Iron Man 3

Okay, so can everyone agree that Robert Downey Jr. was born to play Tony Stark, the coolest of the Avengers, Iron Man? No?!? What's wrong with you? The first movie, released in 2008, started up a superhero franchise that was fun and exciting and action-packed with lots of cool characters. The series is almost a perfect companion piece to Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy in all their cynicism and darkness. Now it's five years later and we've got our third flick for Downey, 2013's Iron Man 3. Will it be the last?

It's been several months since Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) helped the Avengers turn back Loki and his alien minions in New York City, but Tony is still struggling with what he saw and did. He hallucinates, can't sleep at night and exhibits all sorts of signs of PTSD. He may have found something to bring him out of his funk and in a big way. A mysterious terrorist dubbed the Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is unleashing attacks all across the world, defying anyone to stop him. Governments can't stop him, countries just waiting to be attacked. Tony steps up to the plate, telling the Mandarin to come and find him. Iron Man will put an end to the worldwide tyranny. Tony gets more than he bargained for when an attack is unleashed on his coastal home. His life is torn apart and he is feared dead by everyone who knows him as well as international media outlets. Forced to work from the ground up, can Tony rebuild from the ashes to take down this new, seemingly unbeatable enemy?

Now heading into this third Iron Man installment -- this one from director Shane Black -- I was under the assumption that it would be the last of the series, excluding the Avengers sequels. Downey Jr. has said he won't continue with the Iron Man series, but he'll be there for the Avengers 2 and 3. Good news there! I went in here with mild expectations. I liked Iron Man 2, but on a second viewing liked it a little less. Reviews were fairly mixed for this third installment, but that didn't seem to matter. It is currently the fifth highest-grossing film of all-time. Woo, money! I came away disappointed with this one though and can't quite put a finger on it. It's entertaining enough if a little long. Self-indulgent? Sure, most superhero movies are. Something else is missing though. It's more than a little schizophrenic, wasting a deep cast and some really solid moments.

What's above questioning? Though the script doesn't know what to do with most of the characters, Downey Jr. steps up to the plate. This is Tony at his most human. He's been beaten down, and even though he helped the Avengers win in NYC, it took a physical and emotional toll on him. Once the Mandarin unleashes his debilitating attack, Tony/Iron Man almost has to start over. It's cool and refreshing to see this other side of a character you feel like we've gotten to know pretty well. What sets it apart is somewhere in Tony's head is the smarmy, smart-ass, ultra-billionaire Tony Stark we all know and love. This is a great character however you cut it. Black's script has its issues, its flaws from the get-go, but delving into a familiar character in a way we haven't seen before certainly makes it a worthy film.

The rest of the cast is loaded, however misused or underused. Gwyneth Paltrow returns as Pepper Potts, now in charge of Stark Industries and trying to work out her relationship with Tony as much as possible. She's given little to do for much of the movie, but gets her chance at the badass spotlight late. Don Cheadle is basically completely wasted as Rhodes, Tony's friend who's been tasked with piloting the Iron Patriot, the military's version of Iron Man. Jon Favreau returns as Happy, Tony's former bodyguard, but it's a background part here. Paul Bettany also returns and has some fun as the voice of Jarvis, Tony's robotics assistant. Young Ty Simpkins has a good part as Harley, a young boy who comes across Tony at his lowest.

Maybe the weakest part of 'Man 3' is in the Villain Department.The always solid Guy Pearce plays Aldrich Killian, a brilliant scientist who has developed the technology to manipulate human DNA and create super soldiers. Pearce is a good counter to Downey Jr., his cocky demeanor a worthy foe to Tony's similarly cocky attitude. Kingsley is a great addition to the franchise too as the underused Mandarin, a mysterious international terrorist with no qualms about death on massive levels. Rebecca Hall plays Maya Hansen, an engineer who worked with Aldrich in the past and is now caught in the middle between right and wrong. James Badge Dale is perfectly creepy as Savin, Aldrich's enhanced henchman. Two separate twists disappoint but for different reasons. One is really, truly stupid and messes with the whole tone of the movie while the other doesn't come as nearly a big a surprise as it had to be intended.

