ Amalgam comics adaptation.

And that my friend is the vaguely condescending, mildly facetious secret of Iron Man 3.

[Devonix]

about the pants thing? Most Superheroes, both male and female don't wear pants anyway.

[JoshL]

The problem with Justice League vs Avengers is that the Marvel films all built towards the Big Damn Movie. Even the little hints, and post credit scenes built a solid continuity. The DC film-verse doesn't have that now, and they really need to get it before attempting a team movie like that.

I'm also okay with X3 and Wolverine being cannon, though I think both films could have been done better. X3 could have told the cure story OR the Pheonix story, rather than doing a half-baked attempt at both, and been better for it. But the end was a nice setup for a sequel, doubly so after First Class with Moira. Wolverine suffered by, well, being about Wolverine, but it FINALLY had Gambit, and an awesome Wade Wilson (if a crappy Deadpool). Both films were fun enough, and if they want to work that into the next, I'm game...better than throwing out the baby with the bathwater and rebooting.

But if Days of Future Past actually tells a Bishop story...

[Dr.Epic]

You are NEVER the only one.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/34/Time_Enough_at_Last.jpg

"I disagree with that statement. Now someone please bring me some contacts!"

Points to anyone who gets that reference.

[VanBuren]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/34/Time_Enough_at_Last.jpg

"I disagree with that statement. Now someone please bring me some contacts!"

Points to anyone who gets that reference.

Oh yeah, I know that one. Let me identify your reference later when I have more time.

#TemptingFate

[Devonix]

Oh yeah, I know that one. Let me identify your reference later when I have more time.

#TemptingFate

But there was time now. There was time!

[VanBuren]

But there was time now. There was time!

Heh, I was kinda expecting someone to come in and make the reference, and then I was going to bust in with that. :smalltongue:

[Dr.Epic]

Heh, I was kinda expecting someone to come in and make the reference, and then I was going to bust in with that. :smalltongue:

Well, at least there isn't a gremlin on the wing of a plane.

[mangosta71]

The trailer makes me a little sad. I prefer Iron Man to Batman because Tony Stark isn't a whiny little emo bitch. Looks like they're taking that away.

[Dienekes]

Well, at least there isn't a gremlin on the wing of a plane.

That's no big deal, if there was I'd just ask Anthony to wish it into the cornfield.

[Dr.Epic]

I prefer Iron Man to Batman because Tony Stark isn't a whiny little emo bitch.

Yeah, Batman is pretty whiny and annoying. And Magneto is the best civil rights leader and believes in equality of all people and isn't a total, violent, murder racist. We're talking about statements that are completely false right?:smallconfused:

[The Glyphstone]

I don't think it's physically possible to whine in the Batvoice.

[Dr.Epic]

I don't think it's physically possible to whine in the Batvoice.

I think it's physically impossible to whine as Batman.

[Mando Knight]

I think it's physically impossible to whine as Batman.

No, but the writers always seem to make these melancholic retrospectives about how something they want Batman to arbitrarily dislike is connected to the day his parents died...

[Devonix]

I think it's physically impossible to whine as Batman.

Ehh depending on the writer Batman can be one of the whiniest superheroes around.

[DiscipleofBob]

Ehh depending on the writer Batman can be one of the whiniest superheroes around.

Batman spends all of his free time trolling forums for the best ways to defeat other characters just in case it ever comes up.

[Dienekes]

No, but the writers always seem to make these melancholic retrospectives about how something they want Batman to arbitrarily dislike is connected to the day his parents died...

Punk is nothing but death and crime and the rage of a beast!

[The Glyphstone]

Batman spends all of his free time trolling forums for the best ways to defeat other characters just in case it ever comes up.

Except all he can find is 'Give him prep time', which frustrates him to no end in a meta-loop because that's what he's already trying to do.

[Mordar]

I'm going to second the notion someone else gave that you probably don't need films to introduce most of the Justice League. Most people already have an idea who Aqua Man and Wonder Woman are (even if the general public's idea of Aqua Man is colored by the joke that Superfriends made of him), [SNIP]

Now, honestly, Wonder Woman probably should have her own movie anyway, what with her being one of the most well-known superheroes in general, and certainly the most well-known female one, but that's another matter.


The problem with Justice League vs Avengers is that the Marvel films all built towards the Big Damn Movie. Even the little hints, and post credit scenes built a solid continuity. The DC film-verse doesn't have that now, and they really need to get it before attempting a team movie like that.

So, one wonders if perhaps they couldn't flip the script here (pun kind of intended) and use the Big Damn Movie to introduce some of the lesser known characters? Think of it as a huge focus group...everyone is coming to see Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman (and maybe those girls that love Ryan Reynolds if he's GL), and the movie brings us Flash, Aquaman and (though I strongly hope *not*) Martian Manhunter, Cyborg and/or some of the Tier Three.

People react, clamoring for more of X & Y, but not Z...so then they decide which of the characters get their own feature, and which characters get the "speak with the fishes" treatment.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/34/Time_Enough_at_Last.jpg

"I disagree with that statement. Now someone please bring me some contacts!"

Points to anyone who gets that reference.

Someone remind me why he couldn't wander around and find a similar pair of glasses somewhere else...surely his script wasn't that unusual (while I freely admit it is unique in the end!)

[The Glyphstone]

Someone remind me why he couldn't wander around and find a similar pair of glasses somewhere else...surely his script wasn't that unusual (while I freely admit it is unique in the end!)

Because the episode ended?:smallbiggrin:


Though if his eyesight is really bad, he might not be able to see another pair of glasses - my eyesight is bad enough that I can barely make out my glasses against a surface from relatively short distance even when I know where they are. In a bombed-out wasteland like that, it'd be even harder to find and see an intact pair.

[Dr.Epic]

Man, remember when this thread was originally about Iron Man 3. That seems like 10 years ago. Now here we are talking about Twilight Zone. Progress!:smallwink::smallbiggrin:

[The Glyphstone]

Man, remember when this thread was originally about Iron Man 3. That seems like 10 years ago. Now here we are talking about Twilight Zone. Progress!:smallwink::smallbiggrin:

Hey, Iron Man is a guy in a robot suit who fights. That's very close to a guy dressed in a robot costume who fights. That's the plot of the episode 'Steel', Season 5 Episode 122 of the Twilight Zone.

So it's totally on topic!:smallbiggrin:

[Dr.Epic]

Hey, Iron Man is a guy in a robot suit who fights. That's very close to a guy dressed in a robot costume who fights. That's the plot of the episode 'Steel', Season 5 Episode 122 of the Twilight Zone.

So it's totally on topic!:smallbiggrin:

So did Homer in one episode of the Simpsons. Should we talk about that as well? Not like we can derail this thread anymore.

[The Glyphstone]

Considering "I, D'oh-bot", is also based off 'Steel', that would be a logical diversion, yes.

[pita]

No, but the writers always seem to make these melancholic retrospectives about how something they want Batman to arbitrarily dislike is connected to the day his parents died...

"The killer... he was eating a bagel... the smell of cream cheese haunts me to this day."

[Thialfi]

about the pants thing? Most Superheroes, both male and female don't wear pants anyway.

If I had the body that the vast majority of superheroes possess, I wouldn't wear pants either.