IRON MAN- blech.

OK, I saw IRON MAN. The friend I went to the movies with refused to see SPEED RACER so we wound up seeing it instead.

Well, I'll say this. It was a very professionally made, technically proficient film with an excellent performance from RDJ and a couple of really nice bone-tosses to Marvel fans. The suits looked great, the character was right on the money, and the action scenes were very well done. However, it is also probably the most soulless, mechanical, and (ironically) heartless movie I've seen in a long time. Everybody's been saying that something was "missing", and that something is all of that. It was almost completely without passion.

There's a lot to like- I really dug the messages about corporate responsibility (although announcing that a multi-billion dollar publically owned corporation is suddenly dropping its vertical is one of the most irresponsible things a corporation could possibly do) and the topical politics (although that will ultimately date the movie horrendously). I definitely see why it's so popular and getting good notices. But it just felt almost completely controlled, completely engineered, and completely designed to be liked by the widest audirnce possible. Blah. I was really kind of bored. It didn't help seeing the DARK KNIGHT trailer before it, which looks awesome- edgy, gritty, and daring instead of routine, glossy, and safe.

At the end, it's just an empty movie despite its strong central character and leftist politics. Compare it to SPIDER-MAN 2, which had a lot of heart to back up the technical qualities.

But yeah, the surprise at the end (after the credits) was pretty awesome...I'll give it that.

You're such an elitist, Barnes.

Oh no Ken, it's perfectly fine if you and your little friends enjoyed this children's film.

Where's Professor Euro when you need him?

--Mike L.

Hey, don't get me wrong...I love junky movies without a bunch of highfalutin "themes" and so forth. In fact, when I came home from IRON MAN I wanted to watch something that had a little more heart so I put on PHANTASM. Of course, it could be argued that movie has very real themes about a child dealing with and confronting death...

But I did expect IRON MAN to be at least on par with the SPIDER-MAN films, which I think are generally very good (the second one in particular, not so much the third one) and the X-MEN pictures (excluding 3, which was execrable garbage). I didn't think it was at all. It still wasn't in that lower tier of Marvel pictures (FF4, ElEKTRA, GHOST RIDER, HULK) by any means. It was like a third class of Marvel movies, in between the peak of SPIDEY 2 and the absolute death-pit of GHOST RIDER. I think I had more fun with BLADE 3 than IRON MAN. That's kinda bad if you think about it.

There was just no joy in it, I guess...just a lot of professionals making a very professionally produced product and there's a lot to be said for that, I guess. But there was no sense of wonder or movie magic at all.

And I'm sorry, but seeing The Dude in that Iron Monger costume...I dunno man, that's just kind of weird.

And another thing. I'm tired of origin story movies. Stop appeasing those who didn't read the comics. I'm ready for a BALLS TO THE FUCKING WALL Secret Wars movie.

Or they could go the route of Star Wars, start it in the middle and worry about the backstory sometime later or not at all.

The movie had heart. It's problem was that superhero movies need a break, been too many.
A secret wars movie is an A grade dumb idea.

"And another thing. I'm tired of origin story movies. Stop appeasing those who didn't read the comics."

Totally agree with this... by the time the real action starts the movie is already ending...

-Jorge

WAAAAH!

I love origin stories. You need to explain the character to give meaning to the action. Action without meaning is just porn. Now I like porn as much as the next guy, but that's not what I'm looking for in a crowded theater. Usually.

I didn't feel it was missing anything. Perhaps it was a bit by-the-numbers but I'm fine with that. Not only is it often giving the audience what it wants (which is a GOOD thing...I'm looking at you, Matrix 3) but in the case of Iron Man there is additional incentive to make sure the movie succeeds so that interest in the inevitable Avengers mega-flick will be as high as possible.

I don't care if it is selling out. The commercial success means more movies in the genre and I only see that as a good thing.

-MMM

I agree origin stories can be good, but the problem is they are all using the exact same template. 1/2 the film is the hero discovering his powers, the other half is him fighting a supervillan.

The problem is most of the villans don't really fit with the origin story, so the film, as Jorge pointed out, ends twice. The supervillan story is almost a seperate entity, rushed into the third act and never seems to mesh with the overall film. That's why these films struggle to climax properly.
They really should in most cases ditch the supervillans 'till the sequal.

