Comic-Con Madness: Double Dose of Downey ("Iron Man 2")

Rusty here, with the final part of this set. So, before I start rambling too much, let’s dive in…

"Iron Man"

“I am Iron Man”

What a killer final line. That’s Tony Stark nicely summed up in that one moment. That charming, horny, brilliant, semi-weasely billionaire embraces the chance to step up, to finally mean something to someone besides himself. Just watch that final press conference scene—look how disheartened Stark was when he wasn’t accused of being a “superhero.” He’s loving this moment—he’s on top of the world. Well, great…now the sequel can come and knock him down a few pegs or two (like it should).

Like (I’m sure) many of you, I loved “Iron Man.” Director Jon Favreau managed to make a superhero film that wasn’t corny (like some other Marvel movies that shall go unnamed) nor intensely dramatic, but rather one that proudly fell into its own distinct category—a sharp, endlessly clever, and still emotionally involving entry into the superhero canon. Stark isn’t Batman, but nor is he trying to be. You can watch “The Dark Knight” in amazement and awe—“Iron man” watches like a fun night with some great friends (albeit very exciting, ass-kicking ones). Robert Downey Jr. was perfect in a role that now seems tailor-made, and the film seemed to adjust to his style—loose and fun for the most part, but believably dramatic at the turn of a hat. Villain-wise, it was kind of weak and predictable, but that didn’t matter, since the character work was dead-on, and the film’s terrific sense of humor (and solid action) more than compensated for the lesser moments.

So now we’re at Part 2. About a year after the original came out, Director Jon Favreau (he’ll always be “so money” from “Swingers”), Downey, Marvel head honcho Kevin Feige, and newbie cast members Don Cheadle (replacing Terrance Howard from the first film), the great Sam Rockwell (as new villain and Tony Stark-like weapons-manufacturer, Justin Hammer), and Scarlett Johansson (joining the cast as Stark’s new assistant/Russian super spy, the Black Widow) all came to Comic-Con for the world-premiere footage of next summer’s extremely anticipated sequel.

And, simply put…it looked pretty awesome!

But, wait, let’s backtrack a bit. Marvel Pictures branched out a few years back and won back the rights to some of their greatest characters. In turn, as the first wave of their independently-produced films, we got “Iron Man” and Edward Norton’s excellent take on “The Incredible Hulk” (which I really hope gets a sequel too). But Marvel went a step further—for the first time that I’ve ever really seen this, they started combining their characters into one common universe. SPOILER ALERT: the ending shot of the “Incredible Hulk” had Downey Jr., fresh off the events of “Iron Man” (and possibly the sequel?), walk in to a bar to talk to the Hulk’s nemesis, General Ross, about forming a “special team”.

Yep, that’s nothing less than Marvel’s dream-team—the Avengers. But it wasn’t a hollow tease. Marvel has three more pictures planned after “Iron Man 2”—“Thor”, “Captain America,” and we better believe it: “The Avengers” in 2012, featuring those three heroes, and (hopefully) Edward Norton’s Hulk in some capacity. I was crazy about that scene in “The Incredible Hulk”. How rarely do you get to see characters from different movies interacting? How awesome would it be to see fine actors like Downey and Norton playing together (and the actors who’ll fill the costumes for Captain America and the might Nordic god, Thor), bringing real sincerity and talent to an epic superhero story?

And therein is the great challenge. Sequels are a tricky business to begin with. More often than not, “bigger and better” is taken too literally, and we end up getting more noise, explosions, and stuff looking “cool” than a continued arc of a character we love, than actual development for people we’ve come to care about. I don’t know about you guys, but I’ve lost track of how many times have I’ve been let down by Parts 2’s and 3’s, by filmmakers who seemed to forget what made their original films so great. Sure, it’s not exactly life-changing bits of depression, but we grow to care for all these larger-than-life people—they’re only worth revisiting if there’s more of their story to tell. It’s so much more rewarding to see them progress in new, relatable stories, as opposed to watching them fight more stuff and face bigger, more expensive special effects.

As such, “Iron Man 2” has to take Tony Stark someplace new, becoming its own story and a strong entry into the “Iron Man” series, all the while setting the ground work for his team-up with Marvel’s superheroic finest—a smooth transition into the geeky, ridiculous insanity that will be “The Avengers”—piece of cake, right?

Well, it’s too early to tell, but, from the looks of it, Favreau, Downey, and co. at the very least will give us something interesting, new, and very, very fun to watch. This sequel looks to pick up hot on the heels of “Iron Man”’s brilliant closing line. The world now knows he’s Iron Man, so how does Stark deal with that? With the pressure, with the attention, with his own not-exactly-perfect-or-moral lifestyle? It’s a great launching pad, and it’ll be cool to see where the filmmakers go with this. Will it live up to the first one? It’s impossible to make that call yet, but, in terms of what we saw, it should give the first film a good run for its money.

