Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

by Silas Lesnick
Dec 14th, 2010
Jon Favreau will not be returning to the Marvel Universe for a third Iron Man film, Vulture reports.

The article suggests that the choice was made at the director's discretion and that he informed Marvel Studios of his decision this morning. Though Favreau's reasoning is purely speculatory at this stage, it is likely that the director simply wishes to pursue other creative ventures. With the upcoming Cowboys & Aliens hitting next summer and The Magic Kingdom in the early planning stages, Favreau should remain suitably busy for the time being.

UPDATE: It's been confirmed that Favreau is not returning for the third movie.






In baseball, the "Iron Man" record is held by Cal Ripken, Jr. at 2,632 consecutive games. Though the Iron Man film record is currently held by director Jon Favreau, it looks like the number to beat is going to hold at something a little bit smaller.

Two.

Vulture broke the news just hours ago and it has since been confirmed by SHH: Favreau told Marvel Studios this morning that he will not be returning for a third film.

Does that mean it's still too soon to start speculating on who should take over for Iron Man 3? Of course not, this is the internet! Here's SuperHeroHype and CraveOnline's top five choices for a new Iron Man director:

5. Gore Verbinski

No stranger to the House of Mouse, Verbinski delivered one of the studio's biggest successes with the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. Likewise, he's got a similar pedigree to Favreau, countering the smart kiddie fare of Elf and Zathura with Mouse Hunt and the upcoming Rango. Probably Disney's most bankable option, Marvel Studios is meanwhile famous for lowballing its directors (which almost caused Favreau to walk away from Iron Man 2) and that's probably not something you pull with Verbinksi's CV.

4. Andrew Stanton

Another choice with the Disney seal of approval, Stanton's WALL-E mixed CGI metal with drama like nobody's business. Currently hard at work on Disney's John Carter of Mars (which was also once a Marvel comic book series), Stanton is theoretically set by now for live action blockbuster filmmaking and has the technical know-how to deliver something FX heavy that doesn't sacrifice any humanity.

3. Shane Black

Black revitalized Robert Downey Jr's career for a lot of fans with Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang (even if the film failed to make a smash at the box office). What's more, Black consulted on the script for the first Iron Man film and was the one who suggested Downey for the role. An expert at capturing the wry wit that makes Downey's Tony Stark so memorable, Black's downfall as a selection comes in having only the one underperforming directing credit to his name. Still, Black is a pretty accomplished writer and that's arguably what got Joss Whedon aboard The Avengers.

2. Duncan Jones

With the critical acclaim of Moon and the ability to weave a stylish sci-fi narrative, Jones is a shoe-in candidate for some studio to take a big-budget risk on. His name was tossed around as part of the Superman reboot shortlist and he's a self-professed comic book fan with a tentative link to Iron Man already through Sam Rockwell. Depending on how quickly a choice has to be made, it makes sense to see how Jones' sophmore effort, Source Code, turns out both with critics and at the box office, but right now he's got fanboy cred and is a talent poised for exactly this kind of blockbuster break.

1.Paul Verhoeven

Though he's realistically the most unlikely choice on the list, Verhoeven gets the number one spot for being the guy who directed Robocop (along with a number of other genre masterpieces). Though he's over 70 and hasn't had a film released in nearly five years (and one in English, ten), Verhoeven's Iron Man could be a thing of wonder, getting back to the squeamish grit that Favreau featured in the original. Maybe not the family friendly choice, Verhoeven stands out as an auteur whose track record for heroes in metal suits is bar none.

...Well, we knew Favreau wouldn't work on the Iron Man films forever. When they seem to have the capactiy to keep going, like a James Bond series (that's the flavour it's captured), we knew eventually it would be another director who would do it. But on the cusp of finally doing the Mandarin...? It's too bad.

Paul Verhoeven?? Are those guys kidding? He's the anti-franchise director.

Should go with Shane Black after he did think up Leathal Weapon even if they changed his concept a bit.

I hope Jon at least stays on as producer to keep an eye on things.

If this is amicable, then Favreau remaining as a producer would be good.
Unless it's Marvel Studios playing hardball and getting a director off a project because of his pricetag...

I'm sure this means he won't be returning as Happy Hogan, the screen time he got in Iron Man 2 really irked me because he was basically just a goofball in it. Ruined Black Widows' fighting scene, at least for me anyway.

Favreau is an idiot

Don't care too much, as the Iron Man movies are pretty balls as far as them being critiqued as something other than "just a comic book movie", imo. After IM2 I can deal without Favreau's directing.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
I'm sure this means he won't be returning as Happy Hogan, the screen time he got in Iron Man 2 really irked me because he was basically just a goofball in it. Ruined Black Widows' fighting scene, at least for me anyway.
That fight scene was like a parody of a fight scene. She was choppin' people in the knees and KOing them in that.

Jesus - weren't the fans all thanking him for delivering such an awesome first film? I think the second one is pretty good, too...Black Widow's fight scene was good for thrills and comedy, thanks to Favreau's struggle with just one gurad while she blasts through the rest of them.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Don't care too much, as the Iron Man movies are pretty balls as far as them being critiqued as something other than "just a comic book movie", imo. After IM2 I can deal without Favreau's directing.

I guess you were expecting non stop action....

Well, I was expecting more than 10 minutes total of Iron Man in the suit. I guess that's true.

Besides that one thing not happening in the movies for you the flicks did'nt do much for you...

wow just like you and your games less story more action...

Ironman 1 and 2 had bad music besides the AC/DC.

Ironman 1 had a horrible end fight but the rest rocked!
Ironman 2 was great! What's with the hate?
It's early Ironman you can't just rush into Inertial Dampners/Force Fields/Nanotech straightaway.

No real complaints here. As long as Favreau is Prod and Hogan.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Besides that one thing not happening in the movies for you the flicks did'nt do much for you...

wow just like you and your games less story more action...

I'm easy to please. shrug

Originally posted by roughrider
Black Widow's fight scene was good for thrills and comedy, thanks to Favreau's struggle with just one gurad while she blasts through the rest of them.

A fight scene should be done as seriously as possible, considering it was leading up to near to the end of the film and is meant to convey a dangerous, tense situation. It shouldn't be comedic with the 'goofy man trying to impress/protect the hot woman' cliche but failing miserably.

Even the scene at the racetrack with Pepper and Hogan bumbling round in the car with the suitcase suit detracts from the eventual scene, we could have had a lot longer and cooler fight with Whiplash, what we got was disappointing to say the least.

"Iron Man" is one of the best superhero films of all time, and easily one of my favorite movies ever.
"Iron Man 2" was good, but a major step down from the previous movie. Rourke was terrific as the villain, but Stark became more of an ass and there were a lot of plotholes that Favreau almost TOLD you to overlook.

I am crushed Favreau has left the franchise, and I am extremely worried for the sequel.

Hope it does'nt end up like Superman and Batman(Tim Burton's ones) situations first two done good and then then the next few go all loopy and weird.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Hope it does'nt end up like Superman and Batman(Tim Burton's ones) situations first two done good and then then the next few go all loopy and weird.

Burton's films sucked imo.

Frankly most of the guys you've listed are too successful to come into the third film of a franchise like Ironman unless they are just looking for a pay check (and Marvel isn't known for throwing a bunch of zeroes to entice directors). Duncan Jones is a possibility has critical success so he is on the radar of film studios but no box office success. I could see him coming on to direct a comic film for the same reason Nolan and Aronofsky did, because if it is a success the studio will back riskier, "artsier" projects the director actually wants to do.

Favreau's career is riding a high momentum, he has nothing to prove any more (not with Iron Man anyway, what he has to prove is that he can bring the heat with something that isn't Iron Man, which is what he is poised to do with Cowboys and Aliens). It is odd to say but after Iron Man 2 staying on to direct a third Iron Man could only hurt his career at this point. He made the right choice, he needs to cash in all the good will he got from the first Iron Man while he can.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
A fight scene should be done as seriously as possible, considering it was leading up to near to the end of the film and is meant to convey a dangerous, tense situation. It shouldn't be comedic with the 'goofy man trying to impress/protect the hot woman' cliche but failing miserably.

Even the scene at the racetrack with Pepper and Hogan bumbling round in the car with the suitcase suit detracts from the eventual scene, we could have had a lot longer and cooler fight with Whiplash, what we got was disappointing to say the least.

Jesus. Do you criticize the action scenes in the Indiana jones movies too, because they are done with a bit of humor? It's not like it should be serious as a WW2 film. The audience wants fun thrills, and the movie delivered.

That Black Widow fight wasn't thrilling though. Those dudes crumbled like saltines. I don't remember them even fighting back.

The whole movie was actually kind of sub-par. Was it entertaining? Yeah, I thought so. But I don't think I'd watch it again.

Yea, I didnt like Black Widow. Her fighting was lame.

Originally posted by roughrider
Jesus. Do you criticize the action scenes in the Indiana jones movies too, because they are done with a bit of humor? It's not like it should be serious as a WW2 film. The audience wants fun thrills, and the movie delivered.

The Indiana Jones movies have a lot more simplified fight scenes and may I remind you that the humour in any of those individual movies never bloats so much so it loses the point of the scene to yet more comedy. Also the film only mildy refers to it being based around WW2 and is centered more around the war and not in the thick of it so your attempt at sarcasm fails.

I just felt it was unnecessary for MORE comedy considering it was already up to that point saturated with enough meaningless scenes/characters and script that didn't go anywhere because of similar attempts at 'humour'.

Fun thrills, yes it had some but when a director starts to let his ego into the film up to the point where he has to appear in it and it being no less than in an action scene is just terrible. Many directors appear in their own movies but only in cameo form (voices too), and not a character that feels they are part of the adventure or the 'team'. IM1 he was just 'the driver' he has a name and its a veritable character but he's not doing anything to impact the story and that works, this changes in IM2 where he's everywhere.

Originally posted by Mr. Rhythmic
"Iron Man" is one of the best superhero films of all time, and easily one of my favorite movies ever.
"Iron Man 2" was good, but a major step down from the previous movie. Rourke was terrific as the villain, but Stark became more of an ass and there were a lot of plotholes that Favreau almost TOLD you to overlook.

I am crushed Favreau has left the franchise, and I am extremely worried for the sequel.

I also prefer the first Iron Man film over the second one. Iron Man 2 didn't have major plot holes. It just had a different formula than the first film. The first film's plot flowed much smoother and everything was connected. The second film was supposed to be about Tony Stark dealing with a lot of crap around him at the same time (government wants his armors, has to fight Whiplash, has to create a new element from his dad's research, has to save himself from dying, etc.)

Favreau leaving the franchise worries me. When Richard Donner left Superman, the franchise dropped. When Singer left the X-Men franchise, it dropped. Batman Forever was mediocre (no different than the first two Burton films) but that is because BF was a foreshadowing of what was about to follow (and we will NOT discuss what followed after Batman Forever ).

Since the films are the properties of Marvel Studios, I think the continuity will stay clean between Favreau's films and what the new director does. There won't be a 'Schumachering' of the franchise.

Looks like Shane Black is in talks to direct Iron Man 3, good call.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=30757

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Looks like Shane Black is in talks to direct Iron Man 3, good call.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=30757


i read that.. i hope it actually happens

Hope we get Mandarin for the third movie.

Im actually glad he's not returning. I think the first Iron Man is a great movie and even though the second one was a mess it still had many redeeming factors. I'd like to see what someone else can do with the franchise since the ground work has been laid. Besides, i'd like to see him return to his dark and cynical comedy roots.

I fail to see how the second movie was a mess......

It had a lot of bad parts that were at least partially covered up with a lot of "I guess that was pretty cool looking" parts.

Seems to be confirmed that Shane Black will direct!

http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/shane-black-to-direct-marvels-iron-man-3/?_r=true

Now maybe we should change this thread to simply Iron Man 3...

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
Iron Man 2 didn't have major plot holes. It just had a different formula than the first film

It had a good deal of plotholes. Like how can Lt. Col. James "Rhodey" Rhodes just take a suit? Is there no password protection? No software to keep random people from flying off with it? And how does he know how to use it so well?
How did James Rhodes take off the suit after flying it to the US Army camp? There were no robotic arms! Plus, it was even intact after he took it off! How did they know how to assemble/disassemble it?
Why did Whiplash take off his helmet during the fight with War Machine and Iron Man? There was absolutely no reason to.
And what was Whiplash's obsession with whips anyways? Why would he put it in a final suit when he knows it wasn't effective in the first place?
If S.H.I.E.L.D. agents are around all the time, why doesn't anyone of them help out when the army of Iron Man drones attacks the Stark Expo?
How did Tony Stark leave his house without being detected by Agent Coulson?
How did Ivan build his final Whiplash suit without Justin Hammer noticing? In fact, that suit's entirety felt freakishly rushed.

Maybe it's because I'm a little nerdy, but I found it incredibly ridiculous how quickly Tony Stark and Whiplash were able to commandeer any piece of technology they wanted. Does no one password protect their stuff? Are all the other programmers in the Marvel Universe completely inept?

Originally posted by Mr. Rhythmic
It had a good deal of plotholes. Like how can Lt. Col. James "Rhodey" Rhodes just take a suit? Is there no password protection? No software to keep random people from flying off with it? And how does he know how to use it so well?
How did James Rhodes take off the suit after flying it to the US Army camp? There were no robotic arms! Plus, it was even intact after he took it off! How did they know how to assemble/disassemble it?
Why did Whiplash take off his helmet during the fight with War Machine and Iron Man? There was absolutely no reason to.
And what was Whiplash's obsession with whips anyways? Why would he put it in a final suit when he knows it wasn't effective in the first place?
If S.H.I.E.L.D. agents are around all the time, why doesn't anyone of them help out when the army of Iron Man drones attacks the Stark Expo?
How did Tony Stark leave his house without being detected by Agent Coulson?
How did Ivan build his final Whiplash suit without Justin Hammer noticing? In fact, that suit's entirety felt freakishly rushed.

In both the comics and the movies, Tony and Rhodey are very good friends. Tony trusts Rhodey more than anyone else. In the first film, Rhodey was the FIRST person that Tony wanted to show the suit to. So I trust that Tony has given Rhodey more info on the suit during those 6 months (the second film takes place six months after the first film). The first movie did have ONE plot hole though. How did Obadiah Stane learn how to use the suit so fast? Tony needed practice using it. Even Rhodey needed practice using it (as I said earlier, Tony most likely showed him how to use the suit during those six months). So how did Obadiah know how to use it?

The suit doesn't need the robotic arms to be dissasembled. Tony was shown wearing his suit without the mask and was also shown wearing only the gloves of the suit. And even if you need robot arms to dissasemble it, then you don't think they have them? His mansion isn't the only place in the world with those robotic arms. Tony placed robotic arms that dissasembled the suit wherever the suit would go. He even had them during a presentation that he was doing at the beginning of the movie.

What would be the whole point of keeping the helmet on? Whether or not he wore it, it wouldn't have made a difference. It's not really a plot hole. And if it is, then it is a VERY VERY VERY minor plot hole. You're just nitpicking now.

He thought the whips would have worked this time because he they were part of a more advanced suit. And Justin Hammer most likely DID know about the suit. Remember that Justin Hammer gave Vanko full control over the Iron Man suits and didn't interfere with anything. He even let him use androids instead of robotic suits.

SHIELD agents aren't around that much. The only agents that appeared in the movie were Black Widow, Agent Coulson, and Nick Fury. Black Widow was an undercover agent. And she WAS there helping out when the Iron Man drones attacked Stark Expo. Nick Fury only appeared to help Tony get back on his feet and to give him the info required for him to continue his dad's research. That was his job in the movie. Once that job was finished, he left. And keep in mind that he had other members to recruit into the Avengers. He had to deal with superheroes from all over the world, which is why he wasn't always around Tony. And Agent Coulson wasn't there during the attack.

I'll give you that Agent Coulson not detecting Tony was a plot hole. You're right about that.

Why wouldn't Whiplash keep the helmet on? Are you serious? I forget which one did it but one of them tried to shoot him in the face. He closed his helmet in time but immediately took it back off afterwords. The first thoughts in his head should have been "They are trying to kill me. I shouldn't leave my brain open to every single form of attack they possess."

It's not necessarily a plot hole though if you consider how vain and stupid Whiplash seemed to be.

Originally posted by Doctor-Alvis
Why wouldn't Whiplash keep the helmet on? Are you serious? I forget which one did it but one of them tried to shoot him in the face. He closed his helmet in time but immediately took it back off afterwords. The first thoughts in his head should have been "They are trying to kill me. I shouldn't leave my brain open to every single form of attack they possess."

It's not necessarily a plot hole though if you consider how vain and stupid Whiplash seemed to be.

Have you thought of the possibility that maybe he was more comfortable without his helmet on?

I also only noticed Anton Vanko whiplash's father was Crimson Dynamo.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
He even let him use androids instead of robotic suits.



For me that part at least was a complete cop-out. It was so obviously a plot device so that Iron Man wasn't killing people in suits at the end.

Originally posted by Mr. Rhythmic
It had a good deal of plotholes. Like how can Lt. Col. James "Rhodey" Rhodes just take a suit? Is there no password protection? No software to keep random people from flying off with it? And how does he know how to use it so well?
How did James Rhodes take off the suit after flying it to the US Army camp? There were no robotic arms! Plus, it was even intact after he took it off! How did they know how to assemble/disassemble it?
Why did Whiplash take off his helmet during the fight with War Machine and Iron Man? There was absolutely no reason to.
And what was Whiplash's obsession with whips anyways? Why would he put it in a final suit when he knows it wasn't effective in the first place?
If S.H.I.E.L.D. agents are around all the time, why doesn't anyone of them help out when the army of Iron Man drones attacks the Stark Expo?
How did Tony Stark leave his house without being detected by Agent Coulson?
How did Ivan build his final Whiplash suit without Justin Hammer noticing? In fact, that suit's entirety felt freakishly rushed.

- Tony allowed Rhodey some access to the suit, because he had a report ready to give for the government inquiry. Tony may have been surprised by the subpoena, but he knew by the last film he wasn't going to be selling this piece of tech, so he thought just giving details to his friend (and official government liaison) would be as far as it would go.
Yes; there was password protection. Both Nick Fury and the Black Widow point that out later to Tony - proving their point that Tony deep down wanted to quit as Iron Man because of his bad condition, and so provided the info necessary to Rhodey some time back, to take it over when he couldn't.

- We don't see it on screen, but we can assume there are passwords (like in the comics) for the armour to disassemble in an emergency, when there isn't access to the mechanical arms. I mean, Tony got out of his travel armour in Monaco and interrogated Ivan Vanko without flying home first. So we can assume there's alternate ways to exit the suit. Rhodey would know about that too.

- We can only assume Vanko got too confident in the final minutes, and wanted Tony to see his face as he got his revenge. Revenge for his family's honour was more important to him than anything else; more than the money he could have made working with Justin Hammer or selling his own miniature arc reactor.

- Vanko seemed to improve on the whips with the second suit; he was handling both Tony and Rhodey at the same time.

- Unless SHIELD agents have some robotic suits of their own, they wouldn't be very effective stopping the Hammer Drones. They would be relying on Hammer to have everything under control, and if that wasn't the case that Rhodey in the War Machine suit would take care of the unforeseen. Vanko's role behind the scenes was unknown by almost everyone. I mean, we saw in the first film they weren't effective in arresting Obidiah Stane once he got into the Iron Monger suit either.

- Maybe the forthcoming THOR movie will elaborate on this, but Coulson was clearly distracted by the events in New Mexico, and when he came back to Tony to say he was leaving, he wasn't even angry. His head was clearly somewhere else.

- Hammer clearly thought he had Vanko in his pocket, but that was wrong. We all saw Vanko was doing something else at his factory (switching from suits to drones), but Hammer was desperate to show up Tony Stark at the Expo, so didn't push things very far. He wasn't around supervising things, so it's only by the eve of the Expo he has enough of the secrecy and shuts Vanko down (and we see by that time Vanko has new whips up and running - just assume there's a suit around somewhere as well.)

Originally posted by Kazenji
I also only noticed Anton Vanko whiplash's father was Crimson Dynamo.

The character Ivan Vanko is actually an amalgation of Crimson Dynamo and Whiplash.

Originally posted by Kazenji For me that part at least was a complete cop-out. It was so obviously a plot device so that Iron Man wasn't killing people in suits at the end.

So you want to see Iron Man killing people in other armors? The fight scenes would have been a lot more toned down, since Tony would have had to defeat all of the armors without hurting the people wearing them. Androids brought a lot better action to the film. Also, using people instead of androids would have caused a plot hole. Remember the scene where the Black Widow unhacked Rhodey's armor? It would create a plot hole because it wouldn't make sense why the Black Widow would have freed just Rhodey and not all of the other people in suits. Or maybe ALL of their armors would have been unhacked but that would have been stupid because an entire army of Iron Men would have defeated Vanko by teaming up on him. It would have been dissapointed with the film if it went in that direction.

Originally posted by roughrider
- Tony allowed Rhodey some access to the suit, because he had a report ready to give for the government inquiry. Tony may have been surprised by the subpoena, but he knew by the last film he wasn't going to be selling this piece of tech, so he thought just giving details to his friend (and official government liaison) would be as far as it would go.
Yes; there was password protection. Both Nick Fury and the Black Widow point that out later to Tony - proving their point that Tony deep down wanted to quit as Iron Man because of his bad condition, and so provided the info necessary to Rhodey some time back, to take it over when he couldn't.

- We don't see it on screen, but we can assume there are passwords (like in the comics) for the armour to disassemble in an emergency, when there isn't access to the mechanical arms. I mean, Tony got out of his travel armour in Monaco and interrogated Ivan Vanko without flying home first. So we can assume there's alternate ways to exit the suit. Rhodey would know about that too.

- We can only assume Vanko got too confident in the final minutes, and wanted Tony to see his face as he got his revenge. Revenge for his family's honour was more important to him than anything else; more than the money he could have made working with Justin Hammer or selling his own miniature arc reactor.

- Vanko seemed to improve on the whips with the second suit; he was handling both Tony and Rhodey at the same time.

- Unless SHIELD agents have some robotic suits of their own, they wouldn't be very effective stopping the Hammer Drones. They would be relying on Hammer to have everything under control, and if that wasn't the case that Rhodey in the War Machine suit would take care of the unforeseen. Vanko's role behind the scenes was unknown by almost everyone. I mean, we saw in the first film they weren't effective in arresting Obidiah Stane once he got into the Iron Monger suit either.

