|
Title: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on May 24, 2006, 09:54:03 PM Heard it here first? Didnt see this mentioned anywhere else on F13 (yes I used the search function), so I thought I would post it.
Tonight on the Jimmy Kimmel Show, John Favreau said he is set to direct the new Ironman movie. John said it is the first movie being self-financed and produced by Marvel Comics. The script is still being written and at this point no casting has been done yet. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 24, 2006, 10:09:10 PM It was mentioned here (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=6743.0), but Iron Man itself didn't get discussed much. I guess I'm a little curious to see how the do the origin though. I assume it won't involve Vietnam now, and I wonder if he'll build something simplistic at first like the original Iron Man armor or if he'll somehow manage to cobble together some state-of-the-art suit right away after taking some shrapnel to the chest. I fully expect them to play up the whole alcoholic thing at least.
The other thing I'm wondering is who the hell the villain would be. For several reason I don't think the Mandarin would be a wise choice. Titanium Man maybe? Spy Master? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on May 24, 2006, 10:19:51 PM I fully expect them to play up the whole alcoholic thing at least. John mentioned the character being something of a "playboy" and said he expects to be able to insert a little humor with that. He also mentioned maybe transitioning from the earlier bulky suit to the later more refined version. He brought along a concept armor sketch done by his 4 year old son. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Margalis on May 24, 2006, 11:14:42 PM They'll probably make him a Gulf War 1 vet.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 25, 2006, 08:07:32 AM That's what they did in the recent series I think. Not that he was a Gulf War vet, but that he got injured in the Gulf War and had to make the armor there.
Or I could be just projecting. I remember there being an updated origin, I just don't remember where. But really, Iron Man could be really good or really bad. Favreau is decent, I just don't know how he'll do with heavy effects-laden movies. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: ahoythematey on May 27, 2006, 05:56:32 PM Tom Cruise was quite adamant about making this movie a few years back. I'm just sayin'.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SpaceDrake on May 29, 2006, 08:35:19 PM Tom Cruise was quite adamant about making this movie a few years back. I'm just sayin'. Oh please GOD no. I'd prefer to not have Cruise inject his widening brand of insanity into an Iron Man movie. Leave it unspoilt, please. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 30, 2006, 08:38:16 AM Iron Man will fight off Xenu and Fin Fang Foom.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: sarius on May 30, 2006, 08:43:21 AM Tom Cruise was quite adamant about making this movie a few years back. I'm just sayin'. Oh please GOD no. I'd prefer to not have Cruise inject his widening brand of insanity into an Iron Man movie. Leave it unspoilt, please. Tom Cruise as Tony Stark? That would be a sad day, indeed. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 30, 2006, 10:56:36 PM Eh... Cruise doesn't bother me too much. At the least I could kinda picture him as Hal Jordan/Green Lantern.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 31, 2006, 09:03:02 AM Fuck no. I'd rather have Jack Black as Green Latern than Tom Fucking Cruise.
But then I don't understand the history of Green Lantern rings. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: sarius on May 31, 2006, 11:32:04 AM Green Latern -- (blonde) Matt Dillon
Iron Man/Tony Stark --- James Callis (with a hair cut) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on May 31, 2006, 03:20:48 PM Green Latern -- (blonde) Matt Dillon Iron Man/Tony Stark --- James Callis (with a hair cut) What about a younger Tom Selleck? The mustache and hair always reminded me of Ironman. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 31, 2006, 03:34:11 PM Fuck no. I'd rather have Jack Black as Green Latern than Tom Fucking Cruise. But then I don't understand the history of Green Lantern rings. I'd be happy never to see Jack Black in another movie again. I just don't find the guy funny. I can't say I know much about the history of Green Lantern rings, but I know typically they're given out to people who "don't know fear", and that there's typically 1 or 2 Lanterns assigned to each sector of space. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: sarius on May 31, 2006, 05:33:42 PM Green Latern -- (blonde) Matt Dillon Iron Man/Tony Stark --- James Callis (with a hair cut) What about a younger Tom Selleck? The mustache and hair always reminded me of Ironman. Yeah, but Tom isn't young anymore, and neither are we. :) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on May 31, 2006, 05:41:54 PM Green Latern -- (blonde) Matt Dillon Iron Man/Tony Stark --- James Callis (with a hair cut) What about a younger Tom Selleck? The mustache and hair always reminded me of Ironman. Yeah, but Tom isn't young anymore, and neither are we. :) Dont remind me. :cry: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on June 01, 2006, 08:24:42 AM Fuck no. I'd rather have Jack Black as Green Latern than Tom Fucking Cruise. I can't say I know much about the history of Green Lantern rings, but I know typically they're given out to people who "don't know fear", and that there's typically 1 or 2 Lanterns assigned to each sector of space.But then I don't understand the history of Green Lantern rings. I think you missed teh funney. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on June 01, 2006, 08:36:24 AM Ok, I see where you were going with that now. The whole Tom Cruise thing.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on June 01, 2006, 08:42:56 AM Yeah, it only works on that one level. :-D
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on June 01, 2006, 05:01:50 PM You know, I wouldn't mind seeing Christopher Walken play Dr. Strange.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on June 01, 2006, 11:27:17 PM By the......
Hoary Hosts of Hoggoth.... I am..... The Sorcerer Supreme. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on June 01, 2006, 11:39:39 PM Heh, I was thinking about that earlier.
Don't even try. Walken doesn't translate to text right. :-D On a sidenote, did you know that he intentionally talks like that? When he was younger, he did it for the sole purpose of not getting his scenes chopped up. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on June 02, 2006, 01:32:00 AM [Random Superhero A]: Dr.Strange will the spell stop the gates of hell opening onto our plane and releasing Mephisto?
[Dr. Strange]: Yes, but I think we need more cow bell. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: sarius on June 02, 2006, 07:10:39 AM Heh, I was thinking about that earlier. Don't even try. Walken doesn't translate to text right. :-D On a sidenote, did you know that he intentionally talks like that? When he was younger, he did it for the sole purpose of not getting his scenes chopped up. "I'd love to do a character with a wife, a nice little house, a couple of kids, a dog, maybe a bit of singing, and no guns and no killing, but nobody offers me those kind of parts." -- Christopher Walken :roflcopter: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on June 02, 2006, 12:44:42 PM You know last time I was in New York I stood in my underwear at my hotel room window screaming at Christopher Walken and a film crew at 1am. Its an interesting story.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on June 02, 2006, 04:02:16 PM Was he tap dancing too loudly in the lobby?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on June 02, 2006, 07:44:57 PM Was he tap dancing too loudly in the lobby? No they were filming his new thriller "We Own the Night" right outside my window. I had to be up at 4am and the racket being made was unbearable.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on June 02, 2006, 09:01:19 PM That wasn't interesting.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on January 24, 2007, 09:12:39 PM THANK YOU RED WARNING, I'M SURE I WANT TO REPLY!
Paltrow joins cast (http://marvel.com/news/moviestories.811?utm_campaign=front+page+tracking&utm_source=main+graphic&utm_medium=graphic+text+link&utm_content=%2Fnews%2Fmoviestories.811) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on January 25, 2007, 04:13:35 AM Not sure I understand. Do you think there's something wrong with Paltrow?
Again, this film will be great. Favreau is a geek and RDJ can do no wrong (err...acting wise hah). Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on January 25, 2007, 07:41:57 AM I didn't give an opinion, just posted the news.
There's a big red warning that appears if you try to post in a thread that hasn't received a reply in 120 days or more. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on January 25, 2007, 07:49:51 AM Not sure I understand. Do you think there's something wrong with Paltrow? Again, this film will be great. Favreau is a geek and RDJ can do no wrong (err...acting wise hah). I love RDJ, but he is my biggest worry about this movie. He just doesn't fit my vision of Ironman. That said, back in the day, Michael Keaton pleasantly surprised me as Batman so maybe there's hope. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on January 25, 2007, 09:00:02 AM I admit he's a bit quirky, and like Keaton, kind of known for being a comedic actor...But he can do it. He can do just about anything.
I didn't give an opinion, just posted the news. There's a big red warning that appears if you try to post in a thread that hasn't received a reply in 120 days or more. Gotcha. Didn't understand the red warning thing. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on February 08, 2007, 12:55:29 PM Jeff Bridges has supposedly joined the cast now. Interesting....
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on February 08, 2007, 01:04:23 PM Awesome.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on February 10, 2007, 12:56:45 AM This could end up as a decent movie. At least development seems to be progressing along better than most of DC's movies, with Joss Whedon recently parting ways with the Wonder Woman movie, and Goyer off of the Flash.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on February 11, 2007, 11:59:19 AM What what what? Goyer and Whedon both gone? WTF?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on February 12, 2007, 12:04:31 AM Yep. I could balance out the bad news though by telling you that the producer of 300 is looking at doing Frank Miller's Ronin at some point. I don't mind Whedon not doing Wonder Woman so much, because I think he's talented enough at creating his own characters and Universes. It's nice to see him do stuff like X-men and Runaways comics, but for TV and movies I'd rather he just do his own thing. Shame to see Goyer off Flash though, although he can be pretty hit or miss. He's reportedly writing scripts for Captain America and Thor right now (which I suppose may or may not actually get used), in addition to his work on The Dark Knight, so at least he's keeping busy.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on February 12, 2007, 12:33:54 AM Captain America, Thor, and Wonder Woman are all characters that seem incredibly hard to pull off well in cinema. At least in this day and age (Wonder Woman was perfect for 70's television though).
There are quite a few non comic reading females that LOVE Wonder Woman too, but still....Even with that built in audience, it just seems like a hard thing to do. Captain America: Maybe if they played on the dejected/outmoded theme Marvel is doing with him now. But even then, he's too flashy and corny for the big screen (like Wonder Woman). If he hated Bush and Cheney though, that might make up for it. Thor: I'd write it like a Kung Fu episode. Also, I'd write it where he didn't have the hammer. Scratch that. He lost his hammer, and is on the search for it. And then he tracks it down to a small town somewhere out in umm...The West (it's gotta be like Kung Fu right?). So... Strange guy comes into a town, makes friends (especially with a kid), and makes enemies just as quickly. Kicks a little ass in a barfight, and humiliates enemies. Enemies escalate. Kicks more ass. Finds the Hammer (which turns out to be in possession of the local Boss Hog). Pisses off Boss Hog even more. More enemies escalate. Little kid gets kidnapped. Finally reveals the full force of muthafuckin' THOR on their asses. Scares the whole town shitless. Has to leave. Basically the plot of Pale Rider or Kung Fu. Or Roadhouse. Lol. But with Thor. OK, OK, it sucks. Sorry. Sorry for the derail too :-P Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on February 12, 2007, 12:59:24 AM I'd like to see the first Cap movie take place pretty much entirely in WWII. The Ultimate Captain America costume is a step in the right direction of looking less corny, so they should go with something like that. Beyond that you've got a decent basic story of a young man who is too scrawny to pass the Army physical and agrees to be a test subject for Operation: Rebirth because he's eager to do his part in the war. There's a lot of interesting ways they can go with that if they opt not to make him some perfect symbol of America and Freedom. Despite being a Super Soldier, he's still a young guy fighting in a war, and at the same time expected by the government to be a symbolic figure. Play up the man out of time stuff in the next couple movies if the first one does well enough to get sequels, but I'd hate to see the WWII stuff relegated to flashbacks as it should ideally be the best place to show his growth as a character.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on February 12, 2007, 08:20:11 AM Strange guy comes into a town, makes friends (especially with a kid), and makes enemies just as quickly. Kicks a little ass in a barfight, and humiliates enemies. Enemies escalate. Kicks more ass. Finds the Hammer (which turns out to be in possession of the local Boss Hog). Pisses off Boss Hog even more. More enemies escalate. Little kid gets kidnapped. Finally reveals the full force of muthafuckin' THOR on their asses. Scares the whole town shitless. Has to leave. Basically the plot of Pale Rider or Kung Fu. Or Roadhouse. Lol. But with Thor. Or every third episode of the Incredible Hulk TV series, which later had a movie version of Thor. Yes, it sucked. I think any Thor movie done that didn't revolve around Asgard would suck. He's never really worked as well as a superhero as he did during Walt Simonson's run that focused on Asgard and the Ragnarok. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on February 12, 2007, 01:45:26 PM Is it strange if I think a Sub-Mariner film has a better chance than Thor?
I mean, Thor is cool. Cooler than Namor in the comics, I think (well, I used to hate Namor when I was young. I have newfound appreciation for him now). Even though both come from otherworldly domains, I just think the Atlantean is more accessible. Definitely more relevant (what with the environmental protection theme). He's also more angsty (drama!), and a Sub-Mariner film would definitely have it's share of eye candy to boot. Actually, they should have held off on the Surfer for the next FF movie (even though the Surfer is the fucking best). Should have made Namor the (apparent) villain. Make it a modern retelling of the original Torch vs Mariner story. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on February 12, 2007, 11:45:15 PM Well, expect the first shitty movie based on a Frank Miller comic to be Ronin. Sylvain White has signed on as director, and for those of you who don't know who he is, in addition to recently bringing us Stomp the Yard, he also did the direct-to-dvd "I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer".
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: ahoythematey on February 13, 2007, 12:06:04 AM Ronin would not have worked regardless, IMO. If they adhere closely to the graphic novel, it will be too surreal and and pacing will be too sporadic for a two-hour movie. If they venture away from it more than a smidge it'll just be useless direct-to-dvd style shit with actors hamming it up. Only director I think would have a remote chance of pulling it off is now dead.
Ronin just seems better left in bookform. The Dark Knight Returns, on the other hand, is practically a storyboarded script itself for a movie. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on February 13, 2007, 04:03:03 AM Who would you cast for that ?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on February 13, 2007, 04:15:17 AM I always thought Ed Harris would make a great aged Batman.
And again: Ray Liotta as Joker 4 Life! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on February 13, 2007, 04:23:23 AM Ed Harris totally works. He even looks like the artwork. Good job, Sir.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: ahoythematey on February 13, 2007, 05:00:09 AM I was thinking more like Michael Biehn for his age combined with physicality, but I agree Ed Harris is tops.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on February 13, 2007, 08:33:24 AM Back when the series came out, Frank Miller always cited Robert Redford as his visual inspiration for Batman in Dark Knight.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on February 13, 2007, 09:35:28 AM Times Change.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 11, 2007, 06:24:53 PM (http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/779/779801/iron-man-20070411114247484.jpg)
Awesome. Wonder if that's going to be the main suit throughout the film? The movie logo is in the standard red and gold at least... (http://www.ironmanmovie.com/iron_man_layout.jpg) [EDIT] Also, for those still having their doubts about the casting.. (http://littlestuffedbull.com/images/comics/irondowney.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on April 11, 2007, 06:44:20 PM Awesome. Wonder if that's going to be the main suit throughout the film? The movie logo is in the standard red and gold at least... Highly unlikely. That's his "origin" suit and his surroundings match what you would think of if he was building his first suit in captivity in Vietnam (i.e. it's not his nice shiny high-tech Stark Industries lab).Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 11, 2007, 06:47:59 PM Yeah, I knew it was the original suit -- Just wondering how long they'll keep that period in the film. Maybe they'll just brush past it, who knows.
That might not be the shiny Stark Industries lab, but there is that shell casing in the background that says "...Industries" on it. So it probably is a lab or hq of some sort. Just not a shiny one ;). As for Vietnam, I suppose they'll just substitute that for a more recent war (like they've done with the Punisher). Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on April 11, 2007, 06:51:53 PM That might not be the shiny Stark Industries lab, but there is that shell casing in the background that says "...Industries" on it. So it probably is a lab or hq of some sort. Just not a shiny one ;). Stark Industries was providing equipment to the US military during the war (that's why he was over there, he wasn't a solider). That's presumably a piece they captured when they captured Tony. It is interesting that just from that one picture it looks like they are going be pretty faithful to his comic book origins.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on April 11, 2007, 06:54:52 PM As for Vietnam, I suppose they'll just substitute that for a more recent war (like they've done with the Punisher). Yeah it'll probably be something like Desert Storm. That would get the ages about right.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on April 12, 2007, 01:53:56 AM Speaking of pictures that paint a thousand words, that one shot says to me 'hey, this might be good.'
I don't know why. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: ahoythematey on April 12, 2007, 02:14:53 AM That picture reminds me of Favreau's previous, Zathura.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 12, 2007, 02:24:08 AM Never seen Zathura, but if they went with Kirby's Iron-Man, it would have been a little too smooth and retro imo (but it's more or less, an accurate depiction, even with the adjustments).
(http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/8146/ironmanarmormki001lt8.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Teleku on April 12, 2007, 03:50:53 AM Well, last year at the Comicon panel concerning the movies marvel was working on, they basically said they were planning on going through about 4 stages of suit through the movie (if I recall correctly). They said they were going to start with the classic suit, moving up through the more standard red/gold suits, then ending up with a version that became more of a weapons platform, like War Machine. That was awhile ago though, so who knows if they are sticking with that, but the fact they just came out with that screenshot seems to prove they are sticking with what they said so far.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on April 12, 2007, 08:09:30 AM Le awesome. If they can get the armor right like they apparently have, they can get the story right. Hopefully.
I wonder if they'll use the devil horns/Madame Maquse mask version of the red and gold, or just go for the more traditional round head version. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on April 12, 2007, 09:23:26 AM I always preferred the red and white. I hated the War Machine version tho.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on April 12, 2007, 01:58:20 PM I hate the helmet. It looks like it's from The Rocketeer, not Iron Man. Other than that, looks good.
And I was a big fan of the red&white suit too :) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on April 14, 2007, 01:16:30 AM Whoa. I opened the thread and saw Broughden's name.
Also, that Iron Man classic pic that Stray posted - freaking awesome. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on April 14, 2007, 02:28:50 AM I hate the helmet. It looks like it's from The Rocketeer, not Iron Man. Other than that, looks good. And I was a big fan of the red&white suit too :) Um. You mean the helmet in the picture ? It's exactly the same as the original in Stray's post. Which I understand is the point. I am not understanding you. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on April 14, 2007, 11:23:16 AM No, it's not. It's sectioned in the middle, and the eye slits look giant. The mouth slit doesn't really look to be frowned down, either. And while they usually drew the helmet as just being a cylinder sticking (like this one is doing), they would draw it with a jaw-line whenever viewed from the front (like in stray's pic).