It's a superhero movie. The technology is supposed to be goofy and not in any way reality. Somewhere along the way, this one really disappointed me. Aldrich's super soldiers are a cool concept, seemingly indestructible killing machines brimming with dangerous amounts of energy in them. Maybe it's taken too far, maybe it's the relatively unexplained motives of all the bad guys (other than POWER and WORLD DOMINATION), or just the general excess of the finale, but I didn't go along with this movie as much as the previous two. The action-packed finale at a cargo shipping yard has about 50 automated Iron Man suits and Tony and Rhodey and Aldrich and Pepper and everything going on. It was just too much.

There were parts I liked, most of them dealing with Tony. The intro scene goes back to Bern in 1999 as we meet a younger but still cocky Tony, including a nice nod to the first Iron Man as we meet Shaun Toub's Ho Yinsen who we later meet in a cave with Tony in Afghanistan. Stark's monologue at the beginning and end is fitting, a man learning who he is and how he get there. Mostly, I felt like this was wasted potential. A somewhat disappointing conclusion to the trilogy (if it is the conclusion) but still worth watching for the always fun Robert Downey Jr.

Iron Man 3 (2013): ** 1/2 /****

Hook

Let's face it. Who among us actually wanted to grow up? It's just more fun being a kid. Less responsibilities, no obligations, and basically? Do what you want. That's part of the long-lasting charm of the Peter Pan character, a mischievous boy who never grows up, causing mischief and enjoying himself wherever he goes. What if Peter did grow up though, forgetting about what he used to be? So goes 1991's Hook.

A ruthless businessman who can scoop up struggling businesses effortlessly, Peter Banning (Robin Williams) takes his wife and kids, Jack (Charlie Korsmo) and Maggie (Amber Scott), to visit his grandmother, Wendy (Maggie Smith), in London. Obsessed with a merger, Peter has lost touch with his family, and one night, they're mysteriously taken from Wendy's home, an ominous note from a JAS Hook left on their bedroom door. It defies a 'Peter Pan' to come back to Neverland and rescue his children. Peter has no idea what to make of it until Maggie reveals a secret; Peter is in fact Peter Pan all grown up, his "childhood" lost since forgotten when he chose to grow up. How can he get his kids back? By embracing who he used to be, visiting Neverland and tangling with the nasty Captain Hook (Dustin Hoffman). 

As a literary character, Peter Pan first appeared in author J.M. Barrie's 1902 book The Little White Bird. Peter would appear in several other Barrie books and since then has become an instantly recognizable literary character from books and plays to stage plays and feature films, even the iconic Disney classic from 1953. It is a character most kids are aware of at least a little, and there is a charm to the boy who refuses to grow up. A story delving into a 'what if?' about said character is an interesting, unique idea. Peter decided to grow up when he fell in love with his future wife, Moira (Caroline Goodall).  And what if a full-grown Peter doesn't remember his past life as the infamous Peter Pan? Well, away we go.

I watched the movie and enjoyed it only to get a rather large surprise as the credits rolled. Directed by.....Steven Spielberg?!? I couldn't and didn't believe it. Not one of Spielberg's best films, Hook is nonetheless a good film. What struck me most was the distinct look of the film, giving an appearance of almost being based on a stage. The sets are all clearly indoors -- especially the outdoor ones on Neverland and on Hook's ship -- but they're busy, cluttered and claustrophobic. There's always lots of action and movement around, filling the screen to the point it looks like it may burst. John Williams' score is okay if not particularly memorable, never rising above the action on-screen.