- Maybe the forthcoming THOR movie will elaborate on this, but Coulson was clearly distracted by the events in New Mexico, and when he came back to Tony to say he was leaving, he wasn't even angry. His head was clearly somewhere else.

- Hammer clearly thought he had Vanko in his pocket, but that was wrong. We all saw Vanko was doing something else at his factory (switching from suits to drones), but Hammer was desperate to show up Tony Stark at the Expo, so didn't push things very far. He wasn't around supervising things, so it's only by the eve of the Expo he has enough of the secrecy and shuts Vanko down (and we see by that time Vanko has new whips up and running - just assume there's a suit around somewhere as well.)

In that case, I guess Agent Coulson not detecting Tony wasn't a plot hole. My mistake.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
The character Ivan Vanko is actually an amalgation of Crimson Dynamo and Whiplash.


Anton Vanko the father that was dying in the bed in the movie is Crimson Dynamo even look it up, He was the original Dynamo

http://www.comicvine.com/crimson-dynamo/29-7234/

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
Have you thought of the possibility that maybe he was more comfortable without his helmet on?
No, I had not considered that because I was under the assumption sense was supposed to be made.

They tried to shoot him in the face. They were going for the kill. Think long term. And I mean literally minutes into the future. You're Whiplash and your enemies have made it clear they are willing to exploit any opening available to kill you. What would be the smart choice? Helmet on or helmet off? I'd wear wool underwear in the summer if I thought it would significantly lower the chances of people shooting me in the face. There's a point where comfort clearly takes a back seat.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks


So you want to see Iron Man killing people in other armors? The fight scenes would have been a lot more toned down, since Tony would have had to defeat all of the armors without hurting the people wearing them. Androids brought a lot better action to the film. Also, using people instead of androids would have caused a plot hole. Remember the scene where the Black Widow unhacked Rhodey's armor? It would create a plot hole because it wouldn't make sense why the Black Widow would have freed just Rhodey and not all of the other people in suits. Or maybe ALL of their armors would have been unhacked but that would have been stupid because an entire army of Iron Men would have defeated Vanko by teaming up on him. It would have been dissapointed with the film if it went in that direction.

Why not? If they were really evil characters intent on hurting people while in the suits it would make it more of a emotionally charged confrontation; just blasting away at droids is bland. How would it be a plot hole? Vanko demonstrates the ability to fashion a suit for himself (with Hammer's tech), I get that he wanted control, but if thats the case why couldn't there have been a plot device where Vanko calls in some sinister friends to wear them and cause mayhem. They don't have to be Hammer's people when Vanko literally assumes control of his resources.

Iron Man shouldn't be above taking out villains if the situation requires it, just how, when himself and War Machine are bristling with harmful weapons going to take a 'safety first' approach? Is every villain going to be a droid or a non-sentient being? If a super-advanced sentient army attacks is Iron Man going to simply restrain them?

And in IM1 he takes out terrorists, several times, including blowing up a tank (which normally has a crew), and is instrumental in taking out Obediah (another man in a suit). So he has form for this, the second film was too cuddly on reflection.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Why not? If they were really evil characters intent on hurting people while in the suits it would make it more of a emotionally charged confrontation; just blasting away at droids is bland. How would it be a plot hole? Vanko demonstrates the ability to fashion a suit for himself (with Hammer's tech), I get that he wanted control, but if thats the case why couldn't there have been a plot device where Vanko calls in some sinister friends to wear them and cause mayhem. They don't have to be Hammer's people when Vanko literally assumes control of his resources.

Iron Man shouldn't be above taking out villains if the situation requires it, just how, when himself and War Machine are bristling with harmful weapons going to take a 'safety first' approach? Is every villain going to be a droid or a non-sentient being? If a super-advanced sentient army attacks is Iron Man going to simply restrain them?

And in IM1 he takes out terrorists, several times, including blowing up a tank (which normally has a crew), and is instrumental in taking out Obediah (another man in a suit). So he has form for this, the second film was too cuddly on reflection. Or they could have just made them droids to keep it from going to a more mature rating.

In the first film, everyone is aware that Tony did kill some people with the armour in his bid to escape. Same when he rescued the villagers in Gulmira. There's no need to do it all the time.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Anton Vanko the father that was dying in the bed in the movie is Crimson Dynamo even look it up, He was the original Dynamo

http://www.comicvine.com/crimson-dynamo/29-7234/

I know that. But in the film, Anton Vanko was never Crimson Dynamo at any point in the Marvel Movieverse Timeline. The only thing that Anton Vanko from the comics and Anton Vanko from the movie have in common is that they have the same full name. Other than that, they were completely different characters. Nothing from Crimson Dynamo's character in the comics is used in the movie. His son (Ivan Vanko) has a lot more things in common with the Crimson Dynamo from the comics than his father did.

Originally posted by Doctor-Alvis
No, I had not considered that because I was under the assumption sense was supposed to be made.

They tried to shoot him in the face. They were going for the kill. Think long term. And I mean literally minutes into the future. You're Whiplash and your enemies have made it clear they are willing to exploit any opening available to kill you. What would be the smart choice? Helmet on or helmet off? I'd wear wool underwear in the summer if I thought it would significantly lower the chances of people shooting me in the face. There's a point where comfort clearly takes a back seat.

Roughrider already answered your question:
Originally posted by roughrider
We can only assume Vanko got too confident in the final minutes, and wanted Tony to see his face as he got his revenge. Revenge for his family's honour was more important to him than anything else; more than the money he could have made working with Justin Hammer or selling his own miniature arc reactor.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Why not? If they were really evil characters intent on hurting people while in the suits it would make it more of a emotionally charged confrontation; just blasting away at droids is bland. How would it be a plot hole? Vanko demonstrates the ability to fashion a suit for himself (with Hammer's tech), I get that he wanted control, but if thats the case why couldn't there have been a plot device where Vanko calls in some sinister friends to wear them and cause mayhem. They don't have to be Hammer's people when Vanko literally assumes control of his resources.

Iron Man shouldn't be above taking out villains if the situation requires it, just how, when himself and War Machine are bristling with harmful weapons going to take a 'safety first' approach? Is every villain going to be a droid or a non-sentient being? If a super-advanced sentient army attacks is Iron Man going to simply restrain them?

And in IM1 he takes out terrorists, several times, including blowing up a tank (which normally has a crew), and is instrumental in taking out Obediah (another man in a suit). So he has form for this, the second film was too cuddly on reflection.

No one wearing the suits would have been evil. Those suits that Vanko made were sold to the government (through Justin Hammer). So if they would have used people instead of androids, the people in the suits would have been good people. And they couldn't use Vanko's sinister friends for four reasons:
1) Vanko wanted himself to be the only one in the world with the Iron Man technology. He tried killing Tony because he believes that Tony's family took his family's pride and tech. He wanted to bring his family back on top again by getting rid of Tony and replacing his status as the most technological advanced man in the world. He wouldn't have shared his tech with anyone that wasn't part of his family.
2) Vanko is shown as a man that likes to work by himself throughout the whole movie. Calling in some random friends that appear in the last 40 minutes of the film with no character development and are just there to kick some ass in suits would have been stupid and just another excuse to have more evil Iron Men in the movie.
3) Why would the government let Vanko's friends (if he has any friends, they most likely have a criminal record like he did) wear the suits in front of thousands of innocent civilians at StarkExpo? Put yourself in their shoes. If you needed people to wear powerful suits that were created for the purpose of keeping peace, would you let dangerous criminals wear them?
4) Vanko's friends in the suits would have destroyed the entire message of the movie that Tony was trying to bring across. The government wanted Tony's suits because they wanted to use them to bring world peace. Tony kept telling them throughout the film that he is the only one who can control the suit and use it for good and that no one else can control it and use it for good. But even though Tony kept saying that, no one listened to him. When the androids that were owned by the government were hacked by Vanko and started hurting the people that were at StarkExpo, that proved Tony's point all along that he is the only one capable of being Iron Man. That's why the government gave up trying to take the suit away from Tony at the end of the film.

