If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(HitFix)   Tony Stark alcoholism sub-plot nixed from 'Iron Man 3' by studio   (hitfix.com) divider line 86
    More: Interesting, Iron Man, Shane Black, subplot, threequel, Demon in a Bottle, studios  
•       •       •

4573 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 22 Apr 2013 at 11:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



86 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-22 11:50:10 AM
Alcoholism is a serious problem and it would be distasteful to do it in a family friendly movie that will not do it justice.

Does the Iron Man suit have a built in dialysis machine?
 
2013-04-22 11:50:19 AM
I'm no Comic Book Guy, but isn't that one of the character's defining characteristics?
 
2013-04-22 11:50:32 AM
probably because it just wouldn't be believable that Robert Downey Jr could be a drunk.
 
2013-04-22 11:51:45 AM
I can understand that. While it was a great character growth story in the comics, most people go to iron man movies wanting to see iron man you know... Doing iron man stuff. To do justice to the Demon in a Bottle story it would dominate the entire movie.

Although... I could totally see this as a possible 2 episode Special Event on the new S.H.I.E.L.D. show... You never know.

/mother is a alcoholic
//has mad respect for anyone who pulls themselves out of that gutter.
 
2013-04-22 11:52:07 AM
He also liked having sex with farm animals but I bet that never made the cut either....
 
2013-04-22 11:53:37 AM
That would be like if they nixed the being boring subplot from the Superman movie.
 
2013-04-22 11:53:59 AM
Wasn't Iron Man 2 literally about his alcoholism?
 
2013-04-22 11:54:08 AM
I thought they kinda covered the drunk thing in IM2 anyway, albeit brief.
 
2013-04-22 11:54:15 AM
I'm OK with this.  Besides, it's a little late at this point when they've had three movies of him just being a fun-loving playboy that likes an occasional drink that doesn't display the slightest signs of aloholism.
 
2013-04-22 11:54:57 AM

karnal: He also liked having sex with farm animals but I bet that never made the cut either....


Well he is always in his lab...  I never realized why...
 
2013-04-22 11:57:50 AM

Grapple: karnal: He also liked having sex with farm animals but I bet that never made the cut either....

Well he is always in his lab...  I never realized why...


ruh roh rony, rere romes repper
 
2013-04-22 11:59:55 AM
Movie super hero not quite like the comic book version they are based on?
This isn't exactly unheard of.
 
2013-04-22 12:06:19 PM

Sargun: Wasn't Iron Man 2 literally about his alcoholism?


Yay, seems like it would have be a retread.
 
2013-04-22 12:06:21 PM
Farking studio suits need to go back to their hookers and blow and stay out of the creative process.
 
2013-04-22 12:07:06 PM

JerseyTim: That would be like if they nixed the being boring subplot from the Superman movie.


Are you JerseyProud in the GameFAQs forums?
 
2013-04-22 12:08:31 PM
In Tony STark's defense, having to hang out all day listening to Gwyneth Paltrow babble about how the secret to good health is holistic organic hand-crafted seaweed crudite flown in daily from the Netherlands at a price of $87,500 per ounce would drive one to drink.
 
2013-04-22 12:09:20 PM

Captain Kickass: I'm no Comic Book Guy, but isn't that one of the character's defining characteristics?


I don't think the 1980's-era comic book publishers had to worry about the financial impact of a phone call from Seagram or Anhauser-Busch.  That's probably only a small part of the equation though.

Iron Man and Avengers both cater heavily to a younger audience and families with kids. Complex, distressing characters don't always fit in well. Watchmen, on the other hand, got a very different audience, and could use plots involving betrayal, substance abuse, and aging in a way audiences could follow and not find excessively jarring.
 
2013-04-22 12:11:20 PM
They hinted at in 2. I wasn't expecting more.
 
2013-04-22 12:11:43 PM

Sargun: Wasn't Iron Man 2 literally about his alcoholism?


Sortof.  They didn't want to make *that* about his alcoholism either...  So they gave him the 'reason' of dying from palladium poisoning or whatever to make him just fatalistic (and not *really* an alcoholic because that's icky).  Once that was cleared up, he no longer had a reason to feel bad.  It was a cop out.

note: he was drinking in avengers.
 
2013-04-22 12:12:05 PM
They could address his alcoholism without it being Leaving Las Vegas. James Bond is clearly a drunk and it never brings the movie down. Shane Black is one of the best action screenwriters in Hollywood, let him do what he wants. Farking suits.
 
2013-04-22 12:19:10 PM
Ever notice how Hollywood takes books or stories that people enjoy, and turn them into a Race Against Time. Instead of building up the story, they force feed it into their cookie cutter, proven true to work storyline assembly line. Add in witty dialogue, have a love interest and Voila! The movie with the book name is ready.

