Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Iron Thread 3: Out Now! [Iron Man 3] (Use SPOILER Tags!)

13468911

Posts

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    Just a lighter moment that I absolutely loved:
    When Tony was escaping and only had a hand and foot from his suit as well as a gun, and he was shooting all the guards, he gets to the last one and the guard goes:

    "I don't even like working here, these people are crazy."

    I thought that was the perfect attitude for a guard to have. He's not a true believer, he's not willing to die for these people, he just wants a paycheck.

    To be honest, I that was my favourite little beat in the movie. I have been waiting years, for one of the terrorists, guards, soldiers or crook to go "fuck it, I am out of here".

    I can buy storywise, one guy taking out a hundred mooks single handed with his special skills/weapons, but the idea that not one of the mooks will decide to quit and become a mall cop in Boca Raton instead of charging the hero is incredible.

    He will in a Shane Black movie.
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] Registered User regular
    So, are we to presume Potts was cured of here extremis thing at the end? For a second I thought Tony just figured out how to make it safe, then did it on himself. Giving himself the healing properties to allow the surgery to take place, which would explain why he hadn't had it done a long time ago.

    I mostly didn't like the movie. Individual scenes were mediocre, and as a whole they were less then that. The villians didn't seem terribly threatening or hateable. Indeed the conflicts themselves didn't have any emotional impact on me, nor did Tony's struggle with anxiety, which only seemed to affect him when he wasn't doing anything too important. The extremis enemies I thought were not very good. All they do is get hot and move fast and be strong. Why not just fly around and shoot them? Why stand there and let them grab you, which apparently disables the suits and makes it impossible to use the other arm to shoot them in the face.

    I know the movie was trying to make Stark seem all isloated. He has to battle -alone! But it didn't really feel like it. He gets attacked, then ends up in Tenasee, and works from there. Ok. Did he stay there because he was afraid if he went somewhere else he'd be found? Because he didn't have anywhere to go? Why didn't he try to get a hold of different suits of his? Or check up on Potts, for that matter. He spent all this time making homemade ninja gear (while driving from Tenassee to Florida, I guess?) when it really didn't seem like there was a dire need for it. I think the movie should have taken more time to portray Stark as being alone and without other options. As it was it just seemed like same old Tony, basically just doing what he wants and fuck everyone else, rather than being backed into a corner.

    Not a bad movie, but I wouldn't watch again. I like Avengers a million times more. [/spoilers]
    ragesig.jpg

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    So, are we to presume Potts was cured of here extremis thing at the end? For a second I thought Tony just figured out how to make it safe, then did it on himself. Giving himself the healing properties to allow the surgery to take place, which would explain why he hadn't had it done a long time ago.

    I mostly didn't like the movie. Individual scenes were mediocre, and as a whole they were less then that. The villians didn't seem terribly threatening or hateable. Indeed the conflicts themselves didn't have any emotional impact on me, nor did Tony's struggle with anxiety, which only seemed to affect him when he wasn't doing anything too important. The extremis enemies I thought were not very good. All they do is get hot and move fast and be strong. Why not just fly around and shoot them? Why stand there and let them grab you, which apparently disables the suits and makes it impossible to use the other arm to shoot them in the face.

    I know the movie was trying to make Stark seem all isloated. He has to battle -alone! But it didn't really feel like it. He gets attacked, then ends up in Tenasee, and works from there. Ok. Did he stay there because he was afraid if he went somewhere else he'd be found? Because he didn't have anywhere to go? Why didn't he try to get a hold of different suits of his? Or check up on Potts, for that matter. He spent all this time making homemade ninja gear (while driving from Tenassee to Florida, I guess?) when it really didn't seem like there was a dire need for it. I think the movie should have taken more time to portray Stark as being alone and without other options. As it was it just seemed like same old Tony, basically just doing what he wants and fuck everyone else, rather than being backed into a corner.

    Not a bad movie, but I wouldn't watch again. I like Avengers a million times more. [/spoilers]
    We'll have it confirmed whether she still has her powers the next time Pepper has a significant role in a movie. Which will be a while. And she might not be played by Paltrow.
  • PailryderPailryder Registered User regular
    in the scene where he infiltrates the mandarin's "hideout" i can't think of a compelling reason he doesn't just wait the ~10 minutes for his suit to fly to him, why make home depot bombs at all? it didn't seem at this point he was really trying to show that he was capable of doing things without his suit, and his suit ends up coming to him anyway, so?
    steam_sig.png
  • JoolanderJoolander Registered User regular
    Pailryder wrote: »
    in the scene where he infiltrates the mandarin's "hideout" i can't think of a compelling reason he doesn't just wait the ~10 minutes for his suit to fly to him, why make home depot bombs at all? it didn't seem at this point he was really trying to show that he was capable of doing things without his suit, and his suit ends up coming to him anyway, so?
    well,
    JARVIS is still broken at that point

    you know, the AI that would have to pilot the suits on the way there? also, his Mk. 42 prehensile suit is also broken at that point, so he can't just call it to him
  • KingofMadCowsKingofMadCows Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Just don't think too much about the plot or applied any amount of real world logic to the movie. You can easily find a bunch of problems if you do.

