Talk:Iron Man (2008 film)/Archive 4

Iron Man III
I was just going to make this edit, but I thought it might end up reverted. Anyway, regarding the Sequels section; wouldn't it make sence to leave out the s, considering the section no longer says anything about Favreau planning for a trilogy (as the section did before the film's release) or anything about a third film. 96.235.16.217 (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Introduction details
I don't believe development and marketing details are important enough to be at the start of the article, per WP:LEAD. See Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Gone with the Wind, etc. User:Alientraveller disagrees. Comments? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Citizen Kane and GWTW aren't GAs yet. They fail WP:LEAD among other things. And contradictorily, the FA Casablanca's lead does mention the film's development! Alientraveller (talk) 19:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Regarding Casablanca, it's mentioned because it's notable that it was a rush job that worked so remarkably well. Here, there's nothing particularly unusual about its development and especially marketing, plus it's discussed in a lot of detail. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

¡Stop it OK!
In the intro it says "particularly praising Downey's performance" ¡and in the Dark Knight it only says "It was greeted with positive reviews upon release" ¡seriously, whose's performance do you think it was more positively received, Downey's or Ledger's, ¡¿has Downey won or at least been nominated to a lot of awards and golden globes for this movie?! ¡I know Ledger did! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.12.156.120 (talk) 20:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Whatever, it's sourced. Alientraveller (talk) 21:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The mention of the positive reception for Downey's performance helps to better characterize the reviews. Deleting it because of the way a different article about a different film is worded is not appropriate, as we are not comparing the two actors in any way. (I've tweaked the text slightly to say "mostly positive", as some of the reviews take issue with aspects of the film while saying Downey helps to overcome them.) --Ckatz chat spy  00:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Iron Man 2
Is it time Iron Man 2 got its own article? Production is underway, the cast is pretty much all set. The information we have for it is starting to get a little lengthy for a section in the original Iron Man article. --76.90.29.62 (talk) 15:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I asked Erik whether the posting of a photo on Favreau's twitter account of him on set was enough for Iron Man II to meet WP:NFF. Filming will start in April, but I am surprised we haven't heard more about locations (aside from Manhattan Beach). Alientraveller (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Adventure movie
User andreybainas has been removing the adventure category from this article. From what I know, Iron Man has adventure scenes, such as that in the cave and that where he chases two airplanes. Discuss here if you think the adventure category should stay or not. Tom Lennox (talk) 11:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The tag 'superhero film' will do. It's not really an adventure romp like Indiana Jones, the film has a quirky sense of humour but it's more dramatic and espionage based. The 2000s action films category is fine. Alientraveller (talk) 17:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Please note that this genre talk should be kept to a minimum and that if it comes down to edit-wars (which it has) that such suggestions like this fall under WP:OR. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
The page currently contains vandalism. I would remove it myself if it wasn't because I'm on a cellphone and I would need to look up the quotes that have been altered. If anyone cares to fix it, they'll easily find it by looking up the words "vagina" and "penis". --uKER (talk) 06:11, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Vandalism was reverted. In most cases going to to the History and choosing undo is the easiest way to revert vandalism. If it is more subtle and editors keep making changes to the rest of the article it may need to be reverted by copying from an old version but in this case it looks like it was simple undo. -- Horkana (talk) 13:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Not Critically Biased?
Yes, we are all aware that Iron Man was a critically acclaimed movie, however; what about the negative criticism over Iron Man? Certainly it did something wrong? I do not believe it is fair to give Wikipedia readers only positive critiqueing when there was also negative criticism as well. If there that many sentence for all the good things about Iron Man there's room for some bad things. That's just my oppinion. Also I believe that Roger Ebert gave this movie four stars perhaps you could include that in the article as well? I don't know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.139.109 (talk) 22:45, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Cast section formatting
I just noticed that the section is currently formatted more along the lines of a "Casting" prose type section but that the opening sentence of each paragraph is written more like one of our bullet pointed cast sections. I wasn't sure which way to go in fixing it; add bullets or fix the sentences? Suggestions? Millahnna (talk) 21:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Resource
The site for the creative director, at the time of the company that did the opening Iron Man credits has them on his site, in case we ever need a quick check of them: http://www.dannyyount.com/movies/qt_iron_man.html --Tenebrae (talk) 15:21, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Jarvis
There is an ongoing discussion at the Edwin Jarvis talk page regarding the way we refer to Tony Stark's computer system. Could I please ask for your views on the matter? Thanks. drewmunn talk 10:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Page move?
Given the existence of Iron Man (1931 film) and the recent updates to WP:NCF and WP:PDAB regarding precision of disambiguation, this page should be moved to Iron Man (2008 film), no? -Fandraltastic (talk) 21:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * What's the difference now? Does this film not count as the primary topic?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah the change appears to be that if there's any disambiguation in the title, it's by definition not a primary topic, and the disambiguation should be as precise as needed. For example, since Psycho (film) had a disambig in its title, it was not a primary topic (despite being far more notable than its remake), and it was moved to Psycho (1960 film). -Fandraltastic (talk) 21:44, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Per the new guideline, Iron Man (2008 film) would be correct but it hardly seems helpful.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually there's Iron Man (1951 film) too, which was missing from the disambiguation page. -Fandraltastic (talk) 22:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I was going to be bold and move it, but the page is protected against that. Please see the discussion below.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 12:15, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:26, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Iron Man (film) → Iron Man (2008 film) – Per the updated policy at WP:PDAB, WP:NCF, and the above discussion.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 12:15, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Support per the newly implemented policy. "Iron Man (film)" is still an ambiguous term on its own; "Iron Man" is what is the primary topic. Other topics sharing the same name, by the nature of having disambiguation terms attached, are secondary and need to be disambiguated from each other. For similar precedent, there was a resounding consensus to move Psycho (film) to Psycho (1960 film) and Independence Day (film) to Independence Day (1996 film). Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 13:24, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support (I thought WP:NCF already had this policy written before WP:PDAB was clarified). In ictu oculi (talk) 14:20, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:PDAB and WP:NCF -Fandraltastic (talk) 16:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support, since there are other films titled Iron Man. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment, (MichaelQSchmidt moved page Iron Man (film) to Iron Man (2008 film): per WP:NCF) 01:19, 16 June 2013. Such a move is really not constructive in the middle of an RM. Zarcadia (talk) 03:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.


