Iron Man 3 keeps breaking box office records. It’s a good superhero movie and a huge step up from Iron Man 2. But this latest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe had some divisive elements. Here we have listed a few of them (including big spoilers), with both a positive and a less than super assessment. Did you love them or you hated them?
More men than “Iron Men”
Not having his armor/suit gives Tony the opportunity to regain confidence in his ingenuity and stop being obsessed about building an army. Also, him and Rodhe can play Lethal Weapon at the end.
What is this? An episode of Lois & Clark or a superhero movie? The big set pieces are great, but for most of the time the movie feels too small to justify watching it with those 3D glasses.
Pepper Al Gusto
Most love interests tend to be very annoying. But Pepper Potts is the counterbalance that keeps Tony connected with the real world. At this point in their relationship and the saga, she deserved to be in the spotlight saving the hero more than once.
She saves Tony a couple times, true. But trusting a stranger like Maya showed an uncharacteristic poor judgment. Pepper’s main purpose in the story is to be the old fashion damsel in distress to make Tony and the audience suffer for a few minutes. Not only she comes back from that suggested death, but her severe genetic transformation is “fixed” with a single line of dialogue from Stark.
An element translated very faithfully from a recent storyline featured in the comics and an animated movie. They are powerful enough to justify Tony calling into action his entire back-up force, giving us a fanstastic final battle.
Let’s ignore for a second all the practical questions (their clothing doesn’t burn, crazy acrobatic skills, random powers) and let’s focus on this one: Why are they doing what they are doing? Does the virus make good injured soldiers heartless assassins? Is it for money? Ideology?
Guy Pearce impregnates with delicious swagger a T-1000 on steroids. He keeps going and going, in a time when bad guys are usually defeated too quickly. Yes Bane, I am looking at you.
One of the weakest origin stories for a villain ever. The fact that the main adversary isn’t a terrorist but a corporate snake filled with ambition and ego sounds too similar to the developments in the first ‘Iron Man’.
A ballsy move to surprise the audience, with a big corporation and a corrupt politician creating a terrorist for their own gain. We get to see Ben Kingsly like never before. A realistic portrayal could have look too similar to Liam Nesson’s Rahs Al Gul and a more fantastical one (a dragon-like alien with magical rings) would have gone against the grounded tone of the first two.
Tony Stark’s nemesis from the comics doesn’t have a place in a cinematic universe that has featured Red Skull and flying gigantic lizards? It was a missed opportunity to increase the cosmic elements already explored in the other Marvel movies, to expand its mythology and prepare the audience for a less “realistic” Phase Two.
-So what do you think about these elements in Iron Man 3?
Founder & Editor in Chief of DesdeHollywood.com. Since 2009 Néstor brings the best of Hollywood to the world: interviews with the biggest stars and filmmakers, reviews, film festivals, red carpet events, exclusives and scoops. The entertainment capital from a Latino perspective.