Iron Man discussion (Spoilers!)

[SSJmole]

1. Spider-Man
2. X2
3. Batman Begins
4. Superman: The Movie
5. Batman
6. Spider-Man 2
7. X-Men
8. Iron Man
9. The Shadow
10. Spider-Man 3

This seems pretty fair. I would remove Batman and the shadow and replace them with Superman II and V for V for Vendetta and though V for Vendetta would most likely be number 1 on my list.



Iron Man while good did have some problems e.g I watched again the other day with a friend of mine. The part where Tony tells her to throw away his old Arc reactor or what ever it was called. My friend said to me "Oh let me guess she keeps it or something and it'll end up saving his life" and I thought yeah that was such an obvious thing.

Still It is good film I just agree with others who say it's not the best superhero movie ever though

 

[thee great one]

straight comic adaptions would be

10-X-men
9-Blade II
8-X2
7-300
6-Spider-Man 2
5-Blade
4-Iron Man
3-Sin City
2-Batman Begins
1-V For Vendetta

 

[Grocer Man]

This is turning into West Side Story.

Which ones the Jets and which ones the Sharks? And which young couple will be dead by the end of the story?

On topic, what are the odds of Stane returning in the sequel?

 

[Ice]

On topic, what are the odds of Stane returning in the sequel?

I hope none. I'd rather see a new villain (which I'm sure they'll do) than have him return. It's one of the things I don't like about the X-Men films, how they kept Magneto throughout the whole thing.

Even if he isn't the villain, I still wouldn't have him return. It could take focus away and all...

 

[bluebeast]

Eh. For comic movies I'd have to go

1. X2
2. Iron Man
3. Batman Begins
4. Spider-Man 2
5. Hellboy
6. X-Men
7. Superman II
8. Spider-Man
9. X3
10. Superman Returns

 

[Volunteer Fire Detective]

Superman: The Movie was alright. Lex and his heinous land development plots have never worked right on screen, and the ending was awful. Say what you will about how amazing the rest of the movie is, the end where he flies backward around the world and turns back time is a cop-out, and destroys the hope for any kind of conflict in a sequel (I watched Superman II the other day, and throughout the entire movie, I was thinking "Why bother when he can just turn back time and make it all right again? And look! They screwed up the ending a second time!).

Ahem. Enough with my rant. I enjoyed Iron Man a lot. My favorites would probably be:

1 -Spider-Man 2
2 - Batman Begins
3 - Iron Man
4 - Hellboy
5 - V for Vendetta

 

[Hellsbuttmonkey]

After 3 viewings of Iron Man, I have finally decided that i prefer it to both Spiderman 2 and Batman Begins.

My list

1. Iron Man
2. Spiderman 2
3. Batman Begins
4. X2
5. Spiderman
6. Hellboy
7. Batman
8. X-Men
9. Blade
10. 300

 

[Gothamite]

AS far as acting goes, I think it's a level playing field with Downey way ahead of Reeves on the field. Downey had to play an extravangant, self absorbed genius, playboy turned extravagant, self-aware and humane genius playboy trying to do what he can to make things right. Reeves plays, to the very core, a one dimensional super-hero with a one-dimensional personality out to save the world with no other reason than it being his will and responsibilty.

First of all...CAN WE STOP CALLING HIM CHRISTOPHER REEVES? That's not his name! There's no S. There never was. The only S was on his chest.

Sorry, but when your as big a fan of the man's work as I am, it's gets frustrating when someone's trying to give an intelligent argument against your point and the person can't even spell the actor's damn name right.

Second of all, there wasn't one bit of Superman's character in that movie that was one-dimensional. Superman: The Movie MADE Superman a three-dimensional character.

Iron Man just came out and has already made a huge impact. Why hasn't the same been said of the X-Men films or the Spiderman films?

Have you seen Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back? Or even Knocked Up? Anyone who's seen them will know what I'm talking about.

There's your huge impact.

On top of that, everyone and their mom knows about Superman and his origins and Clark Kent and Lois Lane.

Nope. This is one of the biggest myths in comics' fandom. A girl in my class saw me draw a picture of Superman last year and asked if it was Batman.

