RKMBs Forums .::Robegories::. Media Robert Downey Jr to be Iron Man

We're sorry, this video is no longer available.

Oh well.

Why do we need videos of Elsias penis?

Wrong large, black, one-eyed Fury.

Speaking of in-jokes. I didn't notice it, but apparently on the table in Tony's workship there was, among the other gadgets, a glimpse of a familiar-looking red, white and blue shield.

Samuel L. Jackson receives:

Samuel L Jackson is the BEST ACTOR EVER!

You just want to butt sex him.

Saw it, loved it. Paltrow is unbelievably hot. This could be a good move for Downey's career. I hope he handles it well.

Oh yeah, we need an image of Downey Jr with Paltrow as he's thinking: "this is my face as I'm fucking you in the ass".

So you agree that Samuel L. Jackson is overexposed and overrated.

overexposed yes. but he can be a good actor when he wants. but he has done a lot of crap jobs where he just plays himself of late.


Iron Man broke 100 Mill over the weekend.


and they are plotting out The Avengers film franchise.

2011 is also the year Disney is releasing a couple sequels, namely Toy Story 3, Cars 2, Tron 2 Pirates 4 among others. That will probably be the biggest summer ever.

Huh. I coulda sworn they already did "Toy Story 3" as a "straight-to-DVD" release. Wonder who's gonna replace Jim Varney.

Yeah, but you're a retard who fake internet killed himself so what do you know?

Just got back. Loved it. Best Super-hero movie I've ever seen. Minor gripes:


















SPOILERS















I agree with G-Man...Terrence Howard's voice was off to me. I liked his performance but most of the movie he sounded like he'd like to War his Machine up Stark's pooper.

Gwyneth has always been 'meh' to me...she's just really basic; skinny, kind cute but not all that. She's what we used to call 'cold cheese pizza' back in the day: you'd eat it if it were the only thing in thne fridge but even ramen noodles or White Castle would be better. I could have done without all the Stark/Pepper romantical stuff. I never really read Iron Man all like that...is a romance between the two canon? I would have preferred they kept him as the wealthy playa/pimp type. I get that Stark noticed her after he had his whole life-altering experience and all but, let's keep it real: He woulda fucked at least 3 different hotties on the plane before getting abck to L.A. AND he woulda been gettin' a buffie behind the podium at the press conference.

For that matter, he never woulda stopped at B.K. Lounge to get a burger when Fattburger, In-and-out Burger and Sonic were options...

I didn't think that the killing of the terrorists when he rescued the town rang true. I would think that the whole 'saw American soldiers die/No more weapons' thing would have put him off killing. Seems like he would have built additional less lethal weaponry into his armor. Though I must admite that I did like how he left the 2nd in command terrorist to face justice at the hands of his victims. That seemed real to me.

Things I really liked:

When Stark was crawling back to his lab to get the power source. R.D. jr. performance evoked his acting in Less Than Zero which has always been his defining role for me.

All the stuff with the suits. The tech stuff was kewl. The testing/results was realistic. The suits were faithful to the comics.

Jeff Bridges as Stane. Really understated and well played. Brings to mind Liam Neeson as Ra's Al Ghul. Stane didn't really seem evil or whatever...he's just a guy making business decisions. Regardless of the consequences. Bet he's a Republican...

Would have preferred Jarvis be flesh and blood but his personality was spot on. The A.I. aspect allows for character development.

The possibilty that the H.T.I.C. returns in the sequel...or maybe the Avengers flick...as The Mandarin(notice how he kept playing with his ring?). I know that they wanted to be more realistic in the opener but The Mandarin is to Iron Man what Luthor is to Superman or The Joker is to the Bat-Man. He's got to show up at some point. The 10 Rings refence was cool but still...he could be introduced in the Thor movie with the rings being an aspect of Norse Mythology. That would be a cool lead to the Avengers flick.