Holllywood is afraid to take chances, they know the tropes that work for the slack jawed public and stick very close to them. It doesn't surprise me this is happening, and I expect a metric farkton of CG and 'splosions to be thrown at the screen. It's what we expect from summer blockbusters. It's how Michael Bay has made his career.
 
2013-04-22 12:19:44 PM
They're missing one of the story's recurring and central dramatic pieces.  What they don't understand is that without a human drama behind it, Iron Man is just a boom flash pow silly little story about aliens or something.

With his wealth, genius, super-suit, etc. he has immense power in his hands, and if he's half in the can while he's using it then there's the question of whether he's safe or a danger, and whether his decision-making about what and who to blow up or which laws to break "because he had to" is something that makes him a hero or a villain.  That is a huge storyline that they're kind of throwing away.  Without it he's just a guy in a metal suit who makes things go boom.
 
2013-04-22 12:25:33 PM
I'm sure that this has nothing to do with product placement and cooperative sponsorships between the studios and beer/liquor companies.
 
2013-04-22 12:25:44 PM

Mugato: They could address his alcoholism without it being Leaving Las Vegas. James Bond is clearly a drunk and it never brings the movie down. Shane Black is one of the best action screenwriters in Hollywood, let him do what he wants. Farking suits.


Eh, I dunno.  Once they really say "Tony, you're a farking alcoholic, you need to stop drinking", it becomes something that impacts every other time we see him, especially if he's having a drink.  It would color all the other movies too.  And if he magically just gets better, it's both unrealistic and robbing him of the struggle.  True alcoholism's a real biatch.

On the other hand, I wouldn't mind a certain amount of quiet depressive drinking in secret--hints, really--since the voice-over from the trailer is pretty bleak.  He can't sleep, he's nervous, etc.  Taking a little self-medication from a hip flask before a news conference or some other situation where he has to be 'on' could add layers, without Pepper and War Machine staging an intervention.
 
2013-04-22 12:27:54 PM

Mugato: Farking studio suits need to go back to their hookers and blow and stay out of the creative process.


The studio in question here is Marvel Studios though. Comic book execs are more likely to be doped out on dimetapp than cocaine.
 
2013-04-22 12:30:06 PM

Mugato: They could address his alcoholism without it being Leaving Las Vegas. James Bond is clearly a drunk and it never brings the movie down. Shane Black is one of the best action screenwriters in Hollywood, let him do what he wants. Farking suits.


Pretty much this.  Although the Demon in a Bottle was done in the comics and is canon, that doesn't mean that the movie has to do it.  So he's a playboy that likes to drink, drive fast cars, and beat up on baddies.  So's James Bond and you don't see a movie with him confronting his addiction to Vodak martini's.
 
2013-04-22 12:38:01 PM
I just figured that's what the whole storyline was with the virus in IM2. They just substituted the virus for alcohol.
If they wanted to do the drunk story, that should have started in the first one.
Bringing it up now would be bad storytelling.
 
2013-04-22 12:39:13 PM

Captain Kickass: I'm no Comic Book Guy, but isn't that one of the character's defining characteristics?


Yes. Stark's recurring battle with alcoholism is key to the dramatic attraction of the Iron Man franchise, at least from the comic perspective. A truly, brutally, human experience with which Stark repeatedly wrestles - to cut it is to cut one of the things that gave the Iron Man story its appeal.

I can see why they cut it for the movies, but it's still a shame that they did so.
 
2013-04-22 12:40:51 PM

Zombie DJ: Bringing it up now would be bad storytelling.


Alcoholism is progressive. It's not bad storytelling for him to not have a problem in the first film and be a full on drunk by the third.
 
2013-04-22 12:43:46 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: Ever notice how Hollywood takes books or stories that people enjoy, and turn them into a Race Against Time. Instead of building up the story, they force feed it into their cookie cutter, proven true to work storyline assembly line. Add in witty dialogue, have a love interest and Voila! The movie with the book name is ready.

Holllywood is afraid to take chances, they know the tropes that work for the slack jawed public and stick very close to them. It doesn't surprise me this is happening, and I expect a metric farkton of CG and 'splosions to be thrown at the screen. It's what we expect from summer blockbusters. It's how Michael Bay has made his career.


McDonald's hamburgers are bland, flavorless, utterly uninteresting wads of grease, salt, and sugar.  Their only selling point is that they are always the same.  You can go into any McDonald's in the US and know precisely what experience you're going to have, without even looking at the menu.   Every town I've ever visited has at least one or two places that make far better burgers than McDonald's, but McDonald's continues to be one of the most successful businesses in the world.  Familiar mediocrity is often more attractive to people than unfamiliar excellence.

As with burgers, so too with movies.
 
2013-04-22 12:44:45 PM

justtray: Alcoholism is a serious problem and it would be distasteful to do it in a family friendly movie that will not do it justice.

