Does 'Hancock' ruin the 'drunken hero' angle?

[Hypestyle]

since apparently drunkenness/falling out of favor appears to be the big part of Hancock, would the public positively respond to the Iron Man sequel delving into this territory, or would it be "been there, seen that"? uh-oh.. maybe they should rethink 'demon in a bottle'...

[Brian Braddock]

Just posted on the Jon Favreau on Iron Man 2 thread saying as much:-

Favreau basically expresses his concern that Hancock's 'drunken superhero angle' will overshadow the 'Demon in a bottle' storyline, and wonders whether to include it in the sequel.

It is a shame though that Hancock has possibly made a few people in charge of the sequel wary of using the 'Demon in a Bottle' storyline; it kinda reminds me of the whole 'Incredibles/Fantastic Four family with superpowers' thing.

The filmakers were scared that the average moviegoer would think that FF was ripping off the Incredibles; being that the Incredibles movie was out 1st - when it was totally the other way around.

[kedrell]

I don't see too much of a cause for concern. Hancock looks to be more of a comedy whereas IM's 'Demon' storyline could be played much more seriously. Also, Hancock has his superpowers whether he's drunk or not. And I doubt someone's going to be filling in for him and eventually going crazy while he's on the sauce. There's plenty to differentiate the two.

[donk70]

I'm not sure if it will. The way I understand it, Hancock is a Comedy/Drama action flick where as IM II will be action. And lets face it, RDJ is 10x's the actor that Will Smith is

[Figs]

Just posted on the Jon Favreau on Iron Man 2 thread saying as much:-

Favreau basically expresses his concern that Hancock's 'drunken superhero angle' will overshadow the 'Demon in a bottle' storyline, and wonders whether to include it in the sequel.

It is a shame though that Hancock has possibly made a few people in charge of the sequel wary of using the 'Demon in a Bottle' storyline; it kinda reminds me of the whole 'Incredibles/Fantastic Four family with superpowers' thing.

The filmakers were scared that the average moviegoer would think that FF was ripping off the Incredibles; being that the Incredibles movie was out 1st - when it was totally the other way around.


That's why I'm getting sick of these wannabe superhero films. The Incredibles, Super Ex-girlfriend and now Hancock.

Primarily with Incredibles and now Hancock they steal ideas from other existing superheroes that are going to have a movie come out in the near future and use it for theirs to get credit.

I don't think it will ruin it for Iron Man 2 but it definetly is horse**** and I wish these losers would just leave the superhero films for the actual comic book properties.

[Chewy]

I haven't seen the film yet, so I don't know. But, from what I gather from the previews, it looks like he is a drunk (homeless?) superhero who sobers up when others (Bateman) confront him with the realities of his situation and who he is.


I can't see how that would hurt a possible "Stark falls heavily into alcohol (possibly based on a Pepper/Happy relationship, possibly based on an inability to stop the Mandarin, possibily based on fame and fortune going even further to his head), Rhodes takes over for him, then Stark has to battle personal demons before stepping back into the suit (with Rhodes possible standing in his way, with kind of a "Responsibility should only go to the responsible" mindset) before a final confront with Mandarin" storyline. Hancock seem to be a "drunk sobers up" tale, while Iron Man 2 would be more of a "man with a responsibility goes down a dark alley before getting his life back on track" story.

[Sardaukar]

Part of it depends on how successful Hancock is. If it fails to make much of a critical and/or financial splash, it may not matter. If it does okay, then it still may not matter.

[turtlefocker]

Its good to see that Favreau is looking at the story though...

[Raiden]

I think regardless of Hancock stealing the idea of a drunken superhero, IM2 should stay the course with the DOTB storyline. Besides, IM2 will have a serious tone whereas Hancock is slanted toward comedy/action route. Don't change the sequel just because of a Will Smith movie.

[Leto]

I am of the opinion that the entirety of the Demon in a Bottle story doesn't need to be brought to screen.

Show Tony, not Tony as Iron Man, on a drunken bender and the aftermath. The most iconic image of DiaB is Tony looking at his ragged face in a mirror amongst empty bottles and realising his situation.