The scene after credits. I haven't been on the boards or anywhere else lately to read the spoilers so I didn't know it was coming. I usually stay thru the credits on most movies and I ALWAYS do on comic movies. I love Sam Jackson. When he spoke and then stepped out of the shadows, I actually applauded. One of my attractions to the Ultimate line was Nick Fury being modeled after him. And yeah, I have to acknowledge pariah in admitting that he is over exposed but, I heard him on a talk radio show a while back. He knows that he's out there a lot but his attitude is that he's going to do what he has to do to get paid. He cited Snakes on a Plane, The Man, The Great White Hype, S.W.A.T. and Shaft among others as movies he did strictly for the loot. Can't really blame him, though I was really disappointed with Shaft...

None of those movies damage his rep as a fine actor or negate his performances in Unbreakable, Jackie Brown, A Time to Kill, Jungle Fever, Pulp Fiction, Fresh...hell even Star Wars, ep. 2 and 3. His voice work on The Incredibles and the Boondocks was cool, too.


All in all, Iron Man was awesome. Dark Knight has some work to do to match the quality...though the trailer looked really decent. I'm sure all of you have seen it by now but, this was my first time. I also liked the trailer for The Spirit. The Happening looked ok as well...though M. Night Shawhatyamacallit is over-rated to me.

See I took it that he decided that he must make sure the weapns he creates don't fall into the hands of those who would do evil, where before he didnt care as long as he was making weapons.

I don't think he was against killing, just the innocent and the soldiers doing good being killed by his weapons.

I think Tony just had his eyes opened. He'd designed all this stuff, made his money, and used it to keep his life one big party. I do think that he always had the best intentions as far as making sure that the soldiers were protected and had the best weapons to defend themselves. It's when he realized that his weapons were being used by even the bad guys, and they'd almost killed him with one of his own bombs, that he decided that his life had to change. He kept talking about accountability after that. He felt responsible for what his weapons did in the hands of the bad guys. I don't think Tony became a pacifist as much as he became actively involved and responsible for the first time in his life.

Exactly. Not unlike his reaction in "the Armor Wars" when he found out that his IM technology had been stolen and used by supervillains. He didn't give up being Iron Man, he just made sure that no one else would use the technology for evil.

Yeah, I can see what you mean, however...His whole demeanor seemed to me to be more of the "give peace a chance" type or thing. I was surprised when he killed the guys hiding behind the civilians....especially once he realized the offensive capabilities of the repulsor rays. Hell, For all I know, Stark could have designed some type of profectile to instantly knock out or otherwise inacapcitate the terrorists that were hiding behind the civilians...maybe a instant acting version of the paralysis device Stane used against him. Though the missile into the tank looked like it would definitely leave a mark....

I dunno...seems like the whole anti-weapon stance would lead to a renewed sanctity/respect for all life...not just "our" side.

Again I dont think it was anti-weapons, so much as anti-lack of responsibility. H epretty much lived care free, he built the weapons and sold them, but figured the military would keep them in the right hands. after seeing they werent that responsible he decided to step back and consider how to proceed, without putting innocents at risk....

Never read that story line and obviously the comic is different from the movie but...did he kill anybody in Armor Wars? Or did he just go and get his stuff back or render it unusable?

In movie continuity, could Stark not have found a way to make his weapons with some sort of a tracking/detonation device so that at any point his company and/or the military could know the location of piece of Stark produced weaponry? This way he could still provide it for our side and make sure it didn't fall into enemy hands...or destroy it if it did so.

I'm not going to get caught up debating this point any further. I can see it the way bsams laid it out. It makes sense and apparently that's the way the makers of the movie decided to go, but....it just makes more sense to me that he would have developed an aversion to killing ANYBODY...not just US soldiers.

I can dig it. Your view also serves the plot better.

I think seeing that professor, soldiers and those innocent people killed by the terrorists would cause more of a sense of the need to kill them first rather than an aversion.


i think there isnt a person alive after 9-11 that doesn't wish we woulda killed Obama Bin Laden when we had the chance, so I think that seeing stuff like that drives you more than makes you want to avert it....

