Iron Man 3 The IRON MAN 3 News & Speculation Thread - - - - - Part 14

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well said.

Shane Black seems to have delivered a great movie and that's all I ever really want from these movies. Comic accuracy can be rendered completely meaningless if mishandled. Prime example being Green Lantern. Technically that movie was faithful to the source yet managed to be a hot mess.

Do I think Harvey Dent dying or Joker not being perma-white somehow made my viewing experience of TDK miserable? Absolutely not.

Same will go here with the twist if it's as masterly executed as almost every review has indicated. A directors intuitiveness with the material they're handed will always trump "comic accuracy".

Kinda off topic but my God those endless topics in late 2007 and early 2008 when the first pic of Heaths Joker dropped with mind numbing. Hope the forums never get that bad ever again.
 
Well said.

Shane Black seems to have delivered a great movie and that's all I ever really want from these movies. Comic accuracy can be rendered completely meaningless if mishandled. Prime example being Green Lantern. Technically that movie was faithful to the source yet managed to be a hot mess.

Do I think Harvey Dent dying or Joker not being perma-white somehow made my viewing experience of TDK miserable? Absolutely not.

Same will go here with the twist if it's as masterly executed as almost every review has indicated. A directors intuitiveness with the material they're handed will always trump "comic accuracy".

I think people will have a little more trouble with the twist this time and it's not due to being a purist or a comic book continuity hound.

[BLACKOUT]For me, i could not care less about comic continuity, but they built up Kingsley as the mandarin so well and so brilliantly, once the twist is revealed it was incredibly jarring, I could see people hating it on a purely cinematic level. I loved it though...purely because it made the character all the mroe awesome, and it contributed excellently to the already comedic tone. So all smiles from me.[/BLACKOUT]
 
Quick question to anyone who's seen the film...

Is it ever explicitly stated that Killian invented the Ten Rings terrorist organization? And if so, is the Ten Ring's capture of Tony Stark in IM1 or their dealings with Obadiah Stane ever further explained considering that would all appear to be linked back to Killian now?
 
Quick question to anyone who's seen the film...

Is it ever explicitly stated that Killian invented the Ten Rings terrorist organization? And if so, is the Ten Ring's capture of Tony Stark in IM1 or their dealings with Obadiah Stane ever further explained considering that would all appear to be linked back to Killian now?

As far as I know, they are separate and that the whole 10 rings thing is just something used by Killian to build up the Mandarin. The actual terrorist organization is just something else that doesn't really show up outside of the first film.
 
For people that have seen it. If I read the twist with mandarin will it really like spoil the entire movie?
 
How is the final battle? I haven't been hearing anything about it...

It's pretty sweet actually, probably the coolest sequence in the film (if not the coolest iron man sequence put to film) but more importantly, once you consider the themes and the ideas presented throughout the film...then the fight means so so so much more.
 
It's pretty sweet actually, probably the coolest sequence in the film (if not the coolest iron man sequence put to film) but more importantly, once you consider the themes and the ideas presented throughout the film...then the fight means so so so much more.

Nice! I'm excited now! :) About how long is it? And does rhodey fight in his armor?
 
Nice! I'm excited now! :) About how long is it? And does rhodey fight in his armor?

It didn't feel that long but it's nice for Stark to go up against someone who's physically capable (probably even more capable than him) one on one with so much emotion and tension. I[BLACKOUT]t's a really classic showdown, good guy vs bad guy in a brawl.[/BLACKOUT]
 
I try to avoid spoilers...but having to monitor forums it happens....I haven't seen IM3 yet, but knowing the "twist" doesn't bother me at all.
 
Well said.

Shane Black seems to have delivered a great movie and that's all I ever really want from these movies. Comic accuracy can be rendered completely meaningless if mishandled. Prime example being Green Lantern. Technically that movie was faithful to the source yet managed to be a hot mess.

Do I think Harvey Dent dying or Joker not being perma-white somehow made my viewing experience of TDK miserable? Absolutely not.

Same will go here with the twist if it's as masterly executed as almost every review has indicated. A directors intuitiveness with the material they're handed will always trump "comic accuracy".

Craig and Wolvieboy said it perfectly, thank you gentlemen. :woot:
 
I try to avoid spoilers...but having to monitor forums it happens....I haven't seen IM3 yet, but knowing the "twist" doesn't bother me at all.