The big message should be that while Tony has changed morally since the first film in regards to how he runs his business, he also needs to accountable for himself in his personal life because he is the force behind Iron Man.

Throw in Mandarin, Fin Fang Foom, maybe War Machine, and you've got a movie.

[FaT_tONle]

That's why I'm getting sick of these wannabe superhero films. The Incredibles, Super Ex-girlfriend and now Hancock.

Primarily with Incredibles and now Hancock they steal ideas from other existing superheroes that are going to have a movie come out in the near future and use it for theirs to get credit.

I don't think it will ruin it for Iron Man 2 but it definetly is horse**** and I wish these losers would just leave the superhero films for the actual comic book properties.

Figs... please... you snooze you loose... Iron Man could have been done years ago... these other studios are going to capitalize while the genre is still strong. They have every right to do there own thing. Is it a cause for concern? Absolutely. Hancock won't be just a comedy either. But frankly IM 2 doesn't have to be that overthetop. Is it a rehash? Yeah... you still have to make it light if you are going to appeal to the masses. That said... they can still take it to a deep personal level with this. Plus the fact that you have other characters that can carry the film while Downey is dealing with his problems with a guy like War Machine and Mandarin of course. They don't have to build their story around alcoholism... but touch up on it and try to make it different. It is unfortunate that Hancock beat it to the punch. That said Hancock looks great and it will probably make a **** load of money this year.

[Phatman]

Figs... please... you snooze you loose... Iron Man could have been done years ago... these other studios are going to capitalize while the genre is still strong. They have every right to do there own thing. Is it a cause for concern? Absolutely. Hancock won't be just a comedy either. But frankly IM 2 doesn't have to be that overthetop. Is it a rehash? Yeah... you still have to make it light if you are going to appeal to the masses. That said... they can still take it to a deep personal level with this. Plus the fact that you have other characters that can carry the film while Downey is dealing with his problems with a guy like War Machine and Mandarin of course. They don't have to build their story around alcoholism... but touch up on it and try to make it different. It is unfortunate that Hancock beat it to the punch. That said Hancock looks great and it will probably make a **** load of money this year.


Hancock is a cheeseball over the top CGI fest with no depth or substance. Outside of Will smith it looks like crap IM2 with a Demon in a bottle storyline would be deep and thought provoking, especially if they follow Iron man vol 1 115-128. I still get worked up reading those issues. Powerful stuff.RDJ has the acting ability and Faverau is a solid director; IM2 could be in the league of LOTR and Batman Begins in terms of quaulity. Hancock willl be forgotten by August and Will Smith will have his first flop since Wild Wild West.

[kedrell]

IM has already matched LOTR and surpassed BB in quality.

[Phatman]

IM has already matched LOTR and surpassed BB in quality.

True. IM2 could be an oscar contender. it has the actors and the director. With the DIAB storyline it coulde be the definitve superhero movie of the decade.

James woods for Hammer? I always thought it should be Anthony Hopkins. Throw in Monica Belluci as Whitney frost.

Anyway most people will forget about Hancock by July 8.

[Phatman]

IM has already matched LOTR and surpassed BB in quality.

True. IM2 could be an oscar contender. it has the actors and the director. With the DIAB storyline it coulde be the definitve superhero movie of the decade.

James woods for Hammer? I always thought it should be Anthony Hopkins. Throw in Monica Belluci as Whitney frost.

Anyway most people will forget about Hancock by July 8 With the Dark knight coming out and it being Heath Ledger's final performance I think Mr. Smith will have his first flop in ten years.

[Brian Braddock]

True. IM2 could be an oscar contender. it has the actors and the director. With the DIAB storyline it coulde be the definitve superhero movie of the decade.

James woods for Hammer? I always thought it should be Anthony Hopkins. Throw in Monica Belluci as Whitney frost.

Anyway most people will forget about Hancock by July 8 With the Dark knight coming out and it being Heath Ledger's final performance I think Mr. Smith will have his first flop in ten years.

