Iron Man 2 (Jon Favreau, 2010) - The pleasure of the Iron Man franchise is watching one of our most gifted and entertaining actors play a man who is unabashedly in love with himself. Iron Man is the masculine ideal for the modern high-tech age. Robert Downey, Jr., teaming again with director Jon Favreau, relishes in playing Tony Stark, the genius, muscle-bound inventor who is the best at what he does and knows it. Because his value and uniqueness is so high, the superhero can essentially do whatever he wants, outside the law, flaunting US senators who try to force him to turn over the technology. He is also so charming that he can sleep with whomever he desires without turning off his close confidante "Pepper" Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow). He's achieved the American dream, and he doesn't mind showing off by putting on a year-long "Stark Expo" and opening it with a show consisting of rock and roll and some good ol' American T and A.
Stark is an exemplar of American entrepreneurship and inventiveness, who, apparently, has caused all wars on the planet earth to cease, merely because of the threat posed by him in his suit. This is like nuclear deterrence times a hundred, and there is only one man with his finger on the button. Understandably, the US government wants Stark to give them the suit. In turn, he doesn't want them or anyone to get it. If it was perceived that the suit could guarantee world peace for years, as seems to be the case, Stark would seemingly need loads of heavily-armored protection for all those times he's not in his suit. Further, the four or five models of suits he has as "extras" would be a bit better protected than they are. In any case, how exactly would he be able to cause Israel and Palestine to stop launching attacks against one another? Or ethnic/tribal wars in Africa and South Asia? Or the drug war? Or Islamist terrorism? The effect Iron Man has on world peace seems like it'd be much more measured than indicated by the hyperbolic declarations in this film ("I have successfully privatized world peace!").
Mickey Rourke's Ivan Vanko, an inventor's son who blames his misfortunes on Stark because of some obscure generational spat, and Sam Rockwell's Justin Hammer, a rival inventor overshadowed by the success of Stark Industries, both want to get their hands on the suit and the man in it (although, again, providing personal reasons for making Iron Man a target strikes me as redundant, as anybody should see the value in getting their hands on one of those suits). Don Cheadle takes over for Terrence Howard to play James Rhodes, Stark's supposed best friend who for some unexplained reason throws his buddy under the bus in front of a Senate committee, and later actually steals one of Stark's suits and brings it to the hands of the US military, who, again for some unexplained reason, is contracting the whole operation out to Justin Hammer. What operation is that? The operation to kill Tony Stark, I guess. Finally, there's also a secret organization called S.H.I.E.L.D. headed by the eye patched Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) who're also in league with the government, have a mole in Stark Industries (Scarlett Johansson) and somehow know how to save Stark's life by inventing a new element, which is also somehow related to some revelations on some old film reels of his dad's infomercials.
Not much of it makes any sense at all, and the whole thing is mind bogglingly overstuffed with what seems like filler. Not only is the film failing to explain the motivations of many of its characters, but it's actually failing to convey what exactly is supposed to be happening. One-liners spoken rapidly amid quick transitions are supposed to carry the heft of significant elements of the story. The film is paced terribly; it's either dragging on with unnecessary length and convolution, or it's speeding too quickly through dialogue which could be useful, at least to keep our facts straight. The whole thing is too busy, with too many characters. Vanko gets lost in the mix.
Another problem, also true of the original, is that we really have nothing invested in the inevitable climactic battle. The men are enclosed in robotic suits, completely protected. Not only is this not interesting to watch, but it removes the human element from the battles. It winds up being a contest between who's blasters are more powerful (or who's metal is, uh, heavier?). Who cares? We know the answer anyway.
One of the first film's major flaws was that it did not provide Gwyneth Paltrow with enough to do. The second film sees her role much expanded, and she plays off of Downey wonderfully. The constantly womanizing, manically upbeat Stark trades banter with Pepper, an attractive and strong independent woman. Favreau directs by overlapping the dialogue and keeping everything moving quickly. I liked these scenes. They evoked old Hollywood in a way, like in Cary Grant movies.
I like Jon Favreau. It's nice to see him successful, but this is not the movie for him to be directing. Perhaps this convoluted plot was conveyed more clearly and dramatically in comic book form, but film is a different medium, involving a set time parameter. Filmmakers should be free to adapt the plot to make it work best as a film. Often they are not, as seems to be the case here. Thinking back, my favorite scenes were between Stark and his clumsy robotic personal assistant, voiced by Paul Bettany. There was a quiet vulnerability to Stark in these scenes that contrasted quite beautifully with all the narcissism in the rest of the film. Favreau needs to stay small, not beholden to the needs of blockbuster fantasies.
Maxwell Anderson is an avid film watcher and blogger. He is also a freelance assistant video editor in New York City. You can contact him through his blog Ecstatic Text: http://ecstatictext.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment