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!)
Posts
I liked the "look how stupid the government is" bits vis-a-vis terrorism, but it just doesn't replace the need for a good antagonist with strong motivations. I didn't watch the trailers, so the "big twist" didn't work for me. I just got to that point and thought "Well, that was fucking stupid."
Take away the twist, and you've just got fire dudes attacking the only person who they think can actually help them all movie long. And also a bizarre fixation on the president just to make the audience think the situation is important, I guess.
It just fell flat to me. The plot didn't really work, and the villains were just Mcguffins.
I probably won't go out of my way to watch it again.
"There is not a man of us who does not at times need a helping hand to be stretched out to him, and then shame upon him who will not stretch out the helping hand to his brother."
This is a motivation, in the strictest sense of the word. I wouldn't call it "strong" so much as "nuts" but, eh, Killian is a maniac and I think Marvel deliberately goes for unsympathetic maniac villains to ensure the movies are escapist mass-audience palatable.
I think it's clever that the movie Mandarin is literally what the comic Mandarin is; a stereotype designed to creep out a white audience, made by white guys. Which is not to say I don't think it'd have been possible to do a proper Mandarin that wasn't a Yellow Peril archetype.
And why didn't the hostage cry out when "The Mandarin" shot him? Either he didn't really shoot him, in which case it's weird as fuck that he didn't say anything, or he really got shot in which case the actor should have freaked out because he thinks all the guns are fake.
"There is not a man of us who does not at times need a helping hand to be stretched out to him, and then shame upon him who will not stretch out the helping hand to his brother."
This... seems to be a crazy nitpick.
Maybe the censors said that the fake hostage's death throes were too much for a PG-13.
Seriously, it's like people are desperate to find fault in this movie.
Or maybe...
At least, that's what someone on this forum mentioned; I wasn't paying that close of attention to the end credits as they whizzed by on my first viewing, so I'm going to check it out the second.
NNID and many other services: Athenor or Myridiam // 3DS: 3883-5283-0471
Unlike Eternal Sunshine the Iron Man movies occasionally will tell you how the suits work, even if its basics stuff. They don't need to make a college course about it just make it logical, coherent and basic. That's an advantage Favreau had over Black IMO.
An action movie can be more than "robot guy fights fire people" but it shouldn't be to the detriment to the "robot guy" concept. People came to see an Iron Man movie, not a Tony Stark movie. The movie also isn't as smart as it thinks it is. Especially after Avengers.
Its possible to be too subtle, as well.
I think that having the suit become a liability like that would have made Stark's over-reliance upon it a more salient theme.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Though I did think the mandarin was going to hack the suits and Iron Man would have to fight them because that happens any time you make autonomous army in comics.
Er, that's what I'm trying to say. It's an Iron Man movie, so why are people speculating on miniscule details like
Which is... well, some people like finding flaws in things. It's the reason there are terrible critics in the world. I don't want to say that the person who "fucked up," in your words, is the person that wasted their time complaining about this easily-dismissable detail, because that would be unkind.
I do think, however, that a lot of peope were definitely expecting a different movie going into this, and they're eager to find fault in it to justify the fact that they felt fooled, or that they felt one of their favorite villains got the short end of the treatment stick.
I thought that the movie would be
I was surprised, but not upset, that the movie defied my expectations.
Comparing 'Iron Man 3' to 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' is ridiculous. Nothing they did in 'Eternal Sunshine' was impossible. Does the technology to do what they did in the movie exist? No, but it could. And no, they didn't go into super detail about how it all worked, but they at least gave SOME explanation. You can tell a lot of thought went into it. There was no thought put into 'Iron Man 3' other than 'heh heh, that'll look cool, heh heh'. 'Iron Man 3' doesn't bend the rules a little bit, it takes all the laws of Physics and Aerodynamics, not to mention Logic and Reason and puts them into a pile and then takes a huge crap on it and then sets it ablaze. It's a moronic movie made for moronic people which is why it did so well at the box office. Our species is devolving back to a primate state and the success of jackasses like Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich is proof. Watching a movie were a collection of small armor pieces fly 832 miles and assemble themselves is an insult to any human being with even average intelligence. Anyone who sees such a display of stupidity and thinks it's 'awesome' is either a child or has the mental intelligence of one. And anyone who didn't stop to think "Why doesn't he just breathe fire on Tony Stark since he already did it before" belongs in a zoo because they clearly lack the intellect of a Human Being.
Seeing it yesterday, I got the distinct impression...