Does the Iron Man suit have a built in dialysis machine?


ramascreen.com
Unavailable for comment.
 
2013-04-22 12:45:00 PM
4.bp.blogspot.com

The biggest effect of the transition from the 70s-era comics to the 80s was that comics stopped being white hat vs black hat. The characters got more or less bounded by physics and began being treated like actual characters.  It's of course logical that since this is what made them successful, we should backpedal.
 
2013-04-22 12:46:09 PM

YodaBlues: Mugato: Farking studio suits need to go back to their hookers and blow and stay out of the creative process.

The studio in question here is Marvel Studios though. Comic book execs are more likely to be doped out on dimetapp than cocaine.


Marvel is going to take the official blame for it, but Disney told them straight off the instant they got bought that they weren't allowed to do 'Demon in a Bottle'.  I remember it being a thing back when Iron Man 2 came out and fans were beginning to ask questions.

/no movie with Ben Kingsley as the villain is ever good
//but this news just makes me want to ignore renting the DVD as well
 
2013-04-22 12:47:15 PM
elvindeath:
In Tony STark's defense, having to hang out all day listening to Gwyneth Paltrow babble about how the secret to good health is holistic organic hand-crafted seaweed crudite flown in daily from the Netherlands at a price of $87,500 per ounce would drive one to drink.

Acting... the reason we love Pepper Potts despite heaping scorn on Gwyneth and her horrible ways is that it's acting.  Pepper, as depicted, would not run "Goop" because she has more to occupy her than $12,000/lin. ft. hand-painted wallpaper.
 
2013-04-22 12:50:53 PM

FloydA: As with burgers, so too with movies.


No, that's what studio execs think movies are about. And since that's all they give us, that's all we get. But a movie can break from the standard tropes and if it's good, people will see it. Except movies are so damned expensive nowadays, the studios won't take a $200mill dollar risk on a movie that may be the next Matrix or the next Sucker Punch. So we get paint by numbers comic book movies and remakes.
 
2013-04-22 12:52:16 PM

BafflerMeal: Sargun: Wasn't Iron Man 2 literally about his alcoholism?

Sortof.  They didn't want to make *that* about his alcoholism either...  So they gave him the 'reason' of dying from palladium poisoning or whatever to make him just fatalistic (and not *really* an alcoholic because that's icky).  Once that was cleared up, he no longer had a reason to feel bad.  It was a cop out.

note: he was drinking in avengers.


Yes, he poured himself a drink during the scene at the top of Stark Tower.

He also had a drink in his hand during the opening scene of Iron Man, and was plastered during the party scene in Iron Man 2 (the scene where he pees in the suit).

They have not shied away from showing Tony Stark as an enthusiastic drinker, but they haven't really shown him as a true alcoholic mess.
 
2013-04-22 12:54:02 PM
I always thought that the Iron Man movies were about alcohol at least when I watch them.
 
2013-04-22 12:58:36 PM

Captain Kickass: I'm no Comic Book Guy, but isn't that one of the character's defining characteristics?


palelizard: Mugato: They could address his alcoholism without it being Leaving Las Vegas. James Bond is clearly a drunk and it never brings the movie down. Shane Black is one of the best action screenwriters in Hollywood, let him do what he wants. Farking suits.

His alcoholism is definitely one of his defining characteristics.  Every time I see him pick up a drink in the movies, I have to remind myself that movie Tony isn't yet an alcoholic.
 
2013-04-22 01:02:52 PM

unyon: Captain Kickass: I'm no Comic Book Guy, but isn't that one of the character's defining characteristics?

palelizard: Mugato: They could address his alcoholism without it being Leaving Las Vegas. James Bond is clearly a drunk and it never brings the movie down. Shane Black is one of the best action screenwriters in Hollywood, let him do what he wants. Farking suits.

His alcoholism is definitely one of his defining characteristics.  Every time I see him pick up a drink in the movies, I have to remind myself that movie Tony isn't yet an alcoholic.


Recently one of the biggest ongoing stories to happen to him was he re-lapsed during an 'end-of-the-world-it's-all-hopeless' scenario.  And his alcoholism is a publicly known fact in the marvel universe.  The government wanted to take away his special get out of jail free cards, etc... since they now had reason to believe a walking WMD was getting drunk again.
 
2013-04-22 01:03:40 PM

Mugato: FloydA: As with burgers, so too with movies.

No, that's what studio execs think movies are about. And since that's all they give us, that's all we get. But a movie can break from the standard tropes and if it's good, people will see it. Except movies are so damned expensive nowadays, the studios won't take a $200mill dollar risk on a movie that may be the next Matrix or the next Sucker Punch. So we get paint by numbers comic book movies and remakes.


