Iron Man Reviews

When it comes to ranking the Marvel superhero(live action) films, Iron Man is for me up there with the better ones. It looks fabulous, the whole film is very slickly made with top-notch special effects(which look like time and effort was really put into it), awesome-looking futuristic gadgets and Iron Man's suit will be a guaranteed delight to anybody who is familiar or loves anything to do with the superhero. There is a pulsating soundtrack that adds much to the tension of the first half of the story and the enormously fun action sequences, which are exciting and tense with expertly choreography. The script crackles with smart humour that doesn't go overload, all of which is laugh-out-loud funny, yet the hostage plotting that takes up the first part of the film is intelligently written and somehow avoids being over-serious or over-familiar. The story has enough to allow you to emotionally connect with Iron Man(who I've always considered one of Marvel's most interesting and multi-faceted characters) and has a clever mix of the comic's 1960s origins and the effects of contemporary war, which will provide plenty of nostalgia while also feeling relevant. Jon Favreau does a great job directing, he never loses control of the story and he doesn't do anything too fussy. Robert Downey Jnr's performance as Tony Stark/Iron Man is a power-house and one of his best, doing much with the smart dialogue while making the emotional side of the characters wholly believable. Gwyneth Paltrow is a good, loyal side-kick with wise-cracks that don't come across as annoying and Jeff Bridges is surprisingly very good in an against-type role. Personally, the only disappointments were the useless character of Christine Everheart and the somewhat rushed and over-blown finale that wasn't quite as thrilling as it could have been, other than that Iron Man was a classy addition to the Marvel cannon and a great film on its own. 9/10 Bethany Cox

'Iron Man' boasts a nice costume of Iron Man, a good performance by his actor Robert Downey Jr. and some great visual effects. It also features some epic action scenes! Very good if not better than 'Spider-Man 2', I really like this movie for its action and acting and visual effects! Definitely worth watching!

It is not uncommon for a film to take its time to really "start." It sets up the back story, establishes the characters, etc. When done right, this can be a rewarding way to begin a film. When done wrong, you get Iron Man. And when I say this film gets it wrong, I mean it like this: This film never starts. I quite literally waited the entire 2 hour run time for this film to really get moving, and it never did. One could make an argument that this is, in fact, an origin movie, and as a result, it is likely to be more slow-moving than other action-comedies. But there have been many origin stories (Spider-Man immediately comes to mind) that have managed to be thoroughly entertaining, and getting the point and origin of the main character across. Needless to say, Iron Man is no Spider-Man.

As I have mentioned Iron Man is an origin story, specifically about a "playboy, philanthropist, genius" named Tony Stark. He gets seriously injured and captured by terrorists, so an electromagnet is planted in his chest to keep him from dying. In order to escape the terrorists, he builds a suit of armor, which then allows him to become (you got it) Iron Man.

This is a story that could have been comfortably told in a single hour. And yet, it the run time is over 2 hours. Approximately 10 minutes of that represents the action sequences of the film. The rest of the movie is lots and lots of talking. I was amazed by how much meaningless dialogue there was in this film. The plot is simple enough. The characters are actually too simple. So I really don't understand why the majority of this film had to be devoted to conversation regarding the politics of war and weapons, and the formulaic romance between Tony Stark and his assistant Pepper Potts. It's a waste of time and an utter bore. Half of the dialogue could have been removed from the film, and nothing would be lost on the audience.

Thankfully, not quite all of the conversation is unnecessary exposition. There are a meager handful of comedic scenes, that are actually very effective. Frankly, I wish there had been a greater focus on the comedy in Iron Man, because these short bursts of humor and chuckles were far more enjoyable than the rest of the film.

Because even when the conversations have temporarily stopped to make way for flashy action sequences, the film is still a bore. The early action scenes with Iron Man are horribly dull, because he's essentially invincible. And even the climatic fight scene, involving Iron Man vs. the villain in his own Iron Man suit, is remarkably pedestrian; containing all the thrill and tension of a Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots match.

The characters are hugely under developed. Pepper Potts and Lt. Colonel James Rhodes (close friend of Tony Stark), have no personality to speak of. Tony Stark is also a fairly one-dimensional character, but he's likable enough, and receives the lion's share of the humor. The villain (the identity of which I'm really not sure is a spoiler or not, so I'll play it safe) has no distinguishing personality traits, but he's just menacing enough to suffice. And his performance is also pretty solid.

The acting is decent all around. Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark is a perfect fit for the snarky hero. Jeff Bridges as Obadiah Stone is also surprisingly good in his role. And thanks to undeveloped characters, Terrence Howard and Gwyneth Paltrow are utterly forgettable. As expected, Stan Lee has a quick cameo that earns a chuckle.

The score, composed by Ramin Djawadi, is fairly bad. In part, because it's completely unmemorable, and also because of its rock music emphasis. The use of electric guitars, while arguably appropriate for the film, are never pleasant to hear, and all attempts at emotional or suspenseful music are generic and bland.

Not so much flawed as it is dull, Iron Man is a long 2 hours. While snippets of comedy throughout are more than welcome, everything inbetween is tedious and uninteresting. Iron Man simply lacks almost any form of excitement, tension, or fun. The special effects may be shiny and pretty, but the entertainment just isn't there.

Very entertaining!
I actually avoided this movie for a long time, because I didn't want to watch anything "Transformer-like", but really, this was a great story and actually pretty belivable (well maybe that is a bit of a stretch, considering it's a comic book adaptation, so maybe well thought out would be a better description)
Ok, on to the good points:
- there were actually not as many "eyeball rolling moments" as I expected
- great action
- Tony Stark is king of sarcastic humor (also, I now think that in terms of billionare vigilante superhero who is actually human, Tony Stark could wipe the floor with Batman, face it, this guy's got the genius :))
The bad:
- there's no bad, just....baddass!!! kidding, I just can't not comment on " the blond girl saving the day in really high heels" I mean come on y'all, some cliches are really oversold, enough of that!
All in all it's an entertaining watch and for those of you who were not fans of Iron Man,you just might turn after this one.

I already saw this movie (in fact, I even saw it in the movie theater when it was released) but since I have now Disney+, I thought I might as well rewatch the whole MCU. First of all, nowadays, nobody would argue that Robert Downey Jr. was not the right guy to portray Tony Stark. However, many have forgotten that, because of his everlasting drug problem, Downey Jr. was blacklisted for many years and it was at the time really a big gamble from Jon Favreau. Fortunately, this gamble paid off and this flick was a critical and financial success. It was the living proof that a comic-book adaptation didn't need to be gloomy like 'The Dark Knight' to be good. Indeed, it was easily one of the most fun super-hero flick I have ever seen. So, obviously, Robert Downey Jr. completely stole the show with a pitch perfect performance but the rest of the cast was also pretty good (Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges, Gwyneth Paltrow, Paul Bettany, Jon Favreau). And, of course, the special effects were quite awesome but with such a huge budget, that was rather expected. But there was also a good pace and, even though there were plenty of special effects shots, they still managed to develop enough the characters and, as a result, the story was quite compelling to watch. My only critic would be that the story was still too predictable and generic which prevented the whole thing from becoming a real masterpiece. Anyway, to conclude, even if it might not be an actual masterpiece, it is still one of the best super-hero movies out there, even after all these years and after all these movies released within the MCU, and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

You know the film is going to be entertaining if it has Robert Downey, Jr. in it. Hell, you know the film is gonna be amazing if it opens with an AC/DC song. That's right, in this case it's Back in Black. Anyway, Robert Downey, Jr. is by all means the coolest actor to play a superhero. He is not weepy as Peter Parker nor reclusive as Bruce Wayne. He loves what he does and he enjoys every minute of it.

OK, this may take some time but I wanna talk about it. I've never read any of the comics or anything featuring the titular character and I don't know what the original deal is with The Ten Rings in the comics but I didn't like the way they were represented. They're not only represented as terrorists but also Urdu speaking ones and by that I can only come to the conclusion that they're Muslims and this is another anti-Muslim message right here. Tony Stark, an American inventor, has a change of heart when he witnesses his people being killed and stops making weapons. This goes on show that people not only need brutal examples but a heavy dose of their own medicines in order to change their tone and in the end the ones who retaliated back are always thrown in the dirt while the ones who originally came up with these destructive ideas are considered "brilliant", in this case the Muslims and the Americans. Sorry to say this but anyone who thinks up ideas on how to kill their enemies effectively and brutally are not brilliant in any way. They are sadistic and downright corrupted. Why can't they use their "brilliant" minds to bring peace? This also goes on show that not everyone is perfect and America should stop considering themselves as one, thank you!

Anyway, I don't like having my personal views get in the way and I watch all films with an open mind, if I can and, right, now on-to the film: Iron Man could just about be the most coolest superhero film ever (OK, second to Dark Knight) and almost everyone did a great job. It's fast, it's funny and the CGI is very smooth. Also, it's literally devoid of any sort of actual romance, the one thing that fuels superhero movies and I think it was a wise step. Robert's portrayal of Tony Stark kinda reminded me of Nicholson's Joker. Both took an unmistakable relish in their roles and were very well suited and their little dialogues and remarks only made their characters much interesting.

All in all, this is a great superhero film with plenty to offer and will keep you entertained especially in the first hour. A sleek film indeed!

8.0/10

--The main reason I do not like this film, is the actors chosen for these particular characters.

Downey Jr....boy when I heard he was going to be Iron Man, I was disappointed..he comes off TOO annoying, cocky and smarmy...sure he's being Tony Stark, however in other films he's very much annoying and similar. Someone like John Hamm could have been a better choice. Hamm's a versatile actor: Excellent on Mad Men and hilarious on SNL.


Gwyenith Paltrow is a terrible choice. How So? Well her character is suppose to have at least SOME sort of chemistry with Tony Stark. I failed to see this be successful and Downey Jr. and her do not work well together. Possible replacement? Elizabeth Banks, Cate Blanchett, January Jones or others..just not Gwyneth.


Terrance Howard is not the best person for Rhodey. Cheadle was the clear choice, as he proves in the following sequel. I wish they casted him instead of Howard who came off as annoying and stiff.

Jeff Bridges? Physically looking, he's ideal for Obediah, but something was missing and I couldn't quite grasp what it was...oh well I can't think of a better actor but I don't think he was right for the role.

The storyline was pretty decent with some intriguing looking special effects no doubt. When Stark puts on the suit it's visually quite awesome and makes ya go ohhh yea! More action..more action. I felt more violence and drama could have been added to this film, rather than the "romanticism" of Stark and Pepper(Pepper? Really?...stupid name). The roof scene was a bit lengthy as well. I just didn't get the hype, over likable-ness of the film and I thought it needed improvements to make Iron Man more as he needs to be.

Rating: 5.3/10

I am Iron Man. Those could be the lyrics of a certain Black Sabbath song, or maybe a little quip from Tony Stark. Or maybe both. You’ll have to go see the movie to find out for sure I guess.

And that’s exactly what I did last night. In a bit of a hasty decision, I ended up going to see the movie and honestly, had mixed expectations. It looked like it could be good, but I wasn’t expecting TOO much (if you’ve ever heard me talk about the upcoming Dark Knight movie, you know I’ll probably be disappointed by the movie because the expectations are simply through the roof). Comic Book movies are usually good to go into with lower expectations, because as good as some of them have been, some have been downright painful.

But which did Iron Man end up being? Find out at Hijinks Inc!

What's more desire by humans than a millionaire, womanizer, handsome, good tasteful & celebrity ? & in addition has a gold-titanium suit more powerful than anything?
COME ON! this is the coolest superhero ever..

The character has a unbelievable personality and has the courage to make it responsible of the hero life. The first Iron Man movie its a great film in several ways, the screenplay its quite fit to the public, also, the visual effects, the suits, the technology developments are incredible unbelievable, the futuristic laboratory of Stark it's a dream

i enjoy so much this movie, Downey made a great job, but the most impressive thing of the movie its all the art, visual & effects work.

8.5/10

"Iron Man? That's kinda catchy. It's got a nice ring to it."

Superhero movies wildly vary in quality. For every home run that successfully mixes emotional resonance with a thrill-ride payoff (Spider-Man 2 or X-Men), there are morose duds and woeful misfires (Fantastic Four, Elektra, or Hulk). With Jon Favreau's Iron Man, another superhero has been taken from the Marvel Comic stable and CGI'ed into a summer blockbuster. Thankfully, Iron Man can be placed on the short list of superhero movies done right. It's a refreshing blend of witty humour, solid characters, phenomenal special effects and exciting action. It's clear the creative team behind Iron Man actually cared during every step of the production process; working to make a superhero adventure with an eye towards characters and dialogue rather than senseless action. It's not as slapdash as The Incredible Hulk or as pretentious as The Dark Knight. Rather, it's a satisfying crowd-pleaser suited for fans of the source material as well as the uninitiated.

Robert Downey Jr. plays the title role of billionaire Tony Stark, who inherited his father's industry which specialises in producing high-tech weaponry for the United States Army. The story of Stark from the original Marvel comics has been modernised, with the character being placed in the more topical war zone of Afghanistan. During a trip to Afghanistan to demonstrate his latest weapon, Stark is ambushed and captured by a terrorist group who demand for him to build them a missile. Instead of complying with their demands, Stark constructs a deadly suit of armour to escape his captors. However, the traumatic experience in the Middle-East leaves Stark questioning his company's true role in peacekeeping, as he realises how easily his weapons can fall into the wrong hands and be used against the people they was built to protect. Opting to terminate his company's weapons division (enraging the board of directors), Stark concentrates on perfecting the armoured suit design, and this leads to the birth of Iron Man.

