Iron Man 3 is Deeper than the First Two, the Action Sores, but the Comic Book fan in me Feels Partially Betrayed

Iron Man 3 (3 out 5 Stars)

Directed by: Shane Black (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang)

Written by: Drew Pierce, and Shane Black (Lethal Weapon, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang)

Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheedle, Guy Pierce, and Ben Kingsley

I always walk into comic book films attempting never to be a fan boy.  I even walked out of X-Men: The Last Stand with mild optimism.  I have read X-Men comics since I was five years old (23 years), and was excited to see the Phoenix on screen.  Of course looking back this is one of the worst comic book films, of course nothing is worse than Wolverine: Origins.  The character of Iron Man never crossed my path until later, but Tony Stark soon became one of my favorite Marvel characters, and I devoured almost all of his stories from alcoholism to the Civil War.

Iron Man 3 is set in post Avengers world, the battle in New York City is over, and Tony (Downey Jr.) is having a bit of PTSD with regard to all of the events from that day.  The film opens on Tony back in 1999 where he was a playboy bedding Maya Hansen (Rebecca Hall), and meeting an admire Aldrich Killian (Pierce) who runs AIM and wants Tony of board to help advance his plans.  Tony flashes to the present insomnia filled and thinking about the way the past and mistakes define his future.  There is a new villain out to get Tony, named the Mandarin who is this dangerous terrorist plotting to blow up places and people on American soil.

Enter Shane Black the new director, and screenwriter for the film series.  The original Iron Man was directed by the film's star Jon Favreau who plays Stark/Potts bodyguard Happy.  The original film had four different writers namely because the the film had numerous re-writes one script, which actually included the Mandarin, but his character was axed.  The sequel was also directed by Favreau, and written surprisingly by Justin Theroux (the future hubby for Jennifer Aniston).  Black obviously had his work cut out for him after the Avengers film, and a quality first film in the series (2 was not good).

Black has only directed one other feature film, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, a pretty good film, but different from the Marvel popcorn fair.  Yet the direction is one his greater strengths; he knows the characters well, and sets up some great action sequences which succeed.  Black's direction is more emotional than the first two films, namely because his screenplay, which he wrote with first time screenwriter Drew Pierce explores this character on a much deeper level.

When I was watching Tony Stark grapple with his anxiety it was as though they were tackling a version of his alcoholism story within the comic books.  The concept of Stark as an alcoholic will never be a part of the film series (that I can see).  Downey Jr. excels in this role as a narcissist, but there is also something more humbling within the character he has grown, and matured something which this script gets spot on!  I think the deeper, and more emotional level helps make a comic book film feel real, and allows you to become attached to the characters on different levels.

Now changing an entire character around and playing with a villains history, that's where script takes a turn and shows weakness.  I tried not be a fan boy (sorry Shane and Drew) but your big twist almost ruined the entire film.  Spoilers after this part so stop reading if you do not want to know anything.  While it was clear from the beginning that Aldrich Killian was working with the Mandarin (Kingsley) making Killian the big bad, and Mandarin laughable actor who was playing a part is a slap in the face to Marvel history.

For a brief history on the actual representation of both Aldrich Killian and the Mandarin here you go.  Mandarin is character created long ago by Stan Lee way back in 1964.  Mandarin is a pathological egotist who is a genius in science, and marital arts.  Mandarin wields 10 rings which he adapted from alien technology.  These rings could have been tied to the incident in New York City and the future story which centers around Thanos who also wields rings.  Yet you did not go there?  Instead Black and pierce along with producer Favreau took a little known character who was scientist and created a disease, Aldrich Killian, and made him into something he was not, all for the sake of realism.  Fan boy rant over.

Even outside of being a fan, this plot twist felt forced and proved that the battle with the big bad showed that there was little at stake with the actual villain.  Sure Killian took things away from Tony, but the action sequences which were out of this world almost seem pointless because of the way the villain within this film.  A hero is only as interesting as the villain he or she battles.  In this film I think the greatest battle was Stark's inner demons, which was fascinating, and well done.  The actual villain, and the way it was constructed was a total misfire, and lowered the bar for this film.

