Iron Man 2 Titanium Man or Crimson Dynamo?

[Spider-Fan]

So you don't want to ever see the Mandarin?

I think MODOK is not a bad choice, but I think the Mandarin is better.

 

[FaT_tONle]

What the hell are you talking about? I was talking about IM3. If we even get that. But you never know. I don't like repeating villains. Mandarin would only show up in one movie in my ideal IM trilogy. Since the third isn't guaranteed I don't want to risk saving Mandarin for the end. It depends on what they do in Avengers. If another armored villain shows up (a good idea IMO) then for IM3 I won't have to go back to that since that would be the third armored villain we'd have gotten at that point. If they use HYDRA in Avengers then AIM/MODOCK works well for IM3. I also like Nefaria and Madame Mosque as well... but one of those guys needs to bite the dust. Multiple villains is stupid. Anyhow we obviously have a ways to go before having to worry about this.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

As far as we understand, Iron Man 3 is the Avengers, no?

I think using another armored villain would REALLY be pushing it. I think they should just use War Machine and Mandarin in Iron Man II. Done right, it would be the ultimate Iron Man movie.

 

[Spider-Fan]

What the hell are you talking about? I was talking about IM3. If we even get that. But you never know. I don't like repeating villains. Mandarin would only show up in one movie in my ideal IM trilogy. Since the third isn't guaranteed I don't want to risk saving Mandarin for the end. It depends on what they do in Avengers. If another armored villain shows up (a good idea IMO) then for IM3 I won't have to go back to that since that would be the third armored villain we'd have gotten at that point. If they use HYDRA in Avengers then AIM/MODOCK works well for IM3. I also like Nefaria and Madame Mosque as well... but one of those guys needs to bite the dust. Multiple villains is stupid. Anyhow we obviously have a ways to go before having to worry about this.

Ah, sorry. I thought it was for IM2. My bad.

 

[Chris B]

I also like Nefaria and Madame Mosque as well... but one of those guys needs to bite the dust. Multiple villains is stupid. Anyhow we obviously have a ways to go before having to worry about this.

I disagree. IMO, multiple villains can work is you can interwine them. And Count Nefaria and Madame Masque would tie together nicely because of the father and daughter connection.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I disagree. IMO, multiple villains can work is you can interwine them. And Count Nefaria and Madame Masque would tie together nicely because of the father and daughter connection.

Um... not what I was referring to but w/e... I meant we can't have that pair AND MODOCK in the same film.

 

[Chris B]

Um... not what I was referring to but w/e... I meant we can't have that pair AND MODOCK in the same film.

Then I agree. Besides I don't really want to see MODOK in an Iron Man movie.

 

[TopherChaos3]

crimson dynamo, hes got the power to render iron man powerless, a good super hero movie always puts the hero in a situation where IT SEEMS theres no way out

 

[Nepenthes]

Don't ask me why (as I usually can't stand the guy) but I think James Spader would look good opposite RDJ's Tony Stark, not necessarilly as either TM or CD but as one of IM's rogues gallery certainly. I guess it's because he can play such a convincing a$$hole that I figure he'd make a good villain.

Failing that; Verne Troyer can play Titanium Man II (a.k.a. the Gremlin) t:

Now I'm gonna lie down and try and work out were this sudden and disturbing liking of Spader has come from..............

Hank Pym!

man that would be hilarious. Good eye Benitez.

 

[Jick]

Titanium Man, like he was in the Iron Man game for PS2. so awesome.
and like someone said, James Spader as the villain would be so great, acting like the opposite of Tony Stark. genius, confident, armored, but evil.

 

[Casius--J]

I would say both.

I think it could work if it deals with the demon in the bottle story line, and you have more reson for war machine to be around because stark cant handle two armoured villains at once. I think they should include the mandarin and Justin hammer in the story too!!

 

[jokerface89]

I voted Titanium Man but while I think he is a good villain the Mandarin should be the next iron man after all he iron man arch nemesis and seeing how he has already was metion a couple of times in the last iron man movie it would only make sense for him to be the next villain plus it be kind of boring seeing stark just basically fighting another armored villain.

 

[The Overlord]

Yeah, although im SURE you have no idea who that is.