We do occasionally get those great ones, and there are hundreds of fantastic independent films as well.  But you're right, mediocrity is due to risk aversion; not just in the studio heads, but in the audiences.  As long as "Same as it ever was" continues to sell, they'll continue to make it.  They're not doing it just to be assholes; they're doing it because people keep buying it.  If it wasn't profitable, they'd do something else.
 
2013-04-22 01:17:25 PM

Dalek Caan's doomed mistress: /no movie with Ben Kingsley as the villain is ever good


Not saying IM3 will be, but go watch "Sexy Beast"
 
2013-04-22 01:20:05 PM

FloydA: Familiar mediocrity is often more attractive to people than unfamiliar excellence.


Budweiser, Coors, Miller, Pizza Hut, McDonald's, Burger King and Olive Garden just got their new ad campaigns.

/And you happen to be completely correct.
 
2013-04-22 01:23:39 PM
It would have been cut in editing anyway
 
2013-04-22 01:25:30 PM

FloydA: We do occasionally get those great ones, and there are hundreds of fantastic independent films as well. But you're right, mediocrity is due to risk aversion; not just in the studio heads, but in the audiences. As long as "Same as it ever was" continues to sell, they'll continue to make it. They're not doing it just to be assholes; they're doing it because people keep buying it. If it wasn't profitable, they'd do something else.


And when the movie doesn't perform, the blame Piracy!! And go after people to get their money. I'm not condoning pirating the movie, if it's bad, why even download it?

I'm talking about all the remakes specifically. Clash Of The Titans was a moment in time, the remake terrible all the way around. Red Dawn was a moment in time, the remake was terrible all the way around. If it's not a remake, it's a well known property and they force it into the formulaic trend and release it with tons and tons of CGI. Maybe if they paid the screenwriters more to make compelling stories, they could cut back on the CGI.

Additionally, like you said, they don't take risks. There are plenty of films that have taken risks, and if successful, they rip off everything that they think made the movie successful and throw it into every new movie that comes out, thus killing the uniqueness.

It's M. Night Shamalamadingdong theory: If it works, keep rehashing it over and over and over and over until the public doesn't buy it anymore, then take the successful parts and force it into the formula.
 
2013-04-22 01:28:54 PM
3.bp.blogspot.com
it got retconned out of history, anyway
 
2013-04-22 01:32:57 PM
Whomever thought this was a GOOD idea is a moron.  Robert Downey Jr.'s addiction issues are well-known (glad he's still sober).  I think having an addict play an alcoholic would be terribly unsympathetic.
 
2013-04-22 01:33:44 PM

HST's Dead Carcass: Maybe if they paid the screenwriters more to make compelling stories, they could cut back on the CGI.


Eh, screenwriters don't need more money. There are a million starving screenwriters in Hollywood. Money isn't the issue. It's studio execs who think they know better than the writers.
 
2013-04-22 01:34:37 PM

elvisaintdead: Dalek Caan's doomed mistress: /no movie with Ben Kingsley as the villain is ever good

Not saying IM3 will be, but go watch "Sexy Beast"


Damn it, beat me to the punch.
 
2013-04-22 01:36:06 PM

slayer199: Whomever thought this was a GOOD idea is a moron.  Robert Downey Jr.'s addiction issues are well-known (glad he's still sober).  I think having an addict play an alcoholic would be terribly unsympathetic.


Oh please, he's an actor. That's what they do, they act.
 
2013-04-22 01:53:19 PM

PsyLord: Mugato: They could address his alcoholism without it being Leaving Las Vegas. James Bond is clearly a drunk and it never brings the movie down. Shane Black is one of the best action screenwriters in Hollywood, let him do what he wants. Farking suits.

Pretty much this.  Although the Demon in a Bottle was done in the comics and is canon, that doesn't mean that the movie has to do it.  So he's a playboy that likes to drink, drive fast cars, and beat up on baddies.  So's James Bond and you don't see a movie with him confronting his addiction to Vodak martini's.


Demon in a Bottle was nothing. That was one issue.

The major Drunk Tony story (and story that should be a movie all its own) was issues 170-200. Tony becomes a full-on drunk, gives the armor up to Rhodey, loses his company, loses his fortune, becomes a homeless guy wandering the streets, then throws in with some underfunded inventors and winds up getting sober, fighting Obadiah Stane, and debuting the kickass Silver Centurion armor.
 
2013-04-22 02:01:24 PM

Mugato: Oh please, he's an actor. That's what they do, they act.


I've known very few alcoholics that have remained sober...so I don't think having Downey play that dark side of himself is a good idea...now matter how great of an actor he is.
 
2013-04-22 02:20:23 PM

slayer199: Mugato: Oh please, he's an actor. That's what they do, they act.

I've known very few alcoholics that have remained sober...so I don't think having Downey play that dark side of himself is a good idea...now matter how great of an actor he is.


