The IRON MAN 3 News & Speculation Thread - Part 5

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by marvel_freshman

New interview with James Badge Dale, who I had no idea was in the trailer until now.

http://www.showbiz411.com/2012/12/01...swalds-brother

Cool find marvel_freshman, thanks for sharing. Obviously from the airplane scene. Can't wait!

Surfer

[LokiDionysos]

Originally Posted by Surfer

LokiDionysos, as usual you have a very interesting take on things, but I am not so sure about all of the time travel stuff. It just seems to be getting confusing to me. I am also not sure why characters, that I would generally not consider to be time travelers in the comics, would appear as such in the film. I think it would be better to leave time travel to a character like Kang, and have the knowledge and technology to time travel come from the future, not from present day like you are suggesting. However, maybe thats just me.

Surfer

I realize it's a bit complicated but if Jan, AIM, and Thanos are all the major connecting veins of Phase 2 it could workout. AIM may have a little more time to be explored in CA2. If they're a resurrected Hydra head, that is.

I think it could be a way to almost reinvent the Ant Man character by rearranging some of his timeline. Adding more importance to him as the one thing stopping Ultron from using time travel like he will in Age of Ultron. Allowing Pym to discover the negative zone much quicker than in the other comics, adding that huge piece to the movies. Ant Man may be the one thing stopping an Age of Ultron from existing in the MCU. If Ultron kills Pym right after he's created, this stops Pym from ever being able to prevent Ultron's plans for the future. Of course, this requires Ultron having some knowledge of time and would be the reason why AIM is working on timetravel (with subatomic particles) and need Pym (from a plot perspective this also ties some things together, Red Skull will return as part of Ultron's masters). Timetravel would be more like what some of the villains want, but only one villain who comes into phase 3 has direct access to it. AIM thinks the subatomic world will lead to time travel and advance this idea to someone Shield has just chased away. Their research was too controversial and Shield wanted to control Pym. Shield took his stuff, which becomes Lang's, but Pym and janet got suckered into working for AIM. Additionally the only reason time-travel is a goal of AIM's is to try to retrieve Red Skull from the 40's and hence his DNA. If Red Skull's coming back we haven't been shown that he traveled time and dimensions yet. He went through a wormhole in the 40's but we have no clue where or when he ended up..

Not spoilers necessarily but more here:

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

This is why I keep mentioning that the time travel stuff would be mainly kept to Ant Man/Ultron/Immortus. And it would exist only to lead to places between dimensions and times.

In the comics they've made attempts to fix the infamous wife-beating episode. Sometimes it's suggested that Hank wouldn't have done that if not for Ultron etc.

What concerns me is the one attempt they made to fix this, where an alternate version of Kang manipulates things to make Pym hit Janet, and thus gets him kicked off the Avengers team. The android human torch body was involved in this story.
This wouldn't be exactly the same & he wouldn't strike her in the movies. Time-travel and a time-traveling version of Ultron would lead to their disagreement and the need to escape AIM quickly. Ultimately leading to their separation. Almost like this Marvel verse's version of the fight/him not being an Avenger. Which is what Ultron wants. He wanted to control his future by altering Pym's past. He wanted Pym out of the picture right off the bat. However, Pym ends up escaping to the future and sends Ultron to the 31st century. As they're time traveling to stop/hopefully trap Ultron they get separated and that's how Jan ended up trapped in the present, while Hank is in the middle of knowwhere. Two thirds of the Ant Man movie would be Pym and Jan working on time-travel for AIM in the past, learning to use Pym particles in the process, getting stuck small for a while, controlling the ants, and then becoming big. We'd see Ultron being developed at the beginning, but by the time Pym is big again Ultron is threatening AIM and Janet. They come to the quick decision to time-travel. The realization that Ultron's been doing his job, has almost completed the time-travel research he was created to assist in, and intends to use it to overthrow humanity, dawns on them. But Ultron can only send his consciousness (based on Pyms), because you have to travel through a negative wormhole. Something Pym and Janet can physically do, and Ultron can't, because of the Pym particles. Ultron hasn't learned to alter his own size/particles yet, but controls other technology.