Awesome, well I am gonna bit the bullet and read it because I so stoked for this movie and I don't think I can hold out lol.
 
It's not like a sixth sense like twist where it changes the entire movie. For one it happens closer to midway through the film, it just changes the tone of the film and messes with the audiences expectations. If anything i would imagine knowing the twist beforehand could help...although the friends i was with loved the twist.
 
It's not like a sixth sense like twist where it changes the entire movie. For one it happens closer to midway through the film, it just changes the tone of the film and messes with the audiences expectations. If anything i would imagine knowing the twist beforehand could help...although the friends i was with loved the twist.

Cool. One last question for you. Iron Man 2 kinda hinted at Justin Hammer having some sort of influence in Iron Man 3 where he tells Pepper this isn't over or something along those lines. So is Hammer referenced in the movie at all?
 
Cool. One last question for you. Iron Man 2 kinda hinted at Justin Hammer having some sort of influence in Iron Man 3 where he tells Pepper this isn't over or something along those lines. So is Hammer referenced in the movie at all?

Nope, not at all. Maybe in the Avengers 2? Sam Rockwell is such a great actor that deserves more than what Iron Man 2 gave him. (he played Hammer pretty well as well)

[BLACKOUT]But Yinsen makes a sweet little cameo[/BLACKOUT]
 
Nope, not at all. Maybe in the Avengers 2? Sam Rockwell is such a great actor that deserves more than what Iron Man 2 gave him. (he played Hammer pretty well as well)

[BLACKOUT]But Yinsen makes a sweet little cameo[/BLACKOUT]

I think I saw him at the premiere earlier.
 
Nope, not at all. Maybe in the Avengers 2? Sam Rockwell is such a great actor that deserves more than what Iron Man 2 gave him. (he played Hammer pretty well as well)

[BLACKOUT]But Yinsen makes a sweet little cameo[/BLACKOUT]

Awe well, I agree Sam Rockwell is a great actor and deserved more than what Iron Man 2 gave him. And that is a awesome cameo from Iron Man 1 in black. Thanks for the info!
 
Directors do more than 'guide' the process, they're there to deliver their vision. I'm sick of this fanboy preciousness that if a film maker strays from the source material they're doing a disservice to the fans. A director can put whatever their stamp is on whatever film they choose, in exactly the same way that a writer/artist combo on a comic will change the direction and vision of a great book.

I hate the attitude that some people have with these films that a director is basically a 'caretaker' who's job is to just translate the comic panel for panel to the screen.

That's not what Shane Black did, not by a long shot. Yet it's probably one of the best marvel films to date. Why? Because it does great, deep and evolutionary things for a character, has memorable and edge of your seat action and it works and stands alone as a great film OUTSIDE of it's superhero genre.

And of all the great things it did, not a single part of that was at expense for anything else.

I think Phase 2 is going to be great if they keep trying to stick to each individual film as it's own niche and formula.

And you know what, all the fear people have about Robert Downey Jr maybe eventually leaving the role... If we get movies THAT well written and the character explored to THAT extent, then everything will be fine... The character will outlive the actor.

Our only concern should be that we need the other characters to be as firmly cemented in the general publics minds as well.


Thank you so much for saying this.

So often fans complain that Marvel controls its films so tightly that the directors are not allowed to be creative and give their own interpretation of the material. Marvel is assumed to be so risk-averse that every aspect of its films are dictated from the top, with no room for deviation from the studio's own plans. This is such a commonly expressed opinion that it is pretty much taken as fact.

In Iron Man 3 we have a film in which Marvel clearly gave full creative control to Shane Black and his co-writer Drew Pearce, allowing them to tell their story their way, and predictably there are howls of outrage over it. This is an example of Marvel taking a big risk (not that they never did before) in the interest of developing the character of Tony Stark and expanding the scope of his cinematic world. The studio didn't require Black to slavishly copy the comics, understanding as some fans do not that any adaptation requires change and innovation to be successful. That is something Marvel should be commended for whether or not one thinks that the changes were warranted.
 
Thank you so much for saying this.

So often fans complain that Marvel controls its films so tightly that the directors are not allowed to be creative and give their own interpretation of the material. Marvel is assumed to be so risk-averse that every aspect of its films are dictated from the top, with no room for deviation from the studio's own plans. This is such a commonly expressed opinion that it is pretty much taken as fact.

