Iron Man (2008) (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

Speaking of exorbitant prices...is this for real?

$9,999.99?

I get that this is out of print but still. Who would possibly pay this much for this?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/IRON-MAN-U...130856&hash=item3f5b408fc2:g:rgAAAOSwgyxWVB~7

(I'm not posting this in any kind of attempt to help sell it....just because....damn.)

 

[Gary Seven]

^^^ On top of that, it's defective. LOL!!!

 

[Sam Favate]

^^^ On top of that, WTF?!?

 

[Sean Bryan]

Speaking of exorbitant prices...is this for real?

$9,999.99?

I get that this is out of print but still. Who would possibly pay this much for this?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/IRON-MAN-U...130856&hash=item3f5b408fc2:g:rgAAAOSwgyxWVB~7

(I'm not posting this in any kind of attempt to help sell it....just because....damn.)

First thing I’m doing when I get home today is checking to see if my disc is gray!

 

[Chris Will]

Tell me about it! If mine is gray, I'm willing to sell it for $3000!

 

[TravisR]

Speaking of exorbitant prices...is this for real?

$9,999.99?

I get that this is out of print but still. Who would possibly pay this much for this?

I just bought it. Was that not a good idea?

 

[Jake Lipson]

I just bought it. Was that not a good idea?

If you've got the money, knock yourself out. Then maybe you can send me your old copy, if you had one before making this purchase.

 

[Josh Dial]

I just bought it. Was that not a good idea?

Dang, that was you?!

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Pretty sure mine is grey - I'll entertain offers but please, no bids under $1000

 

[Jake Lipson]

Someone stole an Iron Man suit used in one of the films:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...igating-theft-iron-man-suit-used-film-1110128

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Do they think it really works?

 

[Jake Lipson]

Other articles on the same topic today have said that it is a suit from the first film.

I'm sure the allure is that it's a famous movie prop. The bench from The Fault in Our Stars got stolen out of a public park a few years ago too, and that seems much more difficult to accomplish than breaking an Iron Man suit out of storage.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

Do they think it really works?

Well if it does, then it should be quite simple for Tony Stark to find and retrieve it.

 

[Sam Favate]

Today, the kids and I started our re-watch of the MCU films, in order this time. So we started with Iron Man (I know some people say to start with Captain America: The First Avenger, but I wanted to do it in release order). It's a great film, obviously, but what struck me is how much of its story has been used in all the subsequent movies. For example, there is a newspaper clipping about the death of Howard Stark and his wife, dated 1991. (BTW, Howard had to be about 80 around '91, assuming he was near 30 in 1942.) Obviously, they couldn't have know where they'd be 10 years later, but this really is the one where it all begins.

Twenty films (counting Ant-Man and the Wasp) in 10 years is very impressive. There's never been anything like it. Even the James Bond films, previously the most prolific, only manged 7 films in its first 10 years.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

So we started with Iron Man (I know some people say to start with Captain America: The First Avenger, but I wanted to do it in release order).

I think it's entirely correct to begin with Iron Man.

Although most of Captain America: The First Avenger does take place in the World War II era, those are flashback sequences; the film itself is dated for 2011, as the fifth title in the MCU. There are plenty of things within CA:TFA that build upon what we've learned in previous films about the Marvel universe and the history of SHIELD that are missed if one watches the movie first without the context of the other films that would follow.

Between the introduction of Nick Fury at the end of Iron Man, the introduction of Howard Stark and appearance of a prototype for Cap's shield in Iron Man 2, and the introduction of the tesseract in the first Thor, it seems pretty clear to me that production order still remains the most obvious way to watch the films. When you watch them in order, you get the sense that the previous films are building up towards the introduction of Captain America. And when the first Captain America film ends, it doesn't end before the start of Iron Man, it ends before the start of The Avengers.

