!!!

[redbrunja]

Let's start at the end:

• Bruce being in the end tag was brilliant. When the screen cut to black I legit whoop-shrieked.


• What this movie did brilliantly - so, so brilliantly - was take away in very, very believable ways, all of Tony's tools, so you really rooted for him.


• THE BANTER, MY GOD, THE BANTER. TONY WITH THAT KID IN NEBRASKA OR WHEREVER. TONY WITH THE FIRE-CHICK. TONY WITH PEPPER, THE ONE THING HE CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT.


• In general, this was just a much, much tighter movie than Iron Man 2, minus the self-indulgent air force one scene and the ridiculously over-long and confusing climax.


• I'm not sure how I feel about Tony getting the arc reactor removed from his chest.


• Because I saw the trailer, I knew Pepper was going to survive her fall - so I spent all the minutes just counting down until she showed up to kick ass. I kind of wish that had been a surprise.


• But Tony and Pepper's banter! THEIR BANTER.


• Stiles' dad! Jaye's dad! ...maybe Juno's dad?


• Also, I feel like Pepper and Tony should never have a biological kid? Can you imagine how obnoxious he would be when Pepper was pregnant? Or delivering the kid? Ugh, Pepper would have to get Natasha to forcibly remove Tony from the hospital. I think Tony is EPICALLY BRILLANT uncle material, though.


• This movie was ridiculously Christian and America-centric. Like, unbelievably. And I don't think having the Mandarin be a ploy totally made up for that? I'm surprised it did as well as it did for foreign audiences.

Comments

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

See, I read blowing up the suits as 'he was going to calmn the fuck down and stop making suit after suit after suit'. Like, I read 'clean slate' as he's going to sort of go back to the drawing board with the Iron Man tech instead of making suit after suit to try and feel in control. Not that he was going to stop being Iron Man.

I'm not thrilled about the arc reactor being taken out, because it's so iconic, and I am not a fan of removing people's scars or not letting lost things stay lost.

I remembered your post saying she becomes a superhero of her own in the comics but I guess in the movies she'll always be essentially Tony's nanny/secretary. :/

If by nanny/secretary you mean 'CEO of his company' and the reason Stark Industries is still profitable, then yes.

[callmeonetrack.livejournal.com]

Maybe that's how it will be. I mean obviously he'll continue to be Iron Man. They even went so far as to say put a "Tony Stark will return" disclaimer after the Bruce bonus scene, but.. I just wonder how. (And I couldn't help but think it was such a waste of tech/materials to blow up the suits. There was nothing wrong with the suits.)

Yeah, I think taking the bullets/arc reactor out was just super easy/convenient/even sort of lazy storytelling. Just suddenly he can figure out how not to need it...?

The CEO thing seems like a convenient plot device to me though and always has. Maybe if we had more than just the token scene of her as the head of Stark industries where Tony comes in and pesters her at work... I vaguely recall Iron Man 2 doing better at that but...also...wasn't she basically his secretary in the first one and then suddenly she's running the whole company in the second one? Her career has always been kind of sketchy/reactionary to whatever Tony's doing. Almost like she has to babysit his company too because he's off being Iron Man. Maybe she's much better fleshed out in the comics (which I haven't read), but in the movies....she just doesn't have any definition separately from Tony IMO.