What I liked most though was the casting, almost from top to bottom. Who better than to play wild man-child Peter Pan than ultra-goofy Robin Williams? He brings the character to life; a business suit executive who can't be bothered with anything fun. Then, he starts to remember what he used to be and watch out! Let the fireworks ensue. Hoffman is a scene-stealer as Capt. Hook, the infamous pirate leader with a hook for a hand after a crocodile bit his hand off. Julia Roberts plays Tinkerbell, the tiniest of fairies who guides Peter on his rediscovery of who he is. Bob Hoskins too is very good as Smee, Hook's right hand man. Of Peter's Lost Boys, the ones that stand out the most are Dante Brasco as Rufio, the new leader of the Boys, and Raushan Hammond as Thud Butt, the rather....round, jovial Lost Boy. Even look for singer Phil Collins in a small part and Gwyneth Paltrow as a young Wendy in a flashback.  

Far from perfect, the movie does have its flaws. At 144 minutes, it's far too long. Here's my issue. The movie never really slows down from its London intro to the majority of the time being spent on Neverland. It isn't really the pacing's fault, but the movie feels incredibly long at times. Some scenes go on for too long without knowing where to cut it off. As well, the use of some computer generated images looks dated now some 20-plus years later. Hard to criticize it too much, but it's certainly noticeable. Still, it's an entertaining story with an iconic character, an interesting visual look, and a deep cast.

Hook <---trailer (1991): ** 1/2 /****

Contagion

For a lack of a better description or word choice, there are a lot of hack directors currently working in Hollywood. No real specialty or ability, they point the camera and let things take care of themselves. Steven Soderbergh? He ain't one of those talents. I come away more impressed with each film he directs, including one of his most recent ventures, 2011's Contagion.

After visiting Hong Kong on business, Beth Emhoff (Gwyneth Paltrow) returns home to her husband, Mitch (Matt Damon), and isn't feeling quite well, thinking she picked up a bug along her travels. The next morning she drops dead after going through a series of violent seizures. Mitch doesn't believe what he hears, claiming she was fine just minutes and hours before. It wasn't just Beth though. Something else is going along in various cities, regions and countries around the world. People are dropping dead with a variety of symptoms, a disease that the medical community can't quite pinpoint. The death toll grows and grows with each day. What is this new virus? Can it be stopped in time?

This is not an easy film to review, mostly because it isn't a film that's trying to entertain you. In a lot of ways, it reminded me of the wave of big budget disaster movies that hit theaters in the 1960s and 1970s. All-star cast in a perilous situation, who will survive? I guess it's appropriate that a 2010s version isn't an ocean liner overturning or a jet airliner struggling to stay in the air. Instead, we get a smart, well-written pseudo-documentary/medical thriller that seems more relevant in our time than any old disaster movie. Mostly though, it's not a movie you come away from thinking 'Man, that was great.' I finished it thinking 'Great movie, and a well-made one' but great? I don't think it wants to be great. It's content to be different from the norm, and I always give points for that effort.

That's where Soderbergh's film succeeds on so many levels. Yes, it is a feature film, but it feels very real from the start. Some of the director's touches are there -- title cards introducing locales and background -- but it is a very self conscious film for a 2011 audience. News spreads like wildfire of this new disease, Facebook, Twitter, and the Internet in general going crazy. News turns into rumors, rumors turn into chaos, and then it's the individual for himself. A condemnation of our society? Yeah, a little, but it isn't heavy-handed or forced. Instead, it's probably spot on in its portrayal of how our modern society would react in this situation. When survival is on the line, rioting, stealing, killing, everything becomes blurry. Where do you draw the line then as what's too far? Kudos to Soderbergh for handling the situation so smoothly and even effortlessly at times. Just one more sign of a very talented individual behind the camera.

