[Stalker]

I enjoyed it. As said before, it is a fun popcorn flick, and I like the direction Tony Stark went in this one post-Avengers. I didn't like

Spoiler

the fact that Stark made 42 different prototypes and not one is specialized to withstand extreme heat. Having every suit be crippled with a single touch got old, fast. Also, I didn't like the Christmas in May thing.

[Vaddon Ra]

I actually thought it may have been the best iron man film. I know some criticism has been levelled at the pg-13 stuff, I haven't read the comics either, but i felt like it fit with the iron man we see in the marvel films so far. I thought his character progressed nicely and overall really enjoyed it. Not saying it was perfect, but I kinda think people feel irom man 1 was actually a lot better than it really was... Just sayin', cos iron man 1 was essentially a bog standard cliche action movie, it was really good to watch because of Robert Downey Jr and the scripting of his character, but aside from him and him alone the actual action of the original was, well, kinda boring. I thought film 2 was basically the same but with no real push for progression and in fact this film, with it's push to give him a little more desperation and finally move his character from the suave but kinda broken inside archetype was what was needed. True, as stated above, it should have been the second film and the second should ideally not really exist but for what it was in light of what the iron man series has been I thought it was the right film, albeit not perfect, but I think people are looking at IM1 with rose tinted goggles a little too much. Thor was better than Iron Man 1 as an overall if I'm honest although that may just be because I was so surprised I didn't hate it

I'd give IM3 4/5 stars and recommend to anyone who really just wants to be entertained

[dktorode]

I enjoyed it a lot!
I just wish they would have shown more of what the different suits where specialised to do at the end.
They mostly all seemed rather generic which we all know they arent. Kinda let down....other than that...great addition to the franchise.

[tiam]

Studlock, on 06 May 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

Nope, not even close. The comic books themselves don't move that many copies. Make no mistake the money makers are the IP's (which the movies probably make the most money of, then maybe toys?) which Avengers is now probably the biggest one. As for the direction of GotG, I doubt they'll be aiming for anything other than the market of the Avengers. Iron Man wasn't a super well known comic book character until the movies, nor do I really think Captain America or Thor. Really now that I think about it Avengers were never really all that well known outside of comics so who knows what'll happen.

Yeh the xmen and spiderman are the most well known Marvel characters. What are IPs by the way?

[Studlock]

@Jean_Claude Van tiam
Sorry intellectual properties, I was just being lazy.

Man I really want to go see this but none of friends have the time or are not interested. I might have to go by myself.

[McLovin]

So...I saw it.

I was left kind of speechless, and not in a good way. I felt very ambivalent about the whole thing.

On the one hand, I didn't like how Mandarin was handled. On the other, I recognize that was probably the best way they could have handled that character.

On the one hand, I liked all the remote suit flying. On the other, it cheapens the action a bit since Tony is never in danger.

On the one hand, Tony is nice to that kid. On the other, he calls him a pussy.

On the one hand, cool to see all those suits. On the other, that's all you do - just see them.

Just lots of stuff that sort of cancelled itself out.

Also, I didn't feel Downey brought his A-game this time.

And I too thought having it set during Xmastime was just random.

My least favorite of the franchise. Perhaps I'll feel different on a rewatch.

[D'rek]

I saw it on the weekend. I had fun, but I wasn't really moved or intrigued a whole lot... felt myself slipping into ignore-the-plot-and-enjoy-the-fireworks mode.

There were just a whole bunch of things that didn't seem to line up very smoothly

Spoiler

-if the Mandarin is a fake actor dude, why do Mia and Aldritch refer to him ominously?
-(as already mentioned up-thread) not being able to just call Jarvis for a new suit when 40 of them show up later remotely is weird
-what is with Mia being all "we need Tony for our extremis research stabilization" ? That was never explained at all, AFAIK, making the whole Mia character pretty pointless
-similar to the above, what did the whole brain presentation at the start and trying to get Stark Industries to fund AIM have to do with anything? Especially because it seems the extremis thing is blood- and not brain-related.

