Thread of Iron Man 2 Anti-Hype, Now w/ Real-Time Movie Discussion!

[The Dark Shake 3000]

I wouldn't be surprised if post-Avengers, Marvel's film division went right to doing big event "crossover" films every summer. Then people could lose interest in comic book movies -- just like the comics themselves!

[Himu]

Marvel didn't do Ghost Rider, the only movies they have done are Ironman and The Incredible Hulk.

Wow great track record there. 

They are on a track to ruin their franchises. They are rushing everything out as fast as possible to do the avengers and keeping everything tied together in one continuity. And they plan to keep doing sequels to thor/iron man/captain america at the same time as doing multiple avenger movies despite the fact they share leads.

They are turning their self-produced films into everything that is wrong with comics. They signed both chris evans and samuel l. jackson to nine film contracts. They'll probably have to resign them in 3 years based at the rate they plan to force these characters at you.

You get to see captain america and thor twice in less than one year. Not to mention iron man 3 times in the span of 4 years. It's overkill.

Seriously, downey is good as Stark but by the time iron man 3 hits which they already announced you'll have see him four times as a lead in the span of 6 years. That is way too fucking much. These aren't comics.

[WrikaWrek]

I was shocked to hear this is tracking to do really well, somewhere in TDK territory apparently. No one I know is talking about it irl and no one (myself included) seems to have any interest in it. The first film was mediocrity to the nth degree and this looks even more scatter-shot and forgettable.

Huh

Iron Man was the feel good movie of its year, in the same sense that Pirates of The Caribbean was. Whether you liked the movie or not is largely irrelevant to the great word of mouth it received, and the reason why Iron Man 2 isn't being really fucking hyped amongst the nerd crowd is because Iron Man was a mainstream success mostly, and wasn't a movie that had high goals in terms of its story and characters.

Iron Man 2 is tracking huge because, unlike say, Kick Ass for example....the mainstream crowd is gonna fill those theaters no questions asked. Same goes for the buzz, nerds talk Kick Ass but people just wanna go see Iron Man 2, and all they have to say is "Trailer was cool, i'm watching it", nobody gives a fuck about knowing stuff before it happens. Which is exactly what's so creepy about these Dark Knight fanboys.

No surprise really, as DC fanboys are the most vocal online, while Marvel got the short end of the stick by selling the most.

Worth the wait, Superman Returns....biggest pile of shit ever.

So "feel good" trumps something that people clearly took time making, working up anticipation for, and which happens to be one of the biggest films (and critically successful to boot) of all time?

Yeah, you make no fucking sense. Who's the fanboy?

TDK was a sequel to a very liked Batman Begins. Plus the joker died! It wasn't some dc fanboys sweating down their pits that made TDK a hit, it was the Begins + Death combo.

Remember how Avatar had little real hype?  Anyway that's besides the point. Sequels do big bucks depending on the originals, and people loved Iron Man 1 and it was actually a much bigger hit than Begins, so maybe it can do without Robert Downey Jr dying in order to match TDK numbers.

And look, There has been like what? One harry potter each year and a half? And all of them make kinda the same money TDK does. It's really no different here, there's already a fuck ton of material written, all you have to do is adapt stories.

If Batman takes longer, is really because Cristopher Nolan makes other movies in between Batmans, not because the actual movies take longer to make.

[ManaByte]

Movie screened tonight.

It takes place prior to Incredible Hulk.

Apparently there's more Nick Fury and he does a lot to recruit IM into the Avengers.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

So there's a gay sex scene?

[ManaByte]

Miss typed that. He apparently does a lot more than just try to recruit IM.

There's also some kind of reference to "another" Avengers potential, which is probably Hulk.

[Dickie Dee]

I liked the first IM but wasn't gay for it or anything.

Why is the internet compelled to hate slightly nice things??

[Raban]

Why, is it internet-fad to hate Iron Man 2 like it was to love Iron Man 1?

