Iron Man Anyone one else getting a weird vibe about the tone of this movie?

[Prefix]

In my opinion you're underestimating the franchise thinking that.

IM isn't high art it isn't a brain-dead Michael Bay movie, either.

I never said it was! When I say light entertainment, I don't mean stupid crap like X-Men 3. Light entertainment is basically a form of entertainment that appeals to everyone and something you watch to enjoy, not to critically assess. I'd say that describes most mainstream superheroes pretty well.

I have no problem with you enjoying light entertainment.

What I don't like is that you're thinking IM is only limited to that.

It's not a limitation. Light entertainment still has depth, but its a general depth that isn't complex. Basically it is the difference between Spider-Man becoming a hero because he feels responsible for Uncle Ben's death and Dr. Manhattan slowly removing himself from humanity in Watchmen. Everyone can appreciate Spider-Man's form of tragedy, while Dr. Manhattan's situation is based on the presentation of the character and how the audience views it.

It isn't Watchmen. It's just more complex then you're saying

Well I think you don't really understand what I mean when I say 'light entertainment'.

Have you read the comic at all?

Yes, and I still think it is light entertainment.

 

[Iron_Stark]

The vibe I'm gettin from this movie is that its gonna be a fun ride. The humor will come Stark as a character rather than simply for laughs. I remember someone comparing him to the character Leo Dicaprio played in Aviator. I can't remember his character's name.

But Stark is meant to be a little crazy. He's a genious billionaire playboy. I'd be a little crazy too if I had all these characteristics.

Buckle up, it gonna be a fun ride (MAYBE BETTER THAN SPIDER-MAN).

Howard Hughes.

It's funny, when Stan Lee created Tony Stark, he based him off Errol Flynn's looks and Howard Hughes personality.
When I read about people complaining about Stark, they don't get that that's how Stark is, he's crazy, eccentric, and witty.

 

[The Major]

Howard Hughes.

It's funny, when Stan Lee created Tony Stark, he based him off Errol Flynn's looks and Howard Hughes personality.
When I read about people complaining about Stark, they don't get that that's how Stark is, he's crazy, eccentric, and witty.

Stark may have begun with Hughes but he hasn't been like that in decades.

The closest example is Ultimate Iron Man. Who isn't even the same character.

 

[hatebox]

I'm actually vaguely curious to see whether this or Hulk is the better film. I haven't seen anyone seriously suggest this'll top TDK, but it could be a bit of fun. It certainly doesn't seem to be aiming much higher at any rate.

 

[kedrell]

I never read much classic FF before, however I do enjoy the Ultimate FF.

 

[kedrell]

I'm actually vaguely curious to see whether this or Hulk is the better film. I haven't seen anyone seriously suggest this'll top TDK, but it could be a bit of fun. It certainly doesn't seem to be aiming much higher at any rate.

If by topping TDK you mean box office-wise then I'd agree. If you're talking film quality then that's a whole other ball game. I expect both Marvel films to match or exceed TDK as far as quality goes.

 

[thegameq]

How so?!
Look at the comics books themself...they depict the lifes of the men and women behind the suits, not the adventures of (insert character).
I don´t remember who said it, but it was a big name in the comic book business, 5 or 6 years ago, in an issue of Wizard (when i still bought it)....comic book still have that name because it´s a powerful and known title, because they should be called tragic books.
And it´s true, just look at the dramas the characters have endured, from Batman having his back broken, to Superman being killed, to Spider-Man losing his child, to Iron Man having alcohol problems...and the list goes on.
Then, 90% of superheroes start with a tragic moment in their lives.

Hulk is a physical manifestation of Banner´s repressed feelings; The Punisher is the embodiment of post-traumatic syndrome during time of war; Batman is the response of a kid after having his parents being murdered in front of him; Superman is a orphan of the stars.......do i really need to go on?


If you want to blame someone for making a superhero movie the way it should be, blame Ang Lee first.
By joy you mean a mindless popcorn movie, is that it?
Because if it is, you clearly don´t have a clue of what a comic book is, you only know about the powers and whatnot.

Relax,...... IM is looking to be what it should be, the comicbook. Nothing more, nothing less.

As for what comicbooks are, most fans know they are more than super powers and what not, but the draw tends to be the fantasy aspect of course...you know, escapism.

OT of sorts, but that I believe is the biggest gripe many people have with Nolan's Batman; he went overboard with the realism and seriousness angle. Not to say there can't or shouldnt be realsim, but don't go turning the material into something it isn't intended to be.

