The IRON MAN 3 News & Speculation Thread - Part 4

[The Infernal]

It fitting in with the story is a big ask. Like I said, we've been there with Black Widow in IM2. Not to mention that even a role that 'fits the story' can still detract from the movie. Some might view her as out of place for an Iron Man solo movie.

It doesn't go against "everything they've built with the MCU" to tell an Iron Man story with just Iron Man characters. It isn't the point of the MCU to have heroes making cameos or having supporting roles in other heroes movies just because they can do that.

[Crimson King]

You're right, but wouldn't you agree that not all cameos are "just because?" MCU movies will have small sections of crossovers, and they're better because of it.

[spideyboy_1111]

I don't think Widow was the problem with IM2 at all..... Whiplash however....

[Crimson King]

Yeah, I place far more blame on Whiplash's story.

That being said, I still like the movie. It gets too much flack.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by Crimson King

Yeah, I place far more blame on Whiplash's story.

That being said, I still like the movie. It gets too much flack.

agrees... it even flows better with all the films

i think it gets the most heat basically because it was the first sequel and "true" set-up for avengers, and people didn't get it.

[Crimson King]

I wasn't a fan after the first viewing, but when I watched it again months later, I had no problem with it.

[Chewy]

War Machine, Whiplash and Black Widow were all given jack to do but I don't think Iron Man 2 should be used as an example of crossing over characters being a bad idea.

It just shows that you really shouldn't start shooting your movie until you have actually written a script

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Crimson King

It won't detract from anything if it fits with the story. And you can't tell the IM3 story in its own world. That goes against everything they've built with the MCU.

It would definitely detract from the story (and the MCU as a whole) if Janet Van Dyne made her debut in the MCU in IM3 practically sexually assaulting Tony Stark.

That would be a supreme disservice to the character (Janet is *nothing* like that), and would likely be perceived as intruding on Edgar Wright's territory, since Janet reasonably should make her debut in the Ant-Man movie.

[Hawkingbird]

Although I think it was one of the weaker movies, I still think IM2 was great. I'd say it was messy more than anything.

[Mr. Dent]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

It would definitely detract from the story (and the MCU as a whole) if Janet Van Dyne made her debut in the MCU in IM3 practically sexually assaulting Tony Stark.

That would be a supreme disservice to the character (Janet is *nothing* like that), and would likely be perceived as intruding on Edgar Wright's territory, since Janet reasonably should make her debut in the Ant-Man movie.

"Edgar Wright's territory"?? It's not his movie, it's Marvel's movie and they can use their characters however they like. The fact of the matter is the Ant-Man movie is going to have very little hype on its own; by introducing elements of it in more popular titles it will gain more acknowledgement from a GA who have never even heard of Ant-Man or The Wasp/Jan.

Now, we know AIM will play a pretty big role in IM3 and possibly Ant-Man, that's the thread that connects them. If Jan is involved with AIM (and by extension Hank who is probably an AIM employee as well) it would make sense for her to be in the movie at least.

And this school of thought that some people have that character making cameos in a shared universe somehow detracts from the movie is silly, especially when those characters aren't even established heroes yet and can basically just act as easter eggs in those films. This is the same reaction people had when that rumor about Strange appearing in Thor 2 surfaced.

[DOOZlovesBOOZ]

Id have to agree that IM2 shouldn't be used as a precursor on how cameos will affect future movies. Introductions to other character wont hurt as long as they are woven into the story properly and there acctually given something to do.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

"Edgar Wright's territory"?? It's not his movie, it's Marvel's movie and they can use their characters however they like. The fact of the matter is the Ant-Man movie is going to have very little hype on its own; by introducing elements of it in more popular titles it will gain more acknowledgement from a GA who have never even heard of Ant-Man or The Wasp/Jan.

Now, we know AIM will play a pretty big role in IM3 and possibly Ant-Man, that's the thread that connects them. If Jan is involved with AIM (and by extension Hank who is probably an AIM employee as well) it would make sense for her to be in the movie at least.

And this school of thought that some people have that character making cameos in a shared universe somehow detracts from the movie is silly, especially when those characters aren't even established heroes yet and can basically just act as easter eggs in those films. This is the same reaction people had when that rumor about Strange appearing in Thor 2 surfaced.

"Edgar Wright's territory" was poor phrasing on my part, but the point is that Jan definitely belongs to Ant-Man and/or Avengers primarily, and should therefore debut in one of those franchises; to have her first appearance in an IM movie doesn't make much sense.

But again, more importantly, in that trailer scene, Szostak is definitely *not* acting the way Janet Van Dyne would act towards Tony Stark, period. *If* that turns out to be Janet, and she enters the MCU by sexually assaulting Tony Stark, I'm opting out of the Avengers franchise entirely, because it would be headed down the wrong road completely.

[Marathon]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

"Edgar Wright's territory" was poor phrasing on my part, but the point is that Jan definitely belongs to Ant-Man and/or Avengers primarily, and should therefore debut in one of those franchises; to have her first appearance in an IM movie doesn't make much sense.