McLovin, on 12 May 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

On the one hand, I didn't like how Mandarin was handled. On the other, I recognize that was probably the best way they could have handled that character.

Spoiler

I think it would have been a totally different direction of movie, but after Thor/Avengers introduced magic aliens, I don't see any reason they couldn't have done Mandarin as a human who found some other magic alien race's old abandoned technology on Earth or something like that. They could have tied it into the whole Tony-has-PTSD-and-feels-unvaluable part pretty easily, too, by making this how Tony proves he can beat magic alien tech without the help of Thor/other magic aliens.

Furthermore, wikipedia tells me that the Mandarin's rings all have different effects - if they wanted to still have the big 40-different-suits ending having different specialized suits be destroyed and counter the different Mandarin effects would be a good way of showing off the suit specializations and Tony's thinkymeatz.

All that being said, still entertaining and I'm sure a lot of it was dictated by how they are planning to setup Avengers 2.

Also, I really liked seeing Gwyneth Paltrox

Spoiler

kicking some ass!

[Illuyankas]

I'm pretty sure:

Spoiler

1. They were doing so in front of people who didn't know he was an actor, so he was in character the whole time they were filming until he returned to his hideaway
2. I know JARVIS crashed when Stark, uh, crashed, but there's no reason he couldn't have gotten any of the suits once he was back online save for plot
3. You must have missed the whole 'Stark drunkenly solved enough of the stabilisation problem with Extremis to prevent people exploding when damaged like the plant at the start, so once Mia and AIM were stuck they needed him to stop people exploding without regular doses' plot thread.
4. Man, I don't even remember the start party (starty? no that's dumb)

[Primateus]

Spoiler

I think the reason he couldn't call up a new suit was because the gate to the suits "hangar" was blocked by rubble from his house

[McLovin]

D, on 13 May 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

McLovin, on 12 May 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

On the one hand, I didn't like how Mandarin was handled. On the other, I recognize that was probably the best way they could have handled that character.

Spoiler

I think it would have been a totally different direction of movie, but after Thor/Avengers introduced magic aliens, I don't see any reason they couldn't have done Mandarin as a human who found some other magic alien race's old abandoned technology on Earth or something like that. They could have tied it into the whole Tony-has-PTSD-and-feels-unvaluable part pretty easily, too, by making this how Tony proves he can beat magic alien tech without the help of Thor/other magic aliens.

Furthermore, wikipedia tells me that the Mandarin's rings all have different effects - if they wanted to still have the big 40-different-suits ending having different specialized suits be destroyed and counter the different Mandarin effects would be a good way of showing off the suit specializations and Tony's thinkymeatz.

Yeah, I wasn't going for the magic aspect so much as

Spoiler

a racial stereotype kinda thing. I think if they had played him straight up as the inscrutable Eastern Asian terrorist there would have been some outrage from audience and critics. Maybe some loss of international *cough*Chinese*cough* revenue. So instead they do the bait-and-switch, which was probably the better call.

[QuickTidal]

Enjoyed it quite a bit.

Partially in a Shane Black (Read: Last Boy Scout, Lethal Weapon) gritty way, and partially because setting the story back to the beginning-ish sort of helps it avoid 3rd-film-itis.

Aside from all else, choosing to spend most of the film dealing directly with the fallout from his almost-sacrifice in the AVENGERS finale, and the PTSD that came along with that and crippled him mentally was a stroke of absolute Marvel Phase 2 brilliance. Grounding IM3 in that harsh reality is what I've always wanted to see happen in a comic movie. They make these huge action setpieces at the end of these films and everyone just is status-quo in the next film, nothings wrong, they are unaffected...

But here they take Tony Stark, arguably the most easy-going, unaffected individual in the Marvel universe, and force him to not only deal with the fallout of such an action setpiece, but come to vivid and uncomfortable conclusions about it.

