Movies are a passion of mine, but it’s not often I get the
chance to review one. I got to go to Iron Man 3 recently, and I figured I’ll be
talking about it anyway, so I might as well put it up here.
I’ll run it down element by element.
Let’s start with the performances, which were universally
excellent. Robert Downey Jr. gives a depth to Stark beyond what has been
reached before. Paltrow is great as Potts, the go-between for Stark and the
sane world; patient, affectionate, and no-nonsense as always. Cheatle is
amazing as always with what he has to work with (read below), and has some of
the best one-liners in the movie.
Guy Pearce is all snark and arrogance as Aldrich Killian. Rebecca
Hall does well as Maya Hansen, though her part is a mixed bag. Ty Simpkins plays
Harley Keener, and keeps up with the other person who’s on screen for most of
his scenes (Robert Downey Jr.). Ben Kingsley outshines everyone, though. In any
scene he’s in, the Mandarin steals the show.
Stark’s character development is just as good as Downey's acting. Both humbled
and haunted by the events in The Avengers, Stark lives with panic attacks and
PTSD. He’s driven to the edge by the events that in Iron Man 3, closer to his
breaking point than he’s been since the first Iron Man. But he remains a
compelling character, possibly deeper than he has been before. When he succeeds
in the end, you cheer. He regains a portion of his original confidence,
everything he’s earned and an inch more, in true Tony Stark fashion.
Possibly the best part of his growth is the friendship he develops
with a kid named Harley Keener. This relationship parallels Stark’s
relationship with his father, antagonistic at times and never sugar-coated. It
serves to remind the audience that Iron Man 2 presented Stark’s first honest look
at his relationship with his father. Iron Man 3 allows him to finally come to
terms with his father’s absence, and maybe take his first steps toward
preparing for fatherhood himself.
Pepper gets a true storyline independent from Stark, as was
promised, but this falls somewhat flat. If they had given her another ten
minutes and explored her as a character, it would smooth out some of the other
problems in the story. But that would have made her well and truly Stark’s
equal, which must have made them nervous. Instead of the revolution we might
have had, we got reform. It’s hard to complain. But I do, anyway.
Rhodes doesn’t get a storyline, an arc, or development. That
makes sense, seeing as he got all three in Iron Man 2. Good development, if cut
short in the name of safety like Pepper’s story is in Iron Man 3. I find it
strange that he returns to two dimensions as if he’d never been given a third
at all. It makes me concerned for Potts’s character in the future.
Next is the story. You can pretty much consider this spoiler
country, though I’ll try to keep them down.
The story is good, but not great.
One of the best things about it is the cohesion with the
events in The Avengers. Not only are there constant Easter-egg references, but
the events in Iron Man 3 would well and truly not have happened were it not for
The Avengers. In addition, there are little continuity nods to the comics, the
previous movies, and even real life. From the comics, we get a cameo of the
Hulkbuster suit. From previous movies is Stark collecting Butterfingers (his
robot assistant) personally from the wreckage. And from real life, we get Happy’s
job change; Jon Favreau stepping down from directing is hardly a secret, and
this reference is amusing.
Between my comments about the writing, Starks’ character
development, and Pepper’s increased screen time, I’ve given a good idea about
what I like from the story. Here’s what I don’t.
Let me start with the biggest problem: the villains.
No, not the Mandarin. He’s terrific. While some dogmatic
comic fans might have some problems with Sir Ben and his performance, I am not
one of them. One of the first things I thought upon the announcement of the
Mandarin was, “That’s awesome! We’ll finally get to see Iron Man’s biggest foe
on screen!” That was inevitably followed by, “So, how the heck are they going
to fit a racist depiction of a sorcery-wielding Napoleonic Chinese villain into
the technology-based Marvel cinematic universe?”
Better than you’d expect. That’s how.
No, I refer to the other pair in the villain trifecta when I
mention disappointment. Maya Hansen and Aldrich Killian are inexpertly handled
after the halfway point.
Maya develops out of a comedic antagonist for Pepper into what
you could almost call a friend. Her monologue about the death of innocence is legitimately
touching. Unfortunately, it’s followed almost immediately by betrayal. That
betrayal is then hacked off at the knees by Maya’s continued waffling. There’s
a difference between writing a sympathetic and even reluctant villain, and one
that is just weak. Rebecca Hall is consistently giving everything she’s got,
but no one can save a role so muddled.