Yeah, it's nit-picky, but it's how I see it. It's not god awful, optimus-prime-has-fucking-lips, but I don't like it. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 02, 2007, 01:24:32 PM Apparently, this is the look they're using for the modern suit. (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20037509,00.html)
(http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/070502/ironman_l.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on May 02, 2007, 05:31:21 PM Awesome.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on May 03, 2007, 01:44:08 AM Afghanistan. Makes sense.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 03, 2007, 08:38:19 AM Kickass. Let's just hope the movie doesn't make Tony Stark as much of a dick like he's been in the comics lately.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on May 04, 2007, 09:18:32 PM I think that 'Demon in a bottle' comic may be the most recognized single IM comic. Awesome issue, great story arc. I also like the red and white suit but glad they are back to red and gold. Great movie still too! I just wish the Crimson Dynamo and Titanium Man would show up. Heh. His battle with both of them is one of my all time favorites.
OK enough rambling! Looking forward to this one! Glad IM gets a movie before audiences tire of superhero movies. :-D Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on May 04, 2007, 10:00:35 PM I'd like to see the Armor Wars in the inevitable sequel. If Downy can stay out of jail that long.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on July 29, 2007, 03:00:59 AM From Newsarama (http://www.newsarama.com/Comic-Con_07/Marvel/MarvelStudios.html) (more pictures and a description of the Hulk and Iron Man panels):
(http://www.newsarama.com/Comic-Con_07/Marvel/armor_8.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on July 29, 2007, 03:05:36 AM o man
I totally forgot about this movie. I'd been wondering who the fuck would greenlight an Iron Man video game. Right. A movie. My bad. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: TenaciousMike on July 29, 2007, 06:15:43 PM o man I totally forgot about this movie. I'd been wondering who the fuck would greenlight an Iron Man video game. Right. A movie. My bad. Gametrailers have the Iron Man video game shown. Looks okay, but I saw part where he punched the treads on a giant tank three times, doing no damage. But then the tank blew up. Hopefully they add in something a little better as production progresses. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Morfiend on July 30, 2007, 12:41:52 PM (http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1170017/photo_03.jpg)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on July 31, 2007, 12:08:22 PM Damn.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on July 31, 2007, 09:13:46 PM That frickin' ComicCon IM trailer was 10 different types of awesome.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on August 01, 2007, 02:51:50 AM Er, Linkage ? Am I missing something ?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: DraconianOne on August 01, 2007, 05:43:51 AM Get it while it's hot. (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/88701.html)
Paramount have been pulling all the YouTube vids so this may not be around for long. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on August 01, 2007, 06:16:15 AM Sechsay.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on August 01, 2007, 06:28:27 AM Indeed.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on August 01, 2007, 07:20:24 AM I watched it and was underwhelmed but I think part of it is I'm really turned off on Ironman ever since the Civil War crap.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on August 01, 2007, 08:41:18 AM That trailer looks shit hot.
Riggs, think of it like this. This is an Iron Man that's not a complete dick who sold out all his friends and turned into Super Nazi. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on August 01, 2007, 10:02:20 AM Yep, it's Iron Man when he was a completely different kind of dick. Preview looks good though.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on August 02, 2007, 12:52:06 AM Because Punisher 2 doesn't deserve its own thread: (http://icv2.com/articles/home/11028.html)
Quote Variety is reporting that Lionsgate has set an October date for the start of production on a revamped Punisher film, which will star the hulking British actor Ray Stevenson, who played Titus Pullo in HBO's Rome mini-series. Lexi Alexander, the former world kickboxing champion, will direct the film from a script by Nick Santora, Kurt Sutter, Matt Holloway and Art Marcum that is (literally) shooting for an 'R' rating. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on August 02, 2007, 08:39:13 AM Pullo as the Punisher? Not quite sure that's good casting, and I love that actor. Didn't we already do a giant brooding Punisher movie that sucked?
Of course, we also did a smaller brooding Puniser movie that sucked and well, it sucked. So we're screwed either way. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on August 03, 2007, 05:53:08 AM I've never understood the appeal of the Punisher. He was kinda cool way back in the day when he almost shot Spidey.
Plus I don't know how he manages to kill his target walking around with a big ass white skull on his chest. You gotta see him coming for miles and it'd be like "Jesus Christ, it's the Punisher, get in the car!" Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on August 03, 2007, 06:39:33 AM Except by that point he's put a bomb in the car.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on August 03, 2007, 08:22:05 AM Did anyone manage to get a copy of that Ironman trailer saved anywhere? the gametrailers one seems to have poofed.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: MrHat on August 03, 2007, 12:49:07 PM It will probably pop up in official format soon.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on August 11, 2007, 07:41:05 PM http://youtube.com/watch?v=FYxUH5gSRso
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on August 11, 2007, 07:46:21 PM Click for big version:
(http://f13.net/media/images/ironmangroundpose_320.jpg) (http://f13.net/media/images/ironmangroundpose_big.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on August 11, 2007, 08:36:05 PM That looks...shit hot. And not a steaming pile kind of shit hot either.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on August 12, 2007, 12:25:39 AM I don't think this one's gonna be a fuckup. I think if you Like Iron Man, you're going to like the movie.
That said, Iron Man isn't one of my favourite heroes, but this film looks awesome. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on August 12, 2007, 09:43:14 AM Since I was able to turn my brain off to make it through Transformers and enjoy it, I'll probably fare well with this one.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on August 12, 2007, 10:27:07 AM As long as he's not the neoFascist Iron Man/Tony Stark, I'm an Iron Man fan. It's only what they've done with the character since Avengers Disassembled that has caused me to dislike him.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on August 14, 2007, 12:47:13 AM Don't worry. He's a Skrull.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on August 14, 2007, 07:23:55 AM /facestab :tantrum:
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: jpark on August 16, 2007, 03:13:56 PM I have to admit I thought this would be a very difficult comic to adapt to film - but I am liking what I am seeing.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Sky on August 17, 2007, 08:43:57 AM I'd most like to see the vietnam stark with mandarin and whatnot. Too out of date for modern audiences, but some iraq stuff could sub easily enough.
Maybe I haven't read comics since the 70s. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Mazakiel on August 17, 2007, 08:47:20 AM Supposedly, assuming the movie doesn't bomb, it'll be the first of a trilogy. Second movie, for example, will go into more detail about Stark's personal issues, such as alcoholism. And the Mandarin will be behind the scenes, manipulating things, until a big showdown for the third.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Morfiend on August 17, 2007, 12:24:00 PM I used to be a huge Iron Man fan back in the day. I havent read the comic in probably 15 years or so, so I am happy about seeing the movie.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on August 18, 2007, 09:01:10 AM Same. How people manage to not grow out of comics always astounds me.
The second your old enough to read/write threads on the internet about how stupid the marvel metaverse is you should really let them go or something... Then again I'm about to watch some terrible anime in my boxers while I drink water to recover from last night so perhaps people in glass houses etc etc Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on August 18, 2007, 10:06:12 AM Your glass houses have big eyes and way too many upskirt shots of teenage girls in schoolgirl outfits.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on August 19, 2007, 08:05:37 PM I DEMAND Crimson Dynamo and Titanium Man show up in a movie! Hey the Russians are heading back to 'bad guy' territory again, why not?
I hate the Mandarin "Oh look I have magic fucking rings!". Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on August 19, 2007, 10:34:01 PM I DEMAND Crimson Dynamo and Titanium Man show up in a movie! Hey the Russians are heading back to 'bad guy' territory again, why not? Except the Mandarin's rings aren't actually magic, but REALLY advanced alien technology that he disguises as magic to fool the locals / enhance his mistique.I hate the Mandarin "Oh look I have magic fucking rings!". Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on August 20, 2007, 09:05:14 PM Hmm calls himself MANdarin, wears rings and a fruity robe.
Methinks 'he' is trying too hard. Did those aliens also give him poor fashion sense? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on September 05, 2007, 09:08:58 PM The official trailer apparently is coming soon. Favreau posted this up on his MySpace page it seems:
Quote For those of you who have been Jonesing to see the Comic Con footage, we now an official teaser trailer that incorporates much of the same imagery. Paramount is debuting the piece in its entirety across the Viacom Network's highest rated programs. The first appearance will be immediately before the Hills on MTV on 9/10. I've listed the schedule of other slots that Paramount marketing has sent me below. A hi-res version will appear on Apple.com/trailers on 9/11 for those of you who, for whatever reason, choose not to TiVo The Hills. Comedy Central: The Daily Show 10-Sep MTV: The Hills 10-Sep (the break leading into the show) Spike TV : CSI 11-Sep VH1: The Rock Life 10-Sep BET: Baldwin Hills 11-Sep CMT : Trick My Truck 10-Sep Logo : Rick & Steve 11-Sep MTV2: Room 401 10-Sep NAN : Fresh Prince 10-Sep The N: Fresh Prince 11-Sep TV Land: Andy Griffith 11-Sep Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evildrider on September 10, 2007, 12:58:18 PM http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/ironman/
Apple jumped the gun, HD trailer is up. :-D It's main from the Comic-con footage. This movie is gonna be awesome though. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Fordel on September 11, 2007, 12:13:18 AM That is easily one of the best movie trailers I have ever seen. It does exactly what it's supposed to do, make me want to watch the movie, watch it right now, even pay for overpriced popcorn!
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on September 11, 2007, 12:44:15 AM This is the first Marvel movie I'm actually anxious to see since... hell, the first Spider-man movie really.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on September 11, 2007, 01:21:34 AM Yeah, I'd like to reiterate the 'Fuck Me' I gave some moments ago.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evildrider on September 11, 2007, 10:22:33 AM Robert Downey Jr. was a superb pick for Tony Stark. At least he managed to stay sober during the filming it seems. :-D
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Teleku on September 11, 2007, 10:39:55 AM I hope not, that would put him totally out of character.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on September 11, 2007, 01:22:21 PM I am still on the fence. The trailer had awesome moments mixed with something that looked like a GOP Rawr"This is how to be a man and win the Iraq war"rawr type of feel to it.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Mrbloodworth on September 11, 2007, 02:03:37 PM The rock as warmachine.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Xerapis on September 11, 2007, 02:16:49 PM That trailer was fucking awesome.
I liked his blatant warmongering and alcoholism. Shows they're staying true to character :P Agree that Robert Downey Jr looks perfect in the part. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: LK on September 11, 2007, 05:10:03 PM The rock as warmachine. YES. He's been doing nothing but pansy-ass shit lately. Granted, I love the guy, but he hasn't been utilized in something really cool. Just generic shit. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Teleku on September 11, 2007, 06:42:53 PM Isn't warmachine black?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Xerapis on September 11, 2007, 06:57:31 PM According to IMDB, Terrence Howard is playing Jim Rhodes (War Machine squishy center).
Got any source on that Rock thing? Or was it just wishful thinking? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on September 12, 2007, 12:54:45 AM I am still on the fence. The trailer had awesome moments mixed with something that looked like a GOP Rawr"This is how to be a man and win the Iraq war"rawr type of feel to it. #Saw a trailer and interview last night that suggests they've remade Invasion of the Bodysnatchers, except instead of being about Communism, it's about Paedophiles. You got off lucky if Iron Man is only about Winning The Quagmire in Iraq. :) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 13, 2007, 12:29:36 PM Awesome trailer. I knew this would be something good.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on September 13, 2007, 07:01:26 PM I didn't give a shit about this character or movie until I saw that trailer. That looks awesome.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on September 23, 2007, 07:26:22 AM Saw the trailer before RE3 today.
Man, Robert Downy Jr in a suit sucks. I prefer him just gabbing on screen. I'll probably just watch Kiss Kiss Bang Bang the night this shit premiers. Any chance of the movie being good was ruined by the blaring of "Iron Man." Fuck, how cheesy and predictable. I want the person who picked to put that in the movie let alone the God Damn trailer to be stricken with leprosy. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 23, 2007, 10:36:15 AM Dude. Shut the fuck up. You're going to like this. :-)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evildrider on September 24, 2007, 11:38:05 AM Wait, you went to go see RE3 and you are dissing Iron Man?
There's just something wrong with that. :-D Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on September 24, 2007, 11:46:31 AM I knew what I was getting into with RE3.
I did not expect the Iron Man people to ruin the movie so easily. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evildrider on September 24, 2007, 12:32:22 PM So this movie sucks, because they used the song Iron Man in the trailer... that's pretty much what we are getting from you.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on September 24, 2007, 12:34:48 PM You didn't cringe? I most definitely wanted to vomit.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Yegolev on September 24, 2007, 12:45:50 PM I like that song.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Mrbloodworth on September 24, 2007, 12:54:13 PM According to IMDB, Terrence Howard is playing Jim Rhodes (War Machine squishy center). Got any source on that Rock thing? Or was it just wishful thinking? It was a suggestion :-D Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Pennilenko on September 24, 2007, 01:03:03 PM Hehe, you cats are all really, really, strange. It feels good to know that I'm not alone.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Sky on September 24, 2007, 01:15:46 PM I thought it was great they grabbed the original version of Iron Man, which is a great tune and perfectly fitting, and didn't either go with genericmoviescore_01 or have some angsty young pop band cover it. When IM comes out of that bunker in the old crappy first gen suit, looking all Clint Eastwood in Fistful of Dollars (iirc, the bullet-proof vest bit) and Sabbath cranking in the background?
Schild hates freedom. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evildrider on September 24, 2007, 01:21:30 PM You didn't cringe? I most definitely wanted to vomit. No, I didn't even blink.. as it was just an obvious choice. I mean if you would have preferred like a Britney Spears pop tune or something.. I guess I can see your point. :-D Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on September 26, 2007, 04:06:49 PM Sometimes I wonder if every 100 breaths Schild just starts ranting about how this air tastes like shit.
For serious though, that does sound kind of hokey but hardly movie ruining. Also Downey in a suit is bothersome how? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 26, 2007, 07:19:22 PM I'm not a big fan of the Marvel movies, but Iron Man is going to rock! Yes, the Black Sabbath didn't quite fit as well as I think the people who made the trailer thought it did in their heads, but the Filter song in the first half worked. And the very end where Iron Man kicks on the boosters and breaks the sound barrier is cool too. Really, they could have just shown that and the jets, and I would have been happy.
Tony Stark doesn't take shit from anyone and when Al-Qaeda steps on his dick, he builds an Iron Man suit so he can skull fuck them into oblivion. I can't help being excited about this movie. If that's the equivalent of me pissing in anyone's cereal, then I hope they have a big bowl. :-P (I mean that in the nicest way possible) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Grublet on September 26, 2007, 07:38:44 PM I thought Ghost Rider would make a kick ass movie.
Then I saw it. I thought Iron Man would make a kick ass movie. I'll wait for DVD. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 26, 2007, 07:41:56 PM Ghost Rider was made by the same guy who did Daredevil. Those flicks were doomed from the start. Jon Favreau is always cool.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Grublet on September 26, 2007, 07:44:26 PM Jon Favreau is always cool. He was in Rudy. Need I say more? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on September 26, 2007, 07:50:36 PM I thought Ghost Rider would make a kick ass movie. Then I saw it. I thought Iron Man would make a kick ass movie. I'll wait for DVD. There have only been a little over a dozen good Ghost Rider comics. They were all at the end of the series with Johnny Blaze... back in the early 80's... and were mostly good because the Ghost Rider was evil. The potential for making a shitty Ghost Rider movie was pretty high from the start. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 26, 2007, 07:55:17 PM Jon Favreau is always cool. He was in Rudy. Need I say more? According to IMDB he was also in Batman Forever, which we all know is the best of the series. I'm just gonna say that Rudy was early in his career and he probly had bills to pay. Wow... Favreau was in Daredevil also... Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 26, 2007, 11:16:00 PM He was fuckin' money in Swingers.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 26, 2007, 11:30:34 PM Baby, that was money! Tell me that wasn't money. Made is a good one too.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Sky on September 27, 2007, 07:25:22 AM Also Downey in a suit is bothersome how? Downey in a suit, whatever. Willem Dafoe in a suit was a fucking crime...but didn't ruin the movie.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 27, 2007, 08:00:26 AM When I think of Willem Dafoe, I think of him tucking his jeans into his combat boots in Clear and Present Danger. And he was a badass in that movie.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on September 27, 2007, 05:02:18 PM You should try thinking of him in Boondock Saints and/or Platoon more often..
Fuck I'm like 95% sure Platoon is the Vietnam movie title I'm thinking of, I'm going w/ it. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Johny Cee on September 27, 2007, 05:08:29 PM You should try thinking of him in Boondock Saints and/or Platoon more often.. Fuck I'm like 95% sure Platoon is the Vietnam movie title I'm thinking of, I'm going w/ it. Yah, it was Platoon. Dafoe in "Shadow of the Vampire" was amazing, freaky, and kind of sad. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Grublet on September 27, 2007, 07:17:00 PM Dafoe in "Shadow of the Vampire" was amazing, freaky, and kind of sad. Dafoe in "Mr. Bean's Holiday" was freaky and very sad. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 28, 2007, 06:40:40 AM Sgt. Elias is one of my favorite movie characters ever. Ultimate good guy.
On the flipside, Sgt. Barnes is one of my favorite villains. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on September 28, 2007, 09:10:10 AM Dafoe in "Shadow of the Vampire" was amazing, freaky, and kind of sad. Never seen it, will have to talk to my movie buff friend see if he has it in the mountains of vhs/dvd's... Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on September 28, 2007, 12:38:38 PM You should try thinking of him in Boondock Saints Boondock Saints made me want to stab Defoe. Talk about unnecessary scene-chewing and nonsensical characters. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 28, 2007, 03:19:00 PM Not his fault.
