idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Hank Pym isn't Ant-Man in this universe. It's possible that he'll be introduced later, but it's not happening now. And Ant-Man is actually coming out AFTER Avengers 2, iirc.
Or they introduce him as plain old Hank Pym in Avengers 2, and something happens which causes him to become Ant Man.
So they need a new origin for Ultron (and possibly Vision). They might go the "US tries to create it's own sentient Iron Man suit" or they might go with something else.
Could still use Pym for this (as above). Will they? No clue. Lots of ways to do Ultron, and I'm frankly not married to any particular method. I've never been a huge fan of Pym to begin with, so whatever.
I really liked what they did with the Mandarin. Without magic in this universe, you already diminish the impact of his character. And I like that they keep everyone guessing, fan or audience-alike. I also think the franchise is FAR stronger without magic in it (particularly the bullsh*t that is reality-warping).
It's was an interesting twist, but I honestly felt it was a bit of a let down. Kinda wanted to see the actual Mandarin, since that character (done right) is pretty bad-ass. I'm also wondering if at some point there will be some kind of "omg! Magic is real!" reveal in the franchise though. They just seem to go out of their way to do the "none of this is magic, just science" bit over and over. It's become a bit of a mantra. Would be a great twist to have them turn that upside down by suddenly having magic based characters show up and basically say "um... wrong!"
Would be funny as hell to have the "real" Mandarin show up at some point and it turn out that he let them use his name so as to make people think he didn't really exist or something. Dunno. I just think they're really limiting the franchise by not allowing magic and mutant type powers to exist. I think they're going to find themselves having to really stretch to keep things interesting and fresh while maintaining that requirement.
I think Dr. Strange might just have something to say about it as well. :)
I didn't love IM3, but I liked it more than IM2. It seems like it was generally really well-liked, though. And some of it I can really appreciate. I love the "Tony has PTSD" basis of the story, I love Pepper saving the day, I liked Tony having to deal with a crisis without having the suit to rely on (though that final battle scene could have been much shorter, imo).
Eh... I thought both were flawed, but in different ways. IM2 basically had kind of a questionable villain and plot. It wasn't "bad", it just didn't raise the heartbeat a whole lot. IM3 was chock full of action, but I really found most of it silly. I really really really disliked that they went with the whole "modular suit" thing to an absurd degree. I mean, c'mon. His suit breaks into tiny pieces, flies around, and assembles itself on him. Really? It was "ok", when it was more or less one piece, but could form itself around him (as in Avengers). But having each piece basically moving around on its own was kinda dumb. It also quite obviously performed based on plot requirements and nothing else. When it needed to be solid and protect him, it was solid and protected him. But when they needed bits to fly off and the zoom around cause it made for a cool visual, it did that instead.
Iron Man's suit is not the freaking Venom costume. It should be solid when worn. Period. If you want it to have some modular aspects when being assembled and put on and/or taken off? Fine. But once on, it should be on. There was one scene where he literally was punched out of the suit. That was just silly. And then having multiple suits all flying around doing their own thing, with some also being modular like that, just made the whole final battle scene just so out there as to be laughable. I didn't at all get a "this is cool!" sense, but a "OMG! This is ridiculous". I was laughing at the end, and not in a good way.
If I had to say which was more re-watchable, it would honestly be a toss up. IM2 at least didn't have anything completely ridiculous in it.
I just honestly would have liked the movie better if we got more of other characters. It was sort of hard to swallow IM3 coming straight from the Avengers.
It's a film based on a comic book. It's totally in keeping with the genre to have a character who's a member of a team title suddenly do everything alone as though the rest of the team doesn't exist when the story takes place in his own title. That's just the way it goes in the comic book world. I just see this as something you have to accept and move on from.
Absolutely loved Thor 2, though.
Yeah. I was surprised. I liked Thor, but it wasn't knock your socks off amazing. It was a solid telling of the characters and whatnot, but that was about it (to be fair, they had a lot to establish). So I was concerned about what they'd do with the second film, and I'm really glad to see that they did come up with a great story and told it well. They managed to really pull off the feel of Asgard and the other dimensions, without it feeling strained, and threw in a "ancient enemy comes back" story that worked well.
For a title that could be somewhat one dimensional (haha! I kill me), they did a fantastic job with that film. Edited, Feb 20th 2014 5:19pm by gbaji