Iron Man Script Review

[Mr. Magoo]

If Millar and Gough wrote that script, I'm not surprised Marvel didn't like it.
They've dragged out the nasty Father against the Son crap for 5 years on Smallville and just keep running around in circles. Clark should be finishing college and becoming the Big Blue Boy Scout, instead of just screwing around trying to find his 'destiny'. WE KNOW WHAT HIS DESTINY IS! Move on, man! Bring on the Suit and forget the teen angst. We want adult angst!

On a lighter note, if they insist on bringing in his father, why not make HIM the Vietnam Vet whose shrapnel damaged heart needs the ultra-tech heart pace-maker. He is an electronics wizard and developes the best pacemaker for himself with the technology available. His son, Tony, becomes the real techno-wizard and with training started by his father, designs and makes a better heart monitor pacemaker for his father that keeps him alive and well. Because of this design, they make a fortune as a hi-tech medical products company. Unbeknownst to them, his circuitry is being reverse engineered by a military-industrial combine that Tony must eventually stop as the IronMan. Because of their theft of his technology, Tony developes the nanotechnology that allows him to build the Ironman armor, with his father's help. An attack on the Stark medical research facility by the Combine (could be AIM) kills the elder Stark, and gives Tony the go ahead for some real kick-ass Mission Imposssible style fireworks as he avenges his father's death and recovers his technology. Of course, his father's death is a good segway into Tony starting to drink more than he used to or should, setting up his problems with the bottle.

How's that for a new start?

I like all of that, except for the part where the Combine kills his father. I always feel like it's kind of cheap in movies where that happens, like it all of a sudden gives you an excuse to kill someone. Especially if they were going to die in the script anyway. When they put that little throwaway line in Batman Begins, like, "Oh by the way, I sort of indirectly killed your father." It just seemed like the cheapest thing in the world. Ra's might as well have just said "Now you don't have to feel bad about killing me even though it contradicts your principles so that there can be a big scene where I get blowed up real good." Either find a way to write the scene without them dying or just kill them and leave out the "avenge my father's death" angle.

 

[The Batman]

I'm still wondering why this movie hasnt come out yet. This one could kick ass if done right...

 

[InkSlinger]

I like all of that, except for the part where the Combine kills his father. I always feel like it's kind of cheap in movies where that happens, like it all of a sudden gives you an excuse to kill someone. Especially if they were going to die in the script anyway. When they put that little throwaway line in Batman Begins, like, "Oh by the way, I sort of indirectly killed your father." It just seemed like the cheapest thing in the world. Ra's might as well have just said "Now you don't have to feel bad about killing me even though it contradicts your principles so that there can be a big scene where I get blowed up real good." Either find a way to write the scene without them dying or just kill them and leave out the "avenge my father's death" angle.

This is good. Constructive criticism is always good.
OK. His father doesn't die (maybe gets injured? a little? please?) and sees the hand in this of someone he knows. The Mandarin, maybe?
If he had been a Vietnam POW who got the shrapnel from escaping a POW camp, say he was too close to a land mine that went off after he walked past it, and just barely made it back to American forces- the camp commander was the Mandarin, before the war 'ended' and he went into business with an Asian Mafia. (Sounds too much like a Bond movie, but hey, we're making this up as we go along)
The Mandarin has been the 'hand' behind the theft of Stark Enterprises technology. Maybe Tony has been a bit of a party guy, thanks to his success and money. Full of himself but basically a decent guy. He has to have some reason to go after the Mandarin/AIM Combine besides industrial espionage.
Maybe his secretary, Pepper, gets kidnapped, etc. etc.
I was hoping this wouldn't become formulaic, which it just did-
Sorry.
Try and please everyone and you end up with the same crap as every one else. Maybe someone else can pick this up and give it a different kind of hook.
(Maybe a secret message buried in the engraving of the $50.00 bill...No, wait, that's been done-twice)

 

[ultimatefan]

Man, it really pisses me off when they try to make up their own villains. IIRC, Whedon said that WW's rogues were lame, so he was going to make a brand new one inspired by Greek mythology. So what was wrong with Ares?

They better not go with this idiotic Howard Stark crap for Iron Man.

I think if well used, Ares could be a good villain. I never thought of Whedom as the genius geekdom makes of him, and there´s no way I can imagine his overly wise-cracking dialogue working for a character like WW.

 

[ultimatefan]

I like all of that, except for the part where the Combine kills his father. I always feel like it's kind of cheap in movies where that happens, like it all of a sudden gives you an excuse to kill someone. Especially if they were going to die in the script anyway. When they put that little throwaway line in Batman Begins, like, "Oh by the way, I sort of indirectly killed your father." It just seemed like the cheapest thing in the world. Ra's might as well have just said "Now you don't have to feel bad about killing me even though it contradicts your principles so that there can be a big scene where I get blowed up real good." Either find a way to write the scene without them dying or just kill them and leave out the "avenge my father's death" angle.

It wasn´t quite like that. Actually, the death of Bruce´s parents backfired Ra´s plans, because it set the rich and powerful in motion to help the city. And Batman doesn´t really kill him, he just doesn´t risk his life one more time to save him.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I *****ing love Iron Man.

 

[Mr. Magoo]

It wasn´t quite like that. Actually, the death of Bruce´s parents backfired Ra´s plans, because it set the rich and powerful in motion to help the city. And Batman doesn´t really kill him, he just doesn´t risk his life one more time to save him.

Okay: first of all, it probably wasn't THAT Ra's, otherwise he would've had to have been awfully young, like in his early 20s. It was the League of Shadows, which for all we know still exists. Bruce just knocked them out of Gotham at the end. The death of that one character, when the League is over thousands of years old and has probably had hundreds of Ra's al Ghuls, means nothing besides for the opportunity for vengeance. Second of all, the League of Shadows was all about toppling whatever societies had become "corrupt" and "diseased." We could have assumed that Gotham spawned thugs like Joe Chill without their help. The real London certainly did. The real Kowloon certainly did. The real America certainly does. And so on. Third of all, even if Ra's mentioned that the League of Shadows had been trying to destroy Gotham for years, what were the odds really, that they "created" Joe Chill? Not very high, plus it totally eliminates variables such as Chill, his personality, the person who told him to go out and bring him valuables in exchange for a fix, etc. The fact that Ra's even stopped to say that, yes, it was very remotely possible that they (translation: he) were very indirectly involved with what happened to Bruce's parents made no sense. He was practically asking Wayne to kill him, it was totally done to make what Batman did at the end "feel" okay. Yeah, okay, we know he didn't kill Ra's, he just didn't not let him die. He jumped off the derailed train, flipped Ra's the bird, then watched as it crashed into a parking complex and went boom. It's the same thing. Not from the character's standpoint... arguably... but from the audience's. Want further proof that the dialogue was totally tacked-on and unnecessary? What did it have to do with the scene that it was in? Think about it: what did it really have to do with that scene? We knew about their plan, they came, knocked Bruce out and burned down Wayne Manor. We knew that people had grown fearful and complacent which, again, happens all the time in real cities. We didn't need a little history lesson. But we got one anyway. And then we watch the "bad guy" get deaded, because that's what we're used to. Goyer just had to think of a way to make it happen.

P.S. Sorry for a post devoted entirely to Batman in an Iron Man thread I just wanted to explain why I thought that type of thing is cheap in movies and I guess explain why I think it shouldn't be done in Iron Man.

 

[3dman27]

i'd like to see tony on the big screen but with the way marvels civil war is tuning him macheavelian[sp] by the time the movie comes out most folks'll probably tend to consider him a VILLIAN

 

[InkSlinger]

The Batman aside brought up and made several good points.
The Ra's Al Ghul character in the movie was poorly executed and had the lamest dialogue ever. Had a great actor and lousey dialogue.

I think my original plot line for IM would work well.
It may be a cliche, but it sets up perfectly the need to develop the armor and the slide into alcohoism.
However...
Marvel Entertainment seems bent on it's own destruction by creating all new origins for many of their characters.
The creative team behind Spider-Man left it alone for the most part and it worked. (Am I the only one who thought DareDevil was OK? Jesssica Alba as Sue Storm?! Come on!) Why screw up the basics? OK, if it's dated, bring it up-to-date but don't change it too much. Although some origins need to be made relevant to today's economic situations. They seem to screw up the villians more. Tony and his father growing a hugely successful Medical Technology company fits well with his being a successful inventor. He doesn't have to be an arms manufacturer, although I'm sure ANY technology eventually ends up being considerd for military applications. Parts of the Stark mythos could be shared by the father-son. Keeps it in the family. And those whose memories aren't up-to-the-minute on the comic history will remember these parts as being there, just not exactly where.
As long as it makes sense in relation to today's reality, it will fly.
(I just hope it doesn't come across as a cheap RoboCop spinoff.)
If they keep it simple and stick to the basics, it could work like gangbusters.
Let's see how succcessful the new Superman Returns movie will be once people learn the plot of Lois having a kid by someone else because she wouldn't wait for Superman. That's a killer. Lois would never hook up with someone else and have a child after being with the man of her dreams. It just has never happened and makes for a superfluous and unneccessary plot line.

