Iron Man 3 Official Iron Man 3 rate/review thread.

[lozzy.94]

what i liked:
opening scene
the Avengers and MCU references
Aldrich Killian
end battle scene
the score
and pretty much every scene with Eric Savin.

what i didn't like:
Mandarin twist
not enough Iron Man
that stupid kid
the post credit scene
and the way the movie ended.

 

[Shikamaru]

There is a "message" either way, really. Doing the Mandarin this way just makes that more apparent.

Doing the Mandarin some other way would just change the message. But there would always be one. Certainly there was originally, in the comic. To an extent, that's probably true of all villains. But certainly a villain like the Mandarin.

There is nothing wrong with there being a political message. But sacrificing story potential & acting potential to get political message across is something that I can't stand, and is something that has proven to be deadly to the quality of many films in the past. There are ways you can have political messages in your film without sacrificing the overall potential of the film.

 

[jmc]

I don't need to see the film to see how ridiculous the criticisms are. I've read quite a few professional review and this entire thread. I know most of the plot points of this movie. The only issue people have with this movie is the handling of the Mandarin. A cheesy character whose only claim to fame is being the biggest villain for a major character known to have the worst rouges gallery in comics. They tried something different with him. Does this one issue truly ruin a movie for a person? If it does than I think people need to leave the basement and try meeting a woman.

The other criticism of the movie seems to be the level of comedy. That's a personal preference but it is a hallmark of the franchise. Actually of the entire MCU. This entire universe was built on the snark and jokes of Tony Stark. If you didn't like it in this movie, how could you possibly enjoy ANY of the other MCU movies? Or any of the Spider-Man movies for that matter? Iron Man 1 and the Avengers was filled with this.

Um, yes you do. You don't have a horse in the race until you've seen it.

 

[gvalladare]

since I knew about an Iron Man movie, I've been expecting to see the mandarin, to finally see him on film against IM. Imagine how I feel now.

 

[Flemm]

There is nothing wrong with there being a political message. But sacrificing story potential & acting potential to get political message across is something that I can't stand, and is something that has proven to be deadly to the quality of many films in the past. There are ways you can have political messages in your film without sacrificing the overall potential of the film.

But did that happen here? I don't really think so. Or, only if you're really attached to the Mandarin being portrayed a certain way.

That's especially true since, essentially, the Mandarin *is* the main villain of the film. He just uses an elaborate ruse as distraction.

Basically the film takes the "dated" aspect of the Mandarin, that previously made him seem like a questionable choice, or difficult to adapt, and turns that into a strength.

 

[jmc]

But did that happen here? I don't really think so. Or, only if you're really attached to the Mandarin being portrayed a certain way.

That's especially true since, essentially, the Mandarin *is* the main villain of the film.

Again, I think it comes down to feeling mislead based on the character presented to us in the lead up. Forget who is and who isn't the 'real' one, it's more about who's the one people were looking forward to.

 

[Shikamaru]

But did that happen here? I don't really think so. Or, only if you're really attached to the Mandarin being portrayed a certain way.

That's especially true since, essentially, the Mandarin *is* the main villain of the film. He just uses an elaborate ruse as distraction.

Spoiler

I don't count Killian as the Mandarin. Suppose the Joker in TDK was just a hired clown by Sal Maroni. Would you say "Well, Maroni is the Joker in this movie" as a defense? You wouldn't, even if Maroni also believed in Gotham embracing insanity or something like that. If they did this to Joker or Green Goblin, everyone would be pissed. If Fox or Sony did this, everyone would be pissed.

Basically the film turns the "dated" aspect of the Mandarin, that previously made him seem like a questionable choice, or difficult to adapt, and turns that into a strength.

How about taking the dated aspects of the Mandarin and updating them and making the Mandarin work?

 

[Flemm]

Again, I think it comes down to feeling mislead based on the character presented to us in the lead up. Forgot who is and who isn't the 'real' one, it's more about who's the one people were looking forward to.

I'm not saying you should feel some other way about it.

However, that is the whole concept: create this charismatic/menacing façade as a distraction, while the real threat goes unnoticed. Perhaps not entirely, but at least to an extent.

By doing that, you turn a character that flirts with some regrettable stereotypes into a character that deconstructs some of those same stereotypes.

It's clever at the very least.

(As widely discussed long before the movie's release, the Mandarin is basically a racist caricature, a direct descendant of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype.)

If they did this to Joker or Green Goblin, everyone would be pissed. If Fox or Sony did this, everyone would be pissed.

Ok, but even if we accept that this is so, not all characters are the same, nor do they all have equal importance to a given character's mythos. Also, each one presents unique challenges in this type of adaptation.

We're debating whether or not turning the Mandarin into a commentary on certain trends in the way media and politics interact in our culture was a good idea. That's putting the conversation in the right place.

 

[jmc]

The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that not enough thought was placed into this decision.

Spoiler

Ultimately, what does Killian being the mastermind actually do for the story? He has no real relationship with Stark except for a brief encounter a dozen years earlier, and he's not a menacing or terrifying character (and frankly he couldn't be). Other than the initial 'ooo nice twist' there's not a hell of a lot you can say him turning out to be the mastermind does to actually enhance the story. It simple turns the idea of what you thought was going to happen on its head. Sure it doesn't destroy the story, but at the same time can we really say it adds anything? It doesn't affect Tony personally, it doesn't raise the stakes any higher, if anything it diminishes them because we've lost the epic show down between hero and nemesis that we were leading up to. There is very much a Talia from TDKR vibe with this, but I think the difference is most people assumed going in Talia would be revealed, what both have in common though is that they don't do a hell of a lot to the story.

 

[jmc]

I'm not saying you should feel some other way about it.

However, that is the whole concept: create this charismatic/menacing façade as a distraction, while the real threat goes unnoticed. Perhaps not entirely, but at least to an extent.

By doing that, you turn a character that flirts with some regrettable stereotypes into a character that deconstructs some of those same stereotypes.

It's clever at the very least.

(As widely discussed long before the movie's release, the Mandarin is basically a racist caricature, a direct descendant of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype.)

Spoiler

My problem is the real threat, he's not a threat, never feels like one before, never felt like one after, he just became the bad guy to fight in the third act. It's clever in the sense you don't see it coming, but it simultaneously robs the film of it's antagonist. We're left with essentially a silver medal.

 

[ElMariachi]

You are bringing up things that a lot of people criticized in TDKR though. And a lot of people did dwell on characters, plot holes, and all that other stuff. You should visit the TDKR boards more often.

They criticized aspects of the movie, they didn't hate it. People are hating this movie because of one plot point in the movie. Over a character that held no importance to them. This differs from truly iconic characters like Bane or Two Face.

Joker is still the same character and is not undermined in any way despite the lack of permawhite. That's what matters. Harvey dying in the end was something a lot of people didn't accept till TDKR and even the people that that did didn't mind as much because he was used well and he payed off. That isn't anything like what they did with the Mandarin. [BLACKOUT]He isn't even a villain in the movie (I don't count Killian).[/BLACKOUT] You also ignored JMC's arguments. This whole movie was marketed as IRON MAN VS. MANDARIN and was something that was hyped since 2008. That was not the case with Two-Face. A similar hype was the case with the Joker but that actually delivered.

Alot of movies are marketed differently than what the actual product. It's called advertising. Had the Mandarin been handled like YOU wanted, he pretty much would have been the Joker or Whiplash. An eccentric maniac preaching to the hero. They made the Mandarin real world and gave him some depth instead of a black & white cartoon character. A guy that would spit out a few lines, unrealistically shoot some lasers from his rings, and then eventually get put down by Tony. protocista made a great point about this all. The image that terrorists want their victims/enemies to see is the Kingsley Mandarin. That's never the case though. Every bad guy in history really isn't that much different from us. Image is everything. Hitler, Stalin, Osama, Saddam, Kim etc.---it's all an act. Take Stalin for instance. He was regarded as the Man of Steel of Russia. He was nothing more than a short (5'4 height), insecure, physically damaged, cowboy movie loving, cult of personality.

It's easy to create characters like the Joker. He doesn't represent anything at all. Don't get me wrong, his dialouge was brilliant but it doesn't take an expert scribe to give the Joker motivations.

A lot of people do hate FC because of the continuity errors.

No they don't. This movie has been given a complete pass by everybody on this website because of Fassbender.

Of course. It's not like the Mandarin is Iron Man's archenemy or anything.

The major criticism I see people list is the stupid twist. I see most people say that it was a good/great movie but that the twist itself was stupid and robbed the movie of a lot of potential.

Mandarin is Iron Man's archenemy by default. Iron Man's archenemy is Tony Stark. His ego and his alcoholism. The greatest defeats to Iron Man wasn't the Mandarin, it was his own confidence in his abilities. Civil War was a victory on paper but his biggest defeat in the comics. His ego cost the lives of friends and allies, burning bridges with those that survived. It sent the Hulk on a rampage and almost forced his hand to destroy Manhattan. It gave power to Norman Osborn, leveled Asgard, and pretty much changed the landscape of the comics. His ego is one of the greatest Marvel villains. One of it's best heroes too.

This is why the focus on Iron Man villains is stupid. Iron Man isn't villain-centric like Batman/Spider-Man has been. If Tony Stark and his allies are entertaining, they have done their job. The character has alot in common with Star Trek in that regard. At least that's my opinion on the character.

I wonder how people would've reacted to the twist if this wasn't a film made by Marvel Studios. Imagine if Fox, Sony or someone at WB other than Nolan (because Nolan has his own share of fanboys too) did this. I guarantee you that everyone would've snapped. Heck, if they did this to Joker or Green Goblin, everyone would be pissed regardless of how well executed it would be

I disagree with this. Spider-Man, in particular, has become too predictable. I would love to see some bold move like this instead of another father figure villain that Peter has to reluctantly take down.

 

[Flemm]

Spoiler

Ultimately, what does Killian being the mastermind actually do for the story? He has no real relationship with Stark except for a brief encounter a dozen years earlier, and he's not a menacing or terrifying character (and frankly he couldn't be). Other than the initial 'ooo nice twist' there's not a hell of a lot you can say him turning out to be the mastermind does to actually enhance the story. It simple turns the idea of what you thought was going to happen on its head. Sure it doesn't destroy the story, but at the same time can we really say it adds anything? It doesn't affect Tony personally, it doesn't raise the stakes any higher, if anything it diminishes them because we've lost the epic show down between hero and nemesis that we were leading up to. There is very much a Talia from TDKR vibe with this, but I think the difference is most people assumed going in Talia would be revealed, what both have in common though is that they don't do a hell of a lot to the story.

Well...

Spoiler

One of the main ideas presented by the story is the evaporation of this caricature in favor of a much less mysterious figure. (Who is, I think, definitely formidable in his own right.) But, regardless, it can't be said to be gratuitous: without the twist, the meaning of the whole story changes.

I do think the comparison to TDKR is legitimate, and no doubt Nolan had something similar in mind with the whole "theatricality and deception" idea that goes all the way back to Batman Begins.

On the whole I think the twist in IM3 works better because of the particular history of the Mandarin, and the tech-heavy world of Iron Man. But there are definitely some similarities between the two films in this regard.

 

[Blade X]

I hate the idea that you should like the twist simply because it plays with your expectations.

Or simply because it gets across some political message.

Both of these posts are quoted for the truth and because I agree with them.

 

[ElMariachi]

Um, yes you do. You don't have a horse in the race until you've seen it.

I don't think I do. I know the twist and I am not bothered by it at all. I posted here a year ago saying how stupid the Mandarin could possibly be on the big screen. Go watch Mortal Kombat and see what we probably would have ended up with.

I am glad they made him real world. People like to credit Batman as the 'realism hero' but it's actually Iron Man. His villains, aside from Vanko, are pretty believable characters.

 

[Flemm]

I posted here a year ago saying how stupid the Mandarin could possibly be on the big screen.

A lot of people saw the potential problem, as did Favreau and Shane Black.

Could it have been done in a more straight-forward way, and still work? Meh. I think something had to be done to eliminate the all-too-obvious stereotype.

Black did it in a way that is an interesting commentary on how the genre deals with villains, and how the media deals with villains in the real world. I think it's pretty cool. I can understand disappointment from fans who wanted something else, but I think it's much better for a movie like this to try to do something intelligent with a character that runs the risk of just being an awful and embarrassing stereotype.

It's the kind of thing that's good for the genre, even if it doesn't work for everybody.

 

[jmc]

Well...

Spoiler

One of the main ideas presented by the story is the evaporation of this caricature in favor of a much less mysterious figure. (Who is, I think, definitely formidable in his own right.) But, regardless, it can't be said to be gratuitous: without the twist, the meaning of the whole story changes.

I do think the comparison to TDKR is legitimate, and no doubt Nolan had something similar in mind with the whole "theatricality and deception" idea that goes all the way back to Batman Begins.

On the whole I think the twist in IM3 works better because of the particular history of the Mandarin, and the tech-heavy world of Iron Man. But there are definitely some similarities between the two films in this regard.