While Pym was working with the Pym particles, controlling the ants etc, Ultron became self-aware and aware of the timeline manipulation that AIM intended (retrieving Red Skull/controlling Mandarin's Empire). Pym stops Ultron by trapping him in the 31st century, and prevents AIM from acquiring time-travel by taking the device out with him. Slips between the cracks. Gets separated from Jan, lost in space and time. Never heard from again, and Lang became the Ant Man for Shield eventually. They had some research from before he left Shield, but little knowledge of their work at AIM.

Some of this idea may be being re-worked for age of Ultron. In which an alternate version of what I just described goes on and leads to Ultron manipulating time and taking Ant Man out of existence before he can become a problem to Ultron's future goals.
Ultron realizes that because of the time-travel tech at AIM in this verse, he can take out Pym as soon as he's created. If he sees that Pym becomes a recurring problem to him, then he can stomp him out and rule all the various timelines, dimensions, and ages that Pym has just partially unlocked before Pym realizes it. Ultron tries to kill off Janet and Hank in the past, asap, AIM won't let them escape the building, so they panic and complete the time travel themselves before Ultron can get the Pym particle implants. Janet takes them and uses them on herself to stop Ultron from being able to time-travel directly. Only his consciousness is sent to the machines in Avengers 2.. well and Vision, a prototype he builds that can alter his density to travel back from the 31st century.

Ultron is Pym's mistake and like the timeline, he needs to fix it. He needs to timetravel out of knowwhere into the timeframe of Avengers 2 or Ultron's attack will succeed. Only Pym knows that this is when Ultron will return in full force (controlling nano-technology and taking advantage of the suits and existing AI). In Avengers 2 Ultron is still only flirted with and was purposely getting himself involved in things to affect Thanos. Ant Man takes care of his personal foe quickly when both of them suddenly show up after Lang dies. Pym begins to explain who he is & the timetravel fully to Shield and the Avengers. He's reunited with Jan, but we don't catch all of what just happened before Thanos becomes a threat again. Meaning Ant Man could come out after Avengers2, and take place in the 80's/ the present with Pym + Lang narrating Shield's view of events.

Janet and Lang introduce us to Pym's powers at the start of the story in Avengers 2 so that further explanation isn't needed when he timetravels in and they're reunited after Jan searching for him for four movies. The funny thing is Ultron would have prevented the world from falling into Thanos's grip but the masters would have been in charge. Ant Man comes in and changes things, but it only makes it so that Thanos can arrive on schedule. Ultron, Immortus, The Other and Thanos become the major players in phase 3. Nebula and Loki still have roles to play. All the other villains (minus Surtur and maybe Hela) are killed or imprisoned during Avengers 2. Loki is killed by Thanos but Hela helps him return during Ragnarok in Thor 3.

[ctsketch]

Pleas stahp. These theories...even if they were true....would be horrible for the franchise...

[Surfer]

@LokiDionysos, I understand you are trying to make sense of everything you believe to know, but this is not the comics where they have 100's of issues in which to tell a story or explain things. This is a movie or a connected series of movies with not a lot of screen time to get everything said and done, so these ideas you have whether they could possibly work or not on paper is not the issue, but rather if what you are suggesting is the best route for the characters and their franchises in the movies. So, with that said I think I speak for most people when I say that it would not be taking things in a good direction.


Surfer

[spideyboy_1111]

Loki , you mean well but as said before your theories are a bit too elaborate for not only these films, but for theories in general. There's quite alot of wiggle room to be incorrect due to not really having any basis to these theories....

That being said, i do like the idea of AIM working in the background on trying to retrieve Skull. But... Not the time travel aspect......... A way into the asgardian realms (where skull is) would be far more probable

[PyroChamber]

I was just thinking; though they may not talk too much about everything that happened in The Avengers, anyone else wonder if they'll at least mention Avengers Tower like progress on it or something?

