[Chazro]

So, being the old-school comic book nerd that I am, I went to see Iron Man 3.  IMO, while being chock full of eye candy, it's a totally forgettable film.  So many great actors with nothing to do!  The storyline is truly a bore, it"s no wonder that Downey's expressed doubts about doing another one.  Oh well!  Also saw 42, now THAT was a good flick!  Bring on the Man Of Steel!   Jeez, I hope they don't screw up Superman.....again!

[bpape]

Saw it last night too.  Good for action and effects and there was a shot at developing the story but not so much unfortunately. As with most, the first one was the best IMO.

Bryan

[Bob in St. Louis]

Yea, Superman has really gotten the shaft the past couple decades. 
That's just sad. Arguably the most iconic superhero of all time, and he tops the list of B-rated superhero movies.

Hell, even the Green Lantern got a great movie. 

I'm looking forward to seeing Iron Man 3.
I like Downey, I like the character, and I love a good two hours of blowing stuff up on a large HD screen.
A solid story line would be nice, but at the end of the day, my brain is looking to be entertained, not exercised anymore.

Bob

[JP78]

I just went to check it out yesterday - the 3D IMAX format of this film is really pushing the limits of implementing this technology. It was fantastic. 

RE: story line...well, it's hard to care when the movie is so much fun.

[Chazro]

Being an audiophile, of course I understand the attractions of the 'spectacle', i.e., Imax/3d/surroundsound.  But as a music lover (along with other forms of art), I can't help but want it all.  If the attraction is the bombastic tech, why bother hiring the actors?  I guess I'm reacting to comments that boil down to; "yeah, I know the movie sucked, but the FX rocked!".  Truth be told, telling a good story within an FX-heavy movie is probably the most difficult type of filmmaking.  For every Avatar, Inception, or Lord of the Rings there's a Transformers/GI Joe x 10!

[sharpsuxx]

The movie was much more comic book like than the majority of the Marvel movies so far with lots of Puns, and one liners it really was an Iron Man fanboy movie showing so many of the suits.  Spoiler Alert - Interesting Twist that I didn't see coming, but I didn't read the comics so some people must have known it going in.  Overall I got my fun out of it, probably my least favorite of the Marvel movies so far, I hear the Winter Soldier, Capt America 2 is supposed to be really epic though.  I am really looking forward to that one, the new Thor looks to be decent as well.

[Bob in St. Louis]

Chazro, I"m with you 100%. Avatar was truly amazing. If I had to venture a guess, I would say that movies like that are rare due to a lack of imagination and financial backing. Mainly the imagination I suspect, because there's plenty of "backers" out there with the funds.

On another note, I've never heard of "Inception", but if you're ranking it up there with Avatar and and LoTR, then it sounds like a "must-see".

Bob

[Chazro]

'Inception' is truly one of the most polarizing films ever!  Lotta people hated it, lotta people loved it.  I saw it twice in the theaters and own the blu-ray so you know which group I'm a part of!;)  The word 'epic' has become a slang word, to the point where the word seems to have lost it's meaning.  'Inception' is truly epic in just about every way.  The concept, the execution of the concept, special effects, actors, the music (truly epic and an integral part of the story-telling process).  A truly intelligent pic that some people complained gave them headaches because it made them think too hard!  I see it as a brain-tickler, fact is, since Monday's a slow night, I think I'll fire it up tonight!

[Bob in St. Louis]

My wife holds the key to the Netflix cue.
I told her this needs to be coming up soon. Very coon. 

[Tyson]

Dances with Smurfs was not truly amazing.  That movie finally (and firmly) put Cameron in the George Lucas category of film makers for me.

[wushuliu]

I liked IM3 a lot. It was better than the last one and just seemed really well thought and structured. But here's the mindblowing thing:

I just read a comment on another site where someone made a very convincing case for IM3 being based around Jungian analysis! Seriously. The end credit sequence is a big hint, but the poster talked about how Stark literally has to slay a 'dragon' at the end. Not to mention the opening act of him losing everything, meeting the boy (who is def. a young Tony Stark in a lot of ways), 'Maya' as a Pepper opposite (and her name is Maya, duh) on and on.

Shane Black is an AMAZING writer who literally redefined late 80s and 90s action films and screenwriting (starting w/ Lethan Weapon). It's hard to believe he has been able to resurrect himself as a director as well, and he did a great job w/ IM3. He has a lot to prove after his long absence amd Kiss Kiss Bang Bang flopped so I def. believe he would go all out w/ this subtext for IM3. The Jungian thing makes complete sense and puts the film on another level.

