Iron Man 3

Zubeneschamali · 29-04-2013 11:43am

constitutionus wrote: »

and on the mandarin
killians character made a brand of him of sorts so theres nothing to stop anyone else taking up the role.

I think if you want to go that route, it would turn out that Killian

lifted the name and imagery with the ten rings from the real Mandarin, who has been keeping a low profile until this offends him.

Penn · 29-04-2013 12:05pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think if you want to go that route, it would turn out that Killian
lifted the name and imagery with the ten rings from the real Mandarin, who has been keeping a low profile until this offends him.

Except for the fact

Killian shouted "I AM THE MANDARIN!" at Tony, coupled with his Chinese Dragon tattoos. There'd be no point using The Mandarin (a more comics-version of the Mandarin) in a future IM film because there'd be no excitement for it. Ben Kingsley was what we were supposed to expect, and Guy Pearce was what the Mandarin actually was. Having a future film with a new Mandarin which is was we expect and what The Mandarin actually is would be redundant, because it's essentially been done. They'd be far better going for different villains. Even non-typical IM villains, but ones from elsewhere in the Marvel Universe.

Zubeneschamali · 29-04-2013 12:14pm

Penn wrote: »

Except for the fact
Killian shouted "I AM THE MANDARIN!" at Tony, coupled with his Chinese Dragon tattoos.

But he obviously isn't. We see the Mandarin's ten rings symbology, what has that to do with Killian? Nothing. The real Mandarin with his alien-tech power rings may still be out there.

don ramo · 29-04-2013 12:26pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But he obviously isn't. We see the Mandarin's ten rings symbology, what has that to do with Killian? Nothing. The real Mandarin with his alien-tech power rings may still be out there.

which will hopefully leave the story open for avengers 2 or iron man 4,

the real mandarin will be pissed that he was mocked by killian and seek revenge on someone for it,

i hope anyway, it really seemed like a missed opportunity,

Mickeroo · 29-04-2013 1:28pm

Saw it on saturday night. Thought it was great, didn't hit the heights of Avengers but definitely better then both Iron Man movies imo (as much as I like the first it's only half of a great movie).

I loved that it felt like a Shane Black movie, it really had the feel of a Lethal Weapon movie in parts and having Tony

be without his suit for large parts of the film

was refreshing and

MK 42

was like a character in itself by the end!

I didn't find the comedy out of place at all, it managed to balance the darker parts and the humour quite well I thought in much the same way Avengers did last summer though this a slightly darker more character driven film than that was.

Regards the whole

Mandarin reveal. I have read some Iron Man (mainly stories involving other heroes like Civil War though) and I'm familiar with Mandarin from the cartoons. I had kind of sussed it before it happened but I thought "surely they wouldn't do that" and I was pretty taken aback when it actually did happen but to be honest as the film went on I didn't mind it all. It's pretty clear to me (and I'm agreeing with Penn's above post in saying this) that Pearce's character IS the The Mandarin. I think they've left it open enough for him to return in the future in a more traditional Mandarin like role too and I have no problem with them meshing the two characters together like they did. I have to commend the makers for misleading the public in the way they did, it's very rare for a blockbuster to throw in a surprise that left of field these days.

Overall it's one of the strongest films Marvel has done imo and it also showed they're not afraid to take some small risks too

namely the Mandarin stuff and having Tony without a suit.

It will be interesting to see how they deal with Stark in the next Avengers movie now.

The score was brilliant too and I absolutely adored the end credits sequence.

Oh and where was

the reference to the ten rings? totally missed that.

Handsome Bob · 29-04-2013 1:29pm

I remember people debating whether the rings would have any power....they really got us good.

Zubeneschamali · 29-04-2013 1:35pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Oh and where was
the reference to the ten rings? totally missed that.

At the start of each broadcast, they showed this:http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/8415/greeting0000layer7.png

Mc Love · 29-04-2013 3:11pm

Worth seeing this in 3D or stick with 2D?

