Unless you’ve been living under a rock this summer, you know about the G.I. Joe movie. Between the massive marketing campaign and the nostalgia held by anyone under the age of 40, it was bound to evoke reaction from people.
Given Hollywood’s spotty history with remakes, plus the noticeable changes to the franchise that are evident in the trailer, it’s easy to assume the worst.
As someone whose toybox was dominated by G.I. Joes (more than thirty of them by my count), I can identify with those who were upset to see the standard camouflage replaced with some sort of robotic suit that seems to put its wearers into the matrix, where the laws of physics don’t apply.
“G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra” is not an action movie, it is THE action movie. From “Star Wars” through “Spiderman,” the influence of every action movie that came before it is evident in every scene.
The dogfights may feature submarines instead of X-Wings, a robotic suit takes the place of a radioactive spider, but the action is very much the same.
The ensemble cast is made up of very talented actors from across the spectrum, from Channing Tatum and Marlon Wayans to Dennis Quaid and Sienna Miller. While they are all talented actors, there are written with hardly more depth than their plastic counterparts.
Tatum is the gung-ho Soldier who is always ready for the next fight. Wayans is his wise-cracking partner with a heart of gold. Dennis Quaid is the grizzled yet vulnerable leader and Miller plays both the scorned lover and the villainess.
The movie piles action cliché on top of action cliché, but it does so in a way that seems more of a tribute than just lazy writing. There is every sort of conflict you can imagine. Childhood rivalries, old lovers’ quarrels and past family drama all come into play through a series of flashbacks.
It’s a very efficient way to inject drama into each battle, but it does so without letting plot get in the way of explosions.
The movie takes place in a world where the laws of physics don’t always apply, a karate fight could break out at any minute and every vehicle has at least a half-dozen missiles attached to it, just in case.
There are very few breaks in the action, another car chases, gun battle or highly choreographed fight is always right around the corner.
While all this is going on, enough plot points are planted for a long run for the franchise, the final scene indicates that a sequel is probably already in pre-production.
A particular highlight of the film is the battles between Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow. Snake Eyes never talks and Storm Shadow probably spends much of his paycheck on throwing stars.
Both martial artists (one always in black, one always in white), they have a personal history going back to their childhood. Their battles are the highlight of the film, even if you can see it coming from a mile away.
In fact, most of the plot can be plotted within the first ten minutes, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The money that could have gone to an overcomplicated plot line instead went to some absolutely breathtaking scenes.
G.I. Joe purists who still remember getting their first Snake Eyes action figure might not be on board with the movie and its various liberties with the established characters, but if you’re looking to turn off your brain and watch explosions for two hours, there aren’t many movies better suited for that.
Rating - $8.00
Showing posts with label action. Show all posts
Showing posts with label action. Show all posts
Friday, August 7, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
The International
Action-thriller movies have taken an interesting turn in the last decade or so. The action is always plentiful, but often the ‘thriller’ aspect is nothing more than a loose end that gets tied up by the end, but its purpose is to give a brief respite from the gunfire and fistfights.
The Bond franchise and even the Bourne movies have crossed that line. They used to be plot driven, with the occasional gunfight or car chase thrown in to show the audience that movies can still make magic.
Now the only break in action is to re-load and slap some bandages on, then it’s right back into the fray. While action seems to always bring in the big bucks, there is something to be said for the old model, where the plot sucks you in, and the action is just icing on the cake.
“The International” follows an older school of action movies, the school that gave us classics such as “Bullitt.” This type of movie doesn’t bludgeon you with over-the-top shootouts or car chases that destroy entire city blocks. Instead, it is like a volcano, slowly building pressure, erupting then the pressure starts building again.
The film is structured around these release points, and it provides a glimpse back to a simpler kind of movie, not the Jerry Bruckheimer explosion-fests, but a true action-thriller, with an emphasis on the thriller.
The premise is simple enough. Clive Owen (“Sin City,” “Inside Man”), an Interpol agent with a checkered past, and Naomi Watts (“King Kong,” “21 Grams”), a New York District Attorney with everything to lose, team up to bring down an international bank that is suspected of brokering conflicts around the world and profiting off them.
The bank is the classic shadow organization, with people everywhere, and you never know who might be working for them. A quick assassination at the beginning of the film, and the subsequent response by the authorities shows everything you need to know about how far this bank’s reach is.
Owen seems to be at his best when he plays someone that needs to act rather than mull options. His character’s shady past is hinted at, and that’s really all you need to find his motivation. He does a good job as the “wild card,” a role that has been missing from movies since Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry.
Rather than constant explosions, the movie features terse, intense conversations where everyone is lying, and everyone else in the room knows that. It is a remarkable way to ratchet up the tension without being overwhelming. There are also plenty of good, but slightly trite, one-liners, which add nicely to the vintage feel of the movie.
Parts of the plot are predictable, as they are in any action movie. There are subtle references to classics such as “The Godfather” and “Reservoir Dogs” that don’t leap of the screen, but they are there. The combination of cliché and intrigue make the film familiar yet fresh in an interesting way.
And then there is the shootout. A good shootout can make a bad movie better, and conversely, make a good movie worse. In this case, the seven-minute apocalypse that takes place in New York’s Guggenheim Musuem, it’s one for the ages.
What makes it better is that you don’t see it coming. What is supposed to be an eavesdrop on a meeting turns into a full fledged masterpiece of a shootout. The architecture of the museum lets the action breathe, as well as provide many different props for the characters to shoot at.
The movie’s problem becomes apparent as it starts winding down. Without spoiling anything, the film just kind of trails off in a whimper. It’s as if the producers had a few plot points and the idea for the shootout, and decided that it was enough.
Which begs the age-old question: is it about the destination or the journey? While the journey is very satisfying, by the time you get to the destination, you can’t help but look back and wonder, as The Strokes did in 2001,“Is this it?”
Rating - $8.50
The Bond franchise and even the Bourne movies have crossed that line. They used to be plot driven, with the occasional gunfight or car chase thrown in to show the audience that movies can still make magic.
Now the only break in action is to re-load and slap some bandages on, then it’s right back into the fray. While action seems to always bring in the big bucks, there is something to be said for the old model, where the plot sucks you in, and the action is just icing on the cake.
“The International” follows an older school of action movies, the school that gave us classics such as “Bullitt.” This type of movie doesn’t bludgeon you with over-the-top shootouts or car chases that destroy entire city blocks. Instead, it is like a volcano, slowly building pressure, erupting then the pressure starts building again.
The film is structured around these release points, and it provides a glimpse back to a simpler kind of movie, not the Jerry Bruckheimer explosion-fests, but a true action-thriller, with an emphasis on the thriller.
The premise is simple enough. Clive Owen (“Sin City,” “Inside Man”), an Interpol agent with a checkered past, and Naomi Watts (“King Kong,” “21 Grams”), a New York District Attorney with everything to lose, team up to bring down an international bank that is suspected of brokering conflicts around the world and profiting off them.
The bank is the classic shadow organization, with people everywhere, and you never know who might be working for them. A quick assassination at the beginning of the film, and the subsequent response by the authorities shows everything you need to know about how far this bank’s reach is.
Owen seems to be at his best when he plays someone that needs to act rather than mull options. His character’s shady past is hinted at, and that’s really all you need to find his motivation. He does a good job as the “wild card,” a role that has been missing from movies since Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry.
Rather than constant explosions, the movie features terse, intense conversations where everyone is lying, and everyone else in the room knows that. It is a remarkable way to ratchet up the tension without being overwhelming. There are also plenty of good, but slightly trite, one-liners, which add nicely to the vintage feel of the movie.
Parts of the plot are predictable, as they are in any action movie. There are subtle references to classics such as “The Godfather” and “Reservoir Dogs” that don’t leap of the screen, but they are there. The combination of cliché and intrigue make the film familiar yet fresh in an interesting way.
And then there is the shootout. A good shootout can make a bad movie better, and conversely, make a good movie worse. In this case, the seven-minute apocalypse that takes place in New York’s Guggenheim Musuem, it’s one for the ages.
