First Official "Iron Man 2" photo; Favreau speaks

[CaptainCanada]

I'm surprised they actually seem to be going with the

Spoiler: revelation

from the end of the first movie that Tony is Iron Man. I'd assumed SHIELD was going to clean this up rather quickly at the beginning of the next one, but from what Favreau says they seem to be exploring it in 2.

His ID's been out in the comics for years now.

I'm really glad that some film series are moving beyond the arbitrary inclusion of a secret ID; plenty of characters work better without them.

Iron Man's a particularly interesting example, because his Secret ID, when he has it, doesn't really do any of the things that a Secret ID is supposed to do.

 

[Aragorn]

Iron Man
2 Iron 2 Man
Iron Man: Tokyo Drift
Fe ♂

 

[miraclefan]

The Invincible Iron Man.

 

[Thrall]

Bring on The Mandarin baby! Preferably played by Nic Cage.

 

[Praetor]

I'm surprised they actually seem to be going with the

Spoiler: revelation

from the end of the first movie that Tony is Iron Man. I'd assumed SHIELD was going to clean this up rather quickly at the beginning of the next one, but from what Favreau says they seem to be exploring it in 2.

His ID's been out in the comics for years now.

I'm really glad that some film series are moving beyond the arbitrary inclusion of a secret ID; plenty of characters work better without them.

Iron Man's a particularly interesting example, because his Secret ID, when he has it, doesn't really do any of the things that a Secret ID is supposed to do.

I knew that it had been, but I didn't and don't know how long it has been since it was first revealed. I thought they might try to go back and forth on it.

And I do tend to agree that here it certainly works fine without it. Everyone always thought he was Iron Man, anyway.

 

[TheSeeker]

Ooooh... Scarlet Johanssen as Black Widow .

No kidding! As if seeing this movie wasn't already a no-brainer!

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

So, taking a quick look at the picture, I take it we're meant to believe that the new movie's Armor is the one on the right side. Cool, looks more streamlined and closer to the "classic" armor of the sixties and seventies.

Funny though how Stark found it necessary to retrieve and/or rebuild the original MkI armor. What use would it hold? It was discombobulated in the middle of the first film. Funnier still, all the armors seem to be powered. In the comics Stark keeps most of his armors around as souvenirs, but generally without an eye on ever using them again (with notable exceptions, such as the "Iron Legion" where a bunch of former Iron Man substitutes hauled them out of storage). I suppose the chest plates could simply be lit as a sort of ornament...

Mark

 

[John Picard]

So, taking a quick look at the picture, I take it we're meant to believe that the new movie's Armor is the one on the right side. Cool, looks more streamlined and closer to the "classic" armor of the sixties and seventies.

Funny though how Stark found it necessary to retrieve and/or rebuild the original MkI armor. What use would it hold? It was discombobulated in the middle of the first film. Funnier still, all the armors seem to be powered. In the comics Stark keeps most of his armors around as souvenirs, but generally without an eye on ever using them again (with notable exceptions, such as the "Iron Legion" where a bunch of former Iron Man substitutes hauled them out of storage). I suppose the chest plates could simply be lit as a sort of ornament...

Mark

It's smart to keep older versions of the Armor around in the event the current model is damaged beyond repair.

 

[T'Baio]

The Invincible Iron Man.

That's what I think it should be. Sony missed the boat on naming the Spider-Man movies by titles seen on the comics. Hopefully, Marvel will take the chance.

 

[USS Mariner]

It really works, doesn't it?

Iron Man
IIron Man
IIIron Man
Iron IVIan

It's cool. My ony concern is when the make the thrid film. People will roll their eyes at that, and then they'll see the fourth one and get sucked back in again.

The Invincible Iron Man.

That's what I think it should be. Sony missed the boat on naming the Spider-Man movies by titles seen on the comics. Hopefully, Marvel will take the chance.

Ugh. That would just make a huge headache for fans and non-fans alike.

So, taking a quick look at the picture, I take it we're meant to believe that the new movie's Armor is the one on the right side. Cool, looks more streamlined and closer to the "classic" armor of the sixties and seventies.

How are you people getting the impression that it's a new design? Look at the suit to it's right, which is all scorched up and tarnished. Ring any bells?

