MOVIES: Iron Man [Archive] - Page 2

Raganork8

02-05-2008, 09:40 PM

I hope that's not the case either, and I'm optimistic we won't be let down as well. Consider the cast, if nothing else. Sure, you may get one or two name actors that think it'll be cool to be in a superhero flick, no matter what the script is like, but with this film, the entire cast is pretty damned impressive and you'd think unlikely to sign on if they thought it was gonna be crap like the FF films.
So, just based on that alone, I think we're headed in the right direction.

Yeah I doubt it'll be a Fantastic Four kind of situation; but I'm not please so far with the tone of the marketing...

But your comment about the cast; is what makes me think the movie will have a good serious streak to it.

Mark Skywalker

02-06-2008, 02:27 AM

Raganork8

02-06-2008, 09:16 AM

While this is true; I'm not really concerned about how it does; I thought Spiderman 3 was abysmal and that did rather well. I really want this to be a good film; instead of Marvel's usual ok film; better investment.

RollaFett

02-06-2008, 04:40 PM

Looking @ The Marvel comic film datebase a total of 16 films so far

The SPIDER-MAN series is the most successful marvel movie franchise . In Second place is The X-Men series .

both Fantastic Four & Blade have fallen short. Hulk, Daredevil, & Elektra Bombed . The Punisher & Ghost Rider are In the middle for now .

At this point in the game I see Iron Man going either way (It could become the next successful marvel film.) , ( it can go down The FF route) , (Or it could just bomb altogether like the Hulk .)

Ok, so you're talking money, and you're flat-out wrong.

Fantastic Four franchise - $618 million worldwide with $230 million budget.

Blade franchise - $414 million worldwide with $119 million budget (budget for 1st film N/A)

Hulk - $245 million worldwide with $137 million budget.

Daredevil - $179 million worldwide with $78 million budget.

Ghost Rider - $228 million worldwide with $110 budget.

The vast majority of Marvel properties have done not just well, but very well. The only films that could be considered as failures would have to be Elektra and Howard the Duck.

Morridini

02-06-2008, 06:10 PM

Raganork8

02-06-2008, 06:14 PM

borgmatrix

02-06-2008, 06:20 PM

Off-topic, I know, but just wanted to throw this in:
IMO, the Daredevil flick is highly underrated. All the crap I heard about it kept me from seeing it for ages, so when I finally sat down to see it I was prepared for crap. But it actualy turned out ok, obviously some flaws, but not as bad as everyone say it is.
Glad to hear that, Morr. It's a very solid movie and one of my favorite superhero flicks. Top 5 for certain. There's some discussion now in the Comic Book Movies thread about the movie and one particular aspect. You should jump over and give us your thoughts. Would love to hear them.

Also, did you see the DC or the theatrical version?

Morridini

02-06-2008, 06:21 PM

this is because you watched it with low expectations...

Still not a bad movie anyway.

Glad to hear that, Morr. It's a very solid movie and one of my favorite superhero flicks. Top 5 for certain. There's some discussion now in the Comic Book Movies thread about the movie and one particular aspect. You should jump over and give us your thoughts. Would love to hear them.

I did that while you posted this, funny.

Also, did you see the DC or the theatrical version?
I have no idea, the only one available at the video rental store, probably theatrical.

RollaFett

02-07-2008, 04:33 PM

Raganork8

02-07-2008, 04:38 PM

I'm not sure his willingness to kill was ever Iron Man's interesting point; I always thought that it was more of his cross relations with other Marvel comics (not to say he can't stand on his own; but he is interesting when dealing with others; which he does a lot)

Mark Skywalker

02-07-2008, 05:06 PM

http://i26.tinypic.com/wvq3is.gif

This looks to much like a videogame I hope they fix this scene up in the movie .

RollaFett

02-07-2008, 05:07 PM

Yup, couldn't agree more.

Raganork8

02-07-2008, 05:11 PM

from what I heard that part is a simulation that takes place within the film

Kapit

02-07-2008, 05:13 PM

If that's the case, Rag, then we really do need some context :lol:

borgmatrix

02-07-2008, 05:26 PM

This looks to much like a videogame I hope they fix this scene up in the movie .
Who cares? My first and only reaction was how damned cool the scene itself was. Isn't content ultimately most important? I hear countless people (rightfully) rip on movies that are all special fx and no story, stating a preference for meaningful storytelling. But then I see over fixation on CGI everytime its used. I mean, are there some kind of life bonus points people receive for spotting CGI "problems"? And can I put these special sloppy-CGI-spotting points toward a reduction in my school tuition or something? Sign me up, guys, because if there's some special reward, I'm sure I can catch imperfect CGI with the best of 'em.

But otherwise, who really cares? When this movie's eventually in theaters and I see it, I'll be judging performances, script quality, pacing, balance of character/plot development, the soundtrack, and other areas well before I'm doing any critiquing of the special effects, which is honestly the least important aspect by far for me.

Morridini

02-07-2008, 06:43 PM

Ok, so I'm not an Iron-Man junkie, so I don't know his character nearly as well as Batman or Spidey. Anyway, I've heard that he's not adverse to killing. Is this true? And just how often, roughly, has he offed an enemy?

Well it's not like he runs around killing everyone, but when it is the only solution, he doesn't back away as the other heroes do.

As for how many he has killed, I have no idea, even though I am an IM fan, I haven't read too much of him.
I know he killed one dude in the Extremis story-arc, and when he escaped from Afghanistan he killed about 15 terrorists, those are the ones I remember right now.

kopernikuz

02-07-2008, 07:42 PM

But otherwise, who really cares? When this movie's eventually in theaters and I see it, I'll be judging performances, script quality, pacing, balance of character/plot development, the soundtrack, and other areas well before I'm doing any critiquing of the special effects, which is honestly the least important aspect by far for me.
Agreed... We've gotten to a point where effects have the ability to be almost TOO good... because I watched Raiders recently and a couple of other movies we all enjoy and realized that by today's standards... Wow... are the effects in these movies a little awkward, lol. Temple of Doom is another good example... the scenes on the rope bridge and when the water is pounding out of the tunnel... the compositing there is terrible, but when we saw it in the 80's we just didn't care... it was good for it's time.

I watch it today and my own kids are like... "wow that was fake"... why? Because they are spoiled by the effects of today. They don't realize that at the time, that was pretty freaking cool! Watching those films now, the choppy effects become stumbling blocks that momentarily take you out of the film.

Granted, the better the tech gets the better the producers should be striving to make them in their films to keep up. But when they slip here and there, I have learned to let this be the LAST thing that affects my enjoyment of the film. Story, acting and direction first... if there are some questionable imperfections here and there... I'm willing to let them slide a bit if the film entertains otherwise... because I remember where we came from... and dang it if it don't look pretty dang good by comparison. ;)

Kapit

02-08-2008, 04:31 AM

Sign me up, guys, because if there's some special reward, I'm sure I can catch imperfect CGI with the best of 'em.

Though I am a huge supporter of CGI being used more, it needs to be used better. You go back and look at Jurassic Park and the dinosaurs STILL hold up to scrutiny today. They really look like they are roaming around that park. But, the problem nowadays is that the time isn't put into the effects as much as it was back then, so it ends up looking second-rate and crappy. When I see crappy CGI, I'm completely sucked out of the movie. One of the reasons I despise LOTR so much is because it looks fake beyond belief. Gollum just looks jerky and stupid, completely unlike the living creature he's supposed to be. And don't even get me started on how horrible the shrunk down hobbits looked.

But otherwise, who really cares? When this movie's eventually in theaters and I see it, I'll be judging performances, script quality, pacing, balance of character/plot development, the soundtrack, and other areas well before I'm doing any critiquing of the special effects, which is honestly the least important aspect by far for me.I care. I care very much. I'm a very visual person, and movies being the visual medium that they are, the look of the thing is very important to me. If I can't believe something is real, then why believe anything else? Bad CGI throws me back into reality and reminds me that nothing is real.

That being said, I like the action that takes place in that scene from the trailer, but I certainly hope it's cleaned up or something, because it just looks wrong.

Raganork8

02-08-2008, 08:56 AM

You also have to remember Dinosaurs were Animatronic a lot of the time; that really helped in the face that they looked real; the combination of both.

but I agree Jurassic Park is still a movie to marvel out.

borgmatrix

02-08-2008, 02:10 PM

Gollum just looks jerky and stupid, completely unlike the living creature he's supposed to be.
This is the kind of overreaction I'm talking about. In the past, we've gotten fake looking puppets, obvious string work, etc., and you're getting hung up over the pretty solid work done with Gollum? I've watched the same movie, multiple times, and I haven't seen anything worth bringing up as "jerky and stupid".

As discussed in another thread, I'm wondering if people are expecting complete perfection sometimes. Over all the years we've had special effects, there have always been imperfections. Most likely, there always will be. This isn't some issue exclusive to CGI. We're talking about effects. Effects are just that. Effects. They're fake. And because humans are creating them (and we're imperfect), there will always be issues.

Yeah, I know movies are visual. So are video games. I'm played plenty of games that aren't nearly as pretty as others, but haven't cared in the slightest because they usually still look fine, and the content is superior.

When it comes to Iron Man, I'll watch the movie and if we get a bunch of scenes that look like great live-action stuff, and then a scene that "looks like a video game" and then more live-action appearing stuff, and then more video-game looking stuff...then maybe I'll complain about the visual flow and pacing. But really, it'd have to be pretty extreme for me to care that much since its hardly important. I'm sure there'll be so much good work with the effects, that I'd have to seriously lose perspective to only be focusing on minor issues.

Kapit

02-08-2008, 02:47 PM

As discussed in another thread, I'm wondering if people are expecting complete perfection sometimes. Over all the years we've had special effects, there have always been imperfections. Most likely, there always will be. This isn't some issue exclusive to CGI. We're talking about effects. Effects are just that. Effects. They're fake. And because humans are creating them (and we're imperfect), there will always be issues.

Yes, they are fake and human-made, but we are expected to believe in these things. And with the advances in CGI, we are told that these images are closer to realism than ever before. If that's the case, then why can the animation not be closer to realism? Gollum just flat-out looked fake. He did not look like he belonged in that environment with everything else, and seeing as how we need to believe that he's there, it completely ruins being sucked into the movie. The artists can't keep saying "We're getting close to being real" and then throw out crappy effects and expect us to take it.

Yeah, I know movies are visual. So are video games. I'm played plenty of games that aren't nearly as pretty as others, but haven't cared in the slightest because they usually still look fine, and the content is superior.

Video games are more about being interactive than being visually intriguing, IMO, save a few games (Metal Gear Solid being one). The graphics in video games certainly don't matter as much to me as those in movies. Hell, I love the Wii, I think it's easily the best system out there, but the graphics aren't bleeding edge. Do I care then? No. I care about playing through a game. But when I sit down and watch a movie, I'm not interacting with it. I'm not deciding what happens next, I just get to sit there and take it. Because of that, I expect a certain level of quality and consistency in my CGI

When it comes to Iron Man, I'll watch the movie and if we get a bunch of scenes that look like great live-action stuff, and then a scene that "looks like a video game" and then more live-action appearing stuff, and then more video-game looking stuff...then maybe I'll complain about the visual flow and pacing. But really, it'd have to be pretty extreme for me to care that much since its hardly important. I'm sure there'll be so much good work with the effects, that I'd have to seriously lose perspective to only be focusing on minor issues.

I totally agree. I don't want to see anything like that, either, and that scene in the trailer completely bothers me because the look is all wrong. The bloom lighting effects on everything in that scene just screams "video game" and that bothers me immensely.

kopernikuz

02-08-2008, 04:15 PM

Wow... I've heard very few people, even critics, be that unfavorable about Gollum. I thought he was done really well... and if they'd have allowed it, would've given Serkis a supporting actor nod. I thought he was more real than Elijah :P

empire21

02-08-2008, 04:22 PM

Kapit

02-08-2008, 04:25 PM

Haha, yeah, Elijah...not good for that movie.

But anyways, I just did not think Gollum was the technological marvel that so many people made him out to be. I mean, it had been done already. Ahmed Best did it with Jar Jar a few years before, but because they didn't like they character they paid him no attention.

But in my eyes, Gollum just did not look like he fit. None of the CG in the LOTR movies did, IMO. It all just looked CG, and took me completely out of it. Conversely, I'm pissed that ILM was snubbed 3 times for the VFX Oscar for the prequels, especially with ROTS. ROTS didn't even get friggin nominated, yet King Kong, Narnia, and War of the Worlds did? What kind of bull is that? Narnia's CG was all over the place, WOTW was just "eh" overall, and King Kong had some really terrible sequences (especially with the dinosaurs).

/rant

kopernikuz

02-08-2008, 04:51 PM

I mean, it had been done already.
And it'll be done again... just because someone else had done it previously doesn't somehow detract from this instance of it.
Ahmed Best did it with Jar Jar a few years before, but because they didn't like they character they paid him no attention.
Ahmed Best provided the voice and motions... but let's face it... it wasn't a groundbreaking "performance"... digitally, it was a wonder to behold, and I felt angered that The Matrix bullet time was getting more hype than an entirely virtual "actor" in SW... so I agree... Jar Jar was a technological wonder... but that doesn't detract from Gollum... and Gollum was a far better "performance". I felt he blended seamlessly with the actors and was a BETTER actor than well... some of the actors, frankly. lol

But to compare Jar Jar and Gollum... Jar Jar will lose on "performance"... it just wasn't that good... and on technology? Well... Jar Jar just did it "first", that doesn't automatically make it "best". (no pun intended)

Kapit

02-08-2008, 04:58 PM

You're right, just because it was first doesn't mean it was best, but when Gollum strolled around they made him out to be some huge new thing.

And as far as characterization goes, I thought Ahmed did an excellent job considering who the character was. Obviously he's not given any emotional depth or anything, but considering he was just an random goofball, it worked out perfectly.

I guess I'm mostly upset that they trumped up Gollum like he was this big new thing when, in the end, it was nothing new.

RollaFett

02-10-2008, 12:32 PM

But then I see over fixation on CGI everytime its used. I mean, are there some kind of life bonus points people receive for spotting CGI "problems"? And can I put these special sloppy-CGI-spotting points toward a reduction in my school tuition or something? Sign me up, guys, because if there's some special reward, I'm sure I can catch imperfect CGI with the best of 'em.
Ahem...looks like somebody forget the [/sarcasm] emoticon. ;)
But otherwise, who really cares? When this movie's eventually in theaters and I see it, I'll be judging performances, script quality, pacing, balance of character/plot development, the soundtrack, and other areas well before I'm doing any critiquing of the special effects, which is honestly the least important aspect by far for me.
Hey, hey, hey...settle down. I believe the prevailing thought in this thread is that this flick looks like it's gonna kick ass. However, that one scene has some of us troubled. Everything else, so far, has looked terrific, so when that scene jumps out and looks so different, it's susprising. Do I think that if it remains the same, that the film will be ruined? Of course not, and no one else here has said anything remotely to that effect either.
I think it's highly unfair of you to accuse of us over-fixating on the CGI, especially when we've loved everything else we've seen to this point. Nevermind the fact that, in the end, we're merely being critical of an aspect of what is a visual medium.

RollaFett

02-10-2008, 12:41 PM

And it'll be done again... just because someone else had done it previously doesn't somehow detract from this instance of it.

Ahmed Best provided the voice and motions... but let's face it... it wasn't a groundbreaking "performance"... digitally, it was a wonder to behold, and I felt angered that The Matrix bullet time was getting more hype than an entirely virtual "actor" in SW... so I agree... Jar Jar was a technological wonder... but that doesn't detract from Gollum...

You're right, just because it was first doesn't mean it was best, but when Gollum strolled around they made him out to be some huge new thing.

And as far as characterization goes, I thought Ahmed did an excellent job considering who the character was. Obviously he's not given any emotional depth or anything, but considering he was just an random goofball, it worked out perfectly.

I guess I'm mostly upset that they trumped up Gollum like he was this big new thing when, in the end, it was nothing new.

True. Just because it was first doesn't mean it was best. However, as aknowledged here, from a technilogical aspect, it was groundbreaking. Do most of us hate the charatcter? I know I sure do, but it doesn't take away from the fantastic work that was done to create it.
Was Gollum's 'performance' better? That's arguable. But this isn't an acting award we're talking about, it's about the FX, and ILM with Jar Jar did it first, and did it damned well. I just watched TPM again last night (with Rifftrax, BTW, which made it immensely more watchable), and I'm still amazed at how well Jar Jar blended in with the other characters and scenery. ILM did such a great job that unfairly has been overlooked. Why Gollum received all that hype was beyond me, even then.

Kapit

02-10-2008, 02:25 PM

Why Gollum received all that hype was beyond me, even then.

If you weren't in Jersey, I'd kiss you.

RollaFett

02-10-2008, 04:14 PM

^ It's the though that counts.

empire21

02-10-2008, 04:16 PM

Gollum looked great, I can't understand what the two of you have against him or LotR, other than Randall from Clerks not liking the movie(s). :P

RollaFett

02-10-2008, 04:24 PM

Heh, heh...Randall actually summed up perfectly what I was already feeling about those films. But dislike for the films aside, I really had no problem with Gollum. He looked fine to me, and perhaps even a little better than Jar Jar. The simple fact remains, though, that too many people fawned over Gollum as if nothing like that had ever been done before when it was painfully clear that it had been just a few years before with a film just as popular. The backlash against the quality of TPM shouldn't have penalize it for the ground it broke with fully CGI characters.

empire21

02-10-2008, 04:30 PM

empire21

02-10-2008, 04:33 PM

LOL! This is the Iron Man thread.

If you wanna reply to my post, Rolla, hit me in PM.

Morridini

02-10-2008, 05:54 PM

Nono, don't take away the pleasure of seeing you ramble on, go to the LotR thread...

So, something on topic......

IRON MAN ROCKS WOOOOOOOOOOT!!!

RollaFett

02-11-2008, 12:59 PM

^ Heh, heh...I would go to that thread, except I usually go to threads about subjects I like.
Emp, you've been PM'd.

Mark Skywalker

02-23-2008, 10:14 AM

New IRON MAN Poster
http://www.hollywoodchicago.com/sites/default/files/ironmanevoposter_large.jpg

http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg117/mosteel/im.gif
http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=6838

empire21

02-23-2008, 08:55 PM

Those pics are great but you really need to start uploading your pics, Mark.

Morridini

02-24-2008, 09:51 AM

Hmm, I didn't know we had a Mark 2 in this movie.

P-Ray

02-24-2008, 11:02 PM

Favreau interview from Wonder Con!

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35727

Mark Skywalker

02-29-2008, 12:32 AM

The Full Iron Man Trailer!
Source: Paramount Pictures
February 28, 2008

Paramount Pictures and Marvel Studios have brought online the full new trailer for director Jon Favreau's Iron Man (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=7415), kicking off the summer on May 2. The anticipated comic book adaptation stars Robert Downey Jr., Terrence Howard, Gwyneth Paltrow and Jeff Bridges. You can watch the trailer in Flash format using the player below or in High Definition QuickTime using the following links - 1080p (http://largeassets.myspacecdn.com/hd/ironman/ironman_1080p.qtl) | 720p (http://largeassets.myspacecdn.com/hd/ironman/ironman_720p.qtl) | 480p (http://largeassets.myspacecdn.com/hd/ironman/ironman_480p.qtl).