What makes it better is that you don’t see it coming. What is supposed to be an eavesdrop on a meeting turns into a full fledged masterpiece of a shootout. The architecture of the museum lets the action breathe, as well as provide many different props for the characters to shoot at.
The movie’s problem becomes apparent as it starts winding down. Without spoiling anything, the film just kind of trails off in a whimper. It’s as if the producers had a few plot points and the idea for the shootout, and decided that it was enough.
Which begs the age-old question: is it about the destination or the journey? While the journey is very satisfying, by the time you get to the destination, you can’t help but look back and wonder, as The Strokes did in 2001,“Is this it?”
Rating - $8.50
Friday, June 13, 2008
The Incredible Hulk
The first thing prospective viewers of “The Incredible Hulk” will be asking themselves is what the film’s relation is to Ang Lee’s disaster, 2003’s “Hulk.”
Fortunately, the first film is never mentioned, and the Hulk’s origin is explained in the three-minute opening credit sequence. The events are not the same as in the first movie, indicating that this film is an entirely new reboot for the green-skinned hero.
Screenwriter Zak Penn (“PCU,” X-Men 2,” “X-Men: The Last Stand”), no stranger to the comic book movie, penned the script with help from Edward Norton. The result is a script that is closer to the comics and original television show than the previous film.
Norton fills the title role this time, and his acting chops lend a little more depth to Dr. Bruce Banner. Banner lives his life trying to control his heart rate, because anything over 200 beats per minute will unleash his monstrous alter ego.
Playing his love interest Betty Ross, is Liv Tyler. Best known for her glassy eyed stare and quivering lower lip, she was tailor made to play the torn, wounded love interest of Banner.
The film opens to find Banner working in a soda bottling plant in a third-world country, taking anger management in order to manage his ‘incidents.’
When he is eventually tracked down, the story uses the patented “Cloverfield” method of showing glimpses of the monster, in order to build the tension (previously known as the “Jaws” method).
In addition to “Cloverfield,” the film’s opening chase scene strongly resembles one from the blockbuster, “The Bourne Ultimatum.” While there is nothing wrong with films paying tribute to one another, when the references are to smash hits that have come out less than a year ago, it tends to make one cynical.
Many elements of nostalgia from the television show are present, including the famous piano theme from the closing credits, and a brief appearance by Lou Ferrigno.
The film also makes it clear that it is part of the Marvel comics universe. There are several references to Tonty Stark, the main character from “Iron Man.”
The bread and butter of superhero movies, the fight scenes, are incredible. While the Hulk fighting his human pursuers is somewhat entertaining, it’s the fight with The Abomination at the end
Despite its cast improvement over its predecessor, the movie seems unsure of its own worth. Three of the biggest movies in the last nine months are referenced, and the result is a movie that seems unsure of itself.
The film’s strength lies in its narrative. Since the first half of the movie isn’t wasted with an origin story, a full story can develop. As successful as superhero movies become, the first half of the first movie in series can be taken up by the origin, and it strains the narrative when the stories must be juggled.
The film’s conclusion just seems to taper off into nothing, and while ground is laid for the sequel; the viewer is left unsure of the fate of several key characters.
While not quote the savior to the genre that “Iron Man” was (and maybe it’s unfair to compare the two, but Marvel chose to release them within a month of each other), the film is another step in the right direction.
It takes another step towards creating The Avengers, a superhero group that consists of the Hulk and Iron Man, as well as Captain America, Thor and others. But rather than phone in the film in anticipation of an epic Avengers film, “The Incredible Hulk” lays a good foundation for both sequels and crossovers.
Rating - $8.00
Fortunately, the first film is never mentioned, and the Hulk’s origin is explained in the three-minute opening credit sequence. The events are not the same as in the first movie, indicating that this film is an entirely new reboot for the green-skinned hero.
Screenwriter Zak Penn (“PCU,” X-Men 2,” “X-Men: The Last Stand”), no stranger to the comic book movie, penned the script with help from Edward Norton. The result is a script that is closer to the comics and original television show than the previous film.
Norton fills the title role this time, and his acting chops lend a little more depth to Dr. Bruce Banner. Banner lives his life trying to control his heart rate, because anything over 200 beats per minute will unleash his monstrous alter ego.