Iron Man 3 was better than 2 (not hard to be(, had more emotional depth than the first but is still quite flawed.  I can see why some people hate this film, and can understand why other praise the film.  This doesn't even seem like a build up to the Avengers 2, which is good that this is more than that but they could have made it fit into place naturally rather jam the pieces into the puzzle.  Even the closing scene while funny just fell flat.

On a film level Iron Man  explores a much deeper subject matter, but as a fan of the characters and for the sake of the journey this is middle of the road.  

Hugo Shines and Reminds Audiences Where the Beauty of Film Came from and Where it Should be Going

Hugo (4 1/2 out 5 Stars)

Directed by: Martin Scorsese (Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, The Departed)

Written by: John Logan (The Aviator, Gladiator)

Starring: Asa Butterfield, Ben Kinglsey, Chloe Grace Moretz, Sascha Baron Cohen, and Christopher Lee

Imagine a world where renowned director Martin Scorsese directs a beautifully moving family film.  Looking at the four films mentioned above, and knowing his other films Hugo is a different pace for the director.  The result is one of the most beautifully moving stories about a boy who loses his father works in the clocks at a train station in Paris, and embarks on one of the greatest adventures, and these things all connect with the birth of cinema.  There is not much more to ask for.

Hugo starts with our young hero, Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) wandering through clocks winding them, and making sure they work properly.  In the train station he sneaks up to the toy shop and attempts to steal a wind-up toy.  In his effort to steal the toy he is caught by the shop owner (Ben Kingsley) and his notebook and things are confiscated by the shop owner.  This interaction sets up the whole premise of the film where Hugo meets a young girl; her name is Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz).  Isabelle  is the goddaughter to the shop owner , whom she lovingly refers to him as Papa George.  As two young children come together they embark on adventure that connects an automaton that Hugo's father was working with Papa George.  The result is an adventure into the birth of cinema.

Martin Scorsese has moved away from the traditional style of film he directs and he transports viewers into a beautiful world.  As a viewer you can tell that Scorsese loves films, and that this film was a passion project for him.  The film centers around the birth of film making.  Papa George is in fact Georges Méliès, one of most well renowned film makers from the late 1890s through the early 1900's.  Méliès saw film making as process, and art form that could transport viewers into a magical adventure.  Méliès was a magicians prior to being a director, actor etc. and used the magic of editing to create over 500 films.  Scorsese's passion for film and the subject matter is beautifully woven into his direction, and this is his best work since 1990's Goodfellas.

The acting in the film is good.  Asa Butterfield does a wonderful job as Hugo; he plays, the young boy lost, seeking something bigger so well!  Chloe Grace Moretz is one the most talented younger actresses working today she can kick ass and swear in films like Kick-Ass and then create a much softer lyrical character like Isabelle.  There are a few side vignettes throughout this film which center around some wonderful performances from Christopher Lee, Sacha Baron Cohen, Emily Mortimer, Frances de la Tour and Richard Griffiths.  While this vignettes were sometimes distracting, or out place (my only complaint) the acting was great so there were rarely times I felt they took away from the pace of the film.  The main culprit was the one note performance by Sascha Baron Cohen, who while funny was sometimes too cartoonish.  Then there's Ben Kinglsey who played Méliès; his performance is so beautiful and displays a great range showing the role passion played in defining cinema.

The film's star in my book is the beauty captured in the editing, cinematography, art direction, and every other technical aspect.  This is a spectacularly beautifully shot film.  This is also a film that must be seen in 3-D.  I hate the way 3-D has taken over films today, but this film uses the 3-D element better than any film I have ever seen to date.  I felt as though the 3-D makes this film whole and helps to capture the beauty of the story, and the nostalgia of the beginning of film making.

2011 has been the year of nostalgia.  The Artist is nostalgic for the era of silent films, Midnight in Paris is nostalgic for different eras of writing and creativity in France, and Hugo is nostalgic for the birth of the cinema.  Hugo did a wonderful job of transporting me back in time to an era about love and passion. Méliès loved making films, and Scorsese perpetuates that emotional experience in this film.