I know the title of this review doesn’t really work (Jon Favreau directs), but I’m still a little shocked by Iron Man 2. I’d loaded up on pick and mix before it started, so it might be the sugar talking, but this movie is precisely what the first film aspired to be and never quite became.
I was not a fan of Iron Man, which turned up like a massive, multicoloured, attention-seeking toddler in 2008. Jeff Bridges didn’t seem enthused by his role as the bad guy, the final action sequence fell flat and I think the script cracked wise without actually being clever about it. All of this has been fixed for the sequel. Mickey Rourke and Sam Rockwell make an excellent bad guy double-team, and it’s not a Spiderman 3-style ‘too many villains spoil the movie’ situation. Despite the controversy over his clandestine selection, Don Cheadle is better than the frankly despondent Terrence Howard, who he replaces, and the support from Samuel L. Jackson and Scarlett Johansson is probably more meaningful to fans of the comic than people like me, but they do their job.
Robert Downey Jr’s Tony Stark is still an egotistical phoney, but he’s a warmer, more rounded character this time, whose tirade of one liners work to simultaneously mask and reveal his inner insecurities. Or something. What I mean is that the script is far sharper, and the couple of cringe-inducing lines are quickly forgotten as something funnier is fired out to replace them. Or because another robot is about to explode.
The plot is lightweight and it is only ever Stark, rather than the whole world, that is in danger of destruction, self-inflicted or otherwise. This could have been a problem, but the action is so beautifully crafted that you will not care. CGI effects are necessarily employed, but they are almost seamlessly integrated with the non-CGI onscreen elements. Only the occasionally odd sight of an actor’s head floating weirdly inside their massive mech-suits looks out of place. Compared to the excessive cartoonyness of Avatar and the distracting intricacies of Transformers 2, Iron Man 2 is streets ahead. Would it have been better in 3D? Absolutely not.
A tiny niggle I have is with the slightly odd mash of scientific and religious messages. With their advanced technologies and the heightened responsibility, Iron Man and by extension Stark are seen as gods, and frequently referred to either literally or metaphorically in such terms. As Wikipedia kindly informs me, Iron Man was created to be Stan Lee’s vehicle for exploring themes driven by the Cold War, such as the arms race and nuclear weapons. Now these are outdated and replaced with contemporary concerns, such as the cult of celebrity and international terrorism. I’m just not convinced that there is any place for a public that basically deifies Iron Man in the world of the film, when it seems like society has moved in a different direction, choosing science over religion. Although I’m probably being irrelevant and wrong. See the recent South Park episode ‘The Tale of Scrotie McBoogerballs’ for more on over-analysis.
Iron Man 2 is precisely the kind of blockbuster that everyone can enjoy. The action is top class, the script is inoffensive and occasionally funny, and the plot has a pleasingly predictable arc that doesn’t outstay its welcome. Summer is here.
P.S. Could anyone who sees the film please report back to me on something I think I caught site of in the background of one scene that took me by surprise. I think I saw a crude drawing of female genitals etched onto a yellow cabinet in Stark’s home lab during one of the early scenes in the film. He walks past it while Potts is having a go at him and he’s flicking holoscreen things all over the place. If I was mistaken or correct, report back! Cheers.