Why would you take away so many of the very things that make the material popular in the first place?

 

[The Major]

Relax,...... IM is looking to be what it should be, the comicbook.

The comic book and the Iron Man mythos can be complex. It just depends if whoever's using it to tap into the potential.

Nothing more, nothing less.

What medium it's in doesn't mean anything.

You think Lord of the Rings shouldn't be taken seriously since it was a book, too?

As for what comicbooks are, most fans know they are more than super powers and what not, but the draw tends to be the fantasy aspect of course...you know, escapism.

Escapism doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously or have any depth.

In the comics it can get very detailed in how his "universe" works even the made up science aspect of it.

The 90's IM cartoon didn't do a good job at this, IMO.

OT of sorts, but that I believe is the biggest gripe many people have with Nolan's Batman; he went overboard with the realism and seriousness
angle.

It's how's always meant to be.

The movie has to be a bit more realistic then the comics because its much harder to sell it in live action without coming off as campy. It's the most faithful adaption of Batman in live action I've ever seen.

Not to say there can't or shouldnt be realsim, but don't go turning the material into something it isn't intended to be.

It's not like Batman can't be realistic. It just relies on what version you want to watch or read.

Its the same with any other serious comic franchise. Batman is one of these, as is Iron Man.

You'd probably hate Dark Knight Returns.

Why would you take away so many of the very things that make the material popular in the first place?

Batman's supposed to be a realistic super-hero just not all the time. Even the tech and strategies he uses with huge threats make sense. It requires tonnes of imagination to write a good story like that. That's filling in the details so the reader can take it seriously.

He is more realistic in the comics with street level threats in his solo titles while he gets incredibly unrealistic in titles that operate on a much higher level like JLA. He has to do that there otherwise he'd be useless on a team with Superman and J'onn J'onz.

 

[The Major]

I never read much classic FF before, however I do enjoy the Ultimate FF.

You should read Mark Waid's run.

Some of it's in trade paper backs.

UFF is great. Loving Mike Carey's stories in that.

 

[hatebox]

If by topping TDK you mean box office-wise then I'd agree. If you're talking film quality then that's a whole other ball game. I expect both Marvel films to match or exceed TDK as far as quality goes.

lol

I think 'quality-wise' we both know TDK will be better, but Iron Man could still be a pretty good watch!

 

[kedrell]

^Considering I wasn't all that impressed with BB, I doubt it.

 

[hatebox]

 

[kedrell]

^Whatta comeback! Genius! I'm sorry but I have to like the characters in order to like the movie. BB was well made but I just don't care for Batman as a whole. Or the Joker for that matter. Powerless types never impress me.

 

[YJ1]

If by topping TDK you mean box office-wise then I'd agree. If you're talking film quality then that's a whole other ball game. I expect both Marvel films to match or exceed TDK as far as quality goes.

DK will win the box office but I also have little doubt that Iron Man will be the better all around film. I'll have to see the Hulk trailer to judge it against DK.

Most agree that Batman Begins was a good film but it declined significantly when Bruce suited up. Nolan has trouble filming action. We'll all have to wait and see.

 

[Venom1001]

You know what you're going to get when Robert Downey Jr. is involved. And I'm not against that. But lately, everything I've seen from IRON MAN almost makes it look like a cheesefest. They're really playing up the humor angle a lot more than they did before in earlier showings of the trailer, etc. Anyone else getting that vibe a little?

I thought I was all alone, ya I think the same.

I thought I was the only one who thought that this movie looks cheesy.

 

[kedrell]

Yes, there is a small minority who think that way. Seriously, I think you guys are humour-phobic.

 

[The Major]

Yes, there is a small minority who think that way. Seriously, I think you guys are humour-phobic.

Humor is fine. It just doesn't need to overwhelm the story.

IM isn't a comedy.

 

[Keymaker]

^Whatta comeback! Genius! I'm sorry but I have to like the characters in order to like the movie. BB was well made but I just don't care for Batman as a whole. Or the Joker for that matter. Powerless types never impress me.

Haha...as if powers are what make a character interesting.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

As for what comicbooks are, most fans know they are more than super powers and what not, but the draw tends to be the fantasy aspect of course...you know, escapism.

The draw is fantasy....sure, comic books are full of fantasy, the simple idea of someone having powers is irrealistic, but so is 70% of science fiction, and it doesn´t make it less serious.
So, the fantasy aspect is not even an issue, as for escapism...no, it´s not.
If you look at escapism as a way forget daily worries, sure, every movie and entertainment is pure escapism; but escapism is usually the fun and wow factor, the "popcorn side of life".

OT of sorts, but that I believe is the biggest gripe many people have with Nolan's Batman; he went overboard with the realism and seriousness angle. Not to say there can't or shouldnt be realsim, but don't go turning the material into something it isn't intended to be.

He didn´t turned he material into something it isn´t intended to be, he, like Ang Lee, made the movie as it should be.
Sure, both have their flaws, but both movies were about the man behind the hero, as it should be.
Brian Singer tried to do the same, with both the X-Men and Superman Returns.
Imagine you, getting powers, how would you deal with it? How would you scope with that new reality?

Why would you take away so many of the very things that make the material popular in the first place?

Dude, i´m sorry to say, but you are still living in the past, in the 60´s and 70´s, where comic book were meant of kids and teens.
At that time yes, comic books were pure escapism, nothing more.....but times have changed, a lot.
If comic books were still that, i wouldn´t look twice at them.
Escapism is inherent to the genre, the same way action and special effects are inherent to it to, but a comic book is not about action and special effects.

 

[ultimatefan]

To me it´s all a balancing act. On one hand, you have these complex characters with serious issues and dark elements that go behind their costumes and rooftop fights and, as directors like Nolan and Singer - at least with X-Men - proved, you can go into those issues and darker elements and still prevail as a mainstream piece. On the other hand, these are still summer blockbusters, it´s mass audience entertainment, it´s meant to have big action scenes, comedy, romance, etc. It´s all about jiggling the plates, you go too far in one direction, even with all the best intentions, you may end up boring your audience - Ang Lee - and if you go too far the opposite way, you end up with an unwatchable cheesefest - Joel Schumacher.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

I can agree with that, balance is the key word.
But, imo,is much important to focus on the serious aspect of it all, because he action and the wow factor, like i said before, are inherent to the genre, you can´t run from that, not when you have the good and the bad guy with powers and whatnot.

What i feel is that many people still look at comics and all they see are the powers and fights, which is totally understandable....except in comic book fans.
I can´t understand a so called fan (and i´m not referring to anyone in particular) liking comics because they have cool fights, powers, costumes and whatnot.
As i don´t understand anyone wanting for a comic book movie to be nothing more than light fun.
For years, comic book villains were nothing more than caricatures that wanted to conquer the world on a daily basis, they were nothing more than Austin Powers rejects.
Since late 80´s/early 90´s, mostly because of Marvel, comic book villains became what they should have been since day one...menaces.
If, in real life, a cop goes after a serial killer, is not a laughing matter, first thing, he can die....
The same goes in comic books, villains started to became exactly that, and everytime a hero puts on the costume, he might die, which is not a laughing matter or light fun....Barbara Gordon was put on a wheelchair (many say that the Joker raped her before) and Jason Todd was beaten to death with a crowbar, where is the light fun there?
Is it not an extremely serious take on the subject?
Superheroes are not, for quite some time now, men and women that put on a costume and goes fight the good fight; they are men and women that put on a costume and RISKS THEIR LIFES to fight the good fight....that makes things very diferent.
Above that, there isn´t one character that got powers and thought it was cool to go on a defend the innocent (at least that i remember), they all started by a tragic event, which, once again, makes the subject serious and complex.

 

[Venom1001]

Even GR has better visuals.

 

[Prefix]

Dude, i´m sorry to say, but you are still living in the past, in the 60´s and 70´s, where comic book were meant of kids and teens.

And when they sold 100,000 copies a month, as apposed to the abysmal sales of today. What does that tell you?

 

[Armored Avenger]

Powerless types never impress me.

Iron Man has no powers, so saying that the you are not interested in the Dark Knight just because none of the characters have super powers means that you must not be looking forward to Iron Man either.

I love Iron Man and Batman, and one of the reasons is that they have built their own super identity. They were not born with it, they did not ask for it, but because of a tragedy in their lives they decide to become heroes. In my opinion that makes them more heroic than some of the other characters who have powers.



As for the tone of Iron Man, i am not worried at all. Having heard the cast and crew talk about the film in alot of interviews i am confident that the film will find a great balance between humour, drama and action.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Nothing.
It states that the majority don´t care for comics, we are at the video game age.
Comic books were never mainstream, and never will be, and the only thing that saves them from oblivion are the movies.
Since the 80´s that comic books are sometime almost underground, meaning that just a small group reads them.