Agreed! I haven’t seen a movie picked apart this bad for it not following the sciences. It’s almost getting comical. Does that mean that I need mark Back to the Future II as a terrible movie because it’s 2013 and I haven’t seen single flying car yet? Going from prototype stage to full deployment by Oct 2015 is highly improbable. Jurassic Park is out in 3D, how about the fact that the process of DNA extraction from a mosquito, we have the break down of the blood post extraction, passing through the mosquito’s digestive system, and then its not like mosquitoes only look for a specific species. It took millions to decode the human genome (which is useful) and roughly 13 years. So we are going to create dinosaurs, for fun? Or lets go to the cornerstone of the Star Wars franchise, the lightsaber. A “finite” beam of light used as a weapon with no containment field.
If you have any basis in the sciences, and had a sense of realism, there would only be Batman . . . . ., however in the more recent franchise, all of the people working on the Wayne Prototypes would have outed him and government would have labeled him a threat as he is operating as a vigilante, performing outside of the law. Aerial photography could have tracked “The Tumbler” back to the Cave, where he would have been arrested.
It’s all in good fun. If you don’t like a movie because of it’s story is one thing, and we all have different tastes. However, to invalidate a science fiction movie with science fact is stretching it.
Heh. I admit I’m guilty of selective nitpickism usually involving more practical situations.
For example, I can suspend disbelief enough to accept a man can make an infinite energy source and a battle ready suit of super armor out of spare parts in a cave or a dude getting superpowers from a spider bite or an alien armada that’s powered by a single power source for some reason, but as soon as I see someone shooting 50 rounds from a gun that only holds 15, I raise a stink.
The only way sci-fi works effectively, in my opinion is if it’s balanced out with some practical realism.
The all-star sky diving spectacular featuring Iron man scene made me laugh though.
For the record i couldn’t care less about the sciencey aspects, such as point blank explosions and characters somehow being ok. Certain suspension of disbelief can be had on that front. My problems with the flick stem from it being just being a really stupid, lazy, and clumsy movie.
So yeah, because the script writers were evidently too damned lazy to come up with a better sequence of events that result in the missile strike…lets just have stark call simply out the world’s biggest terrorist and and throw down the gauntlet. Then somehow BE SURPRISED, unprepared in every way, and off-guard, and when he picks it up.
Don’t have time for careful and intelligent build-up, we gotta rush this turkey along after all. Audiences are stupid anyway and won’t be bothered by the main character being that dumb and incompetent either, right?
the main thing bothering me was the kid and the lack of ironman in the fully functional ironman suit tearing shit up. I also just thought it was a weak storyline with uninteresting villains to be honest. Also, theres implausible and there is really stupid and i feel like this movie treaded that line at a few points too many . I feel like im judging it fairly because I have no pre conceived notion of what the story should be, i didnt read the comics and I feel like my reasons for not liking it are valid. It definitely had its cool and funny parts but it just wasnt enough for me and like someone else said did seem like a bit of a “clusterfuck”.
I did really like avengers and Ironman in avengers and thats why I wanted to see this movie at all. If this was just coming after ironman 2 i probably wouldnt have went to see it.
Thank you. Yes some level of suspension of disbelief is required in every movie, but there comes a point when its going wayyyy too far. So our hero…billionaire, super genius, member of the avengers, etc is somehow turned into a complete idiot for the sake of plot progression.
Then there’s the subplot where he’s so worried about Pepper being in danger, yet he constantly puts her in danger(WTF?). Even when she rightfully wants to leave the damn house after he just put a huge bullseye over it!!
Stark: “Baby doll, can you stick around for a little while longer? The missiles are about to hit any minute now”.
I’m going off memory on this, but didn’t Stark call him out and then was working on getting defense setup/going on offense (best defense)? The surprise was more the speed at which it happend, than it actually happening…I mean the suit was brand new - a prototype actually - and yet it already had def for Pepper built into it. I don’t get what’s bad writing about that, he called out someone who ‘in essence’ almost killed a super close friend of his. It’s not like a random bombing, he was leaving the hospital one of his best friends was laid up in - in a coma it was personal at that point. If someone fucked up one of my boys, please believe its war…and Tony has ALWAYS been super impulsive in this series, so the actions were completely in character. If it was Pepper who gave it out - that would be different. Hell if anything I’m more surprised fewer people didn’t know where he lived. But that isn’t ‘bad writing’, that’s consistency and logical considering the stress Tony was under…hell what did he do with cousin’s phone after he finished?
It doesn’t matter how smart you are, if some random dude runs up to your mom and knocks her unconscious with a baseball bat, are you going to stand there and ‘think’ about it?
No. You’re going to run after the MF. The build up was based around emotion - not logic. He ‘entertained’ handling it logically when talking to Rhodes, it was his boy getting blasted that changed everything.
yeah, i thought what tony did was stupid as fuck, but thats his character, impulsive and selfish as fuck. i think pepper not punching him in the face at the end, and breaking up with him was silly, but whatever, shes pressed emotionally.
