
How do we love Iron Man? (That's Robert Downey, Jr. as Himself.) Let us count the ways. He's the most satisfying superhero since Terminator.
While I agree with Peter Hartlaub that few things are harder to come by than a good superhero flick, with two exceptions my nominations for Best. Supers. Ever. diverge from his. The Incredibles is on my list. Likewise Superman II. Then Terminator. RoboCop. And Minority Report (the pre-cogs are supers, are they not?) I would add Alien and Aliens, however, strictly speaking, Lt. Ripley is not a superheroine -- she lacks that cosmic additive -- but rather an action heroine.
Since we're strictly speaking, is Iron Man, a self-made hero, a superhero? Are there experts out there who can define the difference between a super and a mere action hero? And if you're not an expert, what is your favorite super movie -- and why? One of the reasons I like Iron Man is though he is physically compromised, he's not depressed, an affliction shared by so many supers.

Comments (17)
Iron Man is definitely a super-hero and the pre cogs from Minority Report are definitely not. A super hero is defined by having abilities that defy nature whether or not they are gained from technology and also acting in a heroic manner. The pre cogs do nothing particularly heroic in minority report all though they have psychic abilites. In that lose definition you could call John Smith from The Dead Zone a superhero. You'd have a better argument that Batman is not a superhero as his abilities are really just an extension of his genius. Although he has some nifty gadgets, body armor and a cool car he has not given himself the ability to fly or do anything like lift tons over his head.
Posted by E.Knight | May 1, 2008 2:49 PM
Posted on May 1, 2008 14:49
Really together superheroes have cool muse/consorts, like Cameron Diaz in "The Mask" or Kirsten Dunst in "Spider Man". Unless they themslves are f superheroes, as Cate Blanchett's Galadriel.
Posted by JDM | May 1, 2008 3:09 PM
Posted on May 1, 2008 15:09
I'm looking forward to seeing Iron Man myself on Saturday. I've seen some of the trailers and it looks interesting. Whomever decided to cast Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark was a genius. He has just the right amount of smart aleck for the role.
However, I have to say that any Best Superhero Movie list is woefully incomplete if it doesn't have "Batman Begins" on it.
In my opinion, they shouldn't have even started the Batman franchise until Christian Bale was old enough to play the role. The only person who really did the part justice in the previous manifestation of the Batman franchise was Val Kilmer, and they could only get him to do it once. Michael Keaton was okay, and George Clooney, well, I have to follow my mother's rule and remember that if you can't say something nice, say nothing at all.
Let's just say, he shouldn't give up his drama gig or the "Ocean's 11" franchise.
Posted by Denise | May 1, 2008 10:56 PM
Posted on May 1, 2008 22:56
EKnight,
I'm very interested in your definition of a superhero. Ok, like me, you think the super needs to possess some cosmic additive. (Which is why I think the precogs qualify.) But the precogs are not the dramatic center of "Minority Report," so is that why you disqualify them? And where do we classify Lt. Ripley? Do we have a Dawrin who can give us a working definition here?
C
Posted by Carrie | May 2, 2008 11:37 AM
Posted on May 2, 2008 11:37
You say that you like Downey's "Iron Man" because he's not depressed. Are you aware of Jonathan Lethem's list of best depressed superheroes? See: http://www.jonathanlethem.com/depressed_superheroes.html
Posted by anon | May 2, 2008 11:41 AM
Posted on May 2, 2008 11:41
Hilarious, Anon. And I meant to write "Darwin" in the prior post.
Posted by Carrie | May 2, 2008 11:43 AM
Posted on May 2, 2008 11:43
Carrie, I'd like to think that, these days, there is no set definition of what constitutes a Super Hero, that it varies from person to person, based on subjective tastes. It used to be that the expression Super Hero conjured up thoughts of bulked-up guys like Steve Reeves and Schwarzenegger exclusively. I like the trend of normal, more readily identifiable Super Heros which, I guess, started when Burton cast Michael Keaton as Batman (quite a stretch and risk at the time). Now we have the likes of Christian Bale, Robert Downey, Jr., Edward Norton and Toby Maguire, guys you might meet on the street, not necessarily in some parallel universe.
