How to Build a Better "Iron Man 3"

I know I'm not. But who is Iron Man?

I am NOT the producer, writer/director nor lead actor of “Iron Man 3”.  (duh)  Despite my previous blog (What about Iron Man 3?) expressing how much I disliked the latest Iron Man movie.  I do respect Kevin Feige, Shane Black and Robert Downey Jr. for all their efforts in bringing us “Iron Man 3”.  My respect has nothing to do with the fact that “Iron Man 3” has opened big and is already a huge box office success.  It comes down to how little courage or effort it takes to criticize anyone’s work.  But it takes enormous courage and perseverance to put out any artistic work such as a movie.  The stakes are even greater with a huge commercial blockbuster based on a pop-culture character.  So it is in the context of that respect, I now write how "Iron Man 3" could have been better.

I was not involved in any way with the latest Iron Man movie.  But I have been a comic book, media, movie and storytelling professional for most of my life.  And since the age of 6, I have been the biggest Iron Man fan that I’ve ever come across.  This blog is from the perspective of a media professional and more importantly from that childhood Iron Man fan. I really don’t expect anyone to care about my thoughts, suggestions or ideas concerning “Iron Man 3”.  So this blog more than any other of my blog entries is really for me.

I’ll begin by posing the question that I think “Iron Man 3” failed to answer in any meaningful way.  “Who is Iron Man?”

To answer that question, I’ll start with a comment I remember Chris Claremont, the legendary X-Men writer made about the problem with Iron Man is that anyone who puts on that suit of armor can be Iron Man.  I wholeheartedly and completely disagree with this assessment.  By now we all know that Tony Stark is Iron Man.  He is one with the suit.  It is an extension of him. It is part of him.  And who is Tony?  In “The Avengers” movie, he says he’s a genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist.  “Iron Man 3” pretty much says he’s a mechanic who builds neat things, has a great girl and occasionally saves the world.  All of these descriptions are true. But as true as those descriptions are, they merely scratch the surface.  

Marvel Comic's latest Iron Man storyline

The best storytellers try to look at and understand characters more deeply.  For example, what makes Tony tick?  What is the heart of his motivation.  I would say most of it comes from his relationship with his father (which the second movie reveals some of).  Tony pushes himself because he wants to prove himself his father’s equal or better.  He wants to be the better businessman, billionaire, playboy, dreamer and futurist.  He wants his father to be proud of who he has become.  Howard Stark is shown to be a cold, stern father who is disconnected from Tony.  The comics at times hint that he may even be abusive (emotionally if not physically).  But even the comics haven’t defined his relationship with his father in too much depth or detail.  The current comic books may rectify that in the Marvel Now “Secret Origin of Tony Stark” storyline.  But even without that detail, we do know that like his father, Tony has demons that he has drowned in alcohol.  I sincerely believe that exploring those demons would be a bold direction for the Iron Man movies.  

But what about the current movies?  At the end of a couple of these recent movies, Tony Stark declares definitively that he is Iron Man.  What does that mean?  Who or what is Iron Man?  After several movies, I think the audience has seen something that just scratches the surface of what Iron Man is.  So here are my thoughts as a decades long Iron Man fan:  Iron Man is a concept or symbol that can actually be bigger than the man.  If I were to go beyond the character, I would say that Iron Man is a metaphor about humanity’s relationship with technology.  Iron Man is an optimistic view of how technology can empower humanity to make our lives better.  We can be faster, stronger, more connected and aware of ourselves.  

The 1960's Comic Book Mandarin

Alright I’m getting a little metaphoric and esoteric.  Let’s bring it back to character.  Or more specifically the hero.  A hero is often best defined by his villain.  The best villains are often the opposite side of the same coin the hero is on.  Think Batman and the Joker.  Superman and Lex Luthor.  For Iron Man, his arch nemesis has always been the Mandarin.  The Mandarin has represented his opposite.  East vs. West.  Technology vs. Mysticism and Magic.  I agree with what Shane Black has said about the Mandarin being an outdated stereotype.  To that end the trailers setup an interesting version of the Mandarin that hints at the embodiment of everyone who hates American values, society and culture.  That turns out to be misleading and false advertisement.

The opposite of Tony Stark in this case is a media sham or an actor.  There is a bit of tongue-in-cheek irony in that.  We have two great actors, Robert Downey Jr. and Ben Kingsley playing off each other.  But really, what does the Mandarin or what is revealed to be the real power behind the Mandarin, Aldrich Killian say about Tony Stark as a hero?  If Tony is the opposite of the villains, then he is not an actor or a sham that manipulates people out petty revenge.  Those villains and therefore what it says about our hero is just not that interesting to me.  IMHO, that also misses the point of who Tony Stark really is and how big, deep and complex a hero he is.

What the trailers setup is that Tony Stark is a charismatic, corporate hero and leader with a cult-like following while the Mandarin is his opposite, a terrorist leader with a cult-like following.  That makes me think of Steve Jobs vs. Osama Bin Laden.  The cult of Mac vs. the cult of Al Queda.  Basically two larger-than-life personalities that inspire world-wide fanaticism pitted against each other.  Wow!  It sends chills down my spine thinking what two great charismatic actors like Robert Downey Jr. and Ben Kingsley could have done with that.  It could have been so much more fun and entertaining to see how these two larger-than-life leaders differ in philosophy, culture and approach.

And therein lies my frustration with “Iron Man 3.”  It inherited so much depth and potential that ultimately ended up being wasted in a loud, meaningless third act where all the plot pieces add up to say nothing interesting about the character or the human condition.  "Iron Man 3" turns out to be light popcorn, escapist entertainment about a neurotic, playboy billionaire who faces off against a burned-out, second-rate actor.  I would much rather have seen a movie about how a charismatic, flawed hero struggles and then triumphs over the demons of ego, media and technology while leading us to a bright, optimistic future with style and flair.  That is a hero for the modern ages.  That is Tony Stark.  That is Iron Man!

What about Iron Man 3?

The kid within has questions about Iron Man 3

“Tony Stark makes you feel

He’s a cool exec with a heart of steel!”

Those were the words that kicked off the Iron Man theme song for the first Iron Man cartoon I saw as a kid.  Back then, the best Marvel could muster were low budget cartoons and live action TV shows.  I still love those cartoons!  (You have no comic nerd cred if you don’t get some joy in watching Jack Kirby and Don Heck illustrations even animated in primitive form.)  Those live action TV shows are another matter altogether.  Even as a kid I only tolerated them because I realized the limits of technology and money made it nearly impossible to bring lesser-known comic book creations like Thor and Iron Man to life.  

Fast forward to 2008:  “Iron Man” the feature film ushers in what is now known as Phase One of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  Thanks to Jon Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. (RDJ), my favorite childhood superhero is no longer a second-tier Marvel character, but recognized the world over as the vanguard of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  For the first time, the world can now really see “live” on the screen what the rest of us Marvel Maniacs have been geeking out over on the printed page.  I’ve been in superhero geek heaven since 2008.  But all things must come to an end.  Phase One ended with a huge $1.5 billion box office bang called “Marvel’s The Avengers.”

IRON MAN 3 and MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE PHASE TWO

The release of “Iron Man 3” officially kicks off Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  Phase Two promises to be both smaller and more intimate with solo hero movies like “Iron Man 3”, “Thor: The Dark World”, and “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”.  But it also promises to get bigger and more cosmic with “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Avengers 2”.  So how does “Iron Man 3” fare in kicking off Phase Two?  

If I had to sum up “Iron Man 3” in a few words:  Loud, disjointed, hollow and disappointing.

Yes, RDJ remains a charming as hell Tony Stark.  Like all the other films featuring Iron Man, he is a joy to watch on screen.  He brings a loud, braggadacio and swagger to Tony while also projecting a hero who is vulnerable, ingenious and persevering.  His interaction with all the other actors on screen is funny, entertaining and engaging.  RDJ remains a joy to watch as Tony Stark.  But after 5 films as Tony Stark (3 Iron Man movies, 1 Avengers and a cameo in the Incredible Hulk), just watching RDJ on the screen is not enough to make a movie great.  The problem with “Iron Man 3” is how all the other pieces of the movie are disjointed and don’t quite add up to a satisfactory film.

The Movie (left) & Comic Book (right) Mandarin

OK, so I’ll admit there is the Iron Man childhood fan in me that’s completely unsatisfied with what has been done with the Mandarin.  Since they alluded to the Mandarin in the “Ten Rings” organization of the first “Iron Man” movie, I’ve always acknowledged it would be challenging to update the bad, Fu Manchu-style, stereotype of Chinese communist villainy that the comic book Mandarin is.  What was alluded to in the trailers of an archetypical villain who stands on the extreme opposite of everything American seemed like an interesting take I was looking forward to.  A hero is often defined by his enemies.  Most people familiar with the Tony Stark character know that he is actually his own worst enemy.  But external to Tony, without a doubt his greatest arch enemy has always been the Mandarin.  Unfortunately, this movie reveals a Mandarin to be something far less than what was advertised in the trailers.  (SLIGHT SPOILER ALERT) In fact, the movie Mandarin is essentially a make-believe joke or a sham.  Can you imagine if Lex Luthor or the Joker weren’t real, but figments created by some other enemy of Superman or Batman?  Entirely unsatisfying.

