#ADMITTEDLY tony stark himself is a one man version of this trope as well

[littlestarprincess]

Im rewatching The Batman and it reminds me how bizarre the superheros-as-cekebrities trope actually is.

Like, yes, I get it. Superheros are the modern collectives version of Odysseus and Hercules and Achilles. We adore them so the closest equivalent to that adoration must be the other category of human we adore, celebrities and idols! I understand the like.... Impulse behind that?

But I also think it's inherently shallow to understand them through a lens that treats their crime fighting as Their Job. Because with a few exceptions (mostly in Marvel, but not all in Marvel), they're straight up wanted by the police for what they're doing.

[eclipsemediaproject-blog]

Iron Man (2008) Review

To kick off this re watch and individual review of each film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe we must of course start at that humble beginning that is so cherished by the fans of this franchise: Iron Man. I'm sure it won't surprise anyone to hear that I have seen this movie many times, so I did have some preconceived notions and feelings towards it before this viewing. I still tried to dive back in as unbiased as possible with the mindset of a new viewer. While some opinions have developed further during this latest watch, I find it leaves a similar impression on me no matter how many times I see it. It’s still a fresh take on the super-hero genre that is full of entertaining performances, great dialogue and a fun edge. Even with all the charm Iron Man has to offer, though, its crowning achievement is introducing the world to Tony Stark, who is easily one of the best written and performed characters I have seen in a long running franchise. This is his origin story, and though we have seen a lot of those throughout the years you would be hard pressed to find one executed this well.

I would describe Marvel Studios' Iron Man as a "risk that was played safe". Iron Man was far from a household name before 2008, and while it turned out that his origin adapted well into film, choosing him was risky in itself when the "A-listers" (Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, ect.) had until then dominated cinema. Jon Favreau’s unique style of humor was also a venturesome choice in the superhero genre. However, by sticking to what I believe to be relatively safe story structures as a base, the tone of the movie was able to hit the right chords and as a result Iron Man himself became an “A-lister”. On paper, though, other than rightfully avoiding some common tropes of the genre, the full plot is moderately formulaic. It is the story of a man and the dire circumstances that put fantastic abilities into his hands, forcing him to gain a new moral outlook. With this sense of what is right he uses his “powers” to do good in the world, and ultimately he must face a villain with opposite ideals and unnatural strengths of his own. Obviously these are only the most bare story beats, but they still follow a structure that we are familiar with. So how does such a standard story end up feeling fresh and inventive? Part of the credit must go to Favreau, who took his one of a kind style and blended it into a fun action film. There may be the occasional rough moment in the flow and overall tone of Iron Man, but it’s only natural considering Favreau was working in a genre that was unfamiliar to him. I also found that these moments were few and far between, and noticeable only when paying close attention. Even catching the rare tonal issue, it still doesn’t really detract from the film’s entertainment. Plus it was more than worth it to have Jon Favreau’s particular flare to a movie like this. It is that very style, along with the excellently written characters, that made Iron Man special. That is, of course, along with the undeniable talent of Robert Downey Jr.

When a story follows such a basic formula, even when does so very well as it does here, one of the best ways for a movie to really shine is to focus on strong characters. That is a strength that this motion picture definitely has. The best example of this is undoubtedly Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal of Tony Stark. Stark has some cool qualities in the comic book stories he originated from- he is a genius, he is incredibly wealthy, and he is a total playboy- there's even some great development later on from what I can tell (though I haven't read very much), notably his use of alcohol to cope with the problems he faces. Despite having a lot of interesting characteristics on the surface, I feel like the character is still missing something in the source material, at least earlier on. For some reason he is still hard to connect with. The cocky, witty, and larger than life persona that Downey brings to the role does a lot to fill that hole in the cinematic franchise, but what truly makes the film version of Tony Stark so compelling is easily Downey's believable performance throughout the strong character arc that was written for him. Tony finally seeing his legacy from the other, darker side of the spectrum is definitely written effectively; but it is the actor's ability to convey his newfound sense of what is right, along with his disillusionment with the life he had before that is truly great.

There was a character that I actually enjoyed a lot more than I remembered during this watch, as well, and that would be Pepper Potts. Personally, I've always liked her relationship with Tony Stark, but her character isn’t given very much growth or development in the first Iron Man. That’s how I feel, anyway, and that is probably why her part in the movie wasn’t one of the main things I remembered. However, despite not having a ton of depth in this movie I don't find her to be poorly written, either. I also found Gwyneth Paltrow’s performance to be pretty enjoyable this time around, too. I especially enjoyed the chemistry between her and Downey, their back and forth being one of the aspects of the movie I liked the most. I was very much invested emotionally in the scenes they shared, and I look forward to seeing their development in future movies as I continue my re watch. 

Yet on the other side of the coin is another important character who unfortunately is not a highlight of the story: Obidiah Stane. The character is not exactly weak, and works relatively well in the first two acts. Jeff Bridges also does fine work with what he was given. As he predictably shifts into the feature villain, though, he seems increasingly two-dimensional, cheesy, and ineffective. As we all know, this trend became a recurring problem in the earlier entries of the MCU; an underdeveloped villain with bland abilities who exists mainly to be a source of conflict. This very well could have been deliberate seeing as the heroes are obviously the spotlight in this series, and for this film having a very standard villain that embodies the opposite of Stark’s growth does work... but honestly his role “working” is about the most that can be said for his contribution to the movie. The deepest part of the character is how he represent's Tony's past, other than that he's just an asshole with a bigger suit.