My thing is - you don’t have to like it, please believe, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I look at what MaidenMasha posted, and that honestly feels more like didn’t like it than calling it a ‘bad movie’. Their games out there that I don’t like and can’t stand. Metal Gear looks cool, but I hate it. Anything competitive from Nintendo - I hate it. It doens’t make it bad. IM3 was a solid movie point blank period. You odn’t have to like it, even if you like the genre or the character - but its still a solid movie (nothing more nothing less). X3 was shit thru and thru, not even incorporating Juggernaut bitch could save it. Same can be said of Wolverine (the new one looks better, though I have my concerns). Those were bad movies. this wasn’t a bad movie, just everyone didn’t like it (which is again - fine). If you WANT something, like more this or less that - that’s not something that defines the quality of the movie. If you odn’t like someone’s logic or how they handled something, that’s you not the movie. Fuccin LOTR could have been over in a single movie, but wasn’t cause of logic. I’m done - I didn’t want to really engauge in anything like this…it just irks me when someone reviews something negatively because of personal taste. Again, to me Smash Bros is a fuccin JOKE, not even competitively…but I’m not going to call it a bad game, I just have severe dislike for it.
Remember this is the IRON MAN TRILOGY, the movies were great here, this is not the fuckin Star Wars Prequel Trilogy (Fuck Jar Jar, fuck that piece of shit).
Hey, you guys can have all the opinions you like. My opinion? The movie was horrendously STUPID and a blight on what was a promising trilogy. It certainly had all the qualities of a bad movie-- lazy writing, clumsy plot progression, heavy-handed resolutions, characters purposely written to be idiots to make the weak script work, crappy villains, build-up with lame payoff, etc.
Conclusion: It was simply a BAD movie.
Should i not feel sad? Because 2 out of 3 ain’t bad?
My biggest dislike with the movie… I feel like they dropped the ball once again in the villain department. Killian just wasn’t memorable or even really intimidating, and that Mandarin nonsense is a wasted opportunity. Killian was even less interesting than Stane or Vanko from the first two. There was no way Tony was gonna lose to this jobber, and that’s how I felt the whole movie.
I gotta admit, the Mandarin shit really left me with a bad taste, so I probably didn’t give the rest of the movie a fair shake. I’ll definitely watch again because like Unreallystic said it’s not a bad movie, but it fell short of my expectations by a lot.
I’m on the line about Killian. There were aspects I didn’t like - especially the ‘generic villain’ aspect, but then there were aspects I DID like - again I REALLY liked the last fight, despite IM looking like a ‘clunky’ hero who excels at long distance, the match-up was just fun to watch. I liked the actor as well…and he executed well, but the ‘geek’ intoduction was ‘meh’ and predictable, but once we are in modern times and forward, I liked him.
Though it does bring up the ‘Spiderman’ issue - were a hero is only as great as his villain - Xmen have Magneto. Superman has Lex Luthor. Batman has Joker. Ironman has __________ . I’d be excited…super excited, if Avengers 2 is based around Ultros & Vision. But I’m also fine with this being hte last IM movie…there is ust no more growth for the character past this point.
Whoa whoa, i can’t believe i missed this tidbit as i just just thinking of X-Men 3 earlier. I remember way back at release almost everybody loved X-Men 3! You heard me. The haters were there, but you had to look around a bit to find them. Slowly but surely over time as the theater-aura wore off, people started looking at the movie in a more objective light and in the present day? Most hate it.
I think thats similar to this movie. You’re all still riding that exciting, summer action movie-high, with the 'explosions and all, to be able to take a step back and see this flick for the barrel of stupid that it was.
In the future i’m certain more will come around with a movie this clumsy and flawed.
People didn’t walk away like ‘the movie was great’. People walked IN excited because of who was supposed to be in it. You had people who came back screaming it was the best shit ever…like 1/10, the other 9/10 said it was meh or crap out hte box. Over time the 10% admitted it was shit.
No one is saying this is the dopest shit ever, people have been pretty reserved about it…which is PROOF that its not ‘Avengers’, but the response has been overall honest without hype (X3 was all hype). Hype is what spins perspective out of control, and while folks like myself wanted to see it - there was no hype motivation in seeing it.
IM1 is still my favorite superhero movie to come out since Mask of the Phantasm in 93. IM2 was shit garbage poop, and IM3 was okay with me. The twist worked well enough, the fire shit was weird at first because the Ironman trilogy started out as kind of a realistic approach, but the other connected movies like Thor and Cap. and Avengers were slowly introducing us to the Magical/Cosmic elements so after a bit the extremis stuff was whatever.
I’m really just posting to say Ironman 2 was a huge let down, and anyone who liked it should feel ashamed of themselves for supporting something moving in the wrong direction, I hope you slowly die of violent dysentery.
