So now it comes to this. Iron Man started off beating the snot out of
terrorists and confronting the Iron Monger. Then he was challenged by
Whiplash, and made to face a number of personal challenges. Lastly, he
helped save Earth from an otherworldly invasion, and he personally
passed through a wormhole to deliver a nuke to the Chitauri mothership.
Where does Iron Man stand after all this?
The third Iron Man film pits Tony Stark against more challenges,
which ultimately straddles the breaking point for the character. The
man proves to be a wreck to start with - a definite far cry from the
suave narcissist we saw in the beginning of the first film - but now his
personal life, his body, and his mind all pay the price for all of Iron
Man's burdens. In this (final?) round of heroic challenges, Iron Man
confronts the Mandarin terrorists, who ultimately target him personally.
In one of the biggest action scenes of the movie, Stark's home is
demolished in a torrent of missiles. That's just the beginning: from
then on, the film traverses across all of the US as Stark works to find
answers, is made to fight more bad guys, confront bigger challenges, and ultimately thwart the enemy's endgame. By that point, the
stakes are raised really high, and it builds up to a lengthy,
explosive, all-out climax.
There is definitely a ton of action and quality special effects to
behold here. At the same time, the action and drama is finely-balanced
with the same style of comedy and wit that's gone into the first two
films. Overall, the tone, pacing, characters, and concepts of Iron Man 3 is very much consistent with the other films. All three are pretty much on the same level in terms of consistency.
And that's a huge relief, considering that in most superhero franchises, the third films don't usually fare that well (remember X-Men: The Last Stand? Or Spiderman 3? Or Superman III?!). IM3 doesn't quite sink that low, thanks not only with its purposeful execution, but also
with its strong basis in characterizations and storytelling. As
indicated above, there is a lot to be said about the character and his
progression across the three films. This third film effectively
completes his transformation, resolves some long-standing issues, and
still manages to pull out a few impressive twists.
There are still problems, however. Many fans have expressed their outrage over the treatment of the Mandarin's character. I personally thought it was a brilliant, entertaining, and well-executed twist, but it'll leave many hardcore fans feeling cheated. The level of believability with this film is also pushed to the limits, as Tony seems to hop from one Iron Man suit to another at a whim, and insanely powerful bad guys pop in and out at the story's convenience. These stand as minor nitpicks for me personally, but they might break the film for certain viewers.
This film is competently-made with good photography and editing. Acting
is as great as ever, and the writing is generally good. This
production has plenty of fine-looking sets, props, costumes, and special
effects. Music is pretty cool.
Iron Man 3 is as satisfying of a conclusion to the Iron Man
franchise as it is a satisfying summer blockbuster. I say "conclusion"
because it makes these first three films feel whole and complete as they
are. However, as a post-credit message asserts, Tony Stark will
return. If so, he'd certainly be welcome, especially in Avengers 2, but even if an Iron Man 4 never comes, this third film does its job admirably.
4.5/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Very Good | Film: Very Good)
This has been my complaint all along with super hero films. They can't translate well from the comic book. There's too much story and plot to consider in film work, where a comic is like a serial. It's ongoing and ever evolving so you have to keep up and current or you'll miss the entire total picture. But, having said that, I don't hate what they've done with all the super hero films. They have their own charms, even the terrible 3's. The script writers should concentrate on not changing too much background and story to wasste time and get on with the plot. Soemtimes they concentrate on what thrills they can inspire us with and not carrying through with the plot. Yes, CGI is great, but we get it already. Not every scene has to be of epic proportions. Have "we" evolved away from watching the story unfold before us into wanting and craving the experience of sound, sight and thrills in every scene relevent or not?
ReplyDelete