 

[Iron Man™]

DAMMIT, this is not what I wanted to hear.

 

[w@llcrawler]

Second of all, the League of Shadows was all about toppling whatever societies had become "corrupt" and "diseased." We could have assumed that Gotham spawned thugs like Joe Chill without their help. The real London certainly did. The real Kowloon certainly did.

Or....did they?

 

[Mr. Magoo]

Or....did they?

Touché, young grasshopper. Touché.

 

[muscaremy]

once they sed "The character is visually boring" and gave their thoughts on V,Constantine, and History of Violence... i lost all respect and care for what these idiots had to say

 

[Sun_Down]

Marvel has scraped the script for Iron Man and is starting over, unfortunatly they have not announced a new writer as yet. My hope is who ever they get to write the script will have some understanding of the history of the title, I understand that Vietnam is out of the question for a origin,but the middle east or even industrial esponiage where either Justin Hammer or Obidiah Stane try to kill Stark.
The other thing that bothered me about the review was Hayter's use of War Machine,which was never Tony's enemy,why he choose War Machine over Iron Monger,Titanium Man or Crimson Dynamo is abit strange.

Do you mean they scrapped this script? If so, I think that bodes well for us. Even though these reviewers obviously have a six-ton chip on their shoulders, this script doesn't seem too solid.

 

[TheVileOne]

I really hope they scrapped this script because the story sounds horrible. I mean no offense to David Hayter, but actually recycling the story from The Hulk which let's stop dancing around, FAILED AND DISAPPOINTED, is ridiculous. It wouldn't work. And it's this very story that attracted potential director, Cassavettes, to the project.

Iron Man actually has a great and underrated Rogues Gallery. Why make Howard Stark a villain? Howard Stark is NOT an Iron Man villain, he never was an Iron Man villain. Why would Howard Stark steal from his own company?! HINT! HE DOESN'T! And he's supposed to be dead!

The father/son story is that, Tony's father dies, and Tony is the brash and upstart young son that has to fill his father's big shoes. And maybe Tony never fully resolved things with his father before he died, but that's the extent of it.

Why the hell this repeat of the Hulk crap? Howard Stark is NOT an Iron Man villain. He never was an Iron Man villain. Howard Stark was NOT a bad guy. He was a philantropist and a man of integrity. The man that Tony ultimately journeys to become from being the rich playboy.

I really hope the Iron Man movie never gets made if they keep this silly story.

Iron Man has great villains, USE THEM. Updating the story is fine. Tony doesn't need to be a Vietnam POW, but the Howard vs. Tony story is ridiculous and has to go.

 

[Mr. Magoo]

I really hope they scrapped this script because the story sounds horrible. I mean no offense to David Hayter, but actually recycling the story from The Hulk which let's stop dancing around, FAILED AND DISAPPOINTED, is ridiculous. It wouldn't work. And it's this very story that attracted potential director, Cassavettes, to the project.

Iron Man actually has a great and underrated Rogues Gallery. Why make Howard Stark a villain? Howard Stark is NOT an Iron Man villain, he never was an Iron Man villain. Why would Howard Stark steal from his own company?! HINT! HE DOESN'T! And he's supposed to be dead!

The father/son story is that, Tony's father dies, and Tony is the brash and upstart young son that has to fill his father's big shoes. And maybe Tony never fully resolved things with his father before he died, but that's the extent of it.

Why the hell this repeat of the Hulk crap? Howard Stark is NOT an Iron Man villain. He never was an Iron Man villain. Howard Stark was NOT a bad guy. He was a philantropist and a man of integrity. The man that Tony ultimately journeys to become from being the rich playboy.

I really hope the Iron Man movie never gets made if they keep this silly story.

Iron Man has great villains, USE THEM. Updating the story is fine. Tony doesn't need to be a Vietnam POW, but the Howard vs. Tony story is ridiculous and has to go.

Okay, I'd hardly call the entire movie "recycled from the Hulk" just because the fathers were villains and scientists in both. They're hardly alike, and if this script was ever made then it would seem even more different. Not saying that I like this script, but people need to stop bringing up the Hulk failing like that proves anything. The father being the bad guy was not why the Hulk sucked, or even one of the reasons why, it had plenty of other **** going on that made it tank.

Second, exactly right on talking about young Tony taking over the company. That's who he is. The brash guy who's young for his job. Hopefully this is nowhere near the script that they end up using, although the alcoholism should still be in there.