Mr Skeletor wrote:

I agree origin stories can be good, but the problem is they are all using the exact same template. 1/2 the film is the hero discovering his powers, the other half is him fighting a supervillan.

The problem is most of the villans don't really fit with the origin story, so the film, as Jorge pointed out, ends twice. The supervillan story is almost a seperate entity, rushed into the third act and never seems to mesh with the overall film. That's why these films struggle to climax properly.
They really should in most cases ditch the supervillans 'till the sequal.

I would have been completely satisfied without the cliched partner-turns-on-me trope and instead had a number of increasingly pitched battles with the terrorist group culminating with the bald guy in the suit plus armaments against IronMan. The bit of ass-kicking he did in the war-torn city was the best action of the movie. The theater broke out in spontaneous applause when he offed the five guys holding human shields.

-MMM

I agree with Frank that the origin story is two 60- to 90-minute movies crammed together. Unfortunately it rarely works, because you get a half-assed origin story combined with a half-assed "testing myself against this blah blah" story. And hence why the second movie in a superhero series is usually much better -- they can dispense with all the wide-eyed wonder/discovery and just get to the plot.

I think the only origin film that was well-done was Batman Begins, because the villain (R'as al-Ghul) was actually part of the origin story -- so they could tie it all in much more organically, and not have to come up with some hamfisted explanation for why there's this other guy, and how HE got his powers, and why he hates Our Hero and thus they have to have a big fight.

Iron Man tries to do this, by revealing that Stane was behind the whole kidnapping thing, but they do this way too late in the film. They should have done the reveal in the opening scene -- it's not like Stane's betrayal was any great surprise, even to those who don't know the comics.

All this crap about "how does somebody cope with being a superhero?" is just a postmodern variation on the "where do I belong?" Disney theme (Hercules, yuk!). There's too much debth to these characters now, if anything. All you need is an exotic location, hot chicks, a disformed villain, a fistfight and a few explosions. And maybe a few jokes.

They have even done it to James Bond. Like you need to "have really loved and been hurt" to become a male chauvinist pig. For real

Well, rather than the Disney comparison, I'd say that IRON MAN was based more on THE WIZARD OF OZ in a roundabout way..."Tin Man Finds Heart"...

Of course a Secret Wars film is a terrible idea. It would cost a billion dollars, alienate anyone who wasn't reading Marvel books in 1985, and it's really pretty goofy over all. Now, what _wouldn't_ be a dumb idea is an ULTIMATES movie.

I'm stepping behind this riot shield now, but I think UNBREAKABLE may be the best origin story committed to film. It hits a lot of the archetypal superhero origin ideas and even manages to introduce a supervillain/archnemesis in such a way that sets up an obsessive opposition without a resolution. Also, the comic book elements kind of creep into the story and gradually alter the "real" world, which is pretty interesting since it keeps everything really grounded without whiz-bang technology or cartoonish psychopaths suddenly showing up in realistic setting. And then HEROES came and ripped the whole thing off and people that hated UNBREAKABLE suddenly flipped over that show.

I'm not defending Shymalan- I've seen THE VILLAGE and LADY IN THE WATER, I know the harm this man is capable of doing to civilization.

As for Iron Man spending the film fighting terrorists...Evil Brown People are the new Russians, and the whole thing would have probably turned into a jingoistic superhero take on Rambo. But that sequence was pretty good, the building the suit in prison was pretty good (did those Evil Brown People watching on camerasomehow miss that the Jericho didn't have arms and legs?)...Was I the only one who thought that human shield scene was awful reminiscent of ROBOCOP?

One thing I think is REALLY fucked up is that the film bends over backwards to depict how an arms corporation (gee, isn't the Stark Industries logo the Lockheed Martin one turned upside down) is involved in all this wrongdoing at the behest of an unpatriotic, unscrupulous upper manager that clearly hates America and likely doesn't care for mom or apple pie yet the indictment stops at both the rest of Stark's corporate leadership and never involves the US Government. I mean, it's cool that they put that idea out there that giant corporations need to be held accountable for what they do, but if you're going to have a tough line like that, then don't be a coward when it comes time to really call out who's really facilitating that kind of behavior.

Aw man...if they do Secret Wars, I hope they use the Jerry-curled jumpsuit-wearing Beyonder instead of the evil mustache and armor Beyonder. Talk about PIMPIN...