Iron Man The Official Iron Man Rate & Review Thread

[Hulkfan2008!]

ironman 9/10 easilyt:

 

[Theweepeople]

Once again, you have failed to understand what exactly Burton did with his Batman.

I'm quite aware with what Burton did with his Batman and Bruce Wayne. I liked what was done with Batman but, his Bruce Wayne appeared to be shallow and boring. Burton clearly failed at making his protagonist somewhat remotely close to as interesting as the antagonist. No clear thinking person would deny this.

He saw Bruce Wayne as a loner, whihc he has always been. He lives in this huge mansion alone with Alfred, has more money than he knows what to do with, and keeps to himself, afraif to truly let anyone in. At night, he is the Batman, protecting his city.

I didn't have a problem with any of this.

Burton purposely didn't provide Batman with a proper origin to keep him mysterious, and I think that worked well. You don't need a typical origin 45 minutes origin story like Spider-man or Iron Man to make a good superhero movie. Like I said, Batman's origin was told in a more subtle and mysterious way.

I wouldn't have had a problem with this if Micheal Keaton's performace of Bruce Wayne didn't put me to sleep. I like mystery but, I want to see some resolution to it when I'm either reading a book or watching a film series. Unfortunately, Burton failed to give us any resolution in the sequel by not giving us any insight at all into Bruce Wayne's past.

And then the Vicki Vale character, who you said was "pointless", gets involved with Bruce Wayne and becomes curious as to the kind of man he actually is. Why is so little known about him? Why won't he let her in on his life?

Why was this supposed to be so interesting? Vicki Vale was the generic damsel in distress that we'd seen in other films and books who needed someone to get her out of trouble. Besides being a damsel her only other purpose in the film appeared to be someone Bruce could sex with. Futhermore, if Vicki Vale was such an important character in Burton's Batman universe please explain to me why there's no mention of her in the sequel.

It just seems like you missed the entire point of the movie and are just looking for ways to bash it.

It seemed as though you missed the entire point of my original argument.


Finally, after reading about Burton's involvement with the chaotic Superman Lives mess I'm convinced he is one of the most overated comic book directors. Here are some of the ideas Burton came up with:


"So what was Burton’s vision? Not much different from Peters’, in fact. Burton hated the flying FX in the 1978 film, too, so he didn’t want Superman to fly. Instead, he put Superman in a Supermobile. (Seven years later, AICN revealed that Burton and Peters had also planned on having Superman teleport from place to place in lieu of flying.) He also hated the classic costume, too, hence the oddball designs he proffered in its place, all of which would have featured silver-relief versions of the ElectroSupes S-shield and armored, treaded boots similar in design to what Michael Keaton wore as Batman:

1. A partially translucent suit that would allow full view of Superman’s internal organs, as reported by Cinescape in late 1997 as Burton’s plans for the film kicked into high gear. (Although word from within the Burton camp confirmed that Burton was indeed hoping to do this, the design was apparently never committed to paper—leaving some people following the project wondering if Burton was really going to use the translucent suit or if it was just a hoax. Nevertheless, Burton’s diehard fans adored the idea, praising it as total genius and the height of coolness. Superman fans, on the other hand, were left scratching their heads over it.)
2. An all-black, alien-looking suit that would have resembled a "cool cross" between Edward Scissorhands, the WB movie Batman, and a Borg. (At one point, this was what Burton’s Superman would have started the film off in.)
3. A metallic silver healing suit/body armor with details that would have made Superman’s body look robotic. (An action figure prototype of Nic Cage as Superman wearing body armor was made, but it looked nothing like the design as described and featured the usual red/blue/gold Superman color scheme.)
4. An all-dark blue suit with a "blood-red" cape. (This would have been the standard Superman suit used in subsequent films.)"



I doubt that Superman Fans would ever forgive him for this BS.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I think Burton's Superman would have been a good fresh of air as a Superman movie,unlike the others IMO which were so dire and so boring.

 

[Theweepeople]

I think Burton's Superman would have been a good fresh of air as a Superman movie,unlike the others IMO which were so dire and so boring.

I'm sure most diehard comic book fans would have been thrilled to see a non flying superman get around in a supermobile.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I'm sure most diehard comic book fans would have been thrilled to see a non flying superman get around in a supermobile.

