So did Rings from Iron Man 1....(spoilers)

So did Aldrich Killian control them too?
Yolando P.
05-10-2013 09:11 PM

Thread Replies

Please log in to participate in this forum.

John Weber

John Weber

If they really were the film does a rather poor job of illustrating that. Nothing in the film shows Killian interacting outside of his AIM circle villain-wise and never refers to having men like Raza's group do anything and all that. Thus it came off more to me in film being more along the lines to if a real world businessman were to pin thing on Al-Qaeda to keep people off of their trail regardless of whether or not that was intended. And even worse the film never bothers to even mention that the Ten Rings were the group that held Tony captive back during the first film. Seriously, it's nowhere. When talking about it with Rhodey it's as if they were any other bad guy and he doesn't treat it as any huge deal to him and talks about them in a very casual manner. And why does it seem to only become personal for him after Happy got caught in the explosion at the Chinese theater? (A plot point that regardless of whether or not Killian leads them is hard to justify) It's like if Joe Chill survived "Batman Begins" and went on to become something like a gang leader or crime lord in Gotham City. And during his tenure as Batman, Bruce would hear about him being at large in Gotham and yet treat him like any other adversary and not the man whose horrible crimes done to him put him down the path made him the man he became. The Ten Rings in effect taking that role for Tony Stark. The very people he became Iron Man to stop. Not to mention, if Killian is the leader of the Ten Rings (which I guess was confirmed) why the heck would they not play that into the 'creating your own demons' theme that Tony Stark talked about in the film's opening narration? Because if Killian indeed formed the Ten Rings, than he in fact has a lot to do with how Tony Stark is Iron Man and thus the adversary he has to contend with. (Stane may have been the one who ordered the hit, but it was the Ten Rings who executed it and decided to take him hostage rather than outright kill him as Stane intended) They could even play with the idea that they created each other as their own demons. (Though I still don't care for the idea of how Stark put Killian down the path to villainy. Would you really blame a guy for standing up somebody who came up to him in a party, when that person was hassling him to begin, and when the guy being hassled was already going somewhere with somebody else. They play it off as Tony being a jerk is what did it, but they should have Tony do something worse to a guy who didn't somewhat deserve whatever it is he did to begin with. But still the dynamic of them creating each other could have been played with) As I keep saying I don't think the film is a bad movie, but that is such a glaring flaw if you know what happened in the previous two. It could and should have been (even) more personal for Tony to go up against Killian if he indeed were the man who put together and lead the Ten Rings. (And Killian's relationship with them should have been better defined IMO)

Jun 4 - 01:55 AM

John Weber

John Weber

If they really were the film does a rather poor job of illustrating that. Nothing in the film shows Killian interacting outside of his AIM circle villain-wise and never refers to having men like Raza's group do anything and all that. Thus it came off more to me in film being more along the lines to if a real world businessman were to pin thing on Al-Qaeda to keep people off of their trail regardless of whether or not that was intended. And even worse the film never bothers to even mention that the Ten Rings were the group that held Tony captive back during the first film. Seriously, it's nowhere. When talking about it with Rhodey it's as if they were any other bad guy and he doesn't treat it as any huge deal to him and talks about them in a very casual manner. And why does it seem to only become personal for him after Happy got caught in the explosion at the Chinese theater? (A plot point that regardless of whether or not Killian leads them is hard to justify) It's like if Joe Chill survived "Batman Begins" and went on to become something like a gang leader or crime lord in Gotham City. And during his tenure as Batman, Bruce would hear about him being at large in Gotham and yet treat him like any other adversary and not the man whose horrible crimes done to him put him down the path made him the man he became. The Ten Rings in effect taking that role for Tony Stark. The very people he became Iron Man to stop. Not to mention, if Killian is the leader of the Ten Rings (which I guess was confirmed) why the heck would they not play that into the ?creating your own demons? theme that Tony Stark talked about in the film's opening narration? Because if Killian indeed formed the Ten Rings, than he in fact has a lot to do with how Tony Stark is Iron Man and thus the adversary he has to contend with. (Stane may have been the one who ordered the hit, but it was the Ten Rings who executed it and decided to take him hostage rather than outright kill him as Stane intended) They could even play with the idea that they created each other as their own demons. (Though I still don't care for the idea of how Stark put Killian down the path to villainy. Would you really blame a guy for standing up somebody who came up to him in a party, when that person was hassling him to begin, and when the guy being hassled was already going somewhere with somebody else. They play it off as Tony being a jerk is what did it, but they should have Tony do something worse to a guy who didn't somewhat deserve whatever it is he did to begin with. But still the dynamic of them creating each other could have been played with) As I keep saying I don't think the film is a bad movie, but that is such a glaring flaw if you know what happened in the previous two. (You cannot tell me that I could think of these things but a veteran and acclaimed writer like Shane Black couldn't.) It could and should have been more personal for Tony to go up against Killian if he indeed were the man who put together and lead the Ten Rings. (And Killian's relationship with them should have been better defined IMO)

Jun 4 - 12:01 AM

John Weber

John Weber

Anyone know why quotation marks come up as questions marks?

Jun 4 - 12:05 AM

Phillip H.

Phillip Hon

Yes, confirmed by Feige himself a while back.

The Mandarin (who for a time was going to be the main villain in the first film) has been a part of the Iron Man series from the beginning, albeit as the off-screen manipulator.

?A lot of this movie is about characters going back into the shadows for various reasons and characters who have been in the shadows coming out and into the light for the first time,? Feige says. ?It is Tony who, for various reasons, finds himself receding into the darkness. I don?t mean emotional darkness, I mean literally ducking out of the spotlight. And we?ll see other characters stepping up who have pulled strings from the background, starting to show their hand.?

May 12 - 10:00 AM

Phillip H.

Phillip Hon

The question marks were supposed to be quotation marks

May 12 - 10:01 AM

Landon McCullough

Landon McCullough

No. Killian just said that the Ten Rings was used by Mandarin. The Ten Rings were controlled by the bad guys in Iron Man 1. The Mandarin is the fake leader, since the real Ten Rings arent in the movie.

May 11 - 12:42 PM

Yolando P.

Yolando P

*Ten Rings

May 10 - 09:12 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile