Robert Downey Jr.: I am 'Iron Man' WTF??

Azazal · Post by **Azazal** » 2006-09-29 11:43am

LOS ANGELES, California (Hollywood Reporter) -- Robert Downey, Jr. is suiting up to star in "Iron Man," a superhero movie based on the Marvel Comics character.

Jon Favreau is directing the Paramount Pictures release. Filming is slated to begin in February in Los Angeles.

Downey will portray Tony Stark, a billionaire industrialist and genius inventor who is kidnapped and forced to build a devastating weapon. Using his intelligence and ingenuity, Stark instead builds a high-tech suit of armor and escapes captivity. Upon his return to the U.S., he uncovers a plot with global implications and must don his armor and protect the world.

The comic debuted in the 1960s, and Iron Man's origin involved Stark being a prisoner of the Viet Cong. The movie version will be set in today's geopolitical climate.

Budgeted at more than $100 million, it marks the first feature film to be produced independently by Marvel Entertainment, which previously licensed its characters, such as "Spider-Man" and "X-Men," to other studios.

Marvel president of production Kevin Feige said the filmmakers looked for the best actor to embody the character.

"The Marvel characters are not just about how high they jump or how fast they fly, they're about their character flaws," Feige said. "They're about their inner demons. They're about the struggles that they go through between being a man and being a hero."

Downey, who has battled his fair share of inner demons, worked hard to get the role, getting in shape and even growing a goatee like the one Stark sports in the comic books.

"In every casting announcement we've done, people in their mind's eye have their own view of it and let us know about it. We're used to it," Feige said. "The point is, we looked at everybody, and we found the best person for the role. It's as confident a casting move as we've ever done. The proof will be in the pudding, but he is Tony Stark."

Downey returns to theaters on November 10 in the Diane Arbus biopic "Fur" opposite Nicole Kidman.

Bertie Wooster · Post by **Bertie Wooster** » 2006-09-29 11:59am

Well, Tony Stark has battled alcoholism so casting Robert Downy Jr isn't too off the mark in that regard. However, Stark is supposed to be a super-genius billionaire industrialist and I'm not sure Robert Downy Jr will translate well into that particular facet of Stark's character.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2006-09-29 02:15pm

Downy is a brilliant actor, despite his personal problems. His performance in 'Charlie' was great, and I have faith in him to research the role. Remember how nobody thought Keaton could be batman? He's #2 on my list of favorite movie batmen.

SCRawl · Post by **SCRawl** » 2006-09-29 02:47pm

I was about to say pretty much what CaptainChewbacca said, so I'll change mine up a little. Downey can play just about any role that can be dreamed up, and Tony Stark won't be much of a stretch. I don't think much of Downey's personal life, but the guy can act. The real question is whether or not he can finish the film before going on his next binge.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-10-01 11:30am

I wonder if they're going to go with the original version, or an updated version of the original (captured by terrorists instead of the Communists?), or just switch right over to the Ultimates version of his origin?

From the description, it sounds like one of the first two...too bad, really, I like the newer version of Stark.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2006-10-01 11:34am

What's the ultimates origin for Tony Stark?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-10-01 11:38am

Molyneux wrote:I wonder if they're going to go with the original version, or an updated version of the original (captured by terrorists instead of the Communists?), or just switch right over to the Ultimates version of his origin?

From the description, it sounds like one of the first two...too bad, really, I like the newer version of Stark.

That depends. Are we talking about the version with Orson Scott Card, in Ultimate Iron Man? If so. . .then simply no. Flat out fucking no. The original is much better in that it doesn't rely on genetic weirdness or giving Tony Wolverine level regeneration powers. In the original he was simply a highly intelligent human, which really helped set him apart from most other super powered heroes.

I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a mixture of the two to make things more modern, but leave the stupid super powers out of it. Those completely butcher Iron Man imo.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-10-01 03:11pm

General Zod wrote:
Molyneux wrote:I wonder if they're going to go with the original version, or an updated version of the original (captured by terrorists instead of the Communists?), or just switch right over to the Ultimates version of his origin?

From the description, it sounds like one of the first two...too bad, really, I like the newer version of Stark.
That depends. Are we talking about the version with Orson Scott Card, in Ultimate Iron Man? If so. . .then simply no. Flat out fucking no. The original is much better in that it doesn't rely on genetic weirdness or giving Tony Wolverine level regeneration powers. In the original he was simply a highly intelligent human, which really helped set him apart from most other super powered heroes.

I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a mixture of the two to make things more modern, but leave the stupid super powers out of it. Those completely butcher Iron Man imo.

You mean leave out the 'stupid super powers' like the mental link Mr. Stark now has with all of his armorsuits?

Post by **Zaia** » 2006-10-01 03:41pm

*moves to Fantasy*

Kon_El · Post by **Kon_El** » 2006-10-01 06:24pm

SCRawl wrote:I was about to say pretty much what CaptainChewbacca said, so I'll change mine up a little. Downey can play just about any role that can be dreamed up, and Tony Stark won't be much of a stretch. I don't think much of Downey's personal life, but the guy can act. The real question is whether or not he can finish the film before going on his next binge.

