This is to be my first entry in a new series I like to call "Retro Reviews", where I'll be reviewing old movies and analyzing whether I still feel the same way about them now as I did back then. With the Avengers hitting in America in less than a week, I decided to do my first Retro Review series on the Marvel films, starting of course with the film that started it all, Iron Man.
What can I say about this film that people haven't already said? I think it's brilliant. Personally, Iron Man is among my favorite comic book film adaptations (beat out only by The Dark Knight and Spider-Man 2). Robert Downey Jr. single handedly took one of Marvel's B-list characters and made him iconic. His interactions with the rest of the top notch cast, from Gwyneth Paltrow's Pepper Potts to Terrence Howard's Rhodey to Jeff Bridge's Obadiah Stane, make the film something to truly behold. What I really love about this film is the sense of realism given off by director Jon Favreau, how he allows the passage of time to move realistically in order to make us believe that building an armored suit is really possible. The building of the armor is handled so expertly, from the steampunk-esque Mark I to the shiny Mark II to the iconic red and gold Mark III, that I can't help but be entranced by every aspect of the story.
I know I've already mentioned it, but I really have to hand it to RDJ. He embodies Tony Stark perfectly, and yet at the same time redefines the character, bringing out his witty, sarcastic side to make him a truly unique individual. The personal arc he goes through is genius, with Stark learning what it means to be held accountable for his actions and take responsibility for the weapons he created. One of my favorite scenes, one which I think exemplifies this arc beautifully, was when he lands in the Middle East and takes out the terrorists in the Mark III. Not only was it a glorious set piece, but there was something that felt right about it. When we think of superheroes out to "save the world", I often wonder why any of them don't get the idea to go out and actually solve the world's problems. Batman's in Gotham, Spidey's in New York, but it seems like they always handle problems on an urban level instead of an international level.
Now here's Iron Man, who in the comics was made as a metaphor for the military industrial complex, and here is reimagined for the War on Terror in place of his Vietnam roots. Either way, it's brilliant to see a hero actually responding to world wide threats. He sees a news channel about suffering in the Middle East, he goes there and beats the crap out of terrorists. This is a superhero who actually gets it. It also helps that, unlike the adolescent, drama-infested Spider-Man or the dark, brooding Batman, Iron Man actually gets to have a little fun.
The film is full of humor, from the trials of building the suit to Tony's interactions with Pepper and Rhodey. I found myself laughing out loud at some of the gags. More than anything, the first Iron Man really captures the essence of a Marvel comic book, all the while making it modernized and cinematic enough to work as an enjoyable film that everyone, not just comic book nerds, can enjoy.
With that said, I do love how the director added in easter eggs for comic fans. The Ten Rings was an excellent way to reference Mandarin without fully showing him, and I really hope that Iron Man 3, despite what Shane Black says, includes him just to resolve that plot point. The foreshadowing of Rhodey's transformation into War Machine was a nice touch, although I wish we got to see what Terrence Howard would have brought to the role had he not been recasted. Somehow I get the feeling he would have had a better dynamic with Tony had he donned the War Machine armor, but I'm here to review what is, not what could have been (besides, this is more relevant to Iron Man 2 anyway). Speaking of which, I noticed how the F-22s were code named Whiplash 1 and 2, which is a nice throaway considering Favrau's choice of villain for the sequel. And of course, there's SHIELD. The acronym pun was funny throughout the film, and I loved the introduction to Coulson, who despite not being a comic based character has gone on to become a breakout supporting role in these films. And then of course is the all-important end credits scene, a brilliant way to tease fans with the Avengers initiative. Four years ago, I thought it was just wishful thinking, but now it's actually happening and I couldn't be more excited for it.
Now that all of this has been said, the question remains: how does the film hold up? Do I still enjoy it just as much now as I did four years ago? The answer is a resounding yes. Not only does Iron Man act as a spring board for Marvel's grand plan, it also works beautifully as a standalone film. Yes, there are teases to a sequel, but as a film it really does work well. The "I Am Iron Man" reveal at the end not only spells dangerous consequences for Tony's future, but also plays on his character, and completely subverts the "rule" in superhero films that the hero has to have a secret identity. But back to what I was saying, the film does hold up after repeat viewings. It's a magnificent film that to this day is one of my all-time favorite superhero movies. Tomorrow I will be reviewing "Iron Man 2", the next phase in Tony Stark's personal journey as well as the next step on the road to the Avengers.
No comments:
Post a Comment