I'd have to side with slayer199 on this one.  As an alcoholic I am fine going to bars, parties and shows and not drinking.  Want to sit me in front of the camera and have me pretend to be drinking?  I'd like to think that that wouldn't matter either but, I don't know.  Don't want RDJ pulling a Daniel Day Lewis and immersing himself in the downward spiral of Stark's alcoholism.
 
2013-04-22 02:24:48 PM

Valeriyance: Want to sit me in front of the camera and have me pretend to be drinking?


He's already done that in the first two and in Avengers.
 
2013-04-22 02:28:03 PM

Mugato: slayer199: Whomever thought this was a GOOD idea is a moron.  Robert Downey Jr.'s addiction issues are well-known (glad he's still sober).  I think having an addict play an alcoholic would be terribly unsympathetic.

Oh please, he's an actor. That's what they do, they act.


Oh please. SOmeone came to RDJ and said "Be a narsasistic, drunkard playbody who people still enjoy being around anyway himself". And paid him millions to do it.

Don;t get me wrong, he's PERFECT for the role and I even loved IM2 (which is rare apparently). That doesn;t mean this is a big stretch "acting" wise for him.
 
2013-04-22 02:29:20 PM
That's not drinking.

But you are right Neeek.  If he can have a cocktail in scenes he should be fine to explore two or more.
 
2013-04-22 02:36:32 PM
Yeah, can't have alcoholism in a kid's movie. Haha, watch Tony Stark get wasted, kids. It's funny.

Now let's watch some violence and fighting and explosions and guns and stuff and American flags and stuff... Yaaaaay!!!! ^_^
 
2013-04-22 02:37:02 PM

Mugato: HST's Dead Carcass: Maybe if they paid the screenwriters more to make compelling stories, they could cut back on the CGI.

Eh, screenwriters don't need more money. There are a million starving screenwriters in Hollywood. Money isn't the issue. It's studio execs who think they know better than the writers.


Um, perhaps you're unaware that it was one of the reasons they asked him, and one of the reasons he accepted? RDJ's past ain't a liability, it's a feature, yo.
 
2013-04-22 02:53:23 PM
"The camera slowly pulls away from the snowglobe, and it's revealed that tony stark really just had an iron deficiency.."
 
2013-04-22 03:07:42 PM
Daddy, you drink more than Ironman, why don't you have a special suit that can fly?

-- Slap
 
2013-04-22 03:18:44 PM

Mugato: They could address his alcoholism without it being Leaving Las Vegas. James Bond is clearly a drunk and it never brings the movie down. Shane Black is one of the best action screenwriters in Hollywood, let him do what he wants. Farking suits



Shaneshould have said "Gee you guys are pussies... Gee you guys are pussies
 
2013-04-22 03:24:16 PM
One of the things I enjoyed about the character was his struggle with alcohol. I always felt that his frustration with the world came from operating on an intelligence level well beyond the average human and/or out of the normal realm of thought which he could escape by drinking. I guess I enjoyed it, because I could relate though I am not a super genius I do tend to see things outside of normal thinking and I have become a regular drinker though I wouldn't quite call it alcoholism since I don't have any of the negative aspects like drinking until I pass out every night. I do not mind that they axed alcoholism from the script, but I wish they would stop hinting at it or portraying him as a heavy drinker since it glamorize drinking.
 
2013-04-22 03:27:31 PM

Profedius: One of the things I enjoyed about the character was his struggle with alcohol. I always felt that his frustration with the world came from operating on an intelligence level well beyond the average human and/or out of the normal realm of thought which he could escape by drinking. I guess I enjoyed it, because I could relate though I am not a super genius I do tend to see things outside of normal thinking and I have become a regular drinker though I wouldn't quite call it alcoholism since I don't have any of the negative aspects like drinking until I pass out every night. I do not mind that they axed alcoholism from the script, but I wish they would stop hinting at it or portraying him as a heavy drinker since it glamorize drinking.


Could just be part of the playboy image
 
2013-04-22 03:27:38 PM

Sargun: Wasn't Iron Man 2 literally about his alcoholism?


This.

Even though he had understandable and underlying reasons, pretty much the entire first half was Stark managing to be even more of a dick than he was in the first movie. And it was awesome, regardless.

/yeah, I said it
 
2013-04-22 03:32:00 PM
i.ebayimg.com

I suppose we should be grateful that RDJ's other major character was done justice with his drug habits.

/thought the BBC's version with nicotine patches was a cop out
 
2013-04-22 03:44:41 PM

Captain Kickass: I'm no Comic Book Guy, but isn't that one of the character's defining characteristics?


Actually No,  but most people mistake the symptom for the real defining characteristic/flaw of Tony Stark.

His real issue is that Tony Stark is an Obsessive, Thrill-Seeking, Ego-Maniac.