Iron Man was a forgettable action film with Downey sleeping through yet another role and Iron Man 2 looks to be the same, will see it to watch Rourke and Rockwell, just like I saw the first for Bridges.

[ManaByte]

This was on Superhero Hype:

SFX Magazine's March issue features an interview with Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige in which he talks more about the studio's upcoming projects and makes one fairly big reveal.

Feige talked about how Iron Man, Iron Man 2 (May 7), Thor (May 6, 2011) and The First Avenger: Captain America (July 22, 2011) will lay the foundation for what should be the ultimate superhero epic - The Avengers (May 4, 2012).

"It's fun now, and we're introducing some new characters in ['Iron Man 2']," he told the magazine. "But it's not about just cramming in lots of new people; that's sort of the cardinal sin of the sequel - adding in too many characters. This is totally Tony Stark's story. And that's gonna weave into Thor's story, and Steve Rogers' story, and it's already ingrained with Nick Fury's story and an organization known as S.H.I.E.L.D."

He says that it is important to first focus on each character. "My only concern is that when we launch a franchise--whichever character's franchise that may be--it should stand on its own two feet... So by the time 'The Avengers' comes in 2012, it's not just a team superhero movie with a bunch of characters with powers. It's three people - four including the Hulk; five including Nick Fury - who you've seen before in other movies, coming together for the very first time."

Catch that Hulk bit? Feige also said that he won't rule out the possibility of a second Incredible Hulk film with Edward Norton. "That would be post-'Avengers,' if it happened... I think there's a chance. It's certainly our intention to use the same actors from film to film where we can."

Feige was asked it will be difficult to meld the fantasy of Thor with the high-tech science fiction in Iron Man and The Avengers. "No," he said, "because we're doing the Jack Kirby/Stan Lee/Walt Simonson/J. Michael Straczynski 'Thor.' We're not doing the blow-the-dust-off-of-the-old-Norse-book-in-your-library 'Thor.' And in the 'Thor' of the Marvel Universe, there's a race called the Asgardians. And we're linked through this Tree of Life that we're unaware of. It's real science, but we don't know about it yet. The 'Thor' movie is about teaching people that."

All the people panicing OMG TOO MANY CHARACTERS can shut up. The people who saw IM2 tonight confirmed that it's not like Spider-Man 3 with too many added characters.

That story also finally confirmed Hulk in Avengers and a possible second Norton Hulk movie.

[ManaByte]

IIRC the plan following Avengers is to have the characters appearing in each others movies like how Cap was in the original opening to Incredible Hulk. They want Avengers to establish that they all work together, so characters like Cap and Nick Fury can then show up in the IM and Hulk sequels as well as the smaller movies they're planning.

Major characters like Iron Man get $200 mil budgets, but they're planning Dr. Strange, Luke Cage, and Black Panther as smaller $40-60 mil movies and they want the bigger characters to show up there.

And you're a fucking idiot if you think DC doesn't want to do the same. Clark Kent was going to show up in Green Lantern, but the Superman lawsuit killed that real fast.

[Cheebs]

Iron Man 2 is before Hulk? Wha? What is the order to all these movies in this series?

[ManaByte]

Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Incredible Hulk

Parts of Thor may take place before all of them, but the stuff on Earth is definitely after IM2.

The WWII stuff in Cap is naturally before those first three.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

Wow, Marvel's already hard at work making their continuity wonky as fuck. Nice.

[Ichirou]

Can Warner Bros. actually make another Superman film or are they screwed until the lawsuit is resolved?

[The Fake Shemp]

I believe they have until 2012 or something like that to make another Superman flick. That's why it's on the fast track. After that, they have to reach some kind of licensing deal with the estate.

[WrikaWrek]

Best hopes for WB is to make hit a homerun with the next Superman movie, like they did with Batman. Which will give them the upper hand when negotiating for the license, when it gets taken away from their hands.

