Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Iron Man 3Follow

#102 Oct 07 2013 at 1:28 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,572 posts
I'd just like to point out that it's a bit unfair to characterize the degree to which SHIELD normally interacts with superheros by showing how often they show up in superhero films. Um... Because they're superhero films. So there's going to be superheros in them. Doesn't tell us what percentage of the SHIELD mission mandate actually involves working with superheros though. It's quite possible that 99% of their time and resources are used dealing with other stuff, and 1% interacting with superheros. But since all the films so far have revolved around superheros we tend to see SHIELD involved.

Maybe the whole point of so little involvement was to make make it more clear that this isn't really what SHIELD focuses on. Saying "that's strange because they were always involved in the other superhero films" doesn't work if their intent is to suggest that that was the exception and not the rule all along. You just happened to see films that included the half dozen or so times they were directly involved with superheros.

Or something like that. Dunno.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#103 Oct 07 2013 at 1:32 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,792 posts
TherealLogros wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
This definitely wasn't my favorite of the Marvel films so far. I'd say that order is Avengers > Thor > Iron Man > Captain America = Iron Man 3 > Iron Man 2.


I'm not completely sure but isn't the Hulk with Edward Norton considered part of this Marvel Movieverse? It's all a bit distant in my memories but the first scene with Ruffalo in The Avengers seemed to fit with The Incredible Hulk.

Edited for clarity.

Edited, Oct 7th 2013 3:13pm by TherealLogros


Yeah, it is. I just always forget it, because it wasn't that good, and because it was the first one before they really started the universe building.

Jophiel wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Though, to be fair, there's a pretty big gap between IM3 and IM2. Smiley: lol

Sure, but was Iron Man 2 worse than Spiderman 3?


I refused to watch it on the basis of the trailers alone. Smiley: lol

I really enjoyed the new Spider-Man movie. Alas, it's not set in this universe.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#104 Oct 07 2013 at 4:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Question: In IM3, a major part of the plot is the Mk 42 suit running out of power. Except I thought the suits were powered off the generator in Stark's chest (the quality of said generator vis-a-vis the suits' abilities being a plot point in previous films) and there was no reference to Stark's little chest engine being compromised. So what gives? Previous movies had Stark taking transcontinental flights in his suit and now he can't make the trip from the West Coast to Tennessee?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#105 Oct 07 2013 at 4:35 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
The newer suits all have internal power sources instead of using the arc reactor in Stark's chest.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#106 Oct 07 2013 at 4:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well obviously that was a stupid choice Smiley: grin

Or at least removing the ability of the suit to tap the reactor if its internal power fails.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#107 Oct 07 2013 at 5:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,883 posts
My take was that the suit was a new enough prototype that there was a glitch in it so it wasn't able to tap the other power supply correctly.

And SHIELD, All of it, was in the giant bunny and knocked out by the initial missile strike.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#108 Oct 07 2013 at 7:26 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,792 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Well obviously that was a stupid choice Smiley: grin

Or at least removing the ability of the suit to tap the reactor if its internal power fails.


Well, it's designed to break into individual pieces, each of which is equipped with repulsors and capable of flight. Kinda necessitates individual power sources.

And considering how much Jarvis screams about the suit being a prototype and not combat ready, I'm guessing the Mk 42 was more a proof of concept piece than something ever intended to see battle. I bet the reactor-based-charging would have been included in the Mk 43 (or just added to 42), once the original design was stable enough to further alter it.

I mean, the new suit didn't even include the launching mechanism for his missiles, if you recall. Smiley: lol

I'm just surprised that ALL of his suits were being kept there. I mean, he was in TN. New York isn't that far away, and a Mk 7 should have been easily accessible once Jarvis woke up. Why wait for the 42 to charge and fly to him... when he could use any other suit?

It would be one thing if they hadn't set Jarvis up to be capable of flying them and made Tony and his arm-chip thing a necessary interface component, but they didn't.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 18 All times are in CDT
Allegory, Anonymous Guests (17)