I mean, yes, the character is a major part of the Iron Man mythos. And yes, the actual concept, or something resembling it, is so absolutely ridiculous and doesn't translate well at all into the present, even acknowledging animosity towards contemporary China ("Ten magic rings? Ancient Chinese secret!"). So having the fake out seemed..plausible. Certainly way less stupid than actually having him as the ages' Osama bin Laden.
But I'm a laymen when it comes to Marvel. I expect fans of the comics have any number of reasons for not wanting it to play out that way.
Heavens to Betsy.
i haven't read any iron man comics, i only knew about the mandarin from armored adventures and maybe one of the video games? i didn't know his background or origin and it didn't matter to me
He's a charismatic leader who has mastery over the media and knows how to manipulate public opinion.
He exploits antipathy towards the West and fashions himself as a champion of the downtrodden.
His agents have infiltrated corporations and western governments, and he takes advantage of the corruption inherent within those organizations.
He utilizes terrorism and unconventional warfare to great effect.
All they have to do to make the Mandarin like Kane is add some pseudo-religious elements and make extremis the equivalent of Tiberium. They could have the Mandarin treat extremis like a divine gift that he gives to his most loyal followers. Extremis could be the technology that he plans to use to change the balance of power in the world.
Like... Help me out here, I'm not sure what parallels you're tying to draw here.
3DS: 2852-6809-9411
xbl - HowYouGetAnts
The rings aren't magic, either. Avengers and Thor bought aliens to the Marvel universe. The Mandarin exploiting alien technology is a logical conclusion to that.
There shouldn't be multiple reasons for this, all we needed was one plausible explanation given to the audience. That's why its a flaw. Some people did notice it, though. Flaws in movies will be discovered, especially when they're big budget movies about popular franchises. A movie like this having too many "maybe's" is a bad sign. It means they left it too vague to the audience, which isn't good in a comedic Iron Man movie.
So what? Not every movie is perfectly constructed. Iron Man 3 definitely wasn't. Not all critics are terrible, you know. Some actually have valid complaints. I liked the movie and the franchise but I'm not going to let it slide for that. People complaining about that minor flaw is a reasonable objection IMO. You may be able to overlook that, others do not.
That gives people an easier excuse to look for flaws. They're less likely to "forgive" something that's let them down. Its not necessarily a bad thing. It means they're less inclined to overlook flaws but I agree people who didn't like the movie shouldn't overboard with it otherwise their criticisms have less weight. of course people were expecting a different movie - the trailers are convincing us we're going to watch Iron Man's Dark Knight Rises, what we got was a
That said, The Mandarin is a pretty dumb name for a vaguely Middle Eastern bin Laden stand-in, so they could have put a bit more effort into that part of it.
Saw the movie tonight, thought it was pretty fun.
- Tony Stark being the controller/builder of robots instead of a guy who uses a super-suit. Like I said in my previous post, it was like, here's a guy who asks C3PO to do stuff for him. And then an army of robots for the final scene... just didn't feel like Iron Man to me at all. They've gone way too far with JARVIS. It's like JARVIS is Iron Man instead of Tony. Maybe that was an intentional comment on Tony going off the deep end a bit but I still didn't appreciate it.
- The really half-assed handling of his PTSD/panic attacks resulting from the events of Avengers. Someone else already talked about this, but it just wasn't done well. The movie is basically a silly comedy, and then once in a while in calm scene they ask RDJ to freak out for a minute and then forget about it. I really would have liked to see a movie where this was dealt with in a meaningful way instead of just kind of throwing it in there sometimes.
- The total physical invulnerability of Tony Stark. The scene where the house blows up and he makes the armor protect Pepper was such a great moment, because it shows Tony is willing to sacrifice himself to protect Pepper. But... who the hell needs armor when you can get slammed against a wall and run away completely uninjured? That moment would have meant a whole lot more if there was some cost to not using the armor on himself. It makes the choice of who to protect with the armor fairly meaningless. I mean, what's the point of having armor if we're shown over and over in the movie that it really makes no difference whether he's wearing it or not - either way he apparently can't be hurt.
Panic attacks are kinda fucked, yo.
I don't even have any big traumatic moments in my past. What Tony was going through seemed perfectly plausible to me.
I feel like you're missing the point. If you were a super hero, maybe they would happen when you were fighting crime say? Or trying to save someone? And not just when it was "convenient", which is what happens in the movie.
Here's a good example: Spider-Man 2. His powers short circuit at absolutely TERRIFYING times and it nearly gets him killed. It's not like they only broke in a quiet scene where no harm came to him. Can you see the difference, from a dramatic standpoint?
My Band "The Wicked Girls"