Iron Man The Official Iron Man Rate & Review Thread

[terry78]

Went to go see it again last night at a 10:40 showing, and some family brought their little kid to it, which I hate, as I go to these showings to get away from that. Every two minutes the theatre hears, "is that Iron Man? Where's Iron Man? What is he doing?" And the parents do nothing.

 

[LadyVader]

Entertainment means different things to different people. For me it might mean (among other things) good acting, interior conflict, interesting cinematography, not necessarily something blowing up every 5 seconds. That doesn't mean that I consider the movie to be flawless. Far from it, to this day I have no idea what goes on in those last 10 minutes and the Hulk vs the mutant puddle fight is unintentionally hilarious, but I do respect it for daring to be different in Hollywood where all the movies follow preset formulas like the one you're raving about that summer comic book movies should be gosh darn tootin' fun!

 

[SurfDUI]

Went to go see it again last night.........Every two minutes the theatre hears, "is that Iron Man? Where's Iron Man? What is he doing?"

Which is why I don't take women to these movies-The same ish seems to happen.
Don't be afraid to use your bruman powers to make others feel uncomfortable in public dude.

 

[Clark Kent]

Entertainment means different things to different people. For me it might mean (among other things) good acting, interior conflict, interesting cinematography, not necessarily something blowing up every 5 seconds.

I don't want something blowing up every 5 seconds either, but I do expect at least 2, or even 3, mind-blowing action sequences in a comic book movie. Hulk just didn't deliver on that, IMO. And I very much doubt if The Incredible Hulk will either, what with its cartoony CGI that looks, to me, like it's 10 years behind what they achieved in Hulk, which was 5 years ago. Plus, the story sounds crappy, IMO.

the one you're raving about that summer comic book movies should be gosh darn tootin' fun!

I said fun, I didn't say gosh darn tootin' fun. I'm not some character from a '50s sitcom, thank you very much.

 

[Silver Spider]

I don't want something blowing up every 5 seconds either, but I do expect at least 2, or even 3, mind-blowing action sequences in a comic book movie. Hulk just didn't deliver on that, IMO. And I very much doubt if The Incredible Hulk will either, what with its cartoony CGI that looks, to me, like it's 10 years behind what they achieved in Hulk, which was 5 years ago. Plus, the story sounds crappy, IMO.



I said fun, I didn't say gosh darn tootin' fun. I'm not some character from a '50s sitcom, thank you very much.

I have to disagree about The Incredible Hulk. I think that will be a good movie. Although I agree that Hulk was not a very good movie.

 

[Silver Spider]

Fair enough, we just think differently, for me, SR and Hulk are 2 of the more mature and adult orientated CB we have been given so far.

IMO, they were far TOO mature and adult-oriented. A comic book movie shouldn't be so mature and intellectual that it bores the younger ones. I don't know about Superman Returns, but I do know that plenty of kids were bored by Hulk.

Do you think that you're gonna enjoy The Incredible Hulk?

I'm going to have to disagree with both of you. I mean SR did have a pretty mature theme to it, but imo Hulk didn't. Hulk has always seemed like it was trying to be all cerebral and complex, but in the end it doesn't really execute either for me. I personally think the Spider-man and X-men trilogies are fairly mature. They both have mature stories being told, it's just an average veiwer could easily overlook them. They will notice the action in them, or the surface of the stories. If you look into them, they are respectable stories. Spider-man 3 is a very underrated movie, because people only notice the flaws it has. While you can argue that Sandman's plot was short, the rest was done very well.

 

[3dman27]

Sure, but I just don't see why anyone considers Hulk entertaining. I was bored to tears by it. The so-called "action" was abysmal, and the pace was arthritic.

hopefully the incredible hulk will be more to your,and fandoms likeing

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

, Indy 4's boring? .



IMO, they were far TOO mature and adult-oriented. A comic book movie shouldn't be so mature and intellectual that it bores the younger ones. I don't know about Superman Returns, but I do know that plenty of kids were bored by Hulk.

I see nothing wrong with a movie being mature, in fact i prefer it, as it allows me to get into the movie a lot more than when its aimed at kids. As you can see by the top 6 movies in my sig, they are all pretty mature in regards to their material, hence why i think they are the best.

Do you think that you're gonna enjoy The Incredible Hulk?

At this point, no, but even if i do enjoy it, i can pretty much guarantee i wont enjoy it as much as the 2003 movie.

If by we, you mean those who share your view of those movies, fair enough. Please don't use we, however, to encompass all of us.

I meant WE will be in for something special if IM2 is better than MY view of those movies.

This goes hand in hand with the mentality that comic books in general are just for kids. A movie should strive to be the best movie it can be and that doesn't always mean appealing to the widest possible audience. In fact, some times it means the opposite of that.