Just to mention, there was this suprisingly entertaining (but silly) MANDY MOORE movie made recently called American Dreamz. Defoe basically played Dick Cheney (to Dennis Quaid's GW Bush). It's cool to see him in stuff like this and that Mr. Bean movie (comedies, which he never did before). (http://www.cinemalogue.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/UNI_D021_00419_rgb.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Grublet on September 28, 2007, 03:24:44 PM that Mr. Bean movie (comedies, which he never did before) I take issue with the most recent Bean movie being a comedy. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on September 28, 2007, 06:41:02 PM Not his fault. No, I think he had a big part in the suckitude of Boondock Saints. It was his acting that bothered me the most about that movie. The rest of it was /meh, but he was truly execrable. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Samwise on September 28, 2007, 07:23:40 PM I loved Boondock Saints, especially Dafoe's scenery-chewing. What's the matter with the rest of you people?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 28, 2007, 07:41:53 PM The only character that saved Boondock Saints for me was Il Duce. I didn't dig Dafoe's quirky FBI agent character at all. His scenes made me cringe. Did he really have to wear those headphones all the time? I'll take Dafoe's wiley Sgt Elias over that eight days a week.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 28, 2007, 08:51:00 PM Elias was wiley?? He was a SAINT man. A SAINT. Even more saintly than Jesus in the Last Temptation.
Wait... wtf does "wiley" mean anyways? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 28, 2007, 09:07:16 PM He was also platoon's the tunnel rat. Elias was the most likeable soldier there, but when it came to war you know that guy was nuts.
edit: I tried looking up "wiley" and it doesn't seem to be a recognized word, hahah. In my head it meant something along the lines of "slightly mad, sly and intelligent." There's some scenes in Platoon in which Elias' eyes widen while he's joking with the others- you can see he's kinda lost his marbles even though he comes across as the most stable one there. Did you see the way he smiled at Beringer before the guy shot and left him for dead? Classic performance. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 28, 2007, 09:18:01 PM Ah yes. Forgot about the tunnel rat stuff. I guess that's "wily". Heh. I usually just see him in relation to Barnes though. It's like the good and evil sides of soldiers and the military.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 28, 2007, 09:31:57 PM Looney Tunes may have confused me!
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on September 28, 2007, 09:32:40 PM No when I think of Dafoe, I think of Bobby Peru (jus like the country) from "Wild at Heart".
If you are a Dafoe fan that's a can't miss role! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 28, 2007, 09:39:30 PM Did you see the way he smiled at Beringer before the guy shot and left him for dead? Classic performance. See, that's exactly the type of scene that makes me think of him as good. Like... He was too innocent to really notice just how fucked in the head Barnes was. That's why he smiled. He was just a cool guy trying to get along. Then again, maybe he just smiled because he was nuts too, and knew what was coming. Haha, I never thought of it that way, but that's pretty fucking interesting nonetheless. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on September 28, 2007, 09:51:53 PM Elias was smiling up until the point where he realized Barnes wasn't going to smile back. That was when Barnes shot him.
There's a few of those exchanges in the film though- ones with the guys trying to twist a laugh out of a horrible experience. Another great scene is when a few of them are comparing kill counts immediately after a fire fight. Wild at Heart is one of those films I've always had on my "Must Watch" list, but never get around to. I'm adding it to my Blockbuster queue. Might as well put Nosferatu and Shadow of the Vampire on there as well :-) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on September 28, 2007, 10:03:31 PM To Live and Die in L.A. is another good one.
It may appear to be some kinda of Miami Vice era 80's action flick, but it's intelligent. I mentioned it above, but if you haven't seen the Last Temptation of Christ, that's good too. It's a Scorsese directed Jesus flick with Defoe as Jesus and Harvey Keitel as Judas. [EDIT] Damn, this Defoe derail all started because Schild thinks RDJ doesn't look right in a suit? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on September 29, 2007, 12:00:27 PM Wild at Heart was Lynch's best movie evar, followed by the Twin Peaks movie and Dune. Everything else has been trying too hard to be something I gave not a shit about. Blue Velvet was ok in that freaky way.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Grublet on September 29, 2007, 02:42:03 PM Was Wild at Heart that movie with Christian Slater and Marisa Tomei?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Zetleft on September 29, 2007, 02:51:17 PM Was Wild at Heart that movie with Christian Slater and Marisa Tomei? Hell no! Wild at Heart was Nicklaus Cage (doing an Evils Impersonation) and Laura Dern. Damn fine movie and Dafoe was one creepy guy, his specialty imo. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Furiously on September 29, 2007, 08:23:43 PM I loved Boondock Saints, especially Dafoe's scenery-chewing. What's the matter with the rest of you people? I'm with Samwise on this one. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Johny Cee on September 29, 2007, 09:35:38 PM Was Wild at Heart that movie with Christian Slater and Marisa Tomei? Untamed Heart was the Christian Slater movie. I watched that and Free Willy in the world's worst double feature. I still wake up crying sometimes. :cry: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on September 29, 2007, 10:53:28 PM To Live and Die in L.A. is another good one. It may appear to be some kinda of Miami Vice era 80's action flick, but it's intelligent. Spot on. It looks like "Vice City: The Movie" or something at first glance, but there's more to it. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on October 01, 2007, 09:36:08 AM I loved Boondock Saints, especially Dafoe's scenery-chewing. What's the matter with the rest of you people? I'm with Samwise on this one. Thirded, you art nazi's posting in a comics forum need help... The movie was fun, Dafoe's over the top character was fun, if you dont like fun... You probably are in the right place, considering this is a board that focuses on MMO's theoretically. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: MrHat on October 03, 2007, 11:16:45 AM Dafoe is Virgil 'Tiger' Cole.
Flight of the Intruder. That movie is money. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Margalis on October 04, 2007, 12:22:47 AM All this talk of Defoe and not a single mention of his best movie?
Body of Evidence. I mean come on now! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on October 04, 2007, 12:34:25 AM heh.. that's like saying rourke's best film was 9 1/2 weeks.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on November 01, 2007, 09:40:30 PM I've been watching Wild at Heart and it dawned on me that Dafoe would have made the perfect Joker. Still, Green Goblin isn't such a bad substitute.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Fordel on February 10, 2008, 02:52:36 AM Not sure if this is old news, but there is another little teaser up at http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/ironman/ . The more I see of the suit in action, the more I want this movie right now!
I don't even care if there is a story anymore! Power Armor blowing crap up please, thanks! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on February 10, 2008, 10:53:19 AM I hope the film is good. Some of the CGI scenes make the suit feel 'toy-ish' though. Like when he's engaged by the jets and spins around like a cruise missile, or when he fires that rocket at the tank (that whole scene doesn't look good to me). Most of the other CGI I've seen looks pretty good though, so maybe those 2 scenes are aberrations.
It just better not have a Hulk ending. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on February 29, 2008, 01:30:08 PM Awesome fucking new trailer up now. (http://media.movies.ign.com/media/034/034317/vids_1.html) It's the kind of thing I almost feel like I shouldn't have watched, since I like to go into a movie not feeling like I've watched most of the best parts already.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on February 29, 2008, 02:02:06 PM Yeah caught that on the tube earlier.
I don't think it's giving away too much. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on February 29, 2008, 02:11:25 PM Downey is such a great Stark. Seems from the trailer that he nailed it.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on February 29, 2008, 03:07:04 PM Schweeeeet! All of my doubts have been removed thanks to the new trailer. I'm even thinking that IM will challenge Spiderman's movie totals.
I mean this looks all sorts of awesome. Like others I kinda wish I hadn't seen so much cool stuff but I can get over it. Heh IM2 better have Crimson Dynamo and Titanium Man though! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Simond on March 01, 2008, 12:17:00 PM So...is it true that Samual L Jackson plays Nick Fury in both this and Hulk, and that Iron Man is going to guest-star in Hulk as well?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on March 01, 2008, 12:42:26 PM Downey definitely has a cameo in the Hulk movie. It's free publicity, ties their movie universe together, and leave open the door for possible future crossovers. I haven't heard anything about Sam Jackson, but here's hoping he doesn't taint Iron Man with his presence.
I think they plan on doing 2 more Iron Man movies. I'm hoping for an Armor Wars storyline. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on March 01, 2008, 01:03:08 PM I've been hearing for a while that Jackson is going to make a brief appearance in Iron Man. The Ultimates version of Nick Fury is a spitting of Jackson. I wouldn't mind seeing HYDRA appear at some point.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on March 01, 2008, 02:43:55 PM How could Jackson taint anything? Or do you just mean the Nick Fury character?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on March 01, 2008, 02:51:51 PM I've grown to hate Sam Jackson. Can you really think of a movie he's been in within the last decade that was good?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on March 01, 2008, 02:59:29 PM I don't know.. Not that many great movies per se, but he's a constant to me.. The guy's a character. He makes typical stuff at least somewhat entertaining.
The last thing I saw him in where he was better than that though wasn't a leading part.. 1408. Last leading part that stood out was Unbreakable, I guess. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Simond on March 01, 2008, 03:14:42 PM Downey definitely has a cameo in the Hulk movie. It's free publicity, ties their movie universe together, and leave open the door for possible future crossovers. I haven't heard anything about Sam Jackson, but here's hoping he doesn't taint Iron Man with his presence. Hulk movie + Iron Man movie + Capt America movie + Thor movie (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800369/) + Ant-man movie (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478970/), all linked together with crossovers = Avengers movie...eventually.I think they plan on doing 2 more Iron Man movies. I'm hoping for an Armor Wars storyline. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on March 02, 2008, 01:10:00 AM I've grown to hate Sam Jackson. Can you really think of a movie he's been in within the last decade that was good? Black Snake Moan was ok. 1408 was decent. The Incredibles was good. Can't say I ever saw Coach Carter, but it got decent reviews. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on March 02, 2008, 01:48:21 AM I didn't like Unbreakable. But his performance was good.
Lots of people like Kill Bill, but I find it unbearable. Mostly though, any movies he's in is pretty much bound to suck. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Johny Cee on March 02, 2008, 03:23:23 PM Jackson is good when he's in a decent movie. He's one of those actors that takes every part that's offered to him, though. I put him in the same boat as Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper and modern day Deniro.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Merusk on March 02, 2008, 06:44:38 PM Jackson is good when he's in a decent movie. He's one of those actors that takes every part that's offered to him, though. I put him in the same boat as Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper and modern day Deniro. He's addressed this in interviews I've seen. He says, "I'm an actor. I love to act, period. So I take parts that look like they'll be fun when I'm doing them." Seems to me he sees himself as a character actor like William H. Macy or Steve Buscemi. I've got no quarrel with that. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on March 03, 2008, 12:53:15 AM Jackson is good when he's in a decent movie. He's one of those actors that takes every part that's offered to him, though. I put him in the same boat as Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper and modern day Deniro. Or Rourke or Brando. If I was lucky enough to get the chance, I'd do the same. Especially if I was some ex-unemployed crack addict like Sam Jackson. Anything would be nice then. At that level, you can always depend on having fun and getting paid.. While the chance of knowing whether the project you're in is going to be a good one is probably the same as getting struck by lightning. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on March 03, 2008, 08:31:15 AM Sam Jackson will NOT turn down an acting job that his schedule allows him. Period. He doesn't give a shit if the movie is turd on cracker bad, he'll act in it. His presence is in no way an indication of a good movie, though his part will usually be decent no matter what.
I'd rather they scrubbed the Ultimates' Nick Fury from the planet, personally. I have no problem with him being black, I have a problem with the creator of that character essentially wanting Shaft to be Nick Fury because he thought that was cool. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on March 03, 2008, 09:38:57 AM Hey, at least it isn't Hasselhoff.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on April 08, 2008, 04:30:05 PM http://gizmodo.com/377412/iron-mans-first-flight-shows-jet+like-hud-every-boys-fantasy
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: tazelbain on April 09, 2008, 12:22:35 PM These commercials have me excited and all I know about Ironman is the movies shown on CN. And then I remember Spiderman 3... :ye_gods:
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 09, 2008, 01:52:01 PM What movies? Those avengers ones? I think I saw the first.
Anyhow, Iron Man, uh, I guess like all of Stan Lee's characters, is a very flawed guy. There are various origin stories as to why he made his suit, but the original (and basically the one in this new flick) is that he was injured during a war, held as prisoner, and forced to make weapons for the enemy (he's a weapon designer). He makes a suit under their noses to free himself. Then keeps on wearing the suit. He's also an extreme alcoholic, and a self righteous prick. That's the basics at least. This will probably be nothing like Spidey 3. Robert Downey Jr. is perfect for this. Not only is he a better actor than any actor that has ever portrayed a superhero, but he just fits the part so well. Never seen a Favreau movie, but acting wise, he seems cool enough. Deserves a chance at least. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on April 09, 2008, 03:30:37 PM The original chestpiece was also used to keep him alive to keep a piece of sharpnel from moving into his heart, and the rest of the suit was built around that. The movie seems to have dispensed with that and instead he has some sort of device implanted in his chest.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: ahoythematey on April 09, 2008, 09:26:44 PM This will probably be nothing like Spidey 3. Robert Downey Jr. is perfect for this. Not only is he a better actor than any actor that has ever portrayed a superhero, but he just fits the part so well. Never seen a Favreau movie, but acting wise, he seems cool enough. Deserves a chance at least. Better than Christian Bale? I'd say they are about equal. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 10, 2008, 12:18:05 AM I'm a big fan. A little biased, I guess. :-)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: ahoythematey on April 10, 2008, 12:29:40 AM Don't get me get me wrong, RDJ is awesome. I'm super-gay for Christian Bale, had to bring him up.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: tazelbain on April 10, 2008, 07:13:37 AM This will probably be nothing like Spidey 3. Robert Downey Jr. is perfect for this. Not only is he a better actor than any actor that has ever portrayed a superhero, but he just fits the part so well. Never seen a Favreau movie, but acting wise, he seems cool enough. Deserves a chance at least. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on April 10, 2008, 11:46:44 AM Oh c'mon. Evil Disco Peter was a stellar comedy routine. (Mainly because that's not what was intended, but hey...)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on April 10, 2008, 11:49:37 AM Comedy doesn't make me angry.
That did. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 10, 2008, 12:12:52 PM I thought Emo Peter was the highlight of that film. I thought it was supposed to be funny?
If you're angry about it, you might be a little emo yourself. ;) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on April 10, 2008, 12:25:20 PM Don't get me get me wrong, RDJ is awesome. I'm super-gay for Christian Bale, had to bring him up. Who isn't at least a little gay for Christian Bale? Dude's a fucking Adonis. But, yeah, watching Robert Downey Jr. in Back to School pretty much guaranteed that I'd watch anything with him in it. Iron Man will be awesome. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: murdoc on April 10, 2008, 12:39:49 PM Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang guaranteed I'll be a RDJ fan FOREVER.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on April 10, 2008, 12:55:54 PM The original chestpiece was also used to keep him alive to keep a piece of sharpnel from moving into his heart, and the rest of the suit was built around that. The movie seems to have dispensed with that and instead he has some sort of device implanted in his chest. Nah, i seem to remember from one of the very early trailers that the shrapnel is still there (he rigs some kind of low tech device to keep it from moving while captured by the terrorists). The bright circular thing is probably whatever he rigs up as a permanent solution after he gets back home.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on April 10, 2008, 07:11:44 PM Nope he has the bright circular disc in his chest while he's still in captivity.
(http://pandadesigns.com/f13/im_chestdevice.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on April 10, 2008, 08:54:15 PM I thought Emo Peter was the highlight of that film. I thought it was supposed to be funny? If you're angry about it, you might be a little emo yourself. ;) Except in S3, he's supposed to 'scare' the audience. Make the audience realize 'oh man, you're turning into a psycho. ditch the suit' not 'why are you wearing clownshoes?' I watched the animated series on Venom arc and it's done much better. Peter turned gradually into a slight jerk, and full-on asshat; only stopping at the last minute before letting Shocker fall to his death. (this is cartoon mind you) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 10, 2008, 09:02:26 PM I see.
Well, the last thing I'll say is that Venom is a stupid character anyways, and I doubt that Tobey McGuire could ever be scary. Maybe Raimi realized both. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Nevermore on April 11, 2008, 05:35:19 AM (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/35/KevinSinCity.jpg/220px-KevinSinCity.jpg)
I never thought Frodo could be scary, either! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Merusk on April 11, 2008, 05:49:56 AM Frodo is always scary because of his freakish Chibi-eyes.
Well, the last thing I'll say is that Venom is a stupid character anyways, :star: :star: :star: :star:Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on April 11, 2008, 06:36:08 AM Frodo is always scary because of his freakish Chibi-eyes. That's because he never blinks. In fact both he and Toby Maguire subscribe to the "keeping my eyes open as wide as possible and never blinking makes me more dramatic" school of acting (I forget who it was that taught them that). They both bug the heck out of me because of that though Toby annoys me more than Elijah.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Sky on April 11, 2008, 06:39:19 AM (I forget who it was that taught them that) (http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/silence/archives/marty.jpg)Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lakov_Sanite on April 11, 2008, 06:49:53 AM Abby.....something.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on April 13, 2008, 12:55:53 PM Me want:
(http://www.sideshowtoy.com/mas_assets/jpg/2957_press08-001.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 13, 2008, 07:42:49 PM Looks heavy.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on April 14, 2008, 09:10:05 PM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX15_zwoZ6c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX15_zwoZ6c)
May 2nd is coming fast. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Fordel on April 14, 2008, 11:23:03 PM I LOVE that he argues with his robots :heart:
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on April 14, 2008, 11:29:08 PM Good news! (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/wildly_popular_iron_man_trailer?utm_source=slate_rss_1)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 15, 2008, 12:40:08 AM Good news! (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/wildly_popular_iron_man_trailer?utm_source=slate_rss_1) I don't think the trailer gives away too much. I'm still not even sure who Jeff Bridges is, other than the villain. Therefore, I don't know the plot. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on April 15, 2008, 01:35:46 AM I don't think that was the joke.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 15, 2008, 01:37:07 AM Either way, I'm fucking stoked! Like a little kid. I want to see this more than Batman. The trailers make me want to see the movie more, not less.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: LK on April 15, 2008, 01:59:45 PM But do the eyes light up on the bust?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on April 15, 2008, 04:27:27 PM ahaha reminds me of a huge Pez candy dispenser
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/32/52953641_ca5522aafc.jpg :grin: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Slyfeind on April 15, 2008, 06:09:53 PM I almost wish I hadn't read this thread. I had no idea about Samuel Jackson or the character he plays. That's freakin' sweet. I probably would have found out eventually. I'm gay for Iron man. WTF I'm in my mid 30's, why am I excited about a movie all of a sudden??
