Iron Man 3 (2013)

"When Tony Stark's world is torn apart by a formidable terrorist called the Mandarin, he starts an odyssey of rebuilding and retribution."

Since I reviewed the original "Iron Man" movie years ago and then decided not to ever review "Iron Man 2" because it was a load of arse, I can't say that I was expecting anything more out of this second sequel. With such a low opinion of this dreck, I wasn't disappointed either. "Iron Man 3" is yet another big-budget, kiddified superhero movie for tweenagers and 40-year-old comicbook nerds who still live in their parents' basement.

The funny thing is that even I kind of enjoyed it in places although the story is really only a cobbled together version of elements from "Batman Forever", "The Dark Knight Rises", and Pierce Brosnan era James Bond with loads of CGI robots and explosions just for the hell of it. To say that 'Iron Man 3" is like a Michael Bay film but with slightly better dialogue is the best way I can think of describing it.

As usual, lapses in logic and plot holes abound, characterisation is minimal except for Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), and the acting skills of everyone except Robert Downey Jr. are completely lost among all the bang, boom, bang and special effects. There's nothing really wrong with any of that in a Summer movie though so it's not worth criticism. This isn't depressingly dull Oscar material after all.

I liked seeing Rebecca Hall from "The Awakening" (2011) even with an American accent. There are a lot better uses which that sexy mouth of hers could be put to instead of over rhotacization, but she does a good job nonetheless. Between her and Stephanie Szostak, there's a bit of a battle going on as to who is the hottest actress in the movie. Sorry, Pepper Potts fans, but until the very end of the movie, it's never likely to be Gwyneth Paltrow.

Guy Pearce is okay as Edward Nygma, I mean Aldrich Killian, and it's a shame that he never made more films in the same vein as "L.A. Confidential" when he was top of his game. Seeing a great actor like this, and also Ben Kingsley, reduced to playing about in movies for little kids is sad. Paul Bettany only used for the voice of a computer? That's just a crime.

If you're looking for a fun night out with lots of action, nothing heavy to think about except the nauseating patriotic messages, and the kind of world-travelling changes of location like Bond movies used to have, then "Iron Man 3" is for you. You'll get a bit of a post-movie buzz out of it for sure.

If you leave before the end credits, there is even the false hope for a moment that this is the last we'll see of Iron Man getting everything destroyed and then putting it all back together again for a while. That's something pretty great in and of itself.

The Avengers (2012)

It appears that all the movie review bloggers are nerding out over this but I really don't understand the attraction.

For a start, it has nothing to do with John Steed and Emma Peel.

It has even less to do with Gambit and Purdey.

I don't really care about the 1998 version of "The Avengers" and neither did anyone else at the time, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

"The Avengers" is obviously something to do with comic book characters which I have no interest in.

It would be like comparing apples to oranges.

I won't be watching it because I'm not 12.

It also doesn't have Spider-Man in it.

Iron Man (2008)

This was obviously a big box office success but I wasn't all that impressed. It's the best Marvel adaptation so far other than Spider-man but they tried to pack far too much in.

As you can tell from the official Marvel biography, no wonder it was all so conflated.

Robert Downey, Jr., was amusing enough as Tony Stark and I expect the comic nerds will think he was perfect for the role. I never liked Iron Man as a superhero and have no real clue how much like the comic book character he is. I was much more into the X-men and Ghost Rider and I haven't been impressed by any of their silver screen portrayals so far.

Anyway, as I said, it tries to pack too much in. I think it's over two hours long (or at least it felt like it) but because of the pacing it all feels very shallow. You don't really get to see Iron Man's famous heart being created and it strains all credibility that he can make the Iron Man suit in a week out of bits and pieces of his existing weapons.

It's not something to really think too hard about anyway though. Let's face it, we're talking about a flying robotic suit of armour here that gives the wearer superhuman powers. At this point anyone looking for realism should really go elsewhere.

The action sequences are what sell this thing. It's a mix of CGI and practical effects but mainly CGI. It's on the same level as "Transformers" so kids will love it. I found it all far too rushed.

Characterisation was two dimensional at best and there was no chemistry between anybody that made you care one iota about them. Most of the dialogue was cringeworthy especially any scenes involving Gwyneth Paltrow.

I'll give it 4 out of 10. It has no rewatchability factor whatsoever and was just on the wrong side of annoying for me to enjoy. If I want to see robots fighting robots then I'll watch "Robocop" again instead.