You saw it! Yes! The ending was like super rushed and is already inspiring so many stupid (and a few not-so-stupid) fan arguments, because everyone's like, "so, what exactly happened there?"
Though I will say the movie made SO MUCH MORE sense the second time around, because there was hella plot stuff that was mentioned only in the briefest ways.
I had problems with the movie, when I looked back at it, but I did really just enjoy the heck out of it while it was on.
Also, I am completely embracing the MCU as a TV show with an extraordinarily big budget and really bizarre scheduling (like, Red Dwarf or IT crowd type scheduling). Which reminds me that I haven't had my full quota of flail-hands for the SHIELD tv show yet.
Also, Pepper! I was kind of annoyed with how she was kidnapped and put in peril, and then also how after her "death" (even though I knew it wasn't going to stick) Tony was still kind of making wisecracks and not all that upset? (I do think the movie was a little afraid of its own pathos). But all was forgiven when she walked out of the fire just supremely pissed off. Like, even the BAMF moment wasn't even the thing that did it for me- but Damsels in Distress rarely get to be actually, properly, main-character like angry. And on second viewing, Tony's apparent nonchalance was the sort of thing I could write epic metas on, because despite knowing how bad the odds were for her survival (despite, or rather, because of, the extremis), he wasn't at all surprised to see her. Relieved, thrilled, a little scared, yes, but not at all surprised, not really. (And he kept talking about her in the present tense). And that's when I realized: he totally thinks she's magic. Like, he is so in awe of her crazy competence that he just kind of assumes it also applies to 200 ft drops into fires.
I must say, perhaps because you forewarned me, I didn't find it too confusing - I mostly tried to pay attention to everything in case it was relevant.
MCU as a tv-mini-series *faints* Yes, yes! *wants* We have it... I suppose, but still...
I love Pepper because as much as she is 'supposed' to fit the usual damsel in distress model, she doesn't. Not even close. I liked the underplay, subtly of their love and how its not in your face (0ther than giant bunnies) but just *there*. Real and awesome.
and don't forget SHIELD. It's Joss, and television, and the MCU, and the guy who played Gunn in Angel possibly playing Luke Cage and yeah, there is MORE than enough possible fangirling there. I am still not done fangirling over that.
Ahem. Also, yeah, Pepper and Tony's relationship is awesome. Total OTP for me, but it's kind of weird, because usually shippers are all about "I like these two characters, they should be in a relationship" and what I'm shipping here is not so much the characters (though obviously I love them both) but their relationship. I'm shipping the actual ship. It's just so grounded and real and full of deep mutual respect and fondness. Which is what it should be, especially for characters who have ten years of a platonic relationship behind them, but yeah. It's fantastic.
Also, I just adore Pepper at this point. As I was saying to someone else, I would totally watch an entire movie of her effortlessly and ruthlessly controlling board meetings, deftly handling the press, keeping her boyfriend from setting off the san andreas fault accidentally, and just basically running her extraordinarily complex life like a strategic genius.
Sigh. Apparently 1300 words of FEELINGS fic and several weeks of picking everything over was not enough.
I don't think there should be a limit of the amount of fangirling on anything :D The new SHIELD show sounds AWESOME... I'm just glad Joss is back on TV. But I do have a slight... slight... want. I want all the Avengers to make guest apperances at random intervals to annoy SHIELD. And LOTS the Natasha and Clint guest appearances....
LOL Shipping a ship. But I feel ya. It's refreshing to see a nice healthy-ish relationship in a comic book movie (let alone any movie), without it being this onesided crushfest and 'I don't know why you like him/her'.
I want to watch it again - and relish in the joy of Pepper and Tony. And I'd watch the Pepper movie too. Or maybe the Pepper episode of the Avengers tv show mini series.
Ooo, I need to go read your fic!! now!! *needs a pepper icon too*
And you never get the feeling she could be replaced with a favorite lamp. (I can't even remember where I heard that - it was something about the roles of women, especially love interests/wives, in stories, and how often they could easily be substituted for a favorite lamp or item of personal importance.)