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evil Elvis on April 15, 2008, 08:02:52 PM But do the eyes light up on the bust? (http://www.sideshowtoy.com/mas_assets/jpg/2957_press09-001.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on April 15, 2008, 08:12:54 PM I almost wish I hadn't read this thread. I had no idea about Samuel Jackson or the character he plays. That's freakin' sweet. I probably would have found out eventually. I'm gay for Iron man. WTF I'm in my mid 30's, why am I excited about a movie all of a sudden?? 30 Year olds can be loser nerds that like crappy fake superheroes also! P.S. I like anime. Well, rarely, but there's some stuff (Lucky Star, Lagann, etc) that just blows my hair back. So rejoice in your loserdom. P.P.S. Anime is more socially acceptable than liking a guy in a cyber suit. Except Gundam. That's less acceptable because it's a cartoon guy in a cartoon robot suit. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tebonas on April 15, 2008, 11:12:22 PM This whole site is an altar to our socially less acceptable hobbies, so whats one more gonna hurt?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on April 16, 2008, 01:13:02 AM P.P.S. Anime is more socially acceptable than liking a guy in a cyber suit. No... no it really isn't. Iron Man is a summer blockbuster movie. There aren't enough comic geeks in the world to get stuff like Spider-man, X-men, or whatever to put up the numbers they do. Non-geeks aren't afraid to go watch these things and enjoy them. It's much more acceptable than anime. Sorry but it's the truth. On another note, I just found out that due to a certain event at my work that we just got word of, I'll actually be getting my prints of Iron Man a couple days earlier than expected, so I might be seeing it as early as the 28th. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: murdoc on April 16, 2008, 06:16:54 AM P.P.S. Anime is more socially acceptable than liking a guy in a cyber suit. Except Gundam. That's less acceptable because it's a cartoon guy in a cartoon robot suit. That was supposed to be green text right? RIGHT!? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on April 16, 2008, 06:41:12 AM Put me in the "lol wut?" category as well. I've overheard debates about how powerful Magneto is from middle-aged warehouse workers who would probably think "gundam" is something they eat in Cambodia.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on April 16, 2008, 08:31:44 AM errr..that's just crazy talk. socailly acceptable? wtf?
maybe in japan schild, but elsewhere in the world anime fans hide underground even from their own relatives. I remember slotting in an anime soundtrack on a road trip with my dad (I'm around 23) and he paused from driving and looked at me funny. 'Son, why are listening to sunday morning cartoon songs?' :pedobear: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Merusk on April 16, 2008, 09:24:42 AM Anime gets more socially acceptable every year. Comics, however, don't. It's odd.
I see plenty of teens browsing the Manga section of the local Borders, but nobody hangs out in the Graphic Novel section or near the Comic rack except ill-clothed dumpy guys age 25+. The sheer fact that the Manga section is 2-3x larger than the GN section is a marvel beyond just the fact that Borders in fucking KENTUCKY even has a section dedicated to Japanese comics. My kids and nephews all know Anime much more than the do Comics. Sure they know Batman and Spiderman and the 'big names' but that's from movies. Talk to them about TV shows or animation in general and if it's not a CN show, it's something like Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, or Gundam. This is an age-range from 4-12, and they've never known a US culture that HASN'T had some kind of Anime in it. To them, it's odd if you don't like it. I can see this maturing into an enjoyment of the other animes out there, past and future, much more than I can see them getting in to comic books. My eldest nephew most of all, as he's a 'jock' at his father's urging (a banker) and both of them see one as OK (because it's a movie or TV show) and the other as "geek central." Another oddity. I blame it on the "reading is for nerds and losers" stereotype. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 16, 2008, 03:20:40 PM Geez, where the fuck did anime come from, Schild? This movie will rock. And some anime is fine too. Fuck a nerd slapfight.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on April 16, 2008, 06:39:15 PM Am I the only one who didn't take him seriously?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 16, 2008, 06:40:03 PM Schild is always serious.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on April 17, 2008, 01:19:39 AM Anime gets more socially acceptable every year. Comics, however, don't. It's odd. Anime doesn't get more socially acceptable every year. For the most part it just fills the same geek niche for younger generations that P&P RPGs, comics, and the like did for previous generations. Without a doubt managa sells more in bookstores than graphic novels, but it hasn't had anywhere near the crossover to the mainstream crowd that comics have had off and on for decades if one looks at something like movie grosses for anime (http://boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=anime.htm) and comic book movies (http://boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=comicbookadaptation.htm). Reading comics in and of itself I'd say isn't exactly socially acceptable (nor do I every really expect it to gain that kind of mainstream acceptance), but due to a handful of iconic characters like Superman, Batman, and Spider-man, that are recognized around the world, and characters being transferred to more mainstream media going as far back as the days of radio dramas (like the Shadow), comics are understood and accepted to an extent in a way that anime isn't. None of this is to say that one is better or more valid than the other. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 17, 2008, 02:09:51 AM Two hot, "worldly" girls have stolen JTHM tpbs from me ([edit] wait, that was just one of those..forgot the other). Many have at least one Wonder Woman ornament on their fridge. The extent of their anime interest is a Hello Kitty purse stashed away in their closet. Some have watched a comic book movie or two. They all love Spider-Man at least.
That's about as socially acceptable as any of this shit will ever be, I think. As for buying comics, hell, I barely do that. I get a lot of info from here actually. Or else, I torrent (shame, shame, shame). Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on April 17, 2008, 08:47:04 AM On the other hand, I can name a hot girl who likes Wonder Woman kinda, but knows her manga backwards and forwards.
I still think comics are more socially acceptable though, because you can jump into a comic-geek rant in front of people who aren't geeks and usually (usually): 1) They think it's funny 2) One or two people in the group get interested in the details of characters they know 3) You are not, thereafter, socially ostracized. Anime, however, doesn't really offer such an option. You can't just, as a joke, start ranting in front of a group of normal people about how Vegeta is clearly the superior fighter to Goku and it's only through luck and the interference of his friends that Goku ever managed to beat him. Because people don't know what the fuck you're talking about. The comics rants they at least have a point of reference. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 17, 2008, 09:27:40 AM This is very true.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Merusk on April 17, 2008, 09:59:37 AM You couldn't do that with comics 20 years ago, either. At least not where I grew up.
Also, people wouldn't have understood Star Wars references 25 years ago, or simly thought you were a fucking loony for droping Yoda-isms. Today they're a "cultural icon" and part of the INTERNATIONAL pop lexicon to a disturbing degree. (A star wars themed Shin Chan? Wtf?) Culture changes, what kids are into today is what we'll be hearing about endlessly in our 50s and 60s while we whinge about how nobody respects 'the classics' anymore. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 17, 2008, 10:19:14 AM There was that guy that Richard Gere played in the Breathless remake. Always going on about the Silver Surfer to his girlfriend.
And really, his character was the coolest dude EVER. Granted, he was kind of retarded, but still, he was cool. And I don't even like Gere that much. ... Hmm, not sure where I'm going with this... Other than that it was made 20 years ago. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on April 17, 2008, 10:44:47 AM You couldn't do that with comics 20 years ago, either. True enough. Anime may get there, but comics are already there. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on April 17, 2008, 11:10:22 AM You couldn't do that with comics 20 years ago, either. Yeah, I'm sure people would have though you were crazy if you were discussing Wonder Woman, the Hulk, and Superman in, oh... let's say the late '70s. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Sky on April 17, 2008, 11:35:23 AM Yeah, I'm sure people would have though you were crazy if you were discussing Wonder Woman, the Hulk, and Superman in, oh... let's say the late '70s. Yeah, really. No cool pop references at all. (http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/5484/snlheroesiv9.jpg) (Sorry for the shitty pic, I refer to Belushi Hulk in the upper corner and Ess En Ell are internet-hating douchebags) No major motion pictures or tv shows. Shit, people knew who fucking SHAZAM was in the 70s. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Simond on April 17, 2008, 12:10:32 PM I can tie this whole derail together with one picture:
(http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08164/batman_the_otaku621.jpg) (http://xs.to) :drill: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on April 28, 2008, 09:09:43 AM A mildly amusing interview with Robert Downey Jr. (http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4739099)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on April 28, 2008, 10:06:07 AM Thanks for that.
I'm not sure where the trend of getting actors from the off the beaten path to star in blockbusters started exactly (like PotC, for example), but I like mainstream hollywood right now. I'm super-stoked for this. It can not not be fun. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on April 30, 2008, 06:18:26 PM Watched it. Really enjoyed it, but won't go into detail until others have had a chance to see it. Also, the last reel of the prints I saw were apparently alternate reels specifically for advanced screenings. The reels had to be taken off after the screenings and replaced with the reels for the regular showing, so presumably there's some sort of change from the ending I saw, but I won't know what until I get a chance to sit down and watch the movie again with the new reel on (likely on Monday).
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on May 01, 2008, 08:27:12 AM Saw the release print for our theater. Very well done. Downy is a perfect Stark, and the suit in action is flawless. Pretty much couldn't ask for a better adaption of Ironman for the Big Screen.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: sigil on May 01, 2008, 09:22:23 AM That fills me with near infinite happiness.
I'll see it on Saturday. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 01, 2008, 11:59:37 AM Saw the release print for our theater. Very well done. Downy is a perfect Stark, and the suit in action is flawless. Pretty much couldn't ask for a better adaption of Ironman for the Big Screen. I'm going to try to catch the end of one of the showings I have tonight. There have been rumors that what was changed on the last reel is that they've added the Nick Fury scene to the end of the credits. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on May 01, 2008, 02:24:12 PM Ahh, if that was the only edit, then you didnt really miss much.
Spoiler: Stark comes down to his living room to find Jackson Fury standing there, who says "you think you are the only superhero out there", and then mentions the "avenger initiative". We need Thor and Capt America movies. Stat. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 01, 2008, 02:44:51 PM Ahh, if that was the only edit, then you didnt really miss much. Yeah, I'd already heard the details of the scene, but since I'm working tonight anyway I'll probably pop into the auditorium for a bit to catch it. By the by, the two movies you want to see are both scheduled for 2009 and already have directors attached to them. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: UnSub on May 02, 2008, 06:37:42 AM I saw "Iron Man" today and it was great. As my wife said, "Like 'Top Gun' but with no Tom Cruise and less homo-eroticism."
Favereau made a very good picture and even the cornball moments aren't that cornball. Downey Jr made the role of Stark his and it is awesome. Plus I just found out his role in "Tropic Thunder" and that's just awesome plus. to wit: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d6/Tropic_thunder_ver3.jpg/200px-Tropic_thunder_ver3.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ookii on May 02, 2008, 08:16:36 AM This movie has a 95% on Rotten Tomatoes with a 122:7 ratio, this is required viewing now.
For the record I said on the onset it would be awesome, Schild still thinks it will be a piece of crap. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on May 02, 2008, 11:04:49 AM That was. By far. The best Marvel superhero movie of all time.
Just. Wow. So good. Here are my regrets/complaints because honestly, if you need anyone else telling you this movie is FUCKING MUST SEE NOW then you don't deserve to see it. The "bad": -If you salvated and got a hard on over every single preview & commercial you have seen a great deal of the movie. Not the best parts mind you. In fact not the best parts at all. But during the beginning of the movie I sort of felt like: Hey speed it up, lets get to the new stuff I'd seen that humvee scene so many times. -There could have been a tiny bit more subtlety, but for a summer comic book action movie, this was fucking mozart so stfu you fucking artfag movie prick. -They shoehorn a little love story in there, but its well done, well acted and doesn't get in the way. -Its not long enough, I would have watched another hour happily. Really that's it, I'm out of ideas. It was fucking bliss, it sucks to have summer blow its movie wad this early. But Will Smith owes me big time for I Am Legend so perhaps his product this year will be as awesome as I expect from him. *edit* lol bin = been Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Teleku on May 02, 2008, 01:15:46 PM For the record I said on the onset it would be awesome, Schild still thinks it will be a piece of crap. But hey, Schild has been incorrect about everything he has ever said about anything regarding movies, so maybe him saying this forced it to be an awesome movie. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 02, 2008, 01:19:57 PM I could have absorbed another hour of that too.
[edit] I liked the ending. Hope it doesn't change. [edit] SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER ----------- The first real show of power (when he went back for the weapon caches, and pummeled those terrorists): I could have used another hour of that. Same goes for the traffic scene. I love the sound of metal smashing into things (which is why I'm all about a good old fashioned car crash movie as well). Favreau (or whoever) is a freakin' tease when it comes to action choreography. It's great, but leaves you begging for more. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 02, 2008, 03:04:51 PM I approve of this film.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on May 02, 2008, 03:43:45 PM "Ok, so we're going to start off at 10% thrust capacity and achieve lift. Ready. And Go." WHOOMP. I haven't had a laugh that good in months.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ragnoros on May 02, 2008, 03:49:43 PM This movie would have been PERFECT with about another half an hour of blowing shit up.
As it is it will simply be the best summer movie of the year, not not the best summer movie ever. Batman, Hancock, Hulk, Ect. You all have a hell of an opening act to follow Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on May 02, 2008, 04:08:07 PM Ok I remembered my two ligit complaints with the movie: SPOILERS MOTHERFUCKERS, I'd do boxes but they get fucked up often by the alternating colors.
1) The tactics employed in fights weren't great. Not that they ever are. My favorite movie is Way of the Gun because it seemed like someone put some thought into the gunplay. 2) The whole bit where the terrorists didn't notice he was building a giant robot suit but they did? That was bad. The bit where he flew into a sand dune and was fine except his arm also bugged me a little but at that point I was still very much in the "I've seen this part already mode" since I had watched the trailers and committed every minute to memory. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: IainC on May 02, 2008, 04:19:24 PM Just got back from watching this. Was ace. Not a fan of summer blockbusters but am a sad comics nerd so was torn. Trailers for Hellboy II, Dark Knight and Indy excited. Trailer for Hulk didn't.
The film: RDJ owned every second of this movie. He was the only actor in every scene he was in. It was like watching Nicholson. Blowing shit up was good. Stark was good. Managed to avoid the 'Hooray, we're America saving brown people from terrorists' vibe that I was afraid of. Gwyneth failed to irritate me like she normally does. I hope Audi paid well for the obscene amount of product placement they got from this film. Not only is an R8 Stark's ride of choice, his assistant drives an A8 and in the fight on the freeway, while anonymous cars are getting flung around like confetti, the family driving a Q7 come safely to a stop in front of Jeff Bridges. Then they get flung through the air at Stark who catches them and puts them down safely so they can drive away. All the while interspersed with gratuitous shots of the grille in case you missed that driving an Audi will save you from getting killed by rampaging power armoured psycopaths. Finally three words that really sorted the comic geeks from the action movie fans in the cinema: Nick Fucking Fury An Avengers movie? I am so there. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 02, 2008, 04:30:45 PM I can't even remember the tactics of Way of the Gun. Always wanted to check it again, maybe I will now. I do remember that hilarious fountain scene though.
I can't pinpoint anything specific as far as what kind of realistic tactics I've seen displayed in movies were.. I tend to just prefer form over function anyways. What's cinematic and looks good, not what's practical. :-) I do know that I like action to be very drawn out. The last 15 minutes of the Road Warrior are the greatest in movie history to me. Or on the less explosive side of things, yet very drawn out -- Carlito's Way. The Grand Central sequence. re: "1)" : They were stupid brown people. Of course they wouldn't notice. [edit] Oh, and on a geeky note... Stark's computers kick ass. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on May 02, 2008, 08:53:11 PM That was an awesome movie. Two paws up.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 02, 2008, 09:37:09 PM Did anyone else spend half the film wondering what The Dude was doing at a weapons manufacturer?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on May 02, 2008, 11:09:29 PM Saw it tonight. Made of fucking win. Huge crowd, which laughed and applauded. Stayed til after the credits and everyone who was left was like screaming and cheering in the theater after the Nick Fury bit.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on May 03, 2008, 12:53:05 AM No one in my theater seemed to know who the fuck Nick Fury is.
I was very pleased. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 03, 2008, 01:11:08 AM Just got back from watching this. Was ace. Not a fan of summer blockbusters but am a sad comics nerd so was torn. Trailers for Hellboy II, Dark Knight and Indy excited. Trailer for Hulk didn't. Some prints also have trailers for The Spirit, and I still haven't quite decided yet whether or not I like how it looks. It's got pretty much the same visual style as Sin City, which is fine since I liked Sin City a lot, but the way the Spirit moves in the trailer looks kinda awkward and the voiceover is pretty cheesy. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on May 03, 2008, 01:50:35 AM Mine had The Spirit. Had a "Man we're trying so fucking hard to be cool!" vibe that I didn't dig. And it had a trailer for Narnia 2: Electric Boogaloo or whatever. I'm entirely fucking sick of magical English schoolchildren and giant medieval battles.
EDIT: Does anyone else want to see an Avengers movie JUST to see Iron Man reacting to the others? RDJ going "Oh, so you're Thor. As in THE Thor. Okay." and so forth would kill. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Llava on May 03, 2008, 02:12:58 AM I'd kill just to have a Toby Maguire cameo in a press conference. No lines necessary. In fact, no lines period. Just show him as a photographer.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: UnSub on May 03, 2008, 05:52:32 AM EDIT: Does anyone else want to see an Avengers movie JUST to see Iron Man reacting to the others? RDJ going "Oh, so you're Thor. As in THE Thor. Okay." and so forth would kill. Provided they follow events in the Ultimates series to some extent - Captain America being a tactical genius, the Hulk being used as a human bomb - then yes, it would be awesome. My guess here is that Marvel Films is going to be linking ALL of their major releases together - Nick Fury in "Iron Man", Iron Man in "Hulk", and so on. At the very least, it keeps Sam Jackson out of straight to DVD comedies. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 03, 2008, 06:47:06 AM Hmm Avengers vs the Inhumans is probably a good way to ease into the Illuminati ? Not sure who's gonna play Blackbolt and Doc Strange though.
