Engaging FaceBook Cover Pics by StvRich 1.2.2 IronMan2008

Thirty writers turned down the opportunity to work on IronMan, when Marvel Studios was finally ready to "Go" on the project, in 2005. Marvel Studios wanted to work from scratch re-writing the introduction of IronMan as their first independent feature. So they approached 30 different writers...

All of them turned it down, saying they were uninterested in the project due to the (relative) obscurity of the character known as, IronMan..

I wonder how they feel about that now...

Added: Feb19th---====================================

NOW UPDATED (as of 2/19/2014) !!! With all Raw-captured photos from the movie!

I literally uploaded all 'raw' (un-retouched) photos from the 2008 movie I just reviewed...! I, when making these articles, I-do capture literally HUNDREDS of photos. Normally, you do not see them all! But here, I have included, each and every frame I captured from the 2008 Ironman movie. You may use them as-is, or retouch them and re-use them yourselves. The link to the web-folder is at the END of this article.

Feb: 2015--- I think I have to recreate this folder anew... if so I will add even more photos if I can----- forgive me, and allow me some time to fix this link... The folder shall be redone ANEW

IronMan (2008) grossed $35.2 million on its first day. IronMan had the second-best premier for a non-sequel, behind only Spider-Man. It had the fourth-biggest opening for a superhero film. Over it's first weekend it grossed $98,618,668 in 4,000 theaters in the U.S. and Canada, ranking #1 in the Box-Office. It was the 3rd greatest grossing movie over a weekend behind "Indiana Jones- Crystal Skull" and "The Dark Knight".

Released in May 2, of 2008 (U.S.), ...by June 18th IronMan became that year's first film to PASS The $300 Million mark for the domestic Box-Office. One year later, in july of 2009, IronMan grossed slightly over half a Billion dollars. ...How are those 30 writers that turned down this "obscure" character feeling ...Now?

See the video below, for the build up to suit mark-III

He actually CRASH-LANDS his mark II suit, after first-flight.

In my first major IronMan / FaceBook piece, I cover the mark-II night-flight. The silver armor is more like the proverbial "knight in shining armor" that appears to be the general metaphor here. It is the first fully functional suit that Stark builds, and is actually the core of the "War Machine" which we see in IronMan 2010.

In original reconceptualizations by Marvel studios it was briefly considered to have Stark fight his own father (with his father playing War-Machine) at the end / crescendo of movie 1. In that version "War Machine" would be a built-up mark-III suit with (removable) weapons attached to the suit. That entire concept was nixed for an alternate time-line.

Producer, Jon Favreau, did so well, that people who were non-genre (non-comic-book fans) could enjoy this as an action flick. Mr Favreu also played a role within the movie as "Happy Hogan", Stark's bodyguard and driver. Mr. Favreau, also got to wear a "motion-capture" suit where the scene he was attempting to improve was the "one-punch-knockout" scene where Tony (in armor mark-I) delivers a huge (heroic-styled) single punch, and knocks a bad guy off his feet. Favreau, was very concerned with the quality of movement for the C.G. artists. Favreau had a few major concerns regarding this movie, as he produced it. A primary care of his, was the transition between computer graphics and suited actors. He wanted the blending from one to the other to be seamless- invisibly so. It is safe to say, he achieved this. Also, he did have a concern where he did NOT wish to have any scene translate to a "comic-book" / pane style of "Look" or "Feel".

He wanted the story to come across as a high-tech, action-thriller. Not as a comic-book.

By contrast, a movie such a "Sin City" was almost entirely comprised to look and feel exactly as a comic book would. Favreau wanted IronMan to feel "real".

This movie was updated to reflect the political feeling of today. With our current "global terrorist" attentions, rather than a post-50's "Cold-War"-era mode of thinking. It reflects our current attitudes, trends, and economy. It only mildly is "retro" here and there. Giving a "nod" to the origins of the story.

It is absolutely a total and complete coincidence that the song "IronMan" by Black Sabbath, has any similarity at all (theme-wise) to the Marvel-company, movie.

Originally, the song was actually entitled "Iron Bloke" by Ozzie Osbourne. When he first heard the opening guitar riff for the first time... Ozzy remarked that it sounded "like a big iron bloke walking about". The title of the song was later changed to Iron Man". But has ZERO link to the super-hero at all.

It just entirely happens coincidentally, that the song matches the title / superhero. But, as an AC/DC fan, I am personally quite happy that AC/DC was chosen as the official "theme" group for the IronMan.

Sometimes a man just has to be an animal. [ Stark is definitely a "manimal" ] And Terrence played a military man who liked shiny things that go "boom". He did not give off the civilized "air" that Cheadle does of being a "company man". Remember those moments during the second IronMan movie? Where a General approaches James Rhodes, and commends him for his "good" work. And "Rhodey" responds.... "Thank You Sir", snaps out a salute.... and that's it... end of story. Nice doggie... and you will get another "Star" for that performance Rhodes...

