Style but no substance. Worst Iron Man ever.

Rating: 1/10 (27 April 2013)

The Dark Knight trilogy has set a benchmark for other comic book movies to follow. Not just in terms of action, but also on story-telling. It is proof that you can make things grittier and less campy without sacrificing box office performance. Outside comic book, Skyfall comes to mind. You may lose younger audiences but will more than make it up with the increase of adult viewers searching for quality. I know Iron Man 3 will never be as good as Nolan's Batman, but I clearly don't expect it to be so flatly disappointing as this.
First, the good points.
Lots and lots of action. Spectacular sensory overload. Hardcore Iron Man fans will love this.
Guy Pearce is perfectly cast as villain. This guy is underrated.
Funny extra scene between Tony Stark and Bruce Banner. It appears at the end of long main credit, not after the 'animation' credit earlier.
Stan 'The Man' Lee does appear in this. Something I look forward to in every Marvel's movies.
Enough. Now the bad points.
The theme is grittier than previous movies, but the twist around two thirds of the movie about Mandarin is very anti-climax. The director spent considerable screen time developing Mandarin's back story and building up the stress and anxiety among the audiences, only to blow it away. Twist works if the audiences being led to think of something, only to be proved wrong later WITHOUT sacrificing the quality of the character (Bruce Willis' Dr Malcolm Crowe in The Sixth Sense).
The story has many plot holes. Many scenes on project Extremis and the soldiers experimented with it left me thinking, yearning for more information. Early in the movie, Pearce's character talks about using the untapped potential of the human brain but the director fails to develop this idea further and connect it to Extremis. How they manage to explode? What gives them the amazing physical prowess? Why they turn orange? Bla bla bla...
I love Iron Patriot and the new colors, but he doesn't have much screen time.
Mark 42 is supposed to be superior than others. But some scenes will show how weak and fragile it is (breaks into pieces when it hit a lorry on a bridge, when hit a container crane at a port, a child snaps Mark 42's finger easily). Perhaps the intention is for some comic relief, but clearly not funny at all. It undermines the grittier feel of this movie overall and the seriousness of a particular scene specifically. I understand that Mark 42 is still in prototype mode and not battle-ready, as mentioned by Jarvis. So why is Tony Stark gambles his life by using it? Better to use older but battle-ready suit. He clearly has plenty to choose from (Iron Legion).
The comic book movies has been getting more divided these days. On one hand, we have Christopher Nolan's quality adaptations like The Dark Knight trilogy and Man of Steel (hopefully!) which combine style and substance. On the other hand, we have 'others', which offer only style, with the intention of making big bucks easily by shamelessly cashing-in on popular and established franchises. Iron Man 3 belongs in 'others'.
A story has a beginning, middle and an end. Again, kudos to Nolan for ending his Bat-trilogy before it gets irrelevant. Every director must have balls to do this. Better to exit when you are on top. I hope this is the end of Iron Man movies. I don't give a sh*t anymore about Marvel's Phase 2.
Now bring me MAN OF STEEL!!!