Ultra Nolanite, knock it off. If you don't like the movie fine, but most people on this site are 5 days away from being able to see this movie, and you have gone out of your way to let the cat out of the bag. I don't know if you're concern trolling, or if you just like to ignore the mods, and I don't care, just knock it off.
Nah...I don't know actually. Maybe it's because i'm such a huge fan of TDKR, it certainly feels like a lot of people really hated that film, but after Norek's rant about this i really don't know.
About people whining why they didn't make seomething for the fanboys, "those who care".
Repeat: The movie is co-written and directed by Shane Black. This is his vision. Like it? Fine. Don't like it? Fine, aswell. But there is NO obligation to do "fanservice" (there's The Avengers for that, and this one for people who like movies with personality, and not vacuum filled with sequences who were long part of fanboys' wet dreams), instead of letting the filmmaker do his own thing... storytelling. Y'know?
Not really, Killian WAS the mandarin, that was IM3's version of the mandarin, not the typical theatrical eastern villain but someone more domestic and natural in his powers and megalomania. The other guy was just Trevor the actor...nothing to do with the Mandarin at all other than a smokescreen devised by the real Mandarin so he could work in Anonymity. Him screaming out he was the Mandarin in the end wasn't so much a reveal as it was a character moment, He stopped wanting to be anonymous and fully got involved in his alter ego, you could say that it was the moment where he finally accepted who he was...he's not the anonymous scientist up on the roof anymore, he's the freaking mandarin the indestructable man who can beat Stark and take over the world. That moment of realisation and acceptance of ones alter-ego mirrors perfectly with Starks own in the film. Which is why i consider Killian's role essential in highlighting Starks own character arc.
You are missing the point and taking the film WAY too much at face value, the whole exploding armours, and controlling them from afar was an attempt to play down the idea that the armour was Iron Man (as shown when Harley asked Tony if the armour was Iron Man) no TONY is iron man, he's not the bruce wayne persona, or the bruce banner half of the Hulk, or the Clark kent, he is 100% iron man, these armours and suits are mere weapons for him like the pellets on Batman's utility belt, that was the idea behind the film to kinda strip it all down and show you how even without the armour and the tech and the money, Tony Stark is still an Avenger. We start the film off with him making up to 42 different suits and not sleeping or spending time with pepper, because he's afraid...the Avengers made him feel powerless and inconsequential, When you have gods and aliens in the world he realises he's just a man, so he goes to the lengths of doing more than his share he wants to feel safe and secure...so he makes suit after suit. Him destroying that is symbolic that he's not afraid anymore that he doesn't need that tech, that he can be the man who loves pepper and be an Avenger because the real hero is the mechanic...not the suit. He takes out the arc reactor as a more literal example that he doesn't need to be afraid of death anymore he can easily make a suit without it, and he can be iron man without it. It's part of his character arc...hence the final line "I am iron man" this time he really means it...suit or no suit, arc reactor or not, he IS Iron Man.
For what its worth, here's my thoughts on IM3 having seen it on Saturday.
I was pretty disappointed. I'd say its possibly better than IM2 but not up to the standards of IM1. I think I may have set my expectations too high after the brilliance of the Avengers, but it was quite a let down for me. Still a pretty decent film, but could've been so much better.
Things that were good...it was definitely funny. Possibly strayed a little into Parody I thought.
Sir Ben Kingsley was great, I enjoyed his performance very much, although the direction they took with the Mandarin I thought was wasteful to say the least.
Mandarin could've been a great villain, instead it was a complete joke. Anyone saying Killian 'being the real Mandarin' makes up for it is kidding themselves...just using the name the Mandarin but sharing NONE of the Mandarin's characteristics is a waste, and you know it!
RDJ knocked it out the park as always. When Stark and Rhodes were together it was entertaining.
Things I didn't like....Pepper, too much action from her
especially saving the day at the end with her newly found fighting skills. I think it would've been better if she had died at the end really!
I thought Extremis was handled poorly, the effect it had on people did not work for me really. The whole Killian, extremis plot was poorly handled I thought. I still don't know what the baddies actual plan was....whatever it was it was lame in the extreme.
There definitely wasn't enough Tony as Iron Man. The bit in IM1 where he takes out the baddies and saves that village? Better than anything he does in IM3 I think.
the remote controlled iron men was a major let down, if Jarvis just controls them all then Tony might as well go home and put his feet up.