Zubeneschamali · 29-04-2013 3:12pm

Mc Love wrote: »

Worth seeing this in 3D or stick with 2D?

I saw it in 3D, but only because that was what was showing at a sensible hour on a decent screen. I'd have preferred 2D.

krudler · 29-04-2013 3:20pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I saw it in 3D, but only because that was what was showing at a sensible hour on a decent screen. I'd have preferred 2D.

the cinema near me only has it on in 2D at 6pm, annoying

Sleepy · 29-04-2013 4:33pm

My 7 year old's three word review "That was BRILLIANT!!!".

My rather more wordy one

Overall I liked it. Up there with Iron Man and better than no. 2. My thoughts:

Not a comic reader so loved the Mandarin twist. TBH, from what I know of the character, it'd be fairly racist to use him in his original guise, this was far smarter.

The suits were way too damn fragile.

The arc reactor no longer being part of Tony only makes sense if he's injected himself with a fixed Extremis virus. Obviously they didn't show that as it allows them to "kill" Tony in Avengers 2 only to have Extremis allow him to regenerate, which would also end his issues at being "just a man in a can" beside the likes of Hulk / Thor etc.

Killian should have died from the Mark 42 explosion, Pepper killing him was just daft.

Gwyneth Paltrow is a damn fine advertisement for yoga (or whatever it is she's doing in the gym).

Duggy747 · 29-04-2013 6:43pm

Guy Pearce was certainly channelling his inner Don Johnson :pac:

$T2eC16VHJIQE9qUHtHBcBP6vIl1Rhw~~60_35.JPG

29-04-2013 6:49pm

I didnt like the movie at all. I thought they really dropped the ball. But just a question because i cant really remember. Was the new Iron Man suit fully functional at any point during the movie ?

Also did Iron Patriot fire his shoulder cannon at any point ?

I was kinda hoping for an Iron Man V Iron Patriot fight but that never happened.

Instead i got a Lethal Weapon movie.

krudler · 29-04-2013 7:27pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I didnt like the movie at all. I thought they really dropped the ball. But just a question because i cant really remember. Was the new Iron Man suit fully functional at any point during the movie ?

Also did Iron Patriot fire his shoulder cannon at any point ?

I was kinda hoping for an Iron Man V Iron Patriot fight but that never happened.

Instead i got a Lethal Weapon movie.

Did in IM2 though, same suit just repainted aint it?

the MK42 was functional during the house collapse, it was a work in progress though iirc.

Nervous Wreck · 29-04-2013 8:04pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

<Good post>

I agree with all this. IM3 was the strongest of the IMs. The first two both have pretty weak 3rd acts (Iron Man vs Iron Monger was boring; Iron Man vs. Drones/Whiplash was more boring). Tony Stark battling the bad guys with intermittent help from his Iron Man armours was interesting, fresh and dangerous.

krudler wrote: »

the MK42 was functional during the house collapse, it was a work in progress though iirc.

Didn't have full weapons or flight capabilities in the house (hence him throwing things at helicopters etc). The Mk42 was fully functional once in the movie; when it crashed Air Force One and then saved the falling people.

30-04-2013 9:21am

krudler wrote: »

Did in IM2 though, same suit just repainted aint it?

the MK42 was functional during the house collapse, it was a work in progress though iirc.

It was a different suit and different shoulder cannon. I even thought War Machine might even make an appearance at the end but no. He just stands there while all the other suits are being chopped in half. :rolleyes:

Penn · 30-04-2013 10:01am

Deleted User wrote: »

It was a different suit and different shoulder cannon. I even thought War Machine might even make an appearance at the end but no. He just stands there while all the other suits are being chopped in half. :rolleyes:

It wasn't a different suit, just painted and renamed (they said in the movie, they couldn't have a government-sanctioned weapon called War Machine. They changed it to Iron Patriot and painted the suit red, white & blue (kinda to act in the same way Captain America did)). And as shown in previous films, no-one can create suits as good as Tony can. Iron Monger failed (but was based off Tony's original design anyway). The Hammer drones in IM2 failed miserably (as did Whiplash's suit). The Government couldn't create an Iron Man suit for themselves, so they repainted and rebranded War Machine, which was one of Tony's suits. They might have changed a few of the weapons on it, but it was the same suit as in the first film.

