Customer Reviews
By
Kyle Maxwell (REAL NAME)
I've loved Iron Man ever since my first Tales of Suspense comic, so I might not be the most unbiased person to write a review. Still, I'm going to try and be as honest as I possibly can. In some ways, Iron Man 2 improves on the original. For instance, the brawl between Iron Man and War Machine was perfect, and RDJr was even better this time around. However, there were some weak moments. For example, Pepper Potts is almost absent from the movie, and is shrill and unpleasant during her brief appearances. Whiplash has never been a particularly compelling villain, and the movie doesn't do much to make him any more exciting. Also, they really need to ST OP with the "Iron Man fights someone who has the same technology" plots. It's already boring. Plus, I couldn't help but wonder where a drunken hobo managed to get the equipment to build an Arc Reactor. Stark did it in the first movie because he had several billion dollars worth of his own weaponry to cannibalize. How does a homeless Russian manage it? Furthermore, the character of Justin Hammer was silly and played for laughs, which was the wrong move. It had a real "Jim Carrey in Batman Forever" vibe to it. Others have mentioned the unnecessary plot lines, and they're right. We could have done entirely without the "Paladium Poisoning" and the "Under House Arrest by SHIELD" plots, since neither of them really went anywhere, and felt like padding in a movie that didn't need any. I didn't mind the Black Widow showing up, but eventually it felt like we were tripping over minor characters. Also, they're not fooling anyone with the whole "The Avengers don't want Tony Stark" subp lot. None of us believe for a moment that they'd do an Avengers movie without the only Avenger that's proven to be a box-office success. Still, it was a good movie. Perhaps not a GREAT movie like the first one, but at least it wasn't a franchise-killing fiasco like Spiderman 3 or Batman and Robin. Honestly, if none of us had ever seen the original Iron Man, we'd all be talking about how this movie was one of the best Comic Book movies ever. But as it is, it's over-shadowed by it's phenomenal predecessor.
By
! MR. KNOW IT ALL ;-b "DR SHOCK" (TRI STATE AREA) (VINE VOICE)
While Iron Man 2 may not be perfect, it is a very solid and fun sequel. Improvements include better a ction sequences and some great characters added to the franchise. Unfortunately there is a lot going on here and even though it isn't hard to follow, there isn't enough time to give each sub plot the proper screen time it deserves. Oddly enough for a super hero film, I think they could have edited some of the talky scenes down and added a little more Iron Man action. A good example of this is when we meet Natasha Romanova she isn't given much to do and I found myself wondering if she was going to be The Black Widow on screen. She is only in one action sequence(a great one with one of the funniest moments in the film)late in the movie and she and Nick Fury are really only there to set up The Avengers movie. I'm not saying it should be edited out, but there is only so much ground you can cover in two hours. Whiplash is played with gusto by Mickey Rourke, but he doesn't have much screen time either and that seems to be the problem with this film, no one but Tony Stark gets eno ugh screen time. After the first encounter with Whiplash in Monaco on the race track, we don't really get a good dose of Iron man until the final battle, which means there is over an hour of time where there isn't that much action. Considering what I had read about this being an action packed film, I found it to be very talky. This isn't necessarily a bad thing because the characters are well developed and the actors are all really good here. The final battle is very good with some very cool Iron Man destruction and some nifty moves, but it's surprising and anti-climatic when Whiplash is defeated very quickly. In the first film, I thought the final battle was too long and in this one, it just seems to end too abruptly. I'm not bashing this film in any way as it is a very fun film that I will most certainly own the DVD/Blu Ray when it is released, but I think the story may have been a little too ambitious for one film. Overall I give Iron Man 2 a solid B(4 stars)and I thin k Favreau did a very good job all things considered. Of course if you are seeing this in a theater, then stick around until the end of the credits role for a little teaser scene about another Marvel Hero who will be hitting theaters next year.
By
Chris Pandolfi (Los Angeles, CA) (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)
At the end of 2008, I made two bold assertions: (1) That "Iron Man" was one of the year's best films; (2) that "Iron Man" was one of the greatest superhero films ever made. I still believe both to be true. Now we have "Iron Man 2." While it is thoroughly entertaining, it's also a bit conventional when compared to its predecessor, having less of a compelling story but more in th e ways of action, special effects, gadgets, humor, and stunt work. It's a comic book through and through. That's fine by me - what it lacks in introspection it more than makes up for in sheer fun. We have plenty to cheer for, not the least of which is our hero, billionaire industrialist Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.), who when we last left him had shut down the weapon's division of his company to focus on more humanitarian uses for technology. The result was a high tech metal suit equipped with rocket boosters and missile launchers. It's now six months after Stark revealed himself as Iron Man at a press conference. Despite the demands of a United States Senate committee, he refuses to share his technology with the American military, believing that world peace can be maintained only if it's privatized. At this meeting, he humiliates Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell), the CEO of a rival company who has unsuccessfully tried to outdo Stark's technology with his own prototype machin es; in an effort to get ahead, Hammer appeals to Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), a Russian physicist who publically revealed his grudge against Stark by attacking him as he was car racing in Monaco. For as yet unknown reasons, Vanko has constructed an arc reactor very similar to the one implanted in Stark's chest. He has improved the design by attaching whips that surge with bolts of electrical energy. Stark, meanwhile, is realizing that his chest implant, originally constructed as a way to keep him alive, contains an element that's slowly poisoning him. He doesn't handle it well. He acts out. He drinks in excess. He hastily appoints his former personal assistant, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), as