I could've done without the little kid...I mean there were some amusing bits, but none of it made any sense and it was a waste of time really.
Overall, worth a watch, but anyone wanting AVENGERS levels of awesomeness is likely to be sorely disappointed, in my opinion.
PS I don't mean to annoy anyone with this review, IM is my favourite Avengers character, and I wanted to love the film, but it just didn't happen for me...I have no doubt quite a few others will be disappointed too.
Nah...I don't know actually. Maybe it's because i'm such a huge fan of TDKR, it certainly feels like a lot of people really hated that film, but after Norek's rant about this i really don't know.
I didn't hate TDKR, but for a film that was 4 years in the making it was very sloppy. My main criticisms are the passage of time in that movie. They have 6 months to resolve the situation, and they resort to the typical Hollywood gimmickry of Gordon blocking the remote detonation with 1 second left on the clock. The best part of the movie was JGL, who was really the only interesting character in the film for me. To me it's just as sloppy and disjointed as Spider-man 3, the only thing that makes Spider-man 3 worse is the disco dancing and all the crying.
Despite all the controversy over the ending of IM3, I don't hear any complaints as to the format of the film. I think finally someone may have broken the 3rd superhero movie curse.
Ultra Nolanite, knock it off. If you don't like the movie fine, but most people on this site are 5 days away from being able to see this movie, and you have gone out of your way to let the cat out of the bag. I don't know if you're concern trolling, or if you just like to ignore the mods, and I don't care, just knock it off.
Wow, I'm just expressing my concerns about the film. And this is the rate/review thread. You're gonna tell me people come in here expecting NOTHING to be spoiled ?
Why don't the people who have seen the film have the right to discus it openly ?
Wow, I'm just expressing my concerns about the film. And this is the rate/review thread. You're gonna tell me people come in here expecting NOTHING to be spoiled ?
Why don't the people who have seen the film have the right to discus it openly ?
About people whining why they didn't make seomething for the fanboys, "those who care".
Repeat: The movie is co-written and directed by Shane Black. This is his vision. Like it? Fine. Don't like it? Fine, aswell. But there is NO obligation to do "fanservice" (there's The Avengers for that, and this one for people who like movies with personality, and not vacuum filled with sequences who were long part of fanboys' wet dreams), instead of letting the filmmaker do his own thing... storytelling. Y'know?
Sharky, I always enjoy your posts, and trust me, I got it. I enjoyed Tony's story arc in this, and I have to admit, Robert was better than ever in the role. But after all, this movie isn't all symbolism and deeper meanings. Face value does matter a lot, and there are things I just can't overlook. All those things I said about previous Marvel movies, about disregarding consequences, always bothered me, but I always ignored them because I enjoy these movies. Seems though as they're okay with it, which bothers me even more.
Yeah while i ultimately disagree with you on the film, Marvel does need to stop the whole practice of having a cliffhanger then disregarding it later on with a throwaway line. I can't begin to tell you how annoyed i was with the whole "how much dark energy did the allfather had to muster to conjure you up here" line in Avengers, just completely negated the somewhat emotional send off the Thor film had, and them just going ahead and picking stark out of desperation even though he was declined? Sloppy stuff from Marvel indeed.
I can only hope the end of IM3 means a more complete (emotionally and mentally) tony stark, someone who has found a way to truly be someone who could conceivably lead the avengers along with a soldier like steve rogers. It's interesting to see how he approaches the guardians of the galaxy and thanos and all that...knowing the mere mention of a black hole sent him over the edge.
Which is why this criticism of the Mandarin is a joke. People were willing to overlook much greater liberties in a Batman movie. Many liberties that really didn't pay off. There is something wrong when more people are passionate about the Mandarin than Bane and especially John Blake/Robin/Batman. Batman. The most iconic comic character in history and certainly the most popular. TDKR in many ways was very similar to IM2. They shoehorned in a fan favorite character that wasn't really essential to the plot--Catwoman and War Machine. Also two pointless characters that didn't do much of anything---- Blake and Widow, to set up future movies. TDKR was a better movie but I don't recall fanboys asking for their money back when tiny, pointless JGL assumes the mantle of the Dark Knight.
I don't mind the criticism, I just hate the inconsistencies of fan reviews. Only Marvel movies are held to a standard of perfection. Iron Man 2 gets chastisted for minor references to the Avengers. Nodody even cared about even bigger plot angles alluding to future movies in Amazing Spider Man and First Class. Too much SHIELD made a movie unwatchable but not too much Oscorp?
