Iron Man 3 Official Iron Man 3 rate/review thread. - Part 1

[redfirebird2008]

Then it must've been me, because I laughed a lot. Perhaps I was in a good mood, who knows.
What I got from the movie was a very palpable chemistry between Shane Black and Downey Jr., like every line he said in the movie was very well said, the pauses, the way the lines were delivered. It felt to me like they were really on the same page when it came to the dialogues and Tony Stark as a character.

I thought the character was very good in the film, just not that funny compared to IM1 or TA. They showed a more somber side of the character and did a great job with it. Excellent performance by RDJ.

 

[DyeLorean]

I thought the character was very good in the film, just not that funny compared to IM1 or TA. They showed a more somber side of the character and did a great job with it. Excellent performance by RDJ.

No doubt about it. Much of the success of the movie comes from him. A big part of the movie is Iron Man-less and with another actor could've been a terrible decision. But Downey Jr brings so much charisma, that the character is equally fun to watch. With or without the suit. And that's a very hard thing to do. At least that's what happened to me.

 

[Shikamaru]

So is it true that....

Spoiler

Bill Maher is in the movie?

 

[redfirebird2008]

No doubt about it. Much of the success of the movie comes from him. A big part of the movie is Iron Man-less and with another actor could've been a terrible decision. But Downey Jr brings so much charisma, that the character is equally fun to watch. With or without the suit. And that's a very hard thing to do. At least that's what happened to me.

Yeah I wasn't bothered by the [BLACKOUT]supposed lack of screentime for Iron Man.[/BLACKOUT]

 

[Casius--J]

Saw this a few hours ago and all in all I really enjoyed the film.[BLACKOUT] Personally I don't think we got any less Iron Man than we did in the previous two films, if we did then it couldnt have been by much. [/BLACKOUT]

I liked the scenes of Tony showing the man behind the suit a lot more as it was in the first one. Let's be honest Stark is a cool character and is capable of doing cool things so it was great to see that explored.

However I do have a couple of nitpicks....

Spoiler

The whole Mandarin twist, man I was so disappointed with this. Whilst it did work in the context of the film, the comic book fan in me is bothered by the fact that this kind of kills our chances of ever seeing Mandarin on screen. I was also disappointed because from the trailers and the scenes in the film, Ben Kingsley would have nailed that part!

I thought Rhodey was underused. I get this was a Tony adventure but I wanted more screen time for his best friend and partner. Also maannn I was hoping that Iron Patriot rubbish was just for show, up until the credits I was awaiting a War Machine 2.0 reveal as I've seen some images of it.

Finally the scene at the end where Tony has this miracle surgery that removes the shrapnel and need for the arc reactor......This creates a problem as if it was so easily available then why not go ahead and get it in the first place instead of being poisoned by the old reactor and having to search for a new element. Granted this new surgery possibly wasn't available at the time but I don't remember them mentioning that so to me it looks like a plothole.

Final verdict would be a good 8/10

Definitely one of my favourite trilogies so far, I thought all three films were consistent and act as good stories.

 

[ElMariachi]

lol I dont think anyone hates IM2, people are just saying it was a tad bit dissapointing after IM1 and also trumping over IM2 is an easy task. at least it gave us [BLACKOUT]war machine action more than IM3[/BLACKOUT]

It sure sounds like they do anytime Iron Man 2 is referenced! I think we all get that the movie was slightly disappointing but it's hardly a bad movie. I personally think it's underrated. Marvel Studios is kind of like Team USA Basketball. Even the worst player on the squad would probably be one of the best players on an NBA team. Green Lantern, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Superman/X-Men fans at the time would have been elated with a movie as successful as IM2.

Despite the weakish plot, Iron Man 2 is such a vibrant movie. It looks great. It is legitimately funny. The action was good, albeit short. There are also quite a few really great scenes in the movie. The humor of the movie is really where it shines. Sam Rockwell and RDJ together was gold. I realize Justin Hammer moonwalking/spray tanning undermined the character as a serious villain but it was still great. Garry Shandling's exchanges with RDJ really had me lol'ing. It was a really bizarre movie. Tony sitting on a giant donut, unibeaming watermelons, acting like Walt Disney, driving race cars, creep staring Black Widow, creating elements in his basement, peeing his suit, fighting Rhodey to a Another One Bites the Dust remix, and facing off against a bad Russian accented parrot lover. It's not a great movie but it's a pretty amusing, creative one. The movie would have been much better without Pepper Potts constantly nagging Tony and Cheadle being a wet blanket for pretty much the entire film. Almost all of the bad scenes in this movie featured Pepper, who was written as if she was menstrauting the entire plot. Wasting scenes having Tony cook her eggs, buy her strawberries, giving her jobs, and pretty being in the doghouse the entire movie.

