Film review: Iron Man 3

posted at 11:01 am on May 5, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Tony Stark’s last adventure has him rattled.  After all, almost getting killed by a wormhole and watching Norse gods dancing through the atmosphere will do that to a guy.  When his past comes back to haunt him, he’s unprepared — and when the world’s biggest terrorist attacks his friend, he’s in the mood for revenge.  But things aren’t what they seem, and Stark isn’t the only one with revenge on his mind.  Can the Iron Man shake off his demons and save America, Pepper Potts, and himself?

Normally I wouldn’t bother to review the third sequel in a series, especially for a Marvel movie, because the audiences for these films are already so established.  However, I did do a review for the latest Die Hard installment, and the Iron Man series has been more fun than most of the comic-book genre.  That plus the cast pulled me in — and I’m glad it did. Iron Man 3 proved to be a fun ride, a great popcorn flick with some (mild) points for pondering on terrorism and facing fears.  The epilogue seems a little rushed, but by that time, you’ll be grateful for the soft landing to the roller-coaster adventure.

Iron Man, more than most of the comic-book genre, relies on character and irreverence.  This installment is no different, and Robert Downey Jr once again charms as Stark, the neurotic and egotistical superhero with no secret identity at all.  Gwyneth Paltrow has a little more to do in this episode, as does Jon Favreau, who also exec-produced this film.  This time, Ben Kingsley and Guy Pearce come on as villains, with Pearce given an almost Edward Nygma-esque character but in a much more serious vein than in Batman Forever.  Don Cheadle is … well, Don Cheadle-level terrific, and Rebecca Hall offers a couple of surprises as Maya Hansen, a one-night fling of Stark’s who returns to seek his assistance.

Unlike most trilogies, one doesn’t have to have followed the series to understand what’s happening in Iron Man 3, but it does help to have seen Marvel’s The Avengers. (Trivia aside: I reviewed it exactly one year ago today.)  This is actually a much better film than The Avengers, with a few more surprises and fewer clichés.  It’s a bit more violent than one might expect for a PG-13 film, and it gets very intense, so it’s not going to be for young children.  Otherwise, buy some popcorn and strap yourself in for a great ride, and be sure to stick around past the credits for one last bit of Marvel fun.

Note: The trailer has a number of lines that never appear in the picture.  Also, next week, I’m going to review The Great Gatsby, with the reasonable expectation that no one will make a Great Gatsby 3 (or 2, either).  I just read the novel for the first time in preparation for it.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

…its good!

KOOLAID2 on May 5, 2013 at 11:08 AM

I just read the novel for the first time in preparation for it

…you have time to read?

KOOLAID2 on May 5, 2013 at 11:09 AM

I enjoyed the film though I felt the ending was rushed and I’m tired of the forced ‘female empowerment’ that gets put in all films now. All in all a good film, but Paltrow’s excessive involvement took away from it being a very good film.

njrob on May 5, 2013 at 11:10 AM

They don’t need to make a Great Gatsby 2 or 3, they can just give us more and more of their interpretations. I’m pretty excited about Iron Man 3, I don’t think I’ve seen Mr. Downey do a bad acting job.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Also, next week, I’m going to review The Great Gatsby, with the reasonable expectation that no one will make a Great Gatsby 3 (or 2, either). I just read the novel for the first time in preparation for it.

Isn’t it sad that this will be the only representation of the roaring 20s? We know more about every other age, but strangely, it’s almost like the 1920s never happened. Thank you progressive revisionists.

nobar on May 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM

njrob on May 5, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Hollyweird is pouring it on Ms. Paltrow this year, it will be interesting to see how she handles it. I think she’s a bit of a twit. I’m probably just jealous.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM

The wife and I are about to head out and see IM3.

I am more shocked Ed just read The Great Gatsby!

Odie1941 on May 5, 2013 at 11:19 AM

‘Iron Man 3′ opens in theaters to $175.3 million in North America, the No. 2 debut of all time behind ‘The Avengers’ – @THR

4 mins ago from http://www.hollywoodreporter.com by editor
========================================================

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-report-iron-man-452194

canopfor on May 5, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Hollyweird is pouring it on Ms. Paltrow this year, it will be interesting to see how she handles it. I think she’s a bit of a twit. I’m probably just jealous.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM

…my bride has what she calls her one ‘poop magazine’…PEOPLE Magazine has her as one of the ‘most beautiful’ women… or something!…when did lemons become sweet and sugar become sour?

