wood cat

kate_nepveu


incidents and accidents, hints and allegations


Firefly, big damn heroes
Kate kate_nepveu
Previous Entry Add to Memories Share Next Entry
Iron Man (spoilers)

 . . . my favorite part was his relationship with his robots.

I wasn't very enthused about this initially, but all the massive squee on my reading list had me more optimistic. Alas, apparently I'm the only person in the world who was bored by this, but bored I was.

The only, only thing that surprised me? Was that Jeff Bridges' character wasn't revealed to have killed Stark's parents. That's it.

My other impressions can be summed up as "what these people need is a honky" [1] and "appeal of the lawless elite" [2].

But I really did like the robots.

[1] A.K.A. the white savior genre, in which a non-white society exists solely to open the eyes of a white guy—up to and including the noble self-sacrifice of a non-white person in his service—and then be partly saved by the white guy to demonstrate his transformation. Because, you know, it's all about the white guys (more).

[2] A.K.A. extrajudicial violence is bad, except when it's wielded by people we like, and then we can have our cake and eat it too—err, condemn violence while reveling in it (more).

[The icon is an acknowledgement that I am not above the appeal of this.]

Trailers: The Dark Knight looks really awesome. I may even watch the first one all the way through as prep (saw the end on hotel TV once and wasn't impressed). New Indiana Jones, I just don't know, but I'm willing to be convinced. The Incredible Hulk . . . well, on one hand, Edward Norton, but on the other, Liv Tyler, so . . .

ETA: oh, yes, there is an extra scene after the credits, but the credits are so long and the scene is so short that I can't recommend staying for it.


montoya

2008-05-18 02:12 am (UTC) (Link)

In re extrajudicial violence, well, you should be pleased to know that the real Iron Man -- er, the one in the comics that is -- is heading up a drive to get superheroes working for the government in a registered, certified, and process-oriented way, to end freelance vigilante-ism.




kate_nepveu

2008-05-18 02:13 pm (UTC) (Link)

Which reminds me of the post-credits scene, which I'd meant to mention, so thanks.

montoya

2008-05-18 02:39 pm (UTC) (Link)

So as a note to self: Our tastes on superhero movies do not greatly overlap, I think.

Also on manga, but I knew that.

kate_nepveu

2008-05-18 02:51 pm (UTC) (Link)

What manga have you read?

montoya

2008-05-18 02:52 pm (UTC) (Link)

Er, anime I meant.

phanatic

2008-05-18 05:55 pm (UTC) (Link)

That already happened. Mightygodking did an excellent send-up of the whole series.

skwidly

2008-05-18 02:14 am (UTC) (Link)

The end is, frankly, the worst part of TDK. It's the character creation story that's the fun part.

kate_nepveu

2008-05-18 02:14 pm (UTC) (Link)

'S what Chad says, so I'm willing to give it a try.

montoya

2008-05-19 03:59 am (UTC) (Link)

I think you'll not like it, but I could be wrong.

I liked it a lot at the time, but when I look back at it now, all I remember is the angsty brooding.

kate_nepveu

2008-05-19 02:32 pm (UTC) (Link)

Angsty brooding is generally not a plus, but even if I don't like it, that's okay, since what interests me most about _TDK_ is not Batman but the Joker.

burger_eater

2008-05-18 03:52 am (UTC) (Link)

BATMAN BEGINS was good stuff. I recommend it.


cliosfolly

2008-05-18 04:29 am (UTC) (Link)

About your footnote number 1, although I enjoyed parts of the movie, I completely agree. I was disturbed by how it slotted perfectly into--from my perspective as a medievalist--the historical dichotomy of Knight smacking down the Saracens, who are given little characterization beyond extreme violence. The East/West narrative is one that would have appealed strongly, in many ways, to an audience five hundred years ago, and to have it repeated so shallowly here was really aggravating, especially given the reinforcing symbolism of the iron suit=knight's suit.

kate_nepveu

2008-05-18 02:14 pm (UTC) (Link)

Weirdly, I hadn't even thought of the knight's suit; thanks for pointing that out.

mswyrr

2008-05-18 05:19 am (UTC) (Link)

You're totally right.

Somehow, though, I enjoyed the heck out of its shininess. I think part of what made it enjoyable for me was that I could, in my head, imagine Tony's moral consciousness arc going up further than the film took it. It was problems + the fact that the morality of the main protag wasn't static that made the problems (sexism, ethnocentrism, elitism) workable. (I walked out of the theater thinking that Stane had a point about the hypocrisy of Tony's anti-weapon response being to make the biggest, baddest weapon ever and I wanted to write fic inspired by that quote “The poor object to being governed badly. The rich object to being governed at all.”) For that reason, I'm not sure I'll enjoy the next film, where they will have no doubt established their status quo and behave as if, now that Tony's had an epiphany, everything he does is mostly right.

kate_nepveu

2008-05-18 02:29 pm (UTC) (Link)

It is shiny and the actors did the best with what they had--which often wasn't much; for all its length, I felt a lot of motivations being skimped on. Like, as you say, tiny amazing power source + new resolve to use technology for the greatest good = _flying suit_.

montoya

2008-05-18 02:40 pm (UTC) (Link)

But of course, if you do something else with the power source, you end up with a movie inspired by Asimov, not Marvel.

kate_nepveu

2008-05-18 02:52 pm (UTC) (Link)

Yeah, I know that requires a certain amount of rolling-with, but it would've been nice if they could've done *something* to acknowledge that.

agrumer

2008-05-18 05:13 pm (UTC) (Link)

For that reason, I'm not sure I'll enjoy the next film, where they will have no doubt established their status quo and behave as if, now that Tony's had an epiphany, everything he does is mostly right.

Or that he's a drunkard who can't handle the responsibility, and someone else has to wear the suit for him.

(Deleted comment)

montoya

2008-05-18 08:28 pm (UTC) (Link)

Rhodes is the guy, yes.

mswyrr

2008-05-18 08:34 pm (UTC) (Link)

((squeee) Awesome! Now I understand why they got an actor of Terrence Howard's ability to play such an underwritten role; he gets to do more later! ((more squee))

mswyrr

2008-05-18 08:28 pm (UTC) (Link)

Huh. Is that what happened in the comic? 'Cause that could be interesting. (Esp. if Rhodes is the one who wears the suit?) And it would explain the way comics-familiar IM moviefic writers have of giving those textual clues (lingering description of sweaty Scotch glass, etc.) that There is a Demon in That There Bottle.

kate_nepveu

2008-05-18 10:03 pm (UTC) (Link)

Now *that* could be interesting, especially with Rhodes in the suit (or extra-sporkworthy, depending on what happens to Rhodes, but . . . )

sargent

2008-05-19 02:26 pm (UTC) (Link)

They also presaged it with his longing look at the suit and his "next time" comment in the film, which I thought was a nice touch.

mmcirvin

2008-05-20 02:18 am (UTC) (Link)

I had no idea what that was referring to, but I still thought it was great. Because, you know, who wouldn't think what he was thinking?

kate_nepveu

2008-05-20 11:01 am (UTC) (Link)

Yeah, me too.

sargent

2008-05-20 02:22 pm (UTC) (Link)

Yeah, when I saw the movie I had no idea of the backstory there, only finding it out later when reading Wikipedia. But it works even if you don't know what's likely going to happen in the inevitable sequels.

rabidotter

2008-05-29 02:43 am (UTC) (Link)

I saw it with my partner and another friend. They both liked _Iron Man_ immensely. I thought it was a bit cheesy. Morton Downey Jr was good. Jeff Bridges made a terrible villain, because I kept thinking "NO! The Dude, he abides! He is not evil! He is too lazy to be ambitious enough to motivate being evil! No, Dude, No!"


kate_nepveu

2008-05-29 04:13 pm (UTC) (Link)

Heh. Chad called him Lex Luthor crossed with the Dude, so it worked for some people, at least.

You are viewing kate_nepveu