 

[3dman27]

they could say there is a medical history of alchaholism in tony's family . i agree with inkslinger about mr afflecks dd portrayal
and with the others about ditching the father vs son storyline

 

[ultimatefan]

Okay: first of all, it probably wasn't THAT Ra's, otherwise he would've had to have been awfully young, like in his early 20s. It was the League of Shadows, which for all we know still exists. Bruce just knocked them out of Gotham at the end. The death of that one character, when the League is over thousands of years old and has probably had hundreds of Ra's al Ghuls, means nothing besides for the opportunity for vengeance. Second of all, the League of Shadows was all about toppling whatever societies had become "corrupt" and "diseased." We could have assumed that Gotham spawned thugs like Joe Chill without their help. The real London certainly did. The real Kowloon certainly did. The real America certainly does. And so on. Third of all, even if Ra's mentioned that the League of Shadows had been trying to destroy Gotham for years, what were the odds really, that they "created" Joe Chill? Not very high, plus it totally eliminates variables such as Chill, his personality, the person who told him to go out and bring him valuables in exchange for a fix, etc. The fact that Ra's even stopped to say that, yes, it was very remotely possible that they (translation: he) were very indirectly involved with what happened to Bruce's parents made no sense. He was practically asking Wayne to kill him, it was totally done to make what Batman did at the end "feel" okay. Yeah, okay, we know he didn't kill Ra's, he just didn't not let him die. He jumped off the derailed train, flipped Ra's the bird, then watched as it crashed into a parking complex and went boom. It's the same thing. Not from the character's standpoint... arguably... but from the audience's. Want further proof that the dialogue was totally tacked-on and unnecessary? What did it have to do with the scene that it was in? Think about it: what did it really have to do with that scene? We knew about their plan, they came, knocked Bruce out and burned down Wayne Manor. We knew that people had grown fearful and complacent which, again, happens all the time in real cities. We didn't need a little history lesson. But we got one anyway. And then we watch the "bad guy" get deaded, because that's what we're used to. Goyer just had to think of a way to make it happen.

P.S. Sorry for a post devoted entirely to Batman in an Iron Man thread I just wanted to explain why I thought that type of thing is cheap in movies and I guess explain why I think it shouldn't be done in Iron Man.

Well, as you explained yourself, the League´s early Gotham activity doesn´t really justify assuming that Ra´s had anything to do, directly at least, with the death of his parents, and I don´t think that was the point of the scene. The point of the scene was to show that the League Of Shadows was an even bigger threat than Bruce thought, and that the kind of Justice that the league represents helps to create more problems than solve, their vengeful concept of Justice not only gets the "bad guys" killed, but also the people who try to solve the problems. If Joe Six-Pack assumes Batman killed Ra´s, that´s not my problem, from my point of view as a moviegoer, Batman didn´t, I think the scene is pretty ironic because Ra´s always told Bruce compassion was a weakness, and if Bruce hadn´t risked his life to save Ra´s the first time, maybe none of that would be happening cuz without his leadership, the league would have fallen apart. So Batman won´t kill a man like Ra´s, but won´t risk his own safety again to save him. It´s a great definiton of who Batman is: he´s not The Punisher, but he´s not Superman either.
Okay, now back to Iron man... The script will probably not be completely scrapped. A new script is likely to borrow elements from this. The JJ Abrams script for Superman was scrapped but there are a few elements that remained, like a big plane rescue scene and Superman standing to listen to the trouble in the world to know who to help first.

 

[Ironman24]

Do you mean they scrapped this script? If so, I think that bodes well for us. Even though these reviewers obviously have a six-ton chip on their shoulders, this script doesn't seem too solid.

Yes, Avi Arad said after they got the rights back from New Line that they have scrapped the old script that New Line had and are starting over from scratch, including a new writer, they are looking for the right talent to begin a new script, which to this point they have not hired.

 

[InkSlinger]

Yes, Avi Arad said after they got the rights back from New Line that they have scrapped the old script that New Line had and are starting over from scratch, including a new writer, they are looking for the right talent to begin a new script, which to this point they have not hired.

We just wrote the outline for a whole movie that just needs fleshing out.
Hire us, dammit, and between the magoo, celldog and meeself, we'll make a script that will make Stan Lee feel like he just took a handful of Viagra.
Geez, doesn't anybody read this stuff?
Give us a crack at this. Call Arad up and tell him to read these posts.
They'll find the talent and people who take this stuff somewhat seriously.
(We'll at least have fun with the what-if's.)