KOOLAID2 on May 5, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Anticipation is still one of the greatest desires even at my age, can’t wait until it hits the Blu-Ray disc.

fourdeucer on May 5, 2013 at 11:31 AM

There is something very wrong with this movie. The villain, the Mandarin isn’t very Mandarin, he is a white dude. There are enough Mandarin Chinese actors, why did they have to get a white dude to play a Chinese villain?

paulsur on May 5, 2013 at 11:37 AM

Sir Ben Kingsley is actually Indian. His birth name is Krishna Pandit Bhanji

Sekhmet on May 5, 2013 at 11:42 AM

The suggestion is the Mandarin, is the MacGuffin, the instrument of Killian, somewhat the way, that Bane was supposed to be the hedge fund manager’s way to get back at Bruce Wayne,

narciso on May 5, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Hollyweird is pouring it on Ms. Paltrow this year, it will be interesting to see how she handles it. I think she’s a bit of a twit. I’m probably just jealous.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM

I’m not sure why. There’s something going on where they’re back to pushing her into the limelight from that silly post calling her the most beautiful woman in the world to all her new movies coming out.

On the bright side, Downey was his usual excellent self. I’m glad he got his life back together.

njrob on May 5, 2013 at 11:50 AM

There is something very wrong with this movie. The villain, the Mandarin isn’t very Mandarin, he is a white dude. There are enough Mandarin Chinese actors, why did they have to get a white dude to play a Chinese villain?

paulsur on May 5, 2013 at 11:37 AM

All is explained in the movie. Don’t take it so seriously. If you do, you’ll have a real conniption with the new Star Trek film.

njrob on May 5, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Saw it yesterday,sold out house,fun crowd and good relaxing time.

docflash on May 5, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Note: The trailer has a number of lines that never appear in the picture.

Apparently the director had to cut 1 hour and 15 minutes from the film to get the film in the theater. Talk about a lot of money wasted.

LoganSix on May 5, 2013 at 11:56 AM

I’m glad he got his life back together.

njrob on May 5, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Amen!!!

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 12:00 PM

KOOLAID2 on May 5, 2013 at 11:30 AM

When liberal rule the world. I read that Ms. Paltrow has a clothing line and tshirts cost $200. A real woman of the people.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 12:02 PM

3 out of 5 stars.

Good plot, Downey is himself, Paltrow kicks butt, orange eyed evil dude is really evil.

Pretty predictable, lots of noise in the IMAX version. LOTS of explosions, some cussing and the use of crude slang describing male and female genitals.

Darker, but not necessarily better than previous films. Most people will like it, and I did too but there was some unneeded crap in there that added nothing to the story but make it offensive.

I actually returned two tickets to the Friday night showing because Mammy didn’t want to see it after I told her about it.

I’ll make sure I read the reviews to know what to expect before I see Star Trek in a couple of weeks.

I normally use Rotten Tomatoes to get a feel for what the real people are saying about the movie and Plugged In online for the specifics about cussing/sex/etc.

PappyD61 on May 5, 2013 at 12:17 PM

And she’s a serious, some might say obsessive vegan,

narciso on May 5, 2013 at 12:18 PM

The Great Gatsby

Will NEVER see this movie.

I now know why the trailer for this looked like a RAP GANGSTA Video with a 20′s flair.

The involvement of MR. BEYONCE, Jay-Z.

NEVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVER.

PappyD61 on May 5, 2013 at 12:20 PM

The Great Gatsby, with the reasonable expectation that no one will make a Great Gatsby 3 (or 2, either). I just read the novel for the first time in preparation for it.

Who did you p8ss off?

CW on May 5, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I just read the novel (The Great Gatsby) for the first time in preparation for it.

Why? There is nothing of value in that book. Nothing.

BigGator5 on May 5, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Woo hoo! Fun movies are finally here!

I liked both Iron Man 1 and 2. I might even see 3 in the theater!