Their complacency with the superman franchise is going to cost them hard. They have 2 years and change to come out with a script, get a director, a cast, and a have it all green lit and with a heavy budget behind it that will allow it to shoot next year, and release in 2012.

Not seeing it really. And fact is, they lose superman, they lose half of their properties selling power, unless Green Lantern turns a hit. And the Justice League, never happening without Superman.

At least Marvel has all the main Avengers within their control. 

[Cheebs]

The whole superman franchise is a mess. Although Quentin Tarantino says Superman Returns is the greatest super hero movie ever made. lolol

[The Dark Shake 3000]

At least he didn't say it was Spider-Man 2

[Cheebs]

At least he didn't say it was Spider-Man 2

I'd rather rewatch a fanboyish love letter to Richard Donner than any of the Spider-Man movies. Real Talk.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

Real talk. Accept no substitutes.

But I'd still rather forget Spider-Man 3 or Superman Returns exist.

[Phoenix Dark]

Superman Returns>>>Batman Begins

[The Dark Shake 3000]

No.

[brawndolicious]

No.

In what way?  And don't give me that majority opinion bullshit mr.fucking film school cigarillo sir, they're both boring movies but batman
just has faggier fans.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

Majority opinion has nothing to do with it. Superman Returns was forgettable, mediocre and, frankly (at the time anyway) hella disappointing. Batman Begins, while not the end-all be-all, is still a very good film with solid performances, a good screenplay, etc. None of which I felt Returns really had. You don't need a film school education™ to see that one is a well made film and the other is mostly fanwank with a very, very shoddy script that needed a few more passes before production.

EDIT - Oh fuck, I'm halfway asleep and didn't even notice I was responding to am nintenho. Disregard the above. Supermanz is fo' fagz, yo.

[brawndolicious]

You're comparing two pieces of fanwank, one that might have catered to your little post-modern comic book fantasies but both are not anything more ambitious nerdy peepshow fanwank.

Superman returns at least was a tribute of the old films and so was at least derivative of something good in that regard, while batman begins skullfucked the idea of a comic book movie and tried to put itself on the pedestal of realism and such emotional bullshits that only a slack-jawed, house-ridden nerd could unsheathe his dick over, and thus became a critical success.

And there is no way that you could get your name printed on the diploma of a fucking accredited university and believe that bale's voice when in costume was a good idea.

[Raban]

You're comparing two pieces of fanwank, one that might have catered to your little post-modern comic book fantasies but both are not anything more ambitious nerdy peepshow fanwank.

Superman returns at least was a tribute of the old films and so was at least derivative of something good in that regard, while batman begins skullfucked the idea of a comic book movie and tried to put itself on the pedestal of realism and such emotional bullshits that only a slack-jawed, house-ridden nerd could unsheathe his dick over, and thus became a critical success.

And there is no way that you could get your name printed on the diploma of a fucking accredited university and believe that bale's voice when in costume was a good idea.

tbh Nolan didn't do this. Batman Begins was only copying Frank Miller's take on the character. Also, I'm sorry, Superman Returns was fucking terrible. To explain it any further is ridiculous.

[WrikaWrek]

Lol at the thought of Superman Returns, of all super hero movies being better than Spiderman 2. You should really drop that dosage of DC kool aid, christ.

[Cormacaroni]

Man, EB really gets worked up every time a superhero movie is brought up. Everyone likes to be all cool about it like they don't really care and it's all forgettable popcorn fare and not the sticky-sweet realization of their every pre-teen fantasy...until their fave gets dissed and the lists come out

If Iron Man is so goddamn fluffy and forgettable why on EARTH do we all still talk about it 2 years later, at the slightest provocation? Just admit it bitches, you love it.

[Solo]

This will be crap just like the first one. I can only hope that Sam Rockwell's presence makes it a fun kind of crap.

