Saturday, May 25, 2013

Iron Man 3

By Sati. Saturday, May 25, 2013 , , , , , , ,
Iron Man 3 was supposed to be the end of the trilogy ."Supposed to be" because now I hear they are planning on doing more movies. Whether it's true or not, the third part focusing on the adventures of Tony Stark is an entertaining summer blockbuster, but for me it was the weakest part of the trilogy. There was just a little too much silliness here and the villain weren't as menacing as he should be to provide the strong sense of danger.

After the events we saw in Avengers, Tony is experiencing panic attacks, being confused and scared of everything that lies beyond what he thought he knew. He cannot sleep, he cannot fully devote himself to Pepper and in the middle of his angst issues, the new enemy resurfaces. He is called Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) and he is a terrorist who is orchestrating attacks on massive scale. Tony's friend and security chef Happy (Jon Favreau) is injured during one of such attacks.
To make matters worse, a handsome and brilliant Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce, who has clearly abandoned any ambition) shows up and he is interested in Pepper. He is like Tony - without all the baggage. There is also a mysterious substance - Extremis - that causes people to turn into radiating energy packs. It looks more ridiculous than it sounds.

It may sound odd but as cool as Avengers was, it now poses a big issue for stand alone movies set in Marvel universe. The whole time I was watching Iron Man 3 I kept wondering - where the hell are the Avengers? Why aren't they helping Stark? Sure, it would cost the studio a lot of money to bring them here, but come on, they can't really reference the movie directly here and expect people to let their absence slide, especially without a single attempt to explain it.
Then there is the villain. I'm not familiar with the comic books but from what I gathered those who are were quite pissed off by the way Mandarin was handled here. I enjoyed the twist that came with his character - it was quite hilarious and it wasn't half as ridiculous as the other threat Stark was facing which was these people with red glowing eyes. Whenever they appeared I felt as if I was watching a bad episode of Supernatural.

Movies based on comic books require some suspension of disbelief but the above problems were really hard to take even in a movie like this one. It also felt somewhat anticlimactic for the final movie (?). The ending was nice, but I don't think I caught the reference there - what was that thing attached to Tony's car? What am I missing?
The third act of the movie, as pretty much every single summer blockbuster's, was unnecessarily bombastic and loud. There were some great moments of humour thrown in there but I really could have dealt without the cliches such as the bad guy is not really dead and comes back and the girl is not really dead and she is fine.

The worst cliche in the movie was definitely the vice president/his daughter moment. I really expected more from the guy who wrote Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. That was just eye-rolling inducing lazy and uninspired writing. I did not however have a problem with the little kid who was helping Stark. It may have been old trick, but it was entertaining to watch.
I'm quite puzzled about the character of Maya Hansen. Why cast incredibly talented Rebecca Hall if she only has several scenes in the movie? Her talent was really wasted in this film and she deserves much better. If she was the main villain in the movie, the film would be far more interesting.

As riddled as it is with problems, the film was still very entertaining. Robert Downey Jr is one of the most amazing and charismatic actors working today and he is practically having the easiest job in the world playing - or should I say - being Tony Stark. Still, even if it's Downey just being Downey, it's so fun to witness. His quick wit, great looks and magnetism are always a treat.
The film was written by Shane Black who collaborated with Downey before on terrific and very clever Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and some of Black's strengths were put to good use here. The banter between Downey and Cheadle is infinitely better here than in second movie and I really adored the cute moments between Tony Stark and the kid that helps him out. Downey is so damn charming you love him even when he calls a small child a pussy.

I must also hand it over to Black - he makes really kick ass Christmas movies. This is his fourth action movie set at Christmas time after Lethal Weapon, The Long Kiss Goodnight, and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. I'm genuinely shocked he didn't make Die Hard.
The film's most amazing action scene is definitely the destruction of Tony's mansion. It's actually one of the most incredible houses I've ever seen in movies so it was terrible to see it destroyed. The scene was really well made and I loved how Tony ordered the suit to head for Pepper instead of him, to protect her.

My favorite running joke in this one was Happy's adoration for Downton Abbey. It's one of my favorite shows so it was so cool see it featured here. Apparently there is more than meets the eye to the joke - it was done because of the suggestion of Jon Favreau, who is a big fan of the British series. He also felt the show would parallel the unrevealed back story that Happy is in love with Pepper but does not come between her and Tony out of respect for his boss, a theme that also exists in Downton Abbey.
Iron Man 2 is still my favorite film in the trilogy. It's an unpopular opinion and I realize that, but I genuinely adored the previous movie. Sam Rockwell goofing around, Tony and Pepper always fighting, kick ass red haired Black Widow and Rourke's batshit villain were so fun to watch it made all the shortcomings irrelevant in my eyes.

Iron Man 3 is fun and witty but it is troubling how many cliches and uninspired ideas made its way here, especially with 8 people responsible for the plot of the movie, if imdb credits are to be believed. It's a good movie but many times it seemed to me that those who wrote it didn't give it their best and chose the lazy resolutions instead.

Iron Man 3
(2013, 130 min)
Plot: When Tony Stark's world is torn apart by a formidable terrorist called the Mandarin, he starts an odyssey of rebuilding and retribution.
Director: Shane Black
Writers: Drew Pearce (screenplay), Shane Black (screenplay)
Stars: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Ben Kingsley, Guy Pearce and Rebecca Hall  

RELATED POSTS:
 

34 comments:

  1. Well, it was better than the last film as I thought it was a pretty good action film. My favorite moment of the film was... the post-credits scene.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah the post-credits scene was pretty good, though I find the necessity to sit though 10 minutes end credits just for that annoying.

