Iron Man 3 Official rate & review IRON MAN 3 thread!

[Xeno]

Love this!!!!

AMC Movie Talk-True to Source Material

[YT]OeNn_SdzIcU[/YT]

That video perfectly encapsulated the debate over IM3's portrayal of Mandarin, and the arguments about changes from comics canon in general. The email that started the ball rolling read like a spot-on parody of some of the more extreme fan reactions to changes made for movie adaptations. The responses from the guests were perfect. The movies aren't in the same universe as the comic book stories, so they will necessarily differ from the source material.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

The letter was kind of embarrassing. Way to perpetuate the sterotype, brah.

 

[Xeno]

Great vid, the only thing I didn't like was they kind of lumped all cb fans into the 'complainers who hated the movie' category. Inaccurate.

The second guy who commented actually pointed out that not all comics fans hate IM3. As he said, comic book fans constitute a tiny minority of filmgoers, and those who hated IM3 are an even tinier subset of that already minuscule number of fans. He also pointed out that people who liked IM3 are less likely to comment on a forum about it, much less create accounts just to slam the film the way some who hated it have done.


They made the very same points in the video that some of us have been making here: The film is successful, the vast majority of the audience and the critics enjoyed it and only a small number of very vocal people have been expressing their dislike of it online.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

There was a second guy? lol I'll have to watch it again. I guess I got distracted.

 

[craigdbfan]

Saw Iron Man 3 earlier today and let me say that I found it to be one of the best comic book/superhero movie of recent. Brilliantly scripted and acted.

It had a rich emotional core with an incredibly important political message that was still able to bring in the laughs without ever compromising said importance.

I need to see this again sometime soon. I can't go on to say how I love that none of it felt by the number. It really ventured into territory that other superhero films have only dared to allude to.

A resounding 10/10.

 

[CrypticOne]

Just came back from seeing this. Definitely better than IM2. I'd give it an 8/10. I don't know why, but something felt different. Don't get me wrong, movie was awesome, but I just felt something missing. The acting was all on point. Story was good. Can't wait until this hits Blu-ray.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

As much as I like the IM3 score (especially the end credits, which are amazing), I feel that IM1 has the superior score and theme. It's the only one of the three that has a single identifiable theme for Iron Man throughout, and it's totally badass, too.

I'm honestly unsure which Iron Man score I like more, IM1 or IM3. Both are great, and Debney's wasn't bad either. His theme was just way too underdeveloped.

 

[cherokeesam]

See, I'm not a subscriber to the whole "apples and oranges comparison" mentality. Frankly, I believe that any two things that share common aspects can be compared, just as those on the other side of the spectrum can highlight the differences to show how they can't, but I think the latter is simply the more timid position. They may not be the exact same genre, but both Iron Man 3 and Star Trek Into Darkness are summer tentpoles and franchise sequels. Benedict Cumberbatch's villain shares many archetypical aspects of comic book villains. Both films use humor consistently, but Trek nails its placement where Iron Man 3 doesn't. And of course, as I already mentioned - Kirk and Spock's friendship in this one film alone has more weight and poignancy than Tony and Rhodey's from all three Iron Man movies combined. It's a perfectly fair comparison.

Then you might as well compare IM3 to Oblivion, or Gravity, or Pacific Rim, or World War Z, or Elysium. And no, none of that makes much sense either. Would you compare a horror film to a rom-com, or a spy thriller to a western? Maybe *you* would, but imma guess no. Again, apples and oranges. When you start trying to compare and contrast movies from separate genres, you might as well throw the measuring stick out the window, because there's not going to be a meaningful set of standards you can refer to there.

 

[Tony Stark]

Anxiously awaiting the comparisons of Great Gatsby to Iron Man 3.

 

[Xeno]

Saw Iron Man 3 earlier today and let me say that I found it to be one of the best comic book/superhero movie of recent. Brilliantly scripted and acted.

It had a rich emotional core with an incredibly important political message that was still able to bring in the laughs without ever compromising said importance.

I need to see this again sometime soon. I can't go on to say how I love that none of it felt by the number. It really ventured into territory that other superhero films have only dared to allude to.

A resounding 10/10.

Glad you liked it, Craig. The best thing about the film, for me at least, was that as you noted it it took risks and went to places we hadn't been before. It's refreshing to have a film give us the unexpected for once.

 

[Fenrir]

Then you might as well compare IM3 to Oblivion, or Gravity, or Pacific Rim, or World War Z, or Elysium. And no, none of that makes much sense either. Would you compare a horror film to a rom-com, or a spy thriller to a western? Maybe *you* would, but imma guess no. Again, apples and oranges. When you start trying to compare and contrast movies from separate genres, you might as well throw the measuring stick out the window, because there's not going to be a meaningful set of standards you can refer to there.

