ROFL!
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 12/17/2009 8:33:32 AM PST by Reaganesque
Click here for the new trailer!
I think you mean “War Machine”...
Oops. My bad.
I liked the original but often found myself thinking “quit yacking and blow something up!”
I’m shallow that way.
Whiplash, Black Widow, War Machine .... this is looking pretty cool!
I enjoyed the first Iron Man movie because it stuck fairly closely to the intent of the creators, except for the guffaw-inducing appearance of black Samuel L. Jackson as caucasian Nick Fury after the closing credits rolled.
I’m actually dreading Iron Man 2 because Samuel L. Jackson is supposed to reprise the aforementioned role, and even if he decided to wear pancake makeup, I don’t think he could pull that off. While I like SLJ in most of his roles, he’s simply a terrible choice to play Nick Fury; even worse than David Hasselhorse in the Nick Fury movie a few years ago.
On a related note, I can hardly wait for the big screen remake of Roots, featuring David Spade as Kunta Kinte and Lucy Liu as his owner.
ROFL!
On a lighter note: Stan Lee plays Larry King.
On the other hand, not sure why they chose Whiplash who IMHO was always a second rater as a villain. If they’re going to have the Black Widow, they could have had the Crimson Dynamo, the Titanium Man, the Mandarin or even Firebrand for the commies in government.
yeah it looks cool
I heard the same argument when Michael Duncan Clark was chosen to play “The Kingpin” in the horrid “Daredevil” movie.
Neither “Kingpin” or “Nick Fury” are racially-based characters. There’s nothing in their background or “literary” history to indicate that race is important. MDC was a great Kingpin, physically and in the role.
Now, if he were a klansman or a white supremist, or if the plot called for a white man to undergo a uniquely “white” experience, I’d agree.
Other than that, he’s just a one-eyed, badass secret agent.
With an eye-patch, Jackson would appear to fill the role.
How effective remains to be seen.
Peronally, the whole “Avengers” thing is a waste of time.
ugh.
Check out the director’s cut of “Daredevil.” Unless you have a fundamental issue with the casting of Ben Affleck, it’s so much better than the theatrical release, it makes you want to seriously slap the studio suits who decided to trim the movie down. It fills in major holes and fleshes the story out very nicely. In my opinion, it’s almost “Spider-Man” good.
But the big question is can SLJ make it through the entire movie without saying MFer and his head not explode?
That's a good one.
I found Daredevil to be forgettable, so maybe I should try again with the Director's Cut.
I thought Elektra was okay (in its case, I didn’t feel any differently about the director’s cut than the original), but mediocre. If you liked it, then all the more reason to check out the Daredevil DC.
You’d have to ply me with a lot of scotch to take another look at “Daredevil”. There’s so much bad acting and character formation all around, particularly the male and female lead, that I would think the director’s cut would trim it more.
And, yes, the Affleck issue is foremost.
Very bad choice.
I was thinking of Aaron Eckhart for the role.
Finally saw “Gone Baby Gone”, and Affleck should stay BEHIND the camera.
Kinky.
Well, in your case, the DC might not help much, although I think you’d have to concede an improvement in the story structure, as well as the final confrontation with Kingpin, which is actually a full fight in the DC. Also, in terms of character, the DC does more to establish him early on as someone to be afraid of.
By the way, I agree with your earlier comments on the racial element. What a lot of first-generation Marvel readers (like me) aren’t aware of is that when the recent Ultimates reboots were developed, Nick Fury was designed as not only being black, but actually being modeled after Jackson himself.
The one instance where I think making a character black was a poor idea was the movie “The Wild Wild West” (or, as I call it, “The Wild Wild Waste”). A black Secret Service field agent in reconstruction-era America was not only historically inaccurate, but not credible in terms of story, as his ability to investigate, infiltrate and move about discreetly would have been non-existent.
It is not like they made him a chick.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.