Iron Man The Official Iron Man Rate & Review Thread

[TheStig]

Let me say that I had really mixed emotions about seeing this movie. Iron Man is probably one of my favorite superheroes and when I saw what happened with a movie adaptation of my other favorite superhero (Daredevil) I was a little apprehensive because I did not want to see them butchered on the screen. Sure the reviews have been overwhelmingly positive and it is raking it in at the box office, but the last thing I wanted was to be disappointed. So realize that this review is from a definite fanboy, but I will try to keep it honest and spoiler free.



Well lets get right to it because the movie definitely doesn't waste any time getting into the thick of things. I thought this movie was fantastic. The special effects were stellar, making Superman Returns look like something shot in Bryan Singer's backyard. The armors are beautiful in a robo-mechanical kind of way and range from the "just get it done" Mark 1 to the "finished" Mark 3. Not only the armors, but the Iron Man interface are all fantastic- I have always wondered what it is like to look through those lenses. What does he see? Well, without ruining it, he sees a lot, and it is badass. Then there is his home AI system "Jarvis" (an awesome nod to comic fans, Jarvis is Stark's butler in the comics, his Alfred if you will) which allows him to do some very cool stuff.

But this movie is far more than special effects. Although a lot of people thought RDJ was a poor to catastrophic choice to play Stark, I thought he did very well. He gave the character a depth and emotion that I havent seen in a superhero movie (Batman Begins included). Much like Jack Sparrow launching Johnny Depp's unorthodox movie career into superstardom, I really feel that this role will do the same for RDJ. The supporting cast was also good- not Batman Begins good, but good none the less. Jeff Bridges does a great job as the villain, imparting a cool terror to the character. While the movie doesn't really go into great detail on his motives, you can see that Stane is a man who is not happy with his current position. Pepper Potts is played well and her relationship with Tony is awkward/romantic sweet in a way that Bruce Wayne and Rachel Dawes could only aspire to. The weakest link is Terry Rhodes played by Terrence Howard, who comes across as a little flat and a little stale which is unfortunate because he may play a much larger role in the future of the franchise.

All in all I thought the movie is definitely one of the top tier superhero movies. It easily ranks with Batman Begins and Spiderman 2 as the best superhero movies that have ever been made. Add the fact that they did it with the relatively obscure Iron Man only heightens the achievement. The pacing is stellar and the character development out of costume is as good, if not better than when in costume. I never once sat in the theater antsy to see Stark put on the armor, I was totally content in seeing Stark being Stark- him in the armor was just gravy.


My Grade: A- This movie was a stellar supporting character performance away from being perfect. If Terry Rhodes or Obadiah Stane had put in a Commissioner Gordon/Lucius Fox level performance, the movie would have been perfect.

 

[TLH]

My Grade: A- This movie was a stellar supporting character performance away from being perfect. If Terry Rhodes or Obadiah Stane had put in a Commissioner Gordon/Lucius Fox level performance, the movie would have been perfect.

I thought Jeff Bridges was fantastic in the film; I personally don't see how you can say he needed to put in a better performance. Exactly what justification do you have for saying Bridges did not give a stellar performance as Stane?

 

[4NutzinYoface]

This movie was beautiful...simply beautiful!

Action (****ING AMAZING!), the pace, the acting, the filming, the cinematography the story everything!

Can't wait for "Iron Man 2"

 

[Spade]

The only thing I can think of that was bad about Stane was that there wasn't another big threat to make his turn in personality a surprise.

 

[TheStig]

I thought Jeff Bridges was fantastic in the film; I personally don't see how you can say he needed to put in a better performance. Exactly what justification do you have for saying Bridges did not give a stellar performance as Stane?

I thought Bridges did a good job with the character, I just wish that they spent a little more time flushing out his motives. I know Stark is #1 and that grates his ego, but why did he finally decide to do something about it, what, 10-15 years after Stark took over? I wanted to know a little more 'why' about the character, and that left me wanting a little bit more.

 

[Spade]

You're assuming that he was always villainous. 10-15 years is enough time to build up some animosity, even if it wasn't noticable before.

 

[TheStig]

You're assuming that he was always villainous. 10-15 years is enough time to build up some animosity, even if it wasn't noticable before.