      Delete
  2. Terrible movie lol. Great review though. So pretty lol

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree on many counts. The absence of the Avengers was conspicuous, especially when Tony found himself in trouble and without resources (the kid section of the movie) The villain did seem cheesey, and "unnecessarily bombastic" is a great way to describe the finale. :o

    Disappointing way to end the series if it is, indeed the end.

    PS, I dont like Part II the BEST, but I do like it. So you're not alone there, at least. LOL. I know there's a lot of haters out there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I never got what was the big problem with part 2. I thought it was funny and hey, it had Scarlett in tight suit :)

      Avengers thing was really weird. At least they could have feature some sort of explanation, I don't know, Thor is having a birthday party in different dimension and they are all there :)

      Delete
  4. Fire breathing villains was too over-the-top for me. During the last fight sequence I kept waiting for the film to be over, too much jokey stuff from Shane Black for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here, it was just too silly. The last act really should have been more imaginative.

      Delete
  5. Great review! I liked this a little more than Iron Man 2, but I'd probably give it a 65. Though it was entertaining, I was disappointed with the cliches too. "Lazy" is a great way to put it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's really as if they gave up somewhere during writing of the script.

      Delete
  6. I didn't have any major problems with this one. I do agree hall was a bit wasted here, but overall i enjoyed this one a lot

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really wish she had more to do, she is so talented and really deserves better roles.

      Delete
  7. well, I planned to see this on theater, but I guess seeing some bad reviews about it (plus busy schedule) I'll see it on smaller screen. Maybe I don't miss much? Thanks for the review.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're not missing that much, the CGI is good but nothing groundbreaking.

      Delete
  8. Thank you! I'm glad I'm not the only one who spent 90% of the movie like "So...where did they Avengers go? Are they all on vacation, hoping Tony Stark will pull something smart out of his ass?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha the thought about them being on vacation crossed my mind too :)

      Delete
    2. It's pretty damn odd when you keep mentioning these guys, but then Tony goes all "solo" and "low-tech" when that's total bulls--t and he could get a ride, a weapon, and some support from SHIELD in like a second. Hell, shouldn't he have at least one working suit stashed in NYC's Stark Tower?

      Delete
    3. Yeah, they really should have made some plausible explanation for Avengers absence in this one.

      Delete
  9. Hall was totally wasted. I wish she would've had more to do as well. I couldn't get past the Avengers thing either. I mean, really only Thor has a legit reason not to come to another Avengers' aid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They really should have bothered to at least try to explain it. It's one thing that the script is lazy, but this issue is really bothering a lot of people.

      Delete
  10. 8 people responsible for the plot?? That's never a good sign! I did enjoy this a lot though. But Shane Black's done far better!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He sure did! I really expected more imaginative story from him.

      Delete
  11. Nice review :)

    I think the lack of the other Avengers is probably the biggest problem to be honest, especially if Tony and Banner are now mates, which we're led to assume. I also thought Killian was nowhere near as interesting as the Mandarin and I'm not even sure what his motivations were, he just seemed like a douche.

    And I thought the whole vice president/daughter thing was actually a missed opportunity. They shoehorned it in when the VP probably had more motivation than anyone. It was a bit of a cliche, but these movies are full to the brim with cliches anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! Yeah, Killian was such a boring villain, it was one of the weakest points in the script.

      I usually let cliches slide but this one was full of them. The film was entertaining but the lazy story was distracting for me.

      Delete
  12. Good review Sati. Honestly, it's a fun movie that knows what type of flick it wants to be, but there are some risk it takes that I think it should have not taken, no matter how original it may have been for the superhero genre. That said, still a very good movie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you! I enjoyed it but it could have been much better.

      Delete
  13. I can understand comic-lovers annoyance with The Mandarin's twist but like you, I absolutely loved it! Ben Kingsly was hilarious!! I was more annoyed at how easily the many Iron Man suits could be destroyed by the villains (compared this to previous films). I like that you picked Iron Man 2 as your favorite, not many people do. Mine however will always be the first one... yeah I know, cliche :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really loved Iron Man 2, but the first part was great as well. Kingsley was hilarious, I loved his performance here.

      Delete
  14. Another great review, I definitely noticed the same cliches you pointed out (especially the VP one) but they didn't really bother me as much for whatever reason. Were you thinking about reviewing Star Trek at all btw?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I'll see new Star Trek I definitely review it, unfortunately I don't have the time for cinema trip right now :(

      Delete
  15. I don't know if you read my own review, but I consider this one stronger than part 2 (at least #3 is trying to do something different, y'know?). What surprises me is that the first film has *so much heart* and that that element, pretty graceful and effortless years ago, has become so much harder for the (mostly) same production team to replicate.

    Basically, I walked out of a Marvel employee movie screening of this movie not being completely sure what my opinion was... I really hope this movie gives Guy Pierce a boost.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll read your review soon! I liked part 2 because it was so much fun, this one was just so formulaic. Guy Pearce really deserves better.

      Delete
  16. I enjoyed the twist as well concerning the villain. I have to smile regarding the third act as being "bombastic and loud." I know exactly what you mean. I hate when the third act devolves into that. Here I didn’t mind it so much especially when compared to the onslaught of the climax in Man of Steel. That assault on my senses makes Iron Man 3 seem like a controlled independent drama full of sophistication and wit.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I just finnished watching it and was very pleased to see Downton Abbey reference in this movie since it's one of my beloved shows. I agree that it might've been a reference to Happy's "backstory" you mentioned, because they kept showing lady Sybil and Branson. :D

    Anyway, great review and unfortunatelly I couldn't agree more with it. There was something seriously wrong with this movie and even though I enjoyed it (it would've been hard not to enjoy it simply because of Robert Downey Jr.). For me the main reason for that was the villan. He was nowhere close of Mickey Rourke's creation in Iron Man 2.

    ReplyDelete