The alcohol is just a crutch he falls back on when (if) he gets bored with fast cars, fast women, secret projects, upgrading the armor and being Iron Man.  Which is pretty much the one thing that he is more
addicted to that the drink.
 
2013-04-22 03:50:58 PM

Dalek Caan's doomed mistress: YodaBlues: Mugato: Farking studio suits need to go back to their hookers and blow and stay out of the creative process.

The studio in question here is Marvel Studios though. Comic book execs are more likely to be doped out on dimetapp than cocaine.

Marvel is going to take the official blame for it, but Disney told them straight off the instant they got bought that they weren't allowed to do 'Demon in a Bottle'.  I remember it being a thing back when Iron Man 2 came out and fans were beginning to ask questions.

/no movie with Ben Kingsley as the villain is ever good
//but this news just makes me want to ignore renting the DVD as well


thumbs.anyclip.com

/begs to differ
 
2013-04-22 04:37:27 PM
i172.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-22 04:44:22 PM

PsyLord: Dalek Caan's doomed mistress: YodaBlues: Mugato: Farking studio suits need to go back to their hookers and blow and stay out of the creative process.

The studio in question here is Marvel Studios though. Comic book execs are more likely to be doped out on dimetapp than cocaine.

Marvel is going to take the official blame for it, but Disney told them straight off the instant they got bought that they weren't allowed to do 'Demon in a Bottle'.  I remember it being a thing back when Iron Man 2 came out and fans were beginning to ask questions.

/no movie with Ben Kingsley as the villain is ever good
//but this news just makes me want to ignore renting the DVD as well



/begs to differ


This. Sneakers wasnt a bad movie.
 
2013-04-22 05:05:49 PM
The Demon in a Bottle thread really encompassed what, 10 years or so? of the comic book?  I know it's effects were definitely still going when I picked up the series as a late 80's reader.  The article says late 70's, so if that's the case, it really took a very long time in comic book world for him to really beat that.

I was thinking it was more like 3-4 years actually, but my memory of time is pretty compressed.

Really the whole Stark vs Rhodes vs Stane would be pretty awesome, but it'd take an entire series of movies itself, I think.
 
2013-04-22 05:09:53 PM
I think the whole Demon In A Bottle story would be too heavy for an action scifi/fantasy film. It would be great if this were a weekly TV series, but trying to boil it down to a two-hour movie would rob the story of its gravitas, and take away from other elements of the movie. Basically, they'd have to make the whole movie JUST Demon In A Bottle.

And then there's the fact that a lot of that story already unfolded in a different way on Marvel Cinematic Earth. Stane's dead there, already. Tony's whole life story is much more compact than the comic's version.

I could see them covering Civil War before they do Demon In A Bottle. It would be more entertaining to see Stark turn into a pro-registration dickwad than to see him wallow in misery as a drunk who gives up the armor and becomes a bum.
 
2013-04-22 05:23:28 PM

ThatBillmanGuy: This. Sneakers wasnt a bad movie.


Sneakers was a great movie.

/cattle mutilations are up
 
2013-04-22 06:10:01 PM

ekdikeo4: The Demon in a Bottle thread really encompassed what, 10 years or so? of the comic book?  I know it's effects were definitely still going when I picked up the series as a late 80's reader.  The article says late 70's, so if that's the case, it really took a very long time in comic book world for him to really beat that.

I was thinking it was more like 3-4 years actually, but my memory of time is pretty compressed.

Really the whole Stark vs Rhodes vs Stane would be pretty awesome, but it'd take an entire series of movies itself, I think.


Demon in a Bottle was, like, 5 issues in the late 70s, ending with issue #128. Then, Tony had a long sober period, which ended in the mid-160s when he took up drinking again. He abandoned the armor in issue #171, lost his company in issue #173, was homeless by issue #178, sober by 182, had put together a new version of the original grey armor by issue #191, and was full-time Iron Man again when he introduced the Silver Centurian armor and battled Stane in issue #200.

So, yeah, 3-4 years for the major drunk and drying out phase, with 6 months for the original drunk story. And that's not quite correct, since his drinking was just a subplot in the issues in the 120s until it became full blown Drunk Tony with issue #128.
 
2013-04-22 06:19:28 PM
You know why the directors cut of Daredevil is about a million times better than the theatrical cut?   Because the big brains at the studio said 'This is too long, we can either cut out action or cut out character development stuff....Screw character development stuff, the audience wants ACTION!'....
 
2013-04-22 06:42:20 PM

FirstNationalBastard: ekdikeo4: The Demon in a Bottle thread really encompassed what, 10 years or so? of the comic book?  I know it's effects were definitely still going when I picked up the series as a late 80's reader.  The article says late 70's, so if that's the case, it really took a very long time in comic book world for him to really beat that.

I was thinking it was more like 3-4 years actually, but my memory of time is pretty compressed.