(waits patiently whule KillingJoke926 does an online search, then comes back claiming to know all ABOUT the character)

I know about him and he is hardly the coolest character around. Plus I don't think the general public would buy a guy named unicorn as a great villain. Plus he is another lame, outdated communist villain. Too many strikes against him.

 

[The Question]

I don't see why The Unicorn wouldn't work. The code name isn't that bad. Hell, it kind of evokes an espionage spy thriller feel, which is the root of the character's origin anyway. The only real snag would be the communist aspect of the character, to which there are two solutions: 1) He was an agent for the KGB during the cold war, and became a mercenary after the fall of the Berlin wall. Or, if you want to tie him to The Mandarin, say that he quit before the Soviet Union fell, having become disillusioned with Communism, and joined up with The Mandarin. 2) Make him a Chinese wetworks guy, and put him in opposition to The Mandarin.

 

[The Overlord]

I don't see why The Unicorn wouldn't work. The code name isn't that bad. Hell, it kind of evokes an espionage spy thriller feel, which is the root of the character's origin anyway. The only real snag would be the communist aspect of the character, to which there are two solutions: 1) He was an agent for the KGB during the cold war, and became a mercenary after the fall of the Berlin wall. Or, if you want to tie him to The Mandarin, say that he quit before the Soviet Union fell, having become disillusioned with Communism, and joined up with The Mandarin. 2) Make him a Chinese wetworks guy, and put him in opposition to The Mandarin.

I bet most people would disagree with the code name, it sounds femmine.

His design kinda sucks too. Plus his powers are lame and generic.

But you don't think there are tons of villains who should appear before unicorn? Ones who don't have femmine names.

 

[The Question]

I bet most people would disagree with the code name, it sounds femmine.

His design kinda sucks too. Plus his powers are lame and generic.

But you don't think there are tons of villains who should appear before unicorn? Ones who don't have femmine names.

He's an Iron Man villain who has a backstory that lends itself to having him either be The Mandarin's minion or a third party working against both Iron Man and The Mandarin. I don't see why he shouldn't be in the movie. He can always be redesigned for the film, and his powers aren't really that bad. He's super strong and does energy blasts. If his powers are lame then so are two of Superman's.

As for the name: If you're playing up the spy background, then the femininity of his name doesn't matter. Code names aren't meant to sound badass or masculine. They're simply meant to be what's written in the official reports and what's said over communications so the other guys don't know who your man is. The Unicorn sounds like a classic espionage code name from old 60s spy thrillers. And while in the U.S., Unicorns are often associated with stuff like My Little Pony, there's nothing wussy about them. They are symbols of strength and purity in folklore.

And, in a slight digression, they are also often symbols of femininity, but not in a weak or unimpressive way. When they are feminine symbols, they are symbols of feminine strength.

 

[The Overlord]

He's an Iron Man villain who has a backstory that lends itself to having him either be The Mandarin's minion or a third party working against both Iron Man and The Mandarin. I don't see why he shouldn't be in the movie. He can always be redesigned for the film, and his powers aren't really that bad. He's super strong and does energy blasts. If his powers are lame then so are two of Superman's.

As for the name: If you're playing up the spy background, then the femininity of his name doesn't matter. Code names aren't meant to sound badass or masculine. They're simply meant to be what's written in the official reports and what's said over communications so the other guys don't know who your man is. The Unicorn sounds like a classic espionage code name from old 60s spy thrillers. And while in the U.S., Unicorns are often associated with stuff like My Little Pony, there's nothing wussy about them. They are symbols of strength and purity in folklore.

And, in a slight digression, they are also often symbols of femininity, but not in a weak or unimpressive way. When they are feminine symbols, they are symbols of feminine strength.

1. Putting in a third party would crowd the movie too much, remember Spider-man 3?

2. There are more interesting villains that could work as henchmen, with better non outdated backstories and cooler powers

3. a guy doesn't want to be a symbol "feminine strength", a guy shouldn't want to be a symbol of feminine anything!

 

[The Question]

1. Putting in a third party would crowd the movie too much, remember Spider-man 3?

Spider-Man 3 wasn't proof that multiple antagonists don't work. There are films with more than two characters working in opposition with each other. Spider-Man 3 was multiple villains done badly.