Playing his love interest Betty Ross, is Liv Tyler. Best known for her glassy eyed stare and quivering lower lip, she was tailor made to play the torn, wounded love interest of Banner.
The film opens to find Banner working in a soda bottling plant in a third-world country, taking anger management in order to manage his ‘incidents.’
When he is eventually tracked down, the story uses the patented “Cloverfield” method of showing glimpses of the monster, in order to build the tension (previously known as the “Jaws” method).
In addition to “Cloverfield,” the film’s opening chase scene strongly resembles one from the blockbuster, “The Bourne Ultimatum.” While there is nothing wrong with films paying tribute to one another, when the references are to smash hits that have come out less than a year ago, it tends to make one cynical.
Many elements of nostalgia from the television show are present, including the famous piano theme from the closing credits, and a brief appearance by Lou Ferrigno.
The film also makes it clear that it is part of the Marvel comics universe. There are several references to Tonty Stark, the main character from “Iron Man.”
The bread and butter of superhero movies, the fight scenes, are incredible. While the Hulk fighting his human pursuers is somewhat entertaining, it’s the fight with The Abomination at the end
Despite its cast improvement over its predecessor, the movie seems unsure of its own worth. Three of the biggest movies in the last nine months are referenced, and the result is a movie that seems unsure of itself.
The film’s strength lies in its narrative. Since the first half of the movie isn’t wasted with an origin story, a full story can develop. As successful as superhero movies become, the first half of the first movie in series can be taken up by the origin, and it strains the narrative when the stories must be juggled.
The film’s conclusion just seems to taper off into nothing, and while ground is laid for the sequel; the viewer is left unsure of the fate of several key characters.
While not quote the savior to the genre that “Iron Man” was (and maybe it’s unfair to compare the two, but Marvel chose to release them within a month of each other), the film is another step in the right direction.
It takes another step towards creating The Avengers, a superhero group that consists of the Hulk and Iron Man, as well as Captain America, Thor and others. But rather than phone in the film in anticipation of an epic Avengers film, “The Incredible Hulk” lays a good foundation for both sequels and crossovers.
Rating - $8.00
Friday, May 23, 2008
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
When word came out that a fourth installment of Indiana Jones was on its’ way, people were understandably skeptical. After all, the last trilogy George Lucas updated didn’t turn out so well.
The fact that Steven Spielberg is at the helm of this picture offers some reassurance.
Harrison Ford, 65, reprises one of his iconic roles as Indiana Jones, professor of Archaeology by day, international adventurer by night. Ford trades in his watch and pension for his trademark fedora and bullwhip.
In “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” nineteen years have passed since the last movie. The film immediately thrusts the viewer into the world of the 1950’s, courtesy of Elvis Aaron Presley’s “Hound Dog,” which was at the top of the charts around the time of the movie.
Gone are the Nazi scientists searching for the power to conquer the world. Replacing them are the Cold War-era Russians searching for the power to conquer the world.
Cate Blanchett (“The Aviator”) plays a Russian colonel who is obsessed with the possibilities offered by psychic warfare. While her accent falters at times, she does very well playing the evil-yet-seductive women that Indy seems to always come in contact with.
Shia LeBeouf (“Transformers,” “Disturbia”) plays a James Dean-style greaser, complete with leather jacket and motorcycle. He nervously combs his hair, doesn’t back down from anything, and does all the other things that round out the characters from “Grease” and “West Side Story” among others.
The character of George “Mac” McHale, played by Ray Winstone (“The Departed,” “Beowulf”) seems to be a last minute addition, a double-, triple- and quadruple- agent who is a shadow, passing in and out of the narrative without leaving any sort of lasting impression. Winstone plays his part well, but the writing for his character just isn’t up to snuff.
The movie continuously beats you over the head with the fact that it takes place in the fifties. The presence of Nazis in the previous films made it clear when the previous films were taking place, they didn’t go out of their way to reinforce the fact that it takes place in the forties.
All the varsity jackets, pleated skirts, Everly Brothers’ tunes and milkshakes with multiple straws in them serve to make this film a nostalgia piece, which doesn’t jive with the spirit of the original movies.
