Skip to main content

The Only Review of Iron Man 3 That You'll Ever Need

Worry not, it's spoiler free.

For the most part, unless I'm insanely passionate about a film, or really have a lot to say, I make my film reviews rather brief. Whenever I read other reviews of films, I just want the gist. So that's what I'm going to bring to you. It's just a warning, for all of those that will shake their fists in rage because I didn't go over the cinematography, or the subtext of America's effects on other countries.

If the Iron Man films had subtitles, than this one would be Iron Man 3: I Am Tony Stark. The whole movie is more about the man, than any of the other 2, including Avengers. This film focuses a lot more on the person inside the suit, and questions whether it makes him, or he makes it. I'm fine with that, because I dig Tony Stark, and I like seeing him in action. I think few people will walk away disappointed because there isn't a lot of Iron Maning going on. However, it's interesting to see Tony deal with problems & situations without the help of being practically invincible with grandiose weapons.

The plot, well, I won't go into detail. Let's just say I felt they sort of rehashed a previous one. I'll also say this, there's something I expected, something I wanted, something I was really looking forward to and did not get at all. Not in the slightest. I think that's going to piss a lot of people off. I know I felt slighted. I found the main villain to be boring, without any depth or character, and not nearly as interesting, or charismatic as the previous films choice of bad-guy. Especially 2, which happens to be my favorite.

If you like 3D, then this will be the film for you. The effects are fantastic, and the action scenes are easily the most grand since Avengers, and go far and above any of the previous Iron Man films. The last 3rd of the film is worth the price of admission alone.

So, in the end, Iron Man 3 is a good film, but not as great as those that came before it. I will say it's definitely head & shoulders above all of Marvel's other trilogy end-caps. Even though I did dig Spider-Man 3.

**** out of 5

- Caliber Winfield
more movie reviews and such at Str8 Gangster, No Chaser
Entire recap of the year 2000 in WCW at WCW In 2000
My book about action films, endorsed by Scott Keith & Maddox, average 5 star rating on amazon, and now available to you for 99cents, which is less than a dollar is available at Man Movie Encyclopedia


  1. I don't think this 'review' told me a great deal I'm afraid.

    I'll avoid spoilers on the plot as well, because there's a major twist midway through the film. You'll probably either love it or hate it. As someone who is not hugely familiar with the Iron Man mythos - I liked it.

    Iron Man 3 is very enjoyable and probably the best of the trilogy. It's certainly better than Iron Man 2 which had 2 uninspiring villains and a rather half-assed attempt at being 'dark'.

    This time round we have Ben Kingsley very enjoyably chewing the scenery (his terror videos are particularly good - the editing on them is exceptional) and Guy Pearce plays the role of yet another genius rival to Tony Stark quite well.

    There are some excellent action scenes; the attack on Stark's house, the rescue from Air Force One - and to a lesser excellent, the final act. It was great technically, but I found a bit dull.

    If anything, Iron Man 3 is a comedy action film. Stark spends most of the film out of armour (and when he is in it, it doesn't work well a lot of the time) - instead teaming up with a kid who just about stays the right side of not being annoying. The kid has a certain level of charm, but I did think he almost killed the film by seemingly grinning whilst being threatened by a villain.

    But the thing with Iron Man 3 is that a recurring theme is Tony's PTSD. A very serious problem in real life and understandable given what he experienced in The Avengers.

    It keeps coming up as a plot point and some of the time they play it sort of serious - other times they play it sort of for laughs. It doesn't feel like they want to have a proper conversation about it - which is probably the film's biggest failing. With Robert Downey Junior they have a fantastic actor,but it never feels like he's really pushed.

    It also has to be said that Rebecca Hall's character is fairly pointless and disappears with little send-off.

    Also, I completely dispute your claim about the 3D. It's yet another movie where they have added that feature in post-production and it adds very little to the film.