C'mon - I think he'd definatlely suit the bill.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b64/SUPERBENITEZ/JustinHammer.jpg

[FaT_tONle]

James Woods as Justin Hammer would be sick.

[FaT_tONle]

Hancock is a cheeseball over the top CGI fest with no depth or substance. Outside of Will smith it looks like crap IM2 with a Demon in a bottle storyline would be deep and thought provoking, especially if they follow Iron man vol 1 115-128. I still get worked up reading those issues. Powerful stuff.RDJ has the acting ability and Faverau is a solid director; IM2 could be in the league of LOTR and Batman Begins in terms of quaulity. Hancock willl be forgotten by August and Will Smith will have his first flop since Wild Wild West.

If you guys want to trash Hancock because it might be taking some luster away from the characters we actually care about feel free.. I'd like to think most of us are better than that. The bottom line is that movie looks very entertaining and it will easily be in the top five gross this year. I'd wish they would have released that some other date. It's too close to Hulk and it will eat B.O there... but the bottom line is it still looks like a HR with the perfect mix of comedy and action.

[TheVileOne]

That's why I'm getting sick of these wannabe superhero films. The Incredibles, Super Ex-girlfriend and now Hancock.

Primarily with Incredibles and now Hancock they steal ideas from other existing superheroes that are going to have a movie come out in the near future and use it for theirs to get credit.

I don't think it will ruin it for Iron Man 2 but it definetly is horse**** and I wish these losers would just leave the superhero films for the actual comic book properties.

The Incredibles was a great movie and Fantastic Four was awful.

Enough of the crybaby nonsense. What did Super Ex-girlfriend ripoff? It was a dumb movie and it bombed. No one saw it.

Comic book properties don't have patents over super heroes. It's ridiculously stupid to say we shouldn't see amazing movies like THE INCREDIBLES because it upsets you that the comic book movies are only allowed to have super heroes in them.

That's like saying we could never get a movie like Robocop and leave it to the comics.

[kyuubijavi1]

since apparently drunkenness/falling out of favor appears to be the big part of Hancock, would the public positively respond to the Iron Man sequel delving into this territory, or would it be "been there, seen that"? uh-oh.. maybe they should rethink 'demon in a bottle'...


From the screening reports ive read hancock aint much of a threat to any super hero movie this year its a comedy and pretty much equal to my super ex girlfriend and that movie was crap

the demon in a bottle is a very interesting story line and should be introduced the only problem i see is the whole avengers thing would a druken Iron Man really fit in with them cause if i was cap id be like wth

[Figs]

The Incredibles was a great movie and Fantastic Four was awful.

Enough of the crybaby nonsense. What did Super Ex-girlfriend ripoff? It was a dumb movie and it bombed. No one saw it.

Comic book properties don't have patents over super heroes. It's ridiculously stupid to say we shouldn't see amazing movies like THE INCREDIBLES because it upsets you that the comic book movies are only allowed to have super heroes in them.

That's like saying we could never get a movie like Robocop and leave it to the comics.


It's not crybaby nonsense...and Incredibles was extremely overrated.

Robocop is a bad comparison...it was it's own thing. Last time I checked their weren't any comics based on a cop who was part man part machine...before they made the Robocop comics at least.

[Gilpesh]

It's not crybaby nonsense...and Incredibles was extremely overrated.

Robocop is a bad comparison...it was it's own thing. Last time I checked their weren't any comics based on a cop who was part man part machine...before they made the Robocop comics at least.

Um... it is when you are complaining how Incredibles ruined Fantastic Four.

Tim Story and Fox ruined it. Just cause the Incredibles did a family super team better, doesn't mean it stole what would have been a good Fantastic Four movie.

[Figs]

Um... it is when you are complaining how Incredibles ruined Fantastic Four.

Tim Story and Fox ruined it. Just cause the Incredibles did a family super team better, doesn't mean it stole what would have been a good Fantastic Four movie.


I never said it ruined FF. Show me...right now...where in my post I said that.

I agree about FF, it was ruined because they got a **** director who should stick to making urban films like Barbershop, and it was under Fox.

