Drop your socks and grab your crocs

I hadn’t read or seen much comic book stuff when I was invited to watch Iron Man with my friends at the movie theater back in 2008. I’d seen and enjoyed the DC cartoons as a kid and of course I knew of Iron Man, but I didn’t know anything about him except that he looked like a rubber chicken version of Dr. Doom.

All this to say, Iron Man launched me into the world of comic books and superheroes. I was hooked from then on and I still love comics today. This movie quite literally changed my life, even if the change wasn’t as profound as most life changes.

Obviously, I’m biased.

But then something genuinely surprising happened.

Somewhere along the line I’ve forgotten how to put down my critical analysis of media and not only was I pleasantly surprised at the great writing still hitting the mark, but I was able to notice the superb cinematography, something I’d missed through no less than 3 rewatches. I mean, of course there’s the surface-level awesomeness like the entire opening sequence with its fluid transitions or the perfectly tense scene where Pepper is collecting data from Obadiah’s files, but even beyond this facade lies near perfection.

That moment when the missile lands next to Tony in the desert, the camera does a short, quick zoom with a zshooom sound and it’s just so reminiscent of comics and the idea of being hyper-aware in a high-stress moment.

When Obadiah has Tony paralyzed and is giving his evil monologue, everything is perfect. The angled shot, the lighting, RDJ’s violet veins, Bridge’s cartoon-villain dress and demeanor. It all comes together in this scene and despite the minimal camera work, the room seems to be spinning as the monologue goes on.

These are still pretty surface level things, but throughout the film there’s just a masterful execution of every element — lighting, costume & makeup, camera angles — just everything is absolutely seamless for 99% of the movie. It’s kind of insane to think about a blockbuster superhero movie being so technically well-executed!

One thing in particular that caught my attention and stayed pretty true throughout the movie is the fact that this movie doesn’t follow Tony Stark. In almost every scene with Tony, the camera is following another character. This does two things: it lets the audience know things that Tony doesn’t, which helps build tension, yadda, yadda; and it makes a distinction between Tony Stark and Iron Man. Because when Tony Stark is in his suit, then the camera begins to follow him. Even the final shot of the movie plays to this, finally — finally — focusing on Tony Stark and Tony Stark alone, as he declares he is Iron Man.

Fucking chef’s kiss. Are you kidding me?! This movie was so fucking good; that’s why it’s one of my favorite MCU movies of all time, despite being the first. (We don’t talk about Hulk in this household.)

Robert Downey Jr. is the perfect Tony Stark. I found it a bit funny that at times the makeup crew tries to harken Downey back to his teen acting days with the extremely glossy eyelashes, but other than that it holds up overall and I would even go as far as to say that we probably haven’t had a stand alone superhero movie that was as good as Iron Man since Iron Man. 

It’s just so damn unique; I can see exactly how it gripped the world with its melding of humor and action and reality and just everything we were all feeling at that moment, without shoving it down our throats that this is what we needed. Like, god, can’t one of these rich guys turn good instead of evil for once? Can’t someone get fed up and save us already? Are we finally getting a superhero movie as good as what’s on WB Kids??

And then Iron Man swoops in, dripping in sarcasm and long-lost teen lust, acting as though it’s the most natural thing in the world for him to be a rich guy in a mech suit, and ultimately delivering us unto a new age of entertainment.

.

.

.

The elephant in the room

Okay, yes, let’s talk about Rhodey. I remember when he was replaced; I was so upset. I felt that Terrence Howard was the absolute best choice for Rhodey and that he did an impeccable job opposite RDJ. Rewatching the film…god damn it, it’s still very true! Why’d you have to do it, Terrence? Why?! You were beautiful as you soared so high…

Listen, I like Don Cheadle as much as the next person, and did back in 2009 too. But he is not a good Rhodey. I feel like there are many other black actors who would have done the role better and I half-remember people throwing around Denzel Washington’s name as a “better” suggestion. Personally, I’d have gone with someone closer to Howard’s look, like maybe Jamie Foxx or someone.

The fact of the matter is that while the character is a military guy, one of the main reasons he’s friends with Stark is because he’s a progressive, more laid-back and approachable kind of military guy; he’d almost have to be for his work as a liaison with civilian organizations. Both Cheadle and Washington have such stern looks…it just doesn’t fit. (To be clear, I think Cheadle has done a good job with the role; I just think Howard would’ve done it perfectly. God it hurt to hear him say, “Next time, baby.”)

I mean, this is just my opinion and I know that Cheadle has millions of fans for his role, but I just don’t see it and never have. Terrence Howard is part of what makes the first Iron Man so great. But, c’est la vie.

.

.

.

So, Iron Man — Great Success! 

I guess I should rate these but I’m afraid there’s going to be a trend…

10/10 for Iron Man!!!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Next week, I’ll see The Incredible Hulk, which I am only watching out of respect for the timeline.

But actually, I liked this movie well enough and thought Edward Norton was a great casting choice. We’ll see if it holds up because it’s been probably a decade since I last saw it.

Anyway, yes, it's a really good redemption story, bc how do u redeem a billionaire? And not just any billionaire, a weapons profiteering billionaire. Someone who was dubbed by the media as "The Merchant of Death", how do u redeem such a man? Yes, he's a genius and yes he does charity work and yes he supports women and free sexuality and yes he's hotter than you grandma's traditional bread right out of the oven but to us, regular ppl, he's an arrogant, self centered, slut that has more money, brains and power than God and he's getting ppl killed!

So how do u make a 39 yo white man-child that has been in this business since birth, aware, responsible, and regretful of his actions and shortcomings? It had to be a situation of enough magnitude that affected him so directly that it pulled him right out of the sewers he had been swimming in.

Spoiler alert, it's not gently. He bumps into it regularly, touches it, holds it. Various times, Tony is talking and Obie finds a way to put a hand on his shoulder. Obie hugs Tony on his left side, for pictures and in private. Obie physically pushes Tony's shoulder to make Stark face him.

In im1 and im2, the main antagonists that pull the plot along are other rich white billionaires who throw money at their problem (Tony) with unethical rich person means. (Hammer hires Vanko with the intention of using him as a way to get to Tony because he's petty as well as using him to further his own military business by selling Vankos inventions under his name) (Stane makes shady deals and puts Tony's weapons up on the black market (which, by the way, what happened to Wanda and Pietro was either a result of Stane's shady deals that Tony was unaware of (Tony was also almost blown up by a Stark branded missile! That he DEFINITELY did not sell! He made the arc reactor so that the shrapnel in his heart wouldn't tear it to shreds!), or US military shittyness, something that Tony was uneducated on, learned about, and immediately, as in literally the second he could, when he was literally supposed to still be in a wheelchair, called a in-person press conference and shut down his weapons program, and immediately became one of the most anti-military characters in the MCU (like in the avengers, when he got real angry about being referred to as soldiers).

Killian isn't a good character, he's doesn't have a particular compelling origin story and wasting the foundation of AIM in the MCU on him sucks. Yes. But he's the last in the list of Iron Man villains that make sense in terms of Tony's personal turning over a new leaf. Stane and Hammer (and Vanko to a degree) are exaggerated versions of Tony's own personal flaws, the things he has to keep in check about HIMSELF. And in that sense, Killian is too. Killian is, if looking in a mirror, an exaggerated version of Tony's desire to be acknowledged and accepted by the people he loves, not being able to take rejection well, and being a risk taker, blown out of proportion. (Tony does deeply crave the affection of those he loves but he doesn't think he naturally deserves it. And while he can be reckless it typically starts and ends with himself. The very last thing Tony would do is, say, start human experimentation (on anyone besides himself) on something known to be dangerous). Killian is impulsive, vindictive, dismissive, self-centered and incapable of reflecting on himself in a meaningful way (basically just any "nice guy" guy on Twitter). He got so butthurt about a single night he dedicated the rest of his life to trying to get back at Tony about it (REAL big "nice guy" on Twitter vibes). He's not well written, he's not even that fun. What makes him interesting, though, is that Tony was kinda all of those things too. (Before his time spent with Yinsen, before Iron Man, before the Avengers).

Tony has never been as bad a Stane, or Hammer, or Killian. But thematically their characters are all "this bad thing about Tony pre-Afghanistan taken 12 steps further."

This movie is trying to be a very loose adaptation of Demon in a Bottle. It's probably the most famous Iron Man comic storyline there is - Or, at least, it was before Civil War. It's about confronting Tony's alcoholism.

Tony drowns himself in alcohol and becomes a danger to others. There's actually a lot more going on there, most notably Justin Hammer making Tony's suit malfunction in ways that Tony gets blamed for, thus ruining his public image and inviting consequences from the government and other supers. But the alcoholism is what it's most known for. It's literally what it's named for.

Demon in a Bottle is kind of a big deal as far as Iron Man stories go, and it had lasting consequences for the character; Namely, Tony's sobriety. He won't touch a drop of alcohol, proudly attends AA meetings, and encourages others to get sober too. Tony Stark is Marvel's biggest proponent of confronting and overcoming substance abuse. He did it, and you can too.

But I guess they didn't want to depict Iron Man's drinking as a character flaw, so we get "Tony is behaving irrationally because of his impending mortality" instead. And that makes the party scene feel really weird.

Because. Like. You can see how this scene fits in perfectly to a Demon in the Bottle adaptation, right? This is Tony's rock bottom. This is the worst he can possibly be. But without the alcoholism, Tony's left without a character flaw to identify and overcome. His character flaw is. Just. Palladium poisoning.

He's acting this way because he's not handling mortality well. And the way that gets resolved is that he cures the palladium problem and is no longer dying. That's not character development. Tony doesn't improve as a person, he just changes his situation. If this behavior is just how he reacts to stress, then how can you guarantee it won't happen again?

As they drag him away, he laughs and shouts, "You lose!" at Tony. The man got what he wanted. In fact, he got exactly what he wanted. He didn't come here to fight Tony. He came here to fight Iron Man. And Tony delivered.

Up until this point, Tony's been riding the high of being all-powerful. The Invincible Iron Man is unparalleled. Nobody could possibly replicate his tech. He successfully privatized world peace, because nobody out there's man enough to go toe-to-toe with him on his best day. (Not the best brag but whatever.)

Tony's whole defense is that so long as the Invincible Iron Man keeps doing what he's doing, no one and nothing can compete with him, so the world will remain at peace.

His hubris invited Whiplash. Vanko lost the fight. But he competed. The world watched him briefly bring Iron Man to his knees. As Stern says in interview shortly after, Vanko proved that the technology to compete exists right now. The Invincible Iron Man is paralleled.

Tony won the fight. But the ground he stands upon was revealed to be unstable. And that is going to have significant repercussions for him.