He did what in a great magnetic field?
So I finally did something I should’ve done weeks ago: went and saw Iron Man.
Just up front: if you haven’t seen it, it’s a great movie. Also if you have.
I first started to get hopeful, I think, seeing an early trailer for it. The first review I read was by James Berardinelli of ReelViews, who’s the only critic I follow, in large part because he tends to get action movies, and not condescend to them. He basically said that director Jon Favreau had made it as an action movie that happened to be about a superhero, not as a funnybook movie. Which was the very promise the trailers seem to hold out, and what got my blood a-pumpin’.
I actually had more knowledge going in than with most comic book movies, having read the book some back in the Seventies - especially when Barry Smith, now dba Barry Windsor-Smith (the only man for Conan in the comics, since Frazetta wouldn’t do the deed) was doing the art. And I didn’t read it that much, although as a devout technophile I always did have a weakness for the battle robot/powered suit conceit. I just generally didn’t, and don’t, follow aboveground comics, not even X-Men - and I was briefly a villain in the series. (Seriously; tell you later.)
So I can’t really address how truly the movie stuck to the comic, although it seemed to do so fairly well. What I can talk about is how true it stayed to how to make a kick-ass action movie.
Which to my mind was: very.
One reason I looked forward so darned much to seeing this was that I’ve recently become a fan of Robert Downey, Jr., as a result of finally seeing the brilliant Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang
One thing that really makes the movie is that it’s character driven, as any good action movie should be; and Downey’s Stark is that character. Other characters aren’t as well developed; they don’t need to be. It’s Downey’s/Stark’s show.
Not that the supporting cast isn’t good. Jeff Bridges does a fine turn as villain Obadiah Stane - what a great name - and when The Dude
Gwyneth Paltrow is smart and also hot enough to puddle titanium as Stark’s factotum Pepper Potts (not such a great name, but I doubt that’s the screenwriters’ fault.) I admit my greatest moment of suspense in the film came toward the end when I thought I saw her head inexorably toward becoming that most hated of Hollywood clichés, the screaming female hostage. But, surprise! She doesn’t. Which brings us to the other thing I really loved about the movie.
Of course - you knew this was coming, yes? - you can’t have a smart movie about a smart, witty, charismatic character without a smart screenplay. Downey got one from Shane Black in KKBB; the screenwriters, almost unbelievably for a film with four credited writers, gave him another one here. The dialogue is crisp and mostly believable; neither characters nor story take a turn for the dumb. It’s an action movie you don’t have to turn off your brain to enjoy - and I think you know how I feel about that.
The special effects are amazing. Better: they’re there to serve the plot and action, not to take their place. Too many filmmakers think all it takes to make an action film is a bunch of chase scenes and SBU. Not that shit doesn’t blow up, and very nicely, too. And the action scenes are clearly and well choreographed and well-photographed; none of these half-second cuts that too many filmmakers think are edgy and advanced, instead of baffling and annoying.
And, OMG, Ralphie is totally in this movie. Yes, Peter Billingsley, the plump-cheeked kid from my favorite Christmas movie ever, A Christmas Story
And yeah, despite the header - best I could think of, okay? - I know the song has nothing to do with the Iron Man comic book. And hell yes, of course they had to use it in the movie!
Okay, on the unlikely assumption I’m not the last person in America to see this movie, I should say: spoiler warning. Even though I already knew what it was anyway, but was still eager to see with my own eyes. Unlike most people, including everybody else in the theater, I always stick to the bitter dregs of the end credits (What, you say you got a life? Good thing I don’t, huh, pal?), not just in hopes of seeing an Easter egg, but of seeing if anybody I knew worked on the film (if they did I missed it.)
Anyway … I’m at best ambivalent about the trend of using black actors to portray characters who were white in previous versions from whatever medium. Still, I know that books, movies, TV shows, and comic books were all awfully pale for a while there. Sometimes it works wonderfully well; sometimes you get The Wild Wild West. Which, granted was not Will Smith’s fault; rather, the real problem was that the screenplay sucked major ass in almost every possible way. It would’ve been tough but a competent writer - such as, well, me - could have pulled off the intrinsic improbability of a black Secret Service agent in the West of the 1870s. Given such a script, Smith could’ve shone in the role.
But you also probably know by now that I’m the last person on Earth to quibble about having SHIELD boss Nick Fury played by Samuel L. Jackson, which is of course the Easter egg. You know I love me some Samuel L. in tough-guy roles. I only wish they’d given him Fury’s trademark flattop, instead of Samuel’s same old glossy dome.
See what you miss when you don’t sit through the credits?
On a final note: I believe they intend a sequel to this movie. I’ve got mixed feelings about that. If they can keep Downey and Favreau and the same writers (or whichever ones were actually responsible for the script being so good) it could rock as hard as this one.
But still … part of what made this movie so successful was that it wasn’t a superhero movie. As Berardinelli says, it didn’t deviate far from the standard plot; yet it wasn’t played as a comic-book adaptation. It’s more like near-future SF, or a lightweight (or anyway less than usually portentous) technothriller. It’s cool in large part because it’s not hard to imagine this stuff actually happening.
You start bringing in Norse gods in non-historical horned helmets, giant green guys in purple trunks, and people in gaudy tights flying on sheer force of personality - well, you’re back to a funnybook movie. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. But it could prove problematic by working against a huge strength of Iron Man the movie.
Tags: action movies, iron man
June 11th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
“Iron Man” is a brilliant movie. I’m glad you had the chance to see it. I’ve seen the movie twice. Twice! The first viewing was to “see” the movie and the second time was to absorb it. Iron Man isn’t about super powers, radioactive-thingies, or magical relics. All he has to work with is his mind. That makes it real for me.
The movie becomes a story about a man who decides he’s not going to waste his life. I don‘t need to suspend my disbelief to watch this movie. Yes you don’t need to turn off your brain—good call on that. OK, Stan Lee as Hugh Hefner, being cuddled by three bodacious babes was a bit hard to swallow, but it’s his movie and his cameo. In an interview, Stan said this cameo was the most fun, ever. Yes, this movie is about fun. I go to movies to be entertained, not to have my intelligence insulted. Yes, the dialog was witty with some deliciously snarky moments.
The pas de deux between Pepper and Tony was spicy. And, those scenes revealed the depth and the extent of their friendship. They could have said Pepper had been Tony’s girl Friday / personal assistant for many years, but they *showed* that Pepper had worked all those years. When they spoke and interacted, you *felt* they had history. I’m visually-oriented. Don’t tell me, show me. And, that made it real for me, too.
I’ve always liked Iron Man. I collected the comics. But, I came to the movie with an open mind. OK, no Happy Hogan – Pepper romance. What a relief! I never liked Hogan. Vietnam v. Afghanistan is not a big deal. I’m not happy with what they did with Rhodey. He’s supposed to be Tony’s pilot and best friend. The interlude on Tony’s private jet was the level of clowning around they did in the comics. That was disappointing, but not devastating. As a result, the movie portrayed Tony as more solitary than he was in the comics. But, the comics showed him as a more decadent wastrel. Stane was splendidly done in both media. I’m glad Favreau picked Stane over the terrorists. A big hero needs a big nemesis to help showcase his sparklypoo heroics.
Yes, the cast made “Iron Man” work as a film. It always helps to select a cast that can actually act. Downey made some interesting comments about the film. He added the cheeseburger obsession to the film based on his own experience. Back in his drug days (daze), he was flat, busted, broke. He had money in his pocket for a cheeseburger at Burger King. He had hit bottom. After he finished that burger, he turned his life around. He put that in the movie. I guess that made it real for him? Downey thought of the role as “a challenge of making a wealthy, establishmentarian, weapons-manufacturing, hard-drinking, womanizing prick into a character who is likable and a hero.” Score!
Probably the best thing about this movie is the varied and successful ways it handled the exposition necessary to bring the newbies up to speed. The movie opens with an awards ceremony that info dumps Tony’s life to date. It was fast, clean, and hit the highlights. Reporter Christine Everhart gives a quick bio on Pepper, who agrees and adds “taking out the trash” as yet another of her duties. Verily, twas the cattiest remark in the movie. I like the way it showed Tony’s trial and error development of the armor, as well as Stane’s lack of testing, when he iced up. The final battle was clumsy. They came across like men who were not used to being armored superheroes. One could see the learning curve in action. That worked for me, too.
Yes, to a sequel. When Stane was in Raza’s tent, putting the sonic hurt on him, there was a wall hanging in the background with 10 rings—the ten rings of the Red Mandarin. Dum da dum dum!
June 12th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Hi, Ann! Always good to see you post.
We’re pretty much in accord on the movie. We seem to have similar motivations in moviegoing, both as to the “fun” and “not having our intelligence insulted.”
I liked the repartee between Pepper and Tony a lot, thought it a high point. I guffawed at Pepper’s “taking out the trash” remark. As I did at the bit on the airplane - purely as someone nowhere near current on the comic I didn’t balk at Stark seducing his good pal Rhodey into getting drunk and acting like a frat rat. Obviously “seduction” in more than the sexual sense is a major skill of Tony’s; but what really made me hoot was the attendants cavorting on the in-flight dance floor, complete with stripper pole. I could completely see Stark having a plane with something like that aboard.
Interesting insight on Downey’s addition of the cheeseburger business. For me it worked on another level: after wandering Europe for a few weeks (too many) years ago I found myself eagerly seeking out a McDonald’s in someplace like Cologne - something I haven’t voluntarily done too often in my whole adult life. I really craved that taste of home. Fascinating that the longing for a burger was also used to symbolize Stark’s turnaround.
All in all, an excellent piece of craft. I could definitely see catching it more than once in the theater.
Thanks for your insight on the likely villains in the sequel. Again, I don’t know enough about the comic to’ve caught the Red Mandarin reference.
I still have to wonder how the need to generate suspension of disbelief will play out, if they carry through with Fury’s “Avengers Initiative,” thereby moving solidly into the costumed-superhero genre. And I guess they’re going to: it’s not a huge secret (but *spoiler alert!* anyway) that Tony Stark flashes a quick cameo in the almost-released Hulk movie - Berardinelli says he “steals the movie.”
Then again, it’s not as if I’m opposed to costumed-superhero flicks. I enjoyed the first two X-Men movies. And I guess Favreau, the writers, and Downey have earned the benefit of the doubt, here, haven’t they?