 

[Kelly]

7.5/10

I actually liked the twist and think it's funny that fans are so angry about it. The main thing I didn't like was the Extremis plot. The Extremis soldiers reminded me of the alien army in the Avengers. I never took either of them seriously as a threat to the protagonist(s). Another thing that I didn't like was the fact that it wasn't as funny as IM1 or Avengers. However, the more serious tone was handled very well. RDJ did a great job taking on a more serious performance than what we've seen out of him in his previous 3 outings as Iron Man.

The more serious tone is one of those things that I'll have to get used to, but it caught me off-guard during my first viewing. Now that I'm aware of it, it will be interesting to see how I feel after repeat viewings. All of that being said, this is a lot better movie than IM2. I would rate this is as the third best Marvel Studios film behind IM1 and Avengers. IM2 is the weakest Marvel Studios film I've seen at 5/10, so IM3 is a huge improvement and I'm glad they put a lot more effort into this one.

I'm looking forward to seeing this Saturday because of all the things you just stated...thanks for the review.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It sure sounds like they do anytime Iron Man 2 is referenced! I think we all get that the movie was slightly disappointing but it's hardly a bad movie. I personally think it's underrated. Marvel Studios is kind of like Team USA Basketball. Even the worst player on the squad would probably be one of the best players on an NBA team. Green Lantern, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Superman/X-Men fans at the time would have been elated with a movie as successful as IM2.

Despite the weakish plot, Iron Man 2 is such a vibrant movie. It looks great. It is legitimately funny. The action was good, albeit short. There are also quite a few really great scenes in the movie. The humor of the movie is really where it shines. Sam Rockwell and RDJ together was gold. I realize Justin Hammer moonwalking/spray tanning undermined the character as a serious villain but it was still great. Garry Shandling's exchanges with RDJ really had me lol'ing. It was a really bizarre movie. Tony sitting on a giant donut, unibeaming watermelons, acting like Walt Disney, driving race cars, creep staring Black Widow, creating elements in his basement, peeing his suit, fighting Rhodey to a Another One Bites the Dust remix, and facing off against a bad Russian accented parrot lover. It's not a great movie but it's a pretty amusing, creative one. The movie would have been much better without Pepper Potts constantly nagging Tony and Cheadle being a wet blanket for pretty much the entire film. Almost all of the bad scenes in this movie featured Pepper, who was written as if she was menstrauting the entire plot. Wasting scenes having Tony cook her eggs, buy her strawberries, giving her jobs, and pretty being in the doghouse the entire movie.

How exactly does it look great? It looks a bit more expensive then IM, but that film uses it locations much better imo.

And IM2 is far more then "slightly disappointing" for many, including me. And it all begins and ends with a cluttered, uninspired, poorly written script. One that has simultaneously too many stories treads, and yet huge chunks of time where nothing is going on. All the ideas are half-baked. Widow, Pepper, Vanko, Rhodey, etc. So many characters who are not fully realized while Tony sits in his house doing little to nothing.

 

[darkslayer101]

Ive heard people say that the film is very serious and then some people say that it isnt serious enough? which is it? lol

the humor worked perfectly for me, but IM3 is just as much maybe more serious than IM1. Occasionally the dead seriousness is met with a quick gag, which i don't mind because it doesn't undermine the seriousness.

 

[ElMariachi]

How exactly does it look great? It looks a bit more expensive then IM, but that film uses it locations much better imo.

And IM2 is far more then "slightly disappointing" for many, including me. And it all begins and ends with a cluttered, uninspired, poorly written script. One that has simultaneously too many stories treads, and yet huge chunks of time where nothing is going on. All the ideas are half-baked.

The cinematography of the movie was fantastic. The CGI of the movie was great too. It looked like a high quality movie, especially the scenes of the Stark Expo, the Monte Carlo racetrack scene, and Starks 3D computers. I disagree that the locations in IM1 were better. The Stark Expo as a location was better and more unique than anything in IM1.