It's just I think if these studios are going to cash in on comic films success they should come up with their own original ideas.

[Gilpesh]

I never said it ruined FF. Show me...right now...where in my post I said that.

I agree about FF, it was ruined because they got a **** director who should stick to making urban films like Carwash, and it was under Fox.

It's just I think if these studios are going to cash in on comic films success they should come up with their own original ideas.

Did you you ever think that you could take Fantastic Four and Watchmen and turn it into a great superhero and kids movie?

That's pretty original right there. :whatever:

[Figs]

If you say so Gilpesh.

I didn't find it all that original, it was entertaining but no where near as awesome and perfect as so many people made it out to be, The Incredibles, not FF.

FF I probably liked less.

[TheVileOne]

It's not crybaby nonsense...and Incredibles was extremely overrated.

Robocop is a bad comparison...it was it's own thing. Last time I checked their weren't any comics based on a cop who was part man part machine...before they made the Robocop comics at least.

So what? There was the character Cyborg from Teen Titans.

The way you seem to think movies like THE INCREDIBLES should not be made because of comic books is ridiculous and has no merit.

[Figs]

So what? There was the character Cyborg from Teen Titans.

The way you seem to think movies like THE INCREDIBLES should not be made because of comic books is ridiculous and has no merit.


I don't necessarily think they shouldn't be made...it's just they should try to create characters that are a little more original.

[The Question]

Robocop was actually very heavily inspired by Judge Dredd. It's themes and very dystopian look at the future of law enforcement borrowed very heavily from the Dredd comics.

[kedrell]

^I always heard it was inspired by Iron Man & Deathlok.

[Superark]

I don't think Hancock will affect IM2 at all.

[TheVileOne]

I don't necessarily think they shouldn't be made...it's just they should try to create characters that are a little more original.

This is even more ridiculous, and you seem to be going back on your original rambling.

What was unoriginal about the characters in The Incredibles BESIDES their super powers? All of which have been around in various forms in comics for years since the golden age which is what Brad Bird drew heavy influence from.

[zmystico]

Hancock reminds me more of "Meteor Man" than an actual superhero movies, I think its geared more for the masses as opposed to comic/superhero fans. I don't see a trilogy or even a sequel for it, just a film capitalizing off the superhero movie trend right now. I thought my super ex-girlfriend used the superhero theme as a backdrop for a story about a bad breakup. I liked The Incredibles although the family's powers were a little stereotypical, the incredibly strong father, the speed demon son, the emo daughter with mystic powers, although I loved Elasti-girl....baby had back lol. I thought it was a good spoof on the superhero genre, and really just a fun flick, but I wouldn't expect a sequel for it.

[ultimatefan]

First of all, Hancock is a comedy, not a serious superhero movie. Second, it looks like it´s gonna be one of the bombs of the summer.

[Franklin Richards]

I understand this problem. The Incredibles sort of stole my beloved FF's thunder. Even though the FF were technically first, to some of the standard movie goer they weren't the First Family of superheroes.

I see Iron Man having some similar problems, but if 2 is as good as 1 then I don't see too much of a problem.


:thing: :doom: :thing:

[Gilpesh]

I understand this problem. The Incredibles sort of stole my beloved FF's thunder. Even though the FF were technically first, to some of the standard movie goer they weren't the First Family of superheroes.

I see Iron Man having some similar problems, but if 2 is as good as 1 then I don't see too much of a problem.


:thing: :doom: :thing:

But that was it. Too bad the people at fox thought that also and just didn't try at all.

[November Rain]

meh, the Incredibles managed to capture the heart and what it meant to be a superhero alot better than 90% of superhero films, it also captured the heart of a true villain who actually suceeded in killing dozens of superheroes in order to fulfill and destroy the legacy they all held.

As for hancock, this discussion is kinda silly, like you can't have two superheroes that drink.

GASP, HANCOCK CAN FLY, IT'LL RUIN A SUPERMAN FILM, GASP...

