Slashdot Mirror
Iron Man Released
Slashdot reader stoolpigeon wrote about the start of summer blockbuster season, and the latest comic book to make it to the big screen. He says "Iron Man is an entertaining movie, as they go. I never was really into comic books — so I have no knowledge or concerns as it relates to following the original story line. I can't address that. The film has good action and some very humorous moments. The serious side of the film is not its strong suit. It's not horrible, but it really doesn't make too much sense. It was interesting to see how they tried to set up an anti-war message without being critical of the US military. It's really a comic book put to film. Not high art or anything, but a whole lot of fun. The film keeps up a fast pace throughout and never bogs down. Some of the product placements were so blatant that they kind of jarred me out of being into the film. The special effects were phenomenal. It was awesome in that regard. Like any movie, it is not everyone's cup of tea If you do go see it in the theater, and you are a big comic books fan, do not leave until after all the credits have run. And I mean all of them." I gotta get a sitter. Man I'm old.
Unless there's someone at your local theater holding a gun to your head, your faux-outrage at being theoretically forced to do something that you never would have done in the first place is quite amusing.
Who said anything about "forced"?
Some movies really do put interesting "featurettes" after the credits... Pixar has done that a number of times, and I do not resent sitting through the credits for more actual content.
However, the FP article made it sound like Iron Man would have something similar, and the post to which I responded acted annoyed that the GP outed the "surprise" as nothing more than the equivalent of a Rick-Roll.
So yes, it would have greatly annoyed me to voluntarily (I neither said nor implied anything about "forced") sit through the credits expecting to see more actual content, only to watch an ad.
Well, you just keep raging against the machine, li'l mister too cool to get excited about an upcoming movie.
Hey, if you like calling yourself a "consumer", good for you. My time has value beyond the number of ad impressions The Sponsors can trick me into watching per minute. I have nothing against you getting excited to watch an ad, I simply have no desire whatsoever to do so myself.
Review
I personally loved the flick. It starts out with some action, gives a backstory, struggles with who he is/was when he finds he is vulnerable and cares, struggles with his business and technology, and they include a touch of romance, several bits of comedy, a nice soundtrack, and a few fights to round out a great movie.
Favre did good.
But hey, I like movies, I used to subscribe to comic books (Iron Man was my first), and I've been enough of an Iron Man fan that even though I stopped subscribing many years ago, I got the PDF product of Iron Man through 2006. I don't generally like Robert Downey Jr, and his characters have varied significantly in his career, but I enjoyed having him as Stark. But I also like the portrayal of inventors and technology and the flow of this movie with it's pacing.
There are of course several "movie inconsistencies", only a couple hints at how much time has passed, some logic problems (in my mind), and people who need the movie to be just like the comics will be ornery about the juxtapositions. I personally disliked Stark's disregard for secrecy - it seems out of comic-book character, even though it is in line for the movie's Stark's character. But it is a very cool movie and I also was surprised when I found it was about 2 hours long.
And yes, there is a scene if you stay past the credits, though not really a surprise. Except for the actor.
Feedback
Anti-war movie? Wow, Stark's ability to care about what his company's weapons are used for seems out of reach for some slashdotters. It comes straight from the books 10 and 20 years ago. This is nothing new, though you may be upset that someone takes a political stance when you wanted to see more things blowed up.
Mediocre movie? Many people consider it to be better than any previously made superhero movie, though other comic book movies may be better (I still like Hellboy). Too broad a generalization to refute directly, I'll say that this movie has actual pacing in the story arc, the comedy is appropriate to the situations (though I can see how some would consider parts manufactured, it is so much more natural than most anything from Batman or other Marvel movies), there is more to the movie than characters moving between action sequences (do people dislike the inventing/refining process?)
McGuffins: It is an imperfect movie, but I think it has half the times of poor logic within the writing that the nearest comic adaptation has, but about the same number of mcguffins (unexplained tech, mis-matched time sequences, etc.)
Gweneth Paltrow: She works well as Pepper Potts (she is a good actress!), actually really well as an assistant with a heart. Though "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" flashed before my eyes in one of the later sequences. And from the ads I'd originally guessed she would be Bethany Cabe, though maybe they're saving Angelina Jolie for that.
Mish-mash: The movie is quite a mish-mash of the Iron Man lore, some things better, some worse in my opinion. But it stayed true to who Iron Man is and made a great movie to boot!