Thinking about it more (which obviously, I haven't done enough of) I really like that they made her CEO before they had them act on the UST. I keep coming across fics that either assumed that she would go back to being his PA after Iron Man 2, or coming across, like, wiki entries that assume that she quit, was his PA, and then some time between the Avengers and Iron Man 3 went back to being his CEO (which, uh? that sounds way more complicated than just assuming that a resignation tendered in the immediate aftermath of nearly being blown up wouldn't stick). And it just made me feel kind of eugh for a couple of different reasons. One, the whole power imbalance and the shadiness of being employed by your lover, but two, man, it kind of falls into that whole "woman tries to do a man's job, fails, then he must come in and bail her out and she happily goes back to her proper place" old fashioned sitcom trope. Which is even more problematic when you consider that Tony himself wasn't exactly a great CEO in the first place.
I am continually amazed and bemused at the mish mash of continuity people come up with. I suppose the comics don't help either as they tend to contradict themselves in the very next series/au/relaunch.
I'm fairly sure that before IM1, Tony did very little CEO-ing and left most of the hard work, actual business running to his Uncle (whose name I forget). Pepper and Uncle ran everything and Tony partied/invented. The thing is... that's movie canon only really, kinda. I remember Tony in the comics and cartoon being more CEOy and less Bruce Waynelike. *shrugs*
Either way, Pepper rocks and runs Stark Industries far better than movie Tony ever did :D
Oh yeah, comics and movie Tony (and Stark industries/International/Resilient/Etc) are so very different. Quite a lot like MCU!Hawkeye and Comics!hawkeyes, although he hasn't had three movies, so his movie canon is less developed and I can understand borrowing more from comics there, even if it doesn't actually make a lot of sense. But we have, relatively speaking, lots and lots of movie canon for Tony (and Pepper), so it seems a little random to blur the line there. (Especially with 616! Pepper, who is as far as I can tell, still really a product of her Girl Friday origins.)
Movie!Tony is probably happier and more well adjusted than pretty much any Tony ever, except perhaps Marvel Adventures!Tony, but that universe is made of sunshine and puppies, so it kind of goes without saying) which is actually kind of hilarious, if you think about it.
Yeah, it is funny :D You certainly wouldn't pick Movie!Tony as the stable version LOL
It's an interesting dynamic, the translation of comic mythos to silver screen. Its no wonder all the fanboys groan and moan when movie versions don't meet their expectations
The thing I really like about the MCU is that it don't seem like an adaptation. Okay, no, that sounds dumb, but...one of the things that I find interesting about the comics is the way they have to kind of keep reinventing themselves despite (or because of) all the baggage. And that's actually pretty cool. And maybe it's just that I've read too many of the other imprints or from reading Exiles with all its visits around the multiverse, the MCU feels like its own thing. Not a straight adaptation of the 616 or the Ultimate 'verse, but just like the Ultimate 'verse or the Marvel Adventures or whatever rearranged the pieces and told different stories with the same themes and characters, made them new again and exciting and accessible...while also reflecting and commenting and playing with the mythology. I hate it when the fanboys start complaining about something being different in the movies, because to me, that's kind of the point. Like the whole mandarin thing. I'm not saying it's perfect, but look at what it did. It took the original comic book villain, with all its 60s hangups - the inscrutable threatening asian Other- the yellow peril etc etc- and gave us the modern equivalent. We may have shifted our fears to men hiding in caves in Pakistan, but we tend to fall into the same mental traps, you know? And then - then, having suitably updated it, just to send the message home- they used it as part of a commentary on the way we construct those villains. It becomes a commentary on the original comic book character as much as on mass media and the war on terror and etc, and it draws a line connecting them. And I think that's good- that wouldn't be the case if it were just a straight up cashing-in adaptation. Cinema is always going to have to tell different stories because it's a different medium, but to do it in such a smart way (as with all of the MCU films, really) indicates that the people behind think the original source materials are...important. Worth doing well. And that's so rare in pop culture, you know- lots of cheap, cynical adaptations, but rarely enough love to truly engage with the material.
