Iron Man

Unlike the plethora of other superhero movies out there, Jon Favreau’s Iron Man (2008) takes a “B-list” Marvel superhero and creates a thoroughly enjoyable two hour spectacle, complete with all the elements an audience expects from the genre, plus some much needed charisma. Regardless of how they feel about the movie as a whole, most critics agree that the casting of Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark was a stroke of genius. “Oceans of soul rage and roil behind those melted-chocolate eyes, and perhaps no actor alive better conveys arrogance, weakness, humor and self-awareness by simply being. One of the twists of ‘Iron Man’ is that, unlike comic books in which insecure adolescents come to terms with their burgeoning physical powers, here a powerful, middle-aged man finds strength in vulnerability,” writes Ann Hornaday of The Washington Post. Christopher Orr of The New Republic adds, “[I]t’s Downey’s vibe--the mordant wit, the boyish enthusiasm, the careful balance of self-love and self-loathing--that gives the film its sharp, comic sensibility and elevates it near the top of what was beginning to seem an exhausted genre.”

Hallmarks of the “exhausted genre” that Orr refers to are inescapably present in the film, which exhibits the issues that trouble most, if not all, superhero comics. Modern readers are generally offended or appalled by stereotypical portrayals of Germans, Japanese and Russians in old comic books, yet this movie offers us an unflinching caricature of Middle Eastern terrorists hiding in caves. To my surprise, none of the reviews I read mentioned any sense of outrage or consternation at these portrayals. The fact that Stark befriends the lightest skinned man, who coincidentally is wearing a suit instead of traditional garb, (his fellow captive Yelsin) does nothing to alleviate concerns about ethnic profiling. As we have seen, superhero stories frequently reflect social, political and economic milieu; thus Iron Man is simply a projection of the public concern with military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, just as the other superheroes were in their respective times. We seem to need these limited representations of our enemies (in this case they are either terrorists or frightened villagers) in order to justify making them “the other” and using force against them. Comic book superheroes appear to serve as the id of society, letting us exercise our repressed desires and unconscious preoccupations in a “safe” environment. But where’s the line between healthy expression and promoting damaging attitudes and stereotypes?

In true vigilante fashion, Iron Man takes it upon himself to do the job the U.S. government is incapable of doing, although it is Tony Stark’s company who created the problem in the first place. This raises the same issue as Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns, which is the tendency of superheroes to beget their own villains. Without Stark Industries the terrorists would not be armed, and without the original Iron Man suit Obadiah Stain would not have created his monstrous variation of it. We applaud Iron Man’s ability to liberate the oppressed townspeople of Golmira, yet the implications of his interference are not fully explored. Surely the notion of one man imposing his self-righteous agenda on the world reeks of fascism? Gershom Legman writes in “Love and Death: A Study in Censorship” that the so called “justice” provided by superheroes is simply a glorified version of lynching in which the hero acts as judge, jury and executioner. Superheroes “[are] really peddling a philosophy of ‘hooded justice’ in no way distinguishable from Hitler and the Ku Klux Klan.” A whole lot of power in the hands of one individual is widely regarded as a bad thing (“absolute power corrupts absolutely”), and yet this film would have us forget what we know and believe that such concentrated power could potentially be a good thing. [This issue is further addressed in the sequel, in which Tony Stark refuses to hand over the suit to the government, exclaiming “I did you a favor. I have successfully privatized world peace!”]

Roger Ebert praises the film for showing “the reality in our own world today: Armaments are escalating beyond the ability to control them. In most movies in this genre, the goal would be to create bigger and better weapons. How unique that Tony Stark wants to disarm. It makes him a superhero who can think, reason and draw moral conclusions, instead of one who recites platitudes.” I disagree. What else is the Iron Man suit but a “bigger and better weapon?” One that allows him, through the use of fear, to control the world’s population: “I haven’t come across anyone man enough to go toe to toe with me on my best day!” (Iron Man 2). On the surface, this film is a well-acted and engaging saga of personal redemption, but underneath lies a more insidious narrative about the fine line between the use and abuse of power.