The terrorists and Obadiah were all criminals and bad people. The people in Iron Man 2 would have been innocent army soldiers wearing suits. There is a huge difference. And there were about 100 - 200 androids in the film. All of those androids being humans in suits getting killed would have caused the film to be R-rated. And Iron Man is that dark of a character to have a film rated R. If you want to see a Marvel superhero killing hundreds of people like that, go read The Punisher.

Originally posted by Newjak
Or they could have just made them droids to keep it from going to a more mature rating.

That's the whole point I was trying to make. They were swerving the idea of suits to make a more cuddly and impersonal battle , where no-one would have their feelings hurt if Tony was taking out people in suits.

No one felt bad about him killing and being reckless with human lives in IM1, but hey...

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
No one wearing the suits would have been evil. Those suits that Vanko made were sold to the government (through Justin Hammer). So if they would have used people instead of androids, the people in the suits would have been good people. And they couldn't use Vanko's sinister friends for four reasons:
1) Vanko wanted himself to be the only one in the world with the Iron Man technology. He tried killing Tony because he believes that Tony's family took his family's pride and tech. He wanted to bring his family back on top again by getting rid of Tony and replacing his status as the most technological advanced man in the world. He wouldn't have shared his tech with anyone that wasn't part of his family.
2) Vanko is shown as a man that likes to work by himself throughout the whole movie. Calling in some random friends that appear in the last 40 minutes of the film with no character development and are just there to kick some ass in suits would have been stupid and just another excuse to have more evil Iron Men in the movie.
3) Why would the government let Vanko's friends (if he has any friends, they most likely have a criminal record like he did) wear the suits in front of thousands of innocent civilians at StarkExpo? Put yourself in their shoes. If you needed people to wear powerful suits that were created for the purpose of keeping peace, would you let dangerous criminals wear them?
4) Vanko's friends in the suits would have destroyed the entire message of the movie that Tony was trying to bring across. The government wanted Tony's suits because they wanted to use them to bring world peace. Tony kept telling them throughout the film that he is the only one who can control the suit and use it for good and that no one else can control it and use it for good. But even though Tony kept saying that, no one listened to him. When the androids that were owned by the government were hacked by Vanko and started hurting the people that were at StarkExpo, that proved Tony's point all along that he is the only one capable of being Iron Man. That's why the government gave up trying to take the suit away from Tony at the end of the film.

The terrorists and Obadiah were all criminals and bad people. The people in Iron Man 2 would have been innocent army soldiers wearing suits. There is a huge difference. And there were about 100 - 200 androids in the film. All of those androids being humans in suits getting killed would have caused the film to be R-rated. And Iron Man is that dark of a character to have a film rated R. If you want to see a Marvel superhero killing hundreds of people like that, go read The Punisher.

Justin Hammer and his people were not evil? Or warmongering? Oh, I guess I just missed the part where himself and his people aid (include blowing him out of prison) a dangerous terrorist and fan the flames of his hatred towards Tony to built BATTLE suits, to use to KILL Tony. Judging from Hammer's apparent lack of concern towards anything but money and fame I guess he was only going to let America use them and not put them on the world market for other countries to buy; thereby making the same profit that arms dealers do. Silly me, a nice man he certainly is.

1) If you got that much from Rourke's performance then you truly are amazing because I felt he was somewhere between bored and disinterested most of the time. He could never be the only person with the Iron Man technology, have you never been exposed to the concept of business? One company makes something, another company pops up and makes the same thing, just slightly different. What is Vanko going to do, off them all?

2) Simple solution, create these characters from the start, films need iconic villains to latch onto and identify with (sentient villains I'm talking about here, not Robot A, B, C...) . Vanko spends most of his time in Hammer's lab, in fact Rourke spent so much time there I thought he was actually trying to make a suit. This left the film without a villain, a villain that supposedly hates Stark enough to sit in a lab and construct an overly elaborate plan, not once considering that he could catch Stark without the suit and just shoot him in the head. Pure hatred on display here all right... let the subject of your limitless fury walk around unarmed and make no other attempt to kill him until its the end of the film and of course then waiting until he's armoured and has back-up.

3) Well keeping the peace sometimes requires the use of violence so you do actually need violent people. You are aware of the fact that soldiers are and have to be dangerous people, or have I just shattered an illusion there?

In any case does it matter if the crowd see them? They are just rich, cheering idiots who won't know a criminal just by looking at them, plus if Vanko did insert his own guys in there I'm sure he would pick guys he would trust implicitly and have enough technical wizardry in him to create foolproof identities for them if any goverment agencies start sniffing around. Plus in my scenario Vanko wouldn't make the suits for the government, he would make sure his guys are in place and just steal them, simple really considering Vanko had total control of Hammer's resources.

4) Actually you've just destroyed your own arguement there. Surely the government would understand Tony's message a lot more if they DO see evil men using them for nefarious purposes. That would strengthen his arguement that the suit and it's technology should be kept with him, not for some who's going to abuse the power like Hammer and Vanko (or someone else like Vanko's possible criminal associates perhaps...)

On your last point: I wouldn't have had hundreds of suits, the fact that they made them drones allowed for that scenario but I would have had a smaller number manned by Vanko's people (and possibly Vanko himself, I mean he had nothing else to do except sit in the lab remember) sent out to a) destroy the Iron Man and War Machine suits, killing Tony and Rhodes in the process, b) destroy his lab and obliterate all his records of his suit's construction (if he's serious about having a monopoly on the suit technology then this would make sense), c) escape, with their suits intact.

Iron Man being 'darker' because he would be eliminating sentient threats? Well I guess in the comics he just turns up and conks them on the head, nicely knocking them out with his harmless array of weapons and sweet, caring attitude. Give me a break.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
Roughrider already answered your question:
I was asking you.

Secondary question - You're whooping up on your enemy and his friend. Giant ball of energy is forming in front of you. Stare at it and die or try to shield yourself so you can maybe live and keep whooping up on your enemy?

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
That's the whole point I was trying to make. They were swerving the idea of suits to make a more cuddly and impersonal battle , where no-one would have their feelings hurt if Tony was taking out people in suits.

No one felt bad about him killing and being reckless with human lives in IM1, but hey... Most studios will not try to hit a higher rating unless they are specifically going for mature. It's statistics the lower the rating the more people will go see the movie. Iron Man doesn't have to be dirty and gritty therefore studios aren't going to do that if they don't have to.

As to the latter it's all about context, seeing them die on screen, and volume. There is a big difference between a handful people dieing without being shown dead vs seeing Tony out right kill a hundred or so people on screen.

And if you're looking for an in-film reason. The simplest is Ivan Vanko doesn't like to get too many people involved. He said so himself people make problem.

So why would he make a number of suits and put people in them when he has absolute control of the androids.

Or you could go with he had no idea about Hammer when he first went after Tony and had no time to get friends into the suits because he was working on a limited schedule once Hammer got him, he was also under Hammer's eyes, and and had no way of getting people over there. Androids were his best bet at maintaining constant control of the situation he was in. He could talk Hammer into them, he could tie them directly to his suit. He could also plant bombs in them.

So pick whichever you like.

Originally posted by Newjak
Most studios will not try to hit a higher rating unless they are specifically going for mature. It's statistics the lower the rating the more people will go see the movie. Iron Man doesn't have to be dirty and gritty therefore studios aren't going to do that if they don't have to.

