View Single Post
Old July 6 2012, 10:20 PM   #332
Location: Toronto, Canada
Re: Iron Man 3 Discussion/Photos/ETC.

Set Harth wrote: View Post
You're forgetting the penultimate scene in which it's made to look like Fury doesn't want Tony for the Avengers ( even though we all knew how that would turn out ), showing Tony being handed explicit Avengers documentation, complete with a computer screen showing the locations corresponding to individual Avengers on a world map. ( In addition, when Coulson leaves for NM, we're meant to understand that's some kind of S.H.I.E.L.D. thing even before we see the scene after the credits. )
Iron Man has always been connected to SHIELD and this was clear in the first movie. SHIELD is not the Avengers, and it wouldn't have made any sense to introduce SHIELD as an agency that was backing up/covering up for Tony in IM1 and then they cease to be involved in IM2.

All there is in IM2 about the Avengers is the few seconds that you just described. It ignores the entire plot of the movie to describe IM2 as nothing but an Avengers trailer based on those minimal scenes.

Take those scenes out, and the rest of the movie isn't affected one bit. So yes, they are part of the multi-movie tie in, but Avengers references aren't the only substance of the film, they are completely irrelevent to the rest of the film, which is exactly how they should have been.

If you thought the other 123 minutes were completely pointless, or you slept through them, fine. That is a valid reason for you to not like the movie. But the 1 minute of Avengers reference didn't sink the movie or make an Avengers trailer.

If you said this about Captain America, which shared the same Mcguffin as Avengers and said it was basically a prequel, I'd say sure. It was basically a prequel, and the part of the title that said " the first Avenger" should be our first clue. But there were no plot connections like that with IM, it stands on it's own as a movie about Tony Stark.
LaxScrutiny is offline   Reply With Quote