Pajiba

What? They didn't call it 'Iron M3n'?

It may come and bite them in the end but I think one of the things to note about the Avengers was that Tony wasn't and still really isn't a team player. While he bonded with Banner he barely got along with any of the others.

Also with Thor back in his realm, Cap (Tony's probably least favorite ally) in Brooklyn, Banner likely back on the run and SHIELD keeping Tony at arm's length given he hacked their system first chance he got, it's safe to say that maybe time away from them and on his own affairs is what he needs.

And I think the bigger question, apart from why these guys aren't calling Avengers every time something happens, is what kind of dumbass tries something after the Avengers? Really, The Mandarin? You feel good going up against the dude who gave an alien army a nuclear suppository? And afterwards just went to lunch, like it weren't no thang? M'kay. Good luck with that.

You can't just say Spiderman 3 because... What, numbers? Because Avengers set a high bar? Nothing in that trailer particularly scares me. Tony's not emo-dancing, for one (as others have pointed out, that standard was met with DJ Iron Man in 2), and there's nothing here that says "Too Big" when the gist of the things that appear to lead to the big stuff is all personal Tony Stark character issuess.

And there are only about two villains. Probably really only the one, though. So not all that worrisome.

Needs more Thor!

Spider-Man 3, Superman III, The Dark Knight Rises, Batman Forever, X-Men: The Last Stand...

There has yet to be a superhero film that could really follow up their wonderful sequels, and do a third film that wasn't fucking terrible.

In this case Iron Man II was awful... So... Maybe they'll... IDK.. Cause they... It'll have to be better... Cause the last one... in that tiny little garden... and "that's not my bird"... It could... you... ugh....................................Fuck you... STOP RAINING ON MY PARADE!!!!!!! Shane Black?!

gotta say for some reason i totally love GOOP in these, but almost nothing else

... I don't get it D: . It just looks so bland and uninspiring.

Hmm. Well I'll definitely see it, even if I'm not completely excited at the idea. I just feel like it won't be nearly as fun without having Tony Stark rif off of the other Avengers, which was one of the best parts of that movie.

I bet the porn version has an army of Real Dolls. That is actually a lot more terrifying.
Particularly the Hulkbuster Real Doll.

*squeak*
SO. THERE. I have faith.

What I like is that even though there is clearly an escalation in terms of the arms (armor?) race, this is clearly a deeply personal conflict--that's why I have hope that it can beat the curse of the three.

This is a smaller story - as it should be. It doesn't seem to have an overwhelming number of villains or any of the other themes that swallowed up Spiderman 3. I agree with bleujayone that IM2 was already kind've the Spiderman 3 of the group. Of course, I'm basing that on a trailer, and things could very well be different. But this still feels like the kind of character-based film that Avengers somewhat was. Then again, it's a trailer. I could be talking out my ass.

If one were going to compare franchises, Iron Man 2 was already like Spider-Man 3 in that both were helmed by directors who already proved their worth with success in the previous chapter(s) and were "thanked" in their next effort by having endless destructive meddling with the studio sticky fingers instead of just sitting back and letting them continue to satisfy both the fandom and audiences while rolling the big profits in. I do not know how much creative freedom Black was given on his leash, but I can only hope he was allowed to tell a straight up Iron Man tale where nobody told him to make things hip for the kiddies or easily accessible to Happy Meal or Hasbro tie-ins at the expense of the story.

I think the only way to make these movies succeed post-Avengers is to focus on their genre strengths, which is pretty much exactly what Marvel is doing. Iron Man 3 is a corporate espionage/terror movie via way of robosuits. I don't think there's any reason to think this movie is in any way going to jump the shark like Spider-man 3 did.

I like to think that GOOP is being propelled backwards by the force of a Mama Boo Boo Cheez Whiz fart.

I already bragged about this privately to Dustin, but I saw a completed work print of the film in January. I signed an NDA so that's it.

That is both awesome and awful for you. Awesome cause it means you got to see it. Awful because you can't actually discuss it with anyone.

Yep.

Is it a yay or a nay?

There's a good chance it will feel anti-climactic and I'm sure a lot of audience members will be wondering why the Avengers aren't just continuing to team up when there's a big threat, but I'm psyched nonetheless. Can't freaking wait to see how they do Rescue.

I was a big fan of Avengers, but I'm more than willing to see this as a stand alone film, where they deal with the Avengers concept in just a few sentences. Kinda' like when they brought Thor to earth.

I thought the trailer was awesome.

That's a good point. I'm a fan of the movies but don't read the comics. (Graphic novels? Never know which is appropriate.) Anyhoo...how do they handle this rather burning question in the comics/GNs?

It varies from throwaway lines, to having standalone plots going on at the same time (so Captain America will be busy fighting his big bad while Thor's fighting his, and so on), to tossing in plot points that prevent them from being able to contact the others, to straight up not mentioning it at all. Sometimes they choose to temporarily leave the team due to conflict or other reasons.

A few times the team disbanded because they were either believed to be dead, some actually did die, they lost credibility, or because of internal conflict within the group. It'll certainly be interesting to see how they handle it in the movie.

Feh. This is going to rock. :) And you, Rowles, are going to have to suck it. No offense.