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by PyroChamber

I was just thinking; though they may not talk too much about everything that happened in The Avengers, anyone else wonder if they'll at least mention Avengers Tower like progress on it or something?

Well I don't know if they will mention the Avengers tower, but we do know they are not ignoring the events of the Avengers in the Iron Man 3 movie. An example of this is seen in the Iron Man 3 trailer when Tony states he is having trouble sleeping and dealing with the events of NY. Just how much connection Iron Man 3 will have with The Avengers or other Phase 2 projects at this point is anyone's guess, but I think Feige has said that they want the characters to stand alone again, so I wouldn't expect too much.

Surfer

[Vartha]

heh Just had to stop in and say, My son really isn't an IM fan from the comics...over thanksgiving, I told him who the villian was Mandarin in IM3 and he laughed and pictured those Fruits with faces attacking Tony lol

and now, back to your previous assumptions

[Hawkingbird]

I hope they do mention some Avengers stuff. Maybe give hints to Phase 2.

[steintym]

I'm sure the events of The Avengers won't be completely ignored. I'm guessing they still want to keep all of these movies tied together, but I wouldn't expect much more than we've previously seen with the Phase 1 films.

[xeno000]

Originally Posted by Hawkingbird

I hope they do mention some Avengers stuff. Maybe give hints to Phase 2.

What I hope for is an in-depth look at what happened in The Avengers and how it affected Tony emotionally and financially. The man had his home turned into Ground Zero for an alien invasion led by a psychotic pseudo-god, then nearly died flying a nuke through a wormhole to the other side of the universe. Those were terribly traumatic experiences that would naturally cause Tony to have PTSD (nightmares, inability to sleep, etc.). When I saw the trailer I was happy to see that those very important issues are being addressed, rather than glossed over and forgotten.


Another thing I'm curious about is what legal ramifications might have arisen from the invasion and the damages it caused. Stark Tower was the epicenter of the attack, even though Tony himself was not responsible for it. The victims of the attack might consider Stark and his company legally responsible, however, mistakenly blaming him for Loki's destructive actions. I wonder if the script will touch on that angle at all, the fact that some people might sue Stark for damages because he seemed connected to the cause because of the portal's location. That would only deepen the problems Tony faces this time around, and it would play into The Mandarin's plans.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by xeno000

What I hope for is an in-depth look at what happened in The Avengers and how it affected Tony emotionally and financially. The man had his home turned into Ground Zero for an alien invasion led by a psychotic pseudo-god, then nearly died flying a nuke through a wormhole to the other side of the universe. Those were terribly traumatic experiences that would naturally cause Tony to have PTSD (nightmares, inability to sleep, etc.). When I saw the trailer I was happy to see that those very important issues are being addressed, rather than glossed over and forgotten.


Another thing I'm curious about is what legal ramifications might have arisen from the invasion and the damages it caused. Stark Tower was the epicenter of the attack, even though Tony himself was not responsible for it. The victims of the attack might consider Stark and his company legally responsible, however, mistakenly blaming him for Loki's destructive actions. I wonder if the script will touch on that angle at all, the fact that some people might sue Stark for damages because he seemed connected to the cause because of the portal's location. That would only deepen the problems Tony faces this time around, and it would play into The Mandarin's plans.

I doubt "the people" in general would harbor any animosity towards Stark and the Avengers. The epilogue of the Avengers pretty well showed that they're all rockstars now, and the world loves 'em appropriately. It's only the bad ol' guvmint/military that's going to give Tony problems.

[mkilban2]

Originally Posted by Vartha

heh Just had to stop in and say, My son really isn't an IM fan from the comics...over thanksgiving, I told him who the villian was Mandarin in IM3 and he laughed and pictured those Fruits with faces attacking Tony lol

and now, back to your previous assumptions

^Awesome haha

[TheVileOne]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

I doubt "the people" in general would harbor any animosity towards Stark and the Avengers. The epilogue of the Avengers pretty well showed that they're all rockstars now, and the world loves 'em appropriately. It's only the bad ol' guvmint/military that's going to give Tony problems.

