Iron Man 3 Discussion/Photos/ETC.

[Captain Craig]

Dream wrote:

---

New Iron Man 3 concept art from comic con.

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/312...7248097290.jpg

This is ahead of Comic Con which doesn't start till the 12th.

That image does, out of context, seem to be Extremis aka "nanotech armor stored in his blood/bones" which imo may be taking things a bit OTT.
Despite having just dealt with aliens I think the audience for this character appreciates the down to earth pseudo-reality about the armor, it's creation and application.

[USS Mariner]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

Seriously, if they go "armor stored in his bones", I'm out.

Good, because you're dragging the rest of us down.

[USS Mariner]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

This is ahead of Comic Con which doesn't start till the 12th.

That image does, out of context, seem to be Extremis aka "nanotech armor stored in his blood/bones" which imo may be taking things a bit OTT.
Despite having just dealt with aliens I think the audience for this character appreciates the down to earth pseudo-reality about the armor, it's creation and application.

Hate to break it to you, luddite, but nanotech is real.

[Captain Craig]

^^^
Yeah, I know that and you know that but it's still a bit out there for Joe Public if they even know about it beyond sci-fi films. That's my point.

[USS Mariner]

StarTrek1701 wrote:

---

Extremis!

Uhh, guys, I know what Extremis is. Extremis is a friend of mine. That's no Extremis.

Honestly, I don't get how this is evidence of Extremis.

Stark only stored the undersheath to the armor in his bones, not all of the armor. He can remote control the armor (which floats itself to him via it's own repulsors), but other than ehnanced/extra organs to ease the strain or operating the armor, there's nothing extraordinary about it.

[USS Mariner]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

^^^
Yeah, I know that and you know that but it's still a bit out there for Joe Public if they even know about it beyond sci-fi films. That's my point.

It's not like we have an entire film to explain it or anything.

[captcalhoun]

it just looks like he's wearing one glove and one boot to me...

[Chemahkuu]

captcalhoun wrote:

---

it just looks like he's wearing one glove and one boot to me...

Exactly. The highres screencap we got of the set, with the various sets of armour looked like there were many parts of suits laying around being worked on, the concept art just looks like he slipped on some of them to test and was surprised by the guards.

[Aldo]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

This is ahead of Comic Con which doesn't start till the 12th.

That image does, out of context, seem to be Extremis aka "nanotech armor stored in his blood/bones" which imo may be taking things a bit OTT.
Despite having just dealt with aliens I think the audience for this character appreciates the down to earth pseudo-reality about the armor, it's creation and application.

I certainly did enjoy the realistic take on the character in the first two films. But like you said, aliens. There's no going back now, all bets are off.

With that said, I'm sure IM3 is going to play it a more realistically than Avengers did, I'm sure they'll save the "out there" stuff for the likes of "Thor" and the Avengers sequel.

[LaxScrutiny]

^As was said, we have nanotech now. There is no reason to preclude aliens from calling next week. Really, no reason, could be next week, next millenium. Putting both premises together does not equal armour stored in bones.

[Dream]

Isn't Extremis considered one of the best storylines in the IM comics? I'm surprised they didn't go with that stroryline for IM2, which ended up just being an Avengers trailer.

[LaxScrutiny]

Dream wrote:

---

Isn't Extremis considered one of the best storylines in the IM comics? I'm surprised they didn't go with that stroryline for IM2, which ended up just being an Avengers trailer.

This gets said far too often and now that I've rewatched IM2 a few times (just got the disk after Avengers) it really seems unjustified.

There is one short visit by Nick Fury mid-film where Tony says "Is this about the A..." and Fury cuts him off and brings it back to the main plot. There is the presence of Black Widow which had nothing to do with the Avengers movie except she was in it too; it's like saying Pepper being in the Avengers made it an Iron Man trailer. Then there was the credits scene. That's it. There was nothing past those few seconds with Fury where they didn't talk about the Avengers, that really tied it to the Avengers; it was all about Tony, his despondency about his failing health, his walls (armour) put up against the people around him who cared, his dealing with living in the shadow of his father, and realizing his dad really did think something of him which turned him around.

The plot was about Tony Stark, and the conflict with Whiplash/Dynamo was a thin layer on top of that. So if you go in thinking that Whiplash is the main story, yeah it seems thin, but if you see it as Tony's story, not Iron Man's, then the movie is actually about something. It really does take the character from one place to somewhere else, a place where he's ready to step up and be an adult, not a child. This has nothing to do with Avengers.

[Captain Craig]

^^^
Well said. I've tried spelling it out like that as well, maybe this spelling lesson will sink-in better with more time passed. I was perhaps trying to ice skate uphill against that heavily held opinion in the months following it's initial theatrical release.

[captcalhoun]

i never really got that it was 'an avengers trailer' either. maybe it did seem like it a bit since it had Widow AND War Machine in, but since WM didn't appear in Avengers, it's even less like one now.

[Set Harth]

LaxScrutiny wrote:

---

This gets said far too often and now that I've rewatched IM2 a few times (just got the disk after Avengers) it really seems unjustified.

There is one short visit by Nick Fury mid-film where Tony says "Is this about the A..." and Fury cuts him off and brings it back to the main plot. There is the presence of Black Widow which had nothing to do with the Avengers movie except she was in it too; it's like saying Pepper being in the Avengers made it an Iron Man trailer. Then there was the credits scene. That's it. There was nothing past those few seconds with Fury where they didn't talk about the Avengers, that really tied it to the Avengers; it was all about Tony, his despondency about his failing health, his walls (armour) put up against the people around him who cared, his dealing with living in the shadow of his father, and realizing his dad really did think something of him which turned him around.

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. )