
Guys, that line was meant to make you think that would be true, but it's not true. Aldrich Killian is a comic book villain. He created the Mandarin so that he has a face to hide behind and a lightning rod for hatred. So what is Killian's end game in all this, now that he has the pieces moved into place? I don't know. I mean, he wants power, I guess. He strings the vice president into his plans which, assuming his last bombing wherein the president would be killed goes off without a hitch, would put an AIM supporter in the White House. He mentions that he controls the war on terror with the west's biggest hitter and its biggest terrorist in his hands. So is he in this for the power? For the money? He seems pretty wealthy already. I didn't get the sense in either of my two viewings over the weekend that he particularly cared about money. There's a little subplot with him in love with Pepper and using her as a trophy that seems a little sudden. Simply put, he seems evil for evil's sake, but without the race hatred of a Red Skull or the power and ego of a Doctor Doom. This might seem like picking on just one aspect of a long movie but it's kind of a make-or-break point. A villain without a sincere motivation is just confusing because there are no terms on the table. I think the film tries to set up the idea of Killian as a once-good guy, back in 1999 when he was a nerd hanger-on with physical deformities, who has been slighted one too many times and snapped, but it doesn't stick. The same is kind of true for Hansen, though we see more of her before and after and she gives us a speech about science meant for good being used for evil. Still, there isn't enough time spent on developing these characters to give us a real sense of why they're doing what they're doing. Hansen is definitely better, showing a woman who is doing important research and will do whatever it takes to get it funded, but she also comes away as someone who has seemingly accepted the Mandarin solution and only thinks better of it later.
Yikes. We've gone two long paragraphs without even touching the titular character. Let's talk about the good first because those paragraphs were definitely huge negatives. The action scenes are intense and fun to watch (if at times a little cluttered and confusing). The film never feels really painful to watch, which seems like a backhanded compliment but really isn't; there are plenty of superhero movies (and movies in general) that don't just drag, they actively seem to resent the viewer. Tony is Tony, suave and cool but able to recognize, eventually the good things in his life. It will never not be fun to watch an Iron Man suit fly through the air and in this movie we get a whole slew of them doing just that. The performances are largely what we would have expected out of the talented group of actors. The film also did a great job of keeping to itself, not reaching out to the Avengers in an attempt at pleasing fans (except in a cute post-credit scene). That can't be easy to do in a time where The Avengers made over a billion dollars.

I'll say again, the action is good if a bit dragged out, but when you set up your main character to have a hugely interesting new flaw then kill it with no resolution and no apparent memory that it was a problem (except for a throwaway line later about how he's sleeping better), you've got a problem in your storytelling. Tony's anxiety attacks, which had played a major role in the first half of the movie, all but disappear when he's told by supporting character Harley Keener (Ty Simpkins), a precocious child with a scientific mind and no father, to go build something. Did...did that solve the problem? Because, from Tony's own testimony and as evidenced by all of the Iron Man suits, he's been building things. Then the anxiety never reappears because we have action scenes to get to. So we take a really interesting and new idea of a character who has always been in control and has understood what he's been doing losing a grip on that control and that reality before completely forgetting we did that and watching Tony and his army of Iron Men attacking an army of Extremis powered soldiers (quick side note: Extremis isn't particularly well-explained either. It "rewires" DNA for the next step in evolution and that MIGHT mean that it makes people able to heal, makes them run faster, makes them stronger, makes them hot to the touch, and so on. But all of that is shown, not told, so who knows what this thing really does?) while trying to save the love interest only to find the love interest saving him. TWIST.
I love Marvel movies. I think that the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been unprecedented in its boldness and its willingness to tie together this huge web of movies and characters, despite legal flaws like "you can't use Spider-Man or mutants." I think The Avengers was a pretty near perfect film for what it set out to do and I've been impressed by the depth of story and character each film has put forth when it would have been so easy to just make a popcorn flick. I think Iron Man 3 is a popcorn flick. It's got good action, quippy characters that we know and love, and a rather undefinable antagonist and plot. I think it's the weakest entry from Marvel since Iron Man set the whole universe in motion. On the plus side, the Iron Man franchise as a whole never reached Spider-Man 3 or X-Men the Last Stand depths. The movie is still totally watchable and never gets painful to watch. I like the introduction of both AIM and Roxxon to the MCU. Hopefully it's not a sign so early on into Marvel's Phase II that the direction from here on out is going to be coasting. I still have high hopes for Thor: The Dark World and remarkably high hopes for Captain America: Winter Soldier. For the first time seeing a new Marvel movie though, I can honestly say I'm not dying to see Iron Man 3 again.
No comments:
Post a Comment