But let’s get to that footage…

Footage:

It all starts with Downey, half-dressed in the Iron-Man suit, sitting atop Randy’s Donuts in L.A. (you know, in the actual giant donut). In walks Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson, in all his steely, eye-patched cool), who chides Downey for not joining his “special team”. Stark is still fast and quippy (his response to Fury: “This is confusing me. Which eye do I address?”)…but we can see that Stark is clearly struggling—the whole “everyone-knows-who-you-are” part of the job is getting to him, and he’s feeling low…we just don’t know exactly why. What exactly happened to put him here? Very cleverly not revealed. Nicely done, Mr. Favreau—you got me hooked already.

The next thing shown was an extended sequence. In some courtroom, with Gwyneth Paltrow’s Pepper Potts (his right-hand woman, conscience, and, as we obviously know, his true love) right behind him, Stark is facing down a committee of Senators, led by the deadpan Garry Schandling. They want this Iron Man armor, thinking it’s a weapon. But Stark, always one step ahead, mocks them all, and celebrates himself “officially privatizing world peace.” The court then calls Stark’s best friend, Jim Rhodes, to testify, launching into my favorite part of the footage.

In walks Cheadle, and bumps into Downey for a quick exchange. Most of us heard the messy business with Terrence Howard being replaced for the sequel. I thought he was very enjoyable in the original, and would’ve loved to see where he took his character (not to mention finally become Iron Man’s metal-clad, super-ally, War Machine). The recasting also really cheapens that great moment where Howard, watching Downey fly off into the sky, looks at his old armor, grins, and says “Next time, baby.” Well, not so much.

Still, as much as that news sucks, whether it was because of salary negations or bigger creative reasons (there was some rumor rumbling that Favreau wasn’t too happy with Howard’s performance), the change is done. Cheadle’s a fine actor, with a great sense of humor and strong presence, so we know the role is in good hands. But the footage took it a step further, in a tiny, perfectly executed moment.

As Rhodes walks to the testifying bench, he bumps into Stark, who can’t believe they dragged him into this. Rhodes, plainly and simply, just says: “Look, it’s me. I’m here. Let’s get over it and move on.” I love moments like that—it works for the story and the character relationships, but simultaneously comments on things outside of the movie. It’s quick and subtle, but it’s absolutely right. Yeah, it’s disappointing Howard couldn’t finish the role he originated, but there’s nothing we can do now. Let’s just accept it and move on. Cheadle will do right by the fans, and I personally can’t wait to see what he does with the role.

After that, the footage launches into a series of quick sequences and images. We see bits of Scarlett Johansson, believably knocking down some bad guys as the Black Widow, Mickey Rourke, with a thick (and legitimate!) Russian accent, building a powered suit of his own, and a quick throwaway shot of Downey’s chest piece, with some kind of infection seemingly spreading from it. Finally, we see Mickey Rourke in full-on costume mode as Whiplash. Now, this is the picture they released a month back…

I wasn’t too impressed with it—it looks a little rough, cheaply made (maybe that’s the point?) and unexciting, but, man, just wait until you see those super-charged, electrified whips in action. It looks phenomenal, and Rourke looks like he’s relishing playing this type of character (as well as his own Hollywood comeback). He should make a good match, both physically and dramatically, for Downey’s Stark.

We see one more money shot of Iron Man flying around, evading explosions, and the screen goes black.

We think it’s over…but then the footage has one more surprise up its sleeve. A brand-new scene opens, with Sam Rockwell’s Justin Hammer walking in to meet Cheadle in an airplane hanger. Rockwell jokes around a bit (he should be great fun in this role), and offers Cheadle a variety of weapons he brought along.

“So, which ones will it be?” he asks him.

“I’ll take them all.” Rhodes replies, with absolute cool.

And the very next shot, we see Rhodes as War Machine, in total badass glory, shooting things left and right from his new, weapon-clad silver armor. For a movie that just finished filing last week, the effects look superb, and this shot of War Machine in particular had fans going crazy in the Convention Hall.

We got tons of juicy details, but the plot isn’t exactly clear yet. I like that—I actually want to be surprised come next May. We know Johansson’s character is Russian (with a name like Natasha Romanov, what else could she be?), so there could be some connection to Mickey Rourke’s Whiplash. Similarly, we heard Justin Hammer is the second villain, so there might be some shady dealings between him and Whiplash too. And I was most intrigued by that shot of Downey’s infected chest piece. I have no idea where they could take that story element, but it opens up some interesting possibilities.

