It's kinda weird seeing how everyone here is saying Iron Man 3 is so underrated.
Granted, 3 is my least favorite of the series, but almost everywhere else I've been on the net the opinion seems to be that 2 is the weak one & people generally seem to like 3 (at least better than 2).
Currently Playing:
Switch - Blade Strangers
PS4 - Kingdom Hearts III, Tetris Effect (VR)
It's kinda weird seeing how everyone here is saying Iron Man 3 is so underrated.
Granted, 3 is my least favorite of the series, but almost everywhere else I've been on the net the opinion seems to be that 2 is the weak one & people generally seem to like 3 (at least better than 2).
Precisely.
But ironically enough... I kinda liked Iron Man 2 more than 3 because it had a decent script buried beneath studio interference. I feel like if Jon Favreau had more creative say/freedom instead of being forced to advertise the upcoming Avengers tie-ins, that movie might've been more decent. It's based on a very interesting and emotional story arc from the comics too, "Demon in a Bottle," which dealt with Tony's alcoholism. I could only wonder if they cast RDJ just to have him play out that arc in Iron Man 2. If so, I'd say they wasted the opportunity to tell a story that would've resonated with both RDJ (in dealing with his demons on-screen) and the audience.
I feel like Hi-Top Films explained it better than me why this sequel could've been so good:
@Rambler genuine question but do you feel the show is trippy? That was my hang up on it as all the memes and parodies suggested it was gonna be an acid trip.
It's kinda weird seeing how everyone here is saying Iron Man 3 is so underrated.
Granted, 3 is my least favorite of the series, but almost everywhere else I've been on the net the opinion seems to be that 2 is the weak one & people generally seem to like 3 (at least better than 2).
While yes, I think 3 is the best one, and that Iron Man 1 is pretty sweet and better than 2, Iron Man 2 is still enjoyable to me, even with all its issues. While I think that Iron Man 3 has the best humor (hot take) and definitely the best fight scenes (really they're so criminally underrated and unique to the MCU), and that Iron Man 1 has the best introduction to new (or then-new) characters and the best overall story, 2 still holds a special place in my heart, and probably has some of the coolest scenes in the Iron Man trilogy, especially that suitcase scene, that's amazing to this day.
Iron Man 3 is awesome. It's in my top 10 superhero films. I do enjoy Iron Man 2 it's not perfect but it's got a cameo from real life Tony Stark it get's brownie points just for that.
The reason Iron Man 3 is bad movie is because how they messed up the Mandrian. If it wasn't for that, it would have been a good movie.
I want to agree with this so much just because I hate the twist. lol But I think over the years, I've kinda accepted that Shane Black had his own creative vision he wanted to tell, so I wouldn't call it a bad movie, but more of a movie that annoys me and fans who wanted the real Mandarin. I can see what Shane was going for with his Mandarin, the US focusing more on obvious external threats than the enemies within, but I just couldn't enjoy it because of my own biasness of not having seen RDJ going against his greatest foe of all time from the comics. That's all it is.
@Maxenmus Let's be honest the only reason the did what they did to the Mandarin was so they didn't offend people, which I can understand. However if that's going to be a problem then it might be a good idea just not to do that character.
RetiredPush Square Moderator and all around retro gamer.
@Tasuki I mean, it's a tough balancing act though, whether to appease the fans or go through with Shane Black's ambitious ideas. I do think that using an established IP that has a lot of fan expectations behind it to do their little indie film experiment might not have been the best decision. I applaud Marvel for trying to do something new with the superhero genre... but it's Iron Man 3, man. They shouldn't have messed with the end of the trilogy with an art project experiment. People didn't pay to see a subversive take on superhero films or a subversive take on terrorism; they paid to see Iron Man. It's like doing a silent mime art show at a monster truck rally. It's out of place, pretentious, and ridiculous.
but it's Iron Man 3, man. They shouldn't have messed with the end of the trilogy with an art project experiment. People didn't pay to see a subversive take on superhero films or a subversive take on terrorism; they paid to see Iron Man. It's like doing a silent mime art show at a monster truck rally. It's out of place, pretentious, and ridiculous.