Posted by Joe | May 2, 2008 1:10 PM
Posted on May 2, 2008 13:10
I think that the technology exists to use hail in creative ways.
Water conservation could be achieved by banning ice machines in states where hail is excessive. Those states could also store hail in freezers and export it to states that are afflicted with
draught. In fact, those 'hail producing' states could actually realize a profit which could result in lower property taxes.
Posted by Rocco Timmons | May 2, 2008 1:44 PM
Posted on May 2, 2008 13:44
huh?
Posted by JDM | May 2, 2008 2:35 PM
Posted on May 2, 2008 14:35
Terrific topic.
I imagine most people would say a superhero is a hero (but who counts as a “hero”; do anti-heroes count as heroes?** See below) who is endowed with super-human, super-natural (though not necessarily in the god & angels sense, of course) powers or qualities. Often they are elected by a higher authority or by fate – in the Greco-Roman sense of the term – to take on their given mission etc. (If you hesitate to accept the power, then you don’t thirst for power for its own sake.)
Sometimes Their power is both a curse and a boon. (Superman had to lose his family and his entire universe to receive his bounty.)
I think that is sort of what most people would say.
But, I’m not sure I’d agree with one of Carrie Rickey's assumptions: that if one is “self-made” then one can’t be a superhero. That the power and mission must be bestowed upon the super hero. Batman is self-made, though you could argue that uncontrollable, powerful, uncaring events in his life (Greco-roman fate) made him, elected him.
I think a good test case is John Maclane from die hard.
He is not a superhero. Close though
I think it’s because he has real downtime when he can just be john. Superheroes must be who they are 24-7. Their downtime is pretence (bruce wayen). They exist for nothing else than to be superheroes.
Footnote:
So who’s a hero to begin with?
Do anti-heroes count as "heroes"; can they be superheroes?
E.G. the many dark, amoral anti-heroes that are bigger than ever in the world of comic books – EG The Punisher. He kills. Every single ‘bad guy’ no matter how innocuous to avenge the murder of his family.
i.e. must heroes represent moral ideals? (they did in pre-WWII pop culture.)
Cheers,
Tirdad Derakhshani
Posted by Anonymous | May 2, 2008 5:36 PM
Posted on May 2, 2008 17:36
Stunning movie - make sure you sit through the credits for a terrific surprise - cast perfectly. But Tony Stark (Iron Man) is beyond depressed. He's an alcoholic whose next filmic venture will see him spiraling out of control. And as evidenced in the first film, his pre-hero life was hugely empty.
A quick defense of George Clooney as Batman. The script was atrocious; Clooney actually did a terrific job trying to keep his head above the horrific dialogue and failed plot. It's a shame that he's so often blamed for the filmic elements he couldn't control.
Posted by JC Roberts | May 3, 2008 6:50 AM
Posted on May 3, 2008 06:50
Who Cares!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Anonymous | May 5, 2008 7:39 AM
Posted on May 5, 2008 07:39
I hate to bring up old news here, but the art films at the Ritz Voorhees are down to only four screens. Sad.
Posted by Jan | May 5, 2008 4:51 PM
Posted on May 5, 2008 16:51
Anonymous:
You says, Who Cares!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You actually meant to say, Who Cares???????????????
Posted by Mike | May 6, 2008 5:15 PM
Posted on May 6, 2008 17:15
Iron Man was practically flawless as a super hero flick; it drops pretty obvious hints that would indicate a sequel as well... i'm thinking the next one should be equally great
Posted by patrick | May 7, 2008 12:32 AM
Posted on May 7, 2008 00:32
this suck ass
Posted by terrance | May 7, 2008 1:13 PM
Posted on May 7, 2008 13:13
Agree with Tirdad's comment:
"...But, I’m not sure I’d agree with one of Carrie Rickey's assumptions: that if one is “self-made” then one can’t be a superhero. That the power and mission must be bestowed upon the super hero. Batman is self-made, though you could argue that uncontrollable, powerful, uncaring events in his life (Greco-roman fate) made him, elected him..."
Likewise, the same applies to Iron Man.
Bruce Wayne & Tony Stark are mere mortals.
These both would be self-made 'superheros'.
Posted by Jay | May 8, 2008 1:42 PM
Posted on May 8, 2008 13:42