In Iron Man 3 we have a film in which Marvel clearly gave full creative control to Shane Black and his co-writer Drew Pearce, allowing them to tell their story their way, and predictably there are howls of outrage over it. This is an example of Marvel taking a big risk (not that they never did before) in the interest of developing the character of Tony Stark and expanding the scope of his cinematic world. The studio didn't require Black to slavishly copy the comics, understanding as some fans do not that any adaptation requires change and innovation to be successful. That is something Marvel should be commended for whether or not one thinks that the changes were warranted.

eh, i dont think they just said "do what ever you want" They do have to OK everything, and im sure if a director pitches an idea and they like it regardless how far out of left field it is.. they'd run with it.

it's a much tighter control for the post avengers films for the fact they're all aside from IM2, the first appearance of all these characters and the tone needs to be perfect and just the way they want their properties depicted. Iron Man now typically writes himself which is great...

IM2 still had a leash on it because it was basically a major set up for the Avengers....

I think the reigns will be loosened up quite a bit this time around.. until we get the newbies like Antman, Strange, Guardians, and Panther
 
Thank you so much for saying this.

So often fans complain that Marvel controls its films so tightly that the directors are not allowed to be creative and give their own interpretation of the material. Marvel is assumed to be so risk-averse that every aspect of its films are dictated from the top, with no room for deviation from the studio's own plans. This is such a commonly expressed opinion that it is pretty much taken as fact.

In Iron Man 3 we have a film in which Marvel clearly gave full creative control to Shane Black and his co-writer Drew Pearce, allowing them to tell their story their way, and predictably there are howls of outrage over it. This is an example of Marvel taking a big risk (not that they never did before) in the interest of developing the character of Tony Stark and expanding the scope of his cinematic world. The studio didn't require Black to slavishly copy the comics, understanding as some fans do not that any adaptation requires change and innovation to be successful. That is something Marvel should be commended for whether or not one thinks that the changes were warranted.
That is because it was true. That is probably why IM3 is so different.
 
Thank you so much for saying this.

So often fans complain that Marvel controls its films so tightly that the directors are not allowed to be creative and give their own interpretation of the material. Marvel is assumed to be so risk-averse that every aspect of its films are dictated from the top, with no room for deviation from the studio's own plans. This is such a commonly expressed opinion that it is pretty much taken as fact.

In Iron Man 3 we have a film in which Marvel clearly gave full creative control to Shane Black and his co-writer Drew Pearce, allowing them to tell their story their way, and predictably there are howls of outrage over it. This is an example of Marvel taking a big risk (not that they never did before) in the interest of developing the character of Tony Stark and expanding the scope of his cinematic world. The studio didn't require Black to slavishly copy the comics, understanding as some fans do not that any adaptation requires change and innovation to be successful. That is something Marvel should be commended for whether or not one thinks that the changes were warranted.
Dude , you just told everything I was thinking ! Come at me Bro :yay:
 
Thank you so much for saying this.

So often fans complain that Marvel controls its films so tightly that the directors are not allowed to be creative and give their own interpretation of the material. Marvel is assumed to be so risk-averse that every aspect of its films are dictated from the top, with no room for deviation from the studio's own plans. This is such a commonly expressed opinion that it is pretty much taken as fact.

In Iron Man 3 we have a film in which Marvel clearly gave full creative control to Shane Black and his co-writer Drew Pearce, allowing them to tell their story their way, and predictably there are howls of outrage over it. This is an example of Marvel taking a big risk (not that they never did before) in the interest of developing the character of Tony Stark and expanding the scope of his cinematic world. The studio didn't require Black to slavishly copy the comics, understanding as some fans do not that any adaptation requires change and innovation to be successful. That is something Marvel should be commended for whether or not one thinks that the changes were warranted.

36243-slow-clap-citizen-kane-orson-w-jpBA.gif
 
I think at the end of the day when it comes to source material for me, it's called the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" its an on screen version of there characters. With that, they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they didn't adapt aspects of the comic universe to bring out the most drama, and suspense, because that's whats needed in the medium of film.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,304
Messages
22,082,668
Members
45,882
Latest member
Charles Xavier
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"