If the movie was more than disappointing for you, then that's your opinion. I just hate it when people act like everyone hates the movie. It has a 7.1 on IMDB and a 73% Fresh rating on RT. Iron Man fans don't hate the movie either, at least from what I heard. I don't think it was looked at as a true disappointment like Spider-Man 3, Superman Returns, the Star Wars prequels, or Matrix sequels.

 

[redfirebird2008]

The cinematography of the movie was fantastic. The CGI of the movie was great too. It looked like a high quality movie, especially the scenes of the Stark Expo, the Monte Carlo racetrack scene, and Starks 3D computers. I disagree that the locations in IM1 were better. The Stark Expo as a location was better and more unique than anything in IM1.

If the movie was more than disappointing for you, then that's your opinion. I just hate it when people act like everyone hates the movie. It has a 7.1 on IMDB and a 73% Fresh rating on RT. Iron Man fans don't hate the movie either, at least from what I heard. I don't think it was looked at as a true disappointment like Spider-Man 3, Superman Returns, the Star Wars prequels, or Matrix sequels.

Its multiplier at the box office was a lot closer to SM3 than you might realize. British movie critic Robbie Collin Tweeted this afternoon that Star Trek 2 is to Star Trek 1 as Iron Man 2 was to Iron Man 1, which implies that he considered IM2 one of the gold standards of disappointment and apparently ST2 disappointed him a lot. He liked IM3 and gave it a 4/5.

IM2 was a huge disappointment to me as well. Luckily they did a much better job with IM3. Huge improvement IMHO.

 

[Tony Stark]

It sure sounds like they do anytime Iron Man 2 is referenced! I think we all get that the movie was slightly disappointing but it's hardly a bad movie. I personally think it's underrated. Marvel Studios is kind of like Team USA Basketball. Even the worst player on the squad would probably be one of the best players on an NBA team. Green Lantern, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Superman/X-Men fans at the time would have been elated with a movie as successful as IM2.

Despite the weakish plot, Iron Man 2 is such a vibrant movie. It looks great. It is legitimately funny. The action was good, albeit short. There are also quite a few really great scenes in the movie. The humor of the movie is really where it shines. Sam Rockwell and RDJ together was gold. I realize Justin Hammer moonwalking/spray tanning undermined the character as a serious villain but it was still great. Garry Shandling's exchanges with RDJ really had me lol'ing. It was a really bizarre movie. Tony sitting on a giant donut, unibeaming watermelons, acting like Walt Disney, driving race cars, creep staring Black Widow, creating elements in his basement, peeing his suit, fighting Rhodey to a Another One Bites the Dust remix, and facing off against a bad Russian accented parrot lover. It's not a great movie but it's a pretty amusing, creative one. The movie would have been much better without Pepper Potts constantly nagging Tony and Cheadle being a wet blanket for pretty much the entire film. Almost all of the bad scenes in this movie featured Pepper, who was written as if she was menstrauting the entire plot. Wasting scenes having Tony cook her eggs, buy her strawberries, giving her jobs, and pretty being in the doghouse the entire movie.

I agree it's a lot better than some make it out to be, and personally I'd rather watch that movie 100 times than to ever watch the Dark Knight Rises again. The only thing I like about Rises was JGL, he was far and away the best actor in that movie, everyone else seemed to mail in their performance.

There certainly are a lot of strange scenes in IM2, like the doughnut shop, but to me it was an introspective story about Tony Stark, much like Hancock was. It was not a traditional superhero story and that's probably what I liked best about it.

As I said before, and you mentioned a few, there are a lot worse movies than IM2. Green Lantern was probably the biggest waste of time and effort ever in a movie. I put that one as the worst superhero movie ever, because it wasn't bad for lack of a budget. How do you spend 200 million on a movie like that and the movie looks like complete ****? Fantastic Four was horrible, but they only had a 100M budget and the film was a success in that it was profitable, and spurred a sequel, no matter how bad anyone thought it was.

 

[ElMariachi]

Its multiplier at the box office was a lot closer to SM3 than you might realize. British movie critic Robbie Collin Tweeted this afternoon that Star Trek 2 is to Star Trek 1 as Iron Man 2 was to Iron Man 1, which implies that he considered IM2 one of the gold standards of disappointment and apparently ST2 disappointed him a lot. He liked IM3 and gave it a 4/5.