 * Comment should be fixed to point to the diambiguation page -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 06:42, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. There's about 1,600 links that will have to be fixed now. It sounds like a huge amount of work. What's the point? I don't see any advantage to the new title. Kauffner (talk) 13:43, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The advantage is that the old title was incorrect.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 17:51, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks to for updating the links! Much appreciated. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:23, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

arc reactor question
Why when Obidiah took Tony's arc reactor was Stark dying? I mean the way I understood things, the arc reactor was there to keep shrapnel bits from migrating to vital organs, but near the beginning of the film, that was mentioned to take weeks, not minutes, and in any case, restoring the magnetic field would not reverse any damage, simply stop it from getting worse. Is this a plot hole, or did I miss something?

Drama —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.125.0.97 (talk) 22:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)


 * In one hand drama, yes. But also: Comedy. The removal of the magnet by Pepper Potts doesn't make any sense, since that magnet must already have been removed by the doctor building the (magnetic) arc reactor into Starks chest. 178.197.235.33 (talk) 22:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

As far as I got from the film story line, the arc reactor powers a magnegtic field ( along with other things) to keep the [ferromagnetic] shrapnels from reaching Stark's heart and/or interfering with the heart elctrical impulses and its operation. This is quite believable. So I guess when Obidiah took Tony's arc reactor from his chest all it does is to agravate the heart instabilities. He wouldn't die right away, but he will in short order. The only thing I found ridiculous is, as a genius weapon designer, Stark designed the interface of the miniturized arc reactor with fiddling wire connectors! Good for the movie drama, but really, really criminally stupid of him for such design. God, first year engineering graduates can design something much better than that, considering his life is at stake. A lot can happen with people fumbling hoplessly to connect the reactor (Miss Pot)...but, as I said, 10 for the movies, 0 for a critical design.Life is short, but the years are long! (talk) 20:08, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, if you wanna talk about realism, then this: The removal of the arc reactor would't have done any harm in such a short time, because it needs some time until the shrapnels would have reached his heart. If not, the second arc reactor wouldn't have been able to save his heart since it would have been immediately destroyed by the shrapnels. So therefore the only explanation is: drama. And comedy. 178.197.235.33 (talk) 22:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * And in the following films, it is revealed the arc reactor was giving off radiation that was killing Stark. If it were me, I think I would have replaced the power supply with one more mundane, like a Metal-H type battery.  Maybe it needed to be recharged often, but would not be killing him.  Even better, design a Nd type permanent magnet which would not need a power supply.  Oh well, needed for the story...  Jokem (talk) 22:33, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Pending Change Revert
In realtion to the recent pending change "09:14, 8 June 2014 188.26.38.66 (→‎Pre-production: Elon Musk is not Tony Stark! Tony Stark was created before Elon was even born, lol.)", I have reverted this change. The text did not say that Elon Musk was Tony Stark, but that the director of the film took inspiration from Elon as to how Tony Stark should be in the films. - Rich (MTCD) T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 11:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Elon Musk inaccuracy
Elon was not the inspiration for how Tony was portrayed in the movie despite what Rich thought, nor was Elon the base for Tony Stark the character.

The actual comics have Tony being a womanizer, light headed kind of guy and easy to like.

That portrayal is also a standard for Robert Downey Jr, he does a very similar character for his Sherlock Holmes performance too, that's just him.

Now back to facts:

My reason for editing is there's been lots of confusion on the Elon Musk involvement matter with the actual movie. Some novice editors in the media are repeating info from the Wikipedia Iron Man 2008 page but interpreting it as the Movie being based on Elon Musk actually, not Tony Stark from the comics. The wording used on the page set up that interpretation and it's hard to put it on the editors only. My take is whoever edited the page was repeating the media as well without fact checking.

Examples: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/elon-musk-its-always-the-quiet-ones-9506963.html

"creators of the Iron Man films used Mr Musk as the basis for Tony Stark, the billionaire playboy, industrialist and engineer who creates a flying jetsuit."

Actual Reality, from Wikipedia, page Iron Man, Iron_Man " Lee based this playboy's looks and personality on Howard Hughes,[7] explaining, "Howard Hughes was one of the most colorful men of our time. He was an inventor, an adventurer, a multi-billionaire, a ladies' man and finally a nutcase."[8] "Without being crazy, he was Howard Hughes," Lee said."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man

That above is the creator of Tony Stark speaking fyi. Now, if you noticed in the movie, Tony's father is named Howard Stark in honor of Howard Hughes too. To make it flat out obvious. Elon's actual involvement was to offer SpaceX's location for filming the Hammer Drones being built by the Russian villain (The all White Factory location). For that he was offered a cameo in the movie, that cameo is being interpreted as a confirmation for the above mentioned misinformation. Favreau himself, the movie director, is confirming that here with a tweet. ( https://twitter.com/Jon_Favreau/status/12546669014941696 ) As you can notice in many of those article's comments, coutless die hard comics and movies fans comment complaining of the same Tony Stark error and trying to correct the media that in fact the movie is based on Tony Stark, the comics character, drunken billionaire Playboy who built suits, or, Howard Hughes - Not Elon Musk who wasn't even born when the character was created. Tony Stark was, as you can see, based on Howard Hughes, a billionaire womanizer who built and flew planes and was a big movie producer too. He was a real person and he flew a lot in the planes he built, he flew them himself and set records. A movie was done on him before as well, with Di Caprio in "The Aviator". All of this info is on Marvel's sites as well. I think it's not just misinformation from Wiki but offensive to Stan Lee, being the father of those Movies' stories and of the character. A better mention would be to move this from the 2008 page and add it to the Iron Man 2 page, saying however that the Hammer Industries facilities were filmed at SpaceX, for which Elon was also offered a cameo in the movie. That is Elon's sole relationship with the movie character. RDJ's acting style is his own, he's not doing an Elon Musk impression.

Actually in Iron Man 3, if you watch at the beginning Tony is training with that karate wood thing, that Bruce Lee used too. RDJ is in real life a Bruce Lee fan and has a clothing line dedicated to him...