Indiana Jones was based on the adventurers from the early part of the 20th century who existed in pulp magazines with serialized stories that played out from week to week.
The movie’s main weakness is that the film seems content in simply bringing back the nostalgia of the previous films, without adding anything new.
Ford looks very fit for his age, and the script doesn’t take it easy on him in terms of stunts. If it weren’t for LeBeouf calling him ‘gramps’ constantly, his age wouldn’t even be relevant.
The movie wants to emphasize the obvious age distance between LeBeouf and Ford, even to its’ own detriment. While the serial adventurers that Indy is based on were always timeless, this film seems determined to make him a dinosaur.
While it might save us another two movies, making a second trilogy (like Star Wars), this ageism really takes away from what could have been just another classic Indiana Jones adventure. Lucas and Co. seems resigned to the fact that Indy is past his prime and the movie is going to appeal to fans of the franchise.
Maybe it was the universal panning of his new Star Wars trilogy that made Lucas and his team so gun-shy, or maybe he just doesn’t have the energy to throw himself into a new epic.
Either way, the film is entertaining. It’s too bad the producers didn’t go for a home run, they seemed content with hitting a single, albeit a single that will net hundreds of millions of dollars.
The vibe is there, but the insistence on reminding the viewer that Dr. Jones is the old man and LeBoeuf is the young turk just gets old, pardon the pun.
Anyone who liked any of the previous films will undoubtedly want to see it, and maybe will even enjoy the film. It’s just a little sad to see the bar set so low.
Rating - $7.00
The fact that Steven Spielberg is at the helm of this picture offers some reassurance.
Harrison Ford, 65, reprises one of his iconic roles as Indiana Jones, professor of Archaeology by day, international adventurer by night. Ford trades in his watch and pension for his trademark fedora and bullwhip.
In “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” nineteen years have passed since the last movie. The film immediately thrusts the viewer into the world of the 1950’s, courtesy of Elvis Aaron Presley’s “Hound Dog,” which was at the top of the charts around the time of the movie.
Gone are the Nazi scientists searching for the power to conquer the world. Replacing them are the Cold War-era Russians searching for the power to conquer the world.
Cate Blanchett (“The Aviator”) plays a Russian colonel who is obsessed with the possibilities offered by psychic warfare. While her accent falters at times, she does very well playing the evil-yet-seductive women that Indy seems to always come in contact with.
Shia LeBeouf (“Transformers,” “Disturbia”) plays a James Dean-style greaser, complete with leather jacket and motorcycle. He nervously combs his hair, doesn’t back down from anything, and does all the other things that round out the characters from “Grease” and “West Side Story” among others.
The character of George “Mac” McHale, played by Ray Winstone (“The Departed,” “Beowulf”) seems to be a last minute addition, a double-, triple- and quadruple- agent who is a shadow, passing in and out of the narrative without leaving any sort of lasting impression. Winstone plays his part well, but the writing for his character just isn’t up to snuff.
The movie continuously beats you over the head with the fact that it takes place in the fifties. The presence of Nazis in the previous films made it clear when the previous films were taking place, they didn’t go out of their way to reinforce the fact that it takes place in the forties.
All the varsity jackets, pleated skirts, Everly Brothers’ tunes and milkshakes with multiple straws in them serve to make this film a nostalgia piece, which doesn’t jive with the spirit of the original movies.
Indiana Jones was based on the adventurers from the early part of the 20th century who existed in pulp magazines with serialized stories that played out from week to week.
The movie’s main weakness is that the film seems content in simply bringing back the nostalgia of the previous films, without adding anything new.
Ford looks very fit for his age, and the script doesn’t take it easy on him in terms of stunts. If it weren’t for LeBeouf calling him ‘gramps’ constantly, his age wouldn’t even be relevant.
The movie wants to emphasize the obvious age distance between LeBeouf and Ford, even to its’ own detriment. While the serial adventurers that Indy is based on were always timeless, this film seems determined to make him a dinosaur.