    Overall, I'd recommend Iron Man 3 - it's genuinely funny and feel-good - and perhaps the second best part of the Marvel* series after The Avengers.

    * The various Spider-Man movies haven't been produced by Marvel.You are wrong to suggest that "it's definitely head & shoulders above all of Marvel's other trilogy end-caps", given that this is the first trilogy they have completed.

  2. "Especially [Iron Man] 2, which happens to be my favorite" "Even though I did dig Spider-Man 3." Hmmm

  3. Oh, and Jon Favreau as Happy Hogan looks like he ate Hulk Hogan. Frak me, but he is bloody fat now.

  4. Yeah, I write my movie reviews how I like to read them. I don't need long winded diatribes. I want a quick over view, and let me know a rating.

    Also, I didn't say anything was produced by Marvel, I merely meant their properties.

    And yeah, I thought Favreau lost a bunch of weight? He was looking rather big.

  5. I really dug Sam Rockwell's smarmy character, and thought Rourke was a total bad-ass. I'm a mark for Rourke, so he's a big reason I dug the 2nd the most. I also liked Tony's refusal to give up the armor, being a drunk asshole, and the stuff with Shield as well.

    As for Spider-Man 3, it's not a classic by any means, but it's no where near as bad as people say. I know it's hip to bash the film, but I'm a square kind of cat.

  6. no... you're a contrarian.

  7. Oh, look out, no one was talking about The Fuj, so the Fuj showed up to talk about The Fuj. Here's The Fuj!

  8. The more you speak, the more you sound like a jealous goon.

    The Fuj at his lamest is still cooler than Caliber will ever be.

  9. so was Fin Fang Foom in it?

  10. I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with the Fuj. Spiderman 3 has been the worst Spiderman movie yet (including the newest one) and Iron Man 2 was far inferior to the first Iron Man. Not thinking that is the case severely hinders my opinion of this review. Thats the way it is.

  11. Can someone explain to me how Spider-man 3 isn't no where near as bad as we think it is? Cause I happen to remember Spider-man happily letting a convicted murderer go because he "Forgave" him.

  12. I wasn't talking about Spiderman, I was talking about Caliber's clear and pathetic envy towards the Fuj.

    It's reaching Douglas levels here.

  13. I didn't say it was perfect, but I don't think it's as bad as X-Men: The Last Stand, or Blade: Trinity. A lot of what I liked about Spider-Man 3 hinges on Peter being a bad-ass. "You want forgivness? Get religion" is one of my favorite lines in cinema. The fact he finally told Harry to fuck off, and let people have it who'd been walking all over him. Sure, I was pissed that Venom was just thrown in the way he was, and that Brock wasn't done nearly the way he should have been, but he was still pretty cool.

    The action scenes with Sandman were great as well, THC was excellent. I think Spider-Man let him go because A] what happened with his Uncle was an accident, and something he wishes he could take back, and B] what was he gonna do? Slap the cuffs on him? Sandman was a pretty hard guy to wrangle.

  14. I wish. I always dug that name, and Fanger scared me as a kid.

  15. Yeah, anyone who thinks Iron Man 2 is better than 1, and likes Spider-Man 3, clearly needs a brain shampoo. Not that caliber hadn't proved himself an idiot long ago.

  16. Rockwell is the man, one of the great underrated actors of our generation. He was awesome in Seven Psychopaths.

  17. Caliber brotha you know I got nothin but love for ya but you gotta face facts dude: you're a contrarian. Anything that is considered the best by most people you're against. Anything that's considered the best by critics, snobs, and hipsters you're against. That leaves you with stuff with a mainstream aesthetic that no one but you considers the best of anything. That's cool, its whatever works for ya, but it makes all your reviews taken with a grain of salt.

    And seriously, I mean, you said Batman Begins was the best movie of the Dark Knight trilogy.

  18. Yeah but you know what? The Beatles do suck balls. And I mean that, you douchebag downvoters.

    To the last comment: Eh, I can belee dat.

