Superhero movies tend to either impress their audiences or let them down completely. Too much technology or far-fetched plot lines are the factors that make comic book creations flop in theaters. Then there are those movies that get all the hype, the recently released “Iron Man” being one of them. It has dazzled audiences nationwide, but does it really deserve it?

Robert Downey Jr. plays child prodigy Tony Stark, who has taken over his father’s multimillion-dollar weapons company. When visiting a Middle Eastern country to promote a new powerful weapon, his car blows up. To save him, a doctor must put a magnetic device in his chest to keep the shrapnel from his heart. He creates a metal suit to escape the cave the Middle Eastern extremists are keeping him in.

To be completely honest, Downey Jr. has come out of nowhere and played a riveting role. The character is complicated and simple at the same time. He seems like one of those cocky businessmen who gets whatever he wants, but proves he actually cares about important issues later in the movie. He is smoking hot with a phenomenal body, and he’s 43 years old.

Downey Jr.’s co-star is Stark’s funny and sassy red-headed assistant Pepper Potts, played by Gwyneth Paltrow. I don’t know where Paltrow has been, but thank you “Iron Man” casters for bringing her back. She does an awesome and impressive job in the role.

The plot is what lacked in the end. It started off pretty good with the character development, but once the story got to the cave, it started to get slow. It’s not that it dragged, it just didn’t move forward. The whole movie seemed to be character development with one really cool battle scene at the end.

Those who have read the comic book say that it stayed true to the story, and that’s why it went slowly. Another argument for its static nature is that it was setting up for a sequel. Both of these points don’t make sense. People go see a movie to be entertained, not to read the comic book. Other outstanding superhero movies go beyond the comic book and create something extra; that’s why they are superior.

The latter argument is just confusing. Just because there is going to be a sequel does not mean there can’t be an ending. The movie needed some closure – the main aspect “Iron Man” was missing.

The cinematography was impressive, and the special effects were super. There are a few scenes that keep viewers on the edge of their seats. All of the technology is super advanced, and every boy in the audience probably wanted to steal it.

In general, the movie was entertaining. There were cool objects being built and relationships forming, but when it started to get near the end, it was a bit lacking. If the characters had some forward movement in their relationship, it would have been satisfactory, but there was almost none. Plus, the last line Stark says kind of ruins the superhero thing.

However, the stellar casting and eye-catching graphics overshadowed the lack of momentum the plot offered, creating a superhero movie that’s not necessarily great but is still one of the better ones to come out of Hollywood.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *