Iron Man 3: A Sequel Too Far?

I love action films. Saying that, I love films. I'm a huge fan of a great many, in a variety of genres (even some I didn't think I'd like).

Some of my favourite movies include Highlander, Aliens, The Killing Fields, The Green Mile, pretty much all the Marvel movies, Wanted, Shawshank, The Notebook (although I seemed to get something irritating my eye towards the end for some reason). Then there's The Hangover films, Batman, some Adam Sandler, Bourne and so many more.

But action films, I love 'em. I die hard, harder and hardest with glee. Through in a dose of fantasy/science fiction, and I'm in my element.

I used to read the Marvel comics when I was young, following the X-Men and the Avengers through all their perilous adventures. I wanted to be an X-Man. Still do, to be honest. Probably a male version of Storm. As such, when the Marvel comics started coming to the big screen, I was a very happy bunny. From the effects to the one-liners to the colours, everything is so much larger than life, and something that has to be seen at the cinema to get the full effect. I even enjoy looking out for the Stan Lee cameos, much in the same way Stephen King did in his films (does he still do that?).

So. Iron Man 3 was a film I had to see, and I had to see it at the cinema. I didn't necessarily have to see it in 3D, as I find it dulls the colours, but hey, why not?

As my wife isn't really into these films, I usually find a cinema buddy. In this case it was a friend from work. Her husband works away and it'd be a while until she saw it, if she, in fact, did. And as it was Orange Wednesday, when cinemas across the country give 2-for-1 tickets for those who are on the Orange mobile phone network (or know someone who is), the place was packed. The queue was out of the doors at the Parkway Cinema in Cleethorpes, but my lemon and lime Slush kept me going until we were let in.

I think my friend and I were as excited as each other. I regress into my childhood at times like this, becoming a 12 year old once more ready to leave this world and enter one of pure imagination.

The Parkway Cinema is great, as far as I'm concerned. The town (or towns seeing as Grimsby and Cleethorpes are stitched together) needed a decent multiplex. Now, don't get me wrong - the old 'pictures' on Freeman Street was great. I remember going from being a child. I think I watched an early Jodie Foster film, Candleshoe, and something else on a Saturday morning, when children could watch a couple of films, or a film and a cartoon, for 10p. And there was the time I queued from 8:00 in the morning to be one of the first in to see Tim Burton's Batman, with Michael Keaton. And the enormous queues for the first Harry Potter film!

But...

It hadn't really changed in all those years. The main screen was big enough, but screen 2 had the knees of the person behind you in your back. We needed something more. Something bigger.

And lo, there was Parkway. I believe it's owned by the same people who own the Louth cinema, where they still stop the film half way through and bring out ice creams and drinks. At the Cleethorpes one, there's 7 screens, plus the Haywood Suite, though I have no idea what that is. There's a bar and the food and drinks don't necessarily require a second mortgage (though such things from such places are notoriously expensive). Oh, and the staff have a sense of humour and know how to smile.

Anywho. Films. Iron Man.

My friend and I found our seats. This was going to be a busy one. Once the curtains had opened and the usual advertisements had droned by, we were presented with a trio of trailers. Gone are the days when they'd just chuck a couple of trailers on, regardless of which film you're seeing. Now, they're tailored to the type of movie. Hence, with Iron Man, we had the new Star Trek film, The Wolverine and Man of Steel. After each one, we looked at each other with a smile and a simultaneous thought of 'O, yes!'

Personally, I'm looking forward to Benedict Cumberbatch as the bad guy in Star Trek: Into Darkness. As a massive fan of his portrayal of Sherlock Holmes in the amazing BBC drama, he's going to OWN the part, I believe.

 

Wolverine. What can I say? A self-confessed X-Men wannabe, I can't miss this.

And Man of Steel. If the trailer is anything to go by, it's potentially a new, deeper take on the Superman story.

ANYWHO! IRON MAN!

I'd seen some poor reviews of this film on IMDB. Quite a few, actually. A reviewer on the radio said that she'd enjoyed it, but it had lost the heart - oh and a twist three quarters of the way along was already something we'd know. With respect to that point, I don't try to figure things out as I go along. I like the reveals and the twists. So many people knew Bruce Willis was dead in the wonderful 6th Sense. I didn't. I didn't want to. The same with Nicole Kidman's The Others. I don't want to find out before the fact. I don't want to work out who did it. I want the surprise. So...

I like how the Avengers films are linked. The Hulk, Thor and Iron Man all had Nick Fury visitations tying them all together for the Assemble movie. They have a timeline too. Even though this falls in line - and refers to events in the Avengers Assemble - it's the first one where Samuel L. Jackson doesn't don his eye-patch. One wonders why this is, especially given other incidents in this film.

Well, to those reviewers on IMDB, poo to you. I loved it. It was exciting, hilarious in places, and a real blast (in so many ways). Robert Downey Jr., whether as Holmes or Stark, plays his characters with wit, sparkle and ego. In this third outing, he doesn't disappoint.