Terrence has enough of a "Rebellious Air" to him that he could actually be a bit of a "bad-boy" and snap out of that corporate / military role, and be a side-kick and fellow super-hero...

He even alludes to this, at the end of IronMan 1. Spying the Mark II suit hanging in Starks Car-Cave, he says "Next time... Baby". Terrence should have been Rhodes. I do not like "switching" characters in Movies. I think the worst thing that EVER happened to Batman, was losing Mike, Keaton... same thing here. Every time I see Don Cheadle, I think of how our "humans" have been switched. I don't think of the movie... Terrence pulled off the "hurt" of being a "shoved-aside" friend of Starks, whereas Cheadle OBVIOUSLY can separate the two. Cheadle has no problem playing "Devils Advocate" and acting in the role of U.S. Gov't. Whereas I think that Terrence would ...SAY... what he is supposed to say, ... yet "think/feel" differently about things, then also ACT, differently. And that is the role I see Terrence filling, to this day... I don't LIKE that Cheadle can actually speak as "The U.S. Gov't", and make it his reality... I don't think it was supposed to be that way. Terrence is a human. Cheadle is a "company" man.... Big difference. I think Terrence would be a GREAT Rhodie / War-Machine...

What? IronMan is supposed to be the only ego-in-a-can? ...Ok.

... what-Ever YOU say ...

I think it was a "mistake"... to Lose Terrance.

Sigh- well, now that the "switch" has been done, it's too late to "go back". I'll take "company man" Cheadle.... I just hope we never EVER lose RDJ as "Stark".

I suppose it works if Don Cheadle remains "Rhodey", after all, the U.S. does need someone who actually obeys an order. Which, Cheadle does very well. Tho' if he does break "orders" it will be more dramatic ...if Cheadle does... ever, break orders. And run to IronMans aide as "War Machine". So I wonder if we ever will see that happen.

Below? Check out Marvels 'developing', men and women.

Every (good) hero needs a Heart. Pepper is his. To "have" and to "hold". It's about time, that a lead-woman in a movie is actually a "Woman" and feminine to the point of "girlie". And YES! Gweneth makes it "work" as even she "acquires" super-powers in the 3rd movie. She's "just-a-girl" and forces beyond her control push her to become, what she "now" is... by the end of IronMan-3. Seems Tony may have found a truly "strong" partner here... I'm sure, she'll come in handy in future movies...

BRAVO! ... I absolutely applaud Marvel Studios for being brave enough to return to tradition. Where men are men, and women are feminine. Yay! There IS "world order" after all... ! Even Black-Widow is sexy, beautiful, and Dangerous... but not "butch".

And even Tony has enough "macho" that the only man who can compete, is a ... "God" (Thor).

Actually, I'm going to be very disappointed if Scarlett Johanson does not reprise her role, as Black Widow. In movie 2, it appeared that "Happy" kinda had a "thing" for her, and I'd personally Hope that there'd be a "Love Interest" there, as well. It'd be nice to see those two characters "get together". Happy tries "So Hard" to be "Super"... or even, just "useful", and "Black Widow"? Is actually enough of a Woman and a Human, to actually care about a guy like Happy-Hogan. I am sure he could "be", Her-Hero.

Obadiah Stane: nice name for a villain... "stain". This was a sort of "natural" situation which happened, and is over-dramatized for this movie. Stark senior dies... years ago, and Obadiah takes command while Tony (Anthony Edward Stark) matures. Then, when Tony takes his heritage, and the number-1 position within Stark-Industries, naturally Stane resents it. So ...of course... he "must" now kill Tony. We all know this is "normal". ...for a movie...

Faran Tahir plays Raza, the leader of the Ten-Rings. Faran went on immediately after this to be a captain of a starship in Star Trek 2009. He was the commander of the ship, James-Tiberious's father was on.

Just A Rather Very Intelligent System. Paul Bettany voices J.A.R.V.I.S. Starks personal computer system.

SHIELD: Agent Phil Coulson, played by Clark Gregg makes his initial appearance as a "fly" that won't buzz off. Well, they WANT Stark on their side. Can you blame them?

Director of SHIELD: Nick Fury, played by the ever-too-cool Samuel L. Jackson, makes a cameo appearance way way at the very very END of the movie, ...after the final credits. He busts into Tony's Malibu home, and introduces the "Avenger initiative". Actually, his first words are to chastise Stark for thinking that "He"... is America's super-hero now.

That's the "problem" with an Aries... they think they Own Everything...

Captain 'A', may be morally in-corrupt. He may also be a master strategist, and Avengers premier tactician, and a natural leader/coordinator of combat... and he may actually be right as far as the compass of his heart goes, and he may be absolutely inarguable regarding the correctness of his morality.

But, if you need to cheat to win... Stark will find out HOW. And implement. Immediately, spontaneously, without a fore-thought, and without fear...