    For example,
    When did Tony Stark become an expert on genetics and bioengineering?

    Extremis can regenerate limbs, cure diseases, make people healthier, increase the production of crops and livestock, and generally make things better for all of humanity, and Pepper doesn't want to fund its research just because it can be used by the military? That's a really poor excuse.

    Where exactly is JARVIS? It's a program running on a computer, where is that computer? Is it in the Mk. 42 suit? Is it in Tony's house? Is it in a satellite orbiting the earth? Is it distributed over a network? Why did it malfunction and how did it get better? Why didn't Tony focus on fixing JARVIS first since JARVIS can control an army of Iron Man suits.

    Why did Tony need to charge the Mk. 42 suit with a car battery? He's got an arc reactor in his chest, that's how he powered the suits before. Heck, a major plot point in Iron Man 2 was how he was creating this special new element that would super charge the arc reactor so he didn't have to rely on palladium cores.

    Why didn't Tony have JARVIS call the other suits earlier, like when he had to save the president? I know the entrance to the suit storage vault was blocked by the wreckage of the house but Tony could have told Pepper to focus on clearing the wreckage. Plus how hard would it have been for the suits to clear that wreckage? They had a hulk buster suit.

    What is Killian's thing with Pepper? That was just random. Why didn't he have his extremis soldiers guard Tony instead of using non-powered guards? Heck, why didn't he inject Tony with the extremis too to give him more incentive to find a way to stabilize the virus? Or why didn't Killian take out Tony's arc reactor and replace it with a car battery to force him to work on extremis?

    Why didn't Tony have more suits focus on attacking Killian? It seemed like the suits were occupied fighting the extremis soldiers but after they kill Killian, there were still like 10 suits flying around so clearly the extremis soldiers were no match for the suits.
    KingofMadCows on
  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    More to go with KingofMadcows very sensible list:
    Why are none of the suits "coded" to Rhodey exactly? Seems like a dick move when apparently Pepper can use the Mark 42 at a whim from Tony...

    A single hot touch from that one lady completely disables the Iron Patriot? But... why??? And did she just like... lug the suit to a helicopter and fly him back to base from Afghanistan? And it NEVER rebooted in that whole time? And if continual heating force opens the suit, why didn't she just do it there and then kill Rhodey, instead of transporting him directly to their SECRET LAIR?

    After what happened to War Machine in 2, why wasn't Tony/Rhodey more strict about security on it? Why didn't Tony include a secret backdoor thingy that only Rhodey could get into in case of emergency?

    Why are all the new suits 1000x worse than the one from 1 (much less 2) except for convenience? Like... the suitcase suit didn't pop off Tony like a pair of tear off pants with a single hit... What happened to the awesome lasers Tony had in 2?

    Tony nearly solved things for Maya in 10 minutes, while drunk. WHY didn't she ever come back and say "I will pay you to help me perfect this,"? She didn't have a revenge reason like Adrian did, presumably.

    Let's pretend like Tony having 40 suits in his basement doesn't make the entire second act a joke (we have to pretend that because it very much does). Why does it also seem like he's pretending to be broke? I mean, yes he buys things at the store, but like common household items. Why doesn't he pay for a supercharge for the Mark 42 with his hojillion dollars? Or buy the news van outright rather than try to sneak around and jack a signal? I'm not saying he needed to do those specific things, but there was ZERO story justification for why we were getting the "World's Most Wanted, Tony with only his worst suit, no friends, and no money" storyline when NONE of those things made sense in THIS storyline. I love how SHIELD seemingly has no interest in this super terrorist detonating bombs all over the US and threatening the President.

    The last bit in Tony vs Adrian is when the Mark 42 comes back, post being hit by a truck. And we get the feeling of "thank god, he's still got ONE left". But then in the ending he (nonsensically) explodes the like... 10 suits that were apparently still there and functional. So... WHY THE FUCK did the Mark 42 need to fly a thousand miles when there were plenty of suits THERE that just weren't helping?! When he's trying to save Pepper, why didn't he ask for like 10 suits to jump in there and lift the block and all the others to run interference for him saving her?