And in fairness, he doesn't stand there while other suits are being destroyed, he gets the President to safety, which was kinda the whole point. I agree that he had very little to do in the film and I would have liked to have seen some more action with him, but I think you're being overly harsh.

ConnorHunter · 30-04-2013 10:28am

Iron man Movie is awesome, I love this movie but i have not seen Iron Man 3.

Hardonraging · 30-04-2013 10:33am

Words fail me as to how disappointing IM3 was , from what was a good action movie franchise, came a cash cow ... I appreciate the story line, and the general direction they will go now with it, but it really just didnt hit the spot for me at all !!

Greyjoy · 30-04-2013 10:33am

I really liked it, I thought it was a huge improvement over IM2. The Extremis storyline gave Stark enemies that were much more visually interesting than just another bloke in a suit. I really liked Guy Pearce's performance as Killian, for me that's what Sam Rockwell's Justin Hammer should have been like in IM2.

That being said there were things that dragged it down for me.

I hated how they treated the Mandarin, I don't mind changing or adapting story ideas for a movie but this went too far for me.

They took a character who should have been Stark's ultimate nemesis and reduced him to a stooge. It would have been comparable to discovering in the Dark Knight that Joker isn't actually a maniac, he was just one of Ra's Al Ghuls' henchmen dressed in clown make-up.

I watched IM1 again on the telly last night and having Killian be the puppetmaster behind the Mandarin & the 10 Rings opens up a can of plot holes in IM1. Why would the 10 Rings need Stark to build a missile if they have a mastermind like Killian in charge? Why would they turn over the MK1 suit to Obidiah instead of giving it to the Mandarin/Killian?

But the biggest flaw for me with the Mandarin reveal is that the film takes a jarring change of tone into an overly comedic style. The movie is building towards its climax, a showdown with the villain and suddenly the bad guy is revealed to be a buffoon. It lets an awful lot of the tension just seep out of the story.

If I were more cynical I would suggest that the treatment of the Mandarin is a cop-out to the Chinese market instead of having a genuine Asian villain.

I didn't mind the absence of the other Avengers as this would be a problem that Thor & the Hulk would just sit it out. But where the hell was Captain America? Terrorist bombings on American soil and the president threatened on national television but Cap's nowhere to be seen? They didn't need to actually have Chris Evans in a guest role but just acknowledge his existence, just have Stark & Rogers check in with each other about the Mandarin.

Penn · 30-04-2013 11:06am

But again,

Ben Kingsley wasn't the Mandarin, Killian was the Mandarin. They didn't reduce The Mandarin to being a stooge, they just misdirected people as to who the Mandarin actually was. Ben Kingsley was playing who we thought was The Mandarin, and likewise, who everyone in the film thought was The Mandarin. But Aldrich Killian was actually The Mandarin, both in terms of planning and power. Being on the rooftop on New Years Eve made him realise that anonymity was true power, so ruling behind the scenes and both creating an enemy and having the Vice President (soon to be President if his plan had worked) meant he'd control the whole war economy in both supply and demand. Same goes for the audience, we all thought Ben Kingsley was the Mandarin but it was Killian who was the real power, the real Mandarin.

Zubeneschamali · 30-04-2013 11:17am

Penn wrote: »

But again,
it was Killian who was the real power, the real Mandarin.

Power, yes; Mandarin, no. Killian's Mandarin is either a fiction or (more likely, given the Ten Rings in the first movie) a hijack of the real Mandarin's persona.

Penn · 30-04-2013 11:31am

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Power, yes; Mandarin, no. Killian's Mandarin is either a fiction or (more likely, given the Ten Rings in the first movie) a hijack of the real Mandarin's persona.