Well... mmMaybe a little fear, once he's deeply into the mess, up to his neck.

IronMan is Avengers brains and balls... he'll serve as "backup" leader, or Group Spokesman, due to experience, talent, native ability and quick wit... but I think even HE appreciates his "strong-suit"... [pardon the pun]. He may be the quickest of the Lot (of all Avengers- perhaps NOT as "quick" as Ultron...) but... He's the point of the spear. Captain 'A', may always understand and be ready to "lay across the wire" so that others may cross. Self-sacrificing and all... and, Captain 'A' is truly "superhuman", but... he's just a 'man'.

So's Stark, except... he may be capable of UNDERSTANDING "The Gods". After all, it's JUST another universe, right?

And isn't THAT just a suit-upgrade ... away? (If Stark is allowed any opportunity to compensate...) Stark, is the ultimate figure embodying "overcompensation".

He's STILL Avengers Brains and Balls.

And HULK? Well... he's HULK... fer cryin' out loud. Just get on Hulk's good side, and STAY there. Maybe feed him some shwarma... and let'im smash something... he'll be Ok...

But, even though in the original Marvel comix, "IronMonger" is a villain, the suited (and out of his mind) "evil" Obadiah, is never ever referred to AS "IronMonger".

But still, this "villainous" action on Obadiah's part is still referred to as, "IronMonger", by fans.

Obadiah, in the movie is simply referring to the "IronMongering" that Stark Industries does by trade. If they cease to be military manufacturers, they will cease to exist as a successful business venture. And, Obadiah is all about the extra dough he makes on the side, selling weapons to 3rd worlds.

Tony's mistake in this movie, is he wants to "come clean" and be responsible for Stark-weaponry. And Tony's initial kidnapping in the first 3rd of the movie, was a failed attempt (by Obadiah) to kill off the Stark Industries "prince", so that Obadiah, may be left in charge of Stark Industries. And when Tony not only survives but now tries to "clean up" business? Obadiah loses it, and just wants Tony.... "Gone". That, was Obadiah's "mistake".

Universal Studios originally bought the rights to "IronMan" in 1990. Ownership was transferred to FOX, in 1997 and at that time even though the development of the entire "IronMan" movie seemed slow... Nicholas Cage actually wanted to be Stark.

By 1998 Tom Cruise, expressed interest in being Stark.

FOX did some preliminary work, redeveloping the concept of IronMan for a modern script. Until in 1999 Quinton Tarantino was approached to Direct and Write it.

That was a No-Go situation. ... AGAIN. FOX then sold IronMan rights to New-Line Cinema. New Line Cinema can be credited for introducing the concept of a Nick Fury cameo, to setup a whole series of Marvel films, including their classic line of heroes. New-Line set a target date of 2006... and nothing happened, yet again. New-Line then returned rights to Marvel.

And finally, Marvel Studies (in 2005) seriously began development, doing a re-write and re-examination of the script, the story, the character... from scratch. In 2006 Jon Favreau was hired to direct. (Good Move) Jon Favreau personally celebrated by going on a diet and losing 70 pounds. Favreau was inpsired by Tom Clancy, James Bond and Robo Cop. And if you re-examine this movie you'll see it does contain elements of all that.

And, actually Howard Hughes was inspiration for the original figure of Tony Stark.

Filming began in Playa Vista, Los Angeles. Jon Favreau chose Cali over New York since New York "had been done" too much with the super-hero's thus far. Filming started on March 12th of 2007, in Playa Vista and Edwards Air Force base. The exterior shots of Starks home are computer generated composites of Point Dume in Malibu. The interior of Starks home was done on set in Playa Vista.

There was a great deal of improv allowed in dialogue scenes, since the script was not complete when filming began. Film making concerns were of the greater view. They all wanted the movie to "make sense" and they worked more on planning action. So Jon Favreau acknowledged that improv could also make the film feel more natural. So some scenes were shot with two cameras to capture lines said on-the-spot spontaneously. As it happens Downey was game to try something new on each take. For instance, it was Downeys own idea that Stark would hold a news conference sitting on the floor (a very Howard Hughes / strange move). And the Jericho weapon speech in Afghanistan is all Downey.

Favreau gave much thought to the concept of IronMan's first villain. And though in the classic story Mandarin is an arch-nemesis, he did not want to come out swinging so hard. He also wanted it to feel more "realistic" than not. So he made the confrontation within the movie very real. Beginning with a failed attempt at Starks assassination. The only reason Stark was NOT initially killed in Afghanistan, is that the 10-Rings suddenly realized who they had, and they attempted to black-mail Stane. That also failed as Stark got free, using his mark-I suit, and regaining his footing and setting the tone for an entire Super-Hero.

Much to Stane's woe.

=====

"egotistical-Genius" - turned - "Super-Hero" ...?

I am afraid, only a God...

(or at least another "Superhero", ...[maybe Rhodie, or Pepper] )

...can 'deal' with THAT.