But again, more importantly, in that trailer scene, Szostak is definitely *not* acting the way Janet Van Dyne would act towards Tony Stark, period. *If* that turns out to be Janet, and she enters the MCU by sexually assaulting Tony Stark, I'm opting out of the Avengers franchise entirely, because it would be headed down the wrong road completely.

Agreed.

[Mr. Dent]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

"Edgar Wright's territory" was poor phrasing on my part, but the point is that Jan definitely belongs to Ant-Man and/or Avengers primarily, and should therefore debut in one of those franchises; to have her first appearance in an IM movie doesn't make much sense.

But again, more importantly, in that trailer scene, Szostak is definitely *not* acting the way Janet Van Dyne would act towards Tony Stark, period. *If* that turns out to be Janet, and she enters the MCU by sexually assaulting Tony Stark, I'm opting out of the Avengers franchise entirely, because it would be headed down the wrong road completely.

We don't know what's going in that scene, period. Even if Janet is sexually assaulting Tony (which she probably isn't) it is not out of her character completely. Jan is outgoing and self-confident in the comics and in this day and age that also means flirtatious..not to mention Tony and Jan dated at one point in the comics anyway and this would presumably be before Jan has much to do with Hank besides a professional relationship at best. Either way, that's a pretty butthurt reason to drop the whole franchise. Your loss though.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

We don't know what's going in that scene, period. Even if Janet is sexually assaulting Tony (which she probably isn't) it is not out of her character completely. Jan is outgoing and self-confident in the comics and in this day and age that also means flirtatious..not to mention Tony and Jan dated at one point in the comics anyway and this would presumably be before Jan has much to do with Hank besides a professional relationship at best. Either way, that's a pretty butthurt reason to drop the whole franchise. Your loss though.

Anybody with eyes and private parts knows what's going on in that scene.

And there's a huge difference between "dating" someone and being "flirtatious," as opposed to knocking somebody around and throwing them against the wall as foreplay. Tony is clearly not enjoying this nearly as much as Szostak is; and if the gender roles were reversed, 99.99% of audiences watching that scene would say it's rape.

Szostak is playing a bad, bad girl. Janet Van Dyne is not a bad, bad girl. Whitney Frost is; Justine Hammer is; Sasha Hammer is; Sunset Bain is; Monica Rappaccini is; hell, even Bethany Cabe can be.

[OrangeCloud]

There is also a difference between sexually assaulting someone and manhandling them.

Doesn't look like she's doing anything other than reminding Stark of her own authority.

[Matarreyes]

I am firmly on the "Black Widow and Fury sucked in IM2" bandwagon.

If this actress is indeed Wasp, I expect it would be worse that that. A hot spy was still fitting with the theme of Ironman movies (that are heavily rooted in technology, and have the structure of corporate thrillers). Wasp is out of place in this kind of movies. And before you say that MCU is infinite and open and adaptative, I disagree. IM movies have a certain feel to it that excludes magic and overboard fantasy or Sci-fi elements such as tiny flying females. The fact that the Ironman suit looks "plausible" is part of its charm, and also part of their appeal to the GA.

[Steyin]

I still don't know what all this "sexually assaulting" talk is about. I've watched the trailer numerous times and saw no such thing.

[Hunter Rider]

Originally Posted by Steyin

I still don't know what all this "sexually assaulting" talk is about. I've watched the trailer numerous times and saw no such thing.

The armor is pinning Tony down in one shot so in fanboy world the next step is sexual assault.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by OrangeCloud

There is also a difference between sexually assaulting someone and manhandling them.

Doesn't look like she's doing anything other than reminding Stark of her own authority.

By pressing her body against his, tilting her head slightly to the side, lowering her eyelids and leaning her lips towards his....? Dude. That's erotica-speak for "we about to get busy up in here."

[Matarreyes]

Notice how she first manhandles him, but later lingers in very close proximity staring at his lips? It´s this second part of her movement that looks like she is sexually assaulting him to me.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Matarreyes

Notice how she first manhandles him, but later lingers in very close proximity staring at his lips? It´s this second part of her movement that looks like she is sexually assaulting him to me.

Exactly.
And if this were a fight instead of foreplay, Tony would be, well, fighting back. Instead, his arms hang limply at his sides, and he looks baffled and confused. *Possibly* under the influence of something here, but it's more likely simply a case of that voice inside Tony's head saying: "Holy ****....here's this hot milf about to rip my clothes off, and for the first time in my life, I can't say I'm happy about that."

[Matarreyes]

Incidentally, WFT with his clothes and the location? Tony Stark cosplaying as christmas elf in a local diner?

[The Infernal]

Originally Posted by Crimson King

You're right, but wouldn't you agree that not all cameos are "just because?" MCU movies will have small sections of crossovers, and they're better because of it.

Not really. Like I was saying in my previous posts, I still think it would detract from the movie. I'm not saying no to all cameos, I wouldn't mind some, but I think in the case of Janet that she would be out of place in an Iron Man movie. Generally I think that Iron Man 3 should stick to its own story and characters. No Avengers set ups.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Originally Posted by spideyboy_1111

I don't think Widow was the problem with IM2 at all..... Whiplash however....

WM stealing screentime from both BW and Whiplash was the problem. But this was discussed before.