Iron Man 2

[Pyro Tramp]

Since the other thread on this topic is ****, thought no harm in making new one....

Just got back from IMAXing it up, as we lucky blighters get it before you! Anyway, will keep this brief as find it hard to say much on the film. It was a bit disappointing, there were only couple action scenes and not much drive to the film. Tony's suit is slowly killing him and there's no cure, until they drop in the deus ex machina which takes up far too much of plot. Most of the central act is just swings and roundabouts, dropping nods here and there with SHIELD and giving bit screen time to underdeveloped baddies. I LOVE Sam Rockwell, fantastically charismatic actor, sadly the writing seemed to restrict much of his flair till towards the end. Mickey Rourke is pretty cool but except for his motivation don't really get too into the character. I don't want to say they were wasted, but more perfunctory. Tony's crisis through the film has some nice scenes, the party particularly but his friendship with Rhodes wasn't really shown much strength but Downey nails the character again. Cheadle does decent job replacing Howard but the role isn't beefy enough for much difference to be noticed. Scarlett Johansen was a pleasant surprise but her character seemed pretty pointless and her gracing action scene was too reminiscent of Nightwalker in X2. As was the final battle to the original Iron Man, robots fighting but this one was over far too quick.

The film was handled by Favreau well enough, despite the fact he has far too much time on screen. The focus on the film was Tony's crisis but has an underwhelming resolution which leaves a lot of plodding middle redundant. I think a bit too much time was given in leading to The Avengers and, not that i know much of the comics but a more satisfying arc would be the 'demon in the bottle' alcoholism narrative. The climatic battle was ended with another deus ex moment and the confrontation with Rourke was far too short.

3_5

[Powdered Water]

I gave the first one a 4, so if this one rates a 3.5... I can live with that.

[terapattrik]

Yes, i also rate it less than iron man 1. Most of the time we have seen that second part or sequel are very successful. Like Lost world comparing to Jurassic park.

[Sleezy]

I can't believe they're not tapping the alcoholism angle. It was always the humanist side of Tony Stark in the comics, and you can't ask for a better shaman to bring that out than Robert Downey Jr. himself. I know Favreau and crew don't want to rain on everybody's parade with a Leaving Las Vegas remake, but it doesn't have to be terribly dreary (and really, when was the last time Downey acted anything remotely resembling "dreary" anyway?)

[nebbit]

Can't wait to see it :yup:

[Pyro Tramp]

I can't believe they're not tapping the alcoholism angle. It was always the humanist side of Tony Stark in the comics, and you can't ask for a better shaman to bring that out than Robert Downey Jr. himself. I know Favreau and crew don't want to rain on everybody's parade with a Leaving Las Vegas remake, but it doesn't have to be terribly dreary (and really, when was the last time Downey acted anything remotely resembling "dreary" anyway?)

Yeahw en he wsa orignally cast thought it was shoe in for ythat story line. alas no. it's replaced by his suit slowly killing him witouy any addiction angle

[John McClane]

Yeahw en he wsa orignally cast thought it was shoe in for ythat story line. alas no. it's replaced by his suit slowly killing him witouy any addiction angleSpeaking of alcohol...:D

[Sleezy]

:laugh:

[Pyro Tramp]

Ahem

[thegreatone]

Since the other thread on this topic is ****, thought no harm in making new one....

Just got back from IMAXing it up, as we lucky blighters get it before you! Anyway, will keep this brief as find it hard to say much on the film. It was a bit disappointing, there were only couple action scenes and not much drive to the film. Tony's suit is slowly killing him and there's no cure, until they drop in the deus ex machina which takes up far too much of plot. Most of the central act is just swings and roundabouts, dropping nods here and there with SHIELD and giving bit screen time to underdeveloped baddies. I LOVE Sam Rockwell, fantastically charismatic actor, sadly the writing seemed to restrict much of his flair till towards the end. Mickey Rourke is pretty cool but except for his motivation don't really get too into the character. I don't want to say they were wasted, but more perfunctory. Tony's crisis through the film has some nice scenes, the party particularly but his friendship with Rhodes wasn't really shown much strength but Downey nails the character again. Cheadle does decent job replacing Howard but the role isn't beefy enough for much difference to be noticed. Scarlett Johansen was a pleasant surprise but her character seemed pretty pointless and her gracing action scene was too reminiscent of Nightwalker in X2. As was the final battle to the original Iron Man, robots fighting but this one was over far too quick.

The film was handled by Favreau well enough, despite the fact he has far too much time on screen. The focus on the film was Tony's crisis but has an underwhelming resolution which leaves a lot of plodding middle redundant. I think a bit too much time was given in leading to The Avengers and, not that i know much of the comics but a more satisfying arc would be the 'demon in the bottle' alcoholism narrative. The climatic battle was ended with another deus ex moment and the confrontation with Rourke was far too short.

3_5

3.5/5 is rather generous of you. ;)

In retrospect, aside from a few quirky jokes, the only thing I liked was Favreau getting his ass whooped throughout the movie. :D

[Pyro Tramp]

It's probably a bit higher as i really wanted to like it more and it wasn't objectively bad.

[thegreatone]

Agreed, it wasn't bad. But it should have been so very better. Like you said, too much time wasted in giving a base to The Avengers. Most of the cast remained under-utilized and consequently under-achieved.
Too much hype....Too little to show :(

Disappointing!

[jrs]

Just saw this. I agree with everyone on here when they say this wasn't up to par with the original. Aside from the scene at Monaco which takes place 25 minutes into the picture and takes up only 10 minutes, the last 20 minutes of Iron Man 2 was better than the entire film itself. The villian this time, Ivan Vanko/Whiplash, (played by Mickey Rourke) was executed well yet his finish was kind of cut short. Mickey Rourke did do a fine job I have to admit. He actually went to an actual russian prison to study his role. The role of Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow‎ on the other hand was kind of bleak and short handed. Her other undercover character Natalie Rushman, didn't have much purpose either. I don't know why they're considering Black Widow as a spin-off because it certainly would be pointless.
As for Iron Man 3? I am not as psyched for it as I was for Iron Man 2. Jon Favreau unfortunately didn't deliver this time. Something tells me it's good that he's not directing The Avengers.

[Pyro Tramp]

Joss Whedon is the one thing i'm looking forward to in The Avengers.

Everyone seems to cite the Monaco scene but driving through the F1 cars just seemed far too ludicrous for me to buy into the scene. Completely took me out.

[will.15]

The drinking angle was introduced late in the comic book series, while a heart problem was the early series conflict, so I don't have a problem not playing up the booze so early. If the Iron Man movies keep getting made, there is plenty of time for Tony Stark to become an alcoholic. Seeing Robert Downey in interviews, what a load of crap he's become, talking about his insistence of keeping the movies PG 13 while keeping the character "real," as if anyone making these movies is looking for an R.

[Powdered Water]

I can't believe they're not tapping the alcoholism angle. It was always the humanist side of Tony Stark in the comics, and you can't ask for a better shaman to bring that out than Robert Downey Jr. himself. I know Favreau and crew don't want to rain on everybody's parade with a Leaving Las Vegas remake, but it doesn't have to be terribly dreary (and really, when was the last time Downey acted anything remotely resembling "dreary" anyway?)

It's such a bummer isn't it? Most of the old comics were so good in the story department. And chock full of them to boot and yet when making the transition to film very few of them follow the actual story that made them popular in the first place. F***ing travesty, really.

[tramp]

The drinking angle was introduced late in the comic book series, while a heart problem was the early series conflict, so I don't have a problem not playing up the booze so early. If the Iron Man movies keep getting made, there is plenty of time for Tony Stark to become an alcoholic. Seeing Robert Downey in interviews, what a load of crap he's become, talking about his insistence of keeping the movies PG 13 while keeping the character "real," as if anyone making these movies is looking for an R.

what's wrong with that? He wants kids to be able to see the movie. I think that's a good thing.

I really like how Iron Man is a bit of a jerk at times and it seemed that birthday party was a bit of the alcoholism angle.

[Kenup17]

I quite enjoyed the movie, Downey Jr. is my favorite "Marvel's Superhero" actor, but many things in this movie were under-developed and left me disappointed:

- Scarlett's character wasn't explored at all, it seemed that they just needed more sexy ladies in the movie (at least that they got right :p)
- Mickey Rourke was great as Ivan Vanko, but there was not much back story for his character, some character only briefly explains his origins and his father's.
- The final fight was ridiculously short, what happened, they ran out of film?
And last, but not least:
- What was Stan Lee's cameo?! If I had blinked at the wrong time, I'd have missed it.
- It was only me or they didn't even mention the names "Black Widow" or "Whiplash" in the movies?

On the other hand, Pepper Potts and Rhodey got more space this time, and the actors handled it quite well. Overall, the movie is quite entertaining, with some nice acting, but for comics fans, its shallowness is a let-down.

The scene where Coulson finds Cap. America's shield was IMO by far the most hilarious in the whole movie

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_FHuDIOk2je0/SkvUfU7TUaI/AAAAAAAAACg/176zKfvcugY/s200/article-0-05493830000005DC-383_468x418.jpg "I want my bird!"

[meatwadsprite]

- What was Stan Lee's cameo?! If I had blinked at the wrong time, I'd have missed it.

He's Larry King

I saw it yesterday. (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=619123) Pretty awesome.

[meatwadsprite]

what's wrong with that? He wants kids to be able to see the movie. I think that's a good thing.

I really like how Iron Man is a bit of a jerk at times and it seemed that birthday party was a bit of the alcoholism angle.

He's drinking a lot in this one so I could see the alcholism becoming a bigger factor later on.

[Sleezy]

I am not as psyched for it as I was for Iron Man 2. Jon Favreau unfortunately didn't deliver this time. Something tells me it's good that he's not directing The Avengers.

I wouldn't place the blame too heavily on Jon Favreau, at least not yet. I'm guessing that with all these satellite films leading up to The Avengers, as well as the gargantuan success of Iron Man, Marvel likely sunk its claws much deeper into this sequel. Gotta have this plotline, gotta have that character...

The same thing happened with the Spider-Man films. Sam Raimi had a good thing going, but those films were money makers, and it was only a matter of time before Marvel and Sony took over. You can bet that on Spider-Man 3, there were more than a few big-wig executives pulling the levers.

It happened with Lord of the Rings, too. Everything was fine until some putz at New Line started telling Peter Jackson the films needed comic relief. Why can't studios just learn to put up and let filmmakers do what they do?

[meatwadsprite]

So you're saying Treebeard and Gimli are stupid ?

[Sleezy]

So you're saying Treebeard and Gimli are stupid ?

I'm saying Gimli was reduced to a buffoon, yes. (Treebeard was pretty much in line with the character from the book.)

Also, there's a lot of pseudo-contemporary dialogue in the second and third films that feel out of place, like they were trying to be more accessible to a more mainstream audience. It's not all bad, as the films are still great, but you can see the studio looming over them much more than in Fellowship.

[jrs]

I wouldn't place the blame too heavily on Jon Favreau, at least not yet.

You're right I suppose. It's mostly Justin Theroux's fault.

[Sleezy]

Yeah, when you hire the guys who wrote Children of Men to write the first film, Justin Theroux is hardly an upgrade to write the sequel.

[earlsmoviepicks]

i thought it was pretty good. I would have liked to have seen Sam Rockwell's part written a bit jucier for him. Also I think Scarlett J's appearance was a little too much sugar in our coffee. (can you tell I'm having my breakfast now?) Gwyneth irks me in this for some reason. The movie did however stimulate very long and detailed discussions with the kiddies as to personal weapon preferences and combinations.

[Yoda]

Saw this a couple of weeks ago, but didn't get around to finishing a review until this evening. Note: review has roughly 34% more smarm than usual.

Iron Man 2

http://www.movieforums.com/images/main/iron_man_2_main.jpg (http://www.movieforums.com/reviews/iron_man_2.html)

The action is fun and dense, though not terribly inventive. The bulk of every conflict still involves giant hunks of metal clanging into each other while beams of light and energy fly around chaotically. If you can't afford a ticket, you can simulate these scenes by turning on a strobe light and putting a pile of silverware in the dryer. ...READ MORE

3.5

[Ash_Lee]

To be honest I felt a bit let down by Iron Man, just as I was with the first film. All the best parts seem to be at the beginning; in Iron Man it was Tony Stark getting captured and building the suit, and in Iron Man 2 it was Iron Man's grand entrance at Flushing Meadows and Mickey Rourkes attack at the F1 race.

And is anyone else getting a bit fed up of the whole "Villain-Must-Die-at-the-End" thing in comic book films? I thought it was a huge mistake killing of Jeff Bridges in the first film, and Rourke's death just seemed to happen this time instead of mean anything. I honestly thought that Iron Man and War Machine's palm-beam maneuver would fail miserably and Rourke would still be standing, ready to take the fight to the next level.

The acting and casting, as always, is great however.

2/5 from me

[Gunny]

The first Iron Man was above average. The sequel? Absolutely awful. I didn't even finish it. I turned it off when Iron Man was in the club in uniform and dancing with everyone on the dance floor.

Garbage.

[spudracer]

There were many problems with Iron Man 2. One, the choice of writer. Clearly, they were looking for more bang bang, less talk talk. Secondly, the "Demon in a Bottle" storyline from the comic is by far the darkest in the series (that I'm aware of). It should have been handled better. Of course, with Iron Man being a comic not as mainstream as Spider-Man or the X-Men, the choice in villains needs to be more mainstream (Crimson Dynamo, Mandarin).

It was the subtle decisions made that really hurt this film, IMO. As I've stated before, Iron Man was clever, fun and exciting. Iron Man 2, while at times fun and exciting, was never clever. Some of the dialogue, was that "zing" that was all over Iron Man, "She did a spread on Tony, last year" "And she wrote a story on me, as well." However, it wasn't enough to hold the movie up to the level of the first film.

[MadMikeyD]

I remember reading somewhere (though it may have just been fan conjecture) that Favreau and Downey originally wanted to cover the "Demon in the Bottle" storyline through Iron Man 2 and 3. However, with The Avengers coming in between the second and third films, they couldn't leave Stark an alcoholic at the end of the second. If I remember correctly (I never read a lot of Iron Man comics), the "Demon in the Bottle" storyline built slowly over time, so I wouldn't rule it out of future movies, if the franchise continues beyond the third installment.

[iluv2viddyfilms]

I can't believe they're not tapping the alcoholism angle. It was always the humanist side of Tony Stark in the comics, and you can't ask for a better shaman to bring that out than Robert Downey Jr. himself. I know Favreau and crew don't want to rain on everybody's parade with a Leaving Las Vegas remake, but it doesn't have to be terribly dreary (and really, when was the last time Downey acted anything remotely resembling "dreary" anyway?)

Good call. I just posted a review of it my thread, but I agree it would have been nice to explore that humanistic side of him more, or at least the humanistic side of Rourke as the revenge seeking villain. Maybe more of his backstory.

Anyway Downey was a bit dreary as Chaplin.

[Uncle Y]

Seeing Captain America's Shield and Thor's hammer was a cool bonus.