<a href="http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=29294971">Iron Man Exclusive Trailer</a> <embed src="http://lads.myspace.com/videos/vplayer.swf" flashvars="m=29294971&v=2&type=video" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="430" height="346"></embed> <a href="http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.addToProfileConfirm&videoid=29294971&title=Iron Man Exclusive Trailer">Add to My Profile</a> | <a href="http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.home">More Videos</a>

Kapit

02-29-2008, 03:16 AM

The tank scene looks soooooooo much better, but still not quite there (in my eyes)

Otherwise...I got nothing besides damn. It looks amazingly awesome.

EDIT: I particularly like the moment where he uses his boosters to pop up in the air and then punch Big Silver Guy in the face.

Morridini

02-29-2008, 04:16 AM

Wohoo, can't wait!!!

empire21

02-29-2008, 07:01 AM

That kicked ass.

Mark Skywalker

02-29-2008, 08:05 AM

I'm so Glad they fixed the CGI in the tank sequence it looks a hell of a lot better than before and much more realistic .
Jeff Bridges Looks freaking badass as the Villian -Obadiah Stane/ Iron Monger

Raganork8

02-29-2008, 08:39 AM

I agree with you Mark

But whats going on with this music....it's like guitar Hero IV.

I have mediocre hopes for this film; it looks like it's going to exceed my expectations; but, something about it is...

RollaFett

02-29-2008, 01:23 PM

Damn, that tank scene is a helluva lot better! And overall, it looks really good. I will, however, agree about the music. What was with all of those guitar riffs? Ah well, it's only a trailer, that doesn't mean the film itself will be like that.

Raganork8

02-29-2008, 03:19 PM

It's not that i don't like rock music; i love it; live eat sleep breathe it...

but i hate when it's overused like this...is this film going to have a score is it going to be Chris Cornell moaning the whole time?

:nahnah:

borgmatrix

02-29-2008, 03:42 PM

The tank scene looks soooooooo much better, but still not quite there (in my eyes)
I'm so Glad they fixed the CGI in the tank sequence it looks a hell of a lot better than before and much more realistic
Damn, that tank scene is a helluva lot better!
Maybe this'll serve as a lesson to everyone to not get your panties in a bunch at the drop of a hat. :wink:

Overall, I can understand most being a little uncertain and not sure how this movie will turn out. The trailers have been playing up the humor a bit, and I know a lot of people are hoping to not get another Fantastic Four. I'm not too worried. It doesn't look nearly as bad as FF sounded and seems closer to Spidey. I figure it can't end up being much worse than Spider-man, and since that was generally pretty well accepted, performing at that level should be okay for most. I see Iron Man as having a better cast, so based on that alone, I'm expecting it'll at least be a slight step ahead of the Spidey films. From the trailers, it's mostly hitting the right note for me, so assuming the balance between humor and action/drama is appropriate in the final film, I think it'll be a good bit better than Spidey and most of the superhero movies, though not on the level of Batman Begins or Superman Returns.

Kapit

02-29-2008, 03:56 PM

Maybe this'll serve as a lesson to everyone to not get your panties in a bunch at the drop of a hat. :wink:

I really don't see how pointing out bad CGI is getting my lacy (yet very comfortable) feminine underwear in a bunch. It looked bad, and I was disappointed. At that stage of the game, and especially because it was a Super Bowl spot, I expected no less than a fully completed and polished scene. I was honestly disappointed by that scene, and while it certainly does look better now, it's still not there, and I'll still always know that it's CG.

borgmatrix

02-29-2008, 04:44 PM

I really don't see how pointing out bad CGI is getting my lacy (yet very comfortable) feminine underwear in a bunch.
:)

It's a "making a mountain out of a mole hill" kind of thing.

But I'm just joking around.

Kapit

02-29-2008, 04:45 PM

I figured as much. Guess I really didn't have to put on the underwear, but I'll be damned if it doesn't effectively hide my thunder.

:cheers:

RollaFett

02-29-2008, 04:45 PM

Plus, the consensus among us who were displeased was that we hoped the shot wasn't quite finished. Well, as we see, it was not quite finished and the up to date shot is far superior.

Raganork8

02-29-2008, 04:55 PM

Now; if only someone could explain this lukewarm feeling I'm getting from the film.

It looks good; but, not GOOD.

borgmatrix

02-29-2008, 05:06 PM

It looks good; but, not GOOD.
That's actually what inspired my paragraph above. I'm guessing its the humor that's kind of coloring the trailers.

Mark Skywalker

02-29-2008, 05:34 PM

Now; if only someone could explain this lukewarm feeling I'm getting from the film.

It looks good; but, not GOOD.

IMO I think this has to do with Director Jon Favreau . This is his chance to make a real name for himself as Director . If Iron Man's becomes a Blockbuster movie, like Spider-Man (2002) did . Then the doors will really open for Favreau. If Iron Man becomes a flop (like Daredevil , Fantastic Four 1 & 2 , Hulk etc....) Then Favreau's is pretty much :censored: .

Raganork8

02-29-2008, 07:35 PM

That's actually what inspired my paragraph above. I'm guessing its the humor that's kind of coloring the trailers.

Yeah; I think that's it. It's not that it's not funny; just that; Marvel overdoes the humor thing a bit; I want to see something more serious than humorous.

I'm not sure what to say; or how to explain it; but I wish the humor could be a once in a while thing.

IMO I think this has to do with Director Jon Favreau . This is his chance to make a real name for himself as Director . If Iron Man's becomes a Blockbuster movie, like Spider-Man (2002) did . Then the doors will really open for Favreau. If Iron Man becomes a flop (like Daredevil , Fantastic Four 1 & 2 , Hulk etc....) Then Favreau's is pretty much :censored: .

I don't know; I usually don't hold movies to their directors and I'm willing to bet that this will be a success.

Morridini

02-29-2008, 08:26 PM

Yeah; I think that's it. It's not that it's not funny; just that; Marvel overdoes the humor thing a bit; I want to see something more serious than humorous.

I would love to see Marvel make a movie based on the Punisher MAX series, of course it woul dhave to be rated R (um, just to be sure, that is the highest rating in the US that is not porn right?).

Raganork8

02-29-2008, 08:41 PM

Yea; unless Nc-17 is still in use.

Mark Skywalker

03-01-2008, 01:59 AM

But whats going on with this music....it's like guitar Hero IV.

Iron Man and heavy metal go hand in hand :rockon::laughing:

Mark Skywalker

03-01-2008, 11:50 AM

Iron Man on the cover April's editon of EMPIRE Magazine
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s79/PJBoySv/IronManEmpire.jpg

Mark Skywalker

03-01-2008, 12:30 PM

Does anyone remember the 90's animated series that use to air on Fox Kids

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lfWPDzvWNds"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lfWPDzvWNds" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

http://marvel.toonzone.net/ironman/

Raganork8

03-01-2008, 03:36 PM

Iron Man on the cover April's editon of EMPIRE Magazine
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s79/PJBoySv/IronManEmpire.jpg

oh god he looks like my husband...

Kapit

03-01-2008, 07:01 PM

oh god he looks like my husband...

Which one? There are 4 on the cover.... :nahnah:

Oh, as a response to what you said earlier, NC-17 still exists, it's just a death kiss to all those movies that use it. None of the major chains will show a movie with an NC17 rating

Raganork8

03-01-2008, 07:33 PM

Thats what I thought; I haven't seen that rating in so long I thought it was gone.

just like XX rating; is that even used anymore?

its either porn or not porn now right?

Can i be talking about this?

XX Iron Man; now that might be interesting.

Kapit

03-01-2008, 07:43 PM

It goes NC17, and then porn. I don't think there's an X, XX, or XXX rating anymore

empire21

03-01-2008, 07:47 PM

oh god he looks like my husband...

Speed Racer? :P

Raganork8

03-01-2008, 08:33 PM

lol I wish Speed Racer is Hawt! :w00t:

Mark Skywalker

03-02-2008, 03:33 AM

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s79/PJBoySv/IronManNewTrailer1.gif

empire21

03-02-2008, 08:36 AM

Sweet!

RollaFett

03-03-2008, 01:13 PM

. If Iron Man becomes a flop (like Daredevil , Fantastic Four 1 & 2 , Hulk etc....) Then Favreau's is pretty much :censored: .

First off, none of the above films you mentioned were flops. You've thrown out that statement before somewhere, and I provided box-office numbers to easily prove that wrong.
Secondly, If you were to consider "Hulk" such a flop, then how did Ang Lee ever recover to win best Director for his very next film. Seems he survived it, huh?
Also, Mark Steven Johnson managed to actually direct yet another comic book movie (Ghost Rider), to even bigger box office numbers after Daredevil. Now, how the hell did that happen.
And even though both FF films were garbage, Tim Story never would've been brought back for the sequel if the first film actully did "flop", now would he?
Please, I'm begging you, PLEASE do a little research before you start posting about comic book movies and their box office numbers, because you are proving that you really don't know what you're talking about.

Kapit

03-03-2008, 01:55 PM

I think Mark means flop in terms of being bad movies

kopernikuz

03-03-2008, 02:25 PM

Perhaps, but even so, Rolla is right even on that score. Besides, if Iron Man is just considered a "bad movie"... but makes a kajillion... Favreau is hardly ":censored:". In fact, I bet he'd propositioned to direct the inevitable sequel... no matter what we consider the quality of the film.

Even FF if it's truly to be judged "poor" by us... garnered a sequel. How so? If the film is truly "bad"? It's because of money... and because not EVERYONE thought it was bad. It found a significant audience in families and young folks (mine included) because it was clean, relatively wholesome and very family-oriented. There's a market there. In fact, one could argue (and I do...) that much of the reason it is so harangued is that it IS so family-friendly "cute", instead of hard-boiled like we seem to like our hero films. Truth is, the movie was very much like it's comic book origin... but maybe that wasn't good enough.