The same can be said for Spiderman and The Hulk but I doubt everyone knows about Iron Man. You can do a Superman movie without having an origin story because of so many things. Mainly the fact that there have been various tv shows over the decades from the old Superman cartoons and show starring the tragic George Reeves to the Adventures of Lois and Clark all the way to Smallville; different generations all hearing the same story. Iron Man didn't have any of that aside from a short lived cartoon that aired at 6am every Saturday morning.

Iron Man was more of a success than Superman Returns (which was counting almost entirely on what people already knew about Superman). In fact, Superman Returns was a bit of a disappointment at the box office.

Iron Man achieved alot more in the movie than just smashing the box office. It told the the origin and told it well. It showed the transition from Tony Stark the industrialist to Tony Stark the humanist. Best of all, it showed the birth of Iron Man and rocked it like a hurricane.

That's fine. It did a good job of it. It's still not better than Superman or Batman Begins. It had no emotional pull to it, whatsoever. It was a manly action film. A Summer Blockbuster. That's it.

Besides, it's not like you could have a guy in a metal suit hanging by strings (like Superman) and make it work. Cgi was almost more than necessary to pull it off.

I know. But it's unfair to say that RDJ was better than Christopher Reeve because Reeve couldn't get 'the action part down'. That's like saying Frank Oz's performance of Yoda is better in the Star Wars prequels because he actually uses a lightsaber and has fights with the Sith. It doesn't make any sense because Frank Oz had nothing to do with it. CGI did.

1. Spider-Man
2. X2
3. Batman Begins
4. Superman: The Movie
5. Batman
6. Spider-Man 2
7. X-Men
8. Iron Man
9. The Shadow
10. Spider-Man 3

1. Batman Begins
2. Superman: The Movie
3. Batman 1989
4. Spider-Man
5. X-Men
6. Iron Man
7. Spider-Man 2
8. X-Men 2
9. Superman Returns
10. Spider-Man 3

Honourable mentions: Batman Forever, Superman II, X-Men 3 and (believe it or not) Daredevil

Personally, I also think X-Men 2 is massively over-rated for the same reason as Iron Man is. It's fun and exciting and has a fantastic plot but there's very little heart in it at all. Even the final scene with Jean's death is really sub-par. I can watch the first X-Men again and again even though it has the least amount of action in the trilogy, because it has some of my favourite scenes in any 'hero flick. The finale with Wolverine saving Rogue has to be the most touching scene in any superhero movie, ever.

(*Waits for someone to make a paedophile joke.*)

Superman: The Movie was alright. Lex and his heinous land development plots have never worked right on screen, and the ending was awful. Say what you will about how amazing the rest of the movie is, the end where he flies backward around the world and turns back time is a cop-out, and destroys the hope for any kind of conflict in a sequel (I watched Superman II the other day, and throughout the entire movie, I was thinking "Why bother when he can just turn back time and make it all right again? And look! They screwed up the ending a second time!).

The plot of the first Superman was clever and great. The only reason people hate it so much now, is because it was milked to death in Superman II and Superman Returns.

Flying around the world to turn back time was ridiculous and silly but it was done for a reason: to show Superman's humanity and that he would sacrifice everything for the life of one human being (Lois Lane). The emotion of the scene (especially when taken into context) makes up for the silliness of it.

 

[J. Agamemnon]

First of all...CAN WE STOP CALLING HIM CHRISTOPHER REEVES? That's not his name! There's no S. There never was. The only S was on his chest.

Sorry, but when your as big a fan of the man's work as I am, it's gets frustrating when someone's trying to give an intelligent argument against your point and the person can't even spell the actor's damn name right.

I'm sure it's a common mistake not even worth getting worked over for. For what it's worth I'm sorry. sheesh.

Second of all, there wasn't one bit of Superman's character in that movie that was one-dimensional. Superman: The Movie MADE Superman a three-dimensional character.

For you maybe, but the character holds every ideal that was Superman in the comics before the movie came out which was exactly a reflection of a one-dimensional superhero. Especially compared to comics at the time like Brave and the Bold nad Spiderman which were tackling down drug addiction and racism. I will agree that he grew throughout the rest of the Superman movies and became somewhat more of a three-dimensional character. As for the first one, it was just plain old Superman doing plain old Superman things and fighting an oaf in Lex Luthor, not even a contestable character. Especially when compared to the comics.

Have you seen Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back? Or even Knocked Up?

There's your huge impact.

Obscure pop culture references? C'mon, do you really expect me to believe that's a valid argument? People don't know these movies for their obscure pop culture references, ESPECIALLY Kevin Smiths films which are more known for their controversy as opposed for being the movie that refenced Iron Man. i could make the same argument in saying that people will know about China because it was referenced on a poster in 40 Year old Virgin. I own both movies though, so for your sake, I will sit back and watch them again to see these refences that made a huge impact.

Nope. This is one of the biggest myths in comics' fandom. A girl in my class saw me draw a picture of Superman last year and asked if it was Batman.

Okay now you're taking this too literally. obviously not EVERYONE is going to know Superman. Especially not a girl who, like most other girls, probably gives two straws about comics in general. Also, is she retarded or a complete airhead?

Iron Man was more of a success than Superman Returns (which was counting almost entirely on what people already knew about Superman). In fact, Superman Returns was a bit of a disappointment at the box office.



That's fine. It did a good job of it. It's still not better than Superman or Batman Begins. It had no emotional pull to it, whatsoever. It was a manly action film. A Summer Blockbuster. That's it.

Granted Iron Man didn't pull as many emotional strings as Superman did. Two reasons: One being that Iron Man isn't as feely a character as Superman. Stark is a billionaire industrialist with more than just saving the world at stake. The guy has a business to run 24/7. He's a do-twelve-things-at-once kind of guy. The second reason being with the Tragedy of Mr. Reeve. You can't watch that movie without thinking about the actor himself and the struggle he eventually had to go through. How could a man playing such an indestructable character become so vulnerable in real life? That in itself is bound to pull at the strings of your heart.

On another note Iron IS a manly action film doing big things. We're getting intertwining plots within each movie Marvel is spitting out. You've already seen Stark making a Captain America shield, the War Machine suit (which I think was just the Mach II), and now the tie-in with Nick Fury and SHIELD. Tell me how many Superhero movies do that without just plugging some last minute scene to plug the setup for the next sequel (which is why i didn't add the twelve rings reference).

I know. But it's unfair to say that RDJ was better than Christopher Reeve because Reeve couldn't get 'the action part down'. That's like saying Frank Oz's performance of Yoda is better in the Star Wars prequels because he actually uses a lightsaber and has fights with the Sith. It doesn't make any sense because Frank Oz had nothing to do with it. CGI did.

MY argument was never to compare the action scenes. I was trying to argue how RDJ still made a bigger impact without the action scenes attributing to any of the emotional pull during the action scenes. If anything my whole argument was mostly based between two actors' performing abilities.

 

[Gothamite]

Sorry, but when your as big a fan of the man's work as I am, it's gets frustrating when someone's trying to give an intelligent argument against your point and the person can't even spell the actor's damn name right.

I'm sure it's a common mistake not even worth getting worked over for. For what it's worth I'm sorry. sheesh.

?!

Especially compared to comics at the time like Brave and the Bold nad Spiderman which were tackling down drug addiction and racism. I will agree that he grew throughout the rest of the Superman movies and became somewhat more of a three-dimensional character. As for the first one, it was just plain old Superman doing plain old Superman things and fighting an oaf in Lex Luthor, not even a contestable character. Especially when compared to the comics.

:noway:

You need to watch this movie again. There is nothing 'plain old' about the journey Clark Kent makes to becoming Superman at all. Certainly, once Lex Luthor appears the plot becomes very routine and even a bit silly, but you're really not focusing at all on the sections of the movie that actually matter (namely, the origin and the finale).

Obscure pop culture references? C'mon, do you really expect me to believe that's a valid argument? People don't know these movies for their obscure pop culture references, ESPECIALLY Kevin Smiths films which are more known for their controversy as opposed for being the movie that refenced Iron Man. i could make the same argument in saying that people will know about China because it was referenced on a poster in 40 Year old Virgin. I own both movies though, so for your sake, I will sit back and watch them again to see these refences that made a huge impact.

The plot of Jay & Silent Bob is based around the fact that there is going to be a Bluntman & Chronic movie made because the success of the first X-Men movie inspired every major movie company to go out and buy the rights to popular comic book characters.

Granted, the Knocked Up reference is pretty obscure and forgettable, but they do reference Spider-Man 3 no less than three times.