As to the latter it's all about context, seeing them die on screen, and volume. There is a big difference between a handful people dieing without being shown dead vs seeing Tony out right kill a hundred or so people on screen.

And if you're looking for an in-film reason. The simplest is Ivan Vanko doesn't like to get too many people involved. He said so himself people make problem.

So why would he make a number of suits and put people in them when he has absolute control of the androids.

Or you could go with he had no idea about Hammer when he first went after Tony and had no time to get friends into the suits because he was working on a limited schedule once Hammer got him, he was also under Hammer's eyes, and and had no way of getting people over there. Androids were his best bet at maintaining constant control of the situation he was in. He could talk Hammer into them, he could tie them directly to his suit. He could also plant bombs in them.

So pick whichever you like.


I agree to a point, but I'm not talking about full-on gory dismemberments or decapitations but in another sense it can be done if handled correctly. Just look at at Matrix Revolutions the battle scenes with the humans in those mechs vs the machines, some died pretty horribly and other scenes in Reloaded and Revolutions were significally jarring or violent. Those were 15 rated, despite all those themes a pretty weak rating.

The thing that irritated me about the conversion to droids was the fact that it was Hammer's insistence up to that moment with Vanko that he wanted suits. The film leads you to believe in him wanting suits so thats what you normally expect from the film. After all, he wants to better Tony Stark's creation with his own company and then he meets Vanko and just blithely accepts his rationale for wanting droids.

Building droids is not being competitive in any way to the product of a suit (droids which were turned into mince-meat by guys wearing suits, tell me which is better now and makes more sense?), that way he (Hammer) is just admitting defeat, which in business terms is suicide. Vanko stating that more people make problems is ludicrous, especially when you consider what Tony (a civilian) has been able to do in that suit up to now.

Not to mention that you, and others have stated that droids give them better control then just a guy in a suit, not so, how then could they wilfully take over War Machine? They took control of that pretty easily.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
I agree to a point, but I'm not talking about full-on gory dismemberments or decapitations but in another sense it can be done if handled correctly. Just look at at Matrix Revolutions the battle scenes with the humans in those mechs vs the machines, some died pretty horribly and other scenes in Reloaded and Revolutions were significally jarring or violent. Those were 15 rated, despite all those themes a pretty weak rating.

The thing that irritated me about the conversion to droids was the fact that it was Hammer's insistence up to that moment with Vanko that he wanted suits. The film leads you to believe in him wanting suits so thats what you normally expect from the film. After all, he wants to better Tony Stark's creation with his own company and then he meets Vanko and just blithely accepts his rationale for wanting droids.

Building droids is not being competitive in any way to the product of a suit (droids which were turned into mince-meat by guys wearing suits, tell me which is better now and makes more sense?), that way he (Hammer) is just admitting defeat, which in business terms is suicide. Vanko stating that more people make problems is ludicrous, especially when you consider what Tony (a civilian) has been able to do in that suit up to now.

Not to mention that you, and others have stated that droids give them better control then just a guy in a suit, not so, how then could they wilfully take over War Machine? They took control of that pretty easily. The Matrix showcased a few gory deaths with the Mechs not 100 + people dieing by Replusors tru the chest or being cut in half.

As for Hammer was simply a patsy. That's the way they portrayed him throughout the whole movie. He was a businessman without any of Tony's abilities.

Hammer needed Ivan he considered him the Golden Goose. He finally had someone who could compete with Stark. Hammer wanted more than anything to beat him. Ivan played to that. He knew he could push Hammer because Hammer needed him. So he played some words and Hammer on the Spot had to keep conceding.

Also the droids may have gotten wrecked but they did they're job. They made Tony use up his big guns before Ivan ever got there. Plus droids have an insane upside in battlefield scenarios. Easier to produce and easier to replace then human if you lose one.

And what happened when War Machine was cut out of Hammer's mainframe Rhodey regained control, but despite Hammer's computer being shutdown Ivan was still in control of the droids. Hence easier to control then humans.

Originally posted by Newjak
The Matrix showcased a few gory deaths with the Mechs not 100 + people dieing by Replusors tru the chest or being cut in half.

Also the droids may have gotten wrecked but they did they're job. They made Tony use up his big guns before Ivan ever got there. Plus droids have an insane upside in battlefield scenarios. Easier to produce and easier to replace then human if you lose one.

And what happened when War Machine was cut out of Hammer's mainframe Rhodey regained control, but despite Hammer's computer being shutdown Ivan was still in control of the droids. Hence easier to control then humans.

And what's the problem with people dying in suits like that? It would be nothing compared to what we expect and see from other films. There are ways to make the scenes less graphic, but still retain the sense that someone, an evil person has met his end (and in my scenario they woud be criminals, not US soldiers). I mean, take the Star Wars PT, one of the things that was inherently missing at times was the absence of a 'real' threat.

Most of the time they (the Jedi) were scything down hordes of dumb, mass produced CGI droids that offered no resistance, no threat whatsoever (no threat=zero suspense). IM2 was the same, mass produced droids that were easily destroyed and while exciting visually I don't think you can compare a battle of human wits and skill, which is far more interesting to me. Not to mention its counter to what we know of Vanko at the racetrack scene, he's not scared of Stark, he confronts him there and tries to take him out. Why hide in a lab behind a computer screen for most of the film? He nearly took him out, he could have learned from that racetrack fight and tried again. Instead he hides, some villain.

Droids are easier to produce but sometimes blind logic would make them inherently dangerous to their human masters, not to mention dangerous to the populus because if just anyone can hack them then they really are a liability. You can condition a human being any which way you want but that person is still human and free to make thier own decisions, which may not be logical, but will still win the day, or battle.

Anyway us humans are mass-produced too, just look at China.

Rhodey regaining control was primarily because beyond everything his suit was still a Stark creation and not subject to Hammer's or Vanko's complete control. Had Vanko built suits for his own loyal people the issue of control would be moot, because they would be all working for the same goals.

by Edward Douglas
Mar 7th, 2011Plans to take a "Tom Clancy-thriller" approach
An Ain't It Cool News reader attended a panel at the Omaha Film Festival on which filmmaker Shane Black was speaking and eventually he was asked about Iron Man 3, a movie he was rumored to be writing and directing last month, something that was never confirmed either by Walt Disney Pictures or Marvel Studios. Fans of Shane Black's directorial debut Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang should be excited about seeing him reunited with Robert Downey Jr. as it was that film that helped Jon Favreau and Marvel make their decision to go with Downey for the role of Tony Stark in the first place.

Black told the film festival audience that he's scheduled to meet later this week with Downey, who will be contributing to the story, and that Black himself will be writing the script as well as directing. Marvel Studios clearly must know that not everyone was happy with the previous sequel and Black said they've decided to focus on Iron Man and Tony Stark for the third movie, rather than bringing in other heroes from the Marvel Universe. And according to Black, they plan on going back to "self-contained single-character stories" following The Avengers.

Black also told the audience:

"Iron Man 3 will not be another 'two men in iron suits fighting each other' film. Instead, it will be more like a Tom Clancy-thriller, with Iron Man fighting real world villians."

This is certainly an interesting take on the character that's not too far removed from some of the better Iron Man comic book stories from the '80s, and maybe that means will be seeing the likes of Spymaster and Madame Masque in the third movie. Who knows? Maybe we'll even see Downey and Black reunited with their Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang co-star Michelle Monaghan in the latter role, even if that would be quite a drastic departure from the "nice girl" roles she normally plays.

Either way, look for a lot more developments on this exciting direction for Iron Man 3, which is currently set for a May 3, 2013 release.

Well this will be after The Avengers, so they will get a breather from being part of a large interlocked film series. But from the sounds of what Black is proposing, I don't this film tackling the Mandarin either.
Come on; we've been waiting.