2. There are more interesting villains that could work as henchmen, with better non outdated backstories and cooler powers

The first part is fairly subjective. I think The Unicorn makes a perfectly good villain. He's a man who's been used by people his whole life and has become increasingly emotionally unstable as a result. He's also got a history with working for The Mandarin.

His backstory also can lend itself to the films. Yes, Russia isn't Communist anymore. But that doesn't mean that it never was. You can have people who worked for the Russians back when they were Communist in films set in the modern day. And it would work for the story. Let's say The Unicorn was an agent for the KGB who, after being used and abused by his superiors, defected and became something of a mercenary. He ultimately joins up with The Mandarin to get back at those who manipulated him in the past.

3. a guy doesn't want to be a symbol "feminine strength", a guy shouldn't want to be a symbol of feminine anything!

Unicorn's aren't always a symbol of feminine strength. I was simply saying that when they are used as a feminine symbol, it's a very positive and strong one. And like I said, it doesn't matter what his name symbolizes: He's a spy. His code name isn't a totem he's taken on to symbolize something greater than himself. It's a means to an end. And using Unicorn as a code name evokes an old school spy feel.

 

[The Overlord]

Spider-Man 3 wasn't proof that multiple antagonists don't work. There are films with more than two characters working in opposition with each other. Spider-Man 3 was multiple villains done badly.

Kiss=keep it simple stupid. Adding another villain takes up screen time better used esle where, well addding nothing to the main plot. Unicorn shouldn't be a third party that eats away at screen time.

The first part is fairly subjective. I think The Unicorn makes a perfectly good villain. He's a man who's been used by people his whole life and has become increasingly emotionally unstable as a result. He's also got a history with working for The Mandarin.

His backstory also can lend itself to the films. Yes, Russia isn't Communist anymore. But that doesn't mean that it never was. You can have people who worked for the Russians back when they were Communist in films set in the modern day. And it would work for the story. Let's say The Unicorn was an agent for the KGB who, after being used and abused by his superiors, defected and became something of a mercenary. He ultimately joins up with The Mandarin to get back at those who manipulated him in the past.
.

So you are saying Ghost, living laser, Spymaster, Whiplash, Blizzard, etc wouldn't make better henchmen? Most of them require fewer changes and have better powers.

Heck why does mandy need henchmen, he is both a physical and mental threat to Stark? This is just adding clutter.

Unicorn's aren't always a symbol of feminine strength. I was simply saying that when they are used as a feminine symbol, it's a very positive and strong one. And like I said, it doesn't matter what his name symbolizes: He's a spy. His code name isn't a totem he's taken on to symbolize something greater than himself. It's a means to an end. And using Unicorn as a code name evokes an old school spy feel.

Most people don't remember that movie and would think that code name is pretty lame.

 

[The Question]

Kiss=keep it simple stupid. Adding another villain takes up screen time better used esle where, well addding nothing to the main plot. Unicorn shouldn't be a third party that eats away at screen time.

And who's to say that adding another villain would add nothing to the plot? It all depends on how well it's executed. I feel like storytelling rules like "kiss" are a hindrance. The rules of telling a story shouldn't be strict rules. They should be guidelines, subject to being ignored or revised based upon circumstances. And I can think of two perfectly good examples of super hero movies where they had multiple villains and it worked. Those being Christopher Nolan's Batman films. Let's count the number of Batman villains present in the films so far. In Begins, you had Ra's Al Ghul, The Scarecrow, Carmine Falcone, Detective Flass, Joe Chill, Mr. Zsasz, and two characters who essentially filled the role of Ra's Al Ghul's bodyguard Ubu. In The Dark Knight, you have The Joker, Two Face, Sal Maroni, Scarecrow, and various mobsters. It's all about striking the right balance between the characters and the plot. Saying that having more than one villain eats up screen time that is needed elsewhere can only be a valid statement if you actually know what the plot is. Otherwise, having that other character could work with the plot beautifully.

So you are saying Ghost, living laser, Spymaster, Whiplash, Blizzard, etc wouldn't make better henchmen? Most of them require fewer changes and have better powers.