I know tons of thinkpieces have been written on why the MCU should be experienced out of order, but I've yet to be convinced by any of them. I'm sure we'll see that phenomenon continue when Ant-Man And The Wasp is released later this summer, and when Captain Marvel is released next spring. Though the bulk of their stories are said to take place before the events in Infinity War, I think it'll be clear by the end of those films that we as the audience are only meant to learn about those stories after we've absorbed the stories that have come before.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I know tons of thinkpieces have been written on why the MCU should be experienced out of order, but I've yet to be convinced by any of them. I'm sure we'll see that phenomenon continue when Ant-Man And The Wasp is released later this summer, and when Captain Marvel is released next spring. Though the bulk of their stories are said to take place before the events in Infinity War, I think it'll be clear by the end of those films that we as the audience are only meant to learn about those stories after we've absorbed the stories that have come before.

If you're watching the entire MCU, then, yes, Iron Man is absolutely the beginning and release order is the best idea.

However, if you're watching selectively to track a certain character's arc or if you just want to see connections between specific films, then you could begin elsewhere. (Ex: I think an argument could be made for going ahead and watching Guardians 2 after Guardians 1 because it takes place chronologically about six months or so after the end of the first on, and doesn't require any other MCU entries in between to explain things in it.)

Next year, I hope that theaters offer a double feature of Infinity War and its sequel, and when I'm watching those together, I won't necessarily want Ant-Man and the Wasp or Captain Marvel to be screened in between (although I have no problem with them being released in between, but the Infinity War double feature should be just that.)

In the case of Ant-Man and the Wasp, it's entirely possible that it is being released after Infinity War just due to the mechanics of the release calendar. Obviously, they wanted Infinity War to be in the "May" (now end-of-April, but still, you see what I mean) summer kickoff position. But because they already had Ragnarok in November and Black Panther in February, there would not have been another appropriate slot to release Ant-Man and the Wasp in before Infinity War (and Ant-Man is not a big enough brand to justify having him in the "May" slot.)

Or there could be a narrative reason to put it second, as you suggested. Or some combination of the two. We'll see in July. Certainly the fact that Ant-Man is not in Infinity War was probably a direct result of their knowing we would see it first.

But isn't it impressive that we are even having this discussion ten years after Iron Man about viewing order? It speaks to the complexity, significance and achievement of what that film helped to create.

 

[Sam Favate]

Continuing my summer project with the kids to re-watch all the films in the MCU, today we watched The Incredible Hulk (its 10 year anniversary is in 10 days). It was much better than I remembered. Norton was very effective as Banner and Liv Tyler and William Hurt were terrific. Yes, the CGI isn't what we're used to seeing today, but so what? I really liked how it took many cues from the TV show, including having Bruce and Betty as fugitives (the TV show was essentially a remake of the David Janssen show The Fugitive). Tony Stark's cameo at the end was really very significant. I remember thinking at the time I first saw it in the theater that this was a dicey proposition - making a shared movie universe. I couldn't have imagined it turning out better.
It really is a shame that Marvel isn't going to make any more Hulk movies, especially now that Ruffalo has nailed the role so well. They chalk it up to problems with Universal (I guess Universal would have to sign off in some way; they have had the rights since the 70s) but whatever the reason, audiences lose.

 

[Sam Favate]

Iron Man 2 today with the kids in our viewing of all the MCU movies this summer, in advance of the Infinity War blu-ray.

Iron Man 2 is my least favorite MCU movie, and as such, I have seen it the least. So watching it again is always good to see things I had forgotten, like the Howard Stark films and the appearance of Agent Coulson. The Black Widow/Nick Fury stuff works well, but a lot of the rest of the film doesn't. The kids were bored in the Senate hearing scene (as if they were watching real Senate hearings), although I thought Downey did a good job of keeping it lively.

This is the worst appearance of Pepper Potts, who tells Tony she is resigning after a week or so on the job. If anyone knew what they were getting into, it's her, so she should have been okay with it. Whiplash doesn't really work as a villain. Just another you-wronged-my-family villain, which we've seen a hundred times. Tattoos to make him scary, seen it. Russian accent, check. I did like Sam Rockwell as Hammer, although his springing of Whiplash to help his company is a bit too mustache-twirling for a corporate villain.

My other complaint is that the first third of the movie takes place at such a frenetic pace and the dialogue is so rapid-fire, that it is easy to miss a lot of it. I've probably seen the movie 4 times in 8 years now, and I'm sure I've missed some. There's a part of the movie, about an hour+ in, where I can never manage to stay awake, and that's not a sign of a good film.

That said, I did enjoy it more than I thought I would. It's by no means a terrible film; there are just some things that don't work, and now that we're used to such a high level in Marvel films, they're very apparent.

 

[Sam Favate]

Hope I'm not boring anyone with these recaps, but the kids and I rewatched Thor and Captain America: The First Avenger this week, along with the related one-shots (A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To Thor's Hammer and Agent Carter, respectively). You could argue that 2011 is when the Marvel films became more sure of themselves and really laid the groundwork for the broad narrative to come.

Thor really works. It has a great cast and provides great introductions to the characters. I wish the later Thor films had used the Warriors Three and Lady Sif as much and as well as this one did. I like that Jane Foster is a scientist instead of a nurse (in the comics) but what is it about Natalie Portman and these big-budget movies? It's like she doesn't show up. Sorry, but she's the weak link here. The after-credit scene where Fury shows off the Tesseract and Loki sees it pretty much sets up everything up to and including Infinity War.

Captain America: The First Avenger has long been one of my favorites. I liked it even more this time, because the first time I saw it, the blue energy beams from Hydra took me out of the movie a bit. Why would they have this technology in WWII? But now I understand. If they truly understood then that that's what they were doing with the Infinity Stones, then hats off to them. That's impressive. Steve Rogers is one of the best characters in the Marvel Universe. Him saying "I don't like bullies" might as well apply to that scene where he holds off Thanos. This movie also has the best romantic relationship in the entire MCU. Peggy Carter (also a great character and played so well by Hayley Atwell) is completely believable as she hears Steve's voice disappear and grieves for him. She deserved the two seasons of that show she got and much more. Howard Stark is also a terrific addition - another "coincidence" that I didn't think worked the first time.

The one-shots are also a joy. We saw The Consultant after Iron Man 2, and it was a nice enough way to explain the ending of Incredible Hulk, but A Funny Thing... is just terrific fun and lets us see Agent Coulson in action for the first time. Agent Carter, the short, is the best of the bunch, even if the show it spawned did ultimately contradict the timing of the one-shot. Atwell is so commanding in her performance that it genuinely seems the only thing holding her back was the gender stereotypes of her time. Marvel needs to do more with her. I hope we see her in Captain Marvel, or, better yet, a third season of her own show.

Next up is The Avengers. I can't believe we got here so quickly.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

but what is it about Natalie Portman and these big-budget movies? It's like she doesn't show up. Sorry, but she's the weak link here.

I don't think you're the first to make that observation. I think that bluescreen/greenscreen/CGI acting is a somewhat different skillset than acting on a traditional set or real world location, and some actors are better at it than others. For instance, compare Portman's performance to that of Hemsworth - both are working for the same director, from the same script and with the same cast and crew, but Hemsworth is fully engaged and convincing, while Portman is not. Or look at her in the Star Wars prequels and consider her performances against those of Ewan McGregor. I think they're interesting and valid comparisons because it's taking the same people working in the same environment and with the same resources and showing the differences in how it winds up in the end. I also think Portman is weak link in this year's Annihilation, which is a great film - but her performance is the least convincing of the group in my view. But put her in films where she's working in more "realistic" environments and it's night and day - she's fantastic in The Professional, she's fantastic in Black Swan, to name but two. I think it just may be that "CGI acting" is not one of the tools in her arsenal.

The after-credit scene where Fury shows off the Tesseract and Loki sees it pretty much sets up everything up to and including Infinity War.

That scene was written and directed by Joss Whedon during Avengers pre-production, which does help explain why it fits so well into that world.

I liked it even more this time, because the first time I saw it, the blue energy beams from Hydra took me out of the movie a bit. Why would they have this technology in WWII?

Because it wasn't something that Hydra invented - it was something that had long been hidden on Earth and came from another realm, as explained at the beginning of the film. Hydra was merely trying to harness it as an energy source, but I think it was clear from the opening scene of the movie, where Hugo Weaving's character steals it from the church, that it was not of this Earth.