Iron Man sequel now officially set for April 30th 2010!

[[A]]

Hey, I used to read these articles about how they'd deal with the demon in a bottle thing, taking into consideration that they were releasing a movie about a drunken super-hero (Hancock) and, if it did well on the box office, why would people go see another movie with the same, uhm, topic. In the other hand, if Hancock failed, how would they make a demon in a bottle thing interesting, and that kind of thoughts and considerations and all.. You think that thought is correct..? or way off..?

[Bubonic]

I didn't see Hancock, but I assume that it was dealt with in sort of a comical manner?
Demon in a Bottle has the potential of being very serious and provoking.
And you ask "why would people go see another movie on the same topic" well because its ****ing Iron Man thats why!

[[A]]

I don't ask that myself, just quoting some other people's...uhmm...thoughts

[I Am The Knight]

Originally Posted by Aeghast

Hey, I used to read these articles about how they'd deal with the demon in a bottle thing, taking into consideration that they were releasing a movie about a drunken super-hero (Hancock) and, if it did well on the box office, why would people go see another movie with the same, uhm, topic. In the other hand, if Hancock failed, how would they make a demon in a bottle thing interesting, and that kind of thoughts and considerations and all.. You think that thought is correct..? or way off..?

Well, no one will care about Hancock in 6 months, let alone 2 years from now, when IM2 is supposed to drop. So, I think they'll be fine

[TheVileOne]

I think they just wanted to see and how Hancock approached, which was terribly.

But then again, Hancock is still on its way to $220 million or more.

[TheComicbookKid]

Hancock was a superhero. The effects of alcoholism were played for laughs.

Stark is just a man. The affect it has on him should be serious, but I'm not sure if one movie is enough time to serious convey the problem. They didn't even setup for the possibility in the first movie. They should just let it go and move on unless they are setting it up for a third movie.

[TheComicbookKid]

http://www.moviehole.net/200814569-d...lks-iron-man-2

The Pick Up Artist himself (before your time kids, just pretend I didn't say anything), Robert Downey Jr chatted up IESB a couple of days back and offered up some dirt on the upcoming "Iron Man 2".
"Our goals are more of the same. The idea that he said he's Iron Man in part 1...it's one thing to say it, and it's another thing to actually evolve to the point where you can live in a heroic fashion. You know, they say, ‘The superhero movie always needs to follow...' and I said who is that guy? Get him out of here! We want to do what worked for us last time, in a way that evolves. We're talking about a guy who is put in an extraordinary circumstance, and the people that are around him, and how that creates a sense of family, and how that disrupts whatever forces that we have to say that are working [in his life]. I like the idea of an Iron Man 2 that you're able to understand various points of view. You're able to touch on some subjects that are a lot more far reaching, while still grounding it in entertainment."
Get all that!?
Meanwhile, Latino Review asked Downey Jr about the chances of Captain America or Thor popping up in the next film - and he seemed to indicate that there was the possibility of a couple of cameos in the future flick.

[Microchip]

I believe RDJ has said that he wants to explore alcoholism in an earlier interview, but in a more recent one, he talks about how he wants to maintain the level of fun from the first IM. Not sure how that'll play out. I just hope they make a good movie, because the Avengers REALLY needs one character with a blockbuster franchise in it!

[scatterax]

Originally Posted by Microchip

I believe RDJ has said that he wants to explore alcoholism in an earlier interview, but in a more recent one, he talks about how he wants to maintain the level of fun from the first IM. Not sure how that'll play out. I just hope they make a good movie, because the Avengers REALLY needs one character with a blockbuster franchise in it!

captain america will brobably be a blockbuster 2. especially if they call the movie "Captain America"

[Asteroid-Man]

It was better in May... cause then it was:
04.03.2010

[Superhero 101]

that would have been so cool.

[scatterax]

ya. but number patterns in release dates mite be a bad omen tho. look what happened to the remake of the omen? what w/ all the 6s. I don't remember hering many good things about that film.

[Apollo]

Originally Posted by Asteroid-Man

It was better in May... cause then it was:
04.03.2010

yea, well aren't you clever!!!




but it Would have been better...

[nolan's roll'n]

I just hope it lives up to the hype and RDJ can deliver again and give us fans what we want.