Is Maya really a
villain? Because some of her dialogue suggests she is. Then again, other bits
of dialogue portray her as a victim, manipulated by the heartless Killian. Has she
made a deal with the Devil? If so, what were the terms? Does she still think it
was worth it? How much influence does she still have over Killian, if any? To
what extent is she involved in the crimes? Is she merely taking blood money, or
does she help to bloody it? Is she a sociopath, or just desperate? Why didn’t
she come to Stark before this? Was she so insulted at being snubbed years ago
that she wouldn’t take help she obviously needs? And finally, why is she so determined
to have him now?
None of this is made as clear as it should be.
Killian is clearer, but completely unrealistic. He wants, in
this order (I believe): Money, Influence, Freedom, and Pepper. What doesn’t he want? And if he has all the
power the story gives him in the later scenes, why doesn’t he openly take what he wants?
Maybe with another ten minutes, we could have clarified
these things. But each minute has a cost, both in practicality and in pacing,
and they couldn’t afford it. No matter what it might have bought.
My second problem with the story is Stark’s narration
throughout. None of it is bad, per se
(not after you’ve watched 10,000 B.C., anyway), but it always seems out of
place. It is explained at one point, and somewhat justified. But considering that
it is totally unnecessary, and considering that Robert Downey Jr. and Shane
Black last worked together in “Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang,” in which the narration is
key to the story, it’s clear they were just having fun. It hurts the story.
Maybe they’ll pull a “Blade Runner: Director’s Cut” and cut the
unnecessary, distracting hand-holding.
This next problem would be the largest, if it were simply
born of laziness or ineptitude. As it is, it comes in third. The plot undermines
itself.
Mark 42 is the key to the movie. Built after the Extremis
comic design, it is lighter, more agile, and more responsive than any model
before. It also has a “call” button (kind of). It is the focus, the thread that
holds the film together and can ultimately sew it up neatly. It successfully ties
together the three acts and stitches most of the ending into place. It is
beautiful, a work of art like few single elements are in a movie. And then the
string is cut, and the plot tears wide open.
I agree with their decision to cut that string.
That string made Pepper a damsel and nothing more. It made
her entire story null and void by placing her in the same position that women
have been relegated to for the history of filmmaking--and, some would say, for the
history of the world. This would have would have undermined everything the
writers, director, and actors had been going for. It would have been terrible. But
it would have made for a more cohesive story than the tacked-on, anticlimactic
subversion that stands in its place.
What they did was good. What they could have done, given an
extra draft of the script, overhauling the foreshadowing, would have been great.
Another, smaller problem is simply that the comic book physics
pushed the comic a little too far. In fact, when my brother and I got up from
our seats, we weren’t discussing the plot or characters. We were discussing the
physics. This is harped on elsewhere, so I’ll be brief. Airplane airborne rescue. “Really?
That’s how you’re going to do it? Why
didn’t you just remove the stunt altogether?”
From story and stunts to cinematography
and direction. It was sufficient. I never saw a shot that made my eyes hurt
(and I was watching it in 3-D, so I might be understating that achievement),
but I never saw a shot that wowed me. The fight sequences were clear (minus the
very end of the last one, which plain happens too quickly for easy 3-D
comprehension). Let me repeat this: even at the end, when things are crazy and
stuff’s blowing up everywhere, you can see what’s happening and tell why it
matters. Shane Black obviously pulled great performances from actors that are
consistently great. I think you can see where I’m going with this. Good, but
not so good that I’d use it as a selling point.
Finally, I’ll touch on the music. To be honest, I found it
mediocre at best. There was a place or two where the score really struck me as
being good, and an equal amount where it was overtly bad. Generally, though, it
was simply unmemorable. Except for that weird credits sequence, like it was
from the ‘70s. Really, guys?
My final verdict is this. Iron Man 3 gets 7/10. It’s a good
movie that tries to do great things. In some places, it succeeds. In others, it
fails. But it takes risks. Can we
really ask any more of our comic book movies?
Yes. Take the larger risk. Run long. Provide deep characters
and satisfying arcs all around. I will sit for the extra twenty minutes while
you develop them. I will cheer at the credits for your courage and make others
come to see it if I have to drag them. Take the risk. Make the story matter.
And for goodness sake, if we’re going to sit through the
credits for the special clip at the end, make it worth our while, huh?
No comments:
Post a Comment