• Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    It was so stupid. Especially considering in real life an American oligarch in such a situation would do everything to not rock the the boat and exploit his American citizenship and financial status to get released (either via an exchange or giving the Taliban lots of money).

    It’s a super hero movie. Tony Stark is an idealized futurist. You’re oligarchs in the franchise are Justin Hammer or Obadiah Stane.

    • J-Bone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      That’s fair. I am just sharing my perspective. Keep in mind this was in 2008, when it just got released in cinemas and that was my initial gut-feeling reaction. Not sure who the other fellows are, but in my mind the Stark character was clearly an American oligarch.

      As I mentioned in my OP, for me positioning Minecraft’s popularity as being bad for the movie industry, while at the same time presenting Superman as a contribution to cinema seems a bit inconsistent.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Stane was the main villain of IM1. Hammer was one of the villains of IM2. Stark was an oligarch, but that’s part of his character arc. He wasn’t a good person in the beginning. That’s the point.

        As far as Minecraft and other popcorn flicks being bad for the industry, those types of movies have always existed.