What does Roger Wardell say it all means though?

[Hawkingbird]

Originally Posted by xeno000

What I hope for is an in-depth look at what happened in The Avengers and how it affected Tony emotionally and financially. The man had his home turned into Ground Zero for an alien invasion led by a psychotic pseudo-god, then nearly died flying a nuke through a wormhole to the other side of the universe. Those were terribly traumatic experiences that would naturally cause Tony to have PTSD (nightmares, inability to sleep, etc.). When I saw the trailer I was happy to see that those very important issues are being addressed, rather than glossed over and forgotten.


Another thing I'm curious about is what legal ramifications might have arisen from the invasion and the damages it caused. Stark Tower was the epicenter of the attack, even though Tony himself was not responsible for it. The victims of the attack might consider Stark and his company legally responsible, however, mistakenly blaming him for Loki's destructive actions. I wonder if the script will touch on that angle at all, the fact that some people might sue Stark for damages because he seemed connected to the cause because of the portal's location. That would only deepen the problems Tony faces this time around, and it would play into The Mandarin's plans.

Maybe the film will be made up of a lengthy court case on compensation

[xeno000]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

I doubt "the people" in general would harbor any animosity towards Stark and the Avengers. The epilogue of the Avengers pretty well showed that they're all rockstars now, and the world loves 'em appropriately. It's only the bad ol' guvmint/military that's going to give Tony problems.

It wouldn't take every New Yorker filing suits to cause a massive headache for Tony. Knowing human nature, some would be bound to sue. If even a few major property owners laid claims for damages Tony could be tied up in litigation with heavy costs for legal fees. There would be insurance on the property, of course, but any insurer worth its salt would find a way to avoid paying out, leaving Stark with the financial burden. Black probably won't go with that, but if he did it could be part of The Mandarin's plot to destroy Tony.


Senator Whatsisface was making noises at the end of the movie about holding the team responsible for what happened. We've all seen how senate and congressional hearings can be used IRL to gin up all manner of problems for corporations. They had already been after Tony to give up the Iron Man armor before. Even though the Air Force has War Machine, they don't have Stark's schematics or his manufacturing process. The invasion could give the government another excuse to try and seize the whole shebang, once and for all.

[Smashlilman]

Originally Posted by xeno000

It wouldn't take every New Yorker filing suits to cause a massive headache for Tony. Knowing human nature, some would be bound to sue. If even a few major property owners laid claims for damages Tony could be tied up in litigation with heavy costs for legal fees. There would be insurance on the property, of course, but any insurer worth its salt would find a way to avoid paying out, leaving Stark with the financial burden. Black probably won't go with that, but if he did it could be part of The Mandarin's plot to destroy Tony.


Senator Whatsisface was making noises at the end of the movie about holding the team responsible for what happened. We've all seen how senate and congressional hearings can be used IRL to gin up all manner of problems for corporations. They had already been after Tony to give up the Iron Man armor before. Even though the Air Force has War Machine, they don't have Stark's schematics or his manufacturing process. The invasion could give the government another excuse to try and seize the whole shebang, once and for all.

They want to mass produce his suit and make an army of Ironmen.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by xeno000

It wouldn't take every New Yorker filing suits to cause a massive headache for Tony. Knowing human nature, some would be bound to sue. If even a few major property owners laid claims for damages Tony could be tied up in litigation with heavy costs for legal fees. There would be insurance on the property, of course, but any insurer worth its salt would find a way to avoid paying out, leaving Stark with the financial burden. Black probably won't go with that, but if he did it could be part of The Mandarin's plot to destroy Tony.