So the movies are based more on Robert than anyone else's style. I take it it's obvious to all of us that Tony Stark doesn't have slow speech and doesn't nod as much as Elon..

Let's get this moved to Iron Man 2 and setting the record clear for good on this.

TonyStarkContributor (talk) 18:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * First welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for engaging in discussion. However the current version of the article does not state that Stark is based on Musk but rather the filmmakers looked to Musk for real-life inspiration for their version of the character. This information is cited to an article written by Jon Favreau himself and published in Time, a highly reliable source.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:17, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

That article, citing, does not say they took inspiration for their version of it.

"When I was trying to bring the character of genius billionaire Tony Stark to the big screen in Iron Man, I had no idea how to make him seem real."

Link for others: http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1984685_1984745_1985495,00.html

That article says Favreau didn't know how to make it seem real, and they basically looked at an entrepreneur to make the tech-nerdy side more real. There is no such thing as a new version mentioned or their own version which you speak of, as a matter of fact, their version is the one delivered by the comics as well. Accurately. Favreau does not imply what you're saying and that you've written on the wikipedia page.

May I ask but are you a special fan of Elon? You seem to want to deliberately spread misionformation with your own twist. I thought wikipedia was pretty professional, which I'm sure it's not the case for everyone.

TonyStarkContributor (talk) 19:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * You got me. I am Elon Musk, editing Wikipedia is how I spend my free-time. But the matter of fact is that the article is not implying what you think. It states that Favreau and Downey looked to Musk (ahem... me) for inspiration to make the character more real, i.e. relatable, which is verified by the source. It does not state that I, Elon Musk, am the basis for the character.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:04, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Also in case you forgot, Inspiration: "5. A person, object, or situation which quickens or stimulates an influence upon the intellect, emotions or creativity."
 * --TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:14, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Do you ever read or just troll?

Someone actually read what Favreau is saying this guy is delusional. I have quoted them, word by word. You keep saying inspiration which they never say, you said to make the character relatable, they never said that. Why not quote the guys instead of posting your sexual fantasies on a Wiki article page?

I take it you like Elon more than you like Wikipedia haha.

TonyStarkContributor (talk) 20:17, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Quoting the current Wikipedia on Iron Man 2008, and Favreau.

In case you have trouble finding your way around the site.

From Jon Favreau's Time Article (http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1984685_1984745_1985495,00.html) ' When I was trying to bring the character of genius billionaire Tony Stark to the big screen in Iron Man, I had no idea how to make him seem real. Robert Downey Jr. said, "We need to sit down with Elon Musk." He was right. '

Now let's quote your edit on Wikipedia:

"Favreau and Downey looked to Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX and Tesla, for inspiration for the film depiction of Tony Stark in order to "make him seem real".[52]"

Now where does Favreau say Elon Musk was the inspiration for the depiction of Tony Stark? All I read was they looked at how to make Tony seem real - which it makes sense because Elon is an entrepreneur.

Wouldn't it be less sensationalist and more correct to say, Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX and Tesla helped Favreau and Downey make the character seem more real.

Notice how helped is the keyword there, lots more different than inspiration, muse, or other pre-puberty sensationalist words. This is not TheInfoWars channel buddy.

Can we get an editor who is over 13 years old in here? Does Jimmy Wales himself need to come down to knock some sense into you?

TonyStarkContributor (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * So you say (and I am quoting you now) that "they looked at how to make Tony seem real - which it makes sense because Elon is an entrepreneur." In other words, Musk was an influence on Favreau's creativity. That my friend is inspiration by definition. And as for your suggestion, the article does not state that Musk played an active role in the process, so we cannot say that he "helped".--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * TonyStarkContributor, you are wildly misinterpreting what is meant by inspiration in this case. Obviously the character is based on the character as written by Stan Lee.  But, as with all adaptations, the creators of the film  stil had to craft their version of the character into a real seeming person.  They looked to a real life person with similar qualities to what they were trying to convey to do this.  Millahnna (talk) 21:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Now trying to find loopholes for your messed up perception? You just dumped everything you said for saying entrepreneur = Tony Stark?

Sir, your concept of inspiration is as wide as the gap between the times article and what you made of it.