The effects were excellent (as they should be with so many people working on them - a massive list in the credits) and you could feel the sound in your boots. Or trainers in my case. Even Joss Whedon makes a cameo at one point and Stan Lee can be seen during the pageant... erm... scene.

The whole room laughed at all the right places, especially during Stark's interactions with the boy. I thought the inclusion of the Iron Patriot missed the mark a little, personally, though Don Cheadle is always great onscreen. Guy Pearce has come such a long way since his Neighbours day and was good as the fire breathing head of AIM and it was nice to see Gwyneth Paltrow kicking some butt.

My favourite, though was Ben Kingsley. He's a wonderful actor anyway, but this is one of my favourite roles. Brilliant.

The climax of the film, for me, was spot on. Plenty of action and excitement with a touching end.

I'm not a critic. I'm a film fan. I like to turn off my mind and enjoy the ride, whether that ride takes me into darkness, hilarity, outer space or a heartfelt story full of depth and emotion. As such, I loved this.

For me, Iron Man 3 rocked.

Enjoy.

Oz: Great and Powerful?

Oz: the Great and Powerful.

But is he?

Well, yes and no...

Disney make some amazing films, that can't be denied. Unfortunately, that can also be their undoing. They coat a particular brand of gloss over their productions that is wonderful when it shines, but is disappointing when it doesn't. With Oz, the shine is definitely there, but in parts, that's the problem.

I loved the black and white introduction. The girl Oz is 'sweet' on mentions that a man who's surname is Gale has asked her to marry him. I thought that was a nice touch. An interesting link to the classic original. I wonder, however, what Disney will do if they feel obliged to produce a sequel to this prequel. Any such film must still be a prequel to the first film (which is, I suppose, now a sequel?) as it would genuinely be a bad move to actually remake the Wizard of Oz.

With a distinct lack of ideas, so many films are being remade - Total Recall, Fright Night, Evil Dead and many more - but there are those films that simply MUST be left alone. The Wizard of Oz is one such movie. Make a sequel if you will (as has been done - Oz, Return to Oz, The Wiz, The Witches of Oz (!)) but don't touch the original.

Please.

When Walt Disney was alive, I believe he refused to make a sequel. Now he's no longer with us, it seems most Disney films will have a number 2 or more at some point. In some cases, these are good. In others, not so. The Lion King is one of my favourite animated films. Up there with Finding Nemo ("just keep swimming!"). I was disappointed by the second one, but thought the third was a unique take on sequels. It worked, and was very funny.

But what will they do with Oz: The Great and Powerful? They've set the scene, leading into the original nicely. The Gale name is there, linking Dorothy and the Wizard. There's the green Wicked Witch (I thought the transformation here was a little weak, but it does have to cater for the younger audience). And the reason for the smoke and mirrors is established too. As such, there's the potential for a second film to be squeezed in, potentially just because it has the Oz name. Not necessarily a good idea.

Anywho, back to the film.

Black and white. I thought this was a fitting tribute to the first film. Plus, when Oz arrived in... erm... Oz, the contrast between the monochrome and the stunning colour was amazing. One issue with black and white films nowadays is that they look like a colour film with the colour removed. The definition is still there. It doesn't look like a traditional 'black and white' movie. A little ageing effect here would have, I think, added. Some imperfections to enhance the perfection.

Still, the transition from dirty old Kansas to beautiful Oz was seamless and Sam Raimi (who I'm a fan of anyway) has helped make the world a much bigger place than it ever was before. As Oz floats along a river to musical plants and river fairies, you're transported to a wonderful land brought to impressive life. I saw the film in 2D - which would help keep the colour vivid - but there were definitely some parts which were included for the 3D viewers. A fall down a waterfall was effective in 2D, so would have turned stomachs in 3!

There was humour mixed nicely in with the shocks and surprises. Finlay, the flying monkey, and his liking of bananas. A Chinatown made from real china pottery. The flying baboon that suddenly appeared, teeth bared (which made me wonder why more wasn't put into the transformation of Theodora - even Roald Dahl's 'The Witches' adaptation had something shown).

Sometimes the actors appeared a little uncomfortable in their roles, apart from Zach Braff who seemed perfectly at home as the monkey (lol). The 'Bully' cry of the Tinkers and the 'Not now' fanfare of Nuck felt forced, and the baboons gaining on them in the mist looked scribbled and not actually doing anything (and the fake running of Gelinda?) but these were fairly minor things in retrospect, considering .

So, Oz: The Great and Powerful. Was he?

Well... Majestic, I think so. Visually impressive, mostly, yes. A nice lead in to the original? Pretty much. It had some excellent parts, some good parts and some ok parts. It had a couple of not so good parts too.

But, did I enjoy it? Yes I did. 'Nuff said.