IM2 was a huge disappointment to me as well. Luckily they did a much better job with IM3. Huge improvement IMHO.

Well if we are going on box office, then yeah. But I don't think people hated Iron Man 2 as much as they did Spider-Man 3. SM3 is pretty much in the same grouping as Batman & Robin and X-Men 3. Iron Man 2 just wasn't as good as Iron Man. It wasn't a franchise killer. I'd put it more along the lines as a Temple of Doom, Batman Returns, Quantum of Solace, Men in Black II, and Die Hard 2. Some people must have liked IM2 given the hype for Avengers. That couldn't all be goodwill left over from IM1.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The cinematography of the movie was fantastic. The CGI of the movie was great too. It looked like a high quality movie, especially the scenes of the Stark Expo, the Monte Carlo racetrack scene, and Starks 3D computers. I disagree that the locations in IM1 were better. The Stark Expo as a location was better and more unique than anything in IM1.

If the movie was more than disappointing for you, then that's your opinion. I just hate it when people act like everyone hates the movie. It has a 7.1 on IMDB and a 73% Fresh rating on RT. Iron Man fans don't hate the movie either, at least from what I heard. I don't think it was looked at as a true disappointment like Spider-Man 3, Superman Returns, the Star Wars prequels, or Matrix sequels.

That is how we guage movies now? IMDB might be the worst way on the planet to judge a film's quality. It has a worse RT score then SR or RotS.

Not that any of that matters. Stark Expo is lifeless. Good idea, but it has no personality and feels artificial. Stark's cave had more too it and it was truly a hole in the wall.

I understand that sometimes there are overreaction too a film. Usually however, that is immediate. But IM2 has dropped more and more over the years as the other MCU films have shown how weak it really is.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Well if we are going on box office, then yeah. But I don't think people hated Iron Man 2 as much as they did Spider-Man 3. SM3 is pretty much in the same grouping as Batman & Robin and X-Men 3. Iron Man 2 just wasn't as good as Iron Man. It wasn't a franchise killer. I'd put it more along the lines as a Temple of Doom, Batman Returns, Quantum of Solace, Men in Black II, and Die Hard 2. Some people must have liked IM2 given the hype for Avengers. That couldn't all be goodwill left over from IM1.

I don't believe the hype for Avengers had anything to do with IM2. Had everything to do with IM1, solid outings for the other characters in their solo movies, and the concept of teaming them together.

And I would agree it's not as hated as SM3. I'm just saying the dropoff from IM1 was pretty steep. That movie had stellar word of mouth.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Well if we are going on box office, then yeah. But I don't think people hated Iron Man 2 as much as they did Spider-Man 3. SM3 is pretty much in the same grouping as Batman & Robin and X-Men 3. Iron Man 2 just wasn't as good as Iron Man. It wasn't a franchise killer. I'd put it more along the lines as a Temple of Doom, Batman Returns, Quantum of Solace, Men in Black II, and Die Hard 2. Some people must have liked IM2 given the hype for Avengers. That couldn't all be goodwill left over from IM1.

Temple of Doom is awesome.

And what you are basically doing is attempting to regulate how "bad" it really is. Every film, including The Last Stand, SM3 and B&R has those that like them. That some people like IM2 doesn't change its quality at all imo.

 

[ElMariachi]

I agree it's a lot better than some make it out to be, and personally I'd rather watch that movie 100 times than to ever watch the Dark Knight Rises again. The only thing I like about Rises was JGL, he was far and away the best actor in that movie, everyone else seemed to mail in their performance.

There certainly are a lot of strange scenes in IM2, like the doughnut shop, but to me it was an introspective story about Tony Stark, much like Hancock was. It was not a traditional superhero story and that's probably what I liked best about it.

As I said before, and you mentioned a few, there are a lot worse movies than IM2. Green Lantern was probably the biggest waste of time and effort ever in a movie. I put that one as the worst superhero movie ever, because it wasn't bad for lack of a budget. How do you spend 200 million on a movie like that and the movie looks like complete ****? Fantastic Four was horrible, but they only had a 100M budget and the film was a success in that it was profitable, and spurred a sequel, no matter how bad anyone thought it was.

Yeah, not too sure where the money for Green Lantern went. At some points of that movie, I thought I was watching a cutscene for an X-Box 360 game. I give the first Fantastic Four movie a pass. I am probably alone on this but I didn't think it was a horrible movie. Doom sucked but everything else was watchable popcorn movie fun. Chiklis really stole the show and made that movie kinda fun.