I have half a dozen thoughts swirling around my head and no real time to quantify them *shakes fist at work*
I agree wholeheartedly with you about translating the original 'concepts' of the villians and heroes even and giving it a modern remake. It's not only required and necessary, but critical for the movie's success.
In my mind, the continued failure of the Wonder Woman adaptation is a case in point. Wonder Woman works... in the comics. But outside, in reality... there is something about her outfit, her 'Amazonian' nature as it were and they (the script writers) just can't find the tone palatable for modern producers/directors. Even Joss failed there.
Modern audiences are so diverse and multicultural in their views and perceptions you can't just cut out the old 'western' dated versions of the characters anymore... ever!
But don't get me even started on how comics portray women even today... LOL
I think that's where we have the advantage. In fandom, we're not strangers to the way you can strip a character down to the essentials and still have them be recognizably - fundamentally- themselves, despite all the scenery changes. Wonder Woman as she was won't work in a movie. But it should be possible (and I say this, knowing very little about her as a character) to strip away all the...stuff, all the typical iconography - and find the core of the character that's universal. Find those stories that resonate...find the spirit of the thing, rather than the letter.
It's like...if in thirty years from now, someone remade Supernatural, it's not the Impala and mullet rock and the leather jacket that makes Dean Winchester. And in fact, it'd be blind adherence to those things that would lead to failure, because the hoops you'd have to jump through to justify elements that don't make sense outside of their original context would interfere with the actual character fundamentals. The point is that Dean created an identity that's a reflection of his father; if suddenly you have to make him Hipster!Dean to explain his attachment to a musical genre from his grandfather's day, with no reference to the Daddy issues, well. You may have checked off the superficial characteristic, but you've completely missed the point.
You saw it! Yes! The ending was like super rushed and is already inspiring so many stupid (and a few not-so-stupid) fan arguments, because everyone's like, "so, what exactly happened there?"
Though I will say the movie made SO MUCH MORE sense the second time around, because there was hella plot stuff that was mentioned only in the briefest ways.
I had problems with the movie, when I looked back at it, but I did really just enjoy the heck out of it while it was on.
Also, I am completely embracing the MCU as a TV show with an extraordinarily big budget and really bizarre scheduling (like, Red Dwarf or IT crowd type scheduling). Which reminds me that I haven't had my full quota of flail-hands for the SHIELD tv show yet.
Also, Pepper! I was kind of annoyed with how she was kidnapped and put in peril, and then also how after her "death" (even though I knew it wasn't going to stick) Tony was still kind of making wisecracks and not all that upset? (I do think the movie was a little afraid of its own pathos). But all was forgiven when she walked out of the fire just supremely pissed off. Like, even the BAMF moment wasn't even the thing that did it for me- but Damsels in Distress rarely get to be actually, properly, main-character like angry. And on second viewing, Tony's apparent nonchalance was the sort of thing I could write epic metas on, because despite knowing how bad the odds were for her survival (despite, or rather, because of, the extremis), he wasn't at all surprised to see her. Relieved, thrilled, a little scared, yes, but not at all surprised, not really. (And he kept talking about her in the present tense). And that's when I realized: he totally thinks she's magic. Like, he is so in awe of her crazy competence that he just kind of assumes it also applies to 200 ft drops into fires.
Reply
MCU as a tv-mini-series *faints* Yes, yes! *wants* We have it... I suppose, but still...
I love Pepper because as much as she is 'supposed' to fit the usual damsel in distress model, she doesn't. Not even close. I liked the underplay, subtly of their love and how its not in your face (0ther than giant bunnies) but just *there*. Real and awesome.
Tony is so out of his league with her :)
Reply
Ahem. Also, yeah, Pepper and Tony's relationship is awesome. Total OTP for me, but it's kind of weird, because usually shippers are all about "I like these two characters, they should be in a relationship" and what I'm shipping here is not so much the characters (though obviously I love them both) but their relationship. I'm shipping the actual ship. It's just so grounded and real and full of deep mutual respect and fondness. Which is what it should be, especially for characters who have ten years of a platonic relationship behind them, but yeah. It's fantastic.