22044 on May 5, 2013 at 12:39 PM

Apparently the director had to cut 1 hour and 15 minutes from the film to get the film in the theater. Talk about a lot of money wasted.

LoganSix on May 5, 2013 at 11:56 AM

This is why I usually wait for the DVD.

MelonCollie on May 5, 2013 at 12:48 PM

I don’t think I’ve seen Mr. Downey do a bad acting job.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Me neither. He, IMO, is one of this age’s superb actors.

I think she’s a bit of a twit. I’m probably just jealous.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM

I think she’s a twit as well. I think she’s a good actress. But she is just another Hollywood moron that just needs to act & keep her mouth shut.
And I find no reason to be jealous of her. Unless one is jealous of money & fame. I am not.

Badger40 on May 5, 2013 at 12:55 PM

lol I don’t believe Paulsur actually saw the film or else he wouldn’t ask such a dumb question.

Sammo21 on May 5, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Maybe I’m just a stick in the mud but I’m not seeing anything with some spoiled witch who gave me the “you’re so stupid if you don’t vote Obama, you little people” spiel in two consecutive elections.

Goopy Paltrow: she’s so much more better than you or me.

Marcus on May 5, 2013 at 1:02 PM

I just read the novel for the first time in preparation for it.

What a vapid snoozer, huh?

I call it “‘First World Problems’ Meme – The Book.”

KingGold on May 5, 2013 at 1:18 PM

Note: The trailer has a number of lines that never appear in the picture.

Fear is my ally. Fear attracts the fearful.

Revenant on May 5, 2013 at 1:36 PM

Badger40 on May 5, 2013 at 12:55 PM

I’m just kidding about being jealous, I was trying to head off critics of me being critical. Her mother is a good actress also.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 1:49 PM

Stay through the credits.

LtGenRob on May 5, 2013 at 1:53 PM

Don Cheadle is … well, Don Cheadle-level terrific

I still never understood why Terrence Howard was replaced. He was awesome as Rhodey.

John the Libertarian on May 5, 2013 at 1:59 PM

I’m probably just jealous.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM

No, she is definitely a twit. She’s never impressed me, and someone like Tony Stark would not stay with her for long.

John the Libertarian on May 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM

I’m probably just jealous.

Cindy Munford on May 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM

She’s an idiot and a moron, who once she married that guy from that British she band, decided Americans were neanderthals. Stay British, skank.

msupertas on May 5, 2013 at 2:21 PM

I enjoyed it very much. Robert Downey, Jr. IS Tony Stark.

kingsjester on May 5, 2013 at 2:32 PM

It was ok, but honestly it seems worse the more I think about it. The twist was unforgivable. You don’t do that to the biggest Iron Man villain. And the bit involving the shrapnel removal completely contradicts Iron Man 2. If he could’ve had that taken care of, why not do that back when the arc reactor was endangering his life in the previous film? Here’s hoping Thor 2 and Cap 2 are better than this.

Doughboy on May 5, 2013 at 2:32 PM

“Iron Man, more than most of the comic-book genre, relies on character and irreverence.”

If you are not a fan of the comic-book genre, I think you will not enjoy this film. Here, the “character and irreverence” are insufficient to lift this movie above even the average comic-book genre film (you know, utterly predictable while being completely independent of its own logical premises).

Ira on May 5, 2013 at 2:33 PM

Saw Iron Man 3 opening night in a packed theatre. I thought it was a great flick, definitely better than Iron Man 2 (which I also really liked) but not quite as good as Iron Man 1.

Lots of great humor and action scenes. I also liked how the movie gets more personal with Tony Stark, essentially taking away the suit and exploring whether Iron Man is the MAN or the SUIT.

I was a little disappointed how The Mandarin was handled, though. Won’t post any spoilers but let’s just say he’s way different from his comic book version. I also threw up in my mouth a little when Bill Maher showed up on a TV screen (thankfully brief but still annoying) and I detected a jab at the Bush administration with a character alluding to the Bush stem cell research policy (it’s a subtle line but it’s there).

That’s about it! Definitely recommend seeing it. Skip the 3-D version, since it’s just a 2-D film post converted by the studio.

Jack_Burton on May 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM

The twist was unforgivable. You don’t do that to the biggest Iron Man villain. And the bit involving the shrapnel removal completely contradicts Iron Man 2. If he could’ve had that taken care of, why not do that back when the arc reactor was endangering his life in the previous film?

Doughboy on May 5, 2013 at 2:32 PM

Yeah, I was surprised about the operation at the end. I figured Stark used the Extremis healing virus to do it, though I don’t remember if it’s actually stated in the film or not. And yup, The Mandarin…I understand your anger on it!

Jack_Burton on May 5, 2013 at 2:40 PM

I now know why the trailer for this looked like a RAP GANGSTA Video with a 20′s flair.

PappyD61 on May 5, 2013 at 12:20 PM

During the previews before IM3, they had an interview about Gatsby where they tried to make a big deal about the director’s fanatical zeal about ’20s authenticity. My head nearly exploded from the cognitive dissonance.

Also, parents: if you must bring your precious little darlings to the movies where they may or may not be told repeatedly to ‘be quiet and just watch the movie,’ you might want to consider telling them to not wear the shoes with the blindingly-flashing multicolored lights that go off any time they put their feet up on the back of the seat in front of them.

James on May 5, 2013 at 2:42 PM

The way they handled the Mandarin ruined the movie for me. I know we talk about things of much greater significance and importance on this blog BUT I don’t feel out of place saying that this film was a BETRAYAL of an iconic villain from comic book lore.

Shame on you Shane Black and Kevin Feige.

Utica681 on May 5, 2013 at 2:55 PM

This is actually a much better film than The Avengers, with a few more surprises and fewer clichés.

Gotta disagree with you on this one. I saw IM3 in a marathon with IM1, IM2, & Avengers. IM3 was obviously better than IM2 but was out classed by Avengers.

PLOT: The villain of IM3 have a product that will make him a billionaire many times over. The product has some problems but many people with the afflictions it cures would be willing to risk those problems. So, the IM3 villain is doing this because Stark hurt his feelings. Loki is trying to take over the world — this is in character for him and his allies reasons (the tesseract) is equally valid.

The name of the villains company mix up was telegraphed – I saw that the second time the audience saw it (helps that I am dyslexic).

CHARACTERS: Stark is an a$$, well established in first & second IM films. Yes, he loves Pepper (why is never well established but he does), however he is still and a$$ to other people. Example how he treats Happy throughout IM2. In Avengers, after Cap says he would never lie down on a wire to let others crawl over him, is when we see IM risk his life for others without any reward to himself. (I privatized peace)

Pepper Potts has not grown at all in all three films – her character is static – even when she went from Stark’s assistant to CEO – no growth.

CGI: The Chitauri were much better realized than any of the background armor. The fight at the ship yard should have distinguished some of the different armor (Hulk busting is the only one I could easily id).

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed IM3 and firmly plan to add it to my BluRay collection but even with the ending after the credits it does not touch the Avengers.

talking_mouse on May 5, 2013 at 2:57 PM

The way they handled the Mandarin ruined the movie for me. I know we talk about things of much greater significance and importance on this blog BUT I don’t feel out of place saying that this film was a BETRAYAL of an iconic villain from comic book lore.

Yes, yes 100 time yes!! To me the Mandarin is up there with Dr. Doom and Magneto as excellent villains. Even since the wall hanging in the cave in IM1 I have been waiting for the Mandarin to show his hand. I was over joyed when Ben Kingsley was announced, since I like his work. I expected the Mandarin with rings blazing. I was disappointed.

talking_mouse on May 5, 2013 at 3:09 PM

I was it in digital 3d yesterday. I’d give a 3 stars our of 5. Some exciting action scenes that looked great in 3d. Seems Iron Man doesn’t really wear his iron suit all that much. And when he does it’s glitchy, or busted up, or it’s mising an arm or a leg piece. The 3 or 4th, lets dance around in the air with just an arm and leg piece attached was getting a little stale. Political correctness ruined the Mandarin villian. The Mandarin was supposed to actually be Chinese and had powerful rings on his hands that shot out energy of various types. The Guy Pierce version of the Mandarin is interesting just not true to the original. And it had the bratty, know-it-all, wise beyond his years, little kid character archetype that drives me crazy. I mean just some random 10 year old in the middle of Tennessee just so happens to be a mechanical genius that knows how to fix an Iron Man suit? Come on……

Heftyjo on May 5, 2013 at 3:31 PM

The problem with the Mandarin is mind-boggling in the level of stupidity it demonstrates.

