there was anything more -ist than your average superhero movie, I really didn't see it.

Yeah, I'm with amych.

Edit: Which is to say that there were the requisite moments that made me roll my eyes, but nothing beyond any other movie out there.

So yeah, it strikes me as terribly likely (again, without having seen it yet) that Tony Stark is meant to be misogynistic, but that does not meant the film is misogynistic.

I've read many arguments that, *because* the main character is a sexist pig (at least, at the beginning), the movie is sexist. I don't agree.

Especially since Pepper is actually, like, useful and stuff. And doesn't swoon and fall into Tony's arms at a moment's notice.

But she's just an assistant! The movie could have made her an engineer*, or a hacker** instead of just a secretary! And when she had her Big Climactic Moment, she got all irrational and told Tony she couldn't do it because it might kill him!***

(Those are more arguments from the blogverse as to why it's a sexist movie.)

*No, they couldn't have.

**No, they couldn't have.

***If you think Rhody wouldn't have said the same thing, perhaps coded in a manly way, you're really kidding yourself. The Delay of Destroying the Flabotnum is a time-honored trope in action movies, regardless of who's doing the delaying.

The arguments seem to say "How dare you make a comic-book movie that reflects the content of the comic book!"

I mean, how many people object to Alfred's presence in Batman?

Right?

(besides, well, the fact that Tony Stark is a womanizer...and that's not portrayed as a good thing, so...).

Yeah, exactly. It's a pretty basic part of the character concept that Tony is Billionaire Playboy As Asshole, as opposed to Billionaire Playboy As Charming Man of Mystery. (Next up? Billionaire Playboy As Roaring Drunk . What will the blogs say?)

I thought women were fairly absent in the movie, but they certainly weren't in refrigerators.

I mean, how many people object to Alfred's presence in Batman?

To be fair, if Alfred were a nubile young female servant, I might have some issues.

I've read many arguments that, *because* the main character is a sexist pig (at least, at the beginning), the movie is sexist. I don't agree.

That's like saying a movie about Hitler promotes Naziism.

And, fuck, I just Godwinned already. Dammit.

And when she had her Big Climactic Moment, she got all irrational and told Tony she couldn't do it because it might kill him!

How DARE she care about someone else's welfare!

The arguments seem to say "How dare you make a comic-book movie that reflects the content of the comic book!"

Well, comic books can certainly be sexist (at best) and downright misogynistic (at worst). But I don't think Iron Man (the movie) was bad in that respect. I don't how the comic fares.

I don't how the comic fares.

Kinda dull, mostly. The movie is much better than any of the comics I've ever picked up, although I'd be happy to be proven wrong, since the character kind of kicks ass.

Haven't seen it yet (maybe after Hec's next paycheck we can go to the semi-local biggish indie house with the excellent vintage posters in the lobby and the concessions stand selling fancy coffees and chicken-apple sausage and veggie dogs), but, even overly sensitive and tetchy as I am, I'd be inclined to stand with Teppy and amych and Dana just on principle.

I love Last Crusade. It...might actually be my favorite. I remember watching Raiders of the Lost Ark again several years ago and finding it kind of...slow.

Kids these days....

Ha. You don't even know. Emmett has been watching the ads and is completely jazzed about getting his hands on the Indy Jones Lego game, but he thinks the movies all look flat-out Bad and he will never, never watch any of them because of their obvious stenchy badness. Pointing out that Indy is played by Han Solo gave him a moment's pause, but only just. What is a parent to do?

Kinda dull, mostly. The movie is much better than any of the comics I've ever picked up, although I'd be happy to be proven wrong, since the character kind of kicks ass.

My familiarity with the character comes solely from The Ultimates.

I mean, how many people object to Alfred's presence in Batman?

To be fair, if Alfred were a nubile young female servant, I might have some issues.

I don't see how the movie could have gotten around the source material, though. Pepper at least belongs in the movie, unlike [whatever Katie Holmes' character in Batman was named] in Batman Begins. There's no canonical basis (wow, that sounds pretentious, and yet I'm leaving it in), and she served absolutely no function in the movie.

Movie-version of Mary Jane? USELESS. It pains me to say it, but she is.

Pepper Potts has got some serious utility. Tony Stark would have ended up dead at least twice (possibly 3 times) if not for her.