For that alone, IM3 will probably be my fave of the trilogy.

[blackzoid]

It was ok I guess.
I'm a bit tired of RDJ though. Its like when PoTC 3 At Worlds End with Depp just limping along, the charming lead character is now expected to snark/joke on command. Loses its spontaneous and unexpected edge and becomes a leaden factory-produced thing. The humour that is. I think RDJ should stick to the Avengers Ensemble's from know on. That way the contrast of his personality would work better.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 14 May 2013 - 03:10 PM

[QuickTidal]

blackzoid, on 14 May 2013 - 03:08 PM, said:

It was ok I guess.
I'm a bit tired of RDJ though. Its like when PoTC 3 At Worlds End with Depp just limping along, the charming lead character is now expected to snark/joke on command. Loses its spontaneous and unexpected edge and becomes a leaden factory-produced thing. The humour that is. I think RDJ should stick to the Avengers Ensemble's from know on. That way the contrast of his personality would work better.

He is. This was the final standalone IRON MAN film.

[polishgenius]

QuickTidal, on 14 May 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

He is. This was the final standalone IRON MAN film.

That was the rumour what with his contract ending, but more recent words have said it's not.

Mind, I'm fairly sure Marvel will be making Iron Man films even if Downey Jr. leaves. It's way too much of a cash cow.

[QuickTidal]

polishgenius, on 14 May 2013 - 04:34 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 14 May 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

He is. This was the final standalone IRON MAN film.

That was the rumour what with his contract ending, but more recent words have said it's not.

Mind, I'm fairly sure Marvel will be making Iron Man films even if Downey Jr. leaves. It's way too much of a cash cow.

I'll just leave this here.

http://io9.com/reali...ney-j-496429844

[McLovin]

Just to be contrarian, I offer that IMO Tobey Maguire was the perfect Peter Parker, and they wound up recasting him.

[Illuyankas]

I offer in return that you are in fact a crazy person and Tobey Maguire was only overshadowed as a gaping void of unfunny unjoke-making anticharisma in that role by Kirsten Dunst bursting out of her fleshy shell into her true incomprehensible form of pure atrocity and devouring the concept of taste itself, leading to the creation of one of mankind's greatest sins, Spiderman 3.

[QuickTidal]

McLovin, on 14 May 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

Just to be contrarian, I offer that IMO Tobey Maguire was the perfect Peter Parker, and they wound up recasting him.

I will give you that he was the perfect Silver or Golden Age Peter Parker. The nervous, nerdy, wallflower. Absolutely, 100%.

But as for a Peter Parker as he has existed since the mid-to-late 1970's (and up till now)...that Garfield did a stellar job of the snarky, not-so-responsible asshole teenager, modern version of Parker.

[dktorode]

meh...my guess is that Downey knows damn well which side his bread is buttered...and he will sign for as many movies as he can.

but that doesnt mean he needs simply role over to play the role every time wage negotiations take place. If he dont put up a fight his agent aint doing his job right.

This post has been edited by dktorode: 15 May 2013 - 11:34 PM

[dktorode]

QuickTidal, on 15 May 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

McLovin, on 14 May 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

Just to be contrarian, I offer that IMO Tobey Maguire was the perfect Peter Parker, and they wound up recasting him.

I will give you that he was the perfect Silver or Golden Age Peter Parker. The nervous, nerdy, wallflower. Absolutely, 100%.

But as for a Peter Parker as he has existed since the mid-to-late 1970's (and up till now)...that Garfield did a stellar job of the snarky, not-so-responsible asshole teenager, modern version of Parker.

this is true
garfield did a much better parker (and spidy...actually more so as spidy is a motor mouth)


but how much was that down to script compaired to acting?
I still thing garfield has that "twitchy" edge over tobey.



tho im over tobey now as an actor in general for a loooong time already.