Posted on 05/02/2008 10:40:44 PM PDT by Yossarian
OK Freepers, Iron Man is now out, and is getting great reviews in the press.
BUT-
Iron Man has always been a political beast. And the reviews mention things like "social commentary" and infer that "Tony Stark changes his opinion on being an arms dealer". Those things tend to be red flags for a FReeper FRiendly Movie.
SO-
Can anyone who's actually seen Iron Man give a good spoiler-free review, including any political hack work done in the flick?
Iron-ically, Robert Downey Jr. seems to be changing his personal worldview too away from liberalism...
Judging from the posts in this thread so far... Tony Stark makes IEDs? I thought Iran did.
In a CNN news report for his shady dealing with the Clinton campaign??? ( I can dream that they'd be "equal" in showing corruption )
If this starts “at the beginning” why do they introduce the alcoholism plotline which was introduced something like 15 years into the series run?
There was no "dig" on water torture. The arabs beat the snot out of him (his face was bloodied, etc), lead him to a mock Nick Berg-style execution, and didn't just politely water board him, but repeatedly shoved his head into a tub of water and held him down for some time.
Loaded up the teens and 12 year olds to go see the movie yesterday, here was the group consensus:
1) It is as good as Spider-Man 1 and X-Men 1 as far as Marvel comic book movies.
2) Armor was well done, comedy was very subtle but funny.
3) Robert Downey pulled Stark off, very good acting on his part.
4) Political aspect was balanced and Stark being converted from careless playboy to concerned citizen was well done.
5) Everyone was looking forward to Iron Man 2.
Stark was not taken out by an IED. His convoy was wiped out by missiles. The missiles happened to be made by his company, thus the irony of the situation, which led to his capture and near death.
Military was treated really well IMHO, as people doing their job. The terrorists were treated as bad guys, there was nothing sympathetic about them.
***MINOR SPOLIERS AHEAD***
The only point of contention was the idea of ‘war profiteering’ on the behalf of Stark’s company. But most of that was due to his partner.
His anti-weapon change of heart is understandable, and it is treated with shock by those who are closest to him (two sympathetic characters — Pepper Potts and Air Force liaison to Stark, Rhodes).
And in the end, when Stark discovers that Iron Man is a weapon after all, he has no compulsions in what is obviously killing terrorists. This is Hollywood/Marvel, a true anti-weapon change of heart would have involved Stark having some sort of attempt at creating weapons to pacify rather than kill.
I also thought it was humorous that after his anti-weapons spiel, his invention of his power source wasn’t marketed and shared with the people. Instead, he poured all of his efforts into creating a flight suit/weapon. LOL.
Personally, give me the original Iron Man who didn’t mind giving Titanium Man, the Mandarin and any number of assorted communists an ass kicking. I guess creating a Islamofascist superhero would be more humorous than deadly. LOL.
But this Iron Man will do too. ;-)
I haven't seen it (yet) but I saw a quote from the Director saying that they were not introducing alcoholism (yet) but saving that for a later movie. Stark parties. Stark drinks. But it's not a problem (yet).
If anyone has seen it and can tell me if I'm wrong, I'd appreciate it.
Before Stark’s conversion, he drinks. A lot. Almost every scene has him with a drink in his hand. The very first shot in the movie is his drink.
But you’re right, his partying in general is the problem in this movie. And alcohol is just an element of that.
Entertainment can be a good thing without all the political BS.
As far as the alcoholism, I don't know. Never read the comic books. Anyone??
Well I really enjoyed it. For a superhero movie, the acting, cast and pacing was superb. Lots of wonderful visual fx but not so much that it becomes overkill.
The two hours flew by and at the end I wanted more. Looking forward to a sequel.
We just got back from seeing Iron Man and like you the
time seemed to fly. Very good action movie.
Just don`t see how Iron Man and Pepper survived that
last battle.
Bet they`ll be a sequel quickly
BUMP!
Let me put it this way: I’m on my way to see it tonight with friends, after having seen it last night with my wife. It’s that good.
You heard wrong.
Bad politics aside, I have to see it. Good versus evil, heroes, gadgets, action, and a romantic sub-plot - I am so there!
I loved that part. Emblematic of the Left’s worship of power for its own sake. Stark was her enemy, but he was confident and manly and not afraid to be an a-hole to her, so she was putty in his hands.
We stuck around for the after-the-credits scene. Tony Stark walks into his house and Nick Fury, boss of SHIELD (played by Laurence Fishburne), who talks to him about getting involved in the Avengers Project
Tony is not an alcoholic (yet). He's a guy who likes to party, but he is not DEPENDENT upon alcohol. He's sober when he has work to do, which is the essential difference between an alcoholic and somebody who just drinks a bit
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.