[Cheebs]

Spider-Man 2 is a far better as super hero movie but Superman Returns is more interesting as a film to watch. I can't watch any of the Spider-Man movies anymore, they bore me. Especially the first. The first and to a lesser extent the second feel so much like the modern standard super hero movie formula that has grown extremely tired. The third at least has the so bad it's good quality too it at least. Superman Returns is semi-enjoyable to watch as a piece of fanboyish Richard Donner homages. Not anywhere near as great as Tarantino proclaims it as though.

In fact they only really good super hero comic based movies of the modern era I would say are really good are the two Batman's and X-Men 2.

[WrikaWrek]

Spiderman 2 is the only close to perfect super hero movie we have.

I mean seriously, Batmans have more interesting characters and more complex plots. Sure.

And whether Superman Returns is a fanboy homage or not, doesn't really fucking matter because it's garbage. Now why do i say that Spiderman 2 is a close to perfect super hero movie? Because for starters Peter Parker will always be a much better conceived gateway between the audience and the hero, than some God like Superman or billionaires like Tony Stark and Bruce Wayne. And then, you know, Spiderman 2 actually does super hero stuff in it, larger than life, edge of your seat "maybe he will not make it" stuff.

Where is that in the other movies? See the problem with Batman is that, undeniably he was the least interesting part of TDK, half of the audience was rooting for The Joker. In that sense, TDK could've been the close to perfect super villain movie. In X Men 2, well...there really is nothing super hero about any of it. Superman returns is lol worthy in that respect. And Iron Man, look Iron Man ain't about no super hero, it's about man's fascination with badass iron armors, that shoot lasers and shit.

Fuck, Blade 2 does the super hero stuff better than those. 

[Solo]

Spiderman 2 is the only close to perfect super hero movie we have.
 

This is about the only thing I've ever agreed with you on 

[Great Rumbler]

If Iron Man is so goddamn fluffy and forgettable why on EARTH do we all still talk about it 2 years later, at the slightest provocation? Just admit it bitches, you love it.

Well, there is that sequel coming out in a few weeks.

[Cheebs]

Spiderman 2 is the only close to perfect super hero movie we have.

I mean seriously, Batmans have more interesting characters and more complex plots. Sure.
 

That is where the problem is for me. I find the normal super hero formula incredibly boring. The Nolan Batman movies are more crime dramas that just happen to have a super hero in them, and Superman Returns in its own (far less effective) way is a polar opposite of a super hero movie. Superman doesn't fit anyone and it's more about being a dead beat dad than it is about super heroes. Which is why I found it more interesting than the Spider-Man/etc movies.

I just plain find traditional super hero movies a bore after seeing so many, when a movie breaks from that formula like Nolan's Batman movies did and Superman Returns did that is what catches my attention.

Same for X-Men 2. I also really really love Batman Returns.

[fistfulofmetal]

Spider-Man 2 is garbage. I hate that the myth of it being good is still being pushed around. Seeing it was probably a worse experience than Spider-Man 3 because I had such high hopes.

[Cheebs]

The only super hero movies I actually really like and enjoy are (no order):
Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Batman Returns, Batman (1966 version), Superman: The Movie (and the DC cut of Superman II), X-Men 2.

Nothing else is worth mentioning. And yes I LOVE the '66 Batman. It's fantastic.

[fistfulofmetal]

I'm in love with Hellboy 2. my personal top fav.

[Solo]

You love Watchmen, fistful. If anyones pushing a myth, its you.

[fistfulofmetal]

i don't love Watchmen. I like it. Mostly for Billy Crudup's performance.

[Cheebs]

It's amazing how quickly people forgot Watchmen. It came out only last year and no one ever talks about it anymore. What a forgettable messy film.

[fistfulofmetal]

Watchmen > Spider-Man 2

[Solo]

It's amazing how quickly people forgot Watchmen. It came out only last year and no one ever talks about it anymore. What a forgettable messy film.

Thats what happens to overhyped and ultimately crappy movies. Ive never read the comic so I went in with no prior attachments, and I thought it was poor on pretty much every level.