What the Mandarin ultimately is revealed as at the end of the film, completely deflates a moment in the first act where an emotionally distraught Tony Stark calls out the Mandarin and declares “it’s just you and me” in a direct charged challenge to the Mandarin.  So what is set up so beautifully in the first act of the movie comes to an entirely unsatisfying resolution between Tony and the Mandarin.

Writer and director, Shane Black has decided not to hang the entire movie on the hero vs. the villain. Then what should he hang the entire movie on?  The obvious choice is Tony Stark’s character arc.  With a superb actor like RDJ whom Shane Black has worked successfully with before in “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang” pre-Iron Man, it should be a slam dunk.  Only it isn’t.  The movie begins with Tony Stark suffering post-traumatic syndrome after the battle in the Avengers.  I loved this angle and approach.  It beautifully shows serious repercussions and a vulnerable character developed from last summer’s blockbuster “The Avengers”.  Shane then strips away Tony from all of his toys, fortune and friends to setup a situation where we can see Tony deconstructed down to the core of who he is.  So far so good.  But then we get to act 3 where we should have an answer to the question:  Who is Tony Stark?  At the end of this movie he once again declares that he is Iron Man.  OK, we get it.  You've said that many times now.  But who is Shane Black’s Iron Man?

The best I can tell, the movie essentially shows that Tony is the sum of all his loud, disjointed hi-tech parts that he builds.  Only he isn’t.  He’s supposed to be more than those mechanical parts.  (SLIGHT SPOILER WARNING) Which he triumphantly blows up to demonstrate that he is not his armor (or its accessories).  So he sheds his metaphorical cocoon to be reborn as...  what I'm not so sure.  Tony?  Iron Man?  As a decades-long Iron Man fan, I have my ideas about who Tony Stark/Iron Man is.  But this movie really does little to illustrate who Tony Stark and Iron Man is beyond a mechanic who makes neat VFX gadgets while making snide remarks.  

The modern classic Extremis storyline

The VFX and “armor” in “Iron Man 3” are another issue I have.  Iron Man is more like Accessory Man in this movie.  In the story, he is actually physically in the suit for only a few minutes.  When he is Iron Man, it’s really just bits and pieces of accessories that he goes into and out off faster than you could put on or take off your own fashion or hi-tech accessories.  This direction relies heavily on many moving CG (Computer Generated) pieces that have little weight on screen.  One of the best things Jon Favreau established in the first Iron Man movie was the use of more practically built armor pieces.  This gave Iron Man more weight and believability on screen.  Even the comic book Extremis version of the armor had a sense of weight and power that is lost in this movie version comprised of many weightless CG pieces that fly around and get knocked off relatively easily. 

Thus we’re left with CG Accessory Man.

I can continue to knit pick plot points such as Tony suddenly becoming a special ops man able to sneak into a highly fortified compound. Or how a highly experienced military man like James Rhodes is left unattended in that compound so that he can easily escape.  Or how easy it is to pry anyone out of any of the Iron Man suits in this movie (my car is more secure and fortified than the Iron Man suits in this movie), but those are really minor points compared to the overarching problem.  Despite inheriting and setting up a beautiful opening character arc, we end up with a big empty shell of a character and movie.  Kind of appropriate considering that one of the comic book Iron Man's nick names is “shell head”.

To be fair, “Iron Man 3” is a decent mindless, blockbuster, summer movie distraction.  The friends I saw this movie with were spread pretty evenly across the spectrum in their reactions ranging from those who really liked it, those who thought it was ok and those who felt it was disappointing.  If it’s not obvious by my review so far, you can count me squarely in the latter disappointed group.

“Iron Man 3” had so much potential inherited from “The Avengers”, previous Iron Man movies and comic books.  While the average summer moviegoer can probably find this movie entertaining, this movie squanders most of that potential and leaves the kid inside of me screaming “what about me?”  What about those of us who have known and loved this character for decades?  Disney and Marvel couldn’t give us the real comic book version of Iron Man and the Mandarin.  So we’re stuck with a hollow shell of a movie that feels more like those low budget Marvel TV shows with watered down versions of these beloved characters. Perhaps what the “Mandarin” says in the movie about fortune cookies sums up Iron Man 3:  It is a hollow knock-off filled with lies.