    So the VP is on AIM's side for two reasons: 1) he'll get to be President and 2) maybe Extremis can cure his daughter or granddaughter or whatever. Fine, that sort of makes sense. But wait, won't his first act as President have to be going full tilt into catching/murdering the Mandarin? How will that work exactly, as he'll be an abject failure as a President if he doesn't make any headway (presumably an unsatisfying and unwanted outcome for him), but catching them (while easy since he knows who they are) would impeach/jail him? And also, seeing as how he knows all about their evil plans, does he somehow NOT know that the explosions generally AREN'T terrorist attacks but Extremis fuck ups? And if he does know that, is he gonna just hope that doesn't happen to his grand/daughter? That seems... dumb.

    shoeboxjeddy.jpg
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Actually both of your lists are really bad. I don't feel like going down the list but
    We've already discussed the implications of Iron Patriots reaction to heat and the movie specifically tells you why Tony doesn't use the Suits until the end. They were locked in the hidden room and the opening has been blocked by Stark's entire house.

    detail-1.jpg
    My Band "The Wicked Girls"
  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    Actually both of your lists are really bad. I don't feel like going down the list but
    We've already discussed the implications of Iron Patriots reaction to heat and the movie specifically tells you why Tony doesn't use the Suits until the end. They were locked in the hidden room and the opening has been blocked by Stark's entire house.

    "Both of your lists are really bad. Let me sort of half ass an iffy answer to one of the 19 things you said, and that'll basically destroy all criticism of the movie, right?"
    MAYBE you could say that Jarvis needed to be up and about to make that (the backup suits) work, but then the movie would have to make sense of the Jarvis situation, which it does not. It makes no sense at all. Is Jarvis stored on a server in the house and he's destroyed in the missile attack? Then how does he come back and how does he last the whole trip to Tennessee if he's already been blown up? Is he specifically in the Mark 42? Why? That seems stupid. Tony loses suits all the time, he's gonna put his AI/butler buddy in the one he's favoring at the time and lose everything if it blows up? Is he in neither place? Then why does he make a confused, obviously poor decision and then turn off, coinciding with the power loss in the Mark 42? Finally, why doesn't Tony, in his message to Pepper, say "Oh btw, there's like 40 perfectly good suits in the basement, can you pay as much as it takes to have the digging crew get right to that spot ASAP? Thanks, love ya," if the debris is a problem? Why WOULD the debris be a problem for an Iron Man suit exactly? They shoot lasers and are super strong and there's 40 of them...

    shoeboxjeddy.jpg
  • KingofMadCowsKingofMadCows Registered User regular
    How did Tony know that the debris would be moved just at the right moment when he most needed the suit? And as I said before, he could have called Pepper to tell her to focus on moving the house. Also, the entrance opens by retracting its metal covering and they have a Hulk buster suit that was strong enough to prop up a giant crane.
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Actually both of your lists are really bad. I don't feel like going down the list THut
    We've already discussed the implications of Iron Patriots reaction to heat and the movie specifically tells you why Tony doesn't use the Suits until the end. They were locked in the hidden room and the opening has been blocked by Stark's entire house.

    "Both of your lists are really bad. Let me sort of half ass an iffy answer to one of the 19 things you said, and that'll basically destroy all criticism of the movie, right?"
    MAYBE you could say that Jarvis needed to be up and about to make that (the backup suits) work, but then the movie would have to make sense of the Jarvis situation, which it does not. It makes no sense at all. Is Jarvis stored on a server in the house and he's destroyed in the missile attack? Then how does he come back and how does he last the whole trip to Tennessee if he's already been blown up? Is he specifically in the Mark 42? Why? That seems stupid. Tony loses suits all the time, he's gonna put his AI/butler buddy in the one he's favoring at the time and lose everything if it blows up? Is he in neither place? Then why does he make a confused, obviously poor decision and then turn off, coinciding with the power loss in the Mark 42? Finally, why doesn't Tony, in his message to Pepper, say "Oh btw, there's like 40 perfectly good suits in the basement, can you pay as much as it takes to have the digging crew get right to that spot ASAP? Thanks, love ya," if the debris is a problem? Why WOULD the debris be a problem for an Iron Man suit exactly? They shoot lasers and are super strong and there's 40 of them...

    I'm not trying to defend the movie against everything. There are some good points in there but frankly most is stuff we've gone over, is explained in the movie or is implied.
    How would you suggest the suits get out of the room on their own? Blow the door and be pelted with debris and thus destroyed or trapped?
    detail-1.jpg
    My Band "The Wicked Girls"
  • HozHoz Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    I thought he infiltrated the mansion without the suit more out of a necessity for stealth. He was declared dead, I assumed he wanted to remain that way until he uncovered the plot.

