Iron Man

[packbat]

This is not a review. My impressions of a movie right after seeing it in the theaters is quite unreliable - I have to forcibly restrain myself just to keep the superlatives out.

Loved it. Terrific superhero movie - up there with the best I've seen (that doesn't count, does it?). Characterization and acting were spot-on. Cinematography - I dare not even attempt to describe it. Special effects? Well, those are always hard. They didn't accomplish the impossible, but they did help push the limits a little closer to it.

In plot - it made sense when I watched it. Not the least because the writing was superb. Whoever did the dialogue did magnificently - genuinely clever, and touching, and well, well done.

It was convincing. It was exciting. It was inspiring - a classic uplifting heroic story, in spite of being indubitably set in the ever-popular day after tomorrow. The good guys are good, and the good guys win.

Today was a great day.

(P.S. Got Patty Griffin's 1000 Kisses at Borders after!)

Comments

[remix79.livejournal.com]

Yay, I was hoping it would be a good movie. AND a good day to boot, even!

[packbat.livejournal.com]

Yup! I even did well on my PDE final!

[nationelectric.livejournal.com]

It was convincing. It was exciting. It was inspiring - a classic uplifting heroic story, in spite of being indubitably set in the ever-popular day after tomorrow. The good guys are good, and the good guys win.

Yeah, this is something that Iron Man did really well. On two levels:

- Stark goes through a convincing redemption experience. It's particularly convincing because he is confronted with his flaws and his sins, has this awakening as to how hollow his life is and the people he's hurt, and genuinely repents. Yet he's not completely transformed -- he's still a conceited bastard, childish in many ways, although he's now more aware of his actions and has a greater sense of responsibility. Even as a hero, he remains flawed. He feels like a human who has undergone change, not like two separate "before" and "after" characters that have been stitched together by the writers.

- The technology, although obviously vastly advanced, *feels* plausible and contemporary to the world it is in. He doesn't feel like a superhero until the very end (and not even quite then) -- he feels like a mortal guy who is acquiring this technology that is cutting edge, but not transcendentally so. There's a sense of risk, and what edge he has feels earned -- I mean, he doesn't just suddenly get his ability to fly in a montage, he spends a lot of subjective time working on it. His real powers aren't technological, they're cleverness and chutzpah and determination.

Taken together, you have a hero who is very, very human. He's larger than life, but in a Steve Jobs way, not a Superman way. The underlying message is that greatness/heroism is something that anyone can attain. That strikes me as very, very powerful.

[packbat.livejournal.com]

That's a good analysis - the continuity of Stark's character was one of the things that struck me most (habits don't change the moment your principles do), but your second point is even more important. And that anyone can become a hero - not to be overly discontinuous, but it seemed very appropriate that Stan Lee made a cameo in this, because his whole "Who Wants to Be a Superhero" show is a (sadly flawed) exaltation of this same idea.

(I like how you picked Steve Jobs for your example there - brought a smile to my face. :P )