Also, I just adore Pepper at this point. As I was saying to someone else, I would totally watch an entire movie of her effortlessly and ruthlessly controlling board meetings, deftly handling the press, keeping her boyfriend from setting off the san andreas fault accidentally, and just basically running her extraordinarily complex life like a strategic genius.
Sigh. Apparently 1300 words of FEELINGS fic and several weeks of picking everything over was not enough.
Reply
LOL Shipping a ship. But I feel ya. It's refreshing to see a nice healthy-ish relationship in a comic book movie (let alone any movie), without it being this onesided crushfest and 'I don't know why you like him/her'.
I want to watch it again - and relish in the joy of Pepper and Tony. And I'd watch the Pepper movie too. Or maybe the Pepper episode of the Avengers tv show mini series.
Ooo, I need to go read your fic!! now!! *needs a pepper icon too*
Reply
Thinking about it more (which obviously, I haven't done enough of) I really like that they made her CEO before they had them act on the UST. I keep coming across fics that either assumed that she would go back to being his PA after Iron Man 2, or coming across, like, wiki entries that assume that she quit, was his PA, and then some time between the Avengers and Iron Man 3 went back to being his CEO (which, uh? that sounds way more complicated than just assuming that a resignation tendered in the immediate aftermath of nearly being blown up wouldn't stick). And it just made me feel kind of eugh for a couple of different reasons. One, the whole power imbalance and the shadiness of being employed by your lover, but two, man, it kind of falls into that whole "woman tries to do a man's job, fails, then he must come in and bail her out and she happily goes back to her proper place" old fashioned sitcom trope. Which is even more problematic when you consider that Tony himself wasn't exactly a great CEO in the first place.
Reply
I'm fairly sure that before IM1, Tony did very little CEO-ing and left most of the hard work, actual business running to his Uncle (whose name I forget). Pepper and Uncle ran everything and Tony partied/invented. The thing is... that's movie canon only really, kinda. I remember Tony in the comics and cartoon being more CEOy and less Bruce Waynelike. *shrugs*
Either way, Pepper rocks and runs Stark Industries far better than movie Tony ever did :D
Reply
Movie!Tony is probably happier and more well adjusted than pretty much any Tony ever, except perhaps Marvel Adventures!Tony, but that universe is made of sunshine and puppies, so it kind of goes without saying) which is actually kind of hilarious, if you think about it.
Reply
It's an interesting dynamic, the translation of comic mythos to silver screen. Its no wonder all the fanboys groan and moan when movie versions don't meet their expectations
Reply
Reply
I agree wholeheartedly with you about translating the original 'concepts' of the villians and heroes even and giving it a modern remake. It's not only required and necessary, but critical for the movie's success.
In my mind, the continued failure of the Wonder Woman adaptation is a case in point. Wonder Woman works... in the comics. But outside, in reality... there is something about her outfit, her 'Amazonian' nature as it were and they (the script writers) just can't find the tone palatable for modern producers/directors. Even Joss failed there.
Modern audiences are so diverse and multicultural in their views and perceptions you can't just cut out the old 'western' dated versions of the characters anymore... ever!
But don't get me even started on how comics portray women even today... LOL
Reply
It's like...if in thirty years from now, someone remade Supernatural, it's not the Impala and mullet rock and the leather jacket that makes Dean Winchester. And in fact, it'd be blind adherence to those things that would lead to failure, because the hoops you'd have to jump through to justify elements that don't make sense outside of their original context would interfere with the actual character fundamentals. The point is that Dean created an identity that's a reflection of his father; if suddenly you have to make him Hipster!Dean to explain his attachment to a musical genre from his grandfather's day, with no reference to the Daddy issues, well. You may have checked off the superficial characteristic, but you've completely missed the point.
Reply
Leave a comment