Spoiler

I don't think it's gratuitous if you look at it from the perspective you've describe. But the way the character was built up not only in the trailer but during the movie makes any message the director was trying to convey somewhat irrelevant, because ultimately it feels like we've been cheated. I can see it from the perspective you and others have suggested, but I don't agree it was in the best interest of the story and frankly the character to do it this way. IM has lacked a genuine adversary on film and everything pointed toward getting one, only to have the rugged pulled out from underneath us. I don't think it would have been a big deal if the marketing wasn't what it was, if it was just a Tony Stark marketed thing with little mention of the villain it wouldn't have been an issue and would have been far more accepted. Ultimately the only way I can convey this film is that it's a film that feels like it doesn't have a bad guy. I will admit though, I do think it works better here than in TDKR because it was genuinely unexpected, which is why I think people aren't taking to it kindly.

 

[jmc]

I don't think I do. I know the twist and I am not bothered by it at all. I posted here a year ago saying how stupid the Mandarin could possibly be on the big screen. Go watch Mortal Kombat and see what we probably would have ended up with.

I am glad they made him real world. People like to credit Batman as the 'realism hero' but it's actually Iron Man. His villains, aside from Vanko, are pretty believable characters.

You can't say anything until you've seen it in context my friend. How about you watch it when it comes out then come back and decided whether you think it works or not.

 

[Flemm]

Spoiler

I don't think it's gratuitous if you look at it from the perspective you've describe. But the way the character was built up not only in the trailer but during the movie makes any message the director was trying to convey somewhat irrelevant, because ultimately it feels like we've been cheated.

Spoiler

Who is *we*? I don't feel cheated. But, of course, I readily admit that I was never attached to the Mandarin as a character.

I think some bad choices were made with Iron Man's adversaries in IM2, which was one reason why the film felt like a dip from #1. Here I think we are back to the level of #1: the adversary is formidable, but not a scene-stealer. Or, he is a scene-stealer, but that turns out to be a mirage.

I think it's more than enough. The Joker is unusual. Mostly these movies don't need the villain to steal every scene. If anything, I think a good balance has probably been struck here: RDJ is still the star of the show, but the bad guy is controversial and also gets attention.

 

[jmc]

Spoiler

Who is *we*? I don't feel cheated. But, of course, I readily admit that I was never attached to the Mandarin as a character.

I think some bad choices were made with Iron Man's adversaries in IM2, which was one reason why the film felt like a dip from #1. Here I think we are back to the level of #1: the adversary is formidable, but not a scene-stealer. Or, he is a scene-stealer, but that turns out to be a mirage.

I think it's more than enough. The Joker is unusual. Mostly these movies don't need the villain to steal every scene.

Spoiler

Let me rephrase. Some people feel cheated. And I kinda dispute the notion that villains don't need to steal the show. The best villains are the ones who do steal it and for what ever reason that I can't comprehend, especially in the Iron Man fan base, there seems to be complete apathy towards the antagonists for the character. It's those lack of villains and strong supporting characters that is going to prevent IM from having a long term future on film I believe, and it kinda bugs me. At the moment it's the RDJ show, and that's great, but I want more from the series as a whole. IM3 was a step in the right direction, way better story than the other two films, but it feels like there's this complete over reliance on RDJ to keep the character going forward. When Ben Kingsley is cast and you see the promotional material that indicates to me they're heading toward a new level, one that potentially chisels things into the public consciousness. But it falls short. Is the film good? Absolutely. Does the plot device work in context? You bet, no argument. Was it in the best interest of the character? I don't think so because to me the villains are just as important to the character mythology as the hero.

 

[Flemm]

Spoiler

But it falls short. Is the film good? Absolutely. Does the plot device work in context? You bet, no argument. Was it in the best interest of the character? I don't think so because to me the villains are just as important to the character mythology as the hero.

Well, I think it's absolutely true that IM has thrived mostly on RDJ. Or, at least, on him and his chemistry with GP. But... every character has its own winning formula.

I've never been that happy with how batman comes across on screen. But he tends to have really cool villains. So... I dunno. Maybe that character is just more villain-centric (at least on film).

And maybe Iron Man will really struggle without RDJ. However, if so, I don't think it will have anything to do with this film's choices regarding the Mandarin.

Spoiler

On the contrary, it's a really cool "update" of the character that will, I think, be received as an intelligent commentary on a variety of things, including the stereotypes surrounding the character's creation in the comics.

And Iron Man could just as easily turn into the kind of role that people are excited about every time it is recast, because it is always a really talented, charismatic guy with a new style and delivery, etc.

Fans of the IM films could just be right: it's more about Tony Stark & friends than the bad guy.

 

[Visualiza]

I'm a film fan first, comic book fan second.


The genre-politics of this film are genius. People feeling cheated by the Mandarin flip are an essential part of this, which is why its so ballsy. The film makers inserted a giant 'kink' in the fabric of the genre at the absolute prime moment - it hits you like the gunshot in LA Confidential. It does to the movie what the I am your father scene does to Star Wars - or what the reveal of Kaiser Soze does to The Usual Suspects. It changes everything.

