VioletEyedDragon (Level 19)

@Ghost_of_GhostDad: tough call. I'll go with MEAN STREETS since I haven't seen it yet.

High profile upcoming arthouse films?

THE BLING RING or MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING

I'm not sure if the movie is even officially a go. I know Tanchaeron desperately wants to make this movie, but I don't think he has secured funding. I'm not even sure if the page deserves a wiki yet.

Looks like X-MEN. Cool.

Though I do hate when they want me to "Like" something on Facebook that I haven't seen yet.

Star Trek into Darkness -- $89 million

Erased -- $250,000

Frances Ha -- $110,000

Augustine -- $35,000

@Ghost_of_GhostDad:

FLINTSTONES because since THE CROODS I am in the mood for another caveman comedy

Blue Sky's Next vs Dreamworks' Next

EPIC or TURBO ??

@meaninoflife42 said:

I hope this issue is resolved soon. I really need to add fast & furious 7 to the wiki.

i was planning to do that lol. I wonder who will get it done first ;)

I wrote a review of THE GREAT GATSBY.

@the_referee: A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, since it is a fantastic film with a very clear point to all the brutality

The two remaining super-hero epics of 2013:

MAN OF STEEL or THE WOLVERINE ??

@stoodspoon: TITANIC, though it still sucks.

Rival Memorial Day weekend blockbusters:

FAST & FURIOUS 6 or THE HANGOVER: PART III

how about you just use the eye? It is the symbol for our site and what we all recognize.

Robert Kelly should be Senator Robert Kelly so he is easier to find.

@mike20 said:

Disney/Marvel seem more concerned with the quantity of movies they're releasing each year over the quality of them.

agreed.

@meaninoflife42 said:

14. Leonardo DiCaprio can rock a pink suit.

also agreed.

@mike20 said:

@VioletEyedDragon: Crimson Dynamo is a better "main villain" for Iron Man to fight, but he just seems so dated to the whole "Cold War" era.

Well I think IRON MAN 2 totally nailed the character, updating it to the modern area but keeping his same motivations and background. Also, I think he was by far the best MCU villain (aside from maybe Red Skull) because he had clear motivations, was intimidating, was believeable, and was entertaining to watch. All the other IRON MAN villains are the same character--an ammoral corporate mogul with a personal grudge against Stark and dreams of world domination.

@Ghost_of_GhostDad said:

@mike20: Good point. To be honest I never really read much Iron Man outside of The Avengers and I have to assume Marvel has updated the Mandarin so as not to be so racially insensitive as the character was in his original incarnation.

As for the mistreatment of Justin Hammer I just blame that on the mess of a movie Iron Man 2 was. There was just too much shit introduced in that movie that sacrificed its story in service of acting as a prologue to The Avengers. Weren't there a lot of script problems and Jon Favreau feeling rushed to get the movie out relatively quickly?

I wouldn't say that the original Mandarin portrayal was "racially insenstitive" because for it time it totally made sense. You've got to keep in mind that the character was created less than ten years after the Korean War.

Now obviously that original look would NOT have worked. But his more updated, modern look would have, and I think they really missed an opportunity there to show a different kind of villain. Mandarin is the ultimate incarnation of a traditional, non-progressive, anti-capitalist, anti-industrialist world. He fights with magic and dresses like he is in the 15th century. He is the perfect foil to Iron Man, who is super-progressive, super-industrialist and all about the advancement of technology.

Of course I get the social commentary the movie was using by having the Mandarin be a myth set up by corporate America (aka AIM). I also found it a little offensive, because they so very clearly took the look of Osama bin Laden for the character and he was absolutely not a myth, as proved by the 3000 American civilians he murdered. But even with that aside, it comes off as a little bit of a "screw you" to fans. The movie was sold as a clear, traditional "Iron Man vs Mandarin" fight, but instead the movie is like "that is all dumb; that is so dated." Why would you make a comic book movie if you are just going to turn it into a joke?

Also, I think Killian was an incredibly annoying, uninspired villain. His world domination plan was so stupid I really wonder if the writers even thought if out. It made NO SENSE. Also, he is just a retread of Obediah Stane from IRON MAN and Sam Rockwell from IRON MAN 2. In fact, the whole movie felt just like a retread of what already happened in the first two.

Also, that ending was really dumb.

@mike20 said:

@VioletEyedDragon said:

@mike20 said:

10. Still no Mandarin in an Iron Man movie.

so disappointing. :(

They should of used the Mandarin in the second film. Whiplash is more of a mercenary, not a master criminal.

Honestly, I would say the villain in the second film is Crimson Dynamo. He is named "Ivan Vanko," which was originally the name of the Crimson Dynamo was (Whiplash in the original comics was named Mark Scarlotti). The final fight scene has Vanko wearing a suit that was clearly modeled after the Dynamo one, just with whips in it. They don't even call him "Whiplash" at all. And Dynamo's backstory (ex-Soviet scientist with a grudge against capitalists) totally fits the one used in the movie.

My guess is they just marketed him as Whiplash since that sounds cooler than Crimson Dynamo.

@mike20 said:

10. Still no Mandarin in an Iron Man movie.

so disappointing. :(

I have zero problem with Johnny Storm being black. I think it doesn't mater to the character at all what race he is, unlike Spider-man, who kind of has to be white. I'm totally okay with him being black and I think Michael B. Jordan is a great actor who should be able to nail the character.

That said, you can't hire a white actor to play Sue Storm and then a black one to play Johnny Storm. It isn't racist or anything, it just doesn't make sense. They are biological siblings. So if you have Johnny Storm be black you HAVE to have Sue Storm be black.

Which I don't have a problem with. I think there are tons of fantastic black actresses who will totally capture the character in a way Jessica Alba wasn't able to. But if you do hire a white actress, then you CANNOT have a black Johnny Storm.

I don't want to sound like a jerk who is intolerant of families with adopted children. I am totally okay with siblings who aren't the same race since they aren't biological. But a lot of the comics make a big deal about how Sue and Johnny have similar personalities because they are related by blood.

Also, if you say they are adopted and then have Sue be the white one and Johnny be the black one it is going to seem racist. Why? Johnny Storm is ALWAYS the dumb one and Sue Storm is ALWAYS the smart one. People already complain with the fantastic four that Johnny is just their for comic relief and to do something stupid (becuase it is true), just like everyone complains that Sue Storm is a sexist charicature (which is also true). If you make Johnny black when it doesn't even make sense, it is going to be really offensive.

The Great Gatsby -- $42 million

Tyler Perry Presents Peeples -- $18 million

Aftershock -- $750,000

Sightseers -- $25,000

Total: $60.8 million

This movie could be epic.

Iron Man 3 -- $183 million

Something in the Air -- $8,500

The Iceman -- $90,000 (I am really going low with the predictions on limited releases, even high profile ones, after TRANCE barely cracked $100k a couple weeks ago)

Scatter My Ashes at Bergdoff's -- $8,500

Total $183.2 million

Pain and Gain -- $20 million

The Big Wedding -- $8 million

Mud -- $1.2 million

Arthur Newman -- $900k