Senator Whatsisface was making noises at the end of the movie about holding the team responsible for what happened. We've all seen how senate and congressional hearings can be used IRL to gin up all manner of problems for corporations. They had already been after Tony to give up the Iron Man armor before. Even though the Air Force has War Machine, they don't have Stark's schematics or his manufacturing process. The invasion could give the government another excuse to try and seize the whole shebang, once and for all.

Yes, given the litigious nature of this country, there's no doubt that "in the real world," folks would be lining up to sue the Avengers for the Battle of Manhattan. But I strongly doubt Marvel Studios or audiences want to get bogged down in that level of boring courtroom drama. And from a screenwriting standpoint, I'd say that Stark Industries has enough legal resources to shoot those lawsuits down; plus Nick Fury has a vested interest in the Avengers, and would certainly bring all his considerable political power to bear in Tony's favor.

IM3 has enough on its plate already; let's not bring the lawyers in, too.

[ctsketch]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Yes, given the litigious nature of this country, there's no doubt that "in the real world," folks would be lining up to sue the Avengers for the Battle of Manhattan. But I strongly doubt Marvel Studios or audiences want to get bogged down in that level of boring courtroom drama. And from a screenwriting standpoint, I'd say that Stark Industries has enough legal resources to shoot those lawsuits down; plus Nick Fury has a vested interest in the Avengers, and would certainly bring all his considerable political power to bear in Tony's favor.

IM3 has enough on its plate already; let's not bring the lawyers in, too.

Well that doesn't have to stop them from briefly mentioning the lawsuits on TV or something...Tony could be watching it on TV and turn it off or something like in IM2

[steintym]

Please no stories about lawsuits ...

If they're mentioned, I'll live, but I want an Iron Man movie not courtroom drama.

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Yes, given the litigious nature of this country, there's no doubt that "in the real world," folks would be lining up to sue the Avengers for the Battle of Manhattan. But I strongly doubt Marvel Studios or audiences want to get bogged down in that level of boring courtroom drama. And from a screenwriting standpoint, I'd say that Stark Industries has enough legal resources to shoot those lawsuits down; plus Nick Fury has a vested interest in the Avengers, and would certainly bring all his considerable political power to bear in Tony's favor.

IM3 has enough on its plate already; let's not bring the lawyers in, too.

Speaking of Nick Fury, (from the SHH Homepage) he mentions that he will not be in Iron Man 3, nor will any of the other Avengers for that matter. However, that doesn't necessarilly mean he or any of the Avengers couldn't be referenced in the movie. So, I guess we will have to see. Link below.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/ar...winter-soldier

Surfer

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by steintym

Please no stories about lawsuits ...

If they're mentioned, I'll live, but I want an Iron Man movie not courtroom drama.

Agreed. I mean the first two movies the small court room drama worked well because Tony was cocky and very sure of himself, and it was funny to watch him with his superior tech just owning and embarrassing the Senator in the court room. However, after the events of the Avengers we are left with a very different Tony Stark, one that almost seems broken to me and definitely not cocky unless he is using it as a facade. Almost, like I felt he was doing when he was cocky with Loki at Stark Tower. I felt he was really scared in that scene (with no armor and no defenses), but tryed to use his cockiness to play off the idea that he was scared and buy himself some time.
So, with this much darker type of movie I don't think the court room drama would work as well as it did in previous movies, not to mention it will start seeming somewhat repetitive and get boring. At least that is how I see it.

Surfer

[Matarreyes]

Originally Posted by xeno000

It wouldn't take every New Yorker filing suits to cause a massive headache for Tony. Knowing human nature, some would be bound to sue. If even a few major property owners laid claims for damages Tony could be tied up in litigation with heavy costs for legal fees.

Senator Whatsisface was making noises at the end of the movie about holding the team responsible for what happened. We've all seen how senate and congressional hearings can be used IRL to gin up all manner of problems for corporations. They had already been after Tony to give up the Iron Man armor before.