Absolutely agreed. And this is what Singer did with SR and Ang did with Hulk, they didnt strive to please the kiddies, they made the movie THEY wanted to make that matched their vision and just hoped people would enjoy it. In both cases, its makes for a much more mature and adult movie experience, and i enjoy those 2 movies a whole lot more than most of the other ones we have had since 1998. Both were only semi-successful of course.

 

[Silver Spider]

I don't watch hundreds of movies every year because I work full-time and have a family, and when I do watch a movie I usually pick one that is entertaining, and not an indie flick that takes a film critic to watch and dissect its meanings (although I do occasionally watch indies such as TWBB).

Personally, I think that's what you need to do to fully enjoy the experience. The reason SR and Hulk didn't do well was because they made that the only way to enjoy the movie. While Spider-man aand X-men, were able to appeal to the casual audience as well as the "dissectors." I don't understand why you think Transformers was that great AVEITWITHJAMON. IMO it was the opposite of the other movies you liked.
Btw, I liked SR alot, but Hulk not so much.

 

[Clark Kent]

hopefully the incredible hulk will be more to your,and fandoms likeing

Hopefully, but, IMO, doubtful.

I see nothing wrong with a movie being mature, in fact i prefer it, as it allows me to get into the movie a lot more than when its aimed at kids.

Do people like misquoting me for some reason? I never said a comic book movie shouldn't be mature. I said that, IMO, Hulk and Superman Returns were both far TOO mature, to the point where, IMO, they ended up being pretentious. At least Hulk did anyway. And why do you make a distinction between movies that are mature and movies that are aimed at kids? Some movies can be both, ya know. The Spider-Man movies dealt with a lot of mature themes, but were also made in such a way that they appealed to kids. Superman Returns may have aimed at kids somewhat, but I don't think Hulk wanted to please kids at ALL, and that, IMO, is ridiculous. Sure there are plenty of comic book characters whose movies should NEVER be aimed at kids, the Punisher amongst them. But if you're dealing with lighter characters like Superman, the Hulk, or Spider-Man, for example, then, IMO, you have to aim somewhat at pleasing the kids. Hell, even Batman Begins wasn't totally unsuitable for the under-12 crowd. I do, however, fear that The Dark Knight will be.

this is what Singer did with SR and Ang did with Hulk, they didnt strive to please the kiddies, they made the movie THEY wanted to make that matched their vision and just hoped people would enjoy it. In both cases, its makes for a much more mature and adult movie experience, and i enjoy those 2 movies a whole lot more than most of the other ones we have had since 1998. Both were only semi-successful of course.

See above.

 

[Immortalfire]

Went to go see it again last night at a 10:40 showing, and some family brought their little kid to it, which I hate, as I go to these showings to get away from that. Every two minutes the theatre hears, "is that Iron Man? Where's Iron Man? What is he doing?" And the parents do nothing.

Racists for messing up your show

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Personally, I think that's what you need to do to fully enjoy the experience. The reason SR and Hulk didn't do well was because they made that the only way to enjoy the movie. While Spider-man aand X-men, were able to appeal to the casual audience as well as the "dissectors." I don't understand why you think Transformers was that great AVEITWITHJAMON. IMO it was the opposite of the other movies you liked.
Btw, I liked SR alot, but Hulk not so much.

Oh i agree about TF, but to be fare, the source material doesnt allow for much more than kid friendly fare that can appeal to adults as well. Thus, you cant really expect TF to be adult and mature. With SR and Hulk you can IMO. TF was one of the rare ones that i loved without it being particularly mature.

 

[LadyVader]

Do people like misquoting me for some reason? I never said a comic book movie shouldn't be mature. I said that, IMO, Hulk and Superman Returns were both far TOO mature, to the point where, IMO, they ended up being pretentious. At least Hulk did anyway. And why do you make a distinction between movies that are mature and movies that are aimed at kids? Some movies can be both, ya know. The Spider-Man movies dealt with a lot of mature themes, but were also made in such a way that they appealed to kids. Superman Returns may have aimed at kids somewhat, but I don't think Hulk wanted to please kids at ALL, and that, IMO, is ridiculous. Sure there are plenty of comic book characters whose movies should NEVER be aimed at kids, the Punisher amongst them. But if you're dealing with lighter characters like Superman, the Hulk, or Spider-Man, for example, then, IMO, you have to aim somewhat at pleasing the kids. Hell, even Batman Begins wasn't totally unsuitable for the under-12 crowd. I do, however, fear that The Dark Knight will be.

They're comic book movies. Above all, they should be FUN.