    Edit: Wait, now I remember those guys seeing him and trying to kill him before that. Man, I really don't know. Movie was fun either way.
    Hoz on
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    How did Tony know that the debris would be moved just at the right moment when he most needed the suit? And as I said before, he could have called Pepper to tell her to focus on moving the house. Also, the entrance opens by retracting its metal covering and they have a Hulk buster suit that was strong enough to prop up a giant crane.
    There is an entire scene on the boat that is only

    "Hey Jarvis give me a progress report of operation House Party"

    "The cranes have gotten to the lower rooms and are near the door"

    And then a later scene between saving the president but before actually getting to the finale where Jarvis interrupts a scene to tell them that the suits are free.

    From this we can surmise that Tony knew because he was having it done himself.
    nightmarenny on
    detail-1.jpg
    My Band "The Wicked Girls"
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Hoz wrote: »
    I thought he infiltrated the mansion without the suit more out of a necessity for stealth. He was declared dead, I assumed he wanted to remain that way until he uncovered the plot.

    Edit: Wait, now I remember those guys seeing him and trying to kill him before that. Man, I really don't know. Movie was fun either way.
    Tony infiltrated the way he did because he couldn't get to his other suits and 42 was taking to long to charge. Right before that Tony has an anxiety attack regarding being denied the only thing that feels safe and the kid suggests he solve his problem by buying something new.

    Tony's anxiety related to being away from his suits can also be seen with how he built his last 45 or so models. They are all built to move remotely(so they can get to him), and open quickly(so he can enter a suit at a moments notice) but has caused a number of weaknesses in design.
    detail-1.jpg
    My Band "The Wicked Girls"
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    A large amount of this movie was metaphor on metaphor, and I can understand how that is not what people were expecting or what people want to see.

    But to that end, I am willing to forgive a lot of dumb shit for the sake of metaphor, because the acting and story at least made sense. The characters were likable, and more importantly believable. If you give this movie even a little bit of logic wiggle room, it is a really beautiful takedown of Stark's character and an interesting and realistic take on the canonical hero's journey.

    Contrast to, say, Prometheus, where every single character is unlikable scum, the plot makes no sense and the metaphors are less subtle and more hammers. There the leaps in logic are like open, oozing sores.

    In Iron Man 3, they are much more like dry skin- somewhat annoying, but easily ignored for the sake of the story.

  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    I will say that I basically enjoyed the movie, watching it just as a movie. That doesn't make it good though. To me, this is one of those "wasted potential and unrefined success on an impressive scale" situations.
    How would the suits survive the debris dropping on them? Gee, I dunno, probably in the exact same fashion that Tony survived the house falling on him that started the whole mess... You know, by lasering what needs lasered, and dodging the rest. Not really the point though. It's just that (imo) the plot requires jumping through GIGANTIC hoops of logic in order to arrive at outcomes like: Tony doesn't wear an Iron Man suit for the majority of the runtime of the movie, Rhodey also does not wear his suit/it does not function for a large portion of the movie, Rhodey is a useless captive for quite a while and only teams up with Tony in the ending, and Tony's girlfriend LITERALLY (nearly) dies in a fire through his mistake. And I have to say why would you work so hard to arrive at such unenviable destinations?

    shoeboxjeddy.jpg
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    I will say that I basically enjoyed the movie, watching it just as a movie. That doesn't make it good though. To me, this is one of those "wasted potential and unrefined success on an impressive scale" situations.
    How would the suits survive the debris dropping on them? Gee, I dunno, probably in the exact same fashion that Tony survived the house falling on him that started the whole mess... You know, by lasering what needs lasered, and dodging the rest. Not really the point though. It's just that (imo) the plot requires jumping through GIGANTIC hoops of logic in order to arrive at outcomes like: Tony doesn't wear an Iron Man suit for the majority of the runtime of the movie, Rhodey also does not wear his suit/it does not function for a large portion of the movie, Rhodey is a useless captive for quite a while and only teams up with Tony in the ending, and Tony's girlfriend LITERALLY (nearly) dies in a fire through his mistake. And I have to say why would you work so hard to arrive at such unenviable destinations?
    You are misremembering. Tony gets trapped by some debris and would have died there if not for mk 42's unique properties and that was him cushioned by water..

    Frankly I don't think I'm jumping through any hoops at all in logic. A movie should not have to spell every little thing out. I feel like a lot of people treat a movie not telling you something as a plot hole.
    detail-1.jpg
    My Band "The Wicked Girls"
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    This movie is subtle as hell, and coming off all of the other Avengers movies, I can get how it is a little jarring and confusing.

    That does not make it a bad movie though.
  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    Arch wrote: »
    This movie is subtle as hell, and coming off all of the other Avengers movies, I can get how it is a little jarring and confusing.

    That does not make it a bad movie though.

    Subtle... ah yes.
    *Remembers the scene where the Mandarin farts and talks about smoking blunts to show that he's a silly head.* SUBTLETY AT ITS FINEST. Less sarcastically, I don't feel like "a plot that makes literally no sense in various places and you just have to go with it" is a good candidate for calling something "subtle."

    Back at nightmare,
    yes you're right about how the scene played out, but also no. Because the Mark 42 is a piece of shit, bafflingly broken suit and judging from the end battle, the others actually worked... So the reason there even WAS a problem is because the suit didn't really have weapons and wouldn't fly right. So again, don't apply the problems it had to the ones that worked and were armed.

    shoeboxjeddy.jpg
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    Like, I think this is the only movie in the current Avengers lineup that can really be considered...I guess an intelligent film?

    I don't want to sound shitty there, so let me try again.

    Iron Man 3 is the only film in current Avengers lineup of films (IM1,2, Captain America, Thor, Avengers) that does anything more than tell an entertaining story. It is the only film that attempts to really explore a character and how they personally interact with and deal with the world. It makes it vastly different in tone and execution than the other films, and it actually borders really closely on art house material ala Pan's Labyrinth.

    Basically the movie tried to do three things- Tell an entertaining story about a superhero, deconstruct a character, and invert expectations whenever possible.

    I think it did the first two well, and the third better than the other movies it can be lumped with.

    This really was the Dark Knight Returns for the Iron Man franchise (that is, the only one that really had anything interesting to say)*

    *my opinions on the Nolanverse may be different than other people's
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    I want to reiterate that I don't think the movie is flawless or without a logical fault.

    Honestly I'm coming at these complaints because the movie directly tells you the answer and it frustrates me that so many people have come in here are offering the same criticisms that seem so obviously wrong.

    It makes me angry and honestly I probably shouldn't have responded this time as I'm not in control and being more then a little short and flippant with people.

    Sorry SHoe and King. I believe I'm right but I've been a bit of an ass because of it.

    I think I'm out for the night.
    detail-1.jpg
    My Band "The Wicked Girls"
  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Arch wrote: »
    This movie is subtle as hell, and coming off all of the other Avengers movies, I can get how it is a little jarring and confusing.

    That does not make it a bad movie though.

    Subtle... ah yes.
    *Remembers the scene where the Mandarin farts and talks about smoking blunts to show that he's a silly head.* SUBTLETY AT ITS FINEST. Less sarcastically, I don't feel like "a plot that makes literally no sense in various places and you just have to go with it" is a good candidate for calling something "subtle."

    Back at nightmare,
    yes you're right about how the scene played out, but also no. Because the Mark 42 is a piece of shit, bafflingly broken suit and judging from the end battle, the others actually worked... So the reason there even WAS a problem is because the suit didn't really have weapons and wouldn't fly right. So again, don't apply the problems it had to the ones that worked and were armed.

    Ok one more.
    Yes the suits could have escaped before the debris became a problem but if they blow a hole in the top then debris falls on them and they are still trapped. The mr 42 specifically had to free itself from the wreckage because the thrusters(which came on only a second later) couldn't have freed him.
    detail-1.jpg
    My Band "The Wicked Girls"
  • KingofMadCowsKingofMadCows Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    The house took up a lot of space but it was only like three or four stories tall. Plus it wasn't a bunker filled with reinforced concrete and steel. It was made of regular material.
    How much debris could have possibly been on the vault? It's not like a skyscraper fell on it. Three or four suits working together should be able to just pushed the debris aside.
    KingofMadCows on
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    Arch wrote: »
    This movie is subtle as hell, and coming off all of the other Avengers movies, I can get how it is a little jarring and confusing.

    That does not make it a bad movie though.

    Subtle... ah yes.
    *Remembers the scene where the Mandarin farts and talks about smoking blunts to show that he's a silly head.* SUBTLETY AT ITS FINEST. Less sarcastically, I don't feel like "a plot that makes literally no sense in various places and you just have to go with it" is a good candidate for calling something "subtle."

    Back at nightmare,
    yes you're right about how the scene played out, but also no. Because the Mark 42 is a piece of shit, bafflingly broken suit and judging from the end battle, the others actually worked... So the reason there even WAS a problem is because the suit didn't really have weapons and wouldn't fly right. So again, don't apply the problems it had to the ones that worked and were armed.

    The only part of the plot that doesn't make sense is Mia Hansen starting with the scene with Pepper in the motel.

    Everything else is either alluded to or outright told to you in the course of the film.

    Complaining about things like "how did the suit parts fly all that way" is like asking how, in Eternal Sunshine, they can erase people's memories.

    In an action movie with nothing else in it? Yeah, those can be valid questions and problems with the movie. But for a film that tried to be more than just "Robot guy fights fire people", it gets leeway with some things.

    And, like nightmare said, most of the criticisms people have been posting are answered in the movie itself, albeit subtly.
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    We aren't making the multiple explanations for things like "where were the suits until the end" up out of whole cloth, for example.

    And a large amount of the complaints with this film are of that nature.

    either "They didn't explain!" and the answer is "yes they did, you missed it" or "I didn't think they needed to spell it out for you"
  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    Arch wrote: »
    It is the only film that attempts to really explore a character and how they personally interact with and deal with the world. It makes it vastly different in tone and execution than the other films, and it actually borders really closely on art house material ala Pan's Labyrinth.

    Basically the movie tried to do three things- Tell an entertaining story about a superhero, deconstruct a character, and invert expectations whenever possible.

    Perhaps you didn't word this exactly how you would have liked to, but huh? I'd say "exploring the character" is ALL the other movies have done. Thor is about Thor starting as an arrogant A hole and becoming a heroic type person. Simultaneously, it delves into why Loki is the way he is and why he becomes an antagonist. Similarly, Captain America shows us how Steve is a good guy and how that becomes his strength and why he gains the admiration and loyalty of his allies. And I'm EXTREMELY confused on how the stuff like "The 60's Avengers" theme song at the end makes you think of an art house tone. Seriously, that's nuts. Instead, I would call it very similar to the flippancy of Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang but with a MUCH more inconsistent tone and less coherent plot.

    I get that the director was trying to surprise us and to his credit, he did. Unfortunately, he was able to surprise us in many cases by doing something stupid and damaging to the narrative, so MAYBE surprise for the sake of it is not brilliant directing technique. A certain director of "What a Tweest!" movies is a relevant reference here.

    shoeboxjeddy.jpg
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Arch wrote: »
    It is the only film that attempts to really explore a character and how they personally interact with and deal with the world. It makes it vastly different in tone and execution than the other films, and it actually borders really closely on art house material ala Pan's Labyrinth.

    Basically the movie tried to do three things- Tell an entertaining story about a superhero, deconstruct a character, and invert expectations whenever possible.

    Perhaps you didn't word this exactly how you would have liked to, but huh? I'd say "exploring the character" is ALL the other movies have done. Thor is about Thor starting as an arrogant A hole and becoming a heroic type person. Simultaneously, it delves into why Loki is the way he is and why he becomes an antagonist. Similarly, Captain America shows us how Steve is a good guy and how that becomes his strength and why he gains the admiration and loyalty of his allies.

    Perhaps I should have said "the only movie that shows actual character growth."

    Thor and Hulk tried to, and didn't really hit it (admittedly Hulk/Banner grow a lot in Avengers, so I might walk that back). Thor was poorly acted and even more poorly written, and the Hulk sailed on Norton's performance. Cap doesn't grow as a character so much as he proves himself to other people. Cap was a good guy all along, just no one believed in him. Cap didn't change at all at the end of his movie, and even after Avengers he is only really "less naive".

    EDIT: Technically also Black Widow had a lot of growth and development between IM2 and Avengers, but I attribute that more so to her role in IM2 being stupid, and limiting, and a little bit sexist. She went from throwaway to important player, and I guess one could call that growth, but only in a technical sense. She should not have been in IM2.
    Arch on
  • HozHoz Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Every movie has plot holes, and most of them bigger than the ones than in IM3. Take a hard look at the much beloved Nolan Batman movies and you will find some dumbfounding shit.

    Why people take notice of plot holes in some movies and not others is because of how much they like the movie. You aren't listing the reasons you don't like the movie, what you're doing is nitpicking a movie you didn't like. I'm convinced the reason a lot of people seem to not have enjoyed this movie is not because of these alleged plot holes, but because it didn't meet their expectations of an Iron Man movie. This was basically a full blown Tony Stark movie, much more so than the previous two.

    I'm one of the people that loved it because of that.
    Hoz on
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    Hoz wrote: »
    Every movie has plot holes, and most of them bigger than the ones than in IM3. Take a hard look at the much beloved Nolan Batman movies and you will find some dumbfounding shit.

    Why people take notice of plot holes in some movies and not others is because of how much they like the movie. I'm convinced the reason a lot of people seem to not have enjoyed this movie is not because of these alleged plot holes, but because it didn't meet their expectations of an Iron Man movie. This was basically a full blown Tony Stark movie, much more so than the previous two.

    I'm one of the people that loved it because of that.

    This is exactly what I was trying to say. Thank you Hoz.
  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    Arch wrote: »
    Perhaps I should have said "the only movie that shows actual character growth."