(http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m20/r3dknight/hamncheese.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 03, 2008, 09:58:48 AM Adrien Brody could pull off a doctor-turned-sorceror without being too corny.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Morfiend on May 03, 2008, 10:05:57 PM Saw it, liked it. The part with the crashing in to the sand really annoyed me. They could have so easily made it believable, and just didnt. That was crap. Other than that one part, I liked it.
Also, did anyone notice that his house was a great replica of his house from the comics? Oh yeah, and Gweneth wasnt annoying. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Jimbo on May 03, 2008, 11:46:12 PM Me and the kido saw it this afternoon, two awesomes from us!
We stayed all the way till the end of the credits, Nick Mutherfukin' Fury! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Kitsune on May 04, 2008, 12:53:57 AM The only thing that irked me about the movie was that there were a solid dozen or so times that Stark should have died, suit or no suit. Falling out of the sky from hundreds of feet up while wearing half a ton of metal isn't something that anyone's walking away from, for example. And it only would've taken one second of footage of him firing the thrusters at the last instant to turn that scene from utterly unbelievable to okay.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: UnSub on May 04, 2008, 05:52:52 AM If we are going to get picky, my big plot hole is Pepper going to SHIELD and no-one getting to Tony before Stane did. They could have at least sent an agent to protect him.
But, you know, it's pretty minor. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on May 04, 2008, 06:41:51 AM LOVED it. IM gets the ole A++++ would watch again.
RDJ and the others actually crammed some drama and human emotion into a summer blockbuster. Great laughs, good story, awesome sfx. I've waited over three decades to see IM on the big screen. Thank God they did it right. -Jeff Bridges=one of the best superhero villians. Yeah I went there. -RDJ=I knew he was a good actor but DAMN. -SLJ="Get these mutherfuckin' Hydra OFF my mutherfuckin' helicarrier!" Would love to see down the road IM vs. The Hulk, or the Avengers. Or take all the current Marvel movie superheroes and make them face some gigantic threat. That would be some awesome. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on May 04, 2008, 11:29:17 AM Regarding the fall in the desert: The fact that the suit can fly, supersonic and intercontinental, is so absurd on the face that you just have to sort of blind yourself to physics going in.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on May 04, 2008, 12:36:31 PM Regarding the fall in the desert: The fact that the suit can fly, supersonic and intercontinental, is so absurd on the face that you just have to sort of blind yourself to physics going in. Well, the suit being able to go Super sonic and Intercontinental is supposed to be due to the use of "Stark Industries Proprietary Repulsor Technology" as some sort of high tech ultra efficient and compact propulsion system, coupled with his "uber arc reactor" which puts out more energy then full sized power plants, but fits in the palm of your hand.The fall in the Desert still seems improbable however. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Triforcer on May 04, 2008, 01:49:00 PM Le awesome. The only downside is everyone is going to whine when Dark Knight comes out that it isn't as good as this, which will anger me.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on May 04, 2008, 04:17:46 PM He was using proprietary Stark Industries Inertial Dampeners which he then improved upon for the newer suits. They didn't want to throw too much technobabble at you though, so they skipped over it.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Aez on May 04, 2008, 06:48:13 PM Great movie.
Hoax - If you like good tactical fights, be sure to check this gem : (http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0006GVJEE.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg) Also: Any comic fan can direct me to the best Ironman series? I'm guessing there's ultimate, extreme and rebirth XXX. Any series is seen has the real canon? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 04, 2008, 07:02:52 PM The real canon is just the plain iron man and avengers comics. I'd suggest just the Ultimate stuff, since you can avoid civil war, and get a re-telling of all of the marvel universe in new art.
On the flipside, the ultimate origin story for stark isn't the standard one told all of the time (basically, he's born with an ailment...kind of a boy-in-the-bubble sort of thing...AND, he's kind of a superpowered mutant when it comes to his intelligence). It's written by orson scott card, if that matters. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 04, 2008, 07:44:12 PM when i glanced over the blue baby start i decided to give it a miss. They already have Xmen, Spidey, Ironman, Nick Fury, Daredevil, Ghost Rider, FF and Hulk. Just toss in David Hasselhoff as Captain America and we're ready :drill:
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on May 04, 2008, 09:11:32 PM Well, the suit being able to go Super sonic and Intercontinental is supposed to be due to the use of "Stark Industries Proprietary Repulsor Technology" as some sort of high tech ultra efficient and compact propulsion system, coupled with his "uber arc reactor" which puts out more energy then full sized power plants, but fits in the palm of your hand. And also keeps you from having to poop while making a 6000 mile flight to Afghanistan in an enclosed metal suit. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Samwise on May 04, 2008, 09:42:57 PM He was using proprietary Stark Industries Inertial Dampeners which he then improved upon for the newer suits. :Love_Letters: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 04, 2008, 11:06:15 PM The suit probably just recycles waste like a space suit.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 05, 2008, 12:53:19 AM Any comic fan can direct me to the best Ironman series? I'm guessing there's ultimate, extreme and rebirth XXX. Any series is seen has the real canon? Some key TPB's: - Iron Man: Demon in a Bottle (http://www.amazon.com/Iron-Man-Bottle-Premiere-Classic/dp/0785130950/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1209976068&sr=1-8). Deals with Stark's alcoholism. - Armor Wars (http://www.amazon.com/Iron-Man-Armor-David-Michelinie/dp/078512506X/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b). Iron Man hunts down various armored villains who've stolen his technology. - War Machine (TPB releases near the end of the month) (http://www.amazon.com/Iron-Man-Machine-Len-Kaminski/dp/0785131329/ref=sr_1_25?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1209976126&sr=1-25). Since they seem to be setting up the possiblity of Rhodes donning the armor in the movies at some point, this could be helpful reading for those interested. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Margalis on May 05, 2008, 03:00:05 AM I just read Ultimates Volume 1 & 2. In it Iron Man actually mentions Robert Downey Jr. ("I've had my nose broken more times than Robert Downey Jr.) In the Ultimates universe a lot of characters are drawn to look similar to real people. Was Stark in any way based on Downey Jr?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 05, 2008, 03:51:25 AM I just glanced at issue 3. The artwork doesn't look like him to me. I think it's just that RDJ did his best to capture it.
At the very least, it didn't register enough with anyone at the Marvel film division to think so. Apparently, they weren't interested in giving it to him at first. He had to audition and test for the role like a newb. It was his idea to go after the part. So taking that into account, I don't think those comics originally had him in mind (like Sam Jackson/Nick Fury, for example). Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Venkman on May 05, 2008, 04:24:17 AM Yea! Glad I with folks who made me stay 'til the end credits.
Movie rocked. Only two things bothered me:
I think this movie will be successful enough to prompt a sequel. But, I wonder, will it be a sequel? Or will it be Avengers? I'm undecided which one I'd rather have :-) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on May 05, 2008, 04:45:15 AM
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 05, 2008, 05:04:07 AM I wanted the Mandarin, dammit. I was SURE they were going to spring him on us.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: UnSub on May 05, 2008, 05:25:01 AM Just toss in David Hasselhoff as Captain America and we're ready :drill: Hasselhoff would reprise his role as Nick Fury. (http://www.davidhasselhoffonline.com/NickFury7.jpg) More seriously, the only actor I could think of playing Captain America is Aaron Eckhart, but he might look a little old and he's in "The Dark Knight" so Marvel might not want him to appear in their film. (http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/harveydent.thumbnail.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WindupAtheist on May 05, 2008, 06:22:23 AM Mandarin? Fuck no. Some shit just won't fly outside of a comic book, and the evil Chinese wizard with magic rings from an alien spaceship is one of them.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 05, 2008, 06:37:11 AM And dragons. DRAGONS!
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 05, 2008, 06:54:49 AM Mandarin? Fuck no. Some shit just won't fly outside of a comic book, and the evil Chinese wizard with magic rings from an alien spaceship is one of them. I haven't seen it yet, but my buddy told me the terrorist group that captures him at the beginning is named Ten Rings. Which means the Mandarin is around and will likely be the villain in a sequel. Also, the Stane villain had nothing to do with Iron Man's origin in the comics. Stane was an industrialist who came after Stark in the late 100's of the Iron Man book. He bought out Stark Industries, sent Iron Man packing and for a while there, Rhodes was Iron Man while Tony went back into the bottle. Tony finally crawled out and made the red and white suit, around issue #200, and fought Stane in his giant dark blue suit and won. I don't remember if Stane ever came back after that. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: schild on May 05, 2008, 06:56:49 AM Aaron Eckhart should play everything and everyone.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 05, 2008, 07:10:14 AM There were 1 or 2 other things that led into a potential Mandarin storyline as well. The leader of the Ten Rings is seen playing absent-mindedly with a very ornamental ring in one scene, and he went on about Mongolian history.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on May 05, 2008, 08:10:39 AM The Mandarin was definately in it. They never called him by name or gave you any reason to know about him unless you know the Iron Man story at all. I liked how they handled it.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 05, 2008, 11:11:42 AM From Yahoo: (http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080505/20080505005656.html?.v=1)
Quote Marvel today updated its feature film slate strategy and plans for the next three years, locking in key release windows for its character franchises. In order to focus its attention on maximizing the success of an Iron Man sequel and the launch of Thor in the summer of 2010 and because Marvel believes that the summer is the optimal time to launch a new property, the Company will not release a self produced film in 2009. Marvel plans to launch its 2010 film slate with the release of the sequel, Iron Man 2, on April 30, 2010, followed by the launch of Thor on June 4, 2010. Additionally, Marvel is planting its feature film stakes for summer 2011 with an Avengers-themed summer – a two-picture project which will debut on May 6, 2011 with The First Avenger: Captain America (working title), followed by The Avengers in July 2011. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 05, 2008, 11:16:31 AM They can do Thor all they want as long as no one says anything about the Mallet Merengue.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on May 05, 2008, 11:26:41 AM I think Thor will be very hard to do and not make it a parody of itself. I keep picturing Karl Urban (the dude from LOTR and Doom) as Thor and them making Thor: Pathfinder of the Rings.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Mrbloodworth on May 05, 2008, 11:27:44 AM Hmm Avengers vs the Inhumans is probably a good way to ease into the Illuminati ? Not sure who's gonna play Blackbolt and Doc Strange though. (http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m20/r3dknight/hamncheese.jpg) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/21/Raul_Julia.gif) Win. To add to that. WAR MACHINE! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 05, 2008, 11:50:26 AM I think Thor will be very hard to do and not make it a parody of itself. I keep picturing Karl Urban (the dude from LOTR and Doom) as Thor and them making Thor: Pathfinder of the Rings. Marvel has a hard time even finding a way to do the Thor comic right. As far as the movie goes, assuming they go with Donald Blake, do they make him a separate personality from Thor, or will they be one and the same person? Should Asgard be brought into first movie in any large capacity, or should it start off more grounded in the "real" world? What big motherfucker can be cast as Thor who also isn't a completely shit actor? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: murdoc on May 05, 2008, 11:53:41 AM According to IMDB, the guy rumoured to be cast as Thor is Kevin McKidd (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0571727/).
Only thing I've ever really seen him in was Rome. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 05, 2008, 11:58:25 AM Dude, Raul Julia is DEAD.
I guess Kevin McKidd could make a pretty good Thor. Funny that Titus Pullo is going to be the new Punisher too (I rather liked Tom Jane). (http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/01/punisher2.jpg) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Johny Cee on May 05, 2008, 12:09:52 PM According to IMDB, the guy rumoured to be cast as Thor is Kevin McKidd (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0571727/). Only thing I've ever really seen him in was Rome. He was in Dog Soldiers (great genre monster movie) and I think in Trainspotting? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Mrbloodworth on May 05, 2008, 12:12:33 PM Dude, Raul Julia is DEAD. Well shitt, he would have made a good one. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 05, 2008, 12:16:51 PM Titus Pullo as Thor would be the bee's knees, provided the story isn't complete and utter shit. You know, like most of the Thor comics have been since Walt Simonson quit writing them back in the day. Thor is just a hard character to do. I'd much rather they skip the whole Donald Blake "God fallen to Earth" thing and do him like the Ultimates.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: IainC on May 05, 2008, 12:18:50 PM According to IMDB, the guy rumoured to be cast as Thor is Kevin McKidd (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0571727/). Only thing I've ever really seen him in was Rome. He was in Dog Soldiers (great genre monster movie) and I think in Trainspotting? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Polysorbate80 on May 05, 2008, 12:27:33 PM Hmm Avengers vs the Inhumans is probably a good way to ease into the Illuminati ? Not sure who's gonna play Blackbolt and Doc Strange though. (http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m20/r3dknight/hamncheese.jpg) (http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/sarahdouglasp2/images/zod3.jpg) (Terence, not Ironwood.) Unfortunately he's old now. (Again, Terence, not Ironwood.) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 05, 2008, 12:38:22 PM Of the two guys from Rome, I think they picked the wrong one. Oh well, I still like him.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 05, 2008, 12:52:57 PM Titus Pullo as Thor would be the bee's knees, provided the story isn't complete and utter shit. You know, like most of the Thor comics have been since Walt Simonson quit writing them back in the day. Thor is just a hard character to do. I'd much rather they skip the whole Donald Blake "God fallen to Earth" thing and do him like the Ultimates. Not sure if it's a typo, but Pullo is Punisher, not Thor. The guy who played Verenus is Thor. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 05, 2008, 12:58:48 PM Dude, Raul Julia is DEAD. I choose to believe that he faked his own death after being in Street Fighter. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 05, 2008, 01:09:13 PM Bah, either Pullo or Verenus would be a great Thor. Verenus is probably the better choice 'cos he's so pretty.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 05, 2008, 01:17:20 PM I think I'm with Schild here. Aaron Eckhart could do anything. Fuck it, have him play both Cap and Thor. He did the whole biker thing in Erin Brockovich, I guess.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 05, 2008, 01:18:03 PM Eckhart would be a fantastic Captain America. Not so much on the Thor, though. I don't see Norse God written on him.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Abagadro on May 05, 2008, 06:38:15 PM Thor was the only comic I consistently read when I was a kid (mostly Simonson, but also the very start of DeFalco) so I'm somewhat stoked for the movie.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on May 06, 2008, 06:42:49 AM The truth behind Civil War (http://www.shortpacked.com/d/20080505.html)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: IainC on May 06, 2008, 03:25:48 PM From Yahoo: (http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080505/20080505005656.html?.v=1) I just reread that, the rest of their schedule looks interesting too - although you missed the weirdest one:Quote Marvel today updated its feature film slate strategy and plans for the next three years, locking in key release windows for its character franchises. In order to focus its attention on maximizing the success of an Iron Man sequel and the launch of Thor in the summer of 2010 and because Marvel believes that the summer is the optimal time to launch a new property, the Company will not release a self produced film in 2009. Marvel plans to launch its 2010 film slate with the release of the sequel, Iron Man 2, on April 30, 2010, followed by the launch of Thor on June 4, 2010. Additionally, Marvel is planting its feature film stakes for summer 2011 with an Avengers-themed summer – a two-picture project which will debut on May 6, 2011 with The First Avenger: Captain America (working title), followed by The Avengers in July 2011. Quote Spider-Man, the Musical Hello Entertainment/David Garfinkle, Martin McCallum, Marvel Entertainment, SONY Pictures Entertainment. In development/opening date to be determined; Julie Taymor director; music & lyrics by U2’s Bono and The Edge :uhrr: :ye_gods: :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 09, 2008, 01:46:21 AM A small bit of news on the upcoming movies (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i61e5a1702fe168400bad9fc6dddfccd6):
Quote "Thor" will be released about six weeks after "Iron Man 2," and Marvel is waiting for a script polish from scribe Mark Protosevich ("I Am Legend"). Matthew Vaughn no longer is attached to direct the project because his holding deal expired December. "It's very much a Marvel superhero story but against the backdrop of nothing you've seen before," Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige said in describing "Thor" as a period fantasy in the vein of "The Lord of the Rings." The "Captain America" project is looking for a rewrite as well as a director. All of Marvel's movies, beginning with "Iron Man," are now being designed to lead up to the July 2011 release of "The Avengers," which will see Iron Man, Hulk, Captain America and Thor teaming up. The studio has Zak Penn on board to write the project, which he will do so in concert with the development of the other projects during the next year and a half. "It will tie in with all the other films preceding it," Feige said. "Almost nothing is cooler than three or four of your favorite heroes coming together for some mega event Not so sure I'm happy with the guy who did the screenplay for I am Legend writing Thor. The Avengers movie also seems a little heavy on male superheroes if those 4 are the only characters that make it in (the Ant Man movie is still unscheduled so I wouldn't except to see the Wasp make it in). I guess it could be worse though, like if they tried to shoehorn in Halle Berry as Storm or Jennifer Garner as Elektra. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Bunk on May 09, 2008, 05:38:01 AM The Mandarin was definitely in it. They never called him by name or gave you any reason to know about him unless you know the Iron Man story at all. I liked how they handled it. I was embarrassed that I didn't realize until after the movie that they referred to the group of warlords as the "Ten Rings". Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on May 09, 2008, 06:59:11 AM Stane and the middle eastern honcho were both wearing matching rings as well. It's fun having a comic book movie that doesn't force feed you everything.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 09, 2008, 07:33:35 AM Hmm... RDJ in a buddy movie with Thor (McKidd?)? I don't see it happening!
Well, I've only seen McKidd in Rome and Kingdom of Heaven. Maybe it'd work, who knows. He just seems out of place with Robert Downey Jr. Both of his characters from those works were very morose (as is Thor). A little too morose. If the Cap ends up being someone like Eckhart (or even, and don't shoot me for this...it's a name being dropped around.. Matthew McConaughey), that'd be funny. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 09, 2008, 08:06:03 AM I like McConaughey, but fuck no, don't make his ass Captain America. Blearg.