While it might save us another two movies, making a second trilogy (like Star Wars), this ageism really takes away from what could have been just another classic Indiana Jones adventure. Lucas and Co. seems resigned to the fact that Indy is past his prime and the movie is going to appeal to fans of the franchise.
Maybe it was the universal panning of his new Star Wars trilogy that made Lucas and his team so gun-shy, or maybe he just doesn’t have the energy to throw himself into a new epic.
Either way, the film is entertaining. It’s too bad the producers didn’t go for a home run, they seemed content with hitting a single, albeit a single that will net hundreds of millions of dollars.
The vibe is there, but the insistence on reminding the viewer that Dr. Jones is the old man and LeBoeuf is the young turk just gets old, pardon the pun.
Anyone who liked any of the previous films will undoubtedly want to see it, and maybe will even enjoy the film. It’s just a little sad to see the bar set so low.
Rating - $7.00
Friday, May 9, 2008
Iron Man
It has become just another Hollywood contrivance. Make a superhero movie and spend money on special effects, not the script. The movie then pulls in $100 million based on the built in fans of the comic.
Everything the “Spider-Man” and “X-Men” movies accomplished for the superhero genre were soon undone by the “Fantastic Four,” “Hulk,” “Daredevil,” “Ghost Rider” and “Elektra” movies that tried to CGI their way past their narrative shortcomings. If you’re wondering when the term CGI became a verb, it was
“Iron Man” is a return to glory for the superhero franchise. While not as much as a household name as Spiderman, Iron Man is still one of the marquee characters in the Marvel universe. He has also never been represented on film, save for a straight-to-DVD cartoon adventure.
The film is the first of Marvel’s movies to be financed by Marvel Studios, and it gives hope that they are paying closer attention to the product that carries their name.
One of Iron Man’s fundamental appeals is the fact that he has no “super powers.” There was no exposure to radiation, nor was he born with any special abilities. All of his powers come from his own mind, from the suit of armor that he has designed for himself.
Most superhero movies cast actors on their way up. Tobey Maguire, Eric Bana and most of the ‘X-Men’ cast used their roles to transition from working actor to superstar. This is what makes Robert Downey Jr. an interesting choice for Iron Man and his alter ego, Tony Stark.
Stark is a work-hard, play-hard weapons contractor who has no sleepless nights due to the nature of his business. It helps that he is often accompanied to bed by a beautiful woman and expensive whiskey.
Sooner or later we all have to pay the piper, and Tony Stark is no exception. His convoy is attacked in the Middle East and he is captured by terrorists intent on having him design their next superweapon. Instead of a missile, Stark develops a prototype of his iron suit.
Stark’s captivity teaches him a lesson about what exactly his weapons do, and he vows to change the effect he has on the world.
It is a testament to Downey’s acting chops that he is able to pull off the transition from a witty yet unlikable weapons contractor to a genuine superhero. Unlike many superhero movies, the story actually shows the changes in Stark, rather than just tells you that he has changed.
Gwyneth Paltrow plays his secretary Pepper Potts. She plays the part well, she is attractive but not gorgeous, and she has just a hint of the neurotic, insecure woman character that she is so well known for.
A bald Jeff Bridges plays the film’s villain, Obadiah Stane. Besides having a great name, Stane is a good villain, ruthless in the boardroom and on the battlefield. One of the things that kept Iron Man from seeping into the general comic book landscape was the lack of notable villains. Bridges does a good job of bringing a credible threat to Iron Man.
The Fantastic Four had Dr. Doom, the X-Men had Magneto, Superman had Lex Luthor. It could be argued that the most famous superheroes (Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, X-Men) were so successful because of the myriad of memorable villains they had to face.
Second-tier superheroes like Iron Man, Captain America and Daredevil do not face quite the same caliber of villains. Since there are already two more “Iron Man” sequels in the works, the producers would do well to put time and effort into creating notable villains.
A major strength of this film is it leaves the viewer wanting more. There is not much CGI, which allows the film to rely on the narrative and the dialogue. There are only a few scenes with Iron Man in his armor, which whets the audience’s appetite for possible sequels.
The major weakness of the film is that almost half of its 126 minutes is taken up with Iron Man’s origin. While this makes a strong foundation for future movies, it doesn’t help when “Iron Man 2” is still at least two years away.