Of all the possible 'cool' end credit scenes they could have done, they chose one that only makes sense if you think of the film through that lens of an inner journey and catharsis.

And Sir Ben is going to get an oscar nod for his performance. Not that he necessarily deserves it but it def. the kind of performance that gets notice.


                                                                  IM3 also shows how to keep a frickin twist secret.

I am not a comic book nerd but I have to give props to Marvel for giving a crap about story, structure, and the joy of getting your money's worth.

[ajzepp]

It's hard to believe he has been able to resurrect himself as a director as well, and he did a great job w/ IM3. He has a lot to prove after his long absence amd Kiss Kiss Bang Bang flopped

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was one of the best films of that year and was reviewed very favorably by moviegoers and critics alike. It's lack of box office success had nothing to do with the job Shane Black did. It had very limited distribution and very little ad budget. It's easily one of my favorite films of all time and I have never come across anyone who wasn't entertained by it.

[SlushPuppy]

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was one of the best films of that year and was reviewed very favorably by moviegoers and critics alike. It's lack of box office success had nothing to do with the job Shane Black did. It had very limited distribution and very little ad budget. It's easily one of my favorite films of all time and I have never come across anyone who wasn't entertained by it.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was a brilliant film. It's one of my favorites, too.

[ajzepp]

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was a brilliant film. It's one of my favorites, too.

It was fantastic...it just had everything...comedy, romance, suspense, action, etc, etc. Holds up well on repeat viewings, as well...I've seen it four times and I'm sure I'll watch it again in the coming months.

[Rob Babcock]

I thought Iron Man 3 was entertaining and I enjoyed it, but it was a little bit of a letdown for me.  First off, there isn't enough Iron Man!  I wasn't manning the stopwatch but it seems like he was only in the armor for a few minutes of a the whole film.  And when he was it basically just Iron Man getting his ass kicked repeatedly.  I thought he was a super hero?  Here just a super punching bag.

Kingsley was superb, but I was a little disappointed by the Mandarin.  While Iron Man wasn't one of my favorite books growing up it was a favorite of my brother; we both felt it was kind of disrespectful to the history of the character to so use him.  Oh well.

All in all it was an okay summer movie, probably better than average, but given the cast and the talents of all involved I thought if fell a bit short of the mark.  I have a little higher hopes for the next Thor movie, believe it or not!  I'm a movie buff to be sure but also a huge Marvel Comics fan and have been for at least three decades, so how well a book is translated to the screen is an issue for me.  I think the first Thor did a pretty good job of capturing the comic book character.  Avengers was among the best of them and the first Captain America was good, too (despite the fact that I don't care for the character one way or the other).

[Tyson]

The Avengers was great because of Whedon.  IMO, they should hand over as much directing duties to him as possible.

[ajzepp]

I thought Iron Man 3 was entertaining and I enjoyed it, but it was a little bit of a letdown for me.  First off, there isn't enough Iron Man!  I wasn't manning the stopwatch but it seems like he was only in the armor for a few minutes of a the whole film.  And when he was it basically just Iron Man getting his ass kicked repeatedly.  I thought he was a super hero?  Here just a super punching bag.

Kingsley was superb, but I was a little disappointed by the Mandarin.  While Iron Man wasn't one of my favorite books growing up it was a favorite of my brother; we both felt it was kind of disrespectful to the history of the character to so use him.  Oh well.

All in all it was an okay summer movie, probably better than average, but given the cast and the talents of all involved I thought if fell a bit short of the mark.  I have a little higher hopes for the next Thor movie, believe it or not!  I'm a movie buff to be sure but also a huge Marvel Comics fan and have been for at least three decades, so how well a book is translated to the screen is an issue for me.  I think the first Thor did a pretty good job of capturing the comic book character.  Avengers was among the best of them and the first Captain America was good, too (despite the fact that I don't care for the character one way or the other).

I saw it this weekend and I pretty much had the same reaction as you. I was entertained, and some of the humor I thought was pretty funny, but overall I didn't think it really advanced the franchise much. I, too, am looking forward to Thor...the first one was better than I expected.

[wushuliu]

I thought Iron Man 3 was entertaining and I enjoyed it, but it was a little bit of a letdown for me.  First off, there isn't enough Iron Man!  I wasn't manning the stopwatch but it seems like he was only in the armor for a few minutes of a the whole film.  And when he was it basically just Iron Man getting his ass kicked repeatedly.  I thought he was a super hero?  Here just a super punching bag.