Before I move on from the characters, I do want to mention a couple of the smaller characters who had an impact on the film. The first being Yinsen, the man in the cave with Tony. The beginning of their relationship admittedly felt a little forced, but they did have a few nice moments as they worked together that felt genuine to me. I'm glad that there are some effective scenes to keep me invested in their relationship, because at times he does unfortunately seem to only be there for the plot and for Tony’s development. His death in particular felt forced to me, and even though his reasons for his self-sacrifice weren't too much of a stretch, the scene just came off as an attempt to add some quick drama to the journey that Tony had started. It may feel a little contrived but that feeling is short lived, and the moment is not over-done, at least. Overall the character does serve the film’s narrative and is obviously an important part of Stark’s life.

Other than Yinsen I really wanted to comment on Phil Coulson because... well honestly because I just love him so much. Coulson's role in the movie has its importance, but it is still a pretty small part. The fact that he is so memorable just goes to show you awesome Clark Gregg is as an actor; he has such great chemistry with everyone he interacts with, and his character is a great way of serving the individual story while simultaneously setting up S.H.I.E.L.D. for the Marvel universe. Ultimately, Gregg utilizes a great balance of humor and mystery to convey the next-level "importance" of the organization. In my notes for this re watch, my exact wording is "Phil Coulson is a treasure" and I feel like that's all I need to say.

While the basic story is not the highlight here, there are some things that it executes splendidly. It handles the underlying themes of Tony Stark's path from war-profiteer to hero with great care, not only showing more ugly sides to war but also making it easy for the viewer to understand how Stark thinks and feels both before and after he is abducted.  The first Iron Man film also tells what I believe to be the perfect origin story. It does this with a surprisingly effective utilization of pacing, starting with the very first scene. I love the opening minutes, and all they do is use dialogue to give us our first taste of who Stark is. Then we are immediately thrown into the action with the abrupt ambush that leads to his capture. That’s when the story pulls back to give us his history and show us a little more of his character, and having already invested the viewer in the story it very quickly gives us all we need to know going forward. I do typically dislike when a movie starts off with a bang then goes back in time to give us more information that we need, because it can get tedious when we really want to see what happens after the opening action. This is not a big issue here, though, as the pacing is very quick and the movie is still in its early phases when we get back to the initial conflict. We are only "taken back" to show us what is absolutely crucial to know, and it doesn't drag on too long or come off feeling forced.

After Stark’s thrilling escape sequence, he is free from the cave to return home, and we move into the second act... which is the best part of the film. Downey's performance is at its peak during the upheaval of Tony Stark’s original life, and the characters have all of their best interactions during this portion of the movie. For a story that primarily focuses on characters, this is definitely some of the most entertaining material. The third act is, unfortunately, the weakest one, as it has the job of turning Stane into the villain and ultimate climax of the movie. Stane's actions as a villain feel forced, especially his actions that lead to the creation of his suit. Even his final fight with Iron Man just feels like it's happening for the sake of having a "big fight" at the end. Stane's dialogue is a little cheesy, and there are moments where things seem to happen just so that there can be more tension and conflict- specifically when Stark is on the ground helpless and Stane keeps missing his shots by a lot. He even has some throwaway line that goes something like "you ruined my targeting system but I'll still kill you". Not an exact quote but it had that awkward feeling of just being written to give us a reason why the hero is being given more time to act in such tense situation. In the end Stane is a weak villain, and when the movie has to focus on him it is not at its best. However, the wrap up and conclusion of the film that comes after this fight is amazing and pretty much makes up for it. It manages to sum up the story that was being told and remind you of the things that made you enjoy it in the first place. The scene where Tony Stark admits to being Iron Man in front of the press is rightfully loved for being a very cool moment for Tony Stark/Iron Man, but it is also a brilliant ending to an origin story. By definition we are getting the story of how Iron Man came to be, it is very fitting that the movie ends at the moment he is truly "born".

CONCLUSION: Despite Favreau's slight inexperience with the genre, a fairly weaker climax/villain and a few moments that feel like they exist solely to move the plot forward, Iron Man succeeds with an entertaining  and unique style accompanied  by an absolutely stellar performance by Robert Downey Jr.- and the result is a very fun watch. The cinematography is on point, featuring a few shots that will remain truly iconic... I particularly love the shot of Tony presenting his missiles as they explode behind him, not to mention almost every second of the first time Tony suits up and uses Iron Man to undo the damage done by his company. The score composed for the film also adds what it needs to, and some of the song choices will pretty much make you to get pumped up. This is why a standard origin story for a comic book hero can make you forget that you know where the story is going... if done right, there are so many inventive ways to tell that story with a different voice. Is this the best movie ever? No. Is it the best Marvel film? The answer for me is still no. That said, it was a great stand alone movie, an even better origin story, and set up a universe so subtly that upon first viewing you didn't even notice that it did anything of the sort. The fact that the world building was done in the background made the post credit scene that teased the Avengers so much better. You had no idea how great an established universe around this movie would be, but when you see that it could happen you suddenly realize how much you want one. Iron Man is not a masterpiece of cinema, nor does it try to be. It was just one hell of a fun ride that not only launched what is arguably the biggest film franchise of all time, it also gave us a fresh new look at the tired superhero genre and redefined our expectations of it going forward. RATING: 7.5 Next: The Incredible Hulk