Short Review: Everything they did right in the first movie, they did wrong in this one.


In this follow up to Iron Man, director Jon Favreau comes down with a serious case of the sophomore blues. The original film had a sarcastic edge that smoothed out a clunky but still enjoyable plot. The origin story of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr) introduced an externally belligerent/internally weak man who finds the cure for his mid-life crisis. In the original Stark is forced to beat down his past self, personified by his business partner Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges). This outing avoids all of that messy character stuff and focuses on lots of loud noises, flashing lights and Scarlett Johansson in a body sock.

Tony Stark returns having achieved world peace thanks to his use of the Iron Man suit. At least, that is what we're told. We never get to actually see him protect the world. It's all explained in a Senate hearing. This makes Stark's hero work an abstract. This in turn makes it meaningless. If it is not on the screen, it doesn't exist for the audience.

The screenplay by Justin Theroux clearly explains that the world is at peace in the opening moments. One would then expect that in turn this world peace would be threatened. Nope. Stark is attacked by Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), a Russian physicist with a grudge. Vanko's personal vendetta is funded by Stark's weapons manufacturer rival Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell). World peace is never actually threatened. The only things threatened in this story are the egos of a bunch of scummy super-geniuses. This does not make for a riveting central conflict.

This lack of stakes is the main reason the film fails so completely. Theroux doesn't paint himself into narrative corners, he paints himself out of the whole room. He is so busy introducing characters for the upcoming Avengers movie and fumbling with technological presentations that he almost doesn't have time shoehorn in any actual characterization.

There are numerous scriptural issues that make the story fall flat. This is evidenced in Stark giving up his company in the first act. Once he does this he has literally nothing to lose. At no time does he find it critical to get his company back. It is just something that happens. If it has no deeper value, why does Theroux involve it in the film?

At one point Hammer tells Vanko to take Stark's "legacy" from him. How does the audience know when his "legacy" is taken away? We are given a statement of action by the villains and it involves a motive no less intangible than them saying they're going to hurt Stark's feelings. This is poor writing.

Vanko's whole motivation is a vacuum. Favreau gives us enough to understand that Vanko is fueled by revenge, but this revenge is hollow because we don't understand its cause. This results in Vanko being little more than another hurdle Stark must overcome instead of a villain to confront. (Spoiler warning) This is why at the end, Stark so easily overcomes Vanko and his droid army and why Vanko's death has zero dramatic punch. He is a non-entity. (Spoiler done)

The film also lacks any symbolism or meaning. In the original we were given the cheesy, but effective symbol of Stark's heart. Does Tony Stark have a heart? Yes, and its sitting in this little glass box. It is a symbol that is referred to and played upon throughout the entire film.

In this film, Favreau sets up a similar conceit. Stark is literally being poisoned by his suit. While the suit gives him fame and glory, it is also making him more toxic (both literally and figuratively). This is a solid metaphor and it is strongly established early on. It is then left unused.

One would hope that when they set up in the first act that Tony Stark and Iron Man are one in the same and that he gains so much through wearing the suit, that in the end he would have to discard the suit in order to complete his heroic task. This would make Stark the real Iron Man and make the suit his accessory, instead of it being the other way around. No such luck.

Overall, this version of the film is an incomplete draft of what should have been a more enjoyable production. It stinks of something that was rushed to market. This is not a good movie. Its not even a passable one. The film ultimately becomes an elongated teaser trailer for the upcoming The Avengers movie, hitting screens in 2012.

Labels: Don Cheadle, Jon Favreau, Mickey Rourke, Robert Downey Jr, Sam Rockwell, Samuel L Jackson, Scarlett Johansson, sequel, superhero

Screenwriter: Justin Theroux (Tropic Thunder)
Director: Jon Favreau (Zathura: A Space Adventure)
Actors: Robert Downey Jr. (Chaplin), Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler), Gwyneth Paltrow (Shakespeare in Love), Scarlett Johansson (The Island), Don Cheadle (Ocean's 11), Sam Rockwell (Moon), Samuel L. Jackson (Snakes on a Plane), Paul Bettany (The Da Vinci Code), Kate Mara (Transibberian), Jon Favreau (Swingers) and Garry Shandling (What Planet Are You From?) and Olivia Munn

