Finally, Someone Writes About Iron Man

I'm not quite sure how a film generates a $100-million opening weekend with nary a mumbling on the Internoob. It's as if everyone saw this movie, but no one can muster up any combination of phonemes and syntax to write about it (digitally anyway, I don't know about them finger-staining pagebounds you plebeians read). In fact, up until the publication of this very post, all that would come up when I googled the phrase "Iron Man" was a friendly Google correction suggesting, "Did you mean: The Life Before Her Eyes?" Well, since us movie fans are in a pinch for Iron Man coverage, I'm here to break the interminable silence with a deafening cat guitar solo (Fig. 1A). Meowwww didda mowww muhmuh mowmow diddy skeeowwww (vibrato ad nauseum). Thus brings us to the hopefully controversial discussion of whether Jon Favreau's epic tale of machismo and metal pumped or thumped. I don't know about youse guys, but I like compartmentalization, so:

"Wait now, you say it's based on a comic book?" This is indeed something I overheard from a bona fide Minnesota Mom sitting behind me this past Saturday night at a sold-out screening of the film in question. A million fictitious readers just threw their skinny pale arms up in bewilderment and duress. Dare I say "it will be okay"? I amassed a pretty hefty comic book collection in my younger years (the momz foolishly attempted to quit smoking by telling me any time I caught her buying a pack I got to pick out a comic book at the grocery store - which was a great deal for exactly one of us) and while I now remember hardly any story arcs or characters' names who aren't in the title of the book, I feel a minor portion of the pain that these people feel whenever a new comic book movie comes to the silver screen. Any big-budgeted attempt at turning a serial product aimed at a niche market into something Minnesota Moms could enjoy ("ooh Gwyneth Paltrow! I've always enjoyed her!") alongside their ungrateful spawn deserves skepticism, to say the least. However, from what I have read heard around town, they did a pretty good job with this here Iron Man. The geeks are raving about how faithful the great auteur Jon Favreau was to his source material. I had no idea Robert Downey, Jr.'s personality in every movie was based off the original superhero's alter ego, Tony Stark. How fascinating. I also didn't know that with their original 1963 comic, Marvel had Tony Stark pitted against Afghan terrorists. How apropos of our time! It's fate! No but seriously: Even though he just plays a variation of himself in every movie, Downey is ridiculously entertaining to watch and Iron Man proves he should be a leading man more often. Also, the whole war on terror update didn't really disfigure the story into a exploitative current events tie-in like I thought it might - it was simply just a new setting, barely touched on. No harm, no foul.

"This better be refundable!!!" This subtle quote comes courtesy of the guy sitting to my left that unsuccessfully flirted with Lady Amy while I was getting popcorn. No no, this cited exclamation wasn't part of his attempt at courting, though it would make it quite funnier had it been. No, he was merely one of the many saying something along the lines of "Me angry but nerdy! Can never quite speak up enough to be intimidating!" when the film projector broke down 10 seconds into the trailer for Indiana Jones and the Slightly Simmering Cauldron of Geriatric Despair, which when fixed, hilariously cut off right when Harrison Ford jumped into the air and immediately cut to CGI'd Ed Norton landing on the ground in the middle of the Hulk 2: Kind of a Remake Maybe preview. It was a masterful and accidental(?) trailer mash-up and I wanted more. But I settled for a new and extended clip of The Dark Knight, which reminded me of how cluttered our summers are now with comic book movies. It's moderately obscene, and it made me anxious to get Iron Man over with, because I was only expecting mediocrity with a good lead actor. It would be all too predictable: none of the darkness or complexities of Batman Begins (though the latter gave way to convolution and crowdedness, which ultimately kept that film from being genuinely great). Downey the self-righteous smart-aleck, Downey the clever escapist, Downey the overly excited hero, Downey the reformed but really still the same and possibly in love. Oh did I give it away?Big whoop. No but seriously: The simplicity let the film be fun and not worry about taking itself too seriously (and only being marginally cheesy) and still allowed room for smartly displayed character quirks/faults that were layered while remaining believable. Something no comic book movie has been able to do since Batman Returns, which is still to this day my favorite comic book movie. Any other genuinely good comic book movies all take themselves just a little too seriously to be both humorously fun and darkly twisted.

"That's it? You tease! You (expletive deleted) tease!" This was not uttered by anyone in the theater, but I can think of a couple different action-frenzied friends that might say something similar to this upon Iron Man's end credits. I'm honestly no expert since it's hardly what I look for when I see a movie - even a giant blockbuster, but for some reason, I felt a discernible lack as Black Sabbath roared up the black screen after the sequel set-up. It confused me, because the whole movie visually looks like a giant Jerry Bruckheimer mold, so why couldn't we get some killer face-whomping action from this intricately crafted suit it took him two-thirds of the movie to make not once, not twice, but THREE times? So much building, not enough destroying! The machismo (and even a smidgen of misogyny) runs so deep throughout the bones of this character and everything about an invincible human rod of thick steel screams "I AM MALE AMERICAN INDUSTRY, I SHALL CRUSH YOU." And yet, only a few climactic run-amoks and none of them ever went as long as say, ohhh, Transformers, or those Pirates movies. No but seriously: I was fine with this. I am often rendered bored/exhausted watching movies where there's non-stop loud crash bang scenes of explosions, fights, and exploding fights. Sure, the aesthetic was big bright American-made 2008 incarnate, but it felt necessary for a character like Tony Stark, who basically is big bright American-made 2008 - it didn't necessarily signify tons of PG-13 carnage waiting in the wings. In fact, the editing and CGI was also calmy and neatly done, allowing for the human eye to actually follow the action (and believe it) when it did occur, unlike the headache scuzz of a classic visually-displeasing Bruckheimer work, which has since unfortunately infiltrated the majority of action-oriented films a thousand fold.

I'd like to hear other people's takes (tried and true commenter Paal left a newer note on last week's May Preview that interested parties should look at), but I ended up basking in Iron Man's chrome glow for a satisfying amount of time. It doesn't stand out in the world of movies, but it certainly is a highlight for its genre. I snobbishly told Lady Amy it was about what I had expected when we stupidly exited the cinema just before the super secret Avengers/Samuel L. Jackson preview, but that was without thinking back on the experience. It was competent and that puts it a step ahead of the rest of most blockbusters, but it is also memorable. This is mostly due to Downey, but still, memorable is tough for gigantic non-intimate movies that everyone shills out 9 bucks for on opening weekend.

This entry was posted by chris, on Thursday, May 08, 2008. You can leave your response.