His cast assembled here is an impressive one, starting with Damon as Mitch, a widowed husband trying to protect his daughter (Anna Jacoby-Heron) from something he can't see. It is an ensemble cast with pretty equal screen-time divided among the group, but Damon's Mitch is the most personal of the stories. Damon as always is very likable on-screen, especially when fighting for his daughter. And you know you're in for it when a big name like Paltrow is dead 10 minutes in. Oops, "spoilers" I guess. Laurence Fishburne and Kate Winslet play doctors at the Center for Disease Control (CDC), Fishburne working from headquarters, Winslet in the field trying to isolate the virus. Jude Law is perfectly slimy as a blogger with quite a following and therefore, a whole lot of power at his disposal. The beautiful Marion Cotillard humanizes a small part as a World Health Organization (WHO) doctor trying to find the source of the virus in Hong Kong. Jennifer Ehle is also very good as Dr. Hextall, a scientist/doctor working diligently to try and find a vaccine. Also look for Elliott Gould, Bryan Cranston, Enrico Colantoni and John Hawkes in small but important supporting parts.

With so many characters and storylines, 'Contagion' does bounce around quite a lot, but it never loses track of where it's going. Title cards show the day and location so we get a sense of how quick the virus is moving, the cells reproducing quicker and quicker. We learn what the virus is as the characters do. The movie has a very distinct look, colors filtered and washed out, the impending doom hanging in the air. Cliff Martinez's score is a gem, part electronic, part synthesized like so many solid Tangerine Dream scores. Listen to track one HERE and follow along with the other links for a taste of it. These are the elements that are easier to critique, but the movie on the whole is well worth recommending.

Don't be confused heading into Contagion. It is an at times very disturbing, highly upsetting story. It isn't always an "easy" movie to watch. Know what you're getting into, and I imagine you'll appreciate it more than if you thought were getting some glossy, superficial medical thriller. It feels based in reality, like this could easily happen to us in our current, modern society. And I'll bet you something. If you weren't a germaphobe before, you will be now. Washing your hands, not touching anything, not touching your face, all the little things I took away and have been on my mind since. A movie well worth checking out.

Contagion <---trailer (2011): *** 1/2 /****

The Avengers

Since 2008's Iron Man, the Marvel Comics universe has been introduced to a worldwide audience via a series of films featuring an infamous list of heroes. With each passing movie, the audience would see little snippets of something bigger being hinted at, something else coming along down the road. We saw quick scenes of characters, usually post-credits, and the rumors drifted. Would all these superhero characters team up as they did in the Marvel comics, forming The Avengers (<---the comic)? You bet, and that's where 2012's The Avengers rides into town to open the summer blockbusters.

For those not familiar with the Avengers' lineup, here goes, a refresher course in badass superheroes. The plot synopsis is next, but I wanted to start with a listing of these characters. The biggest and baddest? Well, I guess that's a personal choice, but I'm starting with Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Tony Stark in real life, a rich, eccentric playboy philanthropist. Joining him are Captain America (Chris Evans), a WWII hero come back to fight in 2012, Thor (Chris Hemsworth), an other-worldly Norse god, and the Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), scientist Bruce Banner post-gamma ray accident. Rounding out the group are two assassins and special agents, Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), a brutally efficient expert in hand-to-hand combat, and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), a pilot and marksman with bow and arrow. Good enough? That's just the start.

Director of espionage and intelligence agency S.H.I.E.L.D., Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) arrives at a remote secure facility in the desert as a time portal opens up and brings an unwelcome visitor. It is Loki (Tom Hiddleston), half-brother of Norse god, Thor, and he intends to wreak havoc on Earth. Loki steals the all-powerful Tesseract -- a pure, clean and unmeasurable source of energy -- and intends to use it to take over the planet. With nowhere to turn and no mortal, normal solution, Fury turns to the only individuals he can in a plan dubbed the Avengers Initiative, a collection of "freaks" all with unique, bizarre powers. With these different personalities and talents, can the group put their differences aside long enough to save the planet?

This is a summer blockbuster, definition of basically, director Joss Whedon's film raking in over $200 million its opening weekend alone, and that's just the United States. It is a big, big movie, but a good big movie, and that means everything. It clocks in at 143 minutes total and even without the most pointed of stories manages to be entertaining from start to finish. 'Avengers' is in no rush to get anywhere. It is a great popcorn movie. The action is great to watch, shot on a huge scale and using CGI but never that ridiculous-looking 'Oh, look, it's CGI' type reaction. Genuinely funny with a handful of legitimate laughs, full of action and great characters, this will not disappoint fans of the Iron Man movies, Hulk, or Thor. The Avengers very much so lives up to its admittedly rather high expectations.

A good script is one thing, and having the talent to execute it another thing entirely. The cast here are movie stars who can act, not just movie stars. The obvious star is Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man/Tony Stark, bringing this character to life perfectly the same way he did in Iron Man 1 and 2. Amidst a sea of solid actors, he manages to stand out, delivering countless smarmy, smart-ass one-liners. I'm also a fan of Evans too, and he's in close second as Captain America in terms of memorable superheroes. None of that is to say the rest are disappointing. Ruffalo and Hemsworth are excellent in smaller parts, pieces of an ensemble. Johansson seems a little out of place, but watching her in a leather catsuit puts any of those questions to bed. Renner too doesn't have a ton to do, but as one of the rising stars in Hollywood, it's one more solid, worthwhile part.

Not enough? Along with the always reliable, always worth watching Samuel L. Jackson, Hiddleston is a great maniacal villain you love to hate, Clark Gregg runs with his chance at more screentime as SHIELD agent Coulson and never looks back, Cobie Smulders (How I Met Your Mother) plays another SHIELD agent, Stellan Skarsgard is the brilliant scientist duped into working for Loki, Harry Dean Stanton as a security guard who meets post-rage Hulk, and Powers Boothe has a quick part as a member of the World Security Council. Oh, can't forget about Gwyneth Paltrow's quick appearance as Pepper Potts, Tony's girlfriend. Not too bad of a cast, huh?

The action is impressive -- more on that later -- but what I liked most was the team aspect of the Avengers. Who's the leader? How will they work together? Can they? The script has countless scenes that throw them together in groups of two and three, five and six, and just lets them go. Yes, they're all different people, but they are in fact fighting together. Jackson's Fury has a great scene late when he has to convince the remaining Avengers to band together, the movie on the whole taking a turn for the dark side as push comes to shove. Their interactions -- both dramatic and humorous -- are a pleasure to watch. Then there's that little kid, primal thing that kicks in. A fight among Iron Man, Thor and Capt. America? Oh, hell yes! A brutal, knock-down fight between Thor and Hulk? Sign me up. The specialist, expert team aspect sounds obvious that it would work (and it does) but these characters clicking into place makes the movie particularly memorable.

Oh, by the way, there's crazy amounts of amazing action. I mentioned earlier watching CGI action gets old quickly, but that's not the case here. The CGI for one, looks real. Crazy thought, isn't it? The movie never goes long without a fight/action sequence, but the best is saved for last, Loki's minions unleashed through a universe portal on New York City, and all that stands in front of them is the Avengers. It goes on for most of 45 minutes but the time flies by. The whole movie does in that sense. Highly entertaining, funny and dramatic, memorable action, and a lineup sheet of some of the coolest superheroes and characters around. Go see this.

The Avengers <---trailer (2012): *** 1/2 /****

Iron Man 2

The Empire Strikes Back, The Godfather 2, The Dark Knight, Temple of Doom, all sequels and 2nd in a trilogy that's better than the original.  Okay, not Temple of Doom, but the others still count. Is that the expectation though or the exceptions to the rule? In the age of milking a franchise cash cow for everything it's worth, the biggest blockbusters of the last 10-15 years have been sequels, often of superhero movies.  One that surprised several years back with its popularity and success at the box office was Iron Man, but unfortunately 2010's Iron Man 2 just can't live up to the raised expectations.