:down

let's at least see how much alcohol plays an influence before jumping to conclusions please. If anything it just shows he really doesn't care about being a hero, while stark uses it completely as a crutch.

comic stories have been covering the same ground for ages, even the same writer will rehash a story for different characters, it's no big deal.

[Eggyman]

meh, the Incredibles managed to capture the heart and what it meant to be a superhero alot better than 90% of superhero films, it also captured the heart of a true villain who actually suceeded in killing dozens of superheroes in order to fulfill and destroy the legacy they all held.

As for hancock, this discussion is kinda silly, like you can't have two superheroes that drink.

GASP, HANCOCK CAN FLY, IT'LL RUIN A SUPERMAN FILM, GASP...

:down

let's at least see how much alcohol plays an influence before jumping to conclusions please. If anything it just shows he really doesn't care about being a hero, while stark uses it completely as a crutch.

comic stories have been covering the same ground for ages, even the same writer will rehash a story for different characters, it's no big deal.

Yes! Well said. I don't think Hancock really has a drinking problem as such - not like Stark, anyway - he just comes across as a lazy bum that doesn't give a ****.

[Evil Twin]

Robocop was actually very heavily inspired by Judge Dredd. It's themes and very dystopian look at the future of law enforcement borrowed very heavily from the Dredd comics.

It probably should be noted that there was a shout out to Howard Chaykin, who's cynical corporate controlled future of American Flagg! was an obvious inspiration, in the closing credits to Robocop.

I honestly think that Robert Downey's history with addiction works against a demon with a bottle adaptation. There was nothing fun or charming witnessing that and a similar scenario is likely to evoke those memories.

[TheVileOne]

Actually, I found Iron Man going on a drunken bender in his suit trying to fight crime while being totally throwed was kind of funny.

[Vaportrail]

I really hope that Jon just goes to see Hancock and realizes that it's a different story they'd be trying to tell.

At least, I hope so. The fact that he compares Hancock's flying through a billboard to Iron Man, stating it'd be 'similar imagery', man. What the heck was Iron Man gonna do?

I think it's too early for War Machine. I figured we'd see the Mandarin and Demon in a Bottle storyline this time and we'd get to War Machine in the third movie.
Then again, if "Iron Man 3" is actually Stark's role in The Avengers, that does raise a question of when they'd get to War Machine.


I feel so rushed.

[TheVileOne]

Here's something else Favreau put on his MySpace group on the Hancock issue:

I never said Demon In a Bottle was out. I just want to make sure that we don’t make a movie too similar to Hancock. I want to wait and see what they do. Alcoholism will definitely inform the character as time goes on.

From the keyboard of Jon Favreau

[hatebox]

Hancock is a cheeseball over the top CGI fest with no depth or substance..


lol, I enjoyed Iron Man, but it's not like it's the polar opposite of those adjectives. hopefully the sequel will go a little deeper.

[Brian Braddock]

Robocop was actually very heavily inspired by Judge Dredd. It's themes and very dystopian look at the future of law enforcement borrowed very heavily from the Dredd comics.

True. I think Rob Bottin knew of the inspiration for Robo too - judging from his early Robocop designs that basically had a copy of Dredd's helmet. :woot:

[DACrowe]

If Hancock bombs or is bad, it won't matter. If not: you make it good enough and say "my comics" did it first , it won't matter. It's happened before with superhero movies.

[Visionary]

IM has already matched LOTR and surpassed BB in quality.Iron Man matched Lord of the Rings in quality, you've gotta be f---ing kiddin'?

I tell you, once the "my favorite comic book movie syndrome" kicks in, you people will say anything. :o

[EternalMaster]

There'll be at least a 2 year gap between Hancock and Iron Man. In Hancock, I seriously doubt alcoholism will be a FOCUS of the film. It's just something that funny old Hancock does. With Iron Man/Stark, it would be a pivotal part of the film.

And again, there will be a two year gap. I don't think the average movie goer is going to draw a connection.

[Ultraman Nexus]

Oh lord. Frankly I could live without ever seeing Demon In A Bottle on the big screen. Not only is it something that just tacks on angst to a character that already has enough, it would just be embarassing the character for movie going audiences and let's face it, no kid anywhere wants to see Iron Man become their drunkass uncle.