McKidd was good in Journeyman (on TV). But his delivery is just a bit morose. I think he'll certainly bring dignity and a good amount of barey-controlled seething anger to the part. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on May 09, 2008, 09:38:00 AM Too bad the Avengers movie is going to have to be sans-Hulk because not only is he a shitty character, he's going to have had to terrible movies under his belt at that point & they haven't even managed to make him look good. In fact the new Hulk is a step back from how he looked in the first one.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Triforcer on May 09, 2008, 12:54:38 PM I would love a Marvel Zombies movie, but the suits would probably figure that their beloved heroes eating people would damage the brand.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 10, 2008, 12:30:38 AM they should start consolidating the weaker hero movies (hulk / punisher/ daredevil) as a crossover. Let character intro take a backseat (which usually takes 1/3 of the movie length and slows it down), have a nice rumble that doesn't change the universe in a big way. Hulk vs Fantastic Four, Punisher vs Daredevil etc. I'm sure they can write something up and make it worthwhile for the viewers (2 heroes for the price of 1)
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on May 10, 2008, 11:54:40 AM For me, the buildup of the hero origins are the best parts. It's pretty much why I loved Iron Man. Like you said, a Daredevil vs. Punisher movie would have potential for coolness. I wouldn't mind seeing Moon Knight vs. Werewolf By Night either. All those characters makes me think about how horrible the Batman franchise was for a while and how glutted Spider-Man became.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lakov_Sanite on May 11, 2008, 01:20:24 PM Too bad the Avengers movie is going to have to be sans-Hulk because not only is he a shitty character, he's going to have had to terrible movies under his belt at that point & they haven't even managed to make him look good. In fact the new Hulk is a step back from how he looked in the first one. Wait, what? Sorry but I have to say that by and large people seem to think the incredible hulk is going to do real well. Now I'm not going to defend a movie that's not even out yet but lets not count our eggs before they're laid here. If iron man is any indication, marvel studios knows how to sell their own property. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 11, 2008, 09:53:52 PM i just hope ironman is not heading into spiderman style of toy-fest. S-3 was horrible. I just rewatched it on DVD and it still pisses me off how Venom is 'forced' into the show and the comedy-fest of 'angry pete'. A little meteor dropped on a park where they're dating and nobody gave a shit? Amazing!
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 12, 2008, 01:05:45 AM I thought it was strange that Raimi was pretty adamant about not wanting Venom, and then turning around and putting him in there. There was an earlier script with Vulture apparently, and Ben Kingsley was in talks about it. As corny as Vulture is, it probably would have been better (by virtue of Sir Ben). And I highly doubt that he was forced to include Venom either -- he had a lot of control over the franchise. It must have been at the advice of his kids or something.
That said, after Goblin and Doc Ock, there wasn't much of anywhere to go but down anyways. Spidey has a lot of villains that just aren't fit for cinema (Sandman could have been with a better script maybe). The return of the Goblin could have been better, but that kid is only good at playing Harry (the xtreme snowboard didn't help either). Iron Man has one good movie left in him. But there is no such thing as a good trilogy. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: IainC on May 12, 2008, 01:15:50 AM But there is no such thing as a good trilogy. There's a Mr. I. Jones and a Mr. J. McClane who'd like to disagree with you there. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 12, 2008, 01:17:23 AM And I highly doubt that he was forced to include Venom either -- he had a lot of control over the franchise. When a movie costs over $250 million to make, there are a lot of people that want to have some control over it. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 12, 2008, 01:26:14 AM But there is no such thing as a good trilogy. There's a Mr. I. Jones and a Mr. J. McClane who'd like to disagree with you there. I first saw Temple of Doom at age 7 -- on my birthday, no less -- an exciting and very forgiving day for a 7 seven year old -- and I still thought it sucked balls. And my opinion hasn't changed since. I do like 1 and 3, however. John McClane... I'm torn. Diehard 1 = awesome. Really, beyond awesome. :awesome_for_real: 2 is different, but good.. 3 is not exactly weak compared to most action flicks, but it is the weak spot in the series. 4 is some entertaining shit. So OK then, it's a good trilogy then. The only one. But it is still a half-assed quadrilogy imo. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on May 12, 2008, 05:59:29 AM 4 is some entertaining shit. 4 is entertaining but it's not Die Hard. It's some neutered cartoony guy who vaguely resembles John McClane if you squint really hard. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 12, 2008, 06:15:40 AM He's just aging a bit. He's still the same old smartass, invincible cop.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Merusk on May 12, 2008, 08:42:29 AM But there is no such thing as a good trilogy. There's a Mr. I. Jones and a Mr. J. McClane who'd like to disagree with you there. I saw Temple of Doom over the weekend since USA played the trilogy all damn weekend. (And History Channel will next weekend.) Oh dear god do I disagree with you on that one. I thought it was OK when I saw it in 5th grade, but now? Crap man, forget that one was ever made and just watch Raiders and Crusade. Hopefuly Crystal Skull will be good and then I can agree on a good trilogy. Seriously.. wtf is with an Indy movie opening with a musical number. It's like the producer was fucking her or something. And Spidey 3 would have been much better with just Sandman, or The Lizzard. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Teleku on May 12, 2008, 10:00:22 AM I thought Die Hard 1, 2, and 3 were all great, fun movies.
I thought Die Hard 4 was a fucking horrible horrible horrible piece of shit. That was hard to get through. Then again, I also didn't mind the Temple of Doom (though it was obviously the weakest of the series). The last 3rd of the movie helped make up for the rest of it, imo. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 12, 2008, 10:16:31 AM Temple of Doom had its high points though. Everything Short Round says is classic. The fucking creepy guy in the village is awesome. The political undercurrent about the British Empire? Oooh, intellectualism!
Fuck Vulture, I want Scorpion or Ultron! Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on May 12, 2008, 10:21:06 AM He's just aging a bit. He's still the same old smartass, invincible cop. He dodged an attack fighter in a semi-truck. It went from John McClain to cartoon at that moment. It was a fun movie. But it wasn't in the Die Hard universe. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: tazelbain on May 12, 2008, 10:25:46 AM Wait, you thought there was realism in the first 3 movies?
:drill: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 12, 2008, 10:38:03 AM Finally saw Iron Man over the weekend. FUCK YES. I had no complaints about it whatsoever. I would have liked to see more Happy Hogan, but only because I like John Favreau as an actor. Robert Downey, Jr. just nailed that role like the Romans nailed Jesus. Jeff Bridges as Stane was fucking brilliant as well. I really found no fault with the movie whatsoever and look forward to the sequel and the Avengers.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 12, 2008, 01:43:32 PM But there is no such thing as a good trilogy. Back to the Future, Lord of the Rings, Hunt for Red October + Patriot Games + Clear and Present Danger, the Man With No Name trilogy, American Pie, Mad Max (while Thunderdome is seen as being the worst of the series, I wouldn't call it a bad movie), Night of the Living Dead + Dawn/Day of the Dead, the Bourne trilogy... Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Johny Cee on May 12, 2008, 01:45:24 PM But there is no such thing as a good trilogy. Back to the Future, Lord of the Rings, Hunt for Red October + Patriot Games + Clear and Present Danger, the Man With No Name trilogy, American Pie, Mad Max (while Thunderdome is seen as being the worst of the series, I wouldn't call it a bad movie), Night of the Living Dead + Dawn/Day of the Dead, the Bourne trilogy... Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 12, 2008, 01:48:42 PM Who says Thunderdome is a bad movie? I'll hurt them!
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Merusk on May 12, 2008, 02:09:44 PM Back to the Future I'd disagree with.. again on the 2nd movie. It was amusing, but I think it dragged-down the whole series. In a number of trilogies (that set out to be trilogies) the 2nd movie seems to be the weak link. Probably because its so often used ONLY as a set-up device for the 3rd movie, and weakens its own narrative. I feel the same way about Pirates 2 and The Two Towers.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lakov_Sanite on May 12, 2008, 02:33:24 PM Back to the Future I'd disagree with.. again on the 2nd movie. It was amusing, but I think it dragged-down the whole series. In a number of trilogies (that set out to be trilogies) the 2nd movie seems to be the weak link. Probably because its so often used ONLY as a set-up device for the 3rd movie, and weakens its own narrative. I feel the same way about Pirates 2 and The Two Towers. Well the question is does a trilogy become greater than the sum of its parts? Empire strikes back wouldnt be a very good movie all on its own but as a transitional movie it made the other two better. The same could be said for a lot of "2nd movies" Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 12, 2008, 03:09:57 PM Back to the Future I'd disagree with.. again on the 2nd movie. It was amusing, but I think it dragged-down the whole series. In a number of trilogies (that set out to be trilogies) the 2nd movie seems to be the weak link. Probably because its so often used ONLY as a set-up device for the 3rd movie, and weakens its own narrative. I feel the same way about Pirates 2 and The Two Towers. Personally, I liked The Two Towers more than Return of the King. Also, I liked Back to the Future 2 right away, whereas 3 took a while to grow on me. As far as Pirates goes I really enjoyed the first one, but the second two needed to trim about an hour and a half off their combined running time. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on May 12, 2008, 03:15:08 PM Seriously.. wtf is with an Indy movie opening with a musical number. It's like the producer was fucking her or something. Director, not Producer.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on May 12, 2008, 03:20:43 PM He's just aging a bit. He's still the same old smartass, invincible cop. He dodged an attack fighter in a semi-truck. It went from John McClain to cartoon at that moment. It was a fun movie. But it wasn't in the Die Hard universe.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 12, 2008, 03:35:56 PM Finally saw Iron Man over the weekend. FUCK YES. I had no complaints about it whatsoever. I would have liked to see more Happy Hogan, but only because I like John Favreau as an actor. Robert Downey, Jr. just nailed that role like the Romans nailed Jesus. Jeff Bridges as Stane was fucking brilliant as well. I really found no fault with the movie whatsoever and look forward to the sequel and the Avengers. It's great, it's really good. But I still don't like ultimate nick fury. It's just not Nick. He sounded too 'happy'. Also, Rhodes doesn't seem to fit the military types, he makes great chemistry with Stark in the movie, but hell he doesn't look like the military man part. 'Next time baby!' was a nice line though. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 12, 2008, 03:36:40 PM The "man with no name" is an anachronistic thing. Leoné didn't intend those to be a "trilogy". He just liked the actors, and kept recycling them for different stories. Besides, Eastwood did have a name in 2 of them. He's only the man with no name in Fistful (the coffin guy calls him "Joe" though). Not to mention that it's just a remake of Yojimbo. He's "Monco" in a Few Dollars (Van Cleff was a "Colonel" something or other), and "Blondie" in TGTBATU (Van Cleef was "Angel Eyes"). Besides that, Blondie is a very different character than the other two -- Not the quiet, mysterious cowboy type. He's more of a talkative smartass in that last one. And if that isn't good enough, the difference between the Colonel and Angel Eyes is like day and night.
That said, yes, it's a kickass group of 3 movies. Not really a trilogy though. LotR was good until, umm... Sean Bean died. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 12, 2008, 03:45:00 PM The "man with no name" is an anachronistic thing. Leoné didn't intend those to be a "trilogy". He just liked the actors, and kept recycling them for different stories. Besides, Eastwood did have a name in 2 of them. He's only the man with no name in Fistful (the coffin guy calls him "Joe" though). Not to mention that it's just a remake of Yojimbo. He's "Monco" in a Few Dollars (Van Cleff was a "Colonel" something or other), and "Blondie" in TGTBATU (Van Cleef was "Angel Eyes"). Besides that, Blondie is a very different character than the other two -- Not the quiet, mysterious cowboy type. He's more of a talkative smartass in that last one. And if that isn't good enough, the difference between the Colonel and Angel Eyes is like day and night. That said, yes, it's a kickass group of 3 movies. Not really a trilogy though. The wikipedia entry does a good job at examining whether or not it's a trilogy: Quote In the "Dollars" Trilogy, Eastwood plays a character with the same mannerisms, wearing the same poncho, lambskin vest and hat, and sporting a silver rattlesnake-shaped plate on the handle of his gun. The question whether the intention was to portray the same individual character in all three films is debatable, but many fans believe that the last film in the trilogy, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is a prequel of sorts to the earlier two,[citation needed] since it is set during the American Civil War and before the period thought of as the "Wild West". Furthermore, Eastwood's character gradually acquires the clothing that he wears throughout the other films in the series, getting his hat, vest and other clothing from the assassin "Angel-Eyes" and taking his signature serape from an anonymous, dying soldier, in exchange for his duster. It can also be noted that the actor portraying the undertaker (Joseph Egger) from the first film shows up in the second as someone Eastwood's character is familiar with. Whether this points to the old man playing the same person or not is unknown as many of the same actors played roles in the three films of characters who were obviously unrelated (such as Lee Van Cleef, who appeared in both For a Few Dollars More and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly as different characters). An expanded version of the movie soundtrack from The Good, the Bad and the Ugly released in 2004 featured a previously unreleased piece titled Il Bandito Monco, i.e. the "The Bandit Monco" (Monco is the nickname of Eastwood's character in the preceding movie and means "one handed" in Italian), lending support to the theory that Eastwood is intended to portray the same character in the three movies.[1] Another interesting note is that towards the end of the first film, one of The Man With No Name's hands is badly injured in a torture scene, and is never shown to totally heal: this might be a connection to the second movie, in most of which he uses only one hand, the other one being saved for shooting only. However, Christopher Frayling has pointed out in his Leone biography, Sergio Leone: Something To Do With Death, that the three films were not intended by Leone or his various script collaborators to be seen as a history of the exact same individual and that it was United Artists, not the filmmakers, who came up with the idea of specifically linking the three films together as a series by referring to the Eastwood character as The Man With No Name in all advertising materials for the movies. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 12, 2008, 04:00:39 PM He's just aging a bit. He's still the same old smartass, invincible cop. He dodged an attack fighter in a semi-truck. It went from John McClain to cartoon at that moment. It was a fun movie. But it wasn't in the Die Hard universe. It wouldn't be too healthy to bungie jump with a firehose tied around your waist either. In fact, rig vs harrier is at least doable (even if not likely). Physically speaking. [edit[ Spelling :uhrr: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on May 12, 2008, 06:35:33 PM Too bad the Avengers movie is going to have to be sans-Hulk because not only is he a shitty character, he's going to have had to terrible movies under his belt at that point & they haven't even managed to make him look good. In fact the new Hulk is a step back from how he looked in the first one. Wait, what? Sorry but I have to say that by and large people seem to think the incredible hulk is going to do real well. Now I'm not going to defend a movie that's not even out yet but lets not count our eggs before they're laid here. If iron man is any indication, marvel studios knows how to sell their own property. I would think everyone thought this but if you've seen the theatrical trailer for this new Hulk, wow, I dont know what's wrong with you. I will say it now, that movie is going to be cgi ass. The Abomination is the only thing that makes the Hulk look like not quite crap. That movie looks like ass, retelling the whole origin story again? Also lame. Fuck that movie. Thumbs down. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 12, 2008, 06:42:51 PM It really doesn't look very good, I agree... But I still like the Hulk in general. So I might be able to enjoy in a guilty pleasure sort of way, like the Bana version.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 13, 2008, 09:20:12 AM Well the question is does a trilogy become greater than the sum of its parts? Empire strikes back wouldnt be a very good movie all on its own but as a transitional movie it made the other two better. You are insane. Empire was loads better than the movies surrounding it, and frankly would have stood on its own quite well, IMO. It would have been a bit depressing with that ending, but damn it was just a fantastic movie without any setup from the other movies. As for the new Hulk movie, I'm afraid it looks like monkey ass, and it really shouldn't. Ed Norton is a great actor as is Tim Roth. But the trailer just makes me think direct-to-video, and I can't quite pinpoint why. The two CGI monsters look terrible. I thought Ang Lee's version was good, just needed less gut-wrenching human drama and more HULK SMASH!!! This looks to have more Hulk Smash but hasn't improved the look, has replaced all the actors for no reason and seems to be directed by Uwe Boll's understudy. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: DraconianOne on May 13, 2008, 04:19:17 PM As for the new Hulk movie, I'm afraid it looks like monkey ass, and it really shouldn't. Ed Norton is a great actor as is Tim Roth. But the trailer just makes me think direct-to-video, and I can't quite pinpoint why. The two CGI monsters look terrible. I thought Ang Lee's version was good, just needed less gut-wrenching human drama and more HULK SMASH!!! This looks to have more Hulk Smash but hasn't improved the look, has replaced all the actors for no reason and seems to be directed by Uwe Boll's understudy. Watched the trailer tonight on the big screen in front of Iron Man (which was very good) and I concur. The bits with Norton as Banner looked more interesting than the Hulk vs Abomination parts which looked badly directed, poorly CGId and totally predictable and cliched. Okay, it was only a trailer and they might have edited it poorly but there were some awful, awful parts in it. I hope to be proved wrong. Also, word to the wise: when trying to find examples of good trilogies, American Pie is not a good example. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 14, 2008, 12:30:41 AM Also, word to the wise: when trying to find examples of good trilogies, American Pie is not a good example. A lot of people like those movies, and the quality is consistant from movie to movie. They might not be to your personal taste, but that's not really what's being argued here. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 14, 2008, 03:08:49 AM They might be consistently good in a vacuum, I guess! The quality isn't good on any kind of relative level (movies of their type) imho. American Pie is pisspoor compared to other highschool movies. As for American Pie 2... Hmm, well.. I'll watch the Rules of Attraction over it any day. Not to mention other great college movies before those two (although that one was released around the same time).
Never saw American Wedding... Never want to. There are no good trilogies. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: DraconianOne on May 14, 2008, 06:50:35 AM I might disagree with Stray about Temple of Doom (which imo is better than Last Crusade) but with regards American Pie, I'm entirely in agreement. Consistently poor quality throughout, good for watching only if the paint has already dried.