  19. I'm with Caliber on that - I think Batman Begins is the best of that trilogy as well.

  20. What a lovely pair of coconuts the two of you make.

  21. I hated the Sandman ending. Whilst the killing of Uncle Ben may have been accidental, I don't think that's a reason to let him go.
    Furthermore, his character was a dangerous criminal. Despite his apparent remorse over Ben, he still committed crimes during the course of the movie that could of resulted in the death or serious injury of others.
    By letting him go, Peter continued to put lives and property at risk.
    BTW - you're right that it's better than Blade Trinity - I'd forgotten about that, but I'd say its about equal to the also disappointing X Men 3.

  22. Irion Man 3 is pretty good.

  23. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and yours is wrong.

  24. He's Spider-Man - he figures out ways to deal with dangerous criminals.
    Sure Sandman wanted to help his daughter and he may not have originally wanted to hurt people...but he constantly did without displaying any apparent concern over it.

  25. "Caliber brotha you know I got nothin but love for ya but you gotta face facts dude: you're a contrarian. "

    The defense rests... lolz

  26. " something I was really looking forward to and did not get at all. Not in the slightest. I think that's going to piss a lot of people off. I know I felt slighted."

    I'd say this line is as revealing as my line about the twist. In fact, I do suspect we may both be referring to the same thing.

  27. May I ask what's so wrong with agreeing with the Caliber man?

  28. Yeah, we are.

    I thought about that before I wrote it, but felt it could be interpreted as anything. Who knows what one looks forward to. But yeah, the thing we're talking about was a REAL let down for me. I was really looking forward to seeing what they'd do with said thing, and blah. Instead we got some generic deal instead.

  29. Honestly, Spider-Man 3 did a lot right. People don't realize it, but despite the casting, Venom was perfect. It was the Green Goblin they screwed up really bad.

  30. I guess what I'm saying is that if you're running a review prior to release, which is typically why guys like Ebert, Roper, Phillips, Talerico, and so on get views, that's a different story, but, if you have the privilege of doing something like that, I.E Pre-release screenings and such, you gotta go in-depth and provide context.

    In my review above, I quote a point "gametrailers" made about great games being toys, and used it to inform my opinion of "Blood Dragon"

  31. I've seen it because, oddly, the Marvel movies seem to come out earlier in the UK than the States.

    Previously, when I used to review films for my student paper (many years ago) I went to previews - usually about a week before a film came out.

  32. I've given you my analysis of your work on a semi-regular basis - often disagreeing with you.

    Last night I said that I thought your review of Iron Man told me little and I completely disagree with your views on Iron Man 2 and Spider-Man 3.

    I've not commented on much of your wrestling related work, but I think your star rating are usually too high.

    I think I've established my position that whilst I encourage your work (and I think you've improved in general) - I don't agree with much of what you say.

    Therefore, I find it odd that I completely agree with your position on the Dark Knight trilogy - given that our opinion is generally viewed as contrary to the accepted consensus.

    Reasonable, yes?

  33. Nonetheless, it suggests that something one expects does not happen - ergo, there's a 'twist'.

    I didn't mind it. In fact, I liked it as it was so leftfield and well executed - I found it funny. Also, I have no investment in that character's backstory.

    If I'm honest, the big flaw with the film is that it tries to be too many things. It wants to explore dark aspects of Tony's character and the world, but it wants to be a comedy. It wants to be a romance, it wants to make a point about what 'terror' is and it wants to be a Big Action Film.

    Nonetheless, I think it works on RDJ's performance alone. He's charming, cool and sexy. Like Austin Powers - women want him and men want to be him.

    In fact, I think there is an Austin vibe about the whole thing. One character displays many similar traits to him and the closing credit sequence/ music is definitely trying to echo 60s capers.

  34. I almost wrote: " I could watch him read from the phone book and be entertained."

    It would seem that you and I are not so dissimilar.
    This worries me.