Above all, a movie should find it's audience and click with it. You can't measure the quality of a movie, even a comic book movie, by how much it appeals to a particular audience or not. A good movie will find it's own audience and click with it. Iron Man, to bring the subject of the day back on topic, clicked with it's own audience, that being young urban males. It doesn't matter if the kids liked it or not cause you know what... young urban males are pretty much kids anyway and if you make a movie that appeals to them it's probably going to appeal to the little kids as well.

That being said Iron Man had a very wide audience, while Hulk had a more limited audience but those who like it... REALLY like it. As evidenced by my own efforts and AVE's. No movie should or shouldn't be one thing. A movie tells a story. What you take from the story is your business, but don't try some cockamaney generalization like comic book movies should appeal to kids because you are seriously demeaning the genre.

And since when the hell is Hulk a light character? Hello? Did you read little fairy tale books about Dr Jekyl and mr Hyde when you were growing up? Cause that's what the Hulk has always been about. That primordial rage that drives people, that makes them blind to reason. How is that a light character? Need Im mention that in recent time he has come to be known as the World Breaker?

 

[Silver Spider]

Oh i agree about TF, but to be fare, the source material doesnt allow for much more than kid friendly fare that can appeal to adults as well. Thus, you cant really expect TF to be adult and mature. With SR and Hulk you can IMO. TF was one of the rare ones that i loved without it being particularly mature.

You didn't have to defend yourself like that, I was just curious as to why you liked it when it was more of a special effects movie.

Above all, a movie should find it's audience and click with it. You can't measure the quality of a movie, even a comic book movie, by how much it appeals to a particular audience or not. A good movie will find it's own audience and click with it. Iron Man, to bring the subject of the day back on topic, clicked with it's own audience, that being young urban males. It doesn't matter if the kids liked it or not cause you know what... young urban males are pretty much kids anyway and if you make a movie that appeals to them it's probably going to appeal to the little kids as well.

That being said Iron Man had a very wide audience, while Hulk had a more limited audience but those who like it... REALLY like it. As evidenced by my own efforts and AVE's. No movie should or shouldn't be one thing. A movie tells a story. What you take from the story is your business, but don't try some cockamaney generalization like comic book movies should appeal to kids because you are seriously demeaning the genre.

And since when the hell is Hulk a light character? Hello? Did you read little fairy tale books about Dr Jekyl and mr Hyde when you were growing up? Cause that's what the Hulk has always been about. That primordial rage that drives people, that makes them blind to reason. How is that a light character? Need Im mention that in recent time he has come to be known as the World Breaker?

I'm not a fan of the Hulk movie, but I think this was a really good post. I mean just because a movie isn't liked, doesn't mean that it was poor quality. I mean, I don't like Batman Begins that much, but I will admit that it was a very well made movie.

 

[X Knight]

hmmmm.....just as long Hulk isn't known as the Wind Breaker!!! lol.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

hmmmm.....just as long Hulk isn't known as the Wind Breaker!!! lol.

Hehehe.

 

[fu manchu]

hmmm.....looks like I opened a can of worms.

 

[DoomRulz]

hmmmm.....just as long Hulk isn't known as the Wind Breaker!!! lol.

Talk about lethal

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Yes, but different people have different interpretations of the word "fun". Now The Crow, American Splendor, Road to perdition, A history of violence and yes, even the Hulk are all comic book movies who may or may not be fun in the traditional sense. That doesn't mean however that they fail at what they're supposed to do, which is entertain. They prove that comic book movies can be dramatic and thought provoking and that doesn't weaken the genre. In fact it strengthens it and gives it credibility.

Throw Superman Returns in there and i completely agree with you, NON of these movie are what you would call fun (though all have parts that are), but they told a story, and focused on character above action (which IM did as well to be fair), and those movies often appeal to me a lot more than the ones made to please the general audience.

Above all, a movie should find it's audience and click with it. You can't measure the quality of a movie, even a comic book movie, by how much it appeals to a particular audience or not. A good movie will find it's own audience and click with it. Iron Man, to bring the subject of the day back on topic, clicked with it's own audience, that being young urban males. It doesn't matter if the kids liked it or not cause you know what... young urban males are pretty much kids anyway and if you make a movie that appeals to them it's probably going to appeal to the little kids as well.

That being said Iron Man had a very wide audience, while Hulk had a more limited audience but those who like it... REALLY like it. As evidenced by my own efforts and AVE's. No movie should or shouldn't be one thing. A movie tells a story. What you take from the story is your business, but don't try some cockamaney generalization like comic book movies should appeal to kids because you are seriously demeaning the genre.

Agreed, above all, a movie shouldnt appeal to any particular audience just to get more money in, and the movies we have cited obviously werent made with money in mind, the directors had a vision, and didnt compromise it to appeal to the kids, and all of them were more enjoyable for it IMO.

And since when the hell is Hulk a light character? Hello? Did you read little fairy tale books about Dr Jekyl and mr Hyde when you were growing up? Cause that's what the Hulk has always been about. That primordial rage that drives people, that makes them blind to reason. How is that a light character? Need Im mention that in recent time he has come to be known as the World Breaker?

AMEN, the 2003 effort tackled the complexity and darkness of the Hulk a lot more than most other CB movies tend to dig into their character. TIH is looking more like a crowd-pleaser, were as Hulk, SR and the like are more like character studies, with some action thrown in.

You didn't have to defend yourself like that, I was just curious as to why you liked it when it was more of a special effects movie.

I wasnt defending myself, i was explaining, and I also wouldnt say TF was just a special effects movie, when i can think of 10 non-action scene's that i love in the movie. You get lines like "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings" in a simple SFX movie. I though Optimus Prime brought some maturity to the movie.

I'm not a fan of the Hulk movie, but I think this was a really good post. I mean just because a movie isn't liked, doesn't mean that it was poor quality. I mean, I don't like Batman Begins that much, but I will admit that it was a very well made movie.

 

[El Payaso]

Above all, a movie should find it's audience and click with it. You can't measure the quality of a movie, even a comic book movie, by how much it appeals to a particular audience or not. A good movie will find it's own audience and click with it. Iron Man, to bring the subject of the day back on topic, clicked with it's own audience, that being young urban males. It doesn't matter if the kids liked it or not cause you know what... young urban males are pretty much kids anyway and if you make a movie that appeals to them it's probably going to appeal to the little kids as well.

That being said Iron Man had a very wide audience, while Hulk had a more limited audience but those who like it... REALLY like it. As evidenced by my own efforts and AVE's. No movie should or shouldn't be one thing. A movie tells a story. What you take from the story is your business, but don't try some cockamaney generalization like comic book movies should appeal to kids because you are seriously demeaning the genre.

And since when the hell is Hulk a light character? Hello? Did you read little fairy tale books about Dr Jekyl and mr Hyde when you were growing up? Cause that's what the Hulk has always been about. That primordial rage that drives people, that makes them blind to reason. How is that a light character? Need Im mention that in recent time he has come to be known as the World Breaker?

^^ This is one of the most perfect posts I've ever seen.

Iron Man was fun. That shouldn't mean at all that Iron Man should be the mold by which all the superhero movies should be shaped after.

I loved Iron Man, almost every second of it. But not because it was fun - as much as I loved the fun in it - I loved it because it didn't feel forced in any way. The humour, for example, didn't feel forced most of times (opposite to let's say Batman Begins were humour was there just because it's supposed to be, mostly ruining the scenes. And please BB was a good movie). Thank Robert Downey for this, the way him and the makers made Tony Stark in such an honest way was what allowed me to buy the character and made the character likeable.

I liked Hulk very much too, in spite of the problems. It also felt honest and I couldn't care less about the amount of people liking/disliking these movies.

 

[Silver Spider]

I wasnt defending myself, i was explaining, and I also wouldnt say TF was just a special effects movie, when i can think of 10 non-action scene's

I was going to say explaining, but I thought that could be more misinterpreted.

 

[Dangerous]

This film is the s#*t.

I make it the second best ever SH flick after BB. 9/10.

TDK and TIH are going to have to go some way to beat this bad boy.

 

[zanos]

Second best after BB? Man this movie must suck!

 

[DoomRulz]

This film is the s#*t.

I make it the second best ever SH flick after BB. 9/10.

TDK and TIH are going to have to go some way to beat this bad boy.

TDK will smoke it, I can promise you that. TIH will probably hit the same level of success as IM though.

 

[StylishHokie21]

Do people like misquoting me for some reason? I never said a comic book movie shouldn't be mature. I said that, IMO, Hulk and Superman Returns were both far TOO mature, to the point where, IMO, they ended up being pretentious. At least Hulk did anyway. And why do you make a distinction between movies that are mature and movies that are aimed at kids? Some movies can be both, ya know. The Spider-Man movies dealt with a lot of mature themes, but were also made in such a way that they appealed to kids. Superman Returns may have aimed at kids somewhat, but I don't think Hulk wanted to please kids at ALL, and that, IMO, is ridiculous. Sure there are plenty of comic book characters whose movies should NEVER be aimed at kids, the Punisher amongst them. But if you're dealing with lighter characters like Superman, the Hulk, or Spider-Man, for example, then, IMO, you have to aim somewhat at pleasing the kids. Hell, even Batman Begins wasn't totally unsuitable for the under-12 crowd. I do, however, fear that The Dark Knight will be.

Agreed.