Really the whole Stark vs Rhodes vs Stane would be pretty awesome, but it'd take an entire series of movies itself, I think.

Demon in a Bottle was, like, 5 issues in the late 70s, ending with issue #128. Then, Tony had a long sober period, which ended in the mid-160s when he took up drinking again. He abandoned the armor in issue #171, lost his company in issue #173, was homeless by issue #178, sober by 182, had put together a new version of the original grey armor by issue #191, and was full-time Iron Man again when he introduced the Silver Centurian armor and battled Stane in issue #200.

So, yeah, 3-4 years for the major drunk and drying out phase, with 6 months for the original drunk story. And that's not quite correct, since his drinking was just a subplot in the issues in the 120s until it became full blown Drunk Tony with issue #128.



He's been dealing with getting drunk again just this last year during and after the Fear Itself story line.  It was a major plot point.  Also, his alcoholism was brought up very directly in Avengers Disassembled back in the early 2000s, and half the Avengers didn't believe his side of the story due to his history.

Even now with Iron-Man-In-Space, he received a 'cocktail' to drink in a recent issue, that had to be verbally explained was only fruit juice to touch on that character point.
 
2013-04-22 06:45:33 PM

FirstNationalBastard: ekdikeo4: The Demon in a Bottle thread really encompassed what, 10 years or so? of the comic book?  I know it's effects were definitely still going when I picked up the series as a late 80's reader.  The article says late 70's, so if that's the case, it really took a very long time in comic book world for him to really beat that.

I was thinking it was more like 3-4 years actually, but my memory of time is pretty compressed.

Really the whole Stark vs Rhodes vs Stane would be pretty awesome, but it'd take an entire series of movies itself, I think.

Demon in a Bottle was, like, 5 issues in the late 70s, ending with issue #128. Then, Tony had a long sober period, which ended in the mid-160s when he took up drinking again. He abandoned the armor in issue #171, lost his company in issue #173, was homeless by issue #178, sober by 182, had put together a new version of the original grey armor by issue #191, and was full-time Iron Man again when he introduced the Silver Centurian armor and battled Stane in issue #200.

So, yeah, 3-4 years for the major drunk and drying out phase, with 6 months for the original drunk story. And that's not quite correct, since his drinking was just a subplot in the issues in the 120s until it became full blown Drunk Tony with issue #128.


ok, so, I wasn't completely out of line with that.  Just not realizing that there were two largely different storylines that involved the alcoholism.  I know it's been a point that would weave in and out over the years, even though I haven't paid attention very closely in a couple decades.
 
2013-04-22 06:56:43 PM

You Are All Sheep: I thought they kinda covered the drunk thing in IM2 anyway, albeit brief.


Was gonna say they did it in the 2nd movie.

www.blogcdn.com
 
2013-04-22 07:28:47 PM

BafflerMeal: FirstNationalBastard: ekdikeo4: The Demon in a Bottle thread really encompassed what, 10 years or so? of the comic book?  I know it's effects were definitely still going when I picked up the series as a late 80's reader.  The article says late 70's, so if that's the case, it really took a very long time in comic book world for him to really beat that.

I was thinking it was more like 3-4 years actually, but my memory of time is pretty compressed.

Really the whole Stark vs Rhodes vs Stane would be pretty awesome, but it'd take an entire series of movies itself, I think.

Demon in a Bottle was, like, 5 issues in the late 70s, ending with issue #128. Then, Tony had a long sober period, which ended in the mid-160s when he took up drinking again. He abandoned the armor in issue #171, lost his company in issue #173, was homeless by issue #178, sober by 182, had put together a new version of the original grey armor by issue #191, and was full-time Iron Man again when he introduced the Silver Centurian armor and battled Stane in issue #200.

So, yeah, 3-4 years for the major drunk and drying out phase, with 6 months for the original drunk story. And that's not quite correct, since his drinking was just a subplot in the issues in the 120s until it became full blown Drunk Tony with issue #128.


He's been dealing with getting drunk again just this last year during and after the Fear Itself story line.  It was a major plot point.  Also, his alcoholism was brought up very directly in Avengers Disassembled back in the early 2000s, and half the Avengers didn't believe his side of the story due to his history.

Even now with Iron-Man-In-Space, he received a 'cocktail' to drink in a recent issue, that had to be verbally explained was only fruit juice to touch on that character point.


To be fair in comics they don't constantly talk about character addictions. Ms. Marvel was an alcoholic and Red Arrow was hooked on smack and you almost never hear about either. I want to say Green Arrow Ollie had a booze problem too once upon a time.
 
2013-04-22 07:43:15 PM

The_Knarf: I can understand that. While it was a great character growth story in the comics, most people go to iron man movies wanting to see iron man you know... Doing iron man stuff. To do justice to the Demon in a Bottle story it would dominate the entire movie.


