The best superhero film to date

Rating: Null/10 (5 May 2008)

Unlike pretty much all the superhero movies out there other than the Hellboy movies, I found "Iron Man" improved on second viewing. I'd go as far as saying that it's the best superhero film to date, although I'd have to see "Hellboy II" again before being sure about it. This film is near perfect as a summer entertainment. Light and largely insubstantial, but still not dumb in the slightest, and actually featuring some interesting writing for Tony Stark. The standard-issue moral dilemmas are handled well, without the stifling seriousness and heavy-handedness which sometimes let down the Nolan Batman films. We care about the dilemmas not necessarily due to their nature but because Tony Stark is such a convincing character.
I'm going to be drawing comparisons to "The Dark Knight" throughout this 'review'. I do so not because I dislike "The Dark Knight" (in fact until a few hours ago I thought I liked it a tad more than "Iron Man"), but because I'm attempting to make a case for "Iron Man" as the best summer blockbuster released in 2008, and the best superhero film to date. "The Dark Knight" is often praised for being more adult and darker than any other superhero film to date. First off, 'more adult' and 'darker' aren't necessarily the same thing. "The Dark Knight" is, on paper, really not all that more ludicrous than "Iron Man", nor is it a better story, nor are the characters more interesting. Bruce Wayne barely exists in "The Dark Knight", Rachel Dawes isn't up to much, Harvey Dent's transformation isn't all that convincing.
Beyond just that, the film is stiflingly dark and humorless, almost to a fault because, well, it is about a guy walking around in a batsuit and fighting a maniac in clown makeup and a guy with half a face. The dialogue is often of an obviously expository nature. Where "The Dark Knight" is better than "Iron Man" is in the visual style. It also boasts a better villain. On the other hand, "Iron Man" is a straightforward superhero movie. It's odd, after so many superhero films, to finally see one which really feels like reading a superhero comic. I am not a fan of Iron Man or Marvel in general, but have read some good Iron Man comics in the past, and this film so wonderfully captures the nature of a superhero comic. Sure, Jeff Bridges' villain isn't great, but he fits very nicely into the story of the movie. The story's really very good too.
The real heart of the film though is with Iron Man himself. While I give a lot of credit to Robert Downey Jr., who gives a performance which, like Heath Ledger's in "The Dark Knight", is well beyond the standard for popcorn fare. The complaints about the film having no character development are also pretty unwarranted. Granted, Pepper Potts isn't up to much, but what really matters is Tony Stark himself and I found him not only convincingly portrayed but quite excellently-written as well. The film is concerned with the origins of Iron Man, not with the origins of Tony Stark. We hear about his father, we see what he was like before being in captivity, but the film doesn't bother with the usual clichéd approach which basically usually means the character is defined by two, maybe three if you're lucky, big, clichéd events in his life. All we need to know for this specific film (there's more to come from Iron Man, let's not forget) is who Tony Stark is NOW, and what went through his head after being in captivity and building the suit. With that in mind I felt "Iron Man" provided a well-rounded lead character, much more interesting than Bruce Wayne in "The Dark Knight" and more substantial than Hellboy or Peter Parker or pretty much most of the rest with specific regard to the movie incarnations of the characters.
The screenplay's wise approach to the origin story means it can focus on the story. It's all pretty standard-issue stuff but done well, and while not insightful or deep or anything it certainly isn't a totally lunkheaded approach to the subject matter: the impact of weapons technology and advancements in the field on the world. Also what really matters is that it's a tight, lean screenplay, and while the climactic battle is a little underwhelming (and unfortunately starts feeling a bit like "Transformers"), it is at least very well-shot, with a sort of clarity which helps all the action scenes here shine.
The film is a well-made, tightly-constructed movie which is as long as it should be, and one which strikes a solid balance between character and story. Robert Downey Jr. is a big part of the film's success, no doubt, but credit should go to director Jon Favreau and the writers as well, because they really managed to deliver a movie that's a hell of a lot of fun, and one with easily the best central character in any superhero movie to date, and I say this as someone who definitely doesn't count Iron Man as their favorite superhero as far as comics go.