The Mandarin had nothing to do with the original Extremis storyline from the comic books. The only reason to add him to the movie was to appeal to comic book fans since the average moviegoer would have no idea who he was. Yet they obviously knew that the Mandarin would be offensive to the Chinese government so they basically created a totally new character who had nothing to do with the comic book version of the Mandarin. Which, predictably, made the movie offensive to the very people they were trying to court by adding in the Mandarin in the first place. Of course in the Extremis comics Aldrich Killian also commits suicide before Tony Stark ever becomes involved so there’s another rather significant change and yet another reason for fans of the comic book to be angry.

All they had to do to avoid angering either the Chinese or the fans was to simply leave the Mandarin out of a story that he was never a part of to begin with. That they didn’t tells me that these people aren’t the sharpest of people.

Of course I’d also think it was more likely that Tony would be suffering from PTSD due to being in a convoy that was attacked by terrorists, injured in said attack with a piece of shrapnel lodged near his heart, held captive in a cave while the terrorists threaten to kill him if he didn’t build weapons for them, witnessing the death of a new friend, and almost being killed by an old family friend so what do I know.

Rip Ford on May 5, 2013 at 3:57 PM

Just saw it. It was okay, but there were a whole lot of missed opportunities — almost to the point that it felt like they were trying to sabotage their own movie.
Way to many things didn’t make any sense from a technical perspective.

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 4:32 PM

By the way, did else suddenly think of this car ad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emhtp2prOxQ
when the redheaded henchlady started getting violent?

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 4:43 PM

I saw it Friday and liked it ok but thought it was a little weak on the Ironman part. The whole “It’s not ready for prime time” shtick about the new IM suit was a little old by the time the movie ended. Also, the fact that the IM was not even in more than 3/4 of the movie made it feel like it was done on the cheap. The fact that Tony Stark can destroy so many of his machines as a fun fireworks display is startling to me even if it is Hollywood. I also found the one night fling girl so much more appealing than Paltrow and the scenes with the little boy in the Tennessee town were some of the best. Over all I would give it a C.

inspectorudy on May 5, 2013 at 4:51 PM

I overall really liked the film, but I didn’t think it was as good as Iron Man 1, or even the Avengers.

Basically, the first half felt utterly fantastic. The second half however had severe pacing issues, and I hate surprise villain reveals. This is especially true when said surprise villain has no clear motivation for their actions.

“Grr, you embarrassed me ages ago! Issa gonna take over the world!”

The whole thing takes an epic set-up, and turns it into an incredibly petty squabble. It would’ve been better if they had actually stuck to the villain being a terrorist, and just went into the mindset and philosophy of anti-western terror.

Again, really liked it. It’s extremely well written, and most of the action sequences are a blast. I just thought a few decisions were a little on the ill conceived side.

WolvenOne on May 5, 2013 at 5:04 PM

I saw it Friday and liked it ok but thought it was a little weak on the Ironman part. The whole “It’s not ready for prime time” shtick about the new IM suit was a little old by the time the movie ended. Also, the fact that the IM was not even in more than 3/4 of the movie made it feel like it was done on the cheap. The fact that Tony Stark can destroy so many of his machines as a fun fireworks display is startling to me even if it is Hollywood. I also found the one night fling girl so much more appealing than Paltrow and the scenes with the little boy in the Tennessee town were some of the best. Over all I would give it a C.

inspectorudy on May 5, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Some part of me was offended when he blew them all up, but also when the bad guys were able to shut down or cut through the suits like they were butter, just because the were hot.

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Some part of me was offended when he blew them all up, but also when the bad guys were able to shut down or cut through the suits like they were butter, just because the were hot.

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 5:04 PM

That is another thing that bothered me. Stark was most or less able to take the villains down with relative ease, when he could get his suit to work correctly for a few moments. Plus, the villains had an extremely hard time opening up the Iron Patriot Suit.

Yes somehow, the moment Stark remotely calls down a couple dozen suits, the villains could suddenly mow through an Iron Man suit like they were nothing at all.