That being said, if there was a point in the story where Tony feels like giving up and they establish this with a single scene of him appearing to be drowning his sorrows I think that would be more than enough.

[Ishmayl]

That's why I'm getting sick of these wannabe superhero films. The Incredibles, Super Ex-girlfriend and now Hancock.

Primarily with Incredibles and now Hancock they steal ideas from other existing superheroes that are going to have a movie come out in the near future and use it for theirs to get credit.
Wow... just, wow. You know, the problem isn't that these people are "stealing" themes and themes. The problem isn't that they're coming out before some "legitimate" comic book superhero (and why do comic book heroes have to be the only superheroes???), the problem is that until Iron Man, Marvel and whoever else they had in the producer's seat was screwing everything up. Brad Bird wrote "The Incredibles" not to "steal" from Fantastic Four, but to show his own rendition of the superhero family. And how did FF answer that? Did they make a kick-ass movie that anyone with the kind of money Marvel and Avi Arad have combined should have made? Did they hire top-notch actors and actresses to play the roles? Did they hire only the best screenwriters to write the best stories of all times? Hell no, they hired second-rate actors (other than Alba, who might be a big-time star nowadays, but that doesn't mean she can act) who can barely get a job in a soap opera to perform a script that sounds like my younger brother wrote while he was high. Then, to top it all off, they only used sub-par special effects. Everyone by now should know that after Star Wars, the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and the Matrix trilogy, that if you're going to use crappy effects, people are going to complain. The bar has been set. It's silly to assume otherwise. So, the argument that "The Incredibles" in any way caused the backlash that FF got is just plain stupid - Marvel and AA caused that backlash, and should look in the future to hiring smarter and more talented people (like they have done for Incredible Hulk and Iron Man) to do the movies.

To answer the Hancock/Iron Man issue, there seems to be a really simple explanation to this. Write a story about a real alcoholic. Don't just write a story about some super-powered schmuck wreaking havoc all across a city because he's throwing a temper tantrum (ala Hancock); write a story about how alcoholism ruins lives - not only the alcoholic's but his family and friends as well. Write a deep, dark story about overcoming it - not through random acts of compassion, but by beating the real demon within. I trust that Jon Favreau could do that if he chooses too, and I trust that RDJ, Gwenneth Paltrow, and others involved can make it happen. But if Marvel keeps making the mistakes of the past, like it did with FF, and like it's rumored is going to happen to the second Iron Man movie (not giving Favreau enough time, possibly not even hiring him because he wants more money), then we're going to get a ****ty sequel that everyone will then blame on Hancock, instead of blaming it on the people responsible. [/rant]

[weezerspider]

IM has already matched LOTR and surpassed BB in quality.

That might have been the stupidest thing I've heard.....

[TheVileOne]

Thing is though, do they want Iron Man to be THAT heavy? Things were apparently cut out of the Hulk because it was too dark and brutal for the audience.

[BMM]

I understand this problem. The Incredibles sort of stole my beloved FF's thunder. Even though the FF were technically first, to some of the standard movie goer they weren't the First Family of superheroes.

I see Iron Man having some similar problems, but if 2 is as good as 1 then I don't see too much of a problem.


:thing: :doom: :thing:

I agree. Personally, I'm not too concerned. I think Hancock looks pretty generic and forgettable. If Iron Man 2 is good enough, it should be able to stand on its own, regardless of Hancock.

[weezerspider]

Thing is though, do they want Iron Man to be THAT heavy? Things were apparently cut out of the Hulk because it was too dark and brutal for the audience.

Comments like this make me want the Norton Cut even more.:bh:

[The Spider-Bat]

Nobody has even mentioned that Frank Castle drank like crazy in the '04 Punisher flick.

[Colossal Spoons]

I don't think the 2 will conflict at all :up:

[Anubis Raptor]

Personally, I try not to compare the two together. I believe
that Hancock and Iron Man are in two completely different universes.

