Review: "Iron Man 3"

The idea of an extraterrestrial life visiting Earth and making contact with humans has been expressed many times over. I remember spending a lot of energy on the subject, to the point where it caused me anxiety. It got so bad, my parents decided NOT to take me to see Independence Day, until I calmed down. Of course, I’m a bit more collected now, but I still wonder; how would we respond to the knowledge of intelligent life beyond our planet?

In Independence Day, we fought against an attack. In District 9, we impoverished an entire species. And in Marvel’s The Avengers, we assembled our best to protect us and send a warning. The options appear to be either A) Fight them or B) Control them, at least in the examples provided. In the case of Avengers, we get a series (the Marvel Cinematic Universe) that shows our world prior to, during and now after alien life has been exposed to all. How does the world move on in the follow up film Iron Man 3?

Better than you’d expect, actually.

No riots, no mass suicides, no political coups. From what we can gather, all that has happened is people are now massive fans of Earth mightiest heroes, and just gush that we fought off aliens. A worldwide nerdgasm, basically. However, the burden of not only having fought off these creatures, but the possibility that more could come back, can be too much for one man.

Tony Stark may be Iron Man, but even his suit can’t defend him against panic attacks. The mere mention of the events of Avengers brings him to a shaking and almost crying state; even superheroes can suffer PTSD. He spends every waking moment building suit after suit, technology after technology, in an obsessive and manic frenzy to not only be prepared for the worst, but to protect his love Pepper Potts.

In this post alien Earth, terrorism STILL exists. I guess that isn’t surprising, but you’d think something as heart stopping as new intelligent life would bring about a worldwide peace, at least for a few months. Terrorist leader The Mandarin makes several threats to the U.S. President, and his bombings get the personal attention of Stark. A challenge is made, and Tony is put on a path that will not only save the day, but teach him how to cope, and ultimately better himself.

Stark has now been featured in 4 movies, including his own trilogy. And, to my surprise and delight, has shown depth in each film. He starts as a cocky bastard who could care less about his actions, to confronting and understanding what his inventions have done, has a figurative and literal change of heart, and dedicates himself to using his skills for good. In one of the boldest moves for any wealthy character, he declares that he will give up his military contracts, and openly admits to being Iron Man. He’s egotistical enough to give himself the spotlight, but repentful enough to grasp the weight of what he has done in the past. What a guy.

It’s amazing how this series can move from the comic book movie side of the spectrum to superhero film. “What?” In my opinion, flicks featuring superheroes can be distinguished as either comic book movies or superhero films. For example: Captain America: The First Avenger is a comic book movie, and Spiderman 2 is a superhero film. One is more about the action, while the other is concerned more with the character. Iron Man 3 succeeds because it delivers the personal conflict AND the thrilling moments. Tony Stark gets to complete his hero arc AND be smarmy to a little kid. Avengers gave Hollywood the blueprints, Iron Man 3 roughs out any edges. Improvements can still be made, but Marvel has the right formula.

Would our world change much after the announcement of alien life? Probably slowly. I’d like to think that it would lead to an era of progress and enlightenment, like in Star Trek: First Contact. Do we have a Tony Stark equivalent to make use of the new ways of thinking? Now I’m stressing out.

4/5 *s

Review: "Evil Dead"

It doesn’t take much to impress me, but it does take a lot to scare me - when it comes to movies, I mean. At my most recent outing, a colleague teased me a bit about my lack of interest in watching horror flicks. Then, just prior to the movie starting, a security woman yells at us all, “If we catch you with an electronic device, you WILL be escorted out by the police!” For me, real instances like this are much scarier than anything that flickers on a screen.

After being bombarded for years by trailers and DVD’s for movies that offer nothing but jump scares and familiar killers, I’m kinda lukewarm towards this genre. Reviewers like The Cine-Masochist make me feel a bit picky and unfair, but it’s just how I feel.

That being said, I should re-state that it doesn’t take much to impress me. All I need is something fairly clever, easy to follow and very fun to watch; if the cast and crew are having a blast, so am I (Troma is great at this).

And watching a demon vomit vibrant, non CGI blood on a woman, only to be chainsawed in half later on, is indeed “a blast” and “fun to watch”.

The new Evil Dead (based on the original Sam Raimi classic - a kind of remake/reinterpretation) begins with the quickest of expository sequences I’ve seen in a long time: Five friends go to a cabin from their youth to help one of them kick drugs, brother and sister have problems, friend and friend have problems and all sorts of groovy weapons are established. Got it? Good. This movie knows what the audience came to see, and is just as antsy to get there as we are.

The book of the dead is found, read aloud, and the drug addicted friend becomes possessed by a demon, setting off a chain of events that could lead to hell on Earth beyond the woods. In one scene, the two men in the group discuss how to end this nightmare. One of them suggests they kill the drug addicted one, as the book suggests to do. When asked if it’ll work, we get one of the best lines EVER, “I don’t know; this isn’t a science book!”

I haven’t watched the first two original Sam Raimi films, so I will just compare this to a movie that gave me equal feelings, Marvel’s The Avengers. Both had high expectations amongst fans, relatively unproven directors (Joss Whedon had only done TV and smaller scale flicks) and the perfect storm of elements to turn them into train wrecks.

Almost a miracle before my eyes, this movie rocked.  

Like with last summer’s superhero blockbuster, Evil Dead gets it all right. It’s a simple story, with enough character depth and conflict to break the first dimension. Smart cinematography and placement of objects in a shot gave weight to what could’ve been flat. The editing was smooth and aware of genre expectations, playing with the typical jump scare beats we’ve all gotten used to. And the effects - 99% practical - made the happenings much more vibrant and very unforgettable. I bet the producers had a tight grip on this one...

I also got the impression that the movie wasn’t just another part of a familiar franchise, but a statement on how modern horror can and should learn from past horror. There is an opening shot that might as well have been taken directly from The Shining - an upside down then right side up shot of a car driving down a long and remote road. Then, of course, there was all the blood. Remember that bleeding elevator sequence? How about a movie featuring fountains of crimson rain? There are not only great effects workers out there, but also genuine fans of thrills and chills, dying to make a movie like the ones they grew up on. Maybe Evil Dead will start a trend.

There was a little kid who, after the screening, stared at the poster for the movie with a huge smile on his face. “The Most Terrifying Film You Will Ever Experience.” it said. I wanted to take a photo with him in front of that, as we were both feeling the same thing; cinematic bliss. Though, the fact that his parents let him go see this shocked me more than the movie itself... Yep, I’m still not scared. But, I am impressed. Very.

5/5 *s