Kingsley was superb, but I was a little disappointed by the Mandarin.  While Iron Man wasn't one of my favorite books growing up it was a favorite of my brother; we both felt it was kind of disrespectful to the history of the character to so use him.  Oh well.

All in all it was an okay summer movie, probably better than average, but given the cast and the talents of all involved I thought if fell a bit short of the mark.  I have a little higher hopes for the next Thor movie, believe it or not!  I'm a movie buff to be sure but also a huge Marvel Comics fan and have been for at least three decades, so how well a book is translated to the screen is an issue for me.  I think the first Thor did a pretty good job of capturing the comic book character.  Avengers was among the best of them and the first Captain America was good, too (despite the fact that I don't care for the character one way or the other).

But wasn't that what Iron Man 2 was about? All Iron Man all the time? They conceived 3 as part of an overall arch and they took a big risk with that and I think it paid off. The whole point of the film was Stark IS Iron man (also RDJ IS Iron Man aka can't replace me suckas!), the man makes the suit not the other way around and for him to get to that point he had to process all the stuff that happened during Avengers. He basically suffers from PTSD in 3: the anxiety attacks, the self doubt, insomnia, etc. etc. I was glad to spend time with just Stark as a man for a while. It's not like they could top Avengers. No way. So they went smaller in scope and internal in narrative. As a standalone no that would not work. But as part of an overall narrative it was needed. The end credit scene says it all really and that was really bold. IM3 makes you understand that these 'superheroes' have to suffer certain consequences and have to fight their own internal villains. Hence Kingsley was unnecessary and they smartly made the character that way. The Mandarin wasn't the point. Every superhero movie now is stuffed with CGI and crazy effects up the wazoo. I don't care about the suit. I care about why that superhero put on (or takes off) the suit; this one puts emphasis on that aspect of the story and I think it paid off. Marvel was considerate enough to think maybe some of us needed a little breather from the whiz bang and I give them props for that. just my. 02.

[Rob Babcock]

But wasn't that what Iron Man 2 was about? All Iron Man all the time? They conceived 3 as part of an overall arch and they took a big risk with that and I think it paid off. The whole point of the film was Stark IS Iron man (also RDJ IS Iron Man aka can't replace me suckas!), the man makes the suit not the other way around and for him to get to that point he had to process all the stuff that happened during Avengers. He basically suffers from PTSD in 3: the anxiety attacks, the self doubt, insomnia, etc. etc. I was glad to spend time with just Stark as a man for a while. It's not like they could top Avengers. No way. So they went smaller in scope and internal in narrative. As a standalone no that would not work. But as part of an overall narrative it was needed. The end credit scene says it all really and that was really bold. IM3 makes you understand that these 'superheroes' have to suffer certain consequences and have to fight their own internal villains. Hence Kingsley was unnecessary and they smartly made the character that way. The Mandarin wasn't the point. Every superhero movie now is stuffed with CGI and crazy effects up the wazoo. I don't care about the suit. I care about why that superhero put on (or takes off) the suit; this one puts emphasis on that aspect of the story and I think it paid off. Marvel was considerate enough to think maybe some of us needed a little breather from the whiz bang and I give them props for that. just my. 02.

You make some good points!  But I don't view a movie like this in that way.  It's a big comic book movie; as such it was a little too staid to be great trash and a little too shallow to be thought provoking.  I don't know that we need a "break" from the big stuff- after all, we had a year to digest the last movie!   We get that Stark is human, but what do go to the movies for if his life is just like ours?  I don't need to see an epic take on his battle with PTSD.  I "get" that there'd be consequences for a mere mortal, but just showing him neurotically chewing scenery isn't cathartic.  To me at least.

And I still it's kind of disrespectful, almost dishonest, to use Mandarin like that.  They use the name, because he's one of the Top 5 all-time classic Iron Man villians.  They shamelessly trade on that to put fanboy butts into the seats.  And then you find it's the bait-and-switch.  What if the Joker turned out to be a ruse by a big crime syndicate?  What if Moriarty with just a name some intelligence agency adopted to give Holmes the runaround?  They needed the name to make the fraud work, but at the end of the day that's still what it is- fraud.  At least to those of us that grew up on the comic.  It's their right to use their IP in whatever way they can make the most cash, but the real fans kind of get cheated along the way.

Again, to each their own.  I did enjoy it but I thought it fell short of greatness.