Anyway... it's certainly too early and probably wholly unfounded to assume this will be like the movies mentioned. Iron Man seems to be coming out quite well... and I think Favreau will continue to work. ;)

Kapit

03-03-2008, 02:36 PM

Truth is, the movie was very much like it's comic book origin... but maybe that wasn't good enough.

I don't see how it follows its comic book origins when Galactus was revealed to be a space cloud...

:)

P-Ray

03-03-2008, 03:02 PM

Even FF if it's truly to be judged "poor" by us... garnered a sequel. How so? If the film is truly "bad"? It's because of money... and because not EVERYONE thought it was bad. It found a significant audience in families and young folks (mine included) because it was clean, relatively wholesome and very family-oriented. There's a market there. In fact, one could argue (and I do...) that much of the reason it is so harangued is that it IS so family-friendly "cute", instead of hard-boiled like we seem to like our hero films. Truth is, the movie was very much like it's comic book origin... but maybe that wasn't good enough.

I agree with this completely!

We loved FF and FF2 b/c of it's clean family quality as well. Not every comic book movie needs to be dark and dreary, IMO!

RollaFett

03-03-2008, 03:07 PM

I think Mark means flop in terms of being bad movies

Well, that would be the first I ever saw the term 'flop' in regards to a movie and it not be about money.

Maybe I was a little hard on Mark, but the fact remains that even if he's talking about the quality of Iron Man, it wouldn't :censored: Favreu's career. Hell, even if it bombed, I doubt it would kill his directing career. Plenty of directors, accomplished or not, have lousy films on thier resumes.

RollaFett

03-03-2008, 03:14 PM

I agree with this completely!

We loved FF and FF2 b/c of it's clean family quality as well. Not every comic book movie needs to be dark and dreary, IMO!

Yeah, you guys are right. It definately got pegged as the comic book movie franchise that Marvel wanted to be more family-friendly. Nothing particularly wrong with that, either, except that hardcore FF fans would probably wind up hating it.

Lord Tesla

03-03-2008, 03:36 PM

I don't see how it follows its comic book origins when Galactus was revealed to be a space cloud...

:)

It *was* rather more like "Gastritus" than "Galactus"...

(And, yes, I know that's not the proper way to spell gastritis; I thought it worked better with the same vowel in the final syllables.)

And, best I recall, we didn't even get a glimpse of the watcher...

We wuz robbed.

borgmatrix

03-03-2008, 04:12 PM

Hell, even if it bombed, I doubt it would kill his directing career. Plenty of directors, accomplished or not, have lousy films on thier resumes.
Like Michael Bay. And he's still going strong.

Yeah, Favreau's career from here will depend more on its BO success than on the actual quality of the film. I don't think he's in any danger.

Hopefully, it brings in lots of money and we get a darn good movie.

It *was* rather more like "Gastritus" than "Galactus"...

(And, yes, I know that's not the proper way to spell gastritis; I thought it worked better with the same vowel in the final syllables.)
Nice. I almost corrected you on that spelling, too, so good thing you added the comment in parentheses. :)

Gastritis...fitting. I'm learning/studying the GI system now. And this is a good reminder I should get back to it. :)

RollaFett

03-03-2008, 04:22 PM

Like Michael Bay. And he's still going strong.

Hey, you said it. And I just happen to agree with you 100%. :)

Hopefully, it brings in lots of money and we get a darn good movie.
That would be nice. It's not unprecedented, y'know? It's happened before, and can certainly happen again.

kopernikuz

03-03-2008, 04:34 PM

I don't see how it follows its comic book origins when Galactus was revealed to be a space cloud...

:)I'm talking about the tone and style... not the plotline. The comic has always been about "family" and in general been very family friendly and upbeat. Not always... but generally so. I thought the films carried that tone well and it worked well for kids and families.

Raganork8

03-03-2008, 08:05 PM

I'm talking about the tone and style... not the plotline. The comic has always been about "family" and in general been very family friendly and upbeat. Not always... but generally so. I thought the films carried that tone well and it worked well for kids and families.

At the same time it was trivial and lame.

Sure it's still generated for family audience; but, does that mean it needs to lose it's merit and all of it's bite?

Fantastic Four comics put us in a family and they had to battle some nasty enemies with a good amount of emotional turmoil and seriousness.

Rise of the Silver Surfer was just too much of nothing...

And I really didn't see why they did what they did to good ole Galacty

And Telsa; why would we see The Watcher(i assume you mean Uatu) he doesn't interfere in earthly affairs if I remember correctly.

Kapit

03-03-2008, 09:39 PM

I'm talking about the tone and style... not the plotline. The comic has always been about "family" and in general been very family friendly and upbeat. Not always... but generally so. I thought the films carried that tone well and it worked well for kids and families.

I think the biggest problem is that it's wrapped up in the FF universe. Had it been some other team of superheroes, I think it would have done much better and probably would have been more interesting.

But instead, the geniuses in marketing push it towards the fanboy audience by having posters that are very dark, they put the lead actress in her underwear in the middle of the street, and then they show off all the action in the trailers. So, they pull in the fanboys who are (understandably) expecting a really cool superhero movie, and are instead left with childish bodily function 'jokes' and an overall feeling of lameness.

Raganork8

03-03-2008, 10:08 PM

I agree with you; but; I have to this...

Jessica Alba in underwear sells; it's shameless in everywhere, instead of making a movie that words as great action/adventure with human themes and emotions they gave us a watered down version of a comic book that I read a long time ago.

I actually went back and read some Silver Surfer stuff and FF stuff as well and it was nothing like this movie.

Moreover the Portrayal of Galactus was just sad; this is a monumental character that when the movie was announced i was excited to see because he's an intricate part of Silver surfers story and when I saw that he had been reduced to a stormy day in Seattle I felt ashamed for being in the theater.

Did anybody else catch the outlining of Galactus traditional head in the heart of the cloud?

That was kind of cool.

Here's a picture of it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Galactus_Cloud.jpg

Also the wikipedia site says:
20th Century Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_Century_Fox)'s rationale for having the character as a cloud was to keep him discreet. [56] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactus#_note-vfx) Visual effects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_effects) studio Weta Digital (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weta_Digital) convinced Fox to add physical hints of the comic book incarnation, such as a shadow and the fiery mass within the cloud resembling a helmet.[56] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactus#_note-vfx) Director Tim Story (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Story) claimed he made Galactus a cloud so that the future Silver Surfer spin-off (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-off) film would have a chance to be unique and introduce the character as he normally appears.[57] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactus#_note-45) J. Michael Straczynski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michael_Straczynski), the spin-off's writer, confirmed Galactus is in his script and that "You don't want to sort of blow out something that big and massive for one quick shot in the first movie."[58] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactus#_note-46)

Lord Tesla

03-03-2008, 11:38 PM

And Telsa; why would we see The Watcher(i assume you mean Uatu) he doesn't interfere in earthly affairs if I remember correctly.

The Watcher was part of the original Galactus/Surfer story line. He wasn't supposed to interfere, but he did. If memory serves, he warned the FF; he also sent Johnny Storm off on a very, very long trip to get a weapon effective against Galactus, and, in the end, he confronted Galactus, and helped work out the bargain by which Galactus left Earth intact.

Lord Tesla

03-03-2008, 11:42 PM

Did anybody else catch the outlining of Galactus traditional head in the heart of the cloud?

That was kind of cool.

I caught it; it was indeed the only pay-off in the whole film. For a moment, I thought, we might be offered the genuine article, but...not.

Raganork8

03-04-2008, 08:40 AM

The Watcher was part of the original Galactus/Surfer story line. He wasn't supposed to interfere, but he did. If memory serves, he warned the FF; he also sent Johnny Storm off on a very, very long trip to get a weapon effective against Galactus, and, in the end, he confronted Galactus, and helped work out the bargain by which Galactus left Earth intact.

Right I remember that; I'm glad Uatu wasn't included.

doesn't Galactus kill Uatu later on?

I can't remember; and I'd have to go through droves of Comics to find out.

and Indeed seeing the outline was cool.

When I saw it; I insisted that he speak; but, not have a voice. I told my friend perhaps it could be just a loud crashing sound and then we see Subtitles.

Also continuity-wise how did Surfer defeat Galactus in FF?

He can't do that; can he?

Not without destroying the devices he uses to convert the planets energy into a suitable source of feeding energy(which weren't even shown in the film)

kopernikuz

03-04-2008, 10:26 AM

So... um... Iron Man looks cool. ;)

borgmatrix

03-04-2008, 02:23 PM

So... um... Iron Man looks cool. ;)
:rofl:

Ah, you beat me to it. I was just going to ask if this was still the Iron Man thread.

Yes, it does look cool. Very cool, IMO. :)

RollaFett

03-04-2008, 03:59 PM

Ok, so they say that they didn't want to spoil the eventual appearance of Galactus in a spin-off film by showing him in FF2? Ooookay. I can understand some of that thought process if Galactus didn't actually play an intregal part in the story. Say, for instance, he was only mentioned as being the Surfer's master in a back story sort of way. But that was not the case at all! He was present, and about to go all Unicron on the friggin' Earth! You have to show him!
Their reason for not doing so is flat out stupid.

RollaFett

03-04-2008, 04:05 PM

So... um... Iron Man looks cool. ;)

:rofl:

Ah, you beat me to it. I was just going to ask if this was still the Iron Man thread.

Yes, it does look cool. Very cool, IMO. :)

Oops. I kind of forgot, myself.

borgmatrix

03-04-2008, 04:32 PM

Oops. I kind of forgot, myself.
Well, you're an almighty Mod, so I'm sure you've got the run of the place anyway. :wink:

RollaFett

03-04-2008, 04:43 PM

Well, that's true.

Mark Skywalker

03-07-2008, 01:44 AM

Brand New official Iron Man poster
http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=6888

Kapit

03-07-2008, 03:58 AM

The one Mark posted is the (far superior) International poster.

Here's both the international and the domestic "Look at the 'splosions" versions

http://www.cinematical.com/2008/03/07/two-new-iron-man-posters/

empire21

03-07-2008, 06:30 AM

The International poster is much better.

Raganork8

03-07-2008, 08:47 AM

The International poster is much better.

absolutley.

Mark Skywalker

03-07-2008, 09:44 AM

The domestic poster gives off (The Original Trilogy) STAR WARS vibe to it . Where the International poster is more like James Bond .

Raganork8

03-07-2008, 09:57 AM

Actually I thought the opposite the international poster resembles:

http://www.starstore.com/acatalog/Star_Wars-one-sheet_L-01.jpg

And the other was like this:

http://www.crankycritic.com/archive/posters/007manwiththegoldengun.jpg

P-Ray

03-30-2008, 09:00 AM

Iron Man gets a rating!

http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=6987

P-Ray

04-09-2008, 10:10 AM

Iron Man (http://movies.go.com/iron-man/d853933/action)
Now You've Seen Everything The promotional train keeps on rolling for the superhero flick, and this week we've seen both a ton of new photos (http://forum.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=messageboard.viewThread&entryID=60780161&groupID=102795074&adTopicID=12&Mytoken=4D8A9DF1-C3D0-4BED-AE1EBFCF363438F6309144636) (scroll down) and a clip (http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/ironman/) of Robert Downey Jr. flying in his armor for the first time. I think at this point if you strung together all the trailers, TV (http://movies.go.com/moviesproxy/buzzbin?columnid=949334&CMP=ILC-Flash1#) spots, clips and pictures that have been released so far, you could recreate the entire movie, like Tony Stark welding his iron alter ego together.

movies.com

Morridini

04-09-2008, 10:22 AM

Well see there http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/ironman/large_clip.html
That's a way to still have the main actor seen without throwing off his mask/helm off each second.

Raganork8

04-09-2008, 11:12 AM

Every time I see a clip of this film; I feel less and less for it...

At first it looked really cool; Now it looks...'alright'

Blizzard

04-09-2008, 11:57 AM

Well, you're an almighty Mod, so I'm sure you've got the run of the place anyway. :wink:

Well, that's true.In your dreams! :laughing:

I finally saw the trailer. If what Rag said is true I won't watch the trailer again, I don't want to get unexcited about this, even if I can't see it until it hits DVD.

Raganork8

04-09-2008, 12:28 PM

In your dreams! :laughing:

I finally saw the trailer. If what Rag said is true I won't watch the trailer again, I don't want to get unexcited about this, even if I can't see it until it hits DVD.

everyone should know; my mind is crazy; but also its the evolution of the trailers have gone from serious to slapstick to borderline sad comedic attempt.

Blizzard

04-09-2008, 12:48 PM

Oh gawd, I hope the movie doesn't do the same thing.

Mark Skywalker

04-20-2008, 10:17 PM

IRON MAN
<object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0" id="main" align="middle" height="350" width="300">

<embed src="http://ironmanmovie.marvel.com/443543222/im_300x350_nabbr2.swf?playerId=220&bandId=220&instanceId=e8f54ce7050f222c2eebba43bfc8e0e9&affiliateId=11" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" height="350" width="300">

</object>
<object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0" id="main" height="0" width="0">

<embed src="http://bandtools.nabbr.com/bandtools/flash.php?bandId=220&playerId=220&instanceId=e8f54ce7050f222c2eebba43bfc8e0e9&affiliateId=11" height="0" width="0">
</object>

(http://ironmanmovie.marvel.com/443543222/)

Talcy

04-25-2008, 08:31 AM

The Empire review is now online.

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=9756

RollaFett

04-25-2008, 03:13 PM

Well, even without seeing the film, that review was kind of what I'd expect. Not bad, and certainly not glowing. In any case, it ain't gonna keep me from seeing it next week.

Morridini

04-25-2008, 03:24 PM

Hmm, reviews starting to pop up. Think I'll leave this thread until after I've seen the movie, don't wanna get too spoiled.

Kapit

04-25-2008, 03:44 PM

After all the buzz, I'm disappointed that Empire's review was so ho-hum

Ah well, I've still got my midnight tickets!

P-Ray

04-26-2008, 01:58 AM

After all the buzz, I'm disappointed that Empire's review was so ho-hum

Ah well, I've still got my midnight tickets!
That doesn't worry me!

I usually don't agree with those very much anyhow!

P-Ray

04-28-2008, 11:05 AM

Terrance Howard on future of War Machine!

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=44457

Morridini

04-30-2008, 05:48 PM

Just got back from watching the movie.

Pretty surprised it turned out to be such a great movie. Really enjoyed it, after Batman Begins I think this must be the second best superhero movie I've seen.

I especially liked the fact that they let the creation of Iron Man take so much time, and not rushing through it as was more likely (like how fast Spidey got his full costume etc). Unfortunately my knowledge of older Iron Man comics are somewhat limited, so I'm not entirely sure how the origin of Iron Mongerer really was like, or how Rhodes knew Tony. But the little I know of IM's origin seemed to fit great with this movie.

I can now say that I strongly disagree with the Empire's review.

Also
I loved the fact that they now introduced SHIELD, give us a Captain America movie and we are all set for The Avengers.

Snake_Judge

04-30-2008, 08:24 PM

There is a theater having a showing at 8 PM on Thursday here. I'm going to that show. I already have tickets.

Kapit

04-30-2008, 11:28 PM

I get to screen the movie at noon at work :D

empire21

05-01-2008, 06:59 AM

I get to screen the movie at noon at work :D

Lucky :censored::censored::censored:!

Morridini

05-01-2008, 09:35 AM

What's so lucky?
Isn't the movie out in the US yet? Norwegian premiere was April 30th.

Raganork8

05-01-2008, 10:16 AM

comes out May 2nd in the U.S.

Morridini

05-01-2008, 10:23 AM

Oh, rarely ever anything gets out here before the US.

Nanana, I saw it before you all :P

Raganork8

05-01-2008, 10:34 AM

lol; I'm waiting for it...I thought my excitement wouldn't die down; but, it has.

Plus I have no money :(

Talcy

05-01-2008, 12:32 PM

Damn, that was seriously good fun!

More please.

Morridini

05-01-2008, 12:33 PM

lol; I'm waiting for it...I thought my excitement wouldn't die down; but, it has.

Yeah I know, I was looking a lot at this movie before, and then all of a sudden it was at the theaters without me noticing. And I guess having so low expectations I had really payed off, but now looking back, even with sky-high expectations I would have been pleased.

Raganork8

05-01-2008, 12:39 PM

I'll catch it soon; last movie I saw on the day it came out was Spiderman 3...

so needless to say; I'm wary of seeing any marvel movie now.

Morridini

05-01-2008, 04:06 PM

Ok mates I have a request for those of you who are going to see it soon. Stick to the end of the credits. My two friends I went to see it with had to rush off for a party they were late for, so I didn't get to see what was after.

And, someone I know from another forum told me about what it was, I need to know if he's messing with me or not, he said that freaking
Ultimate Nick Fury showed up, played by SLJ, but I don't see SLJ credited for IM on IMDB, so am pretty unsure.

Raganork8

05-01-2008, 04:17 PM

being that the movie isn't out; all I'll say is that

Sam Jackson has a relationship Akin to James Earl Jones in ROTS

Horse_Head

05-01-2008, 06:06 PM

I hope to hit the 8 pm screening of this tonight... we shall see.

Kapit

05-02-2008, 04:05 AM

They did it. Marvel f:censored:ing did it.

Yeah, X-Men 1 and 2 were good. And sure, cases could be made for the first two Spider-man films, but Iron Man did it. Iron Man helped support, beyond a doubt, the fact that comic book movies aren't just silly little movies to be tossed aside as kiddie fare.

Iron Man is a seriously enjoyable movie. It's possibly the best translation from book to film that we've seen thus far. And yes, even more accurate than Batman Begins (I believe).

It's funny, I've seen it twice in the span of twelve hours, and it's still hard to express my thoughts beyond pure excitement. All the little hints and geeky little references made throughout the movie were exactly as they should be.

Before I forget, I'm gonna back up Morridini here and say that is is criminal to not stay until the end of the credits...unless you aren't big on the comic books.

Easily one of the best comic book movie. The Dark Knight has its work cut out for it now. ;)

Morridini

05-02-2008, 05:39 AM

Before I forget, I'm gonna back up Morridini here and say that is is criminal to not stay until the end of the credits...unless you aren't big on the comic books.

Gah, I hate my friends making me leave before, so the rumours were true, got to go back and see it again now.

borgmatrix

05-02-2008, 10:24 AM

Iron Man is a seriously enjoyable movie. It's possibly the best translation from book to film that we've seen thus far. And yes, even more accurate than Batman Begins (I believe).
I've been hoping IM would be good, and have been optimistic. Wow. It's sounding a lot better than I ever could have imagined.

My favorite reviewer, James Berardinelli, has given it high praise (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/i/iron_man.html). Here's an excerpt of his review:
Iron Man is a different breed of superhero movie - a film that remembers it's possible to be outside the target demographic and still enjoy a tale set in this genre. What makes Iron Man interesting isn't the storyline which, except for a few wrinkles, is pretty much a standard issue superhero origin plot, but the way in which filmmaker Jon Favreau presents the narrative. Iron Man is mature in its perspective and the way it views its lead character, while at the same time tapping into the inner kid during some expertly executed action sequences. It uses CGI to advance the story rather than to populate the screen with pretty images. And, perhaps most importantly, the humor is restrained enough to avoid pushing the film over the line into camp or self-parody. Over the years, there have been only a handful of exceptional superhero movies, and Iron Man is among them.
I bolded the part that I was especially glad to see, given it was my major concern. Rags, I know you've been worried about this, too. Perhaps we can relax a bit now.