Again, aside from the space sci-fi bend, how exactly is Star Trek that significantly different from Iron Man 3? They may not be exact same sub-genre but on a more general level, they are both big budget crowd-pleasing summer action blockbusters competing for the same audience so in a way they both do belong to the same genre and it is perfectly acceptable to compare both films in terms of aspects which the two films share and there are quite a few as I already pointed out.

Rather than show me how my comparisons are inappropriate, you instead jump on a completely pointless tangent that has little relevance to what I actually said. I'd ask you to explain which romantic comedy or a horror film shares the same kind of similarities as Star Trek and Iron Man 3 do for you to make the dumb insinuation that that is what I implied, but we both know that is a futile argument anyway. So next time, try responding to what I actually said rather than to what I didn't.

 

[Fenrir]

Anxiously awaiting the comparisons of Great Gatsby to Iron Man 3.

Oh look, another poorly placed wiseass remark. Must be an Iron Man 3 fan...

 

[Norek]

People are being attacked for comparing IM3 to STID now?

 

[cherokeesam]

Again, aside from the space sci-fi bend, how exactly is Star Trek that significantly different from Iron Man 3? They may not be exact same sub-genre but on a more general level, they are both big budget crowd-pleasing summer action blockbusters competing for the same audience so in a way they both do belong to the same genre and it is perfectly acceptable to compare both films in terms of aspects which the two films share and there are quite a few as I already pointed out.

Rather than show me how my comparisons are inappropriate, you instead jump on a completely pointless tangent that has little relevance to what I actually said. I'd ask you to explain which romantic comedy or a horror film shares the same kind of similarities as Star Trek and Iron Man 3 do for you to make the dumb insinuation that that is what I implied, but we both know that is a futile argument anyway. So next time, try responding to what I actually said rather than to what I didn't.

"How exactly is Star Trek that significantly different from Iron Man 3?"

One is set in the 23rd century, involves an ensemble cast aboard a starship going to the far reaches of space to battle a traitor in their midst who has sabotaged the greater part of Starfleet. The other involves a 21st century superhero who goes alone to Podunk, Tennessee and sunny Miami to chase a terrorist. What am I missing here? Or better yet: what are *you* missing here?

And if you're going to define "blockbuster" as a genre now, then everybody into the pool --- let's start comparing the finer points of Transformers 2 and Titanic....those movies are virtually identical.

 

[Tony Stark]

Oh look, another poorly placed wiseass remark. Must be an Iron Man 3 fan...

To quote Captain Kirk....

"Relax cupcake, it was a joke."

 

[Tony Stark]

People are being attacked for comparing IM3 to STID now?

No one is attacking anyone. The thought that to like Star Trek I2D, or think that it's better than IM3, means that IM3 was a crap movie.

You can actually like both films, even if you like one better than the other.

 

[ctsketch]

Again, aside from the space sci-fi bend, how exactly is Star Trek that significantly different from Iron Man 3? They may not be exact same sub-genre but on a more general level, they are both big budget crowd-pleasing summer action blockbusters competing for the same audience so in a way they both do belong to the same genre and it is perfectly acceptable to compare both films in terms of aspects which the two films share and there are quite a few as I already pointed out.

Rather than show me how my comparisons are inappropriate, you instead jump on a completely pointless tangent that has little relevance to what I actually said. I'd ask you to explain which romantic comedy or a horror film shares the same kind of similarities as Star Trek and Iron Man 3 do for you to make the dumb insinuation that that is what I implied, but we both know that is a futile argument anyway. So next time, try responding to what I actually said rather than to what I didn't.

Even Star Wars and Star Trek have different fan bases and they are in THE SAME GENRE

 

[Tony Stark]

Star Trek has a pretty small fan base. It goes back to that AMC video, that was posted. I've loved Trek since I was a kid, but the fan base is so small. Until Trek 2009, No trek film has made more than $110M.

Despite all the television spin offs and everything else, Star Trek has a very small, but loyal fan base. In fact a lot of die hard trekkies hate the Abrams' film the same way that a vocal minority hate IM3 and the Mandarin. But J.J. film opened up Trek to new fans who had never watched or cared for the old series.

I don't think people understand how dead Star Trek was after Nemesis. Sure Enterprise had a few season to go, but it was losing viewers hand over fist and was the first Star Trek series since the original to be cancelled.

Bottom line you can compare the two films if you want, but considering the fan ratings for IM3 and the cultural awareness and response to all the Marvel films, but especially Iron Man, Star Trek just does not have a big fan base.

I am hoping that ST:I2D can get 500-600M WW, with the 3D boost and all, but it's not going to come close to the popularity of IM3. And I say that as a long time Star Trek fan, hoping that ST:I2D is a huge success!

 

[Norek]

Bottom line you can compare the two films if you want, but considering the fan ratings for IM3 and the cultural awareness and response to all the Marvel films, but especially Iron Man, Star Trek just does not have a big fan base.

I agree, but all in all, it really depends on what you're comparing in two movies. Last year, people said you can't compare TDKR to Avengers because they have nothing in common.