Hopeless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyStarkContributor (talk • contribs) 21:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

TonyStarkContributor (talk) 21:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

You are the reason aliens if real would never talk to us, yep you did it.

All they have to do is check Wikipedia which is as delusional as to believe a comics character depicted in a movie was somewhat morphed into Elon Musk all while being exactly how the comics made it. Schizophrenic much?

Does Elon Musk have a beard and gets drunk womanizing girls?

Last time I checked he doesn't do either and is married (divorced) with more kids than you can count.

You guys would make Tony Stark look like a burger flipping nerd.

It is true I guess, Wikipedia did turn into Fox News dropping sensationalist words without actually pulling the head out their back first lol.

Ever tried Google? https://www.google.com/search?q=tony+stark+comics&espv=2&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=kSiWU7XdEKOP7AahtIHYAw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=955

It's sad because I can totally see you guys' fucking up at lots of other stuff with this kind of attitude.

TonyStarkContributor (talk) 21:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * As with everyone else here TonyStarkContributor, you are misinterpreting this statement. The filmmakers used Elon Musk as inspiration for their version of Tony Stark, because they wanted to make the character and his characteristics that Stan Lee created in the 1960s, more "real" for audiences in 2008. So they looked to an actual billionaire entrepreneur, inventor, and investor of our time, to base, again, their interpretation of the character for the film. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Also, how about some civility there TonyStarkContributor.  I realize you're frustrated; I often am too when I'm misinterpreting something to a similar extreme.  But there's no reason to get all Summer's Eve about it.  Millahnna (talk) 22:31, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid you guys missed the reason of my mentioning of this, or I forgot to mention it.

Because of Wikipedia's info on this, all newspapers interpret it (not me) as Iron Man being based on Elon Musk, not the Iron Man character and comic book Stan Lee created decades ago for Marvel.

The story and character was actually created by Stan Lee before Elon Musk was even born and I hope we all know that.

Failure of Wikipedia to mention this though and the generality of the word inspiration, allows for that misinformation to happen, as the movie being based on Elon Musk. That's the wording everyone is using word for word btw and they look here for confirmation.

The media is not known to refrain from getting more attention and blowing things out of proportion.

That's why you guys owe it to everyone to be sharp and make it clear.

I suggest you guys google the keywords Elon Musk Iron Man to see how the real world interprets the Wikipedia info currently here. That's why I asked for clarification and it's your responsibility to be sharp.

I am lazy myself at times but I thought it was a nice gesture to say it was Stan Lee's work and not some dreamed up overnight depiction of Elon Musk..

The man (Stan Lee) is kind of a legend having created every single Marvel character you guys probably like too. ;) TonyStarkContributor (talk) 19:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

A version could be: "Favreau and Downey looked to Elon Musk, in order to make the character seem more "real", while Tony Stark was based on Stan Lee's (name linked to Stan Lee's Wiki) Iron Man. Downey and Musk both live in California and fairly close.[52]"

That adds more details and insight too while not taking away from the current info. Downey lives in Venice, California and is pretty close to Elon's home.

109.100.224.221 (talk) 19:40, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


 * The article already mentions that Lee co-created Iron Man in a couple of places. This article is about the film, for a complete history of the character please see Iron Man.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

You said nothing related to the issue all while making it sound important Triplethreat.

109.100.224.221 (talk) 19:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Tony, I believe I have said all that needs to be said on this issue. Also please remember to sign in, so you are not falsely accused of violating WP:Sock puppetry.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm guessing misinformation is your cup of tea. Not mine.

Isn't it funny Favreau (the actual movie director) never talked about inspiration or depiction on the Time.com article, but just the making the character real part, yet you seem to dream words neither him nor Downey have said? You might want a second opinion on this.

