Iron Man

Now that you two auteurs have stopped the Harry Potter nonsense, I was thinking of what negatives Iron Man had. I can't honestly say there was anything terrible about it, but Terrance Howard's acting at times miffed me.

He wasn't as gruff of a Rhody as I'd have liked.

-AC

What it was lacking was a strong final act.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
He wasn't as gruff of a Rhody as I'd have liked.

-AC

I would agree there.

Originally posted by exanda kane
What it was lacking was a strong final act.

Nah, final act was strong.

-AC

It wasn't. It felt exasperated after a while, you could see the strain there, trying to find a satisfying climac and it didn't manage it; it goes through the motions of the superhero origin, but like innumerable other superhero movies, it has a weak final act. It isn't easy to hit the right end note though, and considering they have to juggle all the exposition and characterisation, its suprising that the last act was half as good as it was.

You have to understand that it is a platform for the sequels however. Like Batman Begins, HellBoy, X-Men, Spiderman and Spiderman 2 it can't quite keep up steam til the end.

I didn't leave thinking the final act was unsatisfying at all.

-AC

Well I did.

Yeah, so there.

You do like Sharpe, to be fair.

Just kidding, to each their own.

-AC

Like I said, my only beef with the movie was that Jeff Bridges should have been drinking white Russians or 'Caucasions' as Robtard would say, both are perfectly fine references.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You do like Sharpe, to be fair.

Just kidding, to each their own.

-AC

I'd be the first to point out Sharpe's flaws, but point taken. You like Spiderman. Let's end that at deuce.

Originally posted by Alucard25
Yet you must be one of those people I mean you have the Star Wars & Harry Potter films as some of you favorite movies which all they are are just special effects laden kiddie flicks sooo hypocrite much.

Thats so far off base its ridiculous.The Harry Potter movies have a lot of things in there that if I was a parent,I would not want my kids to be seeing a lot of the things that went on in those movies.They were very much adult themed in many parts with very intense and scary moments for very young children.sure there are some moments that are kiddie moments,but not the majority of the time throughout the films like the spiderman movies are.The only thing in those films that I would not want my kid to see,was the part where Doc Ock breaks loose from the hospital.Thats the only part in those movies thats too much for children. And as far as the Star Wars movies,I only listed A NEW HOPE and EMPIRE STRIKES BACK as favorites of mine.THOSE 2 star wars flicks are not kiddie flicks at all. 🙄 Not at all on the same level with that sci fi kiddie flick of speilbergs E.T. OR THE SPIDER-MAN FILMS. The rest of them except Revenge of the Sith,now THATS a different story.

Spider-Man isn't miraculously guilty of every single cinematic sin known to man simply because you have an over half a decade grudge against it (Yet, oddly, paid to see the following two).

-AC

What cracks me up is his "organic shooters are the biggest sin" rant. They're actually part of the comics, it wasn't a Hollywood invention.

uh obviously you never even read THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN comics from the 60's which thse movies are based off of.if you did,you would know how completely wrong you are that it WAS a hollywood invention.what cracks me up is you listen and read the ramblings of some fool thats been banned here 3 times before and was recently.just wish it had been a permanent one like many do.

Because nobody wishes Mr. Parker was banned, despite the fact that he runs around PMing people to go harrass a Spider-Man movie forum that he got banned from.

-AC

the organics were NOT part of the amazing spiderman comics which the movie was based off of.seeing as how you cant even get your facts straight on anything,your not even worth my time anymore.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
uh obviously you never even read THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN comics from the 60's which thse movies are based off of.if you did,you would know how completely wrong you are that it WAS a hollywood invention.what cracks me up is you listen and read the ramblings of some fool thats been banned here 3 times before and was recently.just wish it had been a permanent one like many do.

Actually, they were based more so off of the Ultimate Spider-Man line, hence the genetic-spider and not the radioactive-spider giving him powers. I would have figured a die-hard Spider-Man fan such as yourself would have know that basic bit of knowledge. Organics did appear in the comics, but you're right, they appeared first in the movie.

Let's stop this, shall we?

Let's get back on topic to the Iron Man movie.