That's the suit from the last film, rebuilt (apparently, he feel that scrubbing it after he pieced it back together wasn't worth the effort. ) Now, aside from grime, the "new" suit looks almost exactly the same. Okay, the seams on the chest look a little different, but the color and major contours are the same, and so is the face, which I'd except to change between films.

Funny though how Stark found it necessary to retrieve and/or rebuild the original MkI armor. What use would it hold?

He rebuilt it because he can.

Besides, Stark recreated the original suit in the computer when he got back (which was a little much, unless he has photographic memory, which doesn't make sense if Pepper has to remember remember his SSN. ), so it's not like it's out of the blue.


Oh yeah, why are they going with Whiplash instead of Crimson Dynamo? Are they afraid of offending the Russians now instead of the Chinese?

 

[T'Baio]

That's what I think it should be. Sony missed the boat on naming the Spider-Man movies by titles seen on the comics. Hopefully, Marvel will take the chance.

Ugh. That would just make a huge headache for fans and non-fans alike.

Uhh...how so?

 

[Skywalker]

I'm still sad that they decided not to call the second Spidey movie The Amazing Spider-Man like originally rumored. Spider-Man 2 is so lame.

And the title's not all that great, either.

 

[John Picard]

IronMan 2: Electric Boogaloo

 

[blockaderunner]

Funny though how Stark found it necessary to retrieve and/or rebuild the original MkI armor. What use would it hold?
Mark

I think it was mainly for sentimental value. Like Batman's giant penny and T-Rex and Joker playing card. It was his first suit and it saved his life. It might also be a little practical as well, since he doesn't want another unscrupulous industrialist like Stane to take his ideas again. I do hope, however, they somehow retcon what he said at the press conference and make Tony and and Shellhead two distinct identidies again. As an old school comics geek, I'm still a sucker for the whole secret identidy thing.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

It's smart to keep older versions of the Armor around in the event the current model is damaged beyond repair.

It's good to have a backup, yes. But if you NEED to have a backup, why not just have an identical armor in the closet somewhere? If I drove a Ferrari and your dad's old partner smashed it up, I wouldn't want to go back to the car I drove in university, especially since I could afford better.

Mark

 

[Praetor]

Where the hell does Batman's T-rex come from anyway?

 

[John Picard]

It's smart to keep older versions of the Armor around in the event the current model is damaged beyond repair.

It's good to have a backup, yes. But if you NEED to have a backup, why not just have an identical armor in the closet somewhere? If I drove a Ferrari and your dad's old partner smashed it up, I wouldn't want to go back to the car I drove in university, especially since I could afford better.

Mark

You fight with the equipment you have, not the equipment you want

Seriously, his old armor isn't always mashed and trashed. It appears he's retired some suits as improvements have come along yet they could prove invaluable in a time of need.

Remember the first movie, when he needed that outdated power supply for his chest?

 

[Dream]

The hall of Armors is there just because it looks cool IMO. There is no reason for Stark to put on the first prototype suit when he has access to the Mark III suit. Stark is the inventor and has the funds so it's not like he can't make the lastest version whenever he wants while he is there at his home.

 

[USS Mariner]

That's what I think it should be. Sony missed the boat on naming the Spider-Man movies by titles seen on the comics. Hopefully, Marvel will take the chance.

Ugh. That would just make a huge headache for fans and non-fans alike.

Uhh...how so?

The major Spidey titles that most "layman" Marvel fans hear of are Amazing, Spectacular and Sensational, which are all synonyms of each other.

Just numbering sequels is a bit lame, but at least the convention has a purpose. How the hell would you keep track of or know which film comes before what if they used the titles instead? All three adjectives describe Spider-Man in the same way, so how exactly does it relate to the plot if they're practically identical in meaning? It'd be a fucking nightmare for everyone.

 

[John Picard]

Ugh. That would just make a huge headache for fans and non-fans alike.

Uhh...how so?

The major Spidey titles that most "layman" Marvel fans hear of are Amazing, Spectacular and Sensational, which are all synonyms of each other.

Just numbering sequels is a bit lame, but at least the convention has a purpose. How the hell would you keep track of or know which film comes before what if they used the titles instead? All three adjectives describe Spider-Man in the same way, so how exactly does it relate to the plot if they're practically identical in meaning? It'd be a fucking nightmare for everyone.

There were no numbers used in the original Planet of the Apes movies. I think numbers for sequels is ridiculous.