(Iron Man 3 spoilers)
Hello again friends, this is an article coming from someone who loved the Iron Man trilogy. I would rate it as the second best ComicBookMovie trilogy of all time, just right behind Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy. To be frank, I like Favreau's style of directing better than Nolan's. I also prefer the general feel of the Iron Man films, and I would rate it above The Dark Knight Trilogy if not for one big problem with all three movies....what was that problem??
...The villains,I know I am not the first one to say this. But, it's true. Now I'm not talking about how much screen time they all got. Because if I was, Whiplash didn't get much screen time and was underused overall. Iron Monger didn't show up until the end. The Mandarin didn't even exist. But I'm not upset about lack of screen time, not at all. I'm sure many would attribute the lack of interesting villains in the Iron Man trilogy to Iron Man lacking interesting villains in the first place. But, nothing could be further from the truth. Iron Man has a great rogues gallery and I would place it as the fifth greatest rogues gallery of all time. (Behind Batman, Spider-Man, Superman and Daredevil and tied with Captain America) Frankly, all three or four of the villains used in the Iron Man trilogy were botched versions of spectacular characters. To get to the point, let's take a look at the three villains used. Iron Monger, Crimson Dynamo/Whiplash, and Mandarin/Mallen/Aldrich Killian. (oh jeez, a three way amalgamation)
Iron Monger
First off I am going to compare Iron Monger from the comics to the one used in the film. Now, I think people have a flawed view of the Iron Monger. Because to be honest, I don't think most people have ever even read a comic with him in it. Because for whatever reason he stopped being used a while ago. Most people think and say that Iron Monger sucks, but the only version of him they know is the clunking brute who showed up at the end of Iron Man. I'm going to give some insight into the actual Iron Monger. In the comics, Obadiah Stane was a business rival of Tony Stark. Obadiah was a tactical, strategic and manipulative genius. Not to mention he's not too shabby in the science department. This all started when he was a kid, and mastered chess. He became the best chess player he could find, constantly trying to find new opponents for him to beat. He was not just a great tactician, he knew how to manipulate the outcome of the game. For instance, one time Obadiah found an opponent who was better than him at chess. He studied this opponent, and knew that he couldn't win. So, he manipulated the outcome by secretly killing the boy's dog, so he would be sad the next day when they played, and would not play at his best and Obadiah would win. Things like that transferred into his adult life, he was known for his ruthlessness, master manipulative/strategic/tactical skills and his incredible business and scientific savvy. Later, when he becomes a villain. He is to Iron Man, what Bane is to Batman. No one has destroyed Stark's legacy and taken away his dignity like the Iron Monger did. To be honest, Iron Monger did to Stark in the comics what we THOUGHT that Mandarin was going to do to him in Iron Man 3. He attacked him on every front, he drove him out of business and attacked his business life. He attacked Iron Man in his superhero life, and ruined his personal life and forced Tony to revert to alcoholism and Tony became a vagrant. He took over the company, and left a drunk Tony Stark for dead.
Now, soak all that in. If you need to, read the above paragraph again. Then think with me, did any of that even come close to happening in Iron Man? Iron Monger is a great villain, and a lot cooler than people give him credit for. But can we blame them? If the only version of him they know is a clunking brute who wants to make money off of weapons? Obadiah in the comics did have personal gain as a motive, but It wasn't nearly as small scale as it was portrayed in the movie. In the movie, Stane wants to sell weapons to terrorists. In the comics, he plans to overtake the biggest company in America and ruin the Stark legacy forever, and destroy Tony's dignity. Stane was ruthless, cunning, genius all around and made a suit nearly on par with Iron Man.
Iron Monger in the movie wasn't a bad villain, but let's face facts. Jeff Bridges' Iron Monger was a botched version of a spectacular villain. A wimpy version of Iron Man's Doomsday.
Whiplash/Crimson Dynamo
Next up, I will discuss and compare the versions from the comics and movie. In Iron Man 2, Whiplash was an amalgamation of Crimson Dynamo and another villain called Blacklash. Because in the comics, "Whiplash" didn't exist, at least not until Iron Man 2 came out. He was obviously meant to be Crimson Dynamo, but they combined him with some elements of Blacklash too. Crimson Dynamo in the comics, was one of Iron Man's longest standing and greatest villains. You see that's where he differs from Iron Monger, Iron Monger attacked Stark for personal gain. Whereas Crimson Dynamo is a hardcore Russian patriot fighting for his nation's pride. On a side note: Folks say Captain America is a blind patriot, well he isn't. He is a patriot, but he just stands for the American principles and ideals. Crimson Dynamo is an example of a somewhat blind but passionate patriot. Back on topic, I never viewed Crimson Dynamo as a truly evil villain. But in fact, a passionate patriot. Now, I am not Russian and have no particular allegiance to that country, but I always sorta admired Crimson Dynamo. Even though he was a bad guy, because every time he went up against a hero in the Marvel universe. He wasn't doing it for himself, he wasn't going it for personal gain, or revenge. He did it for national pride, and to serve his country. I've always seen him as a great villain and an interesting character.
Again, take a good look at the Crimson Dynamo (Vanko) from the comics and then compare it to the Vanko in Iron Man 2. Did they eveb touch on or mention Vanko's motive or his passionate patriotic side? No, he's just mad because Tony's father and his own father had some kind of disagreement in the past. While I didn't think Whiplash in Iron Man 2 was a bad villain, but he was nowhere near as cool as he could have been. If they had just handled him better.
The Mandarin
Next, I will discuss and compare the Mandarin from the comics to the one in the movie. Now, I actually liked Killian as a villain in Iron Man 3. It was interesting how they showcased how terrorist leaders are indeed cowards who hide behind their "ideals" and in the final battle scene, the made Killian really awesome. But aside from that, it was nowhere near as great as it would have been with The actual Mandarin. The Mandarin from the comics was sick, he had the ten rings from an alien world. He was a truly menacing oriental martial artists and terrorist. The Mandarin was a great villain and a great character. Now, Killian is a another amalgamation made up of three components. The Mandarin, Mallen and Aldrich Killian. I already explained who Mandarin was, but Mallen was basically the same guys that Killian was supposed to be in the movie. He had the same powers, and looked similar. As for Aldrich Killian he helped created the Extremis virus and then he killed himself, he only existed for two issues. It is a strange amalgamation of those three, but I do think it kinda works.
I was however upset by the twist, I forgave it later on. But, The Mandarin I knew was butchered into a druggie actor. Granted, Killian was really cool and almost made up for that, but not completely.
Frankly, this is the only major problem with the trilogy. That three fantastic villains got butchered, they were not bad. They were just alright. Now, I'm not a big hardcore comicbook purist like some. But, I do think they ignored potential of three great villains, and instead took the easy way out and got really sloppy with them. Don't think I'm being a hater, because I loved Iron Man 1 & 3, and liked 2. But, they had botched versions of great villains. Now, I really liked the character arc for the hero in all three movies. But they got sloppy with the villains, and hoped that the hero's amazing character arc would make up the difference.
I'm not saying they were bad. I'm just saying that people say that Iron Man has a crappy rogues gallery. When he doesn't, he has a great rogues gallery. Just, in the films they got really sloppy in their handling of them and made them boring and one dimensional. Don't get me wrong, I love the Iron Man trilogy. But they ignored the potential of great villains in order to give our hero more screen time.
Thanks for reading, sound off below if you agree or disagree. I'm open for discussion.