THIS. This so much. I have long since had suspicions that it will at least be a plot point. IM movies are known for being the most realistic of the bunch, and the Congress storyline in IM2 was a brave move.

First of all, we see the birth of this in Avengers: people asking for accountability. And who is the ONLY Avenger the public knows, the one who happens to be a billionaire to boot? They cannot go after SHIELD or any incognito heroes, they can only go after Tony, it´s a pretty obvious move. I also suspect that this may be the reason SHIELD is not looking out for Tony: Fury would only be content to leave him to the public lions if it meant protecting SHIELD from the same ****.

Second of all, in order for Tony to truly be vulnerable in this movie, he would need to lose his public support and his money - the two things he has going for him strongly right now. As long as he has money, he can keep making new suits no matter how many time his mansion is attacked. Now, tie Stark Industries in some litigation (this does not mean to be on screen except in passing) and there you have it.

Thirdly, the guy has been through some serious stuff in previous movies, so I doubt he will suddenly develop PTSD from nuking some aliens when he did not develop a hint of it after being waterboarded by terrorists. Now, if we have the Avengers stuff, some public ****storm he has to weather alone instead of getting his team support and maybe Pepper getting on his case for making 47 armors in a row, then I can buy him having nightmares.

BTW, Tony losing his company (multiple times) is a recurrent storyline in the comics. I don´t see why people argue so vehemently against this, while supporting some pretty obscure characters and cameos.

[Mr. Wooden Alligator]

The Mandarin isn't just some lackey for Guy Pierce's character, I hope? The comment about Kinglsey=Mouthpiece, Pierce=Brains, Other Guy=Muscle worried me.

[Surfer]

Originally Posted by Matarreyes

THIS. This so much. I have long since had suspicions that it will at least be a plot point. IM movies are known for being the most realistic of the bunch, and the Congress storyline in IM2 was a brave move.

First of all, we see the birth of this in Avengers: people asking for accountability. And who is the ONLY Avenger the public knows, the one who happens to be a billionaire to boot? They cannot go after SHIELD or any incognito heroes, they can only go after Tony, it´s a pretty obvious move. I also suspect that this may be the reason SHIELD is not looking out for Tony: Fury would only be content to leave him to the public lions if it meant protecting SHIELD from the same ****.

Second of all, in order for Tony to truly be vulnerable in this movie, he would need to lose his public support and his money - the two things he has going for him strongly right now. As long as he has money, he can keep making new suits no matter how many time his mansion is attacked. Now, tie Stark Industries in some litigation (this does not mean to be on screen except in passing) and there you have it.

Thirdly, the guy has been through some serious stuff in previous movies, so I doubt he will suddenly develop PTSD from nuking some aliens when he did not develop a hint of it after being waterboarded by terrorists. Now, if we have the Avengers stuff, some public ****storm he has to weather alone instead of getting his team support and maybe Pepper getting on his case for making 47 armors in a row, then I can buy him having nightmares.

BTW, Tony losing his company (multiple times) is a recurrent storyline in the comics. I don´t see why people argue so vehemently against this, while supporting some pretty obscure characters and cameos.

Well the comment by Tony in the trailer regarding him having trouble sleeping states it relates to the events of NY., as well as another scene describes his concern about not being able to protect the one thing he cares about most (which appears to be Pepper).

Now, I have always taken it as he has seen all these new things (Aliens and Gods) and forces at work (The Tesseract) beyond the scope of what he thought he knew, and he is left trying to process all of this new information as well as being left with a feeling uneasyness as to whether his Iron Man suit is really enough to protect everything that matters to him. So, he is left with a lot of self doubt is the way I saw it.

Now, I am not against them using something quick on the television regarding people coming after him with law suits and it effecting his money, and I am okay if they even have Mandarin as somehow connected to it, but while it can be part of the major plot point (Tony being ruined in every way possible), I don't want another court scene or something that lasts several minutes. Once again for me the other court room scenes went well because of the humor, but I think with this movie being darker it won't go over as well if they do.

Surfer