____________________________

Man Of Mass Destruction

[Spider-Fan]

Depends on how it is handled in Hancock. Is he just a drunk in the movie to show he is a poor role model, or is his alcoholism creating his self destruction which he must come back from. The latter is what Stark's journey in IM2 should be if alcoholism is used. It seems to me that Hancock's drunkenness might just to further show he is not a good role model. Again, I'd have to see the movie first.

[TheVileOne]

Nobody has even mentioned that Frank Castle drank like crazy in the '04 Punisher flick.

It wasn't quite the pathos of a full blown alcoholic movie starring Nicholas Cage. The story of Iron Man's alcoholism is a lot more significant, deep, and important than Jane downing some wild turkey in the crappy Punisher movie that almost no one saw in theatres.

[LadyKayoss]

I've seen reviews for 'Hancock' that aren't that great, and one reviewer mentioned that it was very 'forgettable.' If that's the case, then maybe this will all be forgotten by the time IM2 comes out.

[Gotham]

I think Iron Man 2 will have Tony Stark's alcoholism at the fore front, rather than Hancock, which doesn't. So, no, it really shouldn't conflict. Especially since they're such different stories.

[Brian Braddock]

I've just finished watching a Hancock special on Sky Movies; to be honest - it left me a bit :cmad:.

Anyone remember the Ben Stiller Menendez Bros. court case gag from 'Cable Guy' where one of the brothers tries to shoe-horn the word 'Asian' into what he's saying over and over again? Well, in these interviews, the words 'Alchoholic' and 'Superhero' where used my Smith and Theron ad nausiem.

The part that really made my blood boil is that Theron at one point actually says "I mean, c'mon, it's a superhero.......and he's drunk! Where else are you gonna see a superhero drunk? You gotta go see Hancock to see a superhero...............drunk."

[weezerspider]

I've just finished watching a Hancock special on Sky Movies; to be honest - it left me a bit :cmad:.

Anyone remember the Ben Stiller Menendez Bros. court case gag from 'Cable Guy' where one of the brothers tries to shoe-horn the word 'Asian' into what he's saying over and over again? Well, in these interviews, the words 'Alchoholic' and 'Superhero' where used my Smith and Theron ad nausiem.

The part that really made my blood boil is that Theron at one point actually says "I mean, c'mon, it's a superhero.......and he's drunk! Where else are you gonna see a superhero drunk? You gotta go see Hancock to see a superhero...............drunk."

wow....... Did Smith say this? whoever did needs to read an Iron Man comic.

[Gilpesh]

Yeah... he needs to see Mystery Men.

And the Shoveler.... hammered.

[Raiden]

I've just finished watching a Hancock special on Sky Movies; to be honest - it left me a bit :cmad:.

Anyone remember the Ben Stiller Menendez Bros. court case gag from 'Cable Guy' where one of the brothers tries to shoe-horn the word 'Asian' into what he's saying over and over again? Well, in these interviews, the words 'Alchoholic' and 'Superhero' where used my Smith and Theron ad nausiem.

The part that really made my blood boil is that Theron at one point actually says "I mean, c'mon, it's a superhero.......and he's drunk! Where else are you gonna see a superhero drunk? You gotta go see Hancock to see a superhero...............drunk."

Well, I'm sure IM2 will treat the alcoholism with alot more respect than Hancock would. In Hancock, it's more like "Well, I bet you have never seen a drunken superhero, well here he is!", but in IM2, it will be part of a realistic storyline that explains how Stark hits bottom, and how he came back from the abyss. I doubt Hancock will be able to outdo the Demon in a Bottle storyline in IM2.

[Lots o lafs]

I seriously doubt they will have Iron Man/Tony Stark(Robert Downey Jr.) as an alcoholic.
1. It would feel weird.
2. MADD would go crazy about it.
3. It was not directed just at Adults. It was directed at Teens and kids also.
4. Alcohol reduces your motor skills so put it together... Flying a multi million dollar piece of machinery while under the influence of alcohol... DWI.

Hancock is an under achieving drunk, Iron Man is an alcoholic.