All in all, it looks like the filmmakers have some excellent material for this sequel. I’m still going to be cautiously optimistic (“Spider-Man 3” had a fantastic trailer too…), but we’re definitely looking at one of next year’s biggest hits (and hopefully a deserving one too).

Panel:


As for the actual panel, it was everything you’d expect from these guys. Favreau was funny and informative (though very careful not to reveal anything substantial—he’s become a master of the tantalizing hint), Downey was his usual entertaining self, and Cheadle and Rockwell look like great additions to the cast.


Johansson was actually my biggest wild card for the new film. She can be so good with the right material (“Lost in Translation,” “Match Point”), but, for me, she’s been kind of hit-or-miss with her latest films (“The Island,” “The Other Boleyn Girl”). Still, the footage looks like she jumped for the chance to play the Black Widow, and Favreau even added how impressed he was when she dyed her hair red weeks before she even got the part. We also found out that she won’t have to do the Russian accent—definitely good news all-around, since it would’ve been ridiculously distracting. (Really, Tony Stark would find nothing suspicious of someone as gorgeous as Johansson working for him, with a think Boris-and-Natasha accent to boot?) She’s a wonderful actress under the right circumstances, and it looks like she took this role seriously, with a good dash of fun as well in playing such a cool-chick character.

I loved some of their anecdotes, particularly Favreau’s story of how the Russian government was thrilled to offer Mickey Rourke a “research” stay in one of their prisons (looks like Whiplash did some time before he enters the story). Turns out, the first big import movie after Perestroika was “9 ½ Weeks,” and Rourke still holds a special place as an uber-sex symbol for my people. Downey had a good bit as well, when asked about working with Mickey Rourke, and he put it best as: “Man, and I thought I was eccentric.”


My personal favorite thing, though, was Cheadle’s response to this question:

“What do you like better, playing a good guy in “Iron Man 2,” or a villain in “Meteor Man”?

Cheadle paused, and then, with perfect timing:

“Yeah, I don’t know what that second movie is.”

The footage was then played again to the crowd’s overwhelming cheers, and the panel members thanked the crowd, with a genuine reminder that it was Comic-Con and the fans that broke the original “Iron Man” from a big question mark to one of the most anticipated movies (and biggest hits) of last summer.

Overall, easily one of the best panels of the convention (although, I agree with Ace—the “Chuck” panel wins it by a nose). Whether the sequel’s any good really remains to be seen, but it looks like the cast and crew sincerely tried to make this one as worthy (if not better) than the original movie.

May 7, 2010? We’ll see you then, Mr. Stark.

You are Iron Man, indeed.

Images courtesy of Marvel Pictures and Paramount Pictures.
Read more!

Comic-Con Madness: Double Dose of Downey (“Sherlock Holmes”)

- Posted by Rusty

Hey, everyone. Rusty here with the first of a double-parter. The other guys are working on their own write-ups right now, including “Chuck” and James Cameron’s “Avatar,” but I luckily snagged two of my favorite events of the entire convention. But first things first, let’s tackle the logical and most deductive choice…

“Sherlock Holmes”

Guy Ritchie’s new spin on Arthur Conan Doyle’s greatest creation arrives in theaters this December in all its Victorian-action-movie glory. You all probably saw the trailer (if not, check it out here). Is it the Sherlock Holmes that we’re used to? Definitely not (I somehow never pictured him being that much of an agile, punching badass). But, more importantly…could it still be good? Absolutely, and the stuff we saw at Comic-Con certainly gives me confidence of that.

Downey Jr. and company are purporting that this will be the closest interpretation of the character to the original works by Doyle. That might be a bit hard to take, especially since Holmes looks to have transformed into John McClane (will “Elementary, my Dear Watson” be his macho-action-hero catchphrase after he beats up some bad guy?). Still, there might be some truth to that claim, but a lot of that really depends on the finished product.

I just had the immense (and very belated) pleasure of rediscovering the Holmes stories—I bought myself a big, fat volume and just dug in…and I loved it! Trough all the different movies, TV shows, and what have you, I forgot just how much of a character Holmes was—how much fun his stories actually are. He was far from some stuffy, boring fellow in a deerskin cap with a penchant for pipes and magnifying glasses. This was a guy who lived for the challenge and puzzles, and shunned anything less than a keen intellect and a hunger for discovery. He knew baritsu (yep, an ancient form of martial arts, which he used on his arch-enemy Professor Moriarty), was an amateur boxer, and just relished disappearing into different characters and disguises. Downey would be brilliant as that—bringing that witty, intellectual energy of his to another worthy character, one that we may not have seen from this particular, lovingly bizarre angle. The new film will probably be a more Hollywood-blockbuster Holmes than Doyle ever intended, but as long as it stays true to the spirit of the original character, then, by all means, it could add all the explosions and fistfights it wants.

The stories also presented one of the best friendships in literature—the ultimate bond between a man of pure logic and intellect and his steady, sensitive backup of a companion. Holmes and Dr. Watson are inseparable—Watson cannot solve crimes because he lacks the “whole picture” vision, while Holmes’ often insane ideas need the restraining and dependable hand of Watson. By all means, they shouldn’t get along—Holmes is an odd, unsociable, drug-addicted mess, while Watson is a smooth, charming, and quite noble doctor. Can you honestly see those two dudes hanging out at a party? But it works. The two together are magic, and that’s the brilliance of Doyle’s “Sherlock Holmes”—that friendship is the charming, emotional clincher of the original stories, and it’s the crucial element that will determine this new movie.

Footage:

And, well, after seeing the Comic-Con footage, I have a lot more faith in the great sleuth’s new adventure. For the most part, I actually liked the trailer that’s now in theaters. It’s fun, moves quickly, and gives you a sense of the scale and action of this new version…everything, that is, but the actual character work. Sure, we get glimpses, but Downey and Jude Law (a perfect choice for Watson) have but one tiny exchange (they’re too busy fighting and jumping), and poor Rachel McAdams (as Holmes’ infamous female intellectual match, Irene Adler) barely utters one word. In fact, I’m pretty sure Adler is dead silent for the entire two minutes—she does look great, though, as the trailer makes sure to point out repeatedly by showing her walking around in 1800s lingerie.

On the other hand, the roughly five minutes or so of Comic-Con footage gave me everything I originally wanted: Holmes and Watson bicker like a hilarious old married couple (McAdams has a great line where she says that the “lovers are fighting again”), McAdams’ Adler proves a verbal, spunky match for Downey’s Holmes (as she should be), and we saw lots more of Holmes, you know, detecting, as opposed to kicking and punching and stuff. We also got a better sense of the story, including the dastardly plan of occultist Lord Blackwood (the great character actor, Mark Strong, reteaming with Ritchie after “Rock ‘n’ Rolla”), in a clever riff on Doyle’s own fascination with mysticism and the occult.

All in all, it looks like witty, clever fun. I loved director Ritchie’s “Snatch” and “Rock ‘n’ Rolla” (anyone else upset that Ritchie’s lucky charm and my perpetual man-crush Jason Statham couldn’t find a role in this one — really, not even as a cool-looking cameo thug?), and I think he’ll step up here to deliver an entertaining, breezy picture that doesn’t betray what fans loved about the original stories. It’s not a guarantee, but it’s certainly looking far more promising.

Panel:

I know I rambled on and on about the footage and the original stories, so I wouldn’t blame all of you people for (justifiably) skimming to finally get to the actual panel. Well, simply put, it was fantastic all-around. It got off to a rousing start when instead of the standard moderator (no offense to him) of the WB panel, in ran Downey to rapturous screams and applause. And he was everything you’d expect: quick, funny, always keeping the audience entertained. Of all the stars at the convention, I was most impressed by him—it probably helps, though, that all of us here are huge fans of his—I’d even guess that Ace and Luke are harboring not-so-secret man-crushes just like me. He genuinely seemed to love the crowd, and vice versa; even when the same questions were asked over and over (and trust me, there were a good four or five questions that were basically variations of something he already answered in the beginning of the panel), Downey didn’t miss a beat, always having some funny anecdote, and making the fans feel like they did him a favor for even asking (or, as he said, “fueling his narcissistic tendencies”). You also get the sense that he found a kindred, quirky spirit in Holmes, and it comes through in his enthusiasm and the footage.

There was some playful banter between him and McAdams (quite lovely herself), and I especially loved McAdams’ answer of how she prepared for her role, by “perusing over and over…the 10 pages she was in.” She’s one of my favorite actresses, and it’s nice to see that she’s likely as smart as she comes across.

The overall vibe from the panel (which also included Downey’s producer wife, Susan, uber action-producer Joel Silver, and the man who originated the project, Lionel Wigram) is that they made a movie they’re proud of, and can’t wait to show it off properly to an audience. It could still go either way, but now I’m looking forward to it a whole lot more.

Will it be as good and faithful as fans would want? Probably not…but that’s not necessarily a negative. Literature invites different interpretations, and if this one captures the core elements that make the stories work, we might be in for an entertaining new take on a beloved character. In the end, it’d be fantastic to have an ongoing current Holmes series, especially one that united both the old-school fans of Doyle and the newbie obsessives of Mr. Tony Stark himself (with me proudly falling in both camps).

Thanks for sticking with me through another horribly lengthy wrap-up. I’ll be back a little later with Part 2 of this set, featuring a tiny-budget Downey flick none of you will probably see anyway. Honestly, what the hell is this “Iron Man 2” movie??

Images courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures.

Read more!