Like JK, James also made a comparison to Batman Begins:

Comparisons can be made between Iron Man and Batman. Both franchises feature rich men who turn to crime fighting as a way to provide balance. Both have lots of gadgets at their disposal. And both have faithful retainers who offer help and advice (Alfred, Miss Potts). Yet, in terms of their cinematic incarnations, even the latest Batman inhabits a pseudo-fantasy world. Tony Stark is grounded in something close to our reality. This gives Iron Man a sense of immediacy that even the fine Batman Begins does not have. Yet Iron Man and Batman Begins have a lot in common in the way that they rework the tired "superhero origin story," replace stereotypes with legitimate characters, and remember that everyone in the audience is not a 14-year old boy.

Well, I'm officially very excited. I'm still looking to TDK to be the event of the year, but IM is sounding pretty damned sweet.

Raganork8

05-02-2008, 11:31 AM

I'd be wary of such high praise on the DAY it's released. Remember this same thing was said about Spiderman 3 on opening day ("greatest superhero film of all time and I went to see it and felt as if it could be one of the WORSE)
I think it's going to be great; but, all of this "it's good; if not better than Batman Begins" sounds like hype to me, especially when TDK is ranked higher in the most anticipated films of this year.

looks like a good movie; I can only hope that the film is better than the marketing; it's funny that that "campy" line is in there; cause EVERY commercial is "campy".

I want Iron Man to be good I really do; but, I think just by looking at footage we've seen; BB and TDK is still light years ahead of anything Marvel has put together.

But I may end of up eating my words.

I have a proposal; let's make this comparison again on July 18th :wink:

Morridini

05-02-2008, 11:41 AM

I'd be wary of such high praise on the DAY it's released. Remember this same thing was said about Spiderman 3 on opening day ("greatest superhero film of all time and I went to see it and felt as if it could be one of the WORSE)

Well it's been out for a few days worldwide, and now a couple of people here has seen it already. The truth of Spidey 3 was revealed at once for us when other people on the forums we visit started seeing it, which has already happened here. Two of us has seen it, and both deem it in Batman Begins class.

Raganork8

05-02-2008, 11:46 AM

I understand there; but, I remember when spiderman came out and there were people who were calling it the best of the three on this forum. I'll wait to the anticipation Hype dies down a little...

That being said; I'm 100% positive it's better than Spiderman 3 and possibly Spiderman 2 and X2 (which i thought were the best efforts) but I'm not quite ready to believe it's BB quality.

But like I said I could be wrong; but, the commercials and everything I've seen of it from Tony Stark crashing through roofs to every rock song in history being played in succession for the commercials, Have not convinced me it was even trying or capable to reach the maturity of BB.

And I'm not sure I get this "fantasy" quality of BB; it seemed pretty plausible to me when I last watched it.

There's something about Marvel movies that scream "different universe" but the two DC/Legendary films have come really close to the world I live in..I'll have to see.

I'm very Batman biased.:yes:

kopernikuz

05-02-2008, 11:56 AM

I wouldn't rate it better than Batman Begins... but it is very good. I seriously enjoyed myself, and Marvel Studios proved that it knows how to make a hero film for the FANS as well as the new viewer... there were so many winks and nods to the fans in this film, while still being a really decent origin flick. Downey was fantastic and hilarious at all the right moments. The "love" story was practically not one, which was perfection in itself... there was brilliant sexual tension, but no sappiness and no "getting the girl" in the end... it ended exactly as it should (something I think a regular studio would've tried to get changed, big time).

I went as a big fan of Iron Man... two of my group knew of Iron Man in name only. All five of us equally enjoyed the film... that to me makes it successful, because you don't have to be a fanboy to enjoy it... but it's still consistent enough translation of the original that most fanboys were drooling.

And boy... as for future film projects in Marvel's planner... after the credits:

they sure weren't subtle, lol. I thought the after credit scene would be a "teaser"... however from the short dialogue it may as well be a press conference announcing a future film, lol. It was awesome!

I would not put it at BB... but it's certainly one of the best superhero movies out there. I knock it up there with the first couple of Spideys. While it's not perfect, by any means... because of its nature as an origin film you're naturally thinking you'd like to have seen a little more and some points are a little rushed... but it's a perfect start and will have me back for more, easily.

borgmatrix

05-02-2008, 12:21 PM

I'd be wary of such high praise on the DAY it's released. Remember this same thing was said about Spiderman 3 on opening day ("greatest superhero film of all time and I went to see it and felt as if it could be one of the WORSE)
Okay, fair. But note that I was specifically looking to JK's assessment as well as to one specific reviewer that I really respect. Berardinelli tends to be very grounded/objective with his reviews. He did not praise S3 (he gave it 2/4 stars (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/s/spider-man3.html)), saying in part:
Audience reaction to the film at the midnight opening screening was negative, bordering on hostile, meaning that the core group of fans did not like what they were seeing. It's easy to understand their displeasure. Compared to the other two movies in the series, this one is a misfire. It's for completists only, and even they are likely to feel let down. Spider-Man and the first sequel were breezy adventures - easy and fun to sit through. Spider-Man 3 is a chore. The effective moments require a lot patience to uncover and some of what has to be shifted to get to them is not worth the effort. People love trilogies because it's said that good things come in threes, but this series would have looked better and felt more satisfying had the filmmakers stopped at two.

And he gave Batman Begins 3.5/4 (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/b/batman_begins.html).

I have a proposal; let's make this comparison again on July 18th :wink:
As far as comparisons to TDK, yeah, that's the most fair thing. But if either of us get a chance to see IM soon, we can certainly make comparisons to BB now.

Raganork8

05-02-2008, 12:37 PM

By The End of the day you'll be hearing a lot from me.

I'm going to go see it at 1:45pm and I'll let you know.

Kapit

05-02-2008, 01:21 PM

Well Rag, if it helps, it's at 95% on Rotten Tomatoes. IM really is a fantastic movie. And I saw above that you mentioned how you were worried there would be no "serious" thoughts in the movie, but there really is. The whole basis of IM is the idea of who's accountable. IM is fun, yes, but it really does have a serious core to it.

Raganork8

05-02-2008, 01:38 PM

Justin

05-02-2008, 03:52 PM

I thought it was excellent, and easily better than the Sider-Man movies (which I thought mostly sucked, although the second one was ok).

It was definitely more fun and captured the comic book better than Batman Begins, but as a piece of art Batman Begins is superior.

By the way, I nominate Aaron Eckhart for Captain America in the Avengers movie.

Morridini

05-02-2008, 04:56 PM

*Giggles*

Just got mack from watching it again, just to get a chance to see the stuff after the credits. Soo cool, hurry up with the Cap America and Thor movie and we are all set.

I don't know Aaron Eckhart much, but might not his role as Harvey Face collide with a Steve Rogers role?

Slick

05-02-2008, 05:58 PM

I just saw it... liked it a lot. I don't know a whole lot about movies, so that's really all I can say. :ohwell:

Raganork8

05-02-2008, 06:20 PM

Just saw it

If we're saying which is a better movie as compared to it's proximity to comic; Iron Man wins

As a film and overall story and acting and all those elements; Batman Begins is still way ahead of the pack.

I'll do a review later; but, the film was very good; not sure if I'll say it's better than X2 or S2 BUT It's one of the best Marvel flicks if not the best.

A little disappointed in the supporting cast and plot.

Overall

7.7/10

borgmatrix

05-03-2008, 01:11 AM

I'll do a review later; but, the film was very good; not sure if I'll say it's better than X2 or S2 BUT It's one of the best Marvel flicks if not the best.
Glad to see you liked it. Given you were uncertain/skeptical beforehand, seeing a positive response from you gives me a greater sense of optimism. Not sure if I'll have a chance to see it anytime soon, but whenever that day comes, I'm looking forward to it.

Mark Skywalker

05-03-2008, 01:27 AM

IRON MAN did not only lived up too all the Hype (brought about by the Trailers, Tv spots, etc..) but it also exceeded and surpassed my expectations . As a comic Book Fanboy I was extremely happy by the fact that this movie wasn't just the typical Summer Blockbuster Superhero movie . (Where The Director basically just makes an action movie to satisfy the Guys who just want to see mindless violence , and add a crappy love story between the Hero & the main Love Interest to get the girls some what intrested .)

While this movie has those elements in them . Director: Jon Favreau focused more on telling a character based driving story that would not only appeal to the comic book fanboys (such as myself) & fangirls , but to the General audience as well . He remained true to the original source material that Stan Lee & Larry Lieber created in comic book "Tales of Suspense" #39 (March 1963) In Which IRON MAN made his official Debut . The origin story was very well done Just like Christopher Nolan did in (June 17 , 2005) with "BATMAN BEGINS".

(The preformenace review)

[Tony Stark/IRON MAN - Robert Downey Jr.] I was on board The Downey Jr. bandwagon from since the moment I heared he was official casted @ Comic-Con Last Summer . I thought he was prefect choice . His preformence as IRON MAN was dead on target he is true to The character of IRON MAN. As Tony Stark he was nailed a bulleye . We got in very begining the selfish rich playboy , Then The Lost Boy trying to find a purpose , To finally A Man on a Mission to protect the innocent and fight against injustice . Downey also brought to the table The comedic side of Stark/Iron Man's Personality as well as the charm . I can't wait to see this explored even further in the sequel .

[Obadiah Stane/Iron Monger-Jeff Bridges] Was Incredible in this movie, He truly was menacing without going over the top. Originally I was kinda of worried that Iron Monger was chosen as The Villain in the origin movie . Instead of Iron Man's Arch-Nemesis The Mandarin . But After hearing Bridges was casted as Stane, I started to warmed up to the idea that this could work if done right . It wasn't until I saw the trailer when you saw a very short preview of The Iron Monger suit . That I got really excited . The finale showdown between Man vs. Monger was basically Robocop 2 - Robocop vs. Robocain match up. It was very good old fashion smackdown .

