Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So...Iron Man anyone? :blush:

 

Iron man the sea guy, is that the films title?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see them use the Warren Ellis characterization of Tony Stark. As much as I hated that story-arc, Ellis' character of Stark was great.

If they just kept that first issue interview with Stark.

But they won't. There are people in Hollywood who can comprehend that conversation and understand what it was about, but they wouldn't be allowed to faithfully reproduce it in the movie. They'd have to alter it in some politically noxious way, and probably stereotype and demean people in the process.

 

Well okay, maybe things have changed and while that would have been true in the past, it won't necessarily be now? I'd be very happy to be wrong about this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiderlegs

That last scene with him flying across the sky was awesome. But Robert Downey as Tony Stark? Interesting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The clips there would seem to suggest exactly what I've thought since it was first announced, which is that he's absolutely perfectly-cast.

 

Stark is, essentially, what Bruce Wayne pretends to be - a good-looking, easy-going and likeable party guy, with latent tortured-by-guilt-and-prone-to-addiction undercurrents. If there's an actor out there who fits that description better than Downey Jr., I can't think of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiderlegs

Yeah, I didn't have a problem with it. It's just interesting. On this laptop, the footage is awfully dark, so it was hard to see the dark scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, he's definitely a brave(ish) choice to head up a major studio picture - not exactly a guaranteed mass-audience draw, and he comes with fairly significant baggage (which, however well it suits the character he's playing, is something which I'd imagine could have put studio execs off). I'm quite impressed that they had the nerve to go with him, actually - judging solely by the clips I've seen so far, it's paid off brilliantly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the videos are being taken down, which makes no sense to me at all, given that all the fanboys seem to be orgasming over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it was awesome. I don't really know anything about Iron Man except for the alcoholism thing and Civil War, but I really want to see that movie. Admittedly, it's mostly that Downey has completely sold me on the main character - the flying suit bits didn't do much for me at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry, all I can remember about the character is that he has a moustache, which does, I suppose, make him stand out amongst Marvel's predominantly clean-shaven heroes.

 

Am I the only person thoroughly unexcited by the prospect of yet another film where a guy in a brightly-coloured costume (albeit not a spandex one) flies around beating up evil-doers whilst destroying up the scenery?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crap. I was looking at it at work, got busy and switched it off, and now they took it down.

 

:icon_evil:

 

*clicks on Sexy Cosplay link*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but you're missing the fine subtlety, Assassin.

You see, he's super-rich so he can't relate to other people, but he ended up with an injured heart (see the symbolism? He's flawed!), so he pretends to be his bodyguard...a working class joe in a cool suit who risks his life to save others....see the symbolism of the suit of iron?

You see, it's far more complex than a guy in a bright suit goes around blowing things up!

 

Actually, I just want to see cool explosions in an Iron Man movie. The thought doesn't entice me with just about any other character or movie, but with an Iron Man movie, I think I could be sold on neat special effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, but you're missing the fine subtlety, Assassin.

You see, he's super-rich so he can't relate to other people, but he ended up with an injured heart (see the symbolism? He's flawed!), so he pretends to be his bodyguard...a working class joe in a cool suit who risks his life to save others....see the symbolism of the suit of iron?

You see, it's far more complex than a guy in a bright suit goes around blowing things up!

Beautifully put! But what does the 'tache symbolise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, but you're missing the fine subtlety, Assassin.

You see, he's super-rich so he can't relate to other people, but he ended up with an injured heart (see the symbolism? He's flawed!), so he pretends to be his bodyguard...a working class joe in a cool suit who risks his life to save others....see the symbolism of the suit of iron?

You see, it's far more complex than a guy in a bright suit goes around blowing things up!

 

Actually, I just want to see cool explosions in an Iron Man movie. The thought doesn't entice me with just about any other character or movie, but with an Iron Man movie, I think I could be sold on neat special effects.

Additionlly, it was also a decent-ish metaphor for all his empty womanising too.

Only Daredevil's love life is worse.

 

Iron Man is the Marvel title that really needed it's own Frank Miller, Peter David or Claremont.

Someone to really unlock all it's potential and define it.

Kurt Buseik came the closest.

 

Hopefully the film will achieve this and externally shape the comic itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, you had almost persuaded me that I might enjoy the film, but then someone had to mention Daredevil...

My bad..

But for all it's faults (And oh were there many) tonally it was fairly close to the comics.

Of all the Marvels film adaptations I enjoyed it the most (Barring Blade 1 I suppose).

 

Anyway, we digress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm willing to sacrifice a great deal of "close to the comics" for a reasonably small amount of "actually being a good fucking film". Which is why I prefer the first two Spider-Man films (hell, even X-Men and X-2, neither of which I'm actually all that fond of, and Hulk, which I actively dislike) to Daredevil by such a vast margin that it's barely worth making the comparison.

 

 

Seriously...Daredevil is your favourite Marvel adaptation to date? Fucking Daredevil? Have they been letting you eat the dog crack again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm willing to sacrifice a great deal of "close to the comics" for a reasonably small amount of "actually being a good fucking film". Which is why I prefer the first two Spider-Man films to Daredevil by such a vast margin that it's barely worth making the comparison.

 

First things first, I am talking about the Directors Cut of Daredevil which is marginaly better.

 

Now the films version of Spiderman, personally came off as even more one dimensional than I feel the comics version sometimes are.

I've mentioned this is in great detail in the Spiderman 3 thread.

 

Overall I'm no Raimi fan and in the Spiderman films I felt his direction was merely competant.

In terms of action the CG in those films wasn't that inspiring either, wheras the Daredevil film really nailed his echo sense visually (Sort of make or break for a Daredevil movie).

The first time, on the big screen with surround sound and all that gumph, I felt it was quite spectacular.

Oddly enough, the character has the potential to work better on film than in the silent comic meduim.

 

Overall the Action sequences in D.D worked well for me too, I could really get behind him and his motivations.

 

Both films had God awful music.

 

I think the film needed more Jim Jarmusch-isms to really get that working class Superhero feel.

 

Elektra and Kingpin were horribly miscast, but Matt, Foggy and Bullseye were good enough for me.

Besides Farrels crap (I'm no fan) he installed enough menace and personally Bullseye works better onscreen then the Green Goblin did.

 

Spiderman 2 was the trilogies highlight.

But overall the trilogy still fealt quite childish.

I still felt more like a traditional and very simple superhero story.

 

Wheras Daredevil was more adult (Okay maybe teenage), darker, murkier and more complex.

The scenes like where D.D leaves the man to die on the train tracks.

Where he practically and revealingly beats up his own Father (A random hood substitute) and frightens the child he was/used to be (The random hoods son who begs him to stop) with what he has become now.

And the directors cut has that bleak scene that verges on the superb where Matt chooses to go to sleep in his isolotion tank knowing very well that there are still victims out there desperatley needing his help.

This is depicted visually as he can "see" her beside him crying for help and as soon as the lid closes she vanishes.

Then there alll the removing teeth in the shower and the general depiction of his powers as a curse that are far more engaging to me than any of The Spiderman films.

 

Hey it's not "deep", but it sure as hell is deeper.

 

Dark ofcourse doesn't equate to good, but I was left with to chew on than any of the Spiderman films.

Overall I felt, empathised and almost genuinly cared more in Daredevil.

 

Technically the Spiderman films are overall "better", but oddly enough and for all the times I've used the word overall, I'd rather prefer some grand peaks with some unfortuante lows than the middleground i definitel;y fealt the first and last Spiderman films were.

 

It's that old argument of which is better, an okay nutritional salad or a great frivolous hotdog.

I will always side with the salad.

 

I did say that it was my "favourite" adaption and not that it was the best.

 

The funny thing is I had never really read any Daredevil before I saw the film.

I was moved enough by the character presented to go and seek out the far superior comic runs.

So all my comic complaints were after the fact.

 

(Sorry it's rushed I have to go and pick up the missus)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually yes - it probably hews closer to the comics than the X-Men films or Hulk, but it's nowhere near as faithful as the Spider-Man films.

 

I may not have considered the wording of my snappy rejoinder carefully enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still felt more like a traditional and very simple superhero story.

 

Wheras Daredevil was more adult (Okay maybe teenage), darker, murkier and more complex.

 

I'd argue that you're missing at least two "pseudo-" prefixes from the second half of the above statement. Which is why you've just summed up exactly why I prefer the (first two) Spider-Man movies to Daredevil. Horses for courses, and all that...

 

Despite all efforts by Frank Miller/Alan Moore wannabes to convince us otherwise, I'd argue that all but a handful of the superhero comics produced in the past 25-30 years have served as ample demonstration that unless you've got a very, very good writer, superheroes do tend to work best in the context of relatively simple, traditional adventure stories. There's space within that for some darkness and moral complexity (I'll cite Batman: The Animated Series here as easily the best non-comic version of any superhero franchise, ever), but it's almost always a mistake to lose sight entirely of the younger audience towards whom the material was originally tailored, as (I'd argue) films like Daredevil and Hulk demonstrate.

 

"Adult" men-in-tights stories were an interesting innovation back in the '80s, but it's something which only really worked well the first few times, and wore very thin a long, long time ago for me. Give me a decent unpretentious bit of light-hearted fun over a moody exploration of one man's tortured soul anyday - if I want the latter (and I frequently do), there are better places to find it than in a superhero film.

 

YMM(and obviously does)V, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have they been letting you eat the dog crack again?

Clever... :rolleyes:

 

 

Any references I make to "dog crack" should be read as an indicator that any perceived vehemence or vitriol in the relevant post are not to be taken at all seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...