But we never really saw it. If I saw some kind of contempt or disgust at the award ceremony in the beginning I would appreciate it, but he seemed to take a "that's Tony" kind of attitude. The only time I saw Stane with the potential to do harm to Tony was when Stark said that they are out of the weapons business- but that was long after Stane gave the order to have him killed. Granted, Stane is a shrewd and cunning character and wouldnt let his emotions be so obvious, but just a glimpse of his intentions would have spoken volumes.

 

[TLH]

I thought Bridges did a good job with the character, I just wish that they spent a little more time flushing out his motives. I know Stark is #1 and that grates his ego, but why did he finally decide to do something about it, what, 10-15 years after Stark took over? I wanted to know a little more 'why' about the character, and that left me wanting a little bit more.

Then why are you saying the film needed a better performance from a supporting character such as Stane? You should have said you would have liked more background on the character instead of implying that Bridges could have done better.

 

[TheStig]

Then why are you saying the film needed a better performance from a supporting character such as Stane? You should have said you would have liked more background on the character instead of implying that Bridges could have done better.

That's fair. It still gets an A- though. t:

 

[DarknessOfDeath]

A+

 

[Immortalfire]

I would greatly appreciate it if you thread derailers would lay off all the Superman talk.

 

[Midnhtsun]

But we never really saw it. If I saw some kind of contempt or disgust at the award ceremony in the beginning I would appreciate it, but he seemed to take a "that's Tony" kind of attitude. The only time I saw Stane with the potential to do harm to Tony was when Stark said that they are out of the weapons business- but that was long after Stane gave the order to have him killed. Granted, Stane is a shrewd and cunning character and wouldnt let his emotions be so obvious, but just a glimpse of his intentions would have spoken volumes.

This though would have lessened the shock of the betrayal, when the viewer finds out that Stane was behind the assasination/kidnapping. I dont think everything needs to be spelled out, surprises are good. Plus him being so supportive towards tony would make it look even more like he had nothing to do with it, if suspicion ever got around

 

[I Am The Knight]

I would greatly appreciate it if you thread derailers would lay off all the Superman talk.

But I wanna know about Superman fighting Chewbacca.

 

[The_Mighty_Thor]

Go watch the kevin smith interviews on youtube.

 

[I Am The Knight]

 

[co2]

It's great to see Iron Man have his day. It's good to see a formerly B level Marvel character become an instant Rock Star with the public. Iron Man was due.

 

[The Guard]

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.

When you say she's not mentioned in the sequel, I assume you mean other than the line where Bruce says "Vicki couldn't reconcile, etc". She was mentioned. She didn't show up there for the same reason that Batman's love interests generally don't last long. The nature of his alter ego.

Vicki was far more than a damsel in distress. She actively sought to uncover details about The Batman, and ended up figuring out who he was. Not via being told, but by figuring it out on her own. And their interactions were far, far, FAR more interesting than Bruce and Rachel's tepid "love".

"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:

The Supermobile was The Eradicator. The idea is that Superman, after he died, just like in the comic books, where he hung out in an armored Kryptonian Battlesuit for a while, came back without powers, and needed transportation/weapons. So...this is something that was drawn right from the comics in a sense.

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.)

This isn't Superman, this is Superman's rumored "healing suit". It was just an idea, and never came to fruition.

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.)

Superman was to start off in traditional red and blue togs. The all black "alien" suit was his regeneration/return suit. Just like in the comics, where he wore a black and silver one.

3. A metallic silver healing suit/body armor with details that would have made Superman’s body look robotic.

All these rumors seem to confuse what's going on, and mostly seem to be referencing the same suits.

4. An all-dark blue suit with a "blood-red" cape. (This would have been the standard Superman suit used in subsequent films.)"

Yes, it would have been the standard, and compared to what Singer designed, would have looked great. Dark blue, bright blood red? It was a mostly traditional costume.

Was Burton the right man to direct Superman? Probably not, but the rumors have been greatly exaggerated in most cases.

There were far larger problems with SUPERMAN RETURNS than his outfits, and most of them stem from Jon Peters, not Burton or his designs.

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).

Then they clearly don't like Batman, period. Explaining him isn't going to make it any more palpable, unless they are somewhat sheeplike, which they may well be.