[Gwyneth Paltrow as Virginia "Pepper" Potts ] was good as the loving assistant

[Terrence Howard as James Rhodes] was super, I can't wait to see him as WAR MACHINE in the sequel . I'm glad they mabe a nod to it in the film . "Next Time Baby"

As for Cameos

1. Jon Favreau as Happy Hogan - I love it, hope to see more of him as an active member in the sequel .

2. [Stan The Man Lee - Mistaken by Stark as Hugh M. Hefner ] This is by far his best Cameo appearence in marvel movies .

3. Samuel L. Jackson as Col. Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D. - Badass Cameo

I loved that Jarvis isn't a human butler making him a cheap Alfred rip-off character instead Jarvis . It's kind of a nod to the H.O.M.E.R. A.I. program that Stark had in the 90's animated series .

The Armor suit (Mark I, Mark II, & Mark III) - The Armor suits were amazing and very well constructed . I like sleekness look of The Mark III . As well as the displayed CGI of the weapons system .

A++++++++

10/10

I can't wait for the upcoming Sequel .

Horse_Head

05-03-2008, 02:34 AM

A funny comparison...
YouTube - Hi, I'm a Marvel...and I'm a DC: Iron Man and Batman

Mark Skywalker

05-03-2008, 02:40 AM

A funny comparison...
YouTube - Hi, I'm a Marvel...and I'm a DC: Iron Man and Batman (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlLeCu63HCA&feature=bz303)

:laughing::laughing::rofl: That's hilarious .

Mark Skywalker

05-03-2008, 04:19 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbfIbXp9UWI

^ Hubba, hubba, hubba! http://www.buddy-icons.info/img/smile/2007.gif :drooly::love::love:

Mark Skywalker

05-03-2008, 05:13 AM

The Box Office Report

According to boxofficemojo.com,Iron Man has made $22,429,393 internationally already!!
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...id=ironman.htm (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=ironman.htm)

Iron Man pulls in $35 million from Thursday-Friday domestically.
http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=7160

empire21

05-03-2008, 07:41 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbfIbXp9UWI

^ Hubba, hubba, hubba! http://www.buddy-icons.info/img/smile/2007.gif :drooly::love:

Best. Review. EVER!

And I had it on mute. :P

P-Ray

05-03-2008, 09:35 AM

Raganork8

05-03-2008, 09:55 AM

Here's my Review:
http://www.helium.com/items/1028783-summer-thats-promising-interesting

You won't be surprised to see that I'm not agreeing with most of you. at least not 100%

Raganork8

05-03-2008, 09:56 AM

Iron Man was absoluitely excellent! Great story and FX and I thought that Robert Downey Jr. did a fantastic job in the role.

And it all started with awesome trailers for Narnia, Hulk, The Dark Knight and then Indiana Jones!

A wonderful experience!!!:rockon:

DARK KNIGHT?!

NO MINE CAME WITH M. NIGHT SHAYMALAN'S THE HAPPENING :censored: :censored: :censored: THIS ISN'T FAIR!

Which trailer was it?

did it start with

"You've Changed things"

or

"Where do we begin?"

borgmatrix

05-03-2008, 10:05 AM

DARK KNIGHT?!

NO MINE CAME WITH M. NIGHT SHAYMALAN'S THE HAPPENING :censored: :censored: :censored: THIS ISN'T FAIR!
And look who's complaining here. The lucky ******* that got to see the special screening of the trailer. :wink:

But no, I'd feel upset too. I don't think seeing the trailer would get old anytime soon.

And I'll echo your question, Rags. Was it the latest trailer or the previous one?

Raganork8

05-03-2008, 10:06 AM

And look who's complaining here. The lucky ******* that got to see the special screening of the trailer. :wink:

But no, I'd feel upset too. I don't think seeing the trailer would get old anytime soon.

And I'll echo your question, Rags. Was it the latest trailer or the previous one?

:laughing:
I think it had to be the old one; the new one isn't scheduled to debut til tomorrow.

P-Ray

05-03-2008, 10:07 AM

DARK KNIGHT?!

NO MINE CAME WITH M. NIGHT SHAYMALAN'S THE HAPPENING :censored: :censored: :censored: THIS ISN'T FAIR!

Which trailer was it?

did it start with

"You've Changed things"

or

"Where do we begin?"
It was the brand new trailer with different Joker scenes and more of Harvey Dent!

Raganork8

05-03-2008, 10:09 AM

It was the brand new trailer with different Joker scenes and more of Harvey Dent!

you :censored: :censored: :censored: luck mutha:censored:

people have been waiting to see that you know?!

some people are still watching happytrails to see if it'll come up!

I also really thought the Hulk trailer made it look very cool

kopernikuz

05-03-2008, 10:12 AM

They showed The Dark Knight at my theater Thursday night too... along with The Happening, Zohan, The Spirit, and Indy... it was a pretty fun trailer session. It was the new Dark Knight one that was leaked earlier. Where Joker is addressing the other mob bosses... Dent is pinned to the floor with the liquid and the fire... all of that... "new class of criminal"

Raganork8

05-03-2008, 10:15 AM

kopernikuz

05-03-2008, 10:16 AM

LOL... well, I did joke with my friends after TDK and Indy trailers ran... "Okay, time to go home..." :P

Glad I stayed though... the movie was a blast.

Raganork8

05-03-2008, 10:20 AM

It was good

P-Ray

05-03-2008, 12:11 PM

35 Mil for Iron man!

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=44623

Jjm3233

05-03-2008, 12:19 PM

I saw it Thursday with the Happening, Hulk, TDK, Indy and Narnia trailers. Rag, I tend to agree with your assesment of the movie, easily one of the best "origin" movies. A lot of fun, hopefully the sequel will improve on the first.

Raganork8

05-03-2008, 12:33 PM

Yeah; I'm somewhat hoping for a sequel; not sure what they'll do; but, whatever problems it had this time could easily be worked out in another one.

lovelucas

05-03-2008, 02:09 PM

<HR style="COLOR: #d1d1e1" SIZE=1> 
Pedestrian / generic story with no surprises. Has too much of a been there done that feel. But Downey is terrific. and this is his show.

P-Ray

05-03-2008, 02:52 PM

I would imagine that not everyone will goo gaga over it but the one thing that can be said is that it's very true to the comic!:wink:

Mark Skywalker

05-03-2008, 10:07 PM

I would imagine that not everyone will goo gaga over it but the one thing that can be said is that it's very true to the comic!:wink:

And that's the main reason for it's success . This is the first marvel comics movie (Besides The AMAZING SPIDER-MAN series.) That is true to the original source material of the character & supporting cast.Jon Favreau should be proud .

Mark Skywalker

05-04-2008, 12:34 PM

IRON MAN up 12% for a $36.4M Saturday; Paramount & Marvel will bank $100.24M by Monday morning!; All-Time 9th-Best Opening & 2nd-Best for a non-sequel!

1. NEW – Iron Man (Paramount) – $94.74M - $23,080 PTA - $100.24M cume

http://news.fantasymoguls.com/originalcontent/2008/05/iron-man-with-3.html

P-Ray

05-04-2008, 12:36 PM

^Nice!

It's good to see a good movie do well:wink:

Mark Skywalker

05-04-2008, 01:19 PM

200 million World Wide .
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=ironman.htm

Mark Skywalker

05-04-2008, 01:33 PM

BTW did any of you notice the Classic 67 Iron Man Theme song was played during the Las Vagas casino scene in background by a Jazzy Band .

In case anyone wants to listen to it. Here (http://www.nowupload.com/:oFK) it is.

Raganork8

05-04-2008, 02:11 PM

Yea; I got a kick out of that

Saranac

05-04-2008, 02:17 PM

Robert Downey jr is surely a superhero all kids and parents can respectfully watch and enjoy. sorta like hugh grant or oj simpson...

Blizzard

05-04-2008, 02:44 PM

Going to see it this afternoon.

Mark Skywalker

05-04-2008, 08:45 PM

Oh yeah, he can fly! Iron Man Rockets to $201M worldwide!
Source: Box Office Mojo (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/)
May 4, 2008

ComingSoon.net (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=44644) has posted the impressive box office estimates for Iron Man, which follow below:

Paramount Pictures and Marvel Studios' Iron Man (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=7415) exceeded all expectations, earning a massive $100.75 million during its opening weekend domestically from 4,105 theaters and $104.2 million since debuting Thursday night, averaging $24,543 per site. Internationally, the film has also earned an incredible $96.7 million in 57 countries since it began opening Wednesday, putting its worldwide total at $201 million after just five days! The comic book adaptation, directed by Jon Favreau and starring Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrence Howard and Jeff Bridges, was the 10th biggest opening of all-time and the fourth biggest for a superhero movie. Among nonsequels, it came in behind only the first Spider-Man, which opened with $114.8 million. As far as May openings, Iron Man (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=7415) came in at #8, just behind X-Men: The Last Stand's $102.8 million when you look at the three-day figure (not counting Thursday night). Financed by Marvel Studios and distributed by Paramount, the movie cost about $150 million to make and $75 million to market.

For more weekend box office results, click here (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=44644)!

http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=7164

Rob

05-05-2008, 12:34 AM

Definitely a movie worth watching.

I wasn't fond of the ending however, was quite displeased with that little announcement, but it does set up some interesting stuff.

The clip after the credits was good too; very happy that it wasn't Hasselhoff!

Blizzard

05-05-2008, 12:56 AM

Extremely awesome movie! RDJ was brilliant.