Yeah, but I think the killing of the professor, et al was ancillary to his real issue....HIS weapons were the ones doing the killing. HE was responsible for the deaths. War is war...peaople are going to die on both sides. To me, Stark would have been so appalled at seeing the true destructive cost in HUMAN LIVES that he could no longer, in good concious, make things specifically designed to take a human life...ANY HUMAN LIFE...again.

My point is more that he decided that he no longer wanted to have anything to do with killing ANYBODY any longer. Thats why he decided to stop making weapons. PERIOD.

Re: bin Laden...since he and his organization took responsibility for 9/11, there was a clear target for America's righteous anger. Having read many of your posts here and elsewhere since 9/11, I know that we come down on different idealogical sides of the war...however, I do agree that almost every American...including me...wanted to see bin Laden dead as some small measure of revenge for 9/11.

Now, if you say that Stark wanted to kill the specific terrorists that kept him hostage, killed his friend, killed civilians...all with weapons that he himself manufactured...and you can say that it was vengeance on his part..?

Well I can definitely agree with you about that. Personal trumps idealogical. But, I'd still say that once those that he held responsible were dealt with, he would not DIRECTLY take a life if he could help it.

Which he didnt take any lives except the groups directly responsible. So maybe he wont continue to kill terrorists, I dunno. But the ones he did kill were part of the organization that killed the Prof. and the soldiers he was with.


Your also assuming he decided to quit making weapons because war is war, but their are amny people who think their are justified wars. So assuming he is someone that thinks war is war is a stretch, not a bad one but the way the movie played out it appears he was more wanting to make right that his weapons were used for evil rather than he was dramatically turned into a peace monger.

Good god. That movie fucking rocked. It might even be better than Batman Begins.











(Please don't ban me rob.)

By that logic, when bin Laden had his men fly planes into the Twin Towers and Pentagon, Boeing was responsible for the deaths.

But, anyway, I took his decision, and the rest of the film seems to bear this intepretation out, that he was upset by the fact that his weapons were falling into the wrong hands, or could do so, not that he was against violence per se.

If anything, it stretched credibility more to interpret the plot as if he was originally unaware that his weapons killed people. They WERE weapons, after all.

I saw this TWICE but it was good both times!

Yeah cause like it might have been a totally different film both times.

Now, now Fred - I saw it twice too - it really did kick all sorts of ass...

so did I.

I roll with the above...(even with elisa )

The planes were not made to cause death. That they were used in that mannner was unfortunate but, there's no reason at all for the manufacturor of the planes to feel any guilt or responsibility.

Weapons, OTOH, are made to kill. Stark would have no illusions about that. However, it is one thing to intellectually KNOW that the product you made is responsible for death. It's another thing entirely to SEE it and experience it up close and personal.

I've read somewhere that several scientists that worked on the Manhattan Project were extremely upset after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They knew what they were making and what it was to be used for but, when faced with the destruction that it caused...even though it ultimately saved more lives than it took...they found it reprehensible.

As I said earlier, the counterpoint to mine makes as much sense to me as my own. And obviously it works to advance the plot in the flick...just would have been interesting to see it the other way.

I thought Shaft was a pretty good movie although I liked Jeffery Wrights and Christian Bales performances more than Jacksons!

As for the Star Wars precraps, I thinked he sucked balls in them - what a gay way to die!

They're also made to deter. Do you think he'd have any illusions about that?

See also: The Cold War (as opposed to global thermo-nuclear war).

The original Shaft (along with The Mack and Superfly) is iconic in the Black community. I haven't watched it in years but, I saw it prolly 20 times when I was a kid. I was disappointed with his performance and, apparently, so was he since he cited it a payday flick

Re: rhe prequels. The movies were meh but Jackson was cool...especially in ep. 2.

Point.

However, isn't the movie set in the Afghanistan war? In this situation the weapons are being made and used to kill, not deter.