Thank you for your "help" here. TonyStarkContributor (talk) 09:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * You have three users stating an opinion, that equates to consensus for what is currently on the page. If you are still failing to see that we are in no way saying Stark (the comic character) was created with influence from Musk, then I highly suggest you just move on from this. We have accurately represented the information from the Time article and you continue to believe that our accuracy of information portrayed is being misused by media (which is not our fault) and is stated wrong, which as it is, is not. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

The sequel section
Is there a reason the sequel section doesn't include the Avengers films? Aside from an WP:EASTEREGG link in the plot section (which I removed), there's no mention of those movies on this page... Argento Surfer (talk) 13:35, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Its mentioned that film is connected to the much larger Marvel Cinematic Universe but instead listing every film in that series, we just list the Iron Man films.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Additionally, all of those "Avengers films" (ie Thor's, Cap's, The Avengers) are not sequels to this film. They just exist in the same universe. The only true sequels are Iron Man 2 and 3. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:10, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean to suggest adding Thor or GotG, just the other films featuring Iron Man. Just because they're not titled Iron Man 2.5 doesn't mean they don't fit the definition of sequel. I guess you could watch IM2 and IM3 without losing much in between, but that's not true for the Thor or Cap lines. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:21, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Its been discussed before and agreed that the sequel section should be limited to follow up films, instead of the character. Perhaps a further information link at the top of the section to Iron Man in other media would suffice.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:37, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you happen to remember where that discussion took place? Argento Surfer (talk) 18:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure, but it might not have addressed Iron Man specifically but one of the other films and applied across the MCU.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll look around. The shared movie universe is a rare concept, but off the top of my head a close comparison would be the Freddy vs. Jason movie. The Friday the 13th (1980 film) includes the crossover movie in it's sequel section, and the A Nightmare on Elm Street page includes the crossover in the lead (there is no sequel section). Aside from the MCU, are there any other examples of a crossover film not being included in a list of sequels? Argento Surfer (talk) 20:27, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The Alien (film), Predator (film), Anaconda (film), and Lake Placid (film) pages all list their crossovers in their sequel section and/or their leads. Argento Surfer (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the difference here is that the MCU is so big, still growing, and has more than just big crossovers (Hulk in Iron Man 3, all the people crossing over into Civil War, etc.). I think it will be best for these sequel sections if we just had a further information link to the list of MCU films on top of the actual sequels. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:18, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't hurt to have a see also at the top of each, linking to the MCU films page and the character's in other media article or film section. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:04, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Jeff Bridges & Robert Downey Jr Helped Re-Write Iron Man During Filming
As quoted here: http://www.cbr.com/jeff-bridges-robert-downey-jr-helped-re-write-iron-man-during-filming Kailash29792 (talk)  21:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * They didn't re-write the film, they just improvised many of their lines, and came up with different versions of scenes themselves as they went along. If we don't have anything about that here, then we should add something, but this isn't the same as people being hired to give the script a re-write during filming. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * We sort of do at the end of the filming section, but I was thinking of adding a bit of what Bridges said. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've added some stuff, and also gave the rest of the page a bit of a once over. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Critics Consensus
Please update the rotten tomatoes critical consensus for Iron Man (2008). It now reads, "Powered by Robert Downey Jr.'s vibrant charm, Iron Man turbo-charges the superhero genre with a deft intelligence and infectious sense of fun."

Feel free to verify, however please update it immediately. Obsolete information should not stay long on these entries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.51.43.50 (talk) 10:29, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I have updated it.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iron_Man_(2008_film)&diff=848798930&oldid=848204456] Odd that Rotten Tomatoes changes it 10 years later. They still had the old consensus in May. The reference did say "Retrieved July 19, 2015". I also updated the date. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:34, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

commercial
"Jon Favreau was set to direct a commercial for the fast-food chain" - did he? This seems out of date. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I can't seem to see find evidence it happened one way or the other, but I can update the wording if necessary. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:32, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * If it didn't happen, it doesn't seem worth including. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:04, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know if it didn't though. It may have, but being 10 years ago, my quick google search didn't seem to bring up any articles or videos. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:16, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

IMAX
Am I to understand that what it says in the theatrical section, that the film was rereleased in IMAX, is incorrect? If so, I will agree that the category should be removed. Otherwise, it should be kept even if the film wasn’t originally released in IMAX. -- Puzzledvegetable |💬|📧|📜 16:44, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Comic Con
Favreau wrote an article about his various experiences at Comic Con over the years. About the early efforts to trying to promote Iron Man in 2006 he said The only thing I had to announce as it related to the plot of the film was that the Mandarin was set to be the villain. Anyone who has seen Iron Man knows that this was not the case, and I learned a valuable lesson: Do, don't say. Even the best-intentioned bolus of information is more likely than not to fizzle into nonexistence before anything is ever accomplished. Walk softly and carry a big stick. I'm glad the fans forgave me for that snafu, and I wasn't about to repeat the mistake.

