Iron Man 3

[Fist and Faith]

Wow! What a disappointment! Oh well, I guess they're allowed to miss after so many good movies. Let's just hope it doesn't become a habit.

[Cail]

Not what I wanted to hear. I thought the second one was horrible, I was hoping this one made up for that.

[I'm Murrin]

As I said in another thread last week - I enjoyed this one a lot, it was big, ridiculous fun without becoming dumb like Iron Man 2.

[dlbpharmd]

This was crap. The plot was like swiss cheese and the acting was horrible. This will kill the series.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Most superhero franchises don't make it past three, anyway. The actors become too old and it gets too difficult to keep topping the previous movie.

In all honesty, we never go to a movie based on a superhero for brilliant acting or a moving soundtrack. We go so we can see flashy action and watch things get shot by lasers or blow up.

The other problem lies with the screen writers. I suspect each of the three movies had a different team, meaning each movie was bringing something different to the table and we, the fans, are ultimately left with discontinuities we cannot quite resolve. The other side of that coin can be just as bad--one set of screenwriters maps the whole plot but wind up writing themselves into a corner they can't leave, such as what happened with The Matrix.

We still plan on seeing this one, though.

[Fist and Faith]

As I said in another thread last week - I enjoyed this one a lot, it was big, ridiculous fun without becoming dumb like Iron Man 2.

I can't really remember 2 enough. I guess I didn't love it so much that I saw it a bunch of times, but I sure don't remember having this feeling about it. I don't know what more they could have done to make 3 dumb. Sheer idiocy on little details and major aspects.

[DukkhaWaynhim]

Admittedly, I have a pretty low threshold of entertainment when it comes to superhero movies... but I enjoyed this movie. It was a popcorn fest, for sure, but that's what superhero movies are, unless they are based on graphic novels and doomed to disavowment by Alan Moore. This one certainly wasn't as good as Iron Man, but it sure was better than 2, by leaps and bounds.

dw

[Orlion]

Not what I wanted to hear. I thought the second one was horrible, I was hoping this one made up for that.

Yeah, I never understood the love people seem to have for the second one.

I'll eventually see this, but after I heard the villain was going to be "PC Mandarin", I've given up hope for this being a 'good movie'.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

The problem is that although the Iron Man franchise is loved by many fans (and even non-fans), once you get outside Iron Monger, Mandarin, Titanium Man, and Living Laser there aren't too many Iron Man foes who really stand out...at least, none really come to mind. Whiplash, whom they used in the second movie even though they never used that name, was never a "major" foe. I think having Spymaster steal the technology and thus start the Iron Wars would have been a decent plot but it might not have fit into only one movie.

[Menolly]

So, does the story hold up for a non-fan, who only follows the movies? If so, I'm good...

[I'm Murrin]

Not what I wanted to hear. I thought the second one was horrible, I was hoping this one made up for that.

Yeah, I never understood the love people seem to have for the second one.

I'll eventually see this, but after I heard the villain was going to be "PC Mandarin", I've given up hope for this being a 'good movie'.

The film is pretty clever about the Mandarin. Something of a meta-commentary exists there on the racist nature of the original character.

[Fist and Faith]

I was actually not bothered by the Mandarin. Yes, entirely unexpected. And it would've been great to see what we were expecting. He's had some great moments in the comics. But as twists go, this was great, and I thought they did it well.

Hashi, some of Iron Man's best moments, imo, were against the "good" guys. Obviously, Hulk comes to mind.

Menolly, no problem.

[wayfriend]

77% on rottentomatoes and yet it's so horridly bad? I am confused.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I suspect some of the commenters on various movie sites are on studio payrolls; their job is to give the movie a good rating.

[DukkhaWaynhim]

Yes, hype on both sides. Reviews and percentages skewed by marketing groups trying to influence the buzz.

But also, don't underestimate the negativity of the meh-ers' ennui, and the disillusioned fanboys with little-big gripes and plenty of 2am keyboard time to vent their nerd spleens.

Sequels are rarely as good as the originators. And some, like Fast and Furious, never started out good, and just got steadily worse. Yet people still watch them. They are what they are.

dw

[I'm Murrin]

77% on rottentomatoes and yet it's so horridly bad? I am confused.

The film's good. A bit silly, but good.

[Orlion]

77% on rottentomatoes and yet it's so horridly bad? I am confused.

The film's good. A bit silly, but good.

A bit silly, with the understanding that this is an understatement, is about right. As far as a 77% on rottentomatoes, that kinda disappoints me... but apparently the Dark Knight Rises got an 87 %.... makes me wonder sometimes if they even watch the same movie.

I would expect around 70% approval with the general audience. It's an entertaining enough movie, it is also leaps and bounds better than Iron Man 2 even if this movie kinda makes a major part of the conflict in that movie...pointless....

Spoiler

I mean, Tony Stark just ups and removes the piece of shrapnel. That 'getting poisoned to death by the generator' story line? Completely rendered unnecessary!

Ultimately, the problems I had with the film:

1) Extremely predictable.
2) The villain tries way too hard to demonstrate that he does not value human life. It's very cartoony.
3) And yet, the villains have a much better, much more moral motivation then the heroes. What the bloody hell?
4) Suffers a little from "Raiders-of-the-Lost-Ark-itis". Essentially, the Nazis in that movie were going to have their faces melted off whether they were opposed by Doctor Jones or no. Really, the conflict in that movie is completely pointless... and, ultimately, a lot of the action in this one kinda is as well.

It's a good popcorn flick, worth the five dollars I spent on it.

[I'm Murrin]

Few quibbles I didn't mention before:

- An extremis-powered villain can survive being exploded, reforming like the goddamn T1000, but dies if you put a hole through his chest.
- Just touching an Iron Man suit with an Extremis-heated hand will disable all its systems... unless you're in a big fight with lots of Iron Man suits in which case it does nothing.
- Badly designed Iron Man suits are completely disabled by decapitation. Tony Stark's supposed to be way too smart to build all of the control systems into the head...

[wayfriend]

I saw it! I liked it. I agree that there's a lot of unexplained technical stuff. But giving Rebecca Hall screen time more than makes up for it. Anyway, the important part of the story, which culminates in Stark's final words, was I think done well for the genre.

The future of Iron Man seems wide open. A cathartic cleansing, a healing, and a renewed sense of identify. I can see the story arc going in any direction; I can see the story arc being considered 'done' too.

[Orlion]

I saw it! I liked it. I agree that there's a lot of unexplained technical stuff. But giving Rebecca Hall screen time more than makes up for it.

That was actually the main reason why I went to see it