The thing is, if you're aware of what exactly you're comparing, you can do it with movies from different genres, and makes sense at the end. The movies with superhero themselves are different genres, so if you look at that, there might not be much to compare, but as evident, people do it all the time.

STID may not make a billion dollars, and neither will Man of Steel, but that doesn't mean we can't compare them to IM3 because they won't make as much money, right?

 

[Fenrir]

One is set in the 23rd century, involves an ensemble cast aboard a starship going to the far reaches of space to battle a traitor in their midst who has sabotaged the greater part of Starfleet. The other involves a 21st century superhero who goes alone to Podunk, Tennessee and sunny Miami to chase a terrorist. What am I missing here? Or better yet: what are *you* missing here?

Starting with the bolded part - first of all, the time period has already been accounted for (when I mentioned space sci-fi bend). STID is an ensemble piece? Well so was TDK, but that didn't stop people from comparing it to Iron Man. Those kinds of differences are present even in films of the same genre. As for the whole "traitor in their midst who sabotaged the greater part of Starfleet", it is obvious now that you haven't seen the movie and have no idea what you're talking about yet have the nerve to question someone who does.

And even after all that, you still failed to address how the similarities I pointed out are inappropriate.

And if you're going to define "blockbuster" as a genre now, then everybody into the pool --- let's start comparing the finer points of Transformers 2 and Titanic....those movies are virtually identical.

Again, picking out bits and pieces from my post that you think you can respond to and conveniently ignoring the parts that you can't. I said "summer action blockbusters that are competing for the same audience". Does Titanic qualify? Do yourself a favor and stop giving anymore asinine examples.

 

[Fenrir]

Even Star Wars and Star Trek have different fan bases and they are in THE SAME GENRE

I said "audience", not "fan base". Big difference there.

 

[Tony Stark]

I'm just saying some people will love both, some will love one and hat the other, some will think both suck. It's subjective.

Fenrir seemed to be saying that because ST:I2D was superior to IM3 it will make people not like and/or forget about IM3. I'm saying that far less people are even going to bother going to see ST:I2D.

It's just like that AMC video posted said, people have to realize where their own perspective ranks within the general movie going population. Whether it's die hard trekkies or die hard CB fans they are only a small makeup of the general movie going populace.

Sure you can compare the films, so long as you don't compare their styles. I mean you can compare to say, "this is a well written script", or "this is a poor written script", or "the cinematography was great", etc., etc. So long as you realize where it's coming from.

Look in 2009, I said Star Trek was the best movie of the summer, but far more people went to see Transformers 2. I think Star Trek is a much better movie, but far more people went to see Transformers.

The guy in the video was saying that generally the critic reviews and the user reviews are not all that far off. He points that the RT critic reviews for IM3 are 78% and the user reviews are 86%. Transformers is an example of the exception to the rule. The critics rated it at 20%, where the user reviews were at 70%.

 

[Tony Stark]

I said "audience", not "fan base". Big difference there.

As I pointed out, Star Trek does not have the same audience.

Now maybe It's a huge surprise, and ends up being the no 1 grossing film of 2013, but in all likelihood, Star Trek best case is in the 700M - 800M WW, but considering Trek's past, I wouldn't bet on it.

Bottom line in all likelihood far more people will see IM3 than Trek.

 

[Fenrir]

As I pointed out, Star Trek does not have the same audience.

Now maybe It's a huge surprise, and ends up being the no 1 grossing film of 2013, but in all likelihood, Star Trek best case is in the 700M - 800M WW, but considering Trek's past, I wouldn't bet on it.

Bottom line in all likelihood far more people will see IM3 than Trek.

My point has absolutely nothing to do with box office numbers or the popularity of both films. I am talking in terms of quality. Star Trek and Iron Man 3 are actually gunning for the same general audience, and that is why you'll see a huge drop in Iron Man 3's numbers when STID opens. Whether or not it surpasses Iron Man 3's take is irrelevant.

I didn't say STID will make people forget about Iron Man 3. I said it will make the flaws of the film more apparent - because STID sets out to do many of the same things that IM3 did as well, but STID just does it better, much better.

 

[Tony Stark]

My point has absolutely nothing to do with box office numbers or the popularity of both films. I am talking in terms of quality. Star Trek and Iron Man 3 are actually gunning for the same general audience, and that is why you'll see a huge drop in Iron Man 3's numbers when STID opens. Whether or not it surpasses Iron Man 3's take is irrelevant.

I didn't say STID will make people forget about Iron Man 3. I said it will make the flaws of the film more apparent - because STID sets out to do many of the same things that IM3 did as well, but STID just does it better, much better.

Way to miss the point. The point is not as many people will see ST, therefore if ST points out flaws in IM3, most people won't notice. Unless ST just takes off and has a huge audience increase that is unexpected.

The point - ST audience =/= IM3 audience.