Fans who are discomforted by that should search for a smarter articulation of what that effect says about the phenomena of comic book movies. The marketing, the execution, the creation of the Mandarin was so perfect - in terms of how we have come to understand film adaptions of difficult comic book villains. It does exactly what the genre has come to do. They take a silly/difficult character and give him a fan-boy's wet dream of a Nolan interpretation. The Mandarin is a commentary on that process firstly. But it also does something more meaningful in the context of the film. It takes off the mask of the villain you want to see, dousing their mystique in cold water, showing them to be simply a creation - another special effect to sell us the movie. We were totally fooled. And we should enjoy that and learn from it.

Its about time a superhero movie deconstructed the idea of villainy in the same way that it has tried to deconstruct the idea of heroism. The villains of our modern world are marketing constructs - Bin Laden, Assad, Kim Jung Il. We do not find them terrifying or even truly abhorrent - but they instill a talismatic sense of excitement within the catastrophe of modern events. Their persona obscures the real war which our governments are waging around them. Our villains are brought to us through the media without even the slightest attempt at empathy - objectivity - or counter-factual. They are almost what we want them to be.

Isn't it unnervingly true, that the face of our enemy, that excites us - is disappointing and crass, and only a personification of the greater threat and challenge to our ideas? Think of Bin Laden taken out in his hide-away with his wives in the dead of night. Perhaps if we had seen that scene it might have been as disappointing and crass as the Mandarin?

Insightful, and very well said. I agree with every word.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

The mandarin twist isn't that bad if you think about it within the context of the movie. And we do get The Manadrin just not a straight comic book adaptation. And yes, I started getting into Iron Man comics after the first movie so I am familiar with Mandarin from the comics etc. So even though I know the twist I am still going in with a open mind come May 3rd. Comic book fans need to realize that Filmmakers can interpret comic book heroes and villians in diffrent ways as long as it serves the story in a movie. I don't think it's written in stone over at Marvel that their characters have to be 100% comic book accurate in all movies.

 

[Repulsor Blast]

this movie is awesome. haters gonna hate

ps. i really hope it makes a huge amount of money so iron man 4 is made lol.

but yeah, see the movie for yourself and judge.

 

[marty mcfly]

I gotta say I was disappointed for a number of reasons...

Spoiler

1. I knew about the twist, and I wasn't "spoiled" by it, but I can imagine that a casual viewer would be disappointed about how it unfolds. The trailers show Ben Kingsley's Mandarin as a scary threat (ala The Joker or something similar), but all of his scary moments are in the previews. The ONLY stuff we don't see in the trailers is when we find out that he's just an actor. Granted, BK did a great job and it was funny, but I just felt cheated.

2. Pretty dodgy visual effects. Obviously Shane Black isn't familiar with CGI and it shows. The suits all look pretty bad, Tony getting in/out of his suits looks bad, the Extremis virus looks bad. It's sad because Jon Favs had a great eye for CGI and Shane Black doesn't.

3. The producers/actors/director kept saying how they wanted to give Don Cheadle more to do, and yet he's in only in like 3 scenes. Lame.

4. Nerdy Killian was laughable. Come on, a nerd that gets dissed at a convention holds a grudge for 13 years and plots a government takedown to get back at Tony? That CAN'T be the best way to portray these characters...

5. I hated the voice over. I get it, they wanted to do a little punch-line at the end, but I just didn't like it. This just didn't feel like an Iron Man film to me. I hate being so nit-picky because I'm usually pretty forgiving about this stuff, but it just didn't feel right to me. At the very least they could have used Matty Libatique as the Cinematographer to keep the "look" consistent.

That being said, I enjoyed the film. But I still like IM1 and IM2 more.

 

[Flemm]

And we do get The Manadrin just not a straight comic book adaptation. And yes, I started getting into Iron Man comics after the first movie so I am familiar with Mandarin from the comics etc.

I think the gist of the complaints...

Spoiler

...is not so much that the depiction of the Mandarin is a departure from the comics, but rather that Kingsley's character is the type of update some fans wanted and were expecting, basically a Nolan-esque adaptation of the villain. But he turns out to be a fraud, or a distraction.

As protoctista pointed out earlier, that is part of the basic concept: the distraction is what you are expecting, it's what you *want* on some level. And that's why it is effective as a distraction.

It's certainly perceptive. And, like I said earlier, I think something like this was necessary for the Mandarin to work anyway.