Agree about IM2. I like that it's weird, different movie. Love it or hate it, nobody can deny that it's unique. The movie ends with the main character getting called a prick. It's stuff like that which makes Iron Man great.

 

[Tony Stark]

That is how we guage movies now? IMDB might be the worst way on the planet to judge a film's quality. It has a worse RT score then SR or RotS.

Not that any of that matters. Stark Expo is lifeless. Good idea, but it has no personality and feels artificial. Stark's cave had more too it and it was truly a hole in the wall.

I understand that sometimes there are overreaction too a film. Usually however, that is immediate. But IM2 has dropped more and more over the years as the other MCU films have shown how weak it really is.

I'll agree with the last bit. Yes as other Marvel Studio films have come out, it shows to be the weakest, that doesn't make it a bad film. The film works because of Downey and Paltrow, and that's what's really made this franchise work.

I said this back when the first IM film came out that it had completely surpassed the Spider-man films in my mind because of the great chemistry with Downey and Paltrow. Maguire and Dunst just didn't work, mostly because Kristen Dunst might be one of the top 5 most annoying people on the face of the planet, next to Nikki Minaj and the Kim Kardashian.

In fact in the genre, only Reeves and Kidder had the kind of on screen chemistry that Downey and Paltrow have.

 

[rashad]

IM2 may not be a total train wreck, but it's not a film I care to revisit.

 

[ElMariachi]

That is how we guage movies now? IMDB might be the worst way on the planet to judge a film's quality. It has a worse RT score then SR or RotS.

Not that any of that matters. Stark Expo is lifeless. Good idea, but it has no personality and feels artificial. Stark's cave had more too it and it was truly a hole in the wall.

I understand that sometimes there are overreaction too a film. Usually however, that is immediate. But IM2 has dropped more and more over the years as the other MCU films have shown how weak it really is.

IMDB is generally pretty good with how movies are rated. You don't tend to see alot of bad movies getting high scores on there. The scores always seem about right. Just do a quick search on comic movies and see if you disagree with any of them. The only one that really stands out is TDKR and all it's fanboys upvoting the movie to Saving Private Ryan territory. Or TDK and Fight Club, and being up there with the greatest movies of all time. The Top 250 is pretty spot on though.

Yes, IM2 is obviously weaker than other MCU movies. That's a high standard though. I'll take Iron Man 2 over Amazing Spider-Man and most other supehero movies these days.

 

[ElMariachi]

I don't believe the hype for Avengers had anything to do with IM2. Had everything to do with IM1, solid outings for the other characters in their solo movies, and the concept of teaming them together.

And I would agree it's not as hated as SM3. I'm just saying the dropoff from IM1 was pretty steep. That movie had stellar word of mouth.

I disagree with that. Iron Man 2 was the lynchpin to the MCU. It set up alot of things in the Avengers. Is Thor as successful without the buzz from the post credit scene? If Thor is not as successful, do people care as much about Thor and Loki? It impacted alot, in my opinion.

 

[Liam_H]

Thor would've performed the same regardless of the post credits scene in IM2.

 

[ElMariachi]

Temple of Doom is awesome.

And what you are basically doing is attempting to regulate how "bad" it really is. Every film, including The Last Stand, SM3 and B&R has those that like them. That some people like IM2 doesn't change its quality at all imo.

Nobody likes Batman and Robin or Spider-Man 3. Both were franchise killers. They are a punchline for the fans and non-fans. This just isn't the case for movies like Iron Man 2 or Batman Returns. Maybe even Last Stand can be added to that list. I guess I never really heard alot of people hating that movie offline.

 

[StarLord]

I'll take Iron Man 2 over Amazing Spider-Man and most other supehero movies these days.

Same.

I actually enjoyed it more than Captain America and The Incredible Hulk.

 

[ElMariachi]

Thor would've performed the same regardless of the post credits scene in IM2.

You think so? A silly character that nobody has ever cared about? Iron Man 2 made the character cool and gave the movie early buzz. These people who were whooping and clapping when they saw the hammer at the end. The same people who were whooping and clapping when Thanos popped up at the end of Avengers. They wouldn't have otherwise cared about the characters without the added significance of being featured in popular movies.