Meh.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I'm sure most diehard comic book fans would have been thrilled to see a non flying superman get around in a supermobile.

....

 

[Theweepeople]

Those were just some of Burton's idiotic ideas. In another thread I posted John Peter's deranged ideas that both Tim Burton and Brett Hackner agreed with.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Those were just some of Burton's idiotic ideas. In another thread I posted John Peter's deranged ideas that both Tim Burton and Brett Hackner agreed with.

It would have looked much better than the piece of crap called Superman Returns! The concept art looked cool IMO,I liked how Doomsday looked.

 

[Spade]

Only an idiot looks at Bruce Wayne and goes "That's just some guy with too much time on his hands".

Come on now.

There are loads of people who do exactly that. Every time I see someone do a parody video on Batman, there's at least one mention that Bruce Wayne chose an odd way to avenge his parent's murder (if they don't try to outright say that his motives are lame).

It's like the people who whine because BATMAN never showed where he got his stuff. Are they stupid?

"People," not me. I don't really care for the angle they went with in Begins as far as equipment goes. But then again, I've never really cared to learn how Batman engineers a batarang. He's Bruce Wayne, and he has money. That's about as much as I need to know. I just think his globe-trekking added a depth that Burton's films were lacking. At least the first...I guess you could argue that Catwoman helped develop him in Returns.

Those were just some of Burton's idiotic ideas. In another thread I posted John Peter's deranged ideas that both Tim Burton and Brett Hackner agreed with.

Mind reposting them?

 

[Theweepeople]

Mind reposting them?

Here are John Peter's ideas:

1. Krypton doesn’t explode. Instead it’s a Naboo rip-off overrun by robot soldiers, walking war machines, and civil war (can you say, Star Wars: Episode I?). Jor-El is literally the king of Krypton and leader of the Kryptonian Senate (thus Superman is a prince), and he and Lara send Kal-El to Earth because he is "the One" whom a prophecy states will save Krypton from destruction (rip-off of The Matrix). The villains, Jor-El’s evil brother and nephew Kata-Zor and Ty-Zor, take Jor-El prisoner and send probe pods out to find and kill the baby Kal-El. 14 years later, Lara and her shell-less turtle servant Taga (shades of Jar Jar Binks) are found by Ty-Zor, and Lara gets tortured to death.
2. Superman’s costume is a living entity housed in a can, and it climbs onto him when he needs it. He first discovers it in a closet when he’s 14 (Jor-El visited Earth and picked the Kents out to be Kal-El’s new parents, leaving them his picture, some S-shield metal pieces signifying the virtues Kal-El must represent, and the costume), and the costume rips his clothes off and stuffs him into itself. So teen Clark is flying around in a suit that’s way too big for him.
3. Lex Luthor is an evil CIA agent obsessed with UFO phenomena. When Superman reveals himself to the world, Luthor demands that the government allow him to hunt Superman down and kill him. The government refuses, so Luthor allies himself with the evil Kryptonians out to kill Kal-El…because Luthor himself is an evil Kryptonian, working undercover as a human to set up an invasion of Earth!
4. All the Kryptonians get into airborne kung-fu fights straight out of The Matrix. Even Luthor gets in on the act at the end of the script.
5. An aerial kung-fu fight between Superman and Ty-Zor results in Superman being lured into a trap: Lois is drowning in a tank filled with kryptonite. (This begs the question of how there can be kryptonite when Krypton didn’t even explode, but….) Superman is given a choice: save her and die from radiation poisoning in the act, or stand by and watch her drown. So he goes in, saves her, and dies. Jor-El magically senses Superman’s death from across the galaxy, commits hara-kiri with a rock he sharpens in his prison cell, goes to Heaven, and talks Superman into coming back to life so he can fulfill the prophecy of saving Krypton from its civil war. So Superman’s soul returns to his body, and he proceeds to trash Ty-Zor and his cronies. And at the end of the film, Superman flies off in a rocket to save Krypton (which is where the second film is planned to take place).
6. A dialogue scene at The Daily Planet implies that Jimmy Olsen—a horny skirt-chaser in the comic books—is gay, as Abrams describes him as "effeminate" and Perry White rags on him for having a boyfriend.