Or maby some quick script changes can acomidate even that. Just put a scene in where Tony is drinking 8 or 9 martinis.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2006-10-02 11:51am

Stofsk wrote:What's the ultimates origin for Tony Stark?

*Spoilers below*

Basically, he was born with neural tissue (the kind in the brain) throughout his entire body. This made him the uber-genius he is, but also put him in a constant state of pain, because of his sense of touch. At around the sametime, his dad was developing this blue goop that when put on a human, would make them effectively invulnerable. The stuff literally eats away anything that tries to pierce it. Anyways, when Tony was born, he was screaming his head off and appeared to the doctors to be in severe pain, but they couldn't figure out why. Suddenly, his dad come and put the goop on Tony and whamo, he stops crying. Anyways, he drinks so much because it helps dull the pain.

And because alcoholism isn't edgey enough anymore, they decide to give him a brain tumor the size of either a golf or tennis ball. The whole Iron Man deal is just his way of living out his last days in style.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2006-10-02 03:50pm

That's gotta be the worst Ultimates backround ever.

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2006-10-02 11:01pm

This, combined wtih a picture of an overweight War Machine in the recent "Wizard's" Halloween contest, is going to do wonders in harassing an Iron Man fan/friend of mine....

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-10-02 11:47pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:That's gotta be the worst Ultimates backround ever.

Eh, Orson Scott Card wrote it...it's actually a pretty nice read, though it doesn't actually have Tony in the Iron Man suit at ALL.

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2006-10-03 12:07am

Molyneux wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:That's gotta be the worst Ultimates backround ever.
Eh, Orson Scott Card wrote it...it's actually a pretty nice read, though it doesn't actually have Tony in the Iron Man suit at ALL.

Not until volume 2 at least, which is almost in the can, from what I understand.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-10-03 12:33am

JME2 wrote:
Molyneux wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:That's gotta be the worst Ultimates backround ever.
Eh, Orson Scott Card wrote it...it's actually a pretty nice read, though it doesn't actually have Tony in the Iron Man suit at ALL.
Not until volume 2 at least, which is almost in the can, from what I understand.

Nice! I'll keep an eye out for it.

Oh, also - UNlike Wolverine's healing ability, OSC went out of his way to make clear that Stark's regeneration follows the laws of physics. If he has to regrow muscle, he needs a LOT of protein and time to do so.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-10-03 02:14pm

Molyneux wrote:
Nice! I'll keep an eye out for it.

Oh, also - UNlike Wolverine's healing ability, OSC went out of his way to make clear that Stark's regeneration follows the laws of physics. If he has to regrow muscle, he needs a LOT of protein and time to do so.

It's still pretty stupid. One of the biggest points behind Stark was that he was just a regular, baseline human that happened to have an extremely high intellect. Sort of the peak of human intelligence as it were. Chalking it up to superpowers kinda trivialises that.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2006-10-03 02:35pm

Lets face it folks... IronMan was the Marvel answer to Batman at times.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2006-10-03 03:26pm

Actually, he was mostly an anti-communist fanboy. Daredevil might be closer to Batman.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2006-10-03 05:27pm

Molyneux wrote: Eh, Orson Scott Card wrote it...it's actually a pretty nice read, though it doesn't actually have Tony in the Iron Man suit at ALL.

IMO Ultimate Ironman easily ranks as the worst Ultimate publication and I’m something of a moderate, most fans consider it an abomination.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-10-03 08:00pm

General Zod wrote:
Molyneux wrote:
Nice! I'll keep an eye out for it.

Oh, also - UNlike Wolverine's healing ability, OSC went out of his way to make clear that Stark's regeneration follows the laws of physics. If he has to regrow muscle, he needs a LOT of protein and time to do so.
It's still pretty stupid. One of the biggest points behind Stark was that he was just a regular, baseline human that happened to have an extremely high intellect. Sort of the peak of human intelligence as it were. Chalking it up to superpowers kinda trivialises that.

And yet, Iron Man HAS a damn superpower in the non-Ultimate comics now, and I haven't heard a massive outcry about them messing with the original version.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-10-03 08:37pm

Molyneux wrote:
General Zod wrote:
Molyneux wrote:
Nice! I'll keep an eye out for it.

Oh, also - UNlike Wolverine's healing ability, OSC went out of his way to make clear that Stark's regeneration follows the laws of physics. If he has to regrow muscle, he needs a LOT of protein and time to do so.
It's still pretty stupid. One of the biggest points behind Stark was that he was just a regular, baseline human that happened to have an extremely high intellect. Sort of the peak of human intelligence as it were. Chalking it up to superpowers kinda trivialises that.
And yet, Iron Man HAS a damn superpower in the non-Ultimate comics now, and I haven't heard a massive outcry about them messing with the original version.

He didn't start off with it, plus my knowledge of regular Iron Man continuity is relatively minimal. Though I did enjoy Ultimates version of Iron Man before OSC got ahold of him. If you're going to make a movie based on the original, then the idea's to keep it true to the original. If they're basing it off Ultimate Iron Man, then it'll suck ass.