Labels: Don Cheadle, film, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jon Favreau, Kate Mara, Mickey Rourke, movie trailer, Paul Bettany, Robert Downey Jr, Sam Rockwell, Samuel L Jackson, Scarlett Johansson

Screenwriters: John Hamburg (Meet the Fockers)
Director: John Hamburg (Along Came Polly)
Actors: Paul Rudd (Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy), Jon Favreau (Four Christmases), Andy Samburg (Hot Rod), Jaime Pressly (Horton Hears a Who), Jason Segel (Knocked Up) and Thomas Lennon (Reno 911!: Miami)

Labels: Andy Samburg, film, Jon Favreau, movie trailer, Paul Rudd, Thomas Lennon

Short Review: Far more interesting than Nickel Man.

Robert Downey Jr. gives the most inviting and outright fun performance since Johnny Depp dressed up like Keith Richard in Pirates of the Caribbean. Downey's career still stinging from his drug issues and time in the hoosegow manages a remarkable comeback performance in this silly flick. He obviously had fun portraying the weapon industrialist turned iron-clad superhero Tony Stark. He gives Stark a belligerent, but sharp minded snarkiness that lights up the whole picture.

The movie itself isn't going to win any awards for originality. The plot a bit copy and paste and only serves to introduce Stark/Iron Man. The points of the plot tick off predictably but the movie as a whole works because screenwriters Mark Fergus and Hank Ostby (Children of Men) smartly keep the focus on Stark rather than Iron Man. The time it takes for the transformation from man to superhero takes almost the whole film. If you're heading in to see Iron Man kick the stuffing out of bad guys and perhaps throw something through a building, you won't be completely disappointed but you're going to have to wait. Don't take this patience to mean this is a moody and ponderous film like Batman Begins. This more like Spider-Man - the story is properly developed so there's less time for the visual eye candy we have come to expect from content free films like Fantastic 4, Tomb Raider, and Daredevil, X-Men: The Last Stand.


What is interesting, at least to me, with this film is its view of the United States. In a time when Hollywood can't seem to say anything positive about America, this movie goes out of its way to be fair. Stark, a weapons dealer, gets kidnapped in Afghanistan. The American soldiers in the field with him are shown as heroic and kind. Given how they've been treated for the past twenty years, this is a notable exception. On top of this, the duality of America's foreign policies is also carefully displayed. Yes, we blow tons of things up and we've caused a great deal of pain. Conversely, we have also fed and saved millions through humanitarian aid and protection. When Stark's friend lies dying in an Afghan cave surrounded by American weapons they're using on our troops, it is not an accident the dying man is lying on top of a bag of grain also from the States. Finally, the villain Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), Stark's business partner, is only identified as the villain when it comes out that he is a turncoat against America and is selling weapons to our enemies. Again, in a time when many in Hollywood would be more than comfortable not making a distinction between terrorists and America, this a worth noting.

If you can turn your brain off and gloss over the details (and ignore the plot conveniences) this is an enjoyable film on many levels. It doesn't rise above its comic book origins. Then again, its about a guy in an iron suit, its not meant to be an Oscar contender.


Cautions: Given that the Iron Man toys have hit the shelves and the franchise is off to a stellar start, many parents will be tempted to take their children to see the movie. For parents I'd give a warning that the movie does have some frank sexual behavior. Stark picks up a reporter and they are shown rolling in the sheets. She is then shown draped naked on the bed, blurry eyed, the morning after. Stark is a womanizer and this is referenced a number of times throughout the film. The violence is not gory but people are shot, beaten and thrown around like rag dolls. It should also be noted that small children will probably be disturbed by the frightening robots and loud voices.


Worldview: The movie contains a very valuable lesson on defining oneself through ones works. Stark is filthy rich, brilliant and insanely successful but his life is hollow. His mentor, once he learns Stark is without a wife and kids points out that Stark is a man who has everything but it means nothing. Much in the same way he sleeps around with women but never experiences love, Stark turns when he looks at his life and recognizes that works for their own sake are without value. The script does a great job of bringing this to life through the use of an obtuse symbol of a chuck of glowing technology that essentially replaces his heart. He only becomes a man when he lives to serve others and not his own selfish needs.


Related Reviews:
Superhero movies
Superman Returns (2006)
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Oxford Film Freak
The Film Chair

Labels: Gwyneth Paltrow, Jeff Bridges, Jon Favreau, movie review, Robert Downey Jr, superhero, Terrance Howard

Merry Christmas - enjoy the birth of Christ by watching a couple of malcontents suffering through humorless strings of slapstick.