But as for no good trilogies - it's true that of 3 films, one is always going to be not as good as the other 2 but that doesn't necessarily make it a bad film. The Godfather Part 3 was nowhere near as good as it's predecessors but it's actually not a bad film in it's own right. ROTJ not as good as the first two Star Wars films but by no means terrible. I know I'm in a vast minority in thinking Alien3 isn't a bad film but it's not as good as the first two at all. I'd also rate the three Evil Dead films as well. Finding trilogies that are consistently (and universally acclaimed as being) good is difficult unless you start bending the rules a bit - i.e. conceptual trilogies rather than narrative trilogies. Romero's troika of Night/Dawn/Day is pretty damned good; Dario Argento's Three Mothers trilogy is good (but inaccessible to a lot of people on account of being foreign); Three Colours Red/White/Blue are very good; Park Chan-Wook's Vengeance trilogy is fantastic. I'm holding out for Toy Story 3 though. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Riggswolfe on May 14, 2008, 07:52:34 AM Also, word to the wise: when trying to find examples of good trilogies, American Pie is not a good example. A lot of people like those movies, and the quality is consistant from movie to movie. They might not be to your personal taste, but that's not really what's being argued here. American Wedding was shit. It almost made me despise Sean William Scott. Thankfully the Rundown and Bulletproof Monk made me change my mind about him being terrible. The first two movies were fun in a mindless teenage sex romp kind of way. Other good trilogies: Back to the Future. 2 was the weakest but it was still fun and inventive. It does suffer from set-up-the-3rd-itis a bit though. Star Wars original trilogy. ROTJ was the weakest but if you removed the Ewoks and replaced them with Wookiees it'd easily be close to the first movie in quality and might even make a run at Empire as the best of the trilogy. Indiana Jones. Again, the 2nd is the weak link but overall it's a very good trilogy. The evil dead "trilogy". I put Trilogy in quotes since Evil Dead 2 is closer to a remake of 1 (or a special edition) than it's own unique movie. It's also unique in that the 3rd movie is the best IMO. LOTR. I think this one is undeniable. I think a lot of people would cite the Bourne Trilogy, but I found the two sequels to be overrated unwatchable messes and the worst destruction of an action franchise I've ever seen. I'd rate Rambo 3 higher than either sequel. Still, I'll throw it in here since a lot of people like these. Wikipedia has a list of movie trilogies which might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_trilogies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_trilogies) I'll throw in an honorable mention for the Caged Heat trilogy but that has nothing to do with the err..quality of the movies so much as teenage memories. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 14, 2008, 08:00:19 AM Godfather 3 has some cool parts, but it's so damn convoluted for me to call that a good movie in it's own right (and like you said, it's not even close to as good as the first 2). The only reason I hang with it is because... I have to. It's the Godfather.
I know that Evil Dead II technically wasn't a remake, but it comes off like one... So it's hard for me to call it a trilogy per se. Either way, I don't really care for it. It's not funny like the last 2. Ash wasn't truly born until 2. Can't give my vote for Romero either! Haha. Night and Dawn were cool, Day not so much. Those last two series you mentioned I've never seen.. I might check them out now. LOTR is dogshit. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Samwise on May 14, 2008, 08:04:45 AM Can't give my vote for Romero either! Haha. Night and Dawn were cool, Day not so much. You shut your dirty mouth. Day was the best one. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Merusk on May 14, 2008, 09:11:30 AM Although not TECHNICALLY a Trilogy, Conan TB, Conand TD and Red Sojna are a good trio of flicks. :grin:
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 14, 2008, 09:38:19 AM I agree with Merusk. Conan ftw.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 14, 2008, 10:27:54 AM Conan the Barbarian rocks... I'm a huge fan. I am genuinely surprised that anyone likes those other two though.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on May 14, 2008, 11:23:19 AM Well the question is does a trilogy become greater than the sum of its parts? Empire strikes back wouldnt be a very good movie all on its own but as a transitional movie it made the other two better. You are insane. Empire was loads better than the movies surrounding it, and frankly would have stood on its own quite well, IMO. It would have been a bit depressing with that ending, but damn it was just a fantastic movie without any setup from the other movies. As for the new Hulk movie, I'm afraid it looks like monkey ass, and it really shouldn't. Ed Norton is a great actor as is Tim Roth. But the trailer just makes me think direct-to-video, and I can't quite pinpoint why. The two CGI monsters look terrible. I thought Ang Lee's version was good, just needed less gut-wrenching human drama and more HULK SMASH!!! This looks to have more Hulk Smash but hasn't improved the look, has replaced all the actors for no reason and seems to be directed by Uwe Boll's understudy. Bana sucked as Bruce Banner. Norton looks like he will do a better job in fitting the part and also in his acting abilities. The CGI for the new one looks like some kid did it on his Apple for a Youtube video. WTF? They couldnt come up with better animators? As bad as the acting, story and casting was in the first Hulk...Ang Lee fucked it all up and should stick to gay cowboy movies. Lastly going back to some of the earlier Spiderman discussions.....Spider always had stupid villians, which makes movies with such sucky villians hard to stomach. Lizard, Vulture, whatever that stupid green and yellow 1970's shocker guy was. An entire fucking stable of super suck villians. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: DraconianOne on May 14, 2008, 12:50:16 PM Conan the Barbarian rocks... I'm a huge fan. I am genuinely surprised that anyone likes those other two though. Once again we are in total agreement! As regards the two trilogies you might watch, be warned that the Three Colours trilogy is rather heavy going, French-Polish set of films revolving around the idealistic themes of the French tricolor. Don't say I didn't warn you. The Vengeance trilogy, however, is fan-fucking-tastic (the three being Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, Oldboy and Lady Vengeance). Anyone who says differently is wrong. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 14, 2008, 01:49:20 PM No one likes the second Conan movie or Red Sonja other than for the extreme campiness of them. And in that regard, they're fantastic.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lakov_Sanite on May 14, 2008, 02:53:09 PM No one likes the second Conan movie or Red Sonja other than for the extreme campiness of them. And in that regard, they're fantastic. I remember watching red sonja on cable when i was a kid and at least once a year since it would always pop up and every time if i wasn't busy i would sit and watch, it's just an enjoyable movie to me, not great but entertaining on a weekend afternoon. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 14, 2008, 03:48:49 PM And Ernie Reyes is the greatest child actor of all time.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Venkman on May 14, 2008, 04:51:32 PM Lethal Weapon was a great trilogy, counting 1, 2, 4.
I don't consider LoTR a trilogy in the traditional sense because the movies merely followed the book format which itself, iirc, was forced on Tolkien by the publisher. And it's just one small story in a much larger narrative anyway. Meanwhile, when SW Ep4-6 launched, that was it altogether. Back and front stories have since been added, and while there's long been discussion of the SW story being envisioned as nine total movies, in the late 70s, it was 4-6 and that's it. Many trilogies also just come out because the first movie was good enough to inspire sequels. Thus, the second movie is about some sort of retelling of the first movie to then justify a storyline that otherwise probably wasn't conceived of continuing at all. I don't know if this is actually the case, but I always got that sense from Back to the Future, Pirates of the Caribbean, and Die Hard. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 14, 2008, 04:56:04 PM I have the hots for that chick who played the evil Queen in Destroyer (she was also Ursa in Superman 2)....Or maybe it was just her outfits. Olivia D'Abo was hot jailbait as well. Those are about the only saving graces.
Bridget Neilsen was pretty hot in her day too. But Red Sonja is crap all around. Didn't know Oldboy was part of a trilogy...Will definitely check it out then. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Phildo on May 14, 2008, 06:33:11 PM I have the hots for that chick who played the evil Queen in Destroyer (she was also Ursa in Superman 2)....Or maybe it was just her outfits. Olivia D'Abo was hot jailbait as well. Those are about the only saving graces. Quoted for emphasis. Hyborian sluts ftw. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Abagadro on May 14, 2008, 06:57:59 PM What, no Grace Jones love?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Evildrider on May 14, 2008, 07:23:38 PM Finally saw Iron Man over the weekend. FUCK YES. I had no complaints about it whatsoever. I would have liked to see more Happy Hogan, but only because I like John Favreau as an actor. Robert Downey, Jr. just nailed that role like the Romans nailed Jesus. Jeff Bridges as Stane was fucking brilliant as well. I really found no fault with the movie whatsoever and look forward to the sequel and the Avengers. I read something about the movie being too long, and Favreau cut most of his scenes out of the movie. They will probably be on DVD or something. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: ahoythematey on May 14, 2008, 07:39:10 PM The Karate Kid is a personal fave of mine. I love the 80's, they were so rad :drill:.
By the way, I thought Ironman was great fun, but I just couldn't help thinking that his nemesis was The Dude, and I don't know how I can help it. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Murgos on May 15, 2008, 07:27:49 AM The Karate Kid is a personal fave of mine. I love the 80's, they were so rad :drill:. By the way, I thought Ironman was great fun, but I just couldn't help thinking that his nemesis was The Dude, and I don't know how I can help it. I think that without the huge beard it would have been easier to mentally disconnect Jeff Bridges from the part. But since the beard covered his face all I had was the voice, and the voice was definitely The Dude's. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on May 15, 2008, 08:56:41 AM Didn't know Oldboy was part of a trilogy...Will definitely check it out then. Likewise, thanks Drac because Oldboy is an amazingly fun movie. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Venkman on May 15, 2008, 09:26:46 AM I think that without the huge beard it would have been easier to mentally disconnect Jeff Bridges from the part. But since the beard covered his face all I had was the voice, and the voice was definitely The Dude's. It's funny that I had the exact reverse experience. I'm not a huge Jeff Bridges fan, simply because I didn't bother with most of his recent flicks. So it actually took me 30 minutes into the movie to lean over to my buddy and ask "hey, is that Jeff Bridges?!" :-) Karate Kid was an ok trilogy with the typical middle-movie issue. Matrix though, I just remembered how bleh I felt about the second and third ones. That was definitely a "hey the first was so successful we should make more!!11" reinvention. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 15, 2008, 09:49:38 PM unfortunately the game still sucks. With something as cool as Crysis released last year that has the suit gimmick it's sad to see how Ironman the Game is lacking the same spark and fails to capture what makes being iron man so cool.
1. Tony gets hit by a rocket, he flinches. That's it. They seem to cut down on the special effects here. EXCELSIOR! 2. Tony fires repulsor blasts...that somehow..doesn't 'repulse' it basically is a laser gun you point and shoot. Why use the gatling gun if repulsor blast is unlimited? 3. You can weave, dodge around with your thruster it's not bad but...I'd really love to grab some poor soul and take him for a ride with me to the clouds before dropping him like Crysis choke super jumps did. 4. Shooting at cars turns it red(the whole car turns really red) before it explodes. Whut? :uhrr: What I like? Gwyneth Paltrow in the in-game model cutscene is fantastic. Downey didn't look too shabby either, but I play games for gaming, not watching cutscenes. Yet another lousy movie-based game. Star Wars Episode 1, the legacy lives on. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Furiously on May 16, 2008, 10:50:19 PM You don't make a trilogy for cinematic integrity.
No one has mentioned Back to the Future. That was a good set. Jaws... Not so much. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 17, 2008, 12:30:22 AM No one has mentioned Back to the Future. That was a good set. You missed a few posts. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on May 18, 2008, 07:25:55 PM stuff Who buys games based on movies? Has this concept ever resulted in an actual good game? Other than the old N64 Bond game. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on May 18, 2008, 08:44:06 PM The Treyarch Spider-Man games were decent.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Teleku on May 18, 2008, 09:47:29 PM Just saw the movie today (finally). Very good! I agree with pretty much everything everybody has said. The only real flaw I can think of is the end fight. I kind of wanted to see Ironman going full out in combat, but he was down in power the whole fight. Kind of a weak end, but overall, an excellent movie. While the ending could have been better, they really left it open for a sequel in a way that will let them jump into action from the get go when they do it (especially liked them hinting at Rhodes taking a suit. Will be awesome to see US Warmachine). Should be good.
I guess I also sort of wished they had emphasized his genius aspect more, like in the Comics. I don't think they really showed just how insanely smart he is in the movie. And even though I should know better, the Nick Fury/Avengers secret scene after the credits had me excited :drill: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 18, 2008, 10:11:03 PM Hmm! I think his genius is the one thing they tapped into really well. There was that whole sequence in the beginning, with the magazine articles and such, that show how he rose to fame. The premise of the movie was that his expertise was coveted so much that he was kidnapped. They spend a good deal of time showing him invent a virtually limitless power source that was small enough to fit in his hand. And again, after that, show the Dude's scientists completely stumped on how to replicate it. There's also all that technology at his house (like Jarvis and the robotic arms) that no one else but him had.
I mean, short of displaying him calculating Pi on a blackboard, I think they did a good job at showing what kind of guy he was. The part they didn't tap into yet was his darkside -- and that's going to be hilarious when they finally do. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Margalis on May 19, 2008, 12:13:07 AM Who buys games based on movies? Has this concept ever resulted in an actual good game? Other than the old N64 Bond game. Batman for the NES was awesome. But yeah, games based on movies are nearly always bad, in part because they tend to get rushed to come out around the same time as the film. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 19, 2008, 03:36:49 AM Hmm! I think his genius is the one thing they tapped into really well. There was that whole sequence in the beginning, with the magazine articles and such, that show how he rose to fame. The premise of the movie was that his expertise was coveted so much that he was kidnapped. They spend a good deal of time showing him invent a virtually limitless power source that was small enough to fit in his hand. And again, after that, show the Dude's scientists completely stumped on how to replicate it. There's also all that technology at his house (like Jarvis and the robotic arms) that no one else but him had. I mean, short of displaying him calculating Pi on a blackboard, I think they did a good job at showing what kind of guy he was. The part they didn't tap into yet was his darkside -- and that's going to be hilarious when they finally do. he wasn't kidnapped, he was a target of hit contract ordered by Stane. But Stane never told them it's Stark. So the insurgents decided to get a cheap weapon discount from Stark before killing him. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tebonas on May 19, 2008, 04:00:06 AM Who buys games based on movies? Has this concept ever resulted in an actual good game? Escape from Butcher Bay Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 19, 2008, 04:01:58 AM Hmm! I think his genius is the one thing they tapped into really well. There was that whole sequence in the beginning, with the magazine articles and such, that show how he rose to fame. The premise of the movie was that his expertise was coveted so much that he was kidnapped. They spend a good deal of time showing him invent a virtually limitless power source that was small enough to fit in his hand. And again, after that, show the Dude's scientists completely stumped on how to replicate it. There's also all that technology at his house (like Jarvis and the robotic arms) that no one else but him had. I mean, short of displaying him calculating Pi on a blackboard, I think they did a good job at showing what kind of guy he was. The part they didn't tap into yet was his darkside -- and that's going to be hilarious when they finally do. he wasn't kidnapped, he was a target of hit contract ordered by Stane. But Stane never told them it's Stark. So the insurgents decided to get a cheap weapon discount from Stark before killing him. Oh that's right...They didn't even know (although there was that one line from the terrorist dude about how no one could win wars without Stark on their side..so that fits my point). For the kind of flick it was, I think it showed how intelligent the guy was well enough. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: rk47 on May 19, 2008, 04:56:05 AM how could they just let him make an armour suit under surveillance? And the part where they panicked when the leader couldn't see Start in the camera angle :uhrr: HAhaha. Sorry to nitpick it's just that my friend said 'Those are the dumbest insurgents I've ever seen' and I can't disagree with that.
They should just ditch with the camera thing to avoid labelling the badguys as absolutely retarded. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on May 19, 2008, 05:04:24 AM Well if you hand wave a bit it's because they were making the individual pieces and it wasn't until the end that they put the pieces together.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 19, 2008, 05:12:58 AM You underestimate the ignorance some people have with technology. Especially technology not-yet-invented. Who really would suspect what he was doing anyways... Seeing that no one else has ever really made a armored suit before? Total element of surprise there really. The only reason we (the audience) know is because it was a movie called Iron Man. :awesome_for_real:
When Caesar first set out to conquer the Gauls, he first had to encounter the Rhine. The Gauls felt safe. Then he erected a bridge right before their very eyes. They didn't even know wtf to think at first. And before they realized it, he crossed the river. Gauls dead. Same deal here... Except with brown people. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WayAbvPar on May 19, 2008, 09:56:06 AM Apologies for the re-rail ( :awesome_for_real: )- I finally saw Iron Man over the weekend. All I had was word of mouth (Ironman was awesome- go see it)- I had never even seen a trailer, or read this thread beforehand, so I wasn't sure what to expect.