By the way, the article I'm reading also revealed that Tim tried to cast Marlon Wayans as Robin in Batman Returns but the WB turned his crazy idea down. I lost a lot of respect for Burton after reading all of this. There's plenty more for me to post in the future. I've just given you all a taste.

 

[fu manchu]

Damn! Leave the Batman and Superman talk somewhere else, please. Talk about Iron Man damn it!!!

 

[Ash J. Williams]

Agreed.

 

[The Shape]

I'm quite aware with what Burton did with his Batman and Bruce Wayne. I liked what was done with Batman but, his Bruce Wayne appeared to be shallow and boring. Burton clearly failed at making his protagonist somewhat remotely close to as interesting as the antagonist. No clear thinking person would deny this.

Maybe this is because Bruce Wayne is a not a psychotic, mass-murdering clown. It's kind of hard for him to upstage the clownish villain chewing up the scenery, though Batman did a good job of balancing that.

I wouldn't have had a problem with this if Micheal Keaton's performace of Bruce Wayne didn't put me to sleep. I like mystery but, I want to see some resolution to it when I'm either reading a book or watching a film series. Unfortunately, Burton failed to give us any resolution in the sequel by not giving us any insight at all into Bruce Wayne's past.

Resolution? There was resolution at the end of the first film. The Bruce Wayne/Batman character had developed. He went from being a closed off loner to allowing the woman he was falling for into his life, attempting to find a balance between living a normal life and being a creature of the night.

And we did get insight to Bruce's past in the first film. I'm not sure what you want. I guess, for you, it's important for you to have at least 30 minutes of a superhero's past explicitly show in a film, but sadly, this was not the case in Batman. We learned about Bruces life through conversations (Bruce, Vicki, and Alfred talking about Bruce as a child...Bruce revealing that Alfred's all he's got), newspaper archives (Knox looking up Wayne, revealing the tragic event that plagued his past), and a flashback (Bruce thinks back on the night that changed his life and we get to see what really happened). Bruce expresses that he feels being Batman is his responisbility. Why? Because he can.

I'm not sure what more you need.

Why was this supposed to be so interesting? Vicki Vale was the generic damsel in distress that we'd seen in other films and books who needed someone to get her out of trouble. Besides being a damsel her only other purpose in the film appeared to be someone Bruce could sex with. Futhermore, if Vicki Vale was such an important character in Burton's Batman universe please explain to me why there's no mention of her in the sequel.

This was interesting because she was breaking through the emotional barrier that Bruce Wayne puts up. And yeah, she was the damsel in distress, but I guess you think Dunst's Mary Jane was much more interesting?

And yes, she was mentioned in the sequel when Bruce and Selina Kyle are discussing their past relationships. He explains why it didn't work out with her. I mean, it is a little difficult to lead a double life and have a solid relationship...

It seemed as though you missed the entire point of my original argument.

Finally, after reading about Burton's involvement with the chaotic Superman Lives mess I'm convinced he is one of the most overated comic book directors. Here are some of the ideas Burton came up with:

That was nice and all, but we were discussing Burton's Batman, not his plans for Superman.

 

[fu manchu]

 

[Spade]

Thread hijack!

But really, is it that bad? Everyone liked Iron Man, or at least the cool people did. 30 pages of "I loved this movie" is tiring.

 

[CanaryFan]

That's why there are other threads.

 

[fu manchu]

Thread hijack!

But really, is it that bad? Everyone liked Iron Man, or at least the cool people did. 30 pages of "I loved this movie" is tiring.

yes its bad! I haven't got tired of it! that why I checking this thread out.


However, I wouldn't mind if its a comparison of batman/superman vs iron man.

 

[Spade]

yes its bad! I haven't got tired of it! that why I checking this thread out.


However, I wouldn't mind if its a comparison of batman/superman vs iron man.

I could whip something up...

Batman
-Bangs chicks
-Has money
-Likes his symbol

Superman
-Flies around
-Saves folks
-Has a bald villain

Close enough comparison between Begins and Returns to Iron Man?

 

[fu manchu]

thats better. now keep it that way!

 

[Star]

But I think the question is who gets more ladies? Batman, Superman (ha ha.) or Tony Stark?!

 

[Theweepeople]

Maybe this is because Bruce Wayne is a not a psychotic, mass-murdering clown. It's kind of hard for him to upstage the clownish villain chewing up the scenery, though Batman did a good job of balancing that.