Screenwriter: Caleb Wilson and Matt Allen
Director: Seth Gordon (The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters)
Actors: Reese Witherspoon (Walk the Line), Vince Vaughn (Be Cool), Robert Duvall (Secondhand Lions) and Jon Favreau (The Replacements)

Labels: film, Jon Favreau, movie trailer, Reese Witherspoon, Robert Duvall, Vince Vaughn

Short Review: Far more interesting than Nickel Man.

Robert Downey Jr. gives the most inviting and outright fun performance since Johnny Depp dressed up like Keith Richard in Pirates of the Caribbean. Downey's career still stinging from his drug issues and time in the hoosegow manages a remarkable comeback performance in this silly flick. He obviously had fun portraying the weapon industrialist turned iron-clad superhero Tony Stark. He gives Stark a belligerent, but sharp minded snarkiness that lights up the whole picture.

The movie itself isn't going to win any awards for originality. The plot a bit copy and paste and only serves to introduce Stark/Iron Man. The points of the plot tick off predictably but the movie as a whole works because screenwriters Mark Fergus and Hank Ostby (Children of Men) smartly keep the focus on Stark rather than Iron Man. The time it takes for the transformation from man to superhero takes almost the whole film. If you're heading in to see Iron Man kick the stuffing out of bad guys and perhaps throw something through a building, you won't be completely disappointed but you're going to have to wait. Don't take this patience to mean this is a moody and ponderous film like Batman Begins. This more like Spider-Man - the story is properly developed so there's less time for the visual eye candy we have come to expect from content free films like Fantastic 4, Tomb Raider, and Daredevil, X-Men: The Last Stand.


What is interesting, at least to me, with this film is its view of the United States. In a time when Hollywood can't seem to say anything positive about America, this movie goes out of its way to be fair. Stark, a weapons dealer, gets kidnapped in Afghanistan. The American soldiers in the field with him are shown as heroic and kind. Given how they've been treated for the past twenty years, this is a notable exception. On top of this, the duality of America's foreign policies is also carefully displayed. Yes, we blow tons of things up and we've caused a great deal of pain. Conversely, we have also fed and saved millions through humanitarian aid and protection. When Stark's friend lies dying in an Afgan cave surrounded by American weapons they're using on our troops, it is not an accident the dying man is lying on top of a bag of grain also from the States. Finally, the villain Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), Stark's business partner, is only identified as the villain when it comes out that he is a turncoat against America and is selling weapons to our enemies. Again, in a time when many in Hollywood would be more than comfortable not making a distinction between terrorists and America, this a worth noting.

If you can turn your brain off and gloss over the details (and ignore the plot conveniences) this is an enjoyable film on many levels. It doesn't rise above its comic book origins. Then again, its about a guy in an iron suit, its not meant to be an Oscar contender.


Cautions: Given that the Iron Man toys have hit the shelves and the franchise is off to a stellar start, many parents will be tempted to take their children to see the movie. For parents I'd give a warning that the movie does have some frank sexual behavior. Stark picks up a reporter and they are shown rolling in the sheets. She is then shown draped naked on the bed, blurry eyed, the morning after. Stark is a womanizer and this is referenced a number of times throughout the film. The violence is not gory but people are shot, beaten and thrown around like rag dolls. It should also be noted that small children will probably be disturbed by the frightening robots and loud voices.


Worldview: The movie contains a very valuable lesson on defining oneself through ones works. Stark is filthy rich, brilliant and insanely successful but his life is hollow. His mentor, once he learns Stark is without a wife and kids points out that Stark is a man who has everything but it means nothing. Much in the same way he sleeps around with women but never experiences love, Stark turns when he looks at his life and recognizes that works for their own sake are without value. The script does a great job of bringing this to life through the use of an obtuse symbol of a chuck of glowing technology that essentially replaces his heart. He only becomes a man when he lives to serve others and not his own selfish needs.


Related Reviews:
Superhero movies
Superman Returns (2006)
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Oxford Film Freak
The Film Chair

Labels: Gwyneth Paltrow, Jeff Bridges, Jon Favreau, movie review, Robert Downey Jr, superhero, Terrance Howard