[Rishi]

I think its too soon. Save this for the third film, we need to see Stark having fun and basking in his new superhero role

[Iron_Stark]

They should save it for the 3rd or give a quick nod or "tip of the hat" as Favreau put it.

Seriously, we got what 5-10 minutes of Stark in the Mark III armor at the very end of the movie and now people want that all over again??

Like the poster above me said let Stark having fun in his new superhero role.

[MaidenUK]

Yes.... Stark should be having fun as Ironman. Maybes they could start some sort of "Slow" decline into the Dunk Stark for the "Demon" story line in IM3. Maybe you could also start down the War machine path too?

[Iron_Stark]

In the begining of the movie, immediately after or during the credits, they should have Stark look into the mirror like in the classic issue 128, with his shirt unbuttoned and an unkept beard, and have him kick the habit right there.

We do not need another movie of RDJ as Stark for about 10 minutes or less in the red and gold armor. We don't need drunken Stark flying around crashing into sh** like Hancock.

We need a fully developed Mandarin story.

[November Rain]

never really got the impression hancock was truelly effected by the alcohol and rather simply used it as a form of escapism to deal with things. Once he had purpose, he was fine...

[Lots o lafs]

Frank Castle was dealing with depression and it was rated R.

[nogap87]

I would like it if they just show Stark with a drink in his hands through much of the sequel and keep the same tone as the 1st movie except with more action. Near the end have Stark find out some bad news like his company is being taken over, Pepper is dating someone, or their were some significant injuries/deaths as a result from his epic battle against >insert villian<. Stark reaches for the bottle. Cue credits.


I can wait till #3 for War Machine. RDJ is the main attraction after all.

[Spider-Fan]

Hancock won't affect alcohol in future IM movies. They didn't focus on his drinking like they would for Stark.

[FaT_tONle]

Basically IM2 won't be in trouble as long as they leave out the whole public perception.... keep the alcohol behind closed doors... speculation and rumors that eventually become a reality. To make it different... have the public favor Iron Man instead of rejecting him... but of course may Iron Man would lose interest half way in to add to the self conflicted hero. I forsee no problems with this.

[kyuubijavi1]

I seriously doubt they will have Iron Man/Tony Stark(Robert Downey Jr.) as an alcoholic.
1. It would feel weird.
2. MADD would go crazy about it.
3. It was not directed just at Adults. It was directed at Teens and kids also.
4. Alcohol reduces your motor skills so put it together... Flying a multi million dollar piece of machinery while under the influence of alcohol... DWI.

Hancock is an under achieving drunk, Iron Man is an alcoholic.

That's horrible reasons if they do the drunken story line its part of his character and a pretty big one Iron man can be shown that he isn't handling the pressure of being a hero. I mean honestly everything in his life before becoming Iron-man was fairly easy he was born into a multi-billion franchise he was a genius since the get-go, now he is dependent on saving lives and being a role model and all that junk could easily drive some one into drinking & worse.

Now don't forget that in superhero movies the second one is usually, hell its always the one where the hero wants to give up and live a normal life.

As for the whole role model hero thing Iron-man was a womanizer throughout the film if he takes up drinking ( he drank in almost every scene in IM ) it wouldn't be that much of a change. My only beef is if the drunk saga starts in the second how will he function in a group of superhero's.

[cain097]

Since, the "Demon in a Bottle" storyline is pretty much the seminal Iron Man story and Favreau appears to like it, I definitely see it being a factor in the next movie. I don't think anyone should expect anything like a direct translation of that story to film, but the general theme and maybe even some imagery will probably survive. Just think about how Batman Begins translated Year One to film. I don't think its too early for Tony to go through a rough patch, and this story is definitely unique for the comic book world. By the time the film is resolved, Tony Stark would be a stronger, more complete person who would easily fit within a superteam in whatever capacity they chose.

[Gilpesh]

Hancock's drinking was never scary. It was always played for laughs in the movie even when they got serious about cleaning him up.

If Iron Man 2 uses Demon in a Bottle, the drinking isn't going to be funny at all.