I see your point, it does seem a little out of place with where it stands in the trilogy.
I'd also like to say the MCU really likes to hire "indie directors" to direct their movies, mainly because "indie directors" are cheap and will listen to studio creative orders. "A director" (like Steven Spielberg or Edgar Wright) someone who has more of a creative vision and experience is more likely to want to follow their own vision. As of recently a lot of the directors at (Disney) Marvel are "indie", I guess they don't want a Iron Man 3 to happen again.
@Kermit1 It's actually the opposite, Marvel hires indie directors for their ideas. Scott Derrickson was hired as he had the idea of the loop end fight, Joss Whedon envisioned the third act being a war film which won the pitch, Taika Waititi was hired to make Thor funny, Chloe Zhao wanted to focus on visual richness and world building etc.
It's also Marvel, they aren't hurting for cash and just managed to bring the very expensive and established Sam Raimi into directing again.
@jump I need to triple check stuff before I say them.
It's fine. It's hard to remember to triple-check everything you say online sometimes. We're not here to debate each other on hard facts; we're here to have a casual conversation and chill.
but it's Iron Man 3, man. They shouldn't have messed with the end of the trilogy with an art project experiment. People didn't pay to see a subversive take on superhero films or a subversive take on terrorism; they paid to see Iron Man. It's like doing a silent mime art show at a monster truck rally. It's out of place, pretentious, and ridiculous.
I see your point, it does seem a little out of place with where it stands in the trilogy.
I'd also like to say the MCU really likes to hire "indie directors" to direct their movies, mainly because "indie directors" are cheap and will listen to studio creative orders. "A director" (like Steven Spielberg or Edgar Wright) someone who has more of a creative vision and experience is more likely to want to follow their own vision. As of recently a lot of the directors at (Disney) Marvel are "indie", I guess they don't want a Iron Man 3 to happen again.
See, even though you got this wrong, this did happen more in the earlier phases of the MCU. I think Edgar Wright was one of the more egregious decisions they made. I thought Ant-Man felt like an uninspired and generic heist film, but I don't know if getting Wright to stay would've made the film more entertaining for me. Guess we'll never know.
I do think that hiring Chloe Zhao was the right ambitious move Marvel made in trusting a director's vision, so at the very least, Marvel is continuing to be experimental even at the top of their game. When Phase 4 happened, and everyone was complaining about how boring WandaVision was, I applauded their take on Wanda because it felt like a fresh new take on superheroes we've rarely seen before. Plus, it really helped that it felt spiritually faithful to the comics, particularly House of M, so I think Marvel, for the most part, achieved a decent balance between experimenting and appeasing the comic book fans in WandaVision... at least until the dumb last episode with Ralph Bohner and disappointing millions of X-Men fans everywhere. Oh well. But I thought the last episode aside, it was a good sign that Marvel was at least trying to explore unconventional stories we'd rarely see in superhero shows. And of course, as I've repetitively said, I loved Eternals when everyone hated it because of this reason.
at least until the dumb last episode with Ralph Bohner and disappointing millions of X-Men fans everywhere.
The theory's people made for that show I think helped with viewership and hurt the show in the end (hear me out). When people started making theories for who was the (my memory is a little foggy) special help and the main guess was Reed Richards and we ended up getting a "normal person". Then when (Ralph Bohner) showed up and people went wild with ideas and theory's.
Wandavision is a 7/10 from me, liked the show but the rabid theorizing killed it for me.
Though for superhero films the first Christopher Reeves Superman is my still favorite superhero film ever, and nothing can really top it for me.
Forums
Topic: Movie thread.
Posts 3,221 to 3,240 of 6,950
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic