Eternalist wrote:and Jon Favreau, the creator of the massively overrated Iron Man

Poor director and Iron Man is overrated for sure.

dagn96 wrote:I really hated King Kong. The effects were decent but something made me not like it. I can't explain it. Maybe it was the plot line.

This story is not THAT big in scale to try to do an epic movie...

ek79 wrote:

Eternalist wrote:and Jon Favreau, the creator of the massively overrated Iron Man

Poor director and Iron Man is overrated for sure.

I do not want to judge Jon Favreau as an awful director. The opening minutes of Iron Man were pretty good actually. It is a shame that the entire movie was simply awful.

The ending was terrible...

ek79 wrote:The ending was terrible...

Yeah, they apparently forgot that they needed to add in a villain and threw in a goofy giant version of Iron Man.

What you said, AND the reveal at the end...
Pffffffffffff..................

I wonder why people liked Iron Man so much, I mean I agree that Robert Downey Jr. is a brilliant person, and I don't know how much the American like the comic. I heard that it's very popular in the USA. So that's two things. But I think that the whole movie was a bit empty...

I love Spider-Man 1 and 2, especially 2, it's one of the best comic-book adaptations, it's full of drama and amazing CGI and brilliant actions. Spider-Man isn't empty, it's full of life, but as I was watching Iron Man I didn't feel anything extraordinary. I was only feeling that I'm watching an action-movie or what. Nothing special, and it's a shame. To be honest, I don't really like the whole Iron Man-story... he (Iron Man) is not so heroic in my eyes. With a heavy armor like that I think anyone could do those superflights and huge rocketshots Spider-Man is good because he sucks in his real life but he's still a super hero, Hulk is good because he's not even a superhero, he's an unleashed beast and it's very tragic, Batman is good (I think I don't have to explain it), but Iron Man... I don't know.

I mean maybe in the comic-books Iron Man is a great hero too, but I didn't feel that in the movie. He - and the film itself - was too empty.

DHOPW42 wrote:but as I was watching Iron Man I didn't feel anything extraordinary. I was only feeling that I'm watching an action-movie or what. Nothing special, and it's a shame.

I think that sums up why I disliked the film. Critics and fans were touting it for "pushing" the genre into "deeper waters". How so? It was actually pretty pedestrian, little more than a paint-by-numbers comic book adaption. Robert Downey Jr. was basically playing himself and it was all "been there, done that". The Spider-Man films were more revolutionary than Iron Man. There was nothing at all spectacular, inventive or revolutionary in the least with the film. The true comic book film revolution came a month or so later with The Dark Knight.

For me, I thought the opening minutes of Iron Man was very solid. They establish who Tony Stark is and while under duress, his experience that lead to the suit was pretty good, in my opinion.

After that... it turned real sour real fast. Hammy villain, really badly strung plot and things really got so boring and annoying very fast. Romance with Paltrow for the sake of having one. Having a villain for the sake of having one. The ending was, I agree, very badly done.

However, I for one think Robert Downey Jr. shines in this role. He wears the burdens and elegance of entrepreneur Tony Stark to a T and he feels natural with the role. In my opinion, he was the only thing watchable in this huge mess of a movie.

niniendowarrior wrote:They establish who Tony Stark is and while under duress, his experience that lead to the suit

That was actually one of my main problems with the film, the suspension of disbelief is beyond absurd. While it is established that Tony Stark is a genius, this becomes an excuse to cheaply explain everything he does. No amount of disbelief can lead me to believe that a man simultaneously builds the world's greatest weapon AND solves the world's energy crisis, in a cave, with a box of SCRAPS!

niniendowarrior wrote:Hammy villain

I completely agree, the villain was simply thrown in there for the sake of being there. Again, it's completely illogical. I can't believe that a power-hungry man, with Stark's blueprints, and a group of less experienced workers can hope to come up with a suit that can even come close to defeating Iron Man's much more advanced suit simply by being bigger.

RDJ was the highlight of the film and no doubt made it watchable, but I felt that it was more or less RDJ being RDJ who just happened to be a character called Tony Stark. In essence, I think he overpowered the role.

Eternalist wrote:

niniendowarrior wrote:They establish who Tony Stark is and while under duress, his experience that lead to the suit

That was actually one of my main problems with the film, the suspension of disbelief is beyond absurd. While it is established that Tony Stark is a genius, this becomes an excuse to cheaply explain everything he does. No amount of disbelief can lead me to believe that a man simultaneously builds the world's greatest weapon AND solves the world's energy crisis, in a cave, with a box of SCRAPS!

While it takes quite a suspension of disbelief to accept the suit of armour from scraps to be the greatest weapon alive, I was frankly more focused on Tony Stark than the suit. When Tony Stark stopped developing, the movie went downhill.