To me, that just demonstrates that the climax wasn’t very well thought through. The moment Stark called down a couple dozen suits, they had to make the villains far stronger, just to keep them from being mowed down in a couple seconds.

Then there were the many false deaths of the wanna-be mandarin in this film. Writers, writers, I don’t care if the guy has a healing factor, you can only blow him up so many times!

WolvenOne on May 5, 2013 at 6:00 PM

I enjoyed this movie as it was better than Iron Man 2, but the first one is still the best. The twist didn’t bother me but I understand why it would bother the die hard Iron Man fans. (Substitute Joker for the Mandarin to get the point.)

My only problem with this movie is that it felt more like an epilogue to Phase One of the Marvel movies instead of a beginning to Phase Two (which Thor 2 will be).

Personally, I would like Robert Downey Jr. to return for the next two Avengers sequels only and then recast the role. Iron Man/Tony Stark to me has always been more interesting as an Avenger than in solo adventures.

RedRobin145 on May 5, 2013 at 6:29 PM

WolvenOne on May 5, 2013 at 6:00 PM

Definite “Storm Trooper” trope going on there for the Iron Man drones.
I still say it would have been a much better movie if the plot had been arranged such that the two heros were saved by actual people in the spare IM suits instead of drones.
So many missed opportunities. So many plot holes. All to bring it back to the tired old “weapons manufactures are bad” instead of something inspiring or interesting.

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 6:45 PM

I think the badguys vs armor is conservation of ninjitsu. I enjoyed it, but could have used more armor time.

Personal peeve was two fold.

1) “Focus groups said it tested better than ‘War Machine.’” Except it was never called the War Machine in the movie. It was a nice touch to me that the armors were referenced but never named (Stane’s armor and “We’re Iron Mongers, Tony.” and Rhodey and the “You want to be a War Machine?” comment from the first two movies)

2) It should have been renamed “Jobbed Machine” as he’s taken down *again*, and arguably the same way.

Aside, would have been nice to seen Pepper called Rescue at some point.

My beef with the Mandarin was that a) either it doesn’t tie into the first movie (remember the organization was called “Ten Rings”) or b) the BBEG was running terrorists before his business.

Stinger end quibble. It would have been perfect for Doc Samson.

The_Livewire on May 5, 2013 at 7:04 PM

“I’m going to review The Great Gatsby”

I can save you the trouble, it’ll be craptastic. Any movie they delay opening over and over again so they can re-edit it is bound to blow chunks. Besides, it didn’t have much of a story to start with, not a fan of the book.

lowandslow on May 5, 2013 at 7:48 PM

Ug, screen refresh just chunked my previous screed. Drat.

Anyway, spoilers below, probably.

Certainly a fun movie, but NOT better than Avengers, and plot-wise actually a train wreck.

The drone IM suit army at the final battle was the worst sort of deux-ex-machina. If Jarvis can fly a drone army, and fight better than Tony can on a per-suit basis, why in the world would Tony ever enter the fray again? Even if he decides to remote the suit himself, he can now forever stay out of harm’s way. And the sudden vulnerability of his suits to human flesh at elevated temperature was really dumb.

Oh, except Jarvis lacks facial recognition safeguards when targeting to protect Stark’s allies. Like his common-law wife. Terrific. Or is it the local suit AI that controls that? Either way the point stands. And if the suits have their own AI why is Jarvis flying them?

I didn’t mind the Mandarin deceit because a) I know nothing of the comics and b) they can undo the twist in the future by revealing that the “act” was, in fact, just a great cover.

But I didn’t understand the primary motivation of the bad guy, whatisname. He’s brought the bio-tech to a certain level, needs Starks money and smarts to iron out the bugs and get it to market. But even before approaching Stark he’s waging a shadow terror campaign? Is this just to get America on a war footing and generate demand for his product? At what point does he switch from trying to get Stark to back him to using the terror campaign to exact revenge for an old insult–and how is he going to fix his tech if he kills Tony, since Tony is the guy who can figure out the bugs and the whatisname guy knows it? Hot mess.

Finally, I more or less enjoyed the suit-less IM parts of the movie, if for no other reason than the way it highlighted Stark’s physical vulnerabilities while he’s suffering emotionally as well.
But when the kid gives him the “mechanic” pep talk and he starts rebounding by making some ad-hoc weapons at the hardware store, the whole thing was a missed opportunity. When did Tony stop being able to power a suit with his personal reactor? His whole MO (the repeated “hobby” line) is to build suits–he should have built a temporary suit with cobbled parts that ran off the reactor in his body. And it should have involved a potato gun with the potatoes being a sabot for something more lethal. Not exploding christmas ornaments and a nail gun, for goodness sake.

Final thing, since no one is reading this at this point: the whole shrapnel in the heart thing was always the worst part of the IronMan setup. What good does it do to keep razor-sharp shards out of your heart if they’re just slicing up your arteries instead? And why, if it’s just creating a magnetic field, would the reactor a) have to be permanently attached to you and b) if it were permanently attached, why would it have to be a cylinder embedded in your chest, presumably severing your sternum and appearing to physically occupy much of the space your heart would normally.

It always should have been a replacement heart. Otherwise in IM2 when it’s temporarily removed a)he wouldn’t be seconds away from losing consciousness and b) the razor sharp shards would presumably have instantly entered his heart and shredded it. Anyway as a lame plot device I’m just glad to see it go.

Still liked the movie.

TexasDan on May 5, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Well the shrapnel was the reason, he continued on this quest, As I suspected Mandarin was the macguffin villain, and Killian the real one,

narciso on May 5, 2013 at 8:56 PM

TexasDan on May 5, 2013 at 8:15 PM

SPOILERS!
*
*
*
As I understand it, the whole “Mandarin” thing was primarily a cover for the fact that his test subjects were randomly combusting in public. He had the production studio set up for the Mandarin take credit for “the terrorist attacks” that were really just embarrassing side-effects of a super-soldier formula. Later he developed a scheme to use the Mandarin as a boogeyman to justify more military purchases from his company. The guy that blew up at the Chinese theater was not deliberate.

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 8:58 PM

Still really disappointed that the the swarm of suits was just a bunch of drones instead of some kind of troop of human Ironmen/War-machines.

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 9:04 PM

Still really disappointed that the the swarm of suits was just a bunch of drones instead of some kind of troop of human Ironmen/War-machines.

Count to 10 on May 5, 2013 at 9:04 PM

Yep. Was this not exactly what the guy in IM2 was trying to do? “Drone better”. And now it turns out–yep, they’re better. I guess I have to backpedal on the deux ex machina complaint a little bit, as “mark 42″ does suggest the potential existence of two score other suits, plus or minus, and since he uses remote control in another battle it’s just one small step to Jarvis doing that will all of them, all at once.

TexasDan on May 5, 2013 at 11:07 PM

I just read the novel (The Great Gatsby) for the first time in preparation for it.

Why? There is nothing of value in that book. Nothing.

BigGator5 on May 5, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Ain’t that the truth? It’s only charm is for leftists who like the portrayal of the rich American doomed to ruin. The only movie version I slightly liked was the 40s version with Alan Ladd.

rickv404 on May 6, 2013 at 10:58 AM

I just read the novel (The Great Gatsby) for the first time in preparation for it.

Why? There is nothing of value in that book. Nothing.

BigGator5 on May 5, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Ain’t that the truth? It’s only charm is for leftists who like the portrayal of the rich American doomed to ruin. The only movie version I slightly liked was the 40s version with Alan Ladd.

rickv404 on May 6, 2013 at 10:58 AM

You people are cultural illiterates. Gatsby is one of the great works of American fiction.

SomeCallMeJohn on May 6, 2013 at 12:38 PM

You people are cultural illiterates. Gatsby is one of the great works of American fiction.

SomeCallMeJohn on May 6, 2013 at 12:38 PM

You’d have to explain that. I learn no lesson from the story of Jay Gatsby. I’m certainly not inspired.

rickv404 on May 6, 2013 at 1:10 PM

I was disappointed when Gwyneth Paltrow didn’t die.

CrustyB on May 7, 2013 at 10:57 AM

“A classic is something that everybody wants to have read and nobody wants to read.”

Mark Twain

CrustyB on May 7, 2013 at 10:59 AM