    Thor and Hulk tried to, and didn't really hit it (admittedly Hulk/Banner grow a lot in Avengers, so I might walk that back). Thor was poorly acted and even more poorly written, and the Hulk sailed on Norton's performance. Cap doesn't grow as a character so much as he proves himself to other people. Cap was a good guy all along, just no one believed in him. Cap didn't change at all at the end of his movie, and even after Avengers he is only really "less naive".

    Stories are about resolving conflict more than just straight up "character development." Certainly it's great if your character changes during the story, but this change can come in many forms. For example, the character might start out the story with a certain view, waver about that view as the story progresses, and then decide to stick with it at the end. I wouldn't diss that movie for using that model (which is what I'd say Cap is doing). I won't argue about Thor, not because I agree but because the argument is unproductive (The acting is bad! No I think it's good. Well I don't think it is! etc).

    Finally, I feel the whole thing about Tony "growing and developing" is somewhat confused.
    Tony's issues were brand new to this movie, they were not at all reflective of where he was earlier in the series. While it makes perfect sense that New York caused trauma for him, this element was rather half baked. In any given quiet scene, he might have a random, not too harmful panic attack. And then he's back to being hyper competent and invincible. His relationship with Pepper actually seems pretty healthy and positive, he doesn't have a wandering eye and he's not boozing like he was in 2 for example. So at the end, Tony blows up all his suits. Why again? It's not like Iron Man was keeping them apart, he saved her life like 3 times WITH the Iron Man suit and creating it coincided with him being a good guy who didn't make weapons and didn't want to sleep around so much. He also got the surgery, which the audience had presumed he wasn't avoiding because of some weird hardheadedness but because it was stated to be medically impossible earlier in the series. Finally he threw the reactor in the sea which... WHAT?????????? His father's gift from beyond the grave, the most powerful and useful power source IN THE WORLD, he just tosses in the ocean? WHY THE EFF??? Okay you don't need it to protect your heart, that's probably the only use for a power source, go ahead and toss it in the ocea...what the eff? Finally, let's analyze if he solved the whole "PTSD" thing. Umm no. Yes he was heroic when it counted, but what does that matter? Maybe he'll still have nightmares. Will having no Iron Man suits make him feel safer somehow? If so, why is he suddenly an idiot? Just wondering...

    (Perhaps the answer is: he will make newer, better Iron man stuff! Okay... then show us that. Such a crucial bit of the process is a little much to just have us infer. That's like hoping we would infer that he would date Pepper in 2, rather than stating it outright.)

    shoeboxjeddy.jpg
  • ArchArch Trust me, I'm a scientist Registered User regular
    I really don't know how to address your criticisms, because it seems more like you keep missing all of the character growth we are talking about.
    Tony didn't need any of that stuff anymore. He didn't need the suits to feel safe, he didn't need the reactor to live, etc etc.

    If you want to talk conflict, that is still my point. Tony's conflict in this movie isn't with Killian, or the Mandarin, not really. The conflict was inside him all along!

    Also, dead serious, this movie was the most accurate portrayal of someone with post-traumatic anxiety issues I have ever seen. It literally is "I am 100% fine and then out of nowhere something unrelated to anything makes me have a panic attack and I can't do anything anymore and am seeing things oh god why I can't stop why can't I stop someone help me".

    Iron Man most definitely was keeping them apart. Did you forget about
    The scene with him remotely controlling the suit from the basement and ruining their date? Or when it burst into their bedroom and grabbed Potts? And how the suits and not the one person he loves more than anything else is the only thing that can snap him out of panic attacks?
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Puts his name on his helicoptor.. ..so everyone knows it's his.Registered User regular
    Yeah, having had a few panic attacks in my life, they are not at all fucking rational.

    Like, rational is the opposite of panic attack.
    thanossig_zps4bf2ceeb.jpg
  • shoeboxjeddyshoeboxjeddy Registered User regular
    Yeah, having had a few panic attacks in my life, they are not at all fucking rational.

    Like, rational is the opposite of panic attack.

    Spoiler tags since my arguments will often involve plot elements.
    That was kind of my point? Like, PTSD isn't "solve the threat and now it's better". (You'd think that maybe he would have it at a time that was inconvenient, like when his life was in danger. But no, LUCKILY his crippling psychological condition only shows up at times that will not get him in too much trouble. The movie doesn't actually do anything but give lipservice to his apparently crippling mental problems.) So at the end of the movie... he's not better. He still might have nightmares that would trigger protective suit reactions, unless he fixed them. It's not like he didn't love Pepper enough, and that was the problem. Similarly, I didn't see the "greeting Pepper with the Iron Man" thing as hiding from her. I saw it as Tony is a huge nerd and he LOVES new stuff like this. How else to explain sending the Mark 42 to save the President without him in it otherwise? It's not like he and Rhodey made this huge travel progress, seeing as how Stark couldn't exactly walk or drive and do that too.

