Oh Baby… Iron Man 2 In IMAX And 3D?

Published 7 years ago by , Updated September 4th, 2012 at 8:38 am,

This will be my face if I get to watch Iron Man 2 in IMAX 3D

Oh man, oh man, oh man… I really hope Jon Favreau gets his way with this (and I’m betting he will!).

At a press conference promoting the Iron Man DVD (which you can win here) and the Blu-Ray version, Favreau talked a bit about Iron Man 2 – and boy did he have some stuff to say that will geek out fans of the first film!

At this point this is just talk and NOT confirmed – but my gut tells me that at least one of these, if not both will come true:

Director Jon Favreau wants to shoot Iron Man 2 at least partially in IMAX and would love to do it in 3D as well.

After seeing the IMAX footage of the The Dark Knight Favreau decided that he’d like to do the same for the next movie about our favorite Armored Avenger. Regarding 3D, he wants to do it. He talked about how cool it would be to see the armor in 3D on the big screen (SWEET!) but the limiting factor would be cost.

Regarding the new buzz catchphrase “dark superhero movie”: Favreau will have none of that. He said he’ll leave that to the Batman series and wants to keep Iron Man more of a light, fun franchise. There was also talk of the Mandarin and War Machine (the attack armor worn by Rhodey in the comics), but nothing specific. For more details head over to Collider.com.

Given that Iron Man earned $570 million worldwide and that the first sequel to superhero films tend to make close to the same as the first one, I don’t think that budget will be an issue when it comes to 3D. Especially given the fact that both the IMAX and the 3D angle tend to give a big boost to box office numbers.

So… is this awesome or is this awesome? icon smile Oh Baby... Iron Man 2 In IMAX And 3D?

Source: IESB and Collider (within seconds of each other!)

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I think Ironman 2 in IMAX will be freakin amazing! I never got the chance to see Dark Knight in IMAX because theres not one near me but I wish I did.

  2. Will the dvd be in 3D?, because that’s when I’ll see this movie.
    I will not support any 3D films,,,ever.
    Iron Man was fine in 2D…
    3D, just turns it into a gimmick.

    If this comes to pass that’s really too bad, the film will then be judged by the 3D effects and not the story.

  3. @790

    Dude, you don’t HAVE to see it in 3D. 3D movies also play in regular old 2D when they’re released.


  4. Well Dude, if they show it in 2D, I’m there, if its in 3D I’m not. :-)

    Most 3D films look afflicted without the glasses on…

  5. IMAX? Definitely!
    3-D? I don’t think so.

    I just can’t come around on 3-D movies. To me, they always come across as over-gimmicky. The last 3-D movie I saw was Superman Returns, and it didn’t do anything for me.

  6. Well just because a lot of movie makers use 3D as a gimmick does not mean that the filmmater is OBLIGATED somehow to do those gimmicks JUST BECAUSE it is in 3D.

    I love watching IMAX 3D documentaries. They don’t do the “who, this thing is coming at you” gimmick because most of the time it is just regularly filmed events, not CG. I like it because it feels like you’re there, so you’re not watching the film, you’re in it. I would love to feel like Iron Man was in front of me battling it out with some bad guy with War Machine by his side. Of course I wouldn’t want to REALLY be there because I might end up being collateral damage, but it’ll be nice to see it that way.

    So I don’t really understand your whole “anti-3D” attitude, I would understand an anti-gimmick attitude but the format doesn’t mean that it has to be gimmicky.

    There are plenty of regular 2D movies that are full of gimmicks, doesn’t mean you have to be against watching all 2D movies…

    We all know a movie doesn’t have to be in 3D to be full of gimmicks…

  7. Well that’s the prob Ken, with 3D, they shoot scenes to specifically jump out at you…

    Never, have I watched a film and said, “this sucks because its not jumping out at me”.
    Its my subjective opinion, obviously…
    But yeah I’ve never liked 3D films, and I’m not jumping on the 3D bandwagon ever…
    (IMO) the film veiwing experience works best in a 2D medium.

    Kofi, I love to read your articles but, Monster House and Beowulf are 2 films that I have no interest in… ;-)
    I do agree however that 3D works best for animation.
    Or what I call, “kid movies”.

  8. “light and fun”? so no demon in a bottle storyline I take it.

    We’ll probably see a little more of SHIELD, maybe secondary Avengers characters??? Welcome, Black Widow

  9. Naysayers of the 3-D movie, you should have seen MONSTER HOUSE. It was AWESOME in 3-D. Beowulf, not so much. IMO, 3-D is best reserved for animated fare.

  10. Um, 790, you’re missing the point. The whole making things jump out at you is a CHOICE of the INDIVIDUAL filmmaker. Just because a movie is being made for 3D doesn’t mean that they are somehow OBLIGATED to do that.

    As much as I hate repeating myself, I’ve seen plenty of IMAX 3D films that did not have a single thing jumping out at you. It doesn’t NEED to have that, and it’s better than watching it in 2D since you feel like the characters are out in front of you. Adds a sense of immersion.

  11. Well Ken J, that was an example, not my point.

    My point is that if the term 3D is in anyway attached to Iron Man2, I will wait for the dvd…

    3D, kills it for me, no matter what movie. ;-)

    I get plenty of immersion from just being there.

  12. @790

    Gotta agree with Ken J on this one. I am NOT a fan of the “poking the audience in the eye” effects of 3D. What I would like to see as it becomes mainstream is for the gimmicky aspects of it to go away, and it being used for the subtlety of bringing us into the movie.


  13. hmm… I wish Favrea would re-consider his anti-dark position there. Tony Stark has alot of darker storylines (drinky drinky anyone) and didn’t Rhodes wear his armour then get his own as part of that?

    Meh, Ironman is awesome either way

  14. i agree i think fav shouldn’t make it to light hearted the 1st one was good but more of a darker harder challenge for him would be good.

    about the 3d i wouldn’t mind seeing it as just being in imax made little difference in tdk besides the opening scene but switching from full screen to wide screen in the different shots wasn’t greatly different to watching it in normal.

  15. I am SOOOOOO glad that Favs is returning to do IM2. He did the first one PERFECTLY and I can tell that he wants to hit the ball out of the park again. I fully expect IM2 to be BETTER than IM, 3-D or no 3-D!!!

    3-D: VERY CAREFULLY and it should be a seperate version, you shouldn’t have to see it in 3-D.

    I think 3-d will ruin the chances of critics taking the film serious. When I hear 3-D, I think ‘for kids.’

    I know it isn’t always the case but it usually is…

  17. The reason why 3D films tend to do that jumping out at you gimmick is purely because it’s not mainstream. So they do see it as a gimmick. But my point, and it seems you keep missing it, is that it doesn’t HAVE to be. That is the result of the choices made by those individual filmmakers. I think once making movies in digital 3D becomes more of a “normal” thing, filmmakers will use that gimmick less and less and it’ll just become another tool to further immerse you into the story.

    But about the darker tone thing, I think they should keep IM slightly light. I don’t want it to be campy or corny, just not the whole try to make the audience so depressed they all want to mass suicide like TDK did toward the end. I loved IM because I was smiling and happy all through the movie. I left the theater in a great mood and felt like I was out doing something fun. Not a feeling I get very often from movies.

    What I do hate about the IM franchise is how fantastical the villains are. I’ve always found it weird how IM is one of the more realistic superheros since he depends on technology to get the job done but he’s still just human, yet they have some of the most outrageous villains.

    I guess that suit makes him so close to being invincible that the only villains that can last longer than 5 minutes would be something pretty big and incredible…

  18. @ Ken J

    Iron Man definitely has horrible Villians, they are OUT THERE. I think they used up the most believable one so… dare I say it’s on to the Mandarin? All the remaining villians will be very hard to adapt.

    There were no super-powers in IM, it was awsome!

    What if they made the Mandarin’s rings technology based in lieu of hocus pocus? Could we accept that?

    Ultimo is a freakkin alien right?

    So who does that leave? Whirlwind? Grey Gargoyle? That dude with the whip?

    I don’t know man… *crosses fingers* Jon Favreu has my faith for this one!

    To elablorate on my 3-D point…

    IMAX is like: “yeah this movie is so awsome you watch it HUGE!!!”

    3-D is like:”Eh… at least thing pop out at you…”

    Don’t focus on making a great 3-D film focus on making a great Iron Man film! Again!

  19. I know, maybe they will do something about a Mandarin and make him rely on technology instead of mystical powers…

    But about the 3D thing, you don’t HAVE to do that. You can simply make a great movie… that happens to be in 3D, those are the ones I like, and they do exist even if you naysayers don’t seem to think so.

  20. The Mandarin’s magical rings ARE technological artifacts from an advanced race anyway. I’m sure they’ll attribute those powers to some quantum-something or zeropoint energy.

    Iron Man in IMAX… I won’t miss that for the world!! In 3D? Well, it had better have plenty of cool flying scenes, lots of long-cut wide shots for action scenes, etc. to do justice to high-res and 3D screenings.

  21. they can use a more supernatural side to things since they may be bringing hulk into the frame with capt am and thor so there gonna have to explain it some how but thats the hard part how they’ll change it. they can still relate it back to technology same as the hulk a mistake of a formula or something like that what ever they do i just hope they do a good job, I’m sure fav will.

    still think he should have kept in the ghost face killah scene in with the beautiful babys cause that would have been money. lol

  22. I don’t think they’ll go supernatural. Favreau wants to keep things very grounded in the technological, and Jae Senn is right: the rings ARE technological, albeit from an alien race in the comics.