I completely disagree. The entire appeal for the movies for me is RDJ as Tony Stark, the Iron Man stuff is nice but it's mostly the same fun generic action hero shiat. I don't have high hopes for the third one as the second showed they were going more in the direction of less Tony, more generic action hero shiat. Shying away from things that might be out of the ordinary is a sign that they're now just in coasting mode. Obviously, I haven't seen it and could be proven wrong, but that's my impression.
 
2013-04-22 07:48:13 PM

therecksays: BafflerMeal: FirstNationalBastard: ekdikeo4: The Demon in a Bottle thread really encompassed what, 10 years or so? of the comic book?  I know it's effects were definitely still going when I picked up the series as a late 80's reader.  The article says late 70's, so if that's the case, it really took a very long time in comic book world for him to really beat that.

I was thinking it was more like 3-4 years actually, but my memory of time is pretty compressed.

Really the whole Stark vs Rhodes vs Stane would be pretty awesome, but it'd take an entire series of movies itself, I think.

Demon in a Bottle was, like, 5 issues in the late 70s, ending with issue #128. Then, Tony had a long sober period, which ended in the mid-160s when he took up drinking again. He abandoned the armor in issue #171, lost his company in issue #173, was homeless by issue #178, sober by 182, had put together a new version of the original grey armor by issue #191, and was full-time Iron Man again when he introduced the Silver Centurian armor and battled Stane in issue #200.

So, yeah, 3-4 years for the major drunk and drying out phase, with 6 months for the original drunk story. And that's not quite correct, since his drinking was just a subplot in the issues in the 120s until it became full blown Drunk Tony with issue #128.


He's been dealing with getting drunk again just this last year during and after the Fear Itself story line.  It was a major plot point.  Also, his alcoholism was brought up very directly in Avengers Disassembled back in the early 2000s, and half the Avengers didn't believe his side of the story due to his history.

Even now with Iron-Man-In-Space, he received a 'cocktail' to drink in a recent issue, that had to be verbally explained was only fruit juice to touch on that character point.

To be fair in comics they don't constantly talk about character addictions. Ms. Marvel was an alcoholic and Red Arrow was hooked on smack and you almost never hear about either. I want t ...


Sure, I agree.  Nor should they.  I'm just pointing out that it's not just a legacy from the 70's.  It's a part of his character.
 
2013-04-22 08:08:49 PM
Sad to see it. The Dark Knight Rises tied in Bruce's demons and personal collapse really well into the main plot. I'm sure they could've tied alcoholism into a reckless playboy like Tony Stark and make it work in the movie.
 
2013-04-22 10:52:27 PM

Mugato: It's not bad storytelling for him to not have a problem in the first film and be a full on drunk by the third.


Not without ALREADY showing it.
It would feel made up at this point just to give him a problem.
And truthfully, I'd see it as the "too many villains in a sequel".
 
2013-04-22 11:06:22 PM

Zombie DJ: Mugato: It's not bad storytelling for him to not have a problem in the first film and be a full on drunk by the third.

Not without ALREADY showing it.
It would feel made up at this point just to give him a problem.
And truthfully, I'd see it as the "too many villains in a sequel".


From the first scene in the first film he had a drink in his hand, it was apparent from the beginning he was a drinker. I dunno, if they decide they don't want to play up the drunk angle then fine. I guess my only real problem is studio execs telling the writers what to do like they know anything.
 
2013-04-23 04:57:48 AM

PsyLord: Dalek Caan's doomed mistress: YodaBlues: Mugato: Farking studio suits need to go back to their hookers and blow and stay out of the creative process.

The studio in question here is Marvel Studios though. Comic book execs are more likely to be doped out on dimetapp than cocaine.

Marvel is going to take the official blame for it, but Disney told them straight off the instant they got bought that they weren't allowed to do 'Demon in a Bottle'.  I remember it being a thing back when Iron Man 2 came out and fans were beginning to ask questions.

/no movie with Ben Kingsley as the villain is ever good
//but this news just makes me want to ignore renting the DVD as well

[thumbs.anyclip.com image 480x252]

/begs to differ


www.fauxvictorianrag.com

farking also farking begs to farking differ you fat coont
 
2013-04-23 09:52:58 AM
Sargun:  Wasn't Iron Man 2 literally about his alcoholism?

Exactly what I was thinking.  And although I liked Iron Man II overall (I know, I know.....a lot of you didn't), I could have easily gone without Tony Stark being a drunken asshole.
 
2013-04-23 06:31:20 PM
Of course he's an alcoholic, he's in a can virtually all the time.
 
2013-04-23 07:45:39 PM

carrion_luggage: Of course he's an alcoholic, he's in a can virtually all the time.


So is Northstar.
 
Displayed 86 of 86 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report