Storyline causes 'Iron Man 3' to fall short of hype
Almost rookie director Shane Black ("Kiss Kiss Bang Bang") is not at fault if some viewers are not happy with "Iron Man 3." The big problem, at least for me, was that the story just was not that good.
It was as though the powers that be have a great franchise, with a fantastic star, a female lead who is almost perfect for her role and a fan base which includes a couple of generations of comic book fans, as well as fans of action movies, but after spending millions of dollars pumping up the public for a new Iron Man movie, they couldn't find a good script.
They couldn't very well let all of the effort go to waste, so they picked the best of the bad scripts (it sounds like "Argo" dialogue, doesn't it?), and ran with it.
While Robert Downey Jr. ("Sherlock Holmes," "Tropic Thunder") turns in another good performance as Tony Stark, it still lacked a little enthusiasm; perhaps he, too, is getting a little tired of the role and wants to move on.
Actress Gwyneth Paltrow ("Shakespeare in Love," "Country Strong") as Pepper Potts, once again, has the same problem as last time, playing a girl who is too smart, too confident, too together to be a Nell Fenwick to Stark's Dudley Do-Right.
Don Cheadle ("Ocean's Eleven," "Hotel Rwanda") again comes on board as Col. James Rhodes, and does so well in starring roles; I wish he would stop showing up in these secondary pieces.
Guy Pearce ("L.A. Confidential," "The King's Speech," "Memento") as Aldrich Killian, plays a pretty decent villain, although plain Jane bad guys in superhero movies tend to turn me off. His on-again/off-again morphing into LavaMan was not fascinating enough for me, and seemed a bit boring.
Ben Kingsley ("Gandhi," "Schindler's List"), on the other hand, as The Mandarin, was a delight. His quirky rendition of Ringo Starr, brought back fond memories of the Beatles drummer portraying a version of himself in the 1968 sleeper hit, "Candy."
This movie was good, but nowhere near as good as the first one, and only marginally better (maybe) than "Iron Man 2." They really did need a better storyline.
Repeating variations of things like the multiple Iron Men, and a serious lack of spark between the two stars (even though the chemistry is definitely there), is an injustice to the movie going public.
The final battle scene was too lacking in close up combat and had more of the same Fourth of July fireworks feel with the aerial fighting, just like in the second movie.
Another problem was that almost all of the action was crammed into two huge "Sock! Pow! Bam!" segments, and the rest of the overly long movie seemed a little too slow.
This movie was good, but deserved to be better. It was as though instead of saving the world, he saved St. Albans. For a superhero like Iron Man, the story should have had a more exciting, more original script. Tony Stark's red and gold armor deserved better.
Billy Summers is a freelance photographer who also reviews films for The Putnam Herald. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.