It'll contain TIH. It has to.it's part of the continuity.

They'll replace TIH with Marvel One-Shot: The Consultant.

Does Robert Downey Jr. have something in his contract that says he must appear in all advertising material without Iron Man's helmet?

I think it's for name/face recognition.

What Bobba Fett said. Besides, the coverart to the multi-disc set of Iron Man and both releases of Iron Man 2 feature him with the helmet on. The whole appearance of the actors sans headgear seems to be a Disney/Marvel imposition for this movie (and Thor ).

If that is the actual disc breakdown them I'm in for the 3D set. I don't own a 3D set up yet, but this is one of the few movies I'm willing to future-proof - mostly for that blu-ray bonus disc.

I think the 3D and the 2D covers should have been switched, the 2D covers looks more 3D with the Shield being thrown and Iron Man's hand stretched straight out toward the viewer.

Plus I like the 3D cover better, it has all the characters in it, while the 2D only has 4 of the heroes on it. The 3D is just cooler in my opinion.

^ i think the idea is to make the cooler cover the most expensive one, to me the 3D versions of Thor and Captain America were classier than their 2D counterparts

The Widow is more suited to 3D

Good point, the studios will do anything to make the extra buck - really sad.

Not really they're in the business of making money. That said, the 3D cover actually sucks worse since it looks like a hastily slapped together mess (not that the other covers are much better). Heck, RDJ's head actually looks pasted on in the 3D cover.

It's the art they've been using in all their marketing materials.

I know. It doesn't change the fact that it looks like absolute amateur crap. It's like a kid's first time using photoshop. I can't believe someone actually got paid for it.

Now mind you, I don't know if that will ACTUALLY be the disc breakdown. That's just based on what Disney has done before with some of their 3D releases (again, Cars 2 and Pirates 4 come to mind).

Now if it does end up not having "exclusive" extras compared to the regular combo pack, I'll just op for that. I've got 2 Blu-Ray players (and both are 3D compatible), but I'm just not interested in watching movies at home in 3D (not to mention that my girlfriend isn't able to see the 3D effect anyways).

I don't know which copy of Cars 2 you own, but mine is five discs:

Disc 1: Blu-ray 3D.
Disc 2: Blu-ray 2D.
Disc 3: Blu-ray Bonus Material (exclusive to the 3D release).
Disc 4: DVD.
Disc 5: Digital Copy (exclusive to the 3D release).

Beauty and the Beast is the exact same layout too. However, the 2D and 3D versions of that title have the same bonus material on a separate disc.

John Carter, The Lion King, Tangled, and Tron: Legacy are all four-disc 3D sets that have the bonus material all on the 2D disc. So regardless if one purchases the standard Blu-ray+DVD release or the 3D combo pack, you get the same bonus material. The exact same applies to the 3D releases of Fright Night and Step Up 3D. Those two are the only Disney BDs I own where the DVD and Digital Copy share the same disc leaving it to be a three-disc set instead of four.

Well yeah at the end its a matter of opinion. They are both kinda cool but the 3D one has more details in it, buildings and crap on the back adding a little more depth to the scene. Its kinda like those old painted movie posters where there is a lot going on and it works as a representation of the feel of the movie rather than a screenshot of the cast.

I think the bigger question here is why would you voluntarily admit you bought Cars 2?

Because I'm a completist and I hate my life.

I yearn for a return to Drew Struzan-styled painted movie posters. This slapped together piece of photoshop doesn't hold a candle to that poster art style.

Apparently this isn't real but fan made.

Yeah I'm considering a purchase, since I have every other Pixar disc, and I figure the extra features can redeem it. Right?

Cars 2 isn't all that bad, as long as you simply view it as Mater's Tall Tales: The Movie rather than a proper sequel to Cars. It's really an entertaining flick. It just doesn't have the sentimentality of the first film and isn't particularly deep.

I had the bad fortune of seeing the first test screening of THAT Avengers. It was 3 hours long and was a complete mess. The theatrical is an hour and twenty minutes or so and everyone I know says that felt long. Imagine 3 hours of nonsense. I had the same experience with Ronin but it was almost exactly what we saw sans any voice over at the end explaining what happened, so everyone left confused.

Considering how many butts got in seats for The Avengers. I'd say the marketing department did it's job pretty well. A hand-drawn poster wouldn't have done any better, so why bother?

Sometimes marketing has nothing to do with it, either people know about the movie and will enjoy it or not.

Avengers has been setup for years and had a huge fan base looking forward to it, the Internet marketed the movie all by itself.

Sure, there were tons of commercials and ads, but word of mouth is more important that any other thing marketing can come up with.

Marketing can make for a huge opening, but then word of mouth and 2nd viewing takes over, that is what makes for mega hits in the box-office.