Okay now you're taking this too literally. obviously not EVERYONE is going to know Superman. Especially not a girl who, like most other girls, probably gives two straws about comics in general.

First of all, my point is not that 'everyone knows Superman'. You said that everyone knows 'everything about Superman and his origin and Clark Kent and Lois Lane and all that', when in fact, a great many people don't even know what his costume looks like.

Second, I'd say even fewer people know that Superman's a comic book character and the same goes for Batman. They're so popular for their other incarnations that I can't imagine giving 'two straws about comics' has anything to do with it.

Granted Iron Man didn't pull as many emotional strings as Superman did. Two reasons: One being that Iron Man isn't as feely a character as Superman.

Wolverine isn't as 'feely' as Superman. Batman certainly isn't as 'feely' as Superman. Even Daredevil had more emotional resonance and he isn't as 'feely'.

The second reason being with the Tragedy of Mr. Reeve. You can't watch that movie without thinking about the actor himself and the struggle he eventually had to go through. How could a man playing such an indestructable character become so vulnerable in real life? That in itself is bound to pull at the strings of your heart.

This is just utter rubbish and an insult to his memory. I've watched Superman with people who didn't even know it was Christopher Reeve until after the movie was over and they still thought it was great.

MY argument was never to compare the action scenes.

You quoted MY argument against someone ELSE's argument and misinterpreted what I said entirely. So I tried to explain it to you. That's about it.

 

[Ice]

This is getting too off-track now. It's one thing to compare Iron Man and other movies, but it's a whole 'nother story to keep talking about Superman and etc.


Keep it on Iron Man. That's it.

 

[bluebeast]

I liked that JARVIS was a robot. It was silly.

 

[Ice]

I liked that JARVIS was a robot. It was silly.

You know, I was hoping someone would actually play him, but even as a AI, Jarvis was still awesome.

 

[bluebeast]

You know, I was hoping someone would actually play him, but even as a AI, Jarvis was still awesome.

Paul Bettany played him, which was pretty cool.

 

[Ice]

Paul Bettany played him, which was pretty cool.

I meant seeing someone physically play him in the movie.

 

[Planet-man]

Almost every reply to Gothamite's is so wrong I have actually contacted the head of theoretical physics at NASA to monitor this thread in hopes of catching a singularity before it's too late to stop it from collapsing the site into a molecule-sized mote of anti-matter.

Also, I completely forgot about V For Vendetta back there, and it would probably sit around #5 on my list. It's an awesome, wonderful movie, definitely in my Top-30 films anywhere, but the films above it are even moreso.

Now that I'm reading The Ultimates for the first time and doing RDj's voice for Tony Stark's I'm almost surprised they actually had the sense to cast him because he's so perfect it seems like a taylor-made "missed oppourtunity" that they in the biz seem to get their rocks off ****ing us over with(see: John Cusack and Jude Law actually asking to be in Watchmen and being replaced by pretty-boy 20-year-olds).

And I'd be more than fine with Obadiah Stane coming back in the next Iron Man movie. One problem with today's wave of superhero movie franchises is that the villains lose a touch of their epicness by only appearing for one film and then being killed off. The X-films having Magneto in a starring role through all three is exactly how it should be.

 

[ourchair]

I liked that JARVIS was a robot. It was silly.

JARVIS the snooty AI was awesome.

And I think it makes total sense on levels above and beyond just 'modernizing' elements of the Iron Man verse.

 

[Grocer Man]

I'd rather see Stane in the sort of role Scarecrow will be in in The Dark Knight: becoming the new villain's whipping boy.

Imagine: Stane comes to to the Mandarin, offering to sell the Iron Monger armor (or remains of it) to the Mandarin in exchange for safety from SHIELD. The Mandarin says something along the lines of "No, because 1) you cost me some of my best men, 2) my reptilian friend surpasses your tin can in everyway, and 3) I'M THE MANDARIN, *****! YOU NEED PROTECTION FROM ME!"

Also, why no love for the little arm-bots in Stark's lab?

 

[bluebeast]

JARVIS the snooty AI was awesome.

And I think it makes total sense on levels above and beyond just 'modernizing' elements of the Iron Man verse.

I think it's much better than having a rehash of Alfred from Begins.

 

[Joe Kalicki]

I think it's much better than having a rehash of Alfred from Begins.

And it allows Langsta to get through the movie without crying.