This is a pathetic excuse. Bruce Wayne is one of the most interesting characters in all the comic books. Making this character interesting in a live action film isn't rocket science. The reason Tim Burton's Bruce Wayne sucks is because Micheal Keaton was miscast as Bruce Wayne. Keaton's personality is way too eccentric to play a suave ladies man. I don't think he has ever pulled off a role like this in any film.

The Bruce Wayne I saw in Batman 89 lacked confidence, was vengeful, and was a complete emotional wreak throughout the entire film. That's not the Wayne I remembered from the comics. On the other hand, Nolan's Bruce Wayne was way more interesting and almost the complete opposite
of Keaton's portrayal of the character.

Resolution? There was resolution at the end of the first film. The Bruce Wayne/Batman character had developed. He went from being a closed off loner to allowing the woman he was falling for into his life, attempting to find a balance between living a normal life and being a creature of the night.

First, of all this is not the resolution I was referring to. I was talking about the mystery of Bruce Wayne's past. This element of mystery was the only thing I found to be interesting about Burton's Wayne in Batman. Unfortunately this became less interesting to me in the second film because we don't learn anything else about Bruce Wayne's past. As a result of this, Bruce Wayne's character fell victim to being overshadowed a second time by not just one villian but, two in Batman Returns.

Secondly, I'm not sure what resolution you're referring to. I didn't see a noticeable difference in the perception of Bruce Wayne's loneliness at the end of Batman. Everything you suggested can only be assumed and the beginning of Batman Returns suggested that little had changed. Bruce Wayne was not with Vicki Vale anymore and the shallow character is barely even referred to the sequel. Bruce was still single, a loner, and struggling to find a balance between living a normal life and being a creature of night. Of course some of this was never to be resolved because Batman was always a loner in the comics so I didn't really have a problem with this.

And we did get insight to Bruce's past in the first film. I'm not sure what you want. I guess, for you, it's important for you to have at least 30 minutes of a superhero's past explicitly show in a film, but sadly, this was not the case in Batman.

I don't think it's neccessary for us to have 30 minutes of time dedicated to a superhero's past. On the other hand I didn't expect to get only 5 minutes of insight into Bruce Wayne's past in the first film. I was not happy with that but, I thought maybe the sequels would give us more. Unfortunately, Batman Returns failed miserably at accomplishing this. Was 15 minutes of character development in Batman too much to ask for?

We learned about Bruces life through conversations (Bruce, Vicki, and Alfred talking about Bruce as a child...Bruce revealing that Alfred's all he's got), newspaper archives (Knox looking up Wayne, revealing the tragic event that plagued his past), and a flashback (Bruce thinks back on the night that changed his life and we get to see what really happened). Bruce expresses that he feels being Batman is his responisbility. Why? Because he can.

Yes, this is all true but, these scenes were few and infrequent. I didn't think any of them lasted long enough to influence a causal viewer to make an emotional connection with Bruce Wayne. I think it would be hard for anyone to get interested in a character whose personality is as cold and vague as their past.

This was interesting because she was breaking through the emotional barrier that Bruce Wayne puts up. And yeah, she was the damsel in distress, but I guess you think Dunst's Mary Jane was much more interesting?

This is a horrible comparison. Comparing a character that Peter Parker was obsessed with during his childhood who shows up in multiple films. To a ****ty character Bruce Wayne barely knew, who slept with him on their first couple of dates, and most likely had a short term relationship with Bruce as evidenced by her nonappearance in Batman Returns. I think the evidence speaks for itself.

And yes, she was mentioned in the sequel when Bruce and Selina Kyle are discussing their past relationships. He explains why it didn't work out with her. I mean, it is a little difficult to lead a double life and have a solid relationship...

I'm still not seeing the significance of the shallow relationship Bruce had with Vicki Vale in Batman. If anything the above quote stated by Bruce Wayne in Batman Returns only solidifies the validitity of how pointless the relationship was.

 

[Spade]

But I think the question is who gets more ladies? Batman, Superman (ha ha.) or Tony Stark?!

Downey-Stark gets so many women he has problems remembering their names days after he bangs them. I'd say he sees alot of traffic coming his way.

 

[Raiden]

Downey-Stark gets so many women he has problems remembering their names days after he bangs them. I'd say he sees alot of traffic coming his way.

Bruce Wayne only pretends to get women because playboy is his cover. Tony Stark is a playboy.

Clark Kent only sleeps with Lois Lane.

 

[LostSon88]

Here are John Peter's ideas:

1. Krypton doesn’t explode. Instead it’s a Naboo rip-off overrun by robot soldiers, walking war machines, and civil war (can you say, Star Wars: Episode I?). Jor-El is literally the king of Krypton and leader of the Kryptonian Senate (thus Superman is a prince), and he and Lara send Kal-El to Earth because he is "the One" whom a prophecy states will save Krypton from destruction (rip-off of The Matrix). The villains, Jor-El’s evil brother and nephew Kata-Zor and Ty-Zor, take Jor-El prisoner and send probe pods out to find and kill the baby Kal-El. 14 years later, Lara and her shell-less turtle servant Taga (shades of Jar Jar Binks) are found by Ty-Zor, and Lara gets tortured to death.
2. Superman’s costume is a living entity housed in a can, and it climbs onto him when he needs it. He first discovers it in a closet when he’s 14 (Jor-El visited Earth and picked the Kents out to be Kal-El’s new parents, leaving them his picture, some S-shield metal pieces signifying the virtues Kal-El must represent, and the costume), and the costume rips his clothes off and stuffs him into itself. So teen Clark is flying around in a suit that’s way too big for him.
3. Lex Luthor is an evil CIA agent obsessed with UFO phenomena. When Superman reveals himself to the world, Luthor demands that the government allow him to hunt Superman down and kill him. The government refuses, so Luthor allies himself with the evil Kryptonians out to kill Kal-El…because Luthor himself is an evil Kryptonian, working undercover as a human to set up an invasion of Earth!
4. All the Kryptonians get into airborne kung-fu fights straight out of The Matrix. Even Luthor gets in on the act at the end of the script.
5. An aerial kung-fu fight between Superman and Ty-Zor results in Superman being lured into a trap: Lois is drowning in a tank filled with kryptonite. (This begs the question of how there can be kryptonite when Krypton didn’t even explode, but….) Superman is given a choice: save her and die from radiation poisoning in the act, or stand by and watch her drown. So he goes in, saves her, and dies. Jor-El magically senses Superman’s death from across the galaxy, commits hara-kiri with a rock he sharpens in his prison cell, goes to Heaven, and talks Superman into coming back to life so he can fulfill the prophecy of saving Krypton from its civil war. So Superman’s soul returns to his body, and he proceeds to trash Ty-Zor and his cronies. And at the end of the film, Superman flies off in a rocket to save Krypton (which is where the second film is planned to take place).
6. A dialogue scene at The Daily Planet implies that Jimmy Olsen—a horny skirt-chaser in the comic books—is gay, as Abrams describes him as "effeminate" and Perry White rags on him for having a boyfriend.

By the way, the article I'm reading also revealed that Tim tried to cast Marlon Wayans as Robin in Batman Returns but the WB turned his crazy idea down. I lost a lot of respect for Burton after reading all of this. There's plenty more for me to post in the future. I've just given you all a taste.

Sorry to stray off topic but...

These wearn't Jon Peters. This was JJ Abrams ideas...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_(film_series)#Failed_projects (scroll down to "Failed Projects")

These were Peters ideas:

-Superman doesn't fly.
-Superman doesn't wear the suit.
-Superman fights a giant spider.
-Brainiac fights polar bears.
-Brainiac has gay robot sidekick.

And the mother of all WTF...

-Superman fights Chewbacca.

 

[Theweepeople]

Sorry to stray off topic but...

These wearn't Jon Peters. This was JJ Abrams ideas...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_(film_series)#Failed_projects (scroll down to "Failed Projects")

These were Peters ideas:

-Superman doesn't fly.
-Superman doesn't wear the suit.
-Superman fights a giant spider.
-Brainiac fights polar bears.
-Brainiac has gay robot sidekick.

And the mother of all WTF...

-Superman fights Chewbacca.

Well, I'm not sure how accurate wikipedia but, you're right about those ideas also being John Peters. I remember seeing a special on the Superman Lives mess and I'm pretty sure it confirmed all of John Peters ideas I posted earlier. I could post the link that confirms all of this. My source also has JJ abrams ideas. I could post this later today.