    Secondly, being a publicly out Iron Man without actually having the suits is LEGITIMATELY dangerous. Like, every threat in this movie is resolved with a suit. The house gets blown up => the suit saves Pepper, then she saves Tony with it, then he calls it back to himself and saves himself with it. Tony assaults the house without a suit => he loses and is captured. He then calls the suit to himself and wins. The president is in trouble and they try to spread the intel to save him => this fails. Tony then saves all the people on the plane with the suit. Tony and Rhodey assault the base => they can't get anywhere near to help. 40 suits show up and make a distraction. The president is much easier to save because of his broken suit. Tony is only able to survive against the baddie (whose name I was getting wrong earlier, sorry) thanks to the suit. Finally, Pepper's hammer blow involves a weapon from the suit. And the fatality is the suit exploding. Out of ALL of this, Tony learns that he doesn't need Iron Man? Maybe his brain is more damaged then we thought... (To be fair, he does win the fight in the small town without the suit. To be accurate though, he wins not with all the sneaky environmental moves, but with two weapons from the suit though, so...)

    shoeboxjeddy.jpg
  • HacksawHacksaw The "New Scum" Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    This was a fantastic Iron Man movie.

    Correction: this was a fantastic Shane Black movie.
    MetroSig.png
  • Dark Raven XDark Raven X Registered User regular
    Jeddy, half the thematic problems you have are explained by other things you think are problems. :I
    What effect are the panic attacks having? Tony's building a ton of new suits to deal with his stress
    The new suits are frankly pretty shitty and weak in comparison to his older suits
    Why are the new suits so terrible?
    Because Tony is under incredible stress and not working properly

    And Tony didn't learn that he "doesn't need Iron Man" - it's pretty much the opposite what with him saying "I am Iron Man" as the closing line. He suicides the army of distractions, that doesn't mean there won't be any Iron Man suits in the future. Like, I highly doubt the order included Iron Patriot's detonation, for instance. What with Rhodey in it. :P
    camo_sig2.png
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    How did Tony know that the debris would be moved just at the right moment when he most needed the suit?
    He didn't.

    That's how 99% of movies work.
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    Regarding the ending:
    He blows up all of the suits that are there, but what are the chances that a guy like Tony blows up every suit he has? He probably has a couple that even he forgot about. "Oh, HERE is my surfboard... hey, this turns into my Mk 8 suit when I imput the verbal code, IRONMANROX. Aren't I a stinker?"

    Furthermore, he can make new suits easily, he just doesn't HAVE to make them because of his PTSD. He didn't erase his server, so he has all of the data on all of the suits, so he can make one (or a similarly small number) of really good suits, as opposed to dozens of inferior ones, each one designed to tackle one specific insecurity. Speaking of his server...

    Jarvis
    is in The Cloud. He has a central server (or, knowing Tony, several servers) where Jarvis ultimately resides, but probably the first thing that he installs in every suit is the specialized technology to run Jarvis independently.

    Each suit can run Jarvis by itself, but is subject to damage or power loss, as seen in this movie. This malfunction does not affect Cloud Jarvis, but does affect Tony's ability to interface with it.

    For convenience, Tony designed the program to be constantly streaming, so he can talk to House Jarvis, Suit Jarvis, and presumably Cell Phone Jarvis all without skipping a beat.

    Just watch, in the next movie, the villian will be Jarvis, who attempts to become Skynet. That's what you get for giving an A.I. advanced cybernetic and robotics data: Terminators.
  • GaryOGaryO Registered User regular
    How about this for the suits
    not freeing themselves. There obviously trapped under several tons of rubble which needs to be cleared first. Why can't the suits do it themselves? Because the signal that would tell them to do it can't penetrate the rubble. Think of it like a cell phone on a subway system. It has no signal because there's too much surface in the way. So the moment the cranes opened the cellar Jarvis is like 'suits activate now!' and they fly to Stark. At least thats how I assume it worked
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    GaryO wrote: »
    How about this for the suits
    not freeing themselves. There obviously trapped under several tons of rubble which needs to be cleared first. Why can't the suits do it themselves? Because the signal that would tell them to do it can't penetrate the rubble. Think of it like a cell phone on a subway system. It has no signal because there's too much surface in the way. So the moment the cranes opened the cellar Jarvis is like 'suits activate now!' and they fly to Stark. At least thats how I assume it worked
    Nah it's just something they ignore.

    I strongly doubt Tony's suits can only communicate on EHF+ frequencies.
Sign In or Register to comment.