Those unfamiliar with the Iron Man comics need not be concerned about being unceremoniously dropped into a flick specifically tailored for the already-established fan-base. The flick has been carefully crafted by an ideal creative team to maximise the appeal and satiate both those steeped in Iron Man lore and those who've never heard of the Mighty Marvel Metal Man. In a way, this is similar to the accomplishments of Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins: the legend is gradually built up while plot and character development is used as the foundation. On the topic of Batman Begins, Iron Man does share similarities to the character of Batman. Both are superheroes without any actual powers - instead, they're well-funded men who rely upon gadgets.

Chief among the strengths of Iron Man is the well-told nature of the narrative, which is Favreau's forte as a mainstream filmmaker. Unlike other blockbuster directors like Michael Bay, Favreau seldom allows his characters and the narrative to get buried in an avalanche of over-the-top digital effects. As with most first instalments of a superhero franchise, the origin tale of Tony Stark/Iron Man had to be covered, and this production does a terrific job of it - more than an hour of the runtime is spent jumping back and forth through time to establish who Tony Stark is. Stark's crisis of conscience is also explored, and the developments in this area feel organic as opposed to contrived. Once Stark dons his armour and heads into action, a viewer will care about the man locked in combat, and this is a great asset in generating that hard-to-nail asset: tension. Many blockbuster movie-goers may find all the exposition and character development boring, yet this reviewer found it absorbing and fascinating - even more so than the action itself. Yes, Iron Man does have its share of amazing action, but these set-pieces are secondary to the drama. The only genuine setback of the narrative structure is its adherence to the "origin tale" formula - it feels like Spider-Man or Batman Begins with changed locations, different characters and a different mythology. For such a solid movie, it's never able to reinvent the origin tale format.

Considering Iron Man's origins as a big-budget summer spectacle, it should come as no surprise to learn that the film also benefits from magnificent digital effects. CGI is most effective when it's utilised by a filmmaker to enhance the plot without overwhelming the frame or drawing attention to the effects, and this is the case here. The digital wizards were visibly in synch with director Favreau, as they never attempted to show off or upstage the actors. Added to this, Matthew Libatique's cinematography is of a high standard. Rather than frenetic camerawork, Libatique and Favreau ensure total coherency of each action sequence (another area where Michael Bay should take notes). Meanwhile, fans of the comics should adore the design of Iron Man's suit - it's an insanely-detailed work of special effects mastery to be admired. With all these positives in mind, it's a shame that Iron Man is bogged down by a few faults. As the home stretch is nearing, the movie shifts gears and becomes a more conventional action movie; leaning on clichés and rote lines such as "But you'll die!" and "He's gone insane". This leads to the climactic showdown, which, while impressive, doesn't provoke the "I can't wait to see how they'll top that" feeling of other superhero movies. Thankfully, the film concludes on a high note.

Casting decisions make or break a superhero movie. While Christopher Reeve was an ideal Superman, Ben Affleck was a woeful Daredevil. Thankfully, Iron Man gets off on the right foot in this department because Robert Downey Jr. is Tony Stark. Downey's portrayal of the man in the metal suit is the backbone of the film - he provides a welcome amount of wit and charm not unlike his excellent work in the overlooked Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (which may be that film earned Downey the Iron Man gig). And the top-notch comedy isn't restricted to Downey's hilarious quips - Favreau has also included moments of clever slapstick humour which would make Charlie Chaplin proud.
The supporting cast is a mixed bag. Jeff Bridges exudes menace in his terrific performance as Stark's business partner and eventual nemesis, but Terrence Howard is tremendously underwhelming as Jim Rhodes. He's not in the least bit memorable and he's terribly wooden. Happily, for the sequel, Howard was replaced by Don Cheadle. Rounding out the cast is Gwyneth Paltrow, who's sweet and intelligent as Pepper Pots, but sorely lacks intensity.

In the end, Iron Man succeeds so well not because of the storyline (which is a standard-issue origin plot) but due to the way in which the storyline is presented by Jon Favreau and his team. The screenplay manages to develop characters effectively while at the same time tapping into one's inner child during the usually remarkable action sequences. Iron Man is, quite simply, a film done by a talented team who respect the source material. Be sure to keep watching until the end of the credits.

8.2/10