I don't think they would be better. I think they would work just as fine as The Unicorn. I'm just saying that The Unicorn's origins and history of having worked for The Mandarin in the comics lends the character to the film pretty well. I was thinking that it would be nice to see a few minor Iron man villains working for The Mandarin with varying levels of screen time. Whiplash, Spymaster, The Unicorn, and Firebrand were all characters I was thinking of.

Heck why does mandy need henchmen, he is both a physical and mental threat to Stark? This is just adding clutter.

Because The Mandarin has always had people working for him in the comics, is more or less established as being the leader or a massive organization in the film series, and can't exactly conquer Asia all by himself.

Most people don't remember that movie and would think that code name is pretty lame.

What movie?

Anyway, don't think people will care all that much. He's a defected spy who's code name is The Unicorn. Big deal.

 

[Nirvana]

Titanium Man would definitely be quite a sight. As for armored villains, they should stick with them. Magical/alien/whatever villains would seem totally out of place in this series.

 

[The Overlord]

And who's to say that adding another villain would add nothing to the plot? It all depends on how well it's executed. I feel like storytelling rules like "kiss" are a hindrance. The rules of telling a story shouldn't be strict rules. They should be guidelines, subject to being ignored or revised based upon circumstances. And I can think of two perfectly good examples of super hero movies where they had multiple villains and it worked. Those being Christopher Nolan's Batman films. Let's count the number of Batman villains present in the films so far. In Begins, you had Ra's Al Ghul, The Scarecrow, Carmine Falcone, Detective Flass, Joe Chill, Mr. Zsasz, and two characters who essentially filled the role of Ra's Al Ghul's bodyguard Ubu. In The Dark Knight, you have The Joker, Two Face, Sal Maroni, Scarecrow, and various mobsters. It's all about striking the right balance between the characters and the plot. Saying that having more than one villain eats up screen time that is needed elsewhere can only be a valid statement if you actually know what the plot is. Otherwise, having that other character could work with the plot beautifully.
.

Yeah because Flass, Chill and Zsasz were such a major villain in that movie and scarecrow was a glorified hecnchman.

Also exactly what would Unicorn as third party add to the film, but a sub plot that would take away time from the man plot.

I don't think they would be better. I think they would work just as fine as The Unicorn. I'm just saying that The Unicorn's origins and history of having worked for The Mandarin in the comics lends the character to the film pretty well. I was thinking that it would be nice to see a few minor Iron man villains working for The Mandarin with varying levels of screen time. Whiplash, Spymaster, The Unicorn, and Firebrand were all characters I was thinking of.
.

Most of those characters more interesting powers than Unicorn's though.

Because The Mandarin has always had people working for him in the comics, is more or less established as being the leader or a massive organization in the film series, and can't exactly conquer Asia all by himself.

.

The latest story which was one of his best had no super powered henchman, so he doesn't need them.

Not that it matters, the chance of unicorn making it into the movies is slim to none.

 

[The IronMan]

Spader would make a good Tiberious Stone

 

[The Question]

Yeah because Flass, Chill and Zsasz were such a major villain in that movie and scarecrow was a glorified hecnchman.

That's kind of my point. It was all a matter of balance. Flass, Chill, and Zsasz weren't massive figures in the film. But they were villains and the plot hinged on their being there in a lot of ways. Bruce would never have been Batman without Chill. Batman and the authorities would never have caught on to Ra's Al Ghul's scheme without Flass or, to a lesser extent, Zsasz (who helped show that Cran was corrupt).

Also exactly what would Unicorn as third party add to the film, but a sub plot that would take away time from the man plot.

Well, since we're talking about a sub plot with no idea of what the main plot is, it seems pretty pointless to argue that it would detract from the main plot.

Most of those characters more interesting powers than Unicorn's though.

Because powers are the only thing that's important. All I'm saying is that The Unicorn backstory and powers make him just as valid a choice for the film as any other minor Iron Man film.

The latest story which was one of his best had no super powered henchman, so he doesn't need them.

Not that it matters, the chance of unicorn making it into the movies is slim to none.

All I'm saying is that there's no reason to right him off out of hand.

 

[Saint]

I voted no armoured villain, this time. Need to see something different. Mallen, says I! Makes a good lackey for Mandarin.