Pretty much his last line in the film is: "I AM THE MANDARIN". He also happened to have huge Chinese dragon tattoos on his chest. There's no reason why he couldn't have taken over the Ten Rings group after the first film (given how they were betrayed and most probably killed by Stane) and came up with Ben Kingsley's Mandarin character to be the figurehead, while he was actually the real Mandarin in control of everything.

30-04-2013 11:37am

Penn wrote: »

It wasn't a different suit, just painted and renamed (they said in the movie, they couldn't have a government-sanctioned weapon called War Machine. They changed it to Iron Patriot and painted the suit red, white & blue (kinda to act in the same way Captain America did)). And as shown in previous films, no-one can create suits as good as Tony can. Iron Monger failed (but was based off Tony's original design anyway). The Hammer drones in IM2 failed miserably (as did Whiplash's suit). The Government couldn't create an Iron Man suit for themselves, so they repainted and rebranded War Machine, which was one of Tony's suits. They might have changed a few of the weapons on it, but it was the same suit as in the first film.

And in fairness, he doesn't stand there while other suits are being destroyed, he gets the President to safety, which was kinda the whole point. I agree that he had very little to do in the film and I would have liked to have seen some more action with him, but I think you're being overly harsh.

It was a different suit. Different shoulder cannon and different body plate.
The government didnt just re-paint the war machine suit. They did however modify it. Again notice the chest plate, shoulders etc...

Penn · 30-04-2013 11:40am

Deleted User wrote: »

It was a different suit. Different shoulder cannon and different body plate.
The government didnt just re-paint the war machine suit. They did however modify it. Again notice the chest plate, shoulders etc...

Well yes, they modified the suit, but what I mean is it's the same suit. It's the same Iron Man suit he stole from Tony in the last film which they made into War Machine. Likewise, they just modified it again in this one to be Iron Patriot.

Zubeneschamali · 30-04-2013 12:02pm

Penn wrote: »

There's no reason why he couldn't have taken over the Ten Rings group after the first film

But why were they called 10 rings back then? Clearly, because of the real Mandarin - the one with the actual 10 rings.

Len_007 · 30-04-2013 12:16pm

Anyone else spot Rebecca Mader in it?

Burkatron · 30-04-2013 12:16pm

Too many people on here debating on what if's! They ****ed the continuity up & made a piss poor movie.

Mickeroo · 30-04-2013 12:28pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But why were they called 10 rings back then? Clearly, because of the real Mandarin - the one with the actual 10 rings.

It was just an easter egg for the fans Imo, they had no idea where the franchise was going to go back then.

Penn · 30-04-2013 12:28pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But why were they called 10 rings back then? Clearly, because of the real Mandarin - the one with the actual 10 rings.

But you're applying comics history to a film which is outside of the comics universe. There are several hints and nods to various comics things in all the films but it doesn't mean they're actual plot points. In Thor, Natalie Portman gives Thor clothes which has her ex-boyfriend's nametag of Donald Blake on them. In the comics, Donald Blake is Thor's human powerless alter-ego. In Captain America, Arnim Zola's face first appears like it's on a green-tinted screen (which is how he looks in the comics), but it zooms out and it's just a type of magnifying glass and he's just a normal guy.

The terror group in IM1 being called The Ten Rings was a nod to the Mandarin (having ten magic rings, but not being in control of a terrorist group called The Ten Rings afaik), but also was a way to introduce him into future films. They did that in this film, but they gave us a different Mandarin by combining him with another character (same way Whiplash in IM2 was a combination of the comics Whiplash and Crimson Dynamo).

Having "The Real Mandarin" as a baddie in a future film is redundant because then they're just rehashing part of the story and treading old ground, plus there'd be less excitement from the general audience to see it because they've already seen the Mandarin. It'd be like if Obadiah Stane's son became the next villain in a new Iron Monger suit. It's been done.

Iron Man 3

Comments