Richard Donner Says Shane Black Will "Knock Your Socks Off" With Iron Man 3!

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=39175

In Donner I trust.

Mickey Rourke Criticizes Marvel Studios For "Breaking Jon Favreau's Balls" And More!

http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=49110

I thought a lot of unique things about Ivan Vanko came through with Mickey's performance. What does he care anyway; his character won't return. He should be careful about criticizing too much; that helped him get marginalized the last time.

Or does Marvel Studios act too heavy handed? How some directors and actors have departed through this quest for the Avengers...

Shane Black talks about Iron Man 3:

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=49135& amp;t=Shane_Black_Calls_Mandarin_A_Racist_Caricatu
re_Confirms_Return_Of_Actors_For_iIron_Man_3i

Originally posted by roughrider
I thought a lot of unique things about Ivan Vanko came through with Mickey's performance. What does he care anyway; his character won't return. He should be careful about criticizing too much; that helped him get marginalized the last time.

Or does Marvel Studios act too heavy handed? How some directors and actors have departed through this quest for the Avengers...

Be interesting to see what they left out from what Rourke is saying.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Shane Black talks about Iron Man 3:

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=49135& amp;t=Shane_Black_Calls_Mandarin_A_Racist_Caricatu
re_Confirms_Return_Of_Actors_For_iIron_Man_3i

Mandarin a racist caricature??

i'm sure Black will find a way around that.

Ultron would also be a great villain for IM3.. Blizzard? Fing Fang Foom?

He's got plenty of great villains to chose from if done right. Look at IM Armoured adventures. All Im's villains have been updated in a really cool way.

So im not sure how much faith to put in a guy who thinks IM has no good villains.

I actually would agree Ironman never really had any incredibly impressive villains. Allot of great characters are defined by their villains but Ironman isn't one of them. Don't get me wrong I love Ironman but what makes him great isn't his rogues gallery. Tony's best enemy has always been himself. That's what's always made his story compelling. Not his epic battles with ghost or crimson D but his battles with himself n his internal struggles.

Stories like demon in a bottle are the best with Tony. That or his butting heads with fellow heroes like civil war.

Ah yes Ghost! Another good villain they could use..

But yeah your right Iron Man's best story was when he was an alcoholic.. I was quite disappointed they didn't go there for the sequel, as thats what I was expecting tbh..

Originally posted by DARTH POWER

He's got plenty of great villains to chose from if done right. Look at IM Armoured adventures. All Im's villains have been updated in a really cool way.


Besides the actual show being shit.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Be interesting to see what they left out from what Rourke is saying.

Mickey Rourke once warned the public that Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing will start race riots in the streets, back in 1989. He should stick to acting and not comment on other things.

Shane Black has a point about Mandarin being a racist caricature; not as bad as Yellow Claw, but still. Jon Favreau admitted a lot would have to be changed about him before he got to being filmed. And I don't think they want an Iron Man movie banned in China, losing out on the big box office there.

(Even though Mandarin was a Nationalist, and so technically no communist sympathizer...)

Rourke elaborates on Iron Man 2

http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=49489

After Cowboys & Aliens tanked this summer, I wonder if Favreau is having second thoughts about walking away...

They should have went for a Mandarin/Fin Fang Foom trilogy instead. But comic companies and movie studios want to **** every movie up.

Originally posted by The Nuul
They should have went for a Mandarin/Fin Fang Foom trilogy instead. But comic companies and movie studios want to **** every movie up.

Well IM1 was hardly a screw up.. In fact its one of the very few superhero movies which will go down in movie history as a classic.

But yeah IM2 was a big disappointment. And my guess would be thats more down to Marvel than Favreau. But no fault of Downey's at all. He saved that movie.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Rourke elaborates on Iron Man 2

http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=49489

I'm hearing a lot from Mickey Rourke about what Marvel Studios put Jon Favreau through...but what I'm not hearing is this from Jon Favreau himself. Or from Robert Downey Jr.
I'll say again: Rourke should quit with the sulky act and be a professional. Favreau has acted like that even though he's departed from the franchise. You can have creative differences with people and still be a professional. Rourke is upset every single thing he wanted to be in the film isn't there? Get over it. Marvel Studios is trying to organize a giant franchise tie-in never before attempted. They have bigger things to worry about with their films than how many scenes Rourke has with his cockatoo.

Theres a new one over at Comicboomovies.com Rourke saying Jon Faveau not having any balls


http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=49549

Robert Downey Jr. Declares IRON MAN 3 Script The Best He's Read In Five Years!

http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=50833

DOWNEY JR. SAYS IRON MAN 3 COULD BE ONE OF THE BEST SUPERHERO MOVIES

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/169201-downey-jr-says-iron-man-3-could-be-one-of-the-best-superhero-movies

Iron Man 3 could begin shooting in May

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=53474

RUMOR: Could IRON MAN 3 Feature NAMOR: THE SUB-MARINER?

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=53714

IRON MAN 3 Set Work Begins; Working Title Revealed

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=55727

RUMOR: Possible IRON MAN 3 Details Leak

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=56196

might be based on Extremis storyline or a part of it.

That sound great, doing the Extremis storyline! And if this is the way they can introduce the Mandarin in a non-cheesy, realistic way, then fine.

Plus having Mallen is good; he's the domestic terrorist who gets that illegal upload of Extremis in his system. Dangerous as hell.

Scarlett Johansson Will Return as Black Widow in 'Iron Man 3'

http://www.comicvine.com/news/scarlett-johansson-will-return-as-black-widow-in-iron-man-3/144478/

hope they do alot more with her in the movie.

Natasha has never hooked up with Tony, has she? Only with Daredevil, Hawkeye & Bucky.
(She's teased Tony for decades, right?
He must wonder what he has to do...)

Just read Ben Kingsley cast as villain. Mandrian me thinks

That's different...

would've thought a more asian looking actor, the guy from The Forbidden Kingdom who played the Jade Warlord would've been good.

Originally posted by Entity
Just read Ben Kingsley cast as villain. Mandrian me thinks

Let's just hold off here. I remember when Shaun Toub was reported by some media sources to have been cast as the Mandarin, when the first Iron Man was getting made; instead, he played Yinsen.

Kingsley may be Anglo-Indian - Mandarin himself is Anglo-Chinese - but he is getting up there in age. I wonder how different he will be from the borderline racial caricature of the comic.

Iron Man 3 to be Co-Produced in China

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/170231-iron-man-3-to-be-co-produced-in-china

Reports on Rotten Tomatoes are being clear, that Ben Kingsley is NOT playing The Mandarin.
(But he could be playing someone like him...?)

Originally posted by roughrider
Reports on Rotten Tomatoes are being clear, that Ben Kingsley is NOT playing The Mandarin.
(But he could be playing someone like him...?)


i think they are wrong especially since the film is being made in china and with a lot of chinese extras.. it seems obvious now that Kindsley is the Mandarin

But why would they go with the Mandarin if its being filmed in China when he's the villain

would've thought China would'nt want a chinese villain.

Guy Pearce Up for Iron Man 3 Role

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/170305-guy-pearce-up-for-iron-man-3-role

Originally posted by Kazenji
But why would they go with the Mandarin if its being filmed in China when he's the villain

would've thought China would'nt want a chinese villain.

Chinese probably think the Mandarin is awesome.

And Movie Ironman isn't ready for Extremis yet. His tech is still garbage. Oh well it will just be a heavily downgraded version I suspect. Damn.

James Badge Dale Joins The Cast Of IRON MAN 3 As COLDBLOOD

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=59851

Uhhhh why is he in the movie...from what i'm looking at he's not a Iron Man foe.

