Late to the Party: Iron Man 3 (2013)

Finally!

Following the events after The Avengers, we return the focus onto America's favorite asshole, Tony Stark! The battle in New York has left Tony emotionally scarred so much that he has panic attacks. Meanwhile, a new terrorist group attacks the country under the surveillance of Iron Man's #1 villain, the Mandarin....OR IS IT?!

I'm going to go right into spoiler territory and dive into the film's biggest problem, the Mandarin. This is the main villain for Iron Man and there was a lot of build up and potential for his appearance in this film. They even chose a great actor to play him. AND THEY COMPLETELY BLEW IT. Why would they go the route of "ah nope he's not the real villain, this guy is!"? Especially when the real villain is boring as all hell? I don't even remember his name and I'm not going to bother looking him up. People have been waiting for the Mandarin just like they did for Loki and Red Skull and just like they are now for Thanos. The plot twist of him being a drunken actor was complete bull. Why couldn't it be the other way around? Have the boring villain be replaced by the Mandarin? This is just like The Dark Knight Rises. It is obvious they only had the Mandarin to draw in the audience and damn did it work out for them. assholes.

Ok rant over. Aside from that, this was still a good movie...when Robert Downey Jr. and Don Cheadle were on screen. The rest of the characters were just there. I mentioned before I like Pepper for being a smart, love interest without being too annoying, but here she just blended in. Even when saving Tony  I couldn't get excited for her. The other side characters, I don't remember them. The bottom line is that Downey and Cheadle did a great job as usual. Their charisma and delivery draws you in and makes you fall in love with the characters.

I feel as if though this is more of a character study film than an action film. Though the action set pieces were good and engaging, most of the focus was still on Tony and the little things he was doing. It was very interesting to see what this character went through after the events of The Avengers. It was smart to show that even a superhero could be traumatized and suffer from anxiety after a near-death experience. Whether or not it was appropriate for a strong, free-willed person like Tony, I'm glad this film took a different approach. Iron Man 3 felt like a better follow up to The Avengers than Thor: The Dark World. In that movie, the characters treated those events like a second thought. I'm glad it didn't rely too much on "you have to see The Avengers in order to understand what is going on." Yes, everyone and their mom saw it and, for the most part, loved it, but how many still remember it?  

How did this compare to the other Iron Man films? The first one will always be on my list of favorite superhero films. I thought it was a great introduction to a classic superhero while being respectful to the source material. The second one, while still good, was a bit under-whelming. The third one is more of the same. There were a few boring parts, but for every mediocre moment, there was a good moment. As always, there was good line delivery and set pieces that really keeps you engaged. Even though the part with the Mandarin a load of crap, they still tried something new and it was definitely worth it for Downey's performance. 

Grade: B

I'm hoping Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy puts a stop to this Avengers Syndrome.

Late to the Party: Saving Mr.Banks (2013)

Saving Mr. Banks is a biopic telling the story of how Walt Disney negotiated the rights for Mary Poppins with the author, P.L. Travers. And that's it! There's your plot summary! There are all these conflicts they had with developing the script, flashbacks to Travers's childhood and awesome 1960's sets in there too.

There are many things I love in this movie. I love the telling of a story about what a studio goes through in order to get the rights from a book to adapt it into a film. That happens to be one of the biggest studios ever for one of the most successful movies of all time. I love all the subtleties in it that only Disney nerds like me would know. I was going totally crazy during the scene where they visited Disneyland just like if I were there in real life! I loved how it soaked in the time period it took place in. The performances were great and you could tell the actors were much invested. 

That is the major draw in this film, the performances; especially the two leads. On one hand, there is a person many people may not know. On the other, you have a character EVERYONE knows. Emma Thompson's performance was great. I really believed her character and her motivations. She wasn't too abundantly rude and obnoxious and you can see where she is coming from with opposing this idea. The rest of the cast did a great job as well as they were all interesting in their own ways.

Then there is Tom Hanks as Disney. Let's start with the role itself. This is a role playing as someone EVERYONE knows so well is insanely difficult. If you mess up, EVERYONE is going to tell. It is similar to playing a US president or biblical figure. Playing such a huge public figure like Walt Disney is not easy and was a huge move for this movie. That being said, Hanks does a good job, but this isn't his best. We've seen Hanks play roles based of real life people and he does great every time. With this, I didn't see Walt Disney, I saw Tom Hanks playing Walt Disney. I felt like some of his mannerisms and the way he talked was not perfected enough. I still heard Captain Phillips with that Mid-Western accent. I can't say it was bad because Hanks has proven himself as an actor and this is a challenging role. 

The only thing I did not like about this film was the flashback sequences regarding Traver's childhood. At times it slowed the movie down and I wanted to go back to the 1960's and continue with that story. It felt like it was a different movie that got tangled up into the other one. Showing Traver's tough childhood could have just taken a single scene. Instead we are interrupted by multiple scenes of uncomfortable situations and disengaging acting. I felt like these parts were boring and a bit excessive. I appreciated that it brought a more dramatic tone for the film so that it is not too cheesy, but it needed to be tone down just a little. Another tid-bit that threw me off was the ending. In the real story, Travers went up to Disney and said “I like Julie Andrews but I hated Dick Van Dyke, re-do everything.” In this film they didn’t go into full detail about what happened after the screening, but they did show Travers crying during. I think this was a bit out of character. If she was pissed off about the penguins and Dick Van Dyke in the movie, why would she suddenly start crying? That is such a large change in emotion and felt unnatural.

I wish there were more autobiographical stores about Walt Disney. His life was so interesting and so many things happened surrounding the company that it would make for an interesting movie or mini-series. Disney may have not been the perfect person it is difficult getting the green light for anything that tells his story. I feel like a lot could be said about the starting of the company, the building of the theme parks, all the successes and failures they endured and maybe even the struggles they went through after his passing. I felt like Saving Mr. Banks was a good start and could start a foundation for more improvement. This was a very enjoyable film and I liked the mixed tone of dramatic and comedic. Live action movies produced by Disney tend to struggle to get my attention for being too cheesy or bland, but this one definitely changes all of that. 

Grade: A

So maybe I should get around to watching Mary Poppins now....