 

[TheVileOne]

Okay, I'd hardly call the entire movie "recycled from the Hulk" just because the fathers were villains and scientists in both. They're hardly alike, and if this script was ever made then it would seem even more different. Not saying that I like this script, but people need to stop bringing up the Hulk failing like that proves anything. The father being the bad guy was not why the Hulk sucked, or even one of the reasons why, it had plenty of other **** going on that made it tank.

Don't you get it though? It's the recycling of that same device, taking it out of the hulk and putting it in Iron Man that would kill the movie. At least in the Hulk comics, there's the continuity that Bruce Banner was abused by his father and that's where the actual hulk persona comes from.

That's not how it works in Iron Man.

And once again, The Hulk was a big disappointment. People weren't engaged by the story of father vs. son at all. They will say with Iron Man, it's the hulk all over again and it would flop.

Second, exactly right on talking about young Tony taking over the company. That's who he is. The brash guy who's young for his job. Hopefully this is nowhere near the script that they end up using, although the alcoholism should still be in there.

The alcoholism does not have to be something done right away. Tony was never an alcoholic from the start. He liked to drink and probably had a weakness to alcohol, but he did not become a full blown alcoholic until an accident where he killed someone (caused by Justin Hammer I think) was the catalyst to his becoming a full blown alcoholic.

 

[3dman27]

yes if memory servrs it was a forigen[sp[] ambassador whom hammer framed iron man for killing by taking trmotecontrol of shellheads armor ant making it have malfunctions as tests of thr rc's viability
'

 

[Mr. Magoo]

Don't you get it though? It's the recycling of that same device, taking it out of the hulk and putting it in Iron Man that would kill the movie. At least in the Hulk comics, there's the continuity that Bruce Banner was abused by his father and that's where the actual hulk persona comes from.

That's not how it works in Iron Man.

And once again, The Hulk was a big disappointment. People weren't engaged by the story of father vs. son at all. They will say with Iron Man, it's the hulk all over again and it would flop.

Well I DON'T get it, apparently. Like I said, the father and son thing is not what people didn't like about Hulk. It's still a bad idea, but the fact that the Hulk had a father vs. son conflict has nothing to do with it. What is that supposed to mean, all movies with father/son conflicts suck? How do you explain the success of Walk the Line? The Hulk has nothing to do with the fact that Iron Man vs. his dad is a dumb idea is what I'm saying; they're two different things.

 

[TheVileOne]

Well I DON'T get it, apparently. Like I said, the father and son thing is not what people didn't like about Hulk. It's still a bad idea, but the fact that the Hulk had a father vs. son conflict has nothing to do with it. What is that supposed to mean, all movies with father/son conflicts suck? How do you explain the success of Walk the Line? The Hulk has nothing to do with the fact that Iron Man vs. his dad is a dumb idea is what I'm saying; they're two different things.

No. It means that its downright stupidity to basically recycle the same stupid father/son plot from The Hulk and translate it to Iron Man. And make the father into a villain from the comics who was never the protagonist's father and make them fight at the end.

Such as the ridiculousness of making Banner's father, The Absorbing Man. According to this script review they make Howard Stark - WAR MACHINE. Umm...no.

And the script review seemed to get across how bad this idea was pretty clearly.

 

[Kurosawa]

I really hope they scrapped this script because the story sounds horrible. I mean no offense to David Hayter, but actually recycling the story from The Hulk which let's stop dancing around, FAILED AND DISAPPOINTED, is ridiculous. It wouldn't work. And it's this very story that attracted potential director, Cassavettes, to the project.

Iron Man actually has a great and underrated Rogues Gallery. Why make Howard Stark a villain? Howard Stark is NOT an Iron Man villain, he never was an Iron Man villain. Why would Howard Stark steal from his own company?! HINT! HE DOESN'T! And he's supposed to be dead!

The father/son story is that, Tony's father dies, and Tony is the brash and upstart young son that has to fill his father's big shoes. And maybe Tony never fully resolved things with his father before he died, but that's the extent of it.

Why the hell this repeat of the Hulk crap? Howard Stark is NOT an Iron Man villain. He never was an Iron Man villain. Howard Stark was NOT a bad guy. He was a philantropist and a man of integrity. The man that Tony ultimately journeys to become from being the rich playboy.

I really hope the Iron Man movie never gets made if they keep this silly story.

Iron Man has great villains, USE THEM. Updating the story is fine. Tony doesn't need to be a Vietnam POW, but the Howard vs. Tony story is ridiculous and has to go.

How can they make an Iron Man movie and NOT use the Mandarin???