So they're up to 3 villains confirmed for this movie, Altho Mandarin hasn't been officially been announced.

The other two are Coldblood-7, Firepower.

Originally posted by the ninjak


And Movie Ironman isn't ready for Extremis yet. His tech is still garbage. Oh well it will just be a heavily downgraded version I suspect.

Why?

Originally posted by Kazenji
So they're up to 3 villains confirmed for this movie,

Let's just pray it won't be a Spiderman 3! But if Robert Downey's saying it's the best script he's read in 5 years, then I have faith!

As long as they're used well and each have the same amount of screen time then yeah should turn out good.....hopefully.

Originally posted by Kazenji
So they're up to 3 villains confirmed for this movie, Altho Mandarin hasn't been officially been announced.

The other two are Coldblood-7, Firepower.

Except when has Coldblood-7 been a villain? He's a hero. And so far James Badge Dale has only been announced as playing Eric Savin. Maybe he's doesn't get turned until another movie. Dylan Baker played Dr. Conners in three Spider Man films and never got to become the Lizard.

Coldblood-who? Firepower...? Why not Titanium Man and Ghost?

Mandarin will be in this movie, right?

^ Aw man Ghost would have been Awsome!

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW


Mandarin will be in this movie, right?

Not sure, They haven't officially said he will be in it but everyone else is making rumors.

it seems Kingsley is indeed The Mandarin..

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/170827-new-details-emerge-on-iron-man-3-villain


also it appears someone will be wearing the Iron Patriot armor..


http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/170833-iron-man-3-confirmed-to-include-iron-patriot

Ewww...

I love the Iron Patriot... But that's because he is Norman Osborn. Putting someone else in the armor is wrong. I also was hoping for something else than another suit... We've already had the twice time for something new.

Originally posted by ares834
Ewww...

I love the Iron Patriot... But that's because he is Norman Osborn. Putting someone else in the armor is wrong. I also was hoping for something else than another suit... We've already had the twice time for something new.

Agreed.

I didn't know what movie this was for but I thought "omg its iron patriot!" and then I thought I should post it so everyone can see!

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/598657_307329256022127_838393831_n.jpg

EDIT: this also

.............

Yes, interesting.

http://screenrant.com/iron-man-3-villains-iron-patriot-kofi-175599/

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
I didn't know what movie this was for but I thought "omg its iron patriot!" and then I thought I should post it so everyone can see!

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/598657_307329256022127_838393831_n.jpg

EDIT: this also

http://www.spidermancrawlspace.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Iron_Patriot_by_ksol_unlimited.jpg

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
cosmic book news thanks maybe james badge dale isn't the Iron Patriot but instead Detroit Steel

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/iron-man-3-2013-first-look-iron-patriot-armor-coldblood

haha ooh bruce I was so hasty to post it that I hadn't noticed you beat me to the punch. Can you ever forgive me ?

Originally posted by BlackZero30x
haha ooh bruce I was so hasty to post it that I hadn't noticed you beat me to the punch. Can you ever forgive me ?


certainly

First set picture and I'm already confused... why is the silver armor there if it's already turned into war machine?

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/iron-man-3-robert-downey-jr-released-official-day-film-production-article-1.1090404

I thought the same thing when I saw the silver armor.

nobody asked why mark 1 was in that picture when it broke apart over the desert in the first movie?

Originally posted by super pr*xy
nobody asked why mark 1 was in that picture when it broke apart over the desert in the first movie?

That's because Obidiah Stane reacquired it from the Ten Rings when they pieced it together in Afghanistan, and had engineers use it as a model for the Iron Monger suit back in California. Did you see the movie? - Pepper Potts and SHIELD agents are looking for Stane in the bowels of Stark's factory, and they come across it.

Phil Coulson: "Looks like you were right. He was building a suit."
Pepper Potts: "I thought it would be bigger."

Anyway, Stane jumps out in the huge armour, fights with Iron Man, dies and we assume Stark took it back for display in his case. Maybe if I looked at Iron Man 2 right now, I'd see it there in the wall.


As far as the Mark II goes, perhaps Tony created a mock-up after it went on to be turned into the War Machine armour, just for sentimental reasons.

my point was he didn't have the suits at one point, but seemed to have re-acquired the suits in one way or another, as the picture suggests..

Do you need a scene where after he survives Stane's attack on him in the first film, he goes down and finds the suit and pulls it into his vault?

Because, you know, I was able to piece that together without someone actually having to show me every minute of Tony Stark's life.

finds what suit?

New Iron Man armor:

http://assets1.ignimgs.com/2012/07/14/newimarmorjpg-43f832_800w.jpg


It looks absolutely atrocious.

Yeah, that is absolutely terrible. Hopefully it's just a specialty armor, and not Tony's primary armor. *crosses fingers*

Is that supposed to be the Bleeding Edge suit?

bleeding edge has way more red.. looks like they reversed the color palette of the bleeding edge armor in terms of percentage, what is painted red vis-a-vis to what is painted gold..

It doesn't even look gold, though. It looks khaki/sand colored.

Boo.

Originally posted by Galan007
Yeah, that is absolutely terrible. Hopefully it's just a specialty armor, and not Tony's primary armor. *crosses fingers*

I think it's his specialty C-3PO suit for protocol & translation duties.

where can I get my hands on that comic con footage?

Originally posted by Galan007
Yeah, that is absolutely terrible. Hopefully it's just a specialty armor, and not Tony's primary armor. *crosses fingers*

It will be the Extremis armour. Attaching around him through nanotechnology. You know every film introduces a modified armoured suit; by the next film it will be different again.

Originally posted by ares834
New Iron Man armor:

http://assets1.ignimgs.com/2012/07/14/newimarmorjpg-43f832_800w.jpg


It looks absolutely atrocious.

i like it and judging by the concept art it should rock.. of course new armor always happens

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
i like it and judging by the concept art it should rock.. of course new armor always happens Needs more red coloring, than yellow.

I don't recall any old Iron Man suits with this much attracting color, other than the diving Gear Iron Man suit.

http://www.ironmanarmory.com/goldfly.jpg

Originally posted by vansonbee
Needs more red coloring, than yellow.

I don't recall any old Iron Man suits with this much attracting color, other than the diving Gear Iron Man suit.


maybe they'll paint it more

Rescue to be in a Iron Man movie?

Originally posted by roughrider
It will be the Extremis armour. Attaching around him through nanotechnology. You know every film introduces a modified armoured suit; by the next film it will be different again.

Uhh why in the hell couldn't they just do a direct translation of the extremis armor to the big screen? Extremis is probably the best looking suit in iron man's armory.

New concept art

I'll just, leave this here.

5EjG-1U3wqA

Looks awesome.

You look awesome.

Ben Kingsly is going to rock! He can still give good performances.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Ben Kingsly is going to rock! He can still give good performances.

People still bitching about why they didn't get an asian actor to play Mandarin

he's not even 100% asian if you read up on him.

Yeah, isn't he the bastard child of a English woman and a Chinese man?

Pretty much.

didn't john wayne play gengis khan? at least kingsley is half-way there..

Being a decedent of Gengis Khan is more important to the character of the Mandarin then his Chinese heritage. Something like 8% of people in Asia are descendants of Gengis Khan, and that includes Iran, Pakistan and India, so plenty of options for Kingsley looking people.

Why he calls him the Mandarin though...

It's not as racist as that old SHIELD villain Yellow Claw, but it is outdated for him to be known simply as the Mandarin. Should he have a partner called Cantonese?

we knew eventually it would be another director who would do it.http://www.qmmv.info/15.jpg

No fire or ice rays from Mandarin's rings

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/Wolvie09/news/?a=69189