I loved it. I could have sat through another 2 hours of it easily. RDJ is just a joy to watch, especially playing a character with flaws that closely mirror his own life. In a perfect world, there would have been more design phase techno bits in his lab at home- I assumed there were powers the suit had due to his previous research/products, but I wanted to see more of the process. Also would have liked to see more of the learning phase as far as using the suit. It felt like he was uber-proficient way too quickly. Minor flaws in a fantastic movie. For the first time in probably 15 theatre trips, I didn't stay for the credits (been a while since a movie did anything interesting after them). Can someone give me a blow by blow of what I missed? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Venkman on May 19, 2008, 10:01:24 AM Stark comes home, someone's bypassed security, that someone is standing in the living room looking out the window, says "I'm Ironman, huh?", you already know who it is by that point, but he turns around to slowly reveal Samual Jackson, and announces himself as the head of "The Avengers"... presumably to talk about a job :wink:
Hmm! I think his genius is the one thing they tapped into really well. There was that whole sequence in the beginning, with the magazine articles and such, that show how he rose to fame. The premise of the movie was that his expertise was coveted so much that he was kidnapped. They spend a good deal of time showing him invent a virtually limitless power source that was small enough to fit in his hand. "Start did it in a cave, with spare parts". Favorite line of the movie, in large part because of Stane's delivery. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 19, 2008, 10:03:57 AM Stark comes home, someone's bypassed security, that someone is standing in the living room looking out the window, says "I'm Ironman, huh?", you already know who it is by that point, but he turns around to slowly reveal Samual Jackson, and announces himself as the head of "The Avengers"... presumably to talk about a job :wink: Actually he's head of S.H.I.E.L.D., and says he wants to talk to Stark about the Avengers Initiative after he tells Stark that there are other heroes out there. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Teleku on May 19, 2008, 10:08:30 AM Heres a very shitty cam copy of it if you want to see:
http://showhype.com/video/iron_man_end_credits_extra_scene_nick_fury_cameo/ Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on May 19, 2008, 01:07:43 PM how could they just let him make an armour suit under surveillance? And the part where they panicked when the leader couldn't see Start in the camera angle :uhrr: HAhaha. Sorry to nitpick it's just that my friend said 'Those are the dumbest insurgents I've ever seen' and I can't disagree with that. They didn't point it out directly, but in the back of the room behind the table and in view of the camera was the missile Stark was pretending to assemble. Since he was working on pieces seperately, the watchers didn't know they weren't for the missile.They should just ditch with the camera thing to avoid labelling the badguys as absolutely retarded. I think they cut it for time or drama, but it would have spoken even more to his genius if they showed him working on both projects throughout those scenes. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: SurfD on May 19, 2008, 09:34:19 PM The only thing that really bugged me about Iron Man, was they never really explained why Stark didn't keel over dead 3 or 4 days after Pepper pulled the magnet out of the socket for his personal reactor upgrade. Wasn't that magnet keeping deadly shards of metal from entering his heart? If not (ie, they medically fixed that problem sometime after he got home, with the first power cell still there), why the hell was it (the magnet) still there when he was swapping out power cells?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on May 19, 2008, 09:52:28 PM The only thing that really bugged me about Iron Man, was they never really explained why Stark didn't keel over dead 3 or 4 days after Pepper pulled the magnet out of the socket for his personal reactor upgrade. Wasn't that magnet keeping deadly shards of metal from entering his heart? If not (ie, they medically fixed that problem sometime after he got home, with the first power cell still there), why the hell was it (the magnet) still there when he was swapping out power cells? In the comic book they were only (very) slowly moving towards his heart. The chest piece in the comic book was what was keeping the pieces from moving closer but he spent much of the time without it while he was constructing the suit.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 20, 2008, 03:15:57 AM Marvel recently launched a second Iron Man series "Invincible Iron Man", presumably to help cash in on the movie (not that comic book movies have ever done much for the sales of actual comics). Only the first issue is out so far but it's good although nothing ground breaking. Iron Fist co-writer Matt Fraction is writing this, and he seems to be going for an almost Armor War kinda vibe. This issue was also one of the last books colored by French artist Stephane Peru (Ultimate X-men), before his recent passing at age 26.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Bunk on May 20, 2008, 05:59:13 AM For me, the buildup of the hero origins are the best parts. It's pretty much why I loved Iron Man. Like you said, a Daredevil vs. Punisher movie would have potential for coolness. I wouldn't mind seeing Moon Knight vs. Werewolf By Night either. All those characters makes me think about how horrible the Batman franchise was for a while and how glutted Spider-Man became. Considering Hollywoods record of totally fucking up my favorite comic characters (see Judge Dread), hopefully they never go anywhere near Moon Knight. - Yes, I know he is pretty much just a generic Batman Ripoff of a character, but the original Sienkiewicz series was outstanding. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on May 20, 2008, 06:47:20 AM I have to say though, Stallone made a pretty badass Dredd.
...If only the story had been good. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on May 20, 2008, 10:29:07 AM I have to say though, Stallone made a pretty badass Dredd. ...If only the story had been good. And hadn't ended 90 minutes into the movie for no discernible reason. The first few minutes of that movie were great, but the story just ran out of steam really quickly. There wasn't nearly enough "I am the law" in that movie. The new Iron Man series is actually about 100 times better than the other Iron Man series. It's still not great, but the Iron Man character as a whole is pissing me off at the moment. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Broughden on May 20, 2008, 10:36:12 AM The only thing that really bugged me about Iron Man, was they never really explained why Stark didn't keel over dead 3 or 4 days after Pepper pulled the magnet out of the socket for his personal reactor upgrade. Wasn't that magnet keeping deadly shards of metal from entering his heart? If not (ie, they medically fixed that problem sometime after he got home, with the first power cell still there), why the hell was it (the magnet) still there when he was swapping out power cells? In the comic book they were only (very) slowly moving towards his heart. The chest piece in the comic book was what was keeping the pieces from moving closer but he spent much of the time without it while he was constructing the suit.Okay so when he got back to civilization they didnt have x-rays or surgeons? They couldnt get the shrapnel out? Instead having a fusion powered electron magnet in his chest was the safer alternative? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on May 20, 2008, 11:43:49 AM Okay so when he got back to civilization they didnt have x-rays or surgeons? They couldnt get the shrapnel out? That's the one thing which always got me. I try to ignore it, but it's hard to look past.Instead having a fusion powered electron magnet in his chest was the safer alternative? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on May 20, 2008, 01:01:24 PM The explination in the movie was, he (Stark) had designed munitions that were designed to create shrapnel that was immpossible to remove via surgery because of whatever. At least thats what I remember being said by the other guy in the cave.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on May 20, 2008, 01:16:51 PM Stick him in an MRI. They'll get removed.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: LK on May 20, 2008, 01:25:36 PM NERDS! :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Nevermore on May 21, 2008, 05:47:50 AM It's times like these that people should really listen to the wisdom of Joel Hodgson.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: IainC on May 21, 2008, 05:50:25 AM It's times like these that people should really listen to the wisdom of Joel Hodgson. I certainly wish I'd listened to Joel Hodgson.Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WayAbvPar on May 21, 2008, 07:41:47 AM But what if I don't want to really just relax?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on May 23, 2008, 02:52:00 AM Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige recently revealed a few details about the Thor and Cap movies. (http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=54651)
Quote Kevin Feige, president of Marvel Studios, confirmed that the upcoming The First Avenger: Captain America will be a World War II period piece, like the comic book on which it is based, and he shot down a rumor that Matthew McConaughey was in line to play the hero. Feige, speaking to online journalists at Universal Studios on May 21, added that Captain America would help set up the eventual Avengers movie, which follows six weeks later. (Feige also confirmed what many fans have speculated: that the star-shaped object in Tony Stark's workshop in Iron Man is indeed part of Cap's famous shield.) Feige also talked about the upcoming Thor movie, confirming that it will take place mostly in Asgard, the mythical Norse realm of the gods, and not in the contemporary real world. "The film is not all Asgard, but it will be a big chunk in Asgard, yeah," Feige said. Feige promised an announcement about a director for Thor "later this summer." Mark Protosevich (The Cell) is drafting a script, which should be submitted in a couple of weeks, he added. Feige also confirmed release dates for Marvel's future slate of superhero movies: Iron Man 2 on April 30, 2010; Thor on June 4, 2010; The First Avenger: Captain America on May 6, 2011; and The Avengers on July 1, 2011. As for a second Iron Man movie, Feige said that talks are underway with director Jon Favreau to return and that he hopes to wrap them up soon. Feige is also producing a Runaways movie, which BKV is currently writing the screenplay for. (http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=16517) Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Raguel on May 24, 2008, 06:54:41 PM Thor is a very good case where filmmakers should resist the temptation to be "true to the comics". Unless we're talking the Simonson stuff. :awesome_for_real: For the love of god tho, just leave out the thee and thou bits. That's pretty much the only thing I ever liked about Millar. (course, I think I only read about 2 issues of Ultimates and about 4 issues of The Authority). Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Furiously on May 31, 2008, 09:21:32 PM Finally saw it. The landing in the sand from the escape sequence was the only thing that bothered me. Other then that. Excellent movie.
Was tempted to go to Indy after it, but... I didn't want to spoil an excellent movie going experience with something that wouldn't be equally good. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: WayAbvPar on June 02, 2008, 01:57:03 PM Indy isn't as bad as it was made to sound, but Ironman definitely kicks its ass.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: LK on June 02, 2008, 09:24:44 PM Fucking Aliens ruined the whole damn flick for me. Fuck Lucas in the ass. They went form Judaism to Hinduism to Christianity to fucking Scientology.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on June 02, 2008, 09:34:02 PM I know this is the Iron Man thread but, Gene Shalit say Indy Jones IV is a 'spectacular winner'. Fuck Yeah! lulz. My cousin just arrived back in the States and we decided to see what was playing at the theaters. All the screens were flooded with Indy so we left and had a beer a local bar instead. I've waited too long to be facefucked by something Gene Shalit likes. Maybe the next one will be worth seeing.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Venkman on June 08, 2008, 05:48:12 AM Stark comes home, someone's bypassed security, that someone is standing in the living room looking out the window, says "I'm Ironman, huh?", you already know who it is by that point, but he turns around to slowly reveal Samual Jackson, and announces himself as the head of "The Avengers"... presumably to talk about a job :wink: Actually he's head of S.H.I.E.L.D., and says he wants to talk to Stark about the Avengers Initiative after he tells Stark that there are other heroes out there. Ah, noted :-) Quote from: Trippy In the comic book they were only (very) slowly moving towards his heart They ever explain why a guy who could create this level of tech with duct tape and bailing wire couldn't figure out how to remove the stupid things? :wink: Serious question though: were these things in his body for the entirety of his comic book career? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Trippy on June 08, 2008, 05:50:09 AM Quote from: Trippy In the comic book they were only (very) slowly moving towards his heart They ever explain why a guy who could create this level of tech with duct tape and bailing wire couldn't figure out how to remove the stupid things? :wink: Serious question though: were these things in his body for the entirety of his comic book career?Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Venkman on June 08, 2008, 08:46:45 AM Ah schweet. Thx.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on June 11, 2008, 02:26:45 AM Already potential problems for Iron Man 2. First, Favreau, isn't sure that an April 2010 release is realistic (http://blog.newsarama.com/2008/06/10/screen-bites-65/).
Quote It’s been five weeks since the one and only phone call my reps have gotten from Marvel. I know their hands are full with the Hulk and I’m sure they will get into it shortly, as they tell me they intend to. I ran into the Marvel guys at the Hulk premiere and everyone sounded eager to get to work on IM2. I am concerned, however, about the announced release date of April 2010. Neither Robert nor I were consulted about this and we are both concerned about how realistic the date is in light of the fact that we have no script, story or even writers hired yet. This genre of movie is best when it is done thoughtfully and with plenty of preparation. It might be better to follow the BB/DK, X/X2 three year release pattern than to scramble for a date. It is difficult because there are no Marvel 09 releases and they need product, but I also think we owe it to the fans to have a great version of IM2 and, at this point, we would have less time to make it than the first one. Second, comes rumors that Marvel Studios might not be willing to pay enough to get Favreau back. (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5052&Itemid=99) Quote Marvel Studios is sitting on top of the world with the recent success of Iron Man so far taking in over $535 million in worldwide box office receipts. So why hasn’t Marvel locked in Jon Favreau to direct the sequel Iron Man 2? It's been known since the release of Iron Man that director Jon Favreau had not yet been officially signed on to direct Iron Man 2. Kevin Feige during our edit bay visit of the Incredible Hulk mentioned that they were in negotiations, several producers have confirmed the same to several different news outlets, so the question is why isn't he locked in yet? About a week ago, the IESB was tipped off by a junior source at Marvel Studios that there had been some delays with Jon's negotiations regarding the sequel. When asked why I was told that Marvel and Favreau hadn't been able to come to terms regarding money. At first I thought my source was full of shit and I dismissed it as a rumor. This last Friday I was contacted by another source at Marvel and this one, let's just say, is much higher up on the food chain, and told me that the chairman of Marvel Studios David Maisel who has been in charge of negotiating new terms with Favreau is being cheap and not willing to pay a fair directors' fee. Favreau was a bargain to begin with, he is after all a fairly new director even though he has had several commercially successful films under his belt when he was brought aboard Iron Man for a steal. Don't know exact numbers but I am sure that it wasn’t a Michael Bay/Brett Ratner/Bryan Singer paycheck. He had to prove himself after all and looking at what the box office and DVD sales are going to bring in, around $750-800 million, I'd say he did his job well, very well. So according to our source at Marvel, Jon was expecting a moderate bump in his fee for the sequel but apparently Marvel has other plans. Our source continues that Maisel believes Iron Man 2 will be a success regardless of Favreau's involvement and feels the studio does not need to pay Jon a higher fee for his services. This is the most disappointing news that I have heard coming out of Hollywood in years, is Marvel out of their Vulcan mind? So bottom line, Jon Favreau has not been locked in to direct Iron Man 2 for the simple reason that Marvel is being cheap - this is 100% accurate folks, no bullshit. This is completely disheartening. Iron Man was the first real Marvel production on their own two feet and Favreau came through like a champ. He gave credibility to the studio, hell, I'd even say he MADE the studio. If that movie had bombed and he hadn't done his job right Marvel wouldn't be making the plans for the future like they are now. They would be going back to making films with other studio partners like they always have. It's time for Marvel to return the favor - give the guy his fee (which I hear is the regular standard director's fee, no more), bring him back and kick some ass with IRON MAN 2! I've contacted Marvel Studios who quickly asked us to contact their publicists over at Principal Communication Group for comment. In regards to the March production start date that Terrence Howard talked about in his interview with Military.com, Paul Pflug from Principal Communications gave us a standard "no comment." So what about Jon coming back to direct Iron Man 2? The official statement is that they are still negotiating with Favreau. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on June 11, 2008, 05:07:26 AM If true, that's totally ridiculous.
Which suggests to me it's true. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lantyssa on June 11, 2008, 07:41:25 AM If true, that's totally ridiculous. They did it with Singer and we ended up with X-Men 3. It's not hard to believe at all.Which suggests to me it's true. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on June 11, 2008, 08:55:27 AM Indeed.
X-Men 3, however, didn't exist. We thought it existed for a while, but now it's being investigated by Top Men. ... Top. Men. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on June 11, 2008, 08:59:11 AM For the first time ever, I'm glad your back, hehe. :grin:
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on June 11, 2008, 09:59:37 AM Well, I'm glad you finally came around to the sycophantic worship that is me.
:oh_i_see: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: HaemishM on June 11, 2008, 10:39:34 AM If they don't put Favreau back in the director's chair, that will shitcan their movies for years to come. Nobody good is going to want to sign deals with them knowing they'll be expected to work for peanuts no matter how successful the project is. We'll go back to Marvel films being directed by Mark Steven Johnson.
Fucking idiots. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Lakov_Sanite on June 11, 2008, 01:47:47 PM If they don't put Favreau back in the director's chair, that will shitcan their movies for years to come. Nobody good is going to want to sign deals with them knowing they'll be expected to work for peanuts no matter how successful the project is. We'll go back to Marvel films being directed by Mark Steven Johnson. Fucking idiots. is RDJ locked into the sequel? I'd love to see him decline IM2 is favreau isn't brought back. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Ironwood on June 11, 2008, 02:34:05 PM That's exactly the type of thing he'd do too.
I'd drink to that. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: UnSub on June 11, 2008, 07:17:30 PM If they don't put Favreau back in the director's chair, that will shitcan their movies for years to come. Nobody good is going to want to sign deals with them knowing they'll be expected to work for peanuts no matter how successful the project is. We'll go back to Marvel films being directed by Mark Steven Johnson. Fucking idiots. Exactly right. Hell, at this point, they should be seen to be rewarding Favereau to attract more directors to their studio. Who'd have thought the way Marvel treats its talent would make its way over to the movie side of the business? Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on July 14, 2008, 10:38:23 PM Y'know.... Well... I guess there's no shame in admitting this, since I payed to see this once, but I got a good cam version of this and I keep on watching it and watching it (and I'll get a BD too, no doubt). It'll go down as the best of the best. Favreau's cockteasing on action was a good move, after all. It just works better that way.
On a sidenote, I think Terence Howard is me when I'm not drunk, and RDJ is me when I AM drunk. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stu on July 15, 2008, 06:43:31 PM When you listen to Coldplay, are you like Pepper Potts?
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on July 15, 2008, 06:46:19 PM Yes, I think so actually..
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Tannhauser on July 20, 2008, 04:37:05 AM "Do you know how I know you're gay?"
"How?" "You listen to Coldplay." Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on July 21, 2008, 10:06:21 PM Shit, I thought it was because I like Pete Burns.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Velorath on January 08, 2009, 02:04:33 AM Mickey Rourke is supposedly in talks to play Crimson Dynamo. (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117998120.html?categoryid=13&cs=1) Sam Rockwell is also in talks for a role which some sites are reporting is Justin Hammer.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on January 08, 2009, 02:19:28 AM Man, I hope that's true.
I was thinking earlier that this "latter day" Rourke has a pretty cool niche, if he's lucky. He's a big dude -- but yet, he can act. There isn't anyone else like that really. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: UnSub on January 08, 2009, 03:56:50 PM Sam Rockwell can also be an awesome actor in the right role. Rouke has talent to burn (and it's a real pity he's done just that in so many bad films).
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hoax on January 10, 2009, 05:29:42 PM I got this on BluRay for xmas, its still twice the movie Batman was, no lie.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hindenburg on January 11, 2009, 03:51:50 PM I was thinking earlier that this "latter day" Rourke has a pretty cool niche, if he's lucky. He's a big dude -- but yet, he can act. There isn't anyone else like that really. Tom Selleck.Jimmy Smits. Ron Perlman. Michael Clarke Duncan. :oh_i_see: That fellow who did the Machete trailer in Grindhouse. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on January 12, 2009, 12:13:19 AM I don't mean just tall or somewhat built. Lots of tall actors. I mean big as in frame and muscular, like a boxer. Only Michael Clark Duncan qualifies there. But when I say big and can act, I mean "I don't need to play in a sappy human interest story, be a schizo mathematician, or a holocaust survivor to get praise. I can play a Wrestler and still get awards for it." I don't think Selleck, Duncan, or Smits are those kind of actors. Heh
Perlman's great, but he's not as big as his Hellboy costume... But perhaps that's a fair enough comparison. Not a lot of guys like Rourke OR Perlman then. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Samwise on January 12, 2009, 08:58:14 AM Perlman is pretty goddamn big.
Also, Danny Trejo is fucking BUILT for a 64-year-old. IIRC he was in fact a boxer in a past life. Also also, how come nobody's mentioned The Rock? :why_so_serious: Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: Hindenburg on January 12, 2009, 09:30:38 AM Danny Trejo (http://z.about.com/d/movies/1/0/g/6/P/grindhousepic18.jpg) Boxer while in prison. Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: stray on January 12, 2009, 09:39:49 AM Have you guys not watched many Rourke movies or something? He's a character actor, just as good as Oldman or Daniel Day Lewis. Tom Selleck and Danny Trejo do not qualify.
Title: Re: Ironman- The Movie Post by: IainC on January 12, 2009, 09:47:22 AM Also also, how come nobody's mentioned The Rock? :why_so_serious: The Rock gave up his acting career to appear in films. |