  35. Very reasonable. It's a damn shame people can't be bothered to be intelligent enough to discuss a disagreement in the manner that you have. Feel free to not like my work or disagree with my opinions as often as you want.

  36. Ahem, that's very kind of you. With tears in my eyes I have to tell you that is the most reasoned comment I have encountered on the Internet in the last week.

    In all seriousness, I still think you need to develop a thicker skin and this post betrays that need.If you set yourself up by delivering reviews titled 'The only INSERT TITLE Review You'll Ever Need', people will always call you out. Even if you had the combined wisdom and knowledge of Roger Ebert, Scott Keith, Winston Churchill, Stephen Hawking and Charlie Reneke.

    Do what you do, enjoy it, don't take it too seriously, take criticism (positive, constructive or negative) and learn from it.

    You have shown that you can do that and you'll keep getting better as a writer.

  37. I am with you on the second Batman actually. Take out Heath Ledger (all 20 minutes of him!) and it's a BAD FILM. 1 I liked and I thought 3 was great, but I didn't go into it expecting Citizen Kane 2 or anything.


  38. Subtext doesn't count, because subtext is what people see in the film, and everyone sees something different. Besides, if what makes a film great is something that's hidden, then it isn't a great film.

    Also, if you ever have any questions about an eating regimine/exercise/workingout, hollar at cha' boy.

  39. The Dark Knight is a film where about an hour could be removed, and you'd have a sleek film.

    I mean, half way through the film I thought "Why doesn't Batman just start doing the opposite of what The Joker says? Because that's what happens, he does the opposite". You have things like Joker getting into jail, just to be caught? Why? You've got all that stuff with Harvey Dent which should have been saved for a different film, you've got that extremely over-the-top and completely unbelievable scene with the sonar.

    So, the movie says that in the end, if you break the rules, get someone else to do it?

    I'm not saying the movie sucks, not at all. I still enjoy the hell out of it. I think Ledger's performance is the greatest in cinema history. However, I think it's a 4 & 1/4-1/2 stars out of 5, not 5 out of 5.

  40. I have a thick skin. I really do.

    People think I get upset at people saying I suck, or what have you. I don't. I truly don't. What bothers me is when someone simply says "You suck". It doesn't bother me that I suck, it bothers me that they're so stupid they can't bother to elaborate. That they don't have half a brain to intelligently discuss what they didn't like.

    It's the ignorance that bothers me.

    Take you for instance, I have absolutely no problem in you saying what you've said, because you were clear, gave your reasons, and never once acted like an idiot. But then again, you're obviously European and not raised on with the American school system & culture, so you have an edge.

    I dig constructive criticism. People told me to align my text to the left, I did. People suggest I get an editor, I was lucky enough to find one. So, it's just people acting like morons that will get me from time to time.

    Also, calling my reviews "the only blahblah you'll ever need" just fits the gimmick. I wanted a trade mark for my reviews, so everyone knew it was Caliber, and that fit.

  41. If this had been out for a while, then I would have gone in-depth.

    If you've read my MME articles, it's clear I can do so. However, with a film like this I wanted to avoid as many spoilers as I could, and just give a view of how I saw things. No matter what I said, with a film like Iron Man 3, those who want to see it, are gonna see it.

    Also, yeah, I've learned that it seems some people just want their thoughts parroted back at them. Why, I have no idea. Besides, I write movie reviews for films like these in the style I enjoy reading; short, and to the point. If you've ever seen film reviews on 411mania, I skip all the stuff they wrote and jump down to "the 411" where it's a paragraph review.

    Trust me, had this been out, and people knew about a certain something, I would have gone on for a while.

    BTW, Meeker, how say you and I do a team up article?

  42. "Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you"

  43. "Even though I did dig Spider-Man 3." Oh, so I shouldn't pay any attention to your opinions. Cool.


Post a Comment