I was going to try and incorporate that into the Production section, mentioning that the film promised the Mandarin as the villain even though that never happened. But thinking about it more it might be better to use it as a way to expand the Marketing section of the article.

Closer to release date, Favreau goes on describe what it was like to promote the film in 2007 (jump to the section of the article subtitled "2007 Iron Man (The Hook)") It is fair to argue that a favorable response at Comic-Con can be a false positive as often as not, but all I can say anecdotally is that I experienced a sea change there that translated in a very real way to the success of the film.

I thought it was an interesting and insightful source that could be added to the article in some way. I might come back around and do it myself eventually but if anyone is interested in using that article about Comic Con to improve the Marketing section or something else then please do go ahead. -- 109.79.184.96 (talk) 03:59, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I've added the article into source some content, but didn't include some of these quotes as they are superfluous to what needed to be sourced. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No need to directly use the quotes I mentioned above, I was quoting directly because it seemed the easiest way to highlight what I thought were key points. What Favre1fan93 has added works well. I might have added more about Favreau firmly believing that Comic Con contributed in a "very real way to the success of the film", but I'm glad the source has been put to good use. -- 109.78.211.204 (talk) 06:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Script changes
A year (or two) ago I grabbed an online copy of the original Iron Man script and like said it was almost as if there was no script due to the improvisation so there are a lot of dramatic differences.

These include:
 * The Dubai scene which was filmed but removed from the movie, but that has already been noted here.
 * Stane is throughout referred in the climax to as the Dynamo instead of Iron Monger.
 * Of course this refers back to how it was originally going to be Crimson Dynamo, although they obviously removed the crimson prefix because the suit is silver.
 * An extended version of the scene where Obadiah steals the "Ark" Reactor from Tony.
 * Now onto the actual original post-credits scene: Right after Tony admits that he is Iron Man it writes CUE MUSIC, and then it cuts to the next scene - this clearly implies that this would be the post-credits scene - where Tony and Rhodey design the War Machine Armor.
 * This also includes some other deleted scenes which are available on Blu Ray/DVD discs.

This was in 2007 and presumably before Samuel L. Jackson was cast as Nick Fury. I think that some of these pre-changes could be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.160.115.63 (talk) 01:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * We would need evidence of that. Can you point to that script available online? El Millo (talk) 01:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Two links sharing the same script and as a person who downloaded a PDF copy I can assure you this is probably enough of a source.
 * I think we might need a secondary reliable source discussing or addressing the changes from script to screen. Otherwise I believe it would be original research. Pinging for input. El Millo (talk) 02:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Have these sites uploaded the script legally? I'm removing them with this edit and having the info redacted per WP:CRD (the two sites were screnplaysandcripts.com and scriptslug.com). If so, which it does not appear that they are, the best we could do is include one as an external link. As Facu-el Millo said, we'd need third-party sources discussing these differences. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:45, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with El Millo we need a secondary reliable source to discuss any changes that were made. Any differences that we notice ourselves would be WP:OR.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

https://www.amazon.ca/Phase-One-Iron-Alex-Irvine/dp/031625634X Well here is Phase One: Iron Man book based on the movie and while the similarities to the script seem very minor, here is some of the content I found:

-During the plane scene, Tony insultingly refers to Rhodey's military uniform as a straitjacket, similar to the screenplay, although Rhodes doesn't find the plane to be automated without a pilot, and here he decides to just sit with Tony and standing up and leaving.

-In the screenplay, Obadiah brings a box of pizza and a resignation letter before taking the Arc Reactor from Tony's heart. While in the book the scene is nearly the same as the movie, when Rhodes comes to help Tony he uncovers a deep dish pizza box.

-In the script, Stane's suit is created with use of some Sampson cluster machine, and in the novel Obi stands next to the Sampson machine that helped create it when he inserts the arc reactor.