[AnorexicBatman]

Iron Man was MARVEL's Batman Begins
Let's hope they do "Demon In A Bottle" and give us another "The Dark Knight"
" He's a guardian ... a jerk ... a watchful protector ... a womanizer ... he's
THE INVINCIBLE IRON MAN!" *cue awesome theme and audience applause*

I can see it now, 10 years hence, the top 10 highest grossing movies of all time are all superhero movies with the Dark Knight leading

[I Am The Knight]

Originally Posted by AnorexicBatman

Iron Man was MARVEL's Batman Begins
Let's hope they do "Demon In A Bottle" and give us another "The Dark Knight"
" He's a guardian ... a jerk ... a watchful protector ... a womanizer ... he's
THE INVINCIBLE IRON MAN!" *cue awesome theme and audience applause*

I can see it now, 10 years hence, the top 10 highest grossing movies of all time are all superhero movies with the Dark Knight leading

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Skippy Roberts

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080505/20080505005656.html?.v=1

I think with WB becoming serious about making movies based on DC superheroes, Marvel should try to have some quality control instead of releasing them quickly in hopes that they can beat WB/DC to the punch. After the success of IM, I think Marvel might've gotten a bit too cocky, without seeing TIH's BO return as a warning sign that perhaps not all their movies will be well-received or make tons of money. I also think they should let IM be more isolated in their universe, and they shouldn't introduce fantasy characters like Thor in IM sequels (they should leave it to The Avengers instead).

[marcvader]

The problem with Iron Man is that he's pretty powerful thus his enemies can't be comprised of normal humans with weapons. Take a look at Superman, he's boring because it's always the same thing, no one on earth can really challenge him so you need to introduce fantasy some how to mix it up. Now mind you I'm not saying Iron Man is as powerful as Supes but he does need something greater than just ordinary humans with superweapons, you need to introduce fantasy to an extent and you can't have him just fighting other people in similar suits all the time either as gets old quick.

[FaT_tONle]

Originally Posted by Raiden

I think with WB becoming serious about making movies based on DC superheroes, Marvel should try to have some quality control instead of releasing them quickly in hopes that they can beat WB/DC to the punch. After the success of IM, I think Marvel might've gotten a bit too cocky, without seeing TIH's BO return as a warning sign that perhaps not all their movies will be well-received or make tons of money. I also think they should let IM be more isolated in their universe, and they shouldn't introduce fantasy characters like Thor in IM sequels (they should leave it to The Avengers instead).

I am not worried about IM2... Marvel isn't stupid enough to screw that one up. They'll give us what works... don't expect TDK or anything but it could still be close... or comparable at least. What I am worried about is Thor and Avengers... because Marvel seems clueless. They can't hapass a string of blockbusters together and expect them to be automatically successful. At the same time they can't treat Thor like they treated the TIH reboot. They still have their work cut out for them.

[Armored Avenger]

It seems the release date has been changed to May 7, 2010

http://www.superherohype.com/news/ir...ws.php?id=7689

[TheVileOne]

Not surprising. If it's released 4/30, it's not quite summer.

May 7th keeps it at the first weekend of may release date. That is the weekend that has given Marvel the most success. Spider-man, Spider-man 3, X-men 2, and Iron Man all came out in the first weekend of May.

Good move setting Cap there for 2011 well.

Hope all this goes off swimmingly.

[FaT_tONle]

So what happens to poor old Narnia 3? I thought they bookmarked May 7th... to bad Narnia 2 flopped. But I think Disney has Prince of Persia slated for May 2010 as well... don't know why they want to overcrowd one month like that. Narnia will probably go to the Holiday season.

[Anti-Venom]

The Narnia fans are worried
http://www.narniaweb.com/news.asp?id=1968&dl=21028080

[Iron_Stark]

Originally Posted by Anti-Venom

The Narnia fans are worried
http://www.narniaweb.com/news.asp?id=1968&dl=21028080

LMAO at some of the quotes:

I think that VDT will totally beat Iron Man 2 to a pulp! VDT is way better!!!
Posted Sept 29, 2008 7:27 PM by susanthegentleofnarnia

Gosh, why would anyone see ironman 2? I just don't get it. I think they have to change the release date now.


Posted Sept 29, 2008 7:33 PM by decarus

Seriously, they should move Narnia to December if they want a chance at success.

[I Am The Knight]

Originally Posted by Iron_Stark

LMAO at some of the quotes:







Seriously, they should move Narnia to December if they want a chance at success.

Agreed. What fanboyism. These type of movies (Narnia type) seem to really reach their potential targent audience during the fall and beyond. Surely Disney will want to avoid another Caspian-like situation.