Share Nickibookworm2010's profile
Nickibookworm2010
Nickibookworm2010's stats
- Review count1
- Helpfulness votes3
- First reviewMay 13, 2013
- Last reviewMay 13, 2013
- Featured reviews0
- Average rating3
Nickibookworm2010's Reviews
Overall rating
3
/
5
Twisted-*SPOILER ALERT!*
PostedMay 13, 2013
Nickibookworm2010
Age:25 to 34
Gender:Female
Goes to the movies:monthly
Dialogue
3
/
5
Special Effects
4
/
5
Art Direction
4
/
5
Acting
5
/
5
Story
2
/
5
Camerawork
2
/
5
I went into the theater to view the latest installment in the Iron Man franchise with low expectations. Iron Man 1 was so enthralling with Robert Downey Jr.’s delightful return to the big screen. The poignant parallels with modern terrorism that served as the film’s central theme captivated me as a viewer and left me with a deep understanding of Tony Stark as a character. Once Iron Man 2 hit theaters, I was severely disappointed in how the franchise sold itself out to have the film merely act as one large advertisement for Marvel’s The Avengers. Too much emphasis on Scarlett Johansson’s deplorable take on the Black Widow and S.H.I.E.L.D. choked the film’s heavy themes of alcoholism, revenge, and death at its core so much so that its own characters could barely breathe under the weight of their own increasing numbers.
So you could assume that Iron Man 3’s recent tweaks would be changes for the better. Shane Black (Kiss Kiss, Bang, Bang) takes the director’s chair, and Academy Award winning Ben Kingsley serves as the film’s central villain. And yet I made sure to keep my expectations low, because the overly fast pacing of many recent Marvel films (Thor, X-Men: First Class) have done nothing but disappoint me and leave me wanting more back story and character development. Could you need more than a new director and an exceptional actor as the villain to make a solid Iron Man film?
The answer is yes, much more. And where I think Iron Man 3 is chiefly flawed is in its writing. We learn early on that there’s a new terrorist in town, the Mandarin, and he’s wreaking havoc. Having been familiarized with the comic book character, I had expected to see a Chinese man wielding magic rings of power. Yet the filmmakers went with a different approach: make the Mandarin not even Chinese at all, rather a slipshod English drunkard posing as a terrorist (Kingsley). Make the Mandarin an American invention of terrorism to have a slighted scientist “rule the war on terror.” Make the role of the true Mandarin played by Guy Pearce’s Aldrich Killian, a scientific genius bent on making the world feel his wrath after Tony misled Killian into thinking Tony was going to fund Killian’s program. This twist will by far be the most controversial move that Marvel has made this entire year in cinema.
And why? I can’t tell you how many disappointed comic book fans I’ve heard complain about the demolition of Iron Man’s chief arch nemesis from comic book lore. To them, it was one thing to make the (fake) Mandarin not even somewhat Chinese in origin (more like Osama Bin Laden). It was another thing entirely to make what they regard the Mandarin as “Iron Man’s Joker” a well…joke. I’ve heard others state that in spite of a change in origin, they were highly anticipating Kingsley’s take on the role, eager to see a “cool terrorist” in action. Instead fans were tricked by what they regard as “false advertising,” which in many respects it was. But I doubt that Iron Man 3 would have made as much money as it did so far if its advertisements showed us who the real Mandarin is, because to many Iron Man fans, he’s just not “bad-ass enough.” I can easily share in the fans’ disappointment with the film, although I wasn’t looking forward to Kingsley’s take on the Mandarin. That “bad-ass” appeal that some fans liked wasn’t really my taste, and I sorely disagreed with Kingsley’s choice on the Mandarin’s voice (what Stark regards to as a “Baptist preacher”). To have the Mandarin become the culmination of a former nerd’s revenge can actually be regarded as refreshing by comparison. Although, I wouldn’t have minded a more traditional approach to the Mandarin like we’ve seen in the comic books, but it seemed like the filmmakers were bent on keeping China happy with their work to increase the film’s revenue stream overseas.
My ambivalence over Iron Man 3 is largely due to the writing. I suspected this film was going to keep any back story brief in favor of keeping the audience’s attention. It would have been reaffirming to see Killian’s development from geeky scientist to flaming martial arts master. But the filmmakers omit this and figure that we’ll “get the idea, because the character’s a stereotype after all.” You’ll also need at least two viewings to make sense of the real Mandarin’s motive because the writing is just so convoluted yet thin. Also, this film, like its first predecessor, is largely politically fueled, and it makes a big liberal statement that America makes its own enemies (I won’t get into where my opinion falls in that category). Tony Stark spends most of his time out of his gold-titanium alloy suit in favor of some detective work, thanks to Shane Black’s direction. However, most of the “mysteries” that Stark was trying to solve was actually quite obvious to the careful viewer. The viewers witness the source of an explosion at Grauman’s Chinese Theater, so why are we watching Tony trying to find the source? So much for the viewers trying to figure it out now that the suspense was sucked out of it. Furthermore, the dark element of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that poor Tony is suffering from is subjected to the film’s ever-present levity, similar to Iron Man 2 when Tony was drunk at his birthday party blowing up watermelons. The source of Tony’s PTSD is pinpointed as his near-death experience in The Avengers. But where’s the regard for his traumatic experience in Iron Man 1 when he spent that time at the mercy of terrorists? This darker element was not explored in the film probably in favor of some more Avengers plugging.
After having seen Iron Man 3 twice (and after some careful deliberation), I can honestly say that I’m almost in favor of the twist that they made. The advertisements certainly were misleading, but isn’t the point of good filmmaking to keep the viewers guessing? I’ll admit I read my fair share of spoilers before seeing the movie to give me an idea of what I was getting myself into, but even so they didn’t really take away from the experience. After events like the Colorado movie theater shooting, maybe it’s time films start phasing out the “bad-ass, cool terrorist” approach like the Joker in favor of the basic comic book villain element: someone who was mistreated in the past and now that hurt has lead them to make bad life decisions. That central message should resonate more loudly to young viewers than a mysterious villain who’s hardened themselves so much so that the audience can’t relate to them, only watch them wreak havoc. And maybe with this change the viewers young and old can more so appreciate that golden rule: treat others how you’d like to be treated.
Pros great actors
Share:
+3points
3of 3voted this as helpful.