"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.

No worries. I'm not referring to you. The globetrotting definitely added some depth to the mythology, and he developed a bit more as a character than he had previously, and that was nice to see. Won't argue that.

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?).

1. Krypton was going to explode in the sequel. Abrams idea involved Superman getting to KNOW his planet, and trying to save it, and then it would have exploded, making it a lot more tragic an element of his mythos.

So...Naboo is the only place that can experience Civil War? I guess I'd question why you have a problem with walking war machines. Strikes me as a pretty cool concept.

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).

Uh..."The One" prophecies like this were around long before the Matrix movies.

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.

It's not quite that simple. Not even remotely that simple.

2. Superman’s costume is a living entity housed in a can, and it climbs onto him when he needs it.

In the first draft, yes. In later drafts, this was changed.

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.

It's actually not as bad as it sounds like it would be.

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!

Luthor being Kryptonian was a bit hard to swallow, but his characterization was spot on. Later drafts had Luthor as...you guessed it, a corrupt businessman with only vague Kryptonian ties (his technology).

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.

Definitely similar. But consider this. There were many rumors that WB utilized certain parts of the Matrix sequels to feel out people's reactions to a Superman like character, and to test the special effects.

It's only "straight out of The Matrix because SUPERMAN stalled as a project and the scenes were basically put INTO THE MATRIX REVOLUTIONS.

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).

Ty-Zor and his cronies brought the Kryptonite with them. It's a mineral from Krypton, and its radiation is deadly to Kryptonians, period. Just like in the comics.

Jor-El committing suicide was removed from later drafts. It was a bit much.

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.

So? Let me tell you, JJ Abrams wrote the best Jimmy Olsen I've ever read. He was smart, capable, and he actually functioned as more than comic relief.

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.

And yet he played an incredibly reserved character in BATMAN.
Superman doesn't fly.

-Superman doesn't wear the suit.

Uh...yes he did. He wore several.

-Superman fights a giant spider.

Jon Peters wanted him to. But in the script, it's not a giant spider, it's a Thanagarian Snare Beast. Which is an actual DC Universe creature.

-Brainiac fights polar bears.

No, Braniac fights polar bear statues at the Fortress of Solitude. And it's not so much a fight as he just takes them apart with his technology.

-Brainiac has gay robot sidekick.

True. L-Ron. Braniac has a sidekick drawn straight from the comics. Gay or not, L-Ron is not the most serious character in the DC Universe. Hardly would have ruined the movie.

-Superman fights Chewbacca.

WTF indeed. Where does this rumor come from?

 

[Adam]

One of the best movies I've seen.

No doubt. The action, the acting, the entertainment... nuff said.

 

[LostSon88]

Uh...yes he did. He wore several.

Jon Peters wanted him to. But in the script, it's not a giant spider, it's a Thanagarian Snare Beast. Which is an actual DC Universe creature.

No, Braniac fights polar bear statues at the Fortress of Solitude. And it's not so much a fight as he just takes them apart with his technology.

True. L-Ron. Braniac has a sidekick drawn straight from the comics. Gay or not, L-Ron is not the most serious character in the DC Universe. Hardly would have ruined the movie.

WTF indeed. Where does this rumor come from?

I actually never read the script. All of this info is straight from Kevin Smith's mouth.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk

 

[fu manchu]

I would greatly appreciate it if you thread derailers would lay off all the Superman talk.

Please ban these thread derailers!!!

 

[LostSon88]

That was the last one from me...promise.

Okay...back on topic.

Iron Man is my NEW number 2...bumping Spider-man 2 to the number 3 slot. However, Batman Begins is still tops for me.

There...proceed.

 

[fu manchu]

I was afraid you were going to say Superman Returns. But Iron Man would be my new number 1.

 

[Spade]

It should be, having been the best Marvel movie made to date. We can only hope their other ventures will be as well-crafted.

 

[LostSon88]

Well it's hands down my favorite Marvel movie...but overall, I still gotta give it to Bats.

 

[fu manchu]

It should be, having been the best Marvel movie made to date. We can only hope their other ventures will be as well-crafted.

yeah, Iron Man was indeed the best Marvel movie. I'm hoping that The Incredible Hulk would be just as good as Iron Man.