-Though not in the actual movie, Tony apparently use tinsel boxes with lasers (?) or something like that when in the cave to give the impression that him and Yinsen are working on the Jericho missile. It is scripted and I'm pretty sure it wasn't ever in the movie.

-Tony's Arc Reactor is sometimes referred to as an RT heart (RT means Repulsor Technology). Just like in the screenplay.

-Some deleted scenes from the script, such as Tony trying to use a gun during his Afghan ambush, him and Rhodey having a discussion in the bathroom in Las Vegas over his absence during the award presentation, and in the same scene Pepper appears and is introduced in that very scene. Along with Rhode crashing Tony's car into Stane during the bus scene in the climax, and similarly the deleted scene where Obadiah and Tony begin collapsing into the large Reactor where Tony tries to 'save' him.

That's all (at least I think) is what adapted because since the novelization was made in 2014 I don't think that a script would plagiarize a book that came out 7 years later. As well there is this article (https://www.slashfilm.com/marvel-called-j-j-abrams-for-help-with-iron-man-3/) that JJ Abrams helped with the final act and I don't think that we should add him as one of the writers in the infobox but perhaps say he assisted in screenwriting somewhere in the production section. And I think that this novel was sold legally enoguh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.163.212.72 (talk) 13:52, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

So, will this be mentioned and/or written somewhere in the article itself?

CJ Entertainment was officially involved with Distributing Iron Man 1 and 2
To the wikipedia staff.

I don't know if anybody in America is aware, in South Korea, there's an Entertainment company called CJ Entertainment who actually distributed the film in South Korea, they also distributed the other films by Dreamworks like The Boss Baby, Trolls, Turbo, Shrek, Shrek 2, Shrek 3, Puss in Boots, Transformers, Cast Away, Megamind, Kung Fu Panda which I was very surprised by.

Anyways CJ Entertainment was involved with the first 2 Iron Man films Iron Man 2008 and Iron Man 2 2010. Here's a South Korean Iron Man poster for proof, just look at the bottom right corner and you'll see the CJ Entertainment Logo symbol.

That's why I tried to put CJ Entertainment in the category section before it got reverted. I also got this information at the Naver website at this link So what do you think, is this poster proof enough for CJ Entertainment to be accepted in Iron Man 2008 and Iron Man 2 2010? Let me know.

CJ Entertainment has its own article.: "From 2007 onwards, CJ Entertainment was the Korean distributor for films by Paramount Pictures, including films by DreamWorks which were bought by Paramount, as Universal Studios had taken over the Korean branch of its joint venture with Paramount, United International Pictures. CJ had already been distributing DreamWorks films for nearly a decade as a result of investing in the studio. It holds the highest market share among the distributors at 27.8 percent. " Dimadick (talk) 06:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Can we please add CJ Entertainment Category Catalog to Iron Man (2008) since it was on the Korean poster? CrosswalkX (talk) 16:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * WP:FILMDIST states:, i.e. the United States. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

US DoD's Changes
@Snooganssnoogans you reverted my edit on the article to add DoD's changes on the basis that you had claimed that Tom is a Russian journalist. What Proof do you have that he is who you claim him to be? If you show actual proof, I would have no issues to remove my edit but I cannot remove based on your word alone. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1052057737 Nvtuil (talk) 04:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Fixing old broken links
I want to fix the broken Roger Ebert film review links. But I cannot figure out how to edit them in the Reference Box. And I do not know if it is appropriate to just replace the old broken links with the new links. Do I have to leave the original archived link? Here are the new updated links: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/iron-man-2008 https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/the-best-films-of-2008-and-there-were-a-lot-of-them — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlSerafino (talk • contribs) 11:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Bibb, Tahir, Bettany, Gregg
The source used to source Bibb, Tahir, Bettany, and Gregg's roles,, does not mention any of those people. Was a different source used to source their roles in the past, or have they always been unsourced? InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Honestly, unsure. But I'm sure we can find a more modern source for them if needed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * For now, I've added failed verification tags. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:38, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Refs added. —El Millo (talk) 02:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks El Millo! InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:42, 6 December 2022 (UTC)