[Cheebs]

Watchmen > Spider-Man 2

I am not a big fan of Spider-Man 2 but....lol.

It's amazing how quickly people forgot Watchmen. It came out only last year and no one ever talks about it anymore. What a forgettable messy film.

Thats what happens to overhyped and ultimately crappy movies. Ive never read the comic so I went in with no prior attachments, and I thought it was poor on pretty much every leve.

Same here. The movie has basically turned me off ever reading the comic, not that I have ever read comics before in the first place.

[The Fake Shemp]

Why would a bad film turn you off to reading what is widely considered a landmark graphic novel, and the only one one to ever win the Hugo Award? That's silly.

That's like me saying, "Man, I'm never going to read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy after that mediocre, unfunny film adaptation!"

[Solo]

Because while the movie may have bungled whatever the book was striving for, the fact that so many have called it a faithful adaptation leads me to believe that the source material wouldnt do it for me either.

That and Ive only read like 2 comic books in my whole life.

[fistfulofmetal]

I watched the animated Black Freighter short recently and I feel it's better than Watchmen. Butler did some great narration.

[The Fake Shemp]

It's faithful in that it carries over a lot of the material, but how it is presented is completely different on account that Alan Moore wrote it for a completely different medium than film.

Again, silly nonsense.

I mean, I at least had the good sense to read all those crappy Harry Potter novels before ragging on both the films and books. Why revel in ignorance?

[Cheebs]

I wouldn't have read it anyway even if it is great. I can't read comics. They give me a headache, not a fan of the format. I tried to read Watchmen once but couldn't last more than like 2 pages. The comic format is not my cup of tea.

[The Fake Shemp]

How do you get a headache from reading?!

[Third]

Donald Duck is the only comic I've ever read.

[Veidt]

Spider-Man 2 is a far better as super hero movie but Superman Returns is more interesting as a film to watch. I can't watch any of the Spider-Man movies anymore, they bore me. Especially the first. The first and to a lesser extent the second feel so much like the modern standard super hero movie formula that has grown extremely tired. The third at least has the so bad it's good quality too it at least. Superman Returns is semi-enjoyable to watch as a piece of fanboyish Richard Donner homages. Not anywhere near as great as Tarantino proclaims it as though.

In fact they only really good super hero comic based movies of the modern era I would say are really good are the two Batman's and X-Men 2.

I agree with this. Superman Returns is exactly that.

[Cheebs]

How do you get a headache from reading?!

Comics, not reading in general. 

It's just not my thing. I love movies, I love music, I love TV. I don't like comics, I don't like video games, I don't like anime. It's not a big deal.

Also it doesn't hurt for me that Superman Returns is a sequel to the Donner movies. Which is the only Superman I know of. I never seen the animated series, never saw Superman III or IV and I clearly never read the comics. All I know is the Donner Superman. That's Superman to me.

[Veidt]

I've watched the animated series, loved the superman in those.

[The Fake Shemp]

Superman Returns is awful.

[Cheebs]

Watching Superman I & II all the time as a kid makes it hard not to love stuff like this:
[youtube=560,345][/youtube]

[The Fake Shemp]

Glad to know that your favorite thing about the movie is the opening credits.

[Cheebs]

Glad to know that your favorite thing about the movie is the opening credits.

It actually is my favorite part. 

Like I said, its shit as a super hero movie, enjoyable as 2 hours of masturbation to Richard Donner.

[The Fake Shemp]

It's pretty much "shit" just as a movie.

[Diunx]

SR is pretty much shit no matter which way you look at it, its probably one of the worse waste of money I have seem in my life.

And Solo Watchmen was not a faithful adaptation of the book at all, some distinguished mentally-challenged fellows just see some scene lifted directly from the panels and start barfing that shit, the movie is a piece of crap and the book is a masterwork of the medium.

[Great Rumbler]

Superman Returns probably would have been better if it weren't just a boring retread of Superman: The Movie.