Honestly, that's mostly what I've been reading these days. People asking exactly for what they were expecting, instead of cleverly written and surprising movies, which try to attempt something fresh and new.
The movie time passes, the more I think audiences deserve formulaic, generic movies which don't offer anything new.
@ElMariachi: Too much S.H.I.E.L.D. did harm Iron Man 2, which I don't think can be compared to the superior The Dark Knight Rises, wether you like it or not. Why did it harm the movie? I'll tell you why. The story tells of Tony Stark being poisoned by the Arc Reactor. How is it solved? Nick Fury and Black Widow walk into a bar and basically tell Tony to look for something his father left over. Mission accomplished. Problem solved. Wow. There are absolutely no stakes in that movie. Jon Favreau's direction is fabulous (and much better than Joss Whedon's), but the script is weak sauce. There are absolutely no stakes, and in the middle of the movie you're trying to understand why you're watching it at all. What it's about. It's about nothing, basically. It's filler material, a fight between Tony and Vanko, with Justin Hammer and War Machine thrown in there, and a tease for the upcoming Avengers. Again, wow. A huge waste of the cast and director Jon Favreau. TDKR is in no way similar to Iron Man 2, and fortunately, this one isn't aswell!
No, than a methodical, ideological terrorist that considers himself a teacher in a diabolical way and doesn't believe in heroes and puts in question Tony Stark's status as a hero and a public figure - like what the trailers suggested he is. Or, considering they had trouble bringing him in, cut him off completely, and have Killian.
I don't believe you now. I would like to see how you knew about this whole Trevor **** months ago. Even if you speculated on something and turned out right, you don't need to make it into a dick measuring contest. Not everyone would believe anything they read.
You got swindled; fair enough to feel "cheated." Do you level the same complaints at Batman Begins, The Dark Knight Rises, No Country for Old Men, Pulp Fiction, or The Wizard of Oz? Just curious.
Why, because they have a somewhat (although not really) similar twists? No, only IM3 I have a problem with. And I somehow can't see how Pulp Fiction got there with the others..?
haha, I didn't hate it enough to rant about it, but so many people made such angry posts I felt like my impending opinion would just be a fart in the wind. I'm kinda over it now, because i actually love the game before the actual ending.
Which is why this criticism of the Mandarin is a joke. People were willing to overlook much greater liberties in a Batman movie. Many liberties that really didn't pay off. There is something wrong when more people are passionate about the Mandarin than Bane and especially John Blake/Robin/Batman. Batman. The most iconic comic character in history and certainly the most popular. TDKR in many ways was very similar to IM2. They shoehorned in a fan favorite character that wasn't really essential to the plot--Catwoman and War Machine. Also two pointless characters that didn't do much of anything---- Blake and Widow, to set up future movies. TDKR was a better movie but I don't recall fanboys asking for their money back when tiny, pointless JGL assumes the mantle of the Dark Knight.
I don't mind the criticism, I just hate the inconsistencies of fan reviews. Only Marvel movies are held to a standard of perfection. Iron Man 2 gets chastisted for minor references to the Avengers. Nodody even cared about even bigger plot angles alluding to future movies in Amazing Spider Man and First Class. Too much SHIELD made a movie unwatchable but not too much Oscorp?
Wait when did this happen ? Is that how you interpret the ending of TDKR ?
Also, the reason people accept the changes made to Bane was because TDKR Bane is a cool character in his own right. No he's not a juiced up SA Luchador but he's a cool villain. And essential stuff like him being the guy that breaks the Bat was all left intact.
Wow, I'm just expressing my concerns about the film. And this is the rate/review thread. You're gonna tell me people come in here expecting NOTHING to be spoiled ?
Why don't the people who have seen the film have the right to discus it openly ?
not really, killian was the mandarin, that was im3's version of the mandarin, not the typical theatrical eastern villain but someone more domestic and natural in his powers and megalomania. The other guy was just trevor the actor...nothing to do with the mandarin at all other than a smokescreen devised by the real mandarin so he could work in anonymity. Him screaming out he was the mandarin in the end wasn't so much a reveal as it was a character moment, he stopped wanting to be anonymous and fully got involved in his alter ego, you could say that it was the moment where he finally accepted who he was...he's not the anonymous scientist up on the roof anymore, he's the freaking mandarin the indestructable man who can beat stark and take over the world. That moment of realisation and acceptance of ones alter-ego mirrors perfectly with starks own in the film. Which is why i consider killian's role essential in highlighting starks own character arc.
You are missing the point and taking the film way too much at face value, the whole exploding armours, and controlling them from afar was an attempt to play down the idea that the armour was iron man (as shown when harley asked tony if the armour was iron man) no tony is iron man, he's not the bruce wayne persona, or the bruce banner half of the hulk, or the clark kent, he is 100% iron man, these armours and suits are mere weapons for him like the pellets on batman's utility belt, that was the idea behind the film to kinda strip it all down and show you how even without the armour and the tech and the money, tony stark is still an avenger. We start the film off with him making up to 42 different suits and not sleeping or spending time with pepper, because he's afraid...the avengers made him feel powerless and inconsequential, when you have gods and aliens in the world he realises he's just a man, so he goes to the lengths of doing more than his share he wants to feel safe and secure...so he makes suit after suit. Him destroying that is symbolic that he's not afraid anymore that he doesn't need that tech, that he can be the man who loves pepper and be an avenger because the real hero is the mechanic...not the suit. He takes out the arc reactor as a more literal example that he doesn't need to be afraid of death anymore he can easily make a suit without it, and he can be iron man without it. It's part of his character arc...hence the final line "i am iron man" this time he really means it...suit or no suit, arc reactor or not, he is iron man.
Honestly, that's mostly what I've been reading these days. People asking exactly for what they were expecting, instead of cleverly written and surprising movies, which try to attempt something fresh and new.
The movie time passes, the more I think audiences deserve formulaic, generic movies which don't offer anything new.
@ElMariachi: Too much S.H.I.E.L.D. did harm Iron Man 2, which I don't think can be compared to the superior The Dark Knight Rises, wether you like it or not. Why did it harm the movie? I'll tell you why. The story tells of Tony Stark being poisoned by the Arc Reactor. How is it solved? Nick Fury and Black Widow walk into a bar and basically tell Tony to look for something his father left over. Mission accomplished. Problem solved. Wow. There are absolutely no stakes in that movie. Jon Favreau's direction is fabulous (and much better than Joss Whedon's), but the script is weak sauce. There are absolutely no stakes, and in the middle of the movie you're trying to understand why you're watching it at all. What it's about. It's about nothing, basically. It's filler material, a fight between Tony and Vanko, with Justin Hammer and War Machine thrown in there, and a tease for the upcoming Avengers. Again, wow. A huge waste of the cast and director Jon Favreau. TDKR is in no way similar to Iron Man 2, and fortunately, this one isn't aswell!
The same could be said about every Batman movie. Anytime Batman needed something, Lucius Fox just pulled another toy from his bag. The antidote, all of the vehicles, the cape, the bomb remote thing, skyhook, and most importantly the sonar to help Batman easily find the Joker. The Nolan movies are filled with deus ex machina. No complaints, of course.
At least we saw Tony create his element and crack a puzzle to obtain the new element.
Which is why this criticism of the Mandarin is a joke. People were willing to overlook much greater liberties in a Batman movie. Many liberties that really didn't pay off. There is something wrong when more people are passionate about the Mandarin than Bane and especially John Blake/Robin/Batman. Batman. The most iconic comic character in history and certainly the most popular. TDKR in many ways was very similar to IM2. They shoehorned in a fan favorite character that wasn't really essential to the plot--Catwoman and War Machine. Also two pointless characters that didn't do much of anything---- Blake and Widow, to set up future movies. TDKR was a better movie but I don't recall fanboys asking for their money back when tiny, pointless JGL assumes the mantle of the Dark Knight.
I don't mind the criticism, I just hate the inconsistencies of fan reviews. Only Marvel movies are held to a standard of perfection. Iron Man 2 gets chastisted for minor references to the Avengers. Nodody even cared about even bigger plot angles alluding to future movies in Amazing Spider Man and First Class. Too much SHIELD made a movie unwatchable but not too much Oscorp?
Honestly, that's mostly what I've been reading these days. People asking exactly for what they were expecting, instead of cleverly written and surprising movies, which try to attempt something fresh and new.
The movie time passes, the more I think audiences deserve formulaic, generic movies which don't offer anything new.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
i really don't know.