When it comes to superhero movies, I fall somewhere in between.  Yes, I like them, but I didn't grow up reading comic books by the hundreds, and I especially don't know the superhero universes where everything has already been set in stone so that a franchise must follow it to the letter.  The problem with any successful franchise though is what to do after the first big success.  You can't just duplicate the first movie. You have to do everything bigger and better.  Director and supporting player Jon Favreau follows that idea by throwing everything into a script that never decides what to focus on and suffers because of it.  Too much going on, too many characters, lack of any development with those characters, and surprisingly enough for a summer blockbuster, not enough action.

Six months since revealing that he is in fact Iron Man, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) has basically wiped out any sort of worldwide conflict. In doing so though he has the U.S. government and the Department of Defense on his tail to give up the Iron Man so that it can be a controlled commodity instead of one man's all-powerful weapon.  That's the least of Tony's problems though as the use of the Iron Man outfit is slowly killing him with possibly a year to live.  He turns over control of Stark Industries to secretary and girlfriend Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and starts to live things up. It's hard to be the best though and rival weapons contractor Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) is using the talents of a pissed off Russian physicist Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) to create his own deadlier version of the Iron Man.

Now regardless of how this cast was utilized or underutilized, I can say that without a doubt this is one of the best casts ever put together for a summer blockbuster.  Downer Jr. again cements himself as one of Hollywood's best actors here playing cocky, narcissistic, downright arrogant Tony Stark who somehow is still lovable.  Paltrow isn't used as well here as the first one and seems like more of an afterthought than anything.  Indie star Rockwell and rejuvenated Rourke are great choices to play the villains even though they're both underused, especially a scene-stealing Rourke.  Then don't forget Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D, Don Cheadle stepping in for Terrence Howard as Colonel Rhodes (an upgrade from the 1st movie), and Scarlett Johansson as Natalie Rushman (Black Widow, member of Shield).

Can you have too much of a good thing though?  That cast is downright impressive, but other than Downey Jr. none of them are given a ton to do.  They're introduced into the storyline, fade out, and then reappear later as needed.  And from someone who is definitely looking forward to The Avengers movie, that whole subplot feels like it's being shoved down our throats as viewers.  But that's the problem with the whole movie for me.  There is a ton going on, and then nothing at all at the same time.  For almost 90 minutes, nothing happens other than Tony moping around.  Favreau has all these great elements and can't peg down what he wants to do with it.  The first Iron Man certainly had some slower moving segments too, but here they're just more noticeable.  At 124 minutes, this is a movie that could have been cut by 15 or 20 minutes and been a sleeker, more compact finished product.

Now to counter 90 minutes of basically nothingness, everything is thrown in the last 30 minutes, by far the best part of the movie and one of the better finales in an action movie around.  Stark and Rhodes -- both outfitted in Iron Man outfits -- go toe-to-toe with Ivan's army of drone Iron Men in an epic showdown that never overdoes it with the CGI.  It is an action scene where everything is visible and never moves too fast, keeping you interested even knowing we're watching computerized robots beat the crap out of each other.  Add in Johansson in a skintight leather outfit (to be fair, every movie needs that) kicking ass against endless nameless security guards, and you've got quite a finale.

I can't put my finger on it, but something was missing from this sequel.  It lacks a certain energy the first one had and never truly finds it's footing.  It tries to one-up the original while sticking to its origins but can't find that all-important middle ground.  Downey Jr again is solid, Cheadle is an upgrade, Johansson is beyond gorgeous as the eye candy, Rourke and Rockwell are above average talents, and the action-packed finale is a whopper.  But for whatever reason, it doesn't add up.  Worth watching, but I was disappointed here.

Iron Man 2 <---trailer (2010): ** 1/2 /****

Iron Man

Here's a novel concept for you. When casting an action movie, a superhero movie, don't just pick the biggest, burliest actor around and hand him a script full of ridiculous one-liners. In the last few years, the big budget action flick has gone down a different route, cast some of the best actors in Hollywood and give them a starring role, actors like Christian Bale, Edward Norton, and Robert Downey Jr.