If you do see this movie in the theatre, make sure you stay until the credits run out. There is a short teaser that features an expected but welcome cameo.
The movie is well worth seeing, and there are enough subtle nuances to invite repeated viewings. Stan Lee makes his best cameo in a Marvel film yet. Hopefully this is a sign that studios will no longer be content with churning out mindless superhero movies, but rather will take the time and effort required to bring these print heroes to life.
Rating - $10.00
Everything the “Spider-Man” and “X-Men” movies accomplished for the superhero genre were soon undone by the “Fantastic Four,” “Hulk,” “Daredevil,” “Ghost Rider” and “Elektra” movies that tried to CGI their way past their narrative shortcomings. If you’re wondering when the term CGI became a verb, it was
“Iron Man” is a return to glory for the superhero franchise. While not as much as a household name as Spiderman, Iron Man is still one of the marquee characters in the Marvel universe. He has also never been represented on film, save for a straight-to-DVD cartoon adventure.
The film is the first of Marvel’s movies to be financed by Marvel Studios, and it gives hope that they are paying closer attention to the product that carries their name.
One of Iron Man’s fundamental appeals is the fact that he has no “super powers.” There was no exposure to radiation, nor was he born with any special abilities. All of his powers come from his own mind, from the suit of armor that he has designed for himself.
Most superhero movies cast actors on their way up. Tobey Maguire, Eric Bana and most of the ‘X-Men’ cast used their roles to transition from working actor to superstar. This is what makes Robert Downey Jr. an interesting choice for Iron Man and his alter ego, Tony Stark.
Stark is a work-hard, play-hard weapons contractor who has no sleepless nights due to the nature of his business. It helps that he is often accompanied to bed by a beautiful woman and expensive whiskey.
Sooner or later we all have to pay the piper, and Tony Stark is no exception. His convoy is attacked in the Middle East and he is captured by terrorists intent on having him design their next superweapon. Instead of a missile, Stark develops a prototype of his iron suit.
Stark’s captivity teaches him a lesson about what exactly his weapons do, and he vows to change the effect he has on the world.
It is a testament to Downey’s acting chops that he is able to pull off the transition from a witty yet unlikable weapons contractor to a genuine superhero. Unlike many superhero movies, the story actually shows the changes in Stark, rather than just tells you that he has changed.
Gwyneth Paltrow plays his secretary Pepper Potts. She plays the part well, she is attractive but not gorgeous, and she has just a hint of the neurotic, insecure woman character that she is so well known for.
A bald Jeff Bridges plays the film’s villain, Obadiah Stane. Besides having a great name, Stane is a good villain, ruthless in the boardroom and on the battlefield. One of the things that kept Iron Man from seeping into the general comic book landscape was the lack of notable villains. Bridges does a good job of bringing a credible threat to Iron Man.
The Fantastic Four had Dr. Doom, the X-Men had Magneto, Superman had Lex Luthor. It could be argued that the most famous superheroes (Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, X-Men) were so successful because of the myriad of memorable villains they had to face.
Second-tier superheroes like Iron Man, Captain America and Daredevil do not face quite the same caliber of villains. Since there are already two more “Iron Man” sequels in the works, the producers would do well to put time and effort into creating notable villains.
A major strength of this film is it leaves the viewer wanting more. There is not much CGI, which allows the film to rely on the narrative and the dialogue. There are only a few scenes with Iron Man in his armor, which whets the audience’s appetite for possible sequels.
The major weakness of the film is that almost half of its 126 minutes is taken up with Iron Man’s origin. While this makes a strong foundation for future movies, it doesn’t help when “Iron Man 2” is still at least two years away.
If you do see this movie in the theatre, make sure you stay until the credits run out. There is a short teaser that features an expected but welcome cameo.
The movie is well worth seeing, and there are enough subtle nuances to invite repeated viewings. Stan Lee makes his best cameo in a Marvel film yet. Hopefully this is a sign that studios will no longer be content with churning out mindless superhero movies, but rather will take the time and effort required to bring these print heroes to life.
Rating - $10.00
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)