Mark Skywalker

05-05-2008, 02:01 AM

I love IRON MAN's THEME it kick's ass

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CjWpWIw4bzc&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CjWpWIw4bzc&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

JSunday

05-05-2008, 09:55 AM

4 stars of 5 for me. One-star knock for some typical genre fighting scenes that don't rise above the norm, especially near the end, although they were cool to watch. The stuff in the Middle East represents the best of the action.

The BEST parts of this film are where not much happens at all....like Stark building both suits, especially the second one. His interactions with that watch-dog robot are both keenly sweet and funny. Lots of really sincere charm there, the type of subtle elements so often MISSING from like comic book films. I almost could've done entirely WITHOUT the end sequence, which felt forced and gratuitous. Thankfully this almost after-thought "battle" was brief. I always wonder if there’s not another way to end these things than that big brawl you always suspect.

Have no doubts about Downey Jr.. He's the entire reason this film rises well above the norm for hero films. He nails the Stark character perfectly and the alcoholism is just keenly ironic.

That being said it's not nearly as good as Batman Begins, insofar as the plot...deep character development....and that's probably because I prefer the more "serious" side of these films. BUT it is good fun. And the Downey Jr./Bridges relationship adds up to a pair of performances that is above what you normally get for a "comic book" movie. Perhaps Heath ledger will up the ante. Sure seems like it’s heading in that direction.

Even the humor is finely handled (well written and again, perfectly acted)...and, as importantly, well timed. So often the humor in these kinds of films comes unintentionally...and the "jokes" fall flat. Not here.

Raganork8

05-05-2008, 10:10 AM

Saw it again; wasn't as pleased as the first time.

the plot was really predictable and I wasn't happy with the score that much either.

Still not a bad movie; just, not amazing as I've said before. Marvel could do way better than this and I hope a sequel improves on what this one had problems with.

Also I hope they don't get too caught up in trying to make the ultimate crossover movie; so much so, that the individual movies purpose is only to have enough characters to be in the crossover.

I've changed my rating from 7.7/10 to 7.3/10

borgmatrix

05-05-2008, 10:55 AM

Still not a bad movie; just, not amazing as I've said before. Marvel could do way better than this and I hope a sequel improves on what this one had problems with.
Saw it yesterday. My biggest gripe is that I didn't get to see the new TDK trailer. Or an Indy trailer. Or Hulk. Even the Prince Caspian trailer was lame and not nearly as good as the previous trailer. What the hell? If I coulda just seen TDK trailer, I'd have thrilled. :mad:

BUT, can't forget why I was really there, and Iron Man rocked. I'd agree with the sentiment expressed by some that this is Marvel's best movie thus far.

The story was pretty solid, though I really wish we could have gotten the "uncompressed" version of the comic storylines. Probably wouldn't have been practical for movies, but I can't imagine anything more dramatic than seeing Stane take over the company, Stark losing everything and becoming a homeless alcoholic, and Rhodes as Iron Man in his stead. And then Stark's eventual return and confrontation with Rhodes and then Stane/Iron Monger. Assuming that's all accurate info on wikipedia. Sounds like a darn cool storyline.

I liked the movie. A lot. I'll toss it up there among my other favorite superhero films: BB, BR, SR, Daredevil (DC), and Superman II (Donner cut). Downey was great, loved the dynamic between him and Paltrow, and really liked Bridges as Stane. The Stark character was so fun to watch. As was Pepper (for other obvious reasons).

If there's any complaint, and this is minor, I felt the fight with Iron Monger didn't quite live up to the sheer coolness of Iron Man's initial butt-kicking appearance earlier. Also, I kind of wish they'd opened the movie with awards show introduction of Stark. That would have been such a cool way to literally introduce us to Stark and his celebrity world. I didn't find it necessary to start with the attack/kidnapping of Stark and then jump back 36 hours (or whatever).

I don't think I'd put ahead of BB (though I need to allow some time to pass to more accurately assess where IM would fall in comparison to my other favorites), but it wouldn't be too far behind. I'm still expecting TDK to be better, but I was impressed with IM.

Mark Skywalker

05-05-2008, 01:18 PM

Marvel Studios Sets Four More Release Dates!
Source: Marvel Entertainment
May 5, 2008

Marvel Entertainment released their first quarter report to its shareholders this morning to coincide with the announcement about the success this past weekend of Marvel Studios' first production Iron Man (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=7415), which grossed an estimated $104.2 million domestically and over $201 million worldwide. The announcement included an update of Marvel Studios' feature film slate with the already-rumored Iron Man 2 (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=44655) announced for a release on April 30, 2010, followed by three more movies for the summers of '10 and '11. Matthew Vaughn's Thor (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=23177) is set for a release on June 4, 2010, and The First Avenger: Captain America (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=44656) (the working title) will kick off the summer of 2011 on May 6, followed by the highly-anticipated and foreshadowed The Avengers (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=44657) scheduled for July 2011. (Edgar Wright's Ant-Man is also listed as being in development with no release date set.)

In a conference call this morning, Marvel Studios' David Maisel said that Iron Man 2 (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=44655) will be used to introduce Thor. Regarding more "Hulk" movies, Maisel said "We definitely plan on continuing." He added that development continues on Spider-Man 4. "I can't give any other updates other than to say it's in development and everybody's excited about 'Spider-Man 4,'" he said.

With that in mind, one can start expecting a lot more announcements in the coming months about creative teams and casting for those movies including who might direct the Captain America and Avengers movies. (Whomever plays Steve Rogers AKA Captain America presumably will be making two movies at once.)

http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=7165

Raganork8

05-05-2008, 01:25 PM

Going off of what Bog said I think my list goes like this:

Batman Begins

X-2

Superman Returns/Spiderman 2/ Iron Man

Blade series.

If i cut up the blade series though the first one would come right after X-2

Kapit

05-05-2008, 01:40 PM

Probably wouldn't have been practical for movies, but I can't imagine anything more dramatic than seeing Stane take over the company, Stark losing everything and becoming a homeless alcoholic, and Rhodes as Iron Man in his stead. And then Stark's eventual return and confrontation with Rhodes and then Stane/Iron Monger. Assuming that's all accurate info on wikipedia. Sounds like a darn cool storyline.

Most of that will probably happen in the next movie. Favreau said in an interview that Rhodey's line "Next time, baby" was put there on purpose to tease what's coming next.

Raganork8

05-05-2008, 01:45 PM

I hope they get someone better than Terence Howard...

I didn't like him at all; he did nothing and wasn't even good at not doing anything.

He's very overrated to me.

It will be interesting to see how War Machine will look.

With Iron Monger gone who are they gonna go up against?

Don't tell me Mandarin?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

kopernikuz

05-05-2008, 01:52 PM

I really like Terrence Howard... and I thought he was just fine in IM... I thought he and RDJ's characters clicked like they might have been real friends. I have no problem with any of the cast to be honest, and hope they all return for any sequels, spin-offs or whatever....

I think it's amazing how Marvel Studios for it's first official release managed to pull so many Oscar alums in its main cast. One or two, you sometimes see... but nearly all of them? I think this helped... they were all top-notch.

Kapit

05-05-2008, 01:58 PM

Don't tell me Mandarin?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Well, Stark was captured by members of the Ten Rings...

borgmatrix

05-05-2008, 02:32 PM

I really like Terrence Howard... and I thought he was just fine in IM...
I was uncertain about Howard during his first scene. Something about his delivery wasn't quite working for me. But after that, no problems whatsoever.

Raganork8

05-05-2008, 02:33 PM

Well, Stark was captured by members of the Ten Rings...

That's very true...

I didn't make that connection until just now.

thanks. :)

Raganork8

05-05-2008, 02:35 PM

I love IRON MAN's THEME it kick's ass

Finally we disagree on something

Really unoriginal.

Mark Skywalker

05-05-2008, 05:47 PM

Well, Stark was captured by members of the Ten Rings...

And the leader of that group had one of the rings on his finger .

P-Ray

05-06-2008, 10:55 AM

Actual weekend #'s

http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=7167

Mark Skywalker

05-06-2008, 06:16 PM

90'sANIMATED SERIES
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lfWPDzvWNds&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lfWPDzvWNds&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

2008 MOVIE VERSION
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-9xBmWITlA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-9xBmWITlA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Mark Skywalker

05-07-2008, 04:56 AM

Downey Jr. and Favreau on Iron Man 2
Source: Entertainment Weekly
May 7, 2008

Entertainment Weekly caught up with both Robert Downey Jr. and director Jon Favreau after the box office figures for Iron Man (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=7415) started coming in. They asked both about Iron Man 2 (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=44655), coming to theaters on April 30, 2010.

Here's a clip from the Downey Jr. interview, which you can read in full here (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20198228,00.html):

When you were brainstorming with Jon Favreau, what were the elements that you wanted to bring to the next Iron Man movie?
There's this idea of Terrence [Howard] putting on a suit and coming back as War Machine, who is pretty iconic in the Iron Man and Marvel universe. Just seeing where it can all go, but grounding it in a very modern mythology. I see it as greatest dysfunctional family story ever told.... In The New York Post a couple days ago, [there was a cartoon] of Iron Man suited up, and he's telling the governor even his super-powers can't get him out of the budget problem. That was what Jon was hoping for and excited to see the most, the idea that Tony Stark and Iron Man can become part of the cultural fabric. When we heard posters were being defaced to promote political or social ideas, he just got such a hoot out of that.

And a bit from the Favreau interview, available in full here (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20198027,00.html).

Will you be involved with the sequel?
We've been speaking informally about it, and in concept we would all love to work together again. But I found out about the announcement last night, so it's not something that — we would definitely love to collaborate more with the sequel. There's no formal arrangement yet, but in theory we would all love to see it happen.... There's definitely a lot of ideas that we all have now. This type of movie is based on serialized materials, so it lends itself very easily to [many different sequel possibilities]. There's definitely a level of enthusiasm from myself and the cast to tell more stories.

Iron Man (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=7415) earn