For one, it's fun to see these actors in roles that aren't so buttoned-down and right out of a purely dramatic product. I'm all for the Oscar winners, but seeing a movie and being entertained can be enjoyable too. The changing trend though isn't just to cast a big name actor and let the thing go. The two most recent Batman movies come to mind as examples of then filling out a supporting cast that equals the star power, like Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman, Heath Ledger, Cillian Murphy and on and on. Following this formula is 2008's Iron Man, one of the best superhero movies out there.

Born with a brilliant mind and the resources to build quite a life for himself, Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) has everything in life; money, cars, women, huge houses and a generally ridiculously over the top lifestyle. As head of Stark Industries -- the world's biggest weapons manufacturer -- Tony puts his skills in engineering and innovation to good use, creating all sorts of new weaponry that hopefully can bring peace to the world. Demonstrating one of his weapons in Afghanistan for U.S. armed forces, Starks' convoy is ambushed and he's captured by a terrorist group dubbed the 'Ten Rings' led by the power-hungry Raza (Faran Tahir).

Kept as a prisoner in a mountain cave, Stark is forced into building the very weapon he was demonstrating for the terrorists. But with some help from another prisoner, Yinsen (a small but memorable part for Shaun Toub), Stark builds a complicated suit of iron with weapons and hydraulics that helps him escape, but not before he sees piles of Stark Industries weapons in the caves. Returning to the states, Stark builds another suit, even more complicated, and goes about righting wrongs that his company has done with help from a close friend and army contact, Col. James Rhodes (Terrence Howard). What's worse, all the evidence points to his partner, Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), as the one selling the weapons.

For a long list of reasons that would take two or three posts, I really enjoyed this movie from start to finish. The top reason is by far Downey Jr. as Tony Stark in an inspired bit of casting. Over his career, Downey has had his fair of struggles with drugs and police, but he's always been a great actor which he shows off here. He somehow makes Stark a likable fellow with a perfect blend of humor, toughness and genuine sympathy. Topping it off, Downey seems to be enjoying himself and doesn't take himself too seriously. His introduction to flying is one of the movie's best scenes (about seven minutes into this clip which continues into Part 7) and just keeps on building.

Anyone who's read any of my reviews of newer movies knows that CGI is one my biggest pet peeves in action movies...when it's handled poorly and overused. Not so here as the CGI elements blend seamlessly into the story like this scene with Iron Man tangling with two fighter jets. The ending gets a little crazy but it's never too much. The action in general is fast-paced but coherent, and overall not overdone. For a 126-minute long movie, there isn't a ton of action to begin with. Large chunks of the story are spent on Stark developing and creating his suit, and they're great chunks of the story that bring the character to life.

The supporting cast is mostly three roles, Bridges' Stane (the obvious villain), Howard's Rhodes, and Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts, a woman who basically tries to keep Stark's crazy life as controlled as possible. Paltrow hadn't been in a big budget movie since 2004 as she started a family with Coldplay's Chris Martin, but it's great to see her back with a good role. She's got chemistry with Downey but also holds her ground with him. Bridges revels in the bad guy role, and Howard is a good second banana as Rhodes. Howard has been in the news for basically having his part recast without him knowing it which is a shame because as much as I like Don Cheadle, Howard was a good fit.

Every so often a movie surprises you, and this one qualifies for me. Great casting, some phenomenal action sequences and across the board a hugely entertaining movie. I knew little to nothing about the character from comic books and still loved it. Also, stick around for a post-credits scene at the end of the movie with Samuel L. Jackson making an appearance. You won't be disappointed. And more good news, Iron Man 2 due out in May 2010. Count me in.

Iron Man <----trailer (2008): *** 1/2 /****