the new CEO of his company. If he's to survive, he must replace the core of the implant with an entirely new element, one he has tried but failed to create on his own. Out of the blue comes special agent Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), who suggests that Stark look to his father's rese arch for guidance. New to the cast is Don Cheadle, who replaces Terrence Howard as Stark's dedicated but weary friend Lt. Colonel James Rhodes. Also new is Scarlett Johansson as Stark's newly hired personal assistant Natalie Rushman, who says she's from the company's legal department. Watching this movie, I was quite dazzled by the sights and sounds, and I found the plot engaging in a suspension-of-disbelief kind of way. I did not, however, find it persuasive, as I did the first film, which I felt put a refreshing and thought-provoking spin on the traditional comic book adversary; Stark might have physically battled with the power-hungry Obadiah Stane, but his real enemies were war and injustice, both of which he took part in by selling weapons of mass destruction. This time around, it's much more by the book - a superhero pitted against a madman out for revenge, a fight to the finish that includes a lot of things blowing up, a showcase of digital wizardry and highly chore ographed stunts. There are a number of films that can give you pretty much the same thing. That being said, there's no denying the quality of the performances, especially Downey, whose cocky take on Stark makes the film fun but not jokey. Rockwell is quite good, playing Hammer is if he were Stark's slightly goofier evil twin - comedy relief with a hint of something darker, you might say. Credit also to Rourke, who truly does convey the anger, resentment, and pain his character feels in every one of his scenes. He isn't given all that much screen time, but when he's on, he's on, resonating with a deep, calm, frighteningly low voice and an imposing build. If there is an "Iron Man 3," and I have no doubt that there will be, I can only hope it doesn't follow its predecessor's lead and decline in quality. The original "Iron Man" was a superb film, redefining the superhero genre for both old and new generations of moviegoers. "Iron Man 2" is a great looking and wonderfully perfo rmed sequel, although its approach to the story is routine, more so than I had preferred it to be. Still, you've got to hand it to director Jon Favreau and writer Justin Theroux - they sure know how to entertain an audience. There's an early scene in which Stark, dressed as Iron Man, jumps off a plane, flies through the sky, and lands unharmed in the middle of one of his own lavishly high tech expos in New York City. Throngs of people cheer him on. I suspect the audiences for this movie will do the same when it's over.
By
H. Bala "Me Too Can Read" (Just moved to posh Marina Del Rey, CA - where if you drop a quarter, why, you just keep on walking) (TOP 100 REVIEWER) (REAL NAM E)
There's nothing like that first kiss, yeah, and so even though IRON MAN 2 comes out and unleashes its share of awesomeness, even though it is very much worth a look, the mystery is gone, the expectations met, we've, er, already copped that feel. IRON MAN 2, good as it is, doesn't drop on us like lightning in a bottle, and so it isn't quite as exhilarating. What it does give us is more of that good Robert Downey, Jr. The guy has made the Invincible Iron Man into his own, and I can't see anyone else now as Tony Stark, and I'm betting you can't, either. Downey brings the same devilish, bigger-than-life charisma, that same brash "I'm Tony Stark! Who the eff are you?!" swagger. Tony Stark is brilliant and ego-centric, but he's got good intentions. His heart's in the right place, and so we forgive the rampant narcissism. Plus, he's a fun dude to be around. IRON MAN 2 chronicles Tony's fall from grac e and his redemption. Six months ago Tony Stark told the world that he was Iron Man. But has fame and success gone to his head? He's been more eccentric lately, indulging even more in hedonism lately, and he's conducting the Stark Expo like it's a rock concert (which is actually bloody cool). Certain parties are worried. Iron Man's arrival had gone a ways into ensuring global peace or at least global detente. But six months later, the American government - as embodied in the person of the slimy Senator Stern (Garry Shandling) - is itching to get its paws on the Iron Man tech and, so, Tony has to attend senate hearings. Stark, in his own inimitable manner, blows the hearings out of the water. There's a fatal flaw in the schematics, a gremlin in the wires. Carefree on the outside, on the inside Tony is very concerned. The palladium element in the arc reactor in his chest is gradually poisoning him, and each use of the Iron Man armor accelerates the condition. But he keeps up the pretense, having informed no one of his impending death. Maybe you can't blame the guy for carrying on so. I actually expected this movie to delve into Tony's alcoholism (from the classic story arc in the comics), but we only get a peek at the man's fondness for booze. We do get moments when we see the flamboyant playboy take a sippy, as well as one epic drunken binge at a party (while in armor, no less). This public eff-up sends Tony's credibility plummeting, and that slimy senator's smirk just got even smirkier. Rival industrialist Justin Hammer isn't the Big Bad of the movie, but Sam Rockwell supplies him with a pronounced air of unctuousness, and you hate him. Hammer, fed up with languishing in Stark's shadow, hires a crazed and tattooed Russian physicist to craft his own arsenal of armored suits, and a Russian physicist played by the menacing Mickey Rourke probably would have no choice but to be crazed and tattooed. They don't call Rourke's character by his superv illain code name, but it's Whiplash (with a smidge of Crimson Dynamo thrown in). He nurses a serious grudge against Tony and Tony's father, Howard Stark, who had a falling out with Whiplash's own inventor father. But how does Rourke get away with chewing a toothpick all the time? IRON MAN 2 isn't magic like the first movie and that initial sense of novelty has worn off, but it's still terrific and the scale is bigger. Downey's presence drives the thing, and the fact that we don't mind that Tony Stark is onscreen more than Iron Man says something about the skills set Downey brings to the party. We still get that good banter between him and Gwyneth Paltrow. Don Cheadle takes over from Terrence Howard, and it's like he's always been on board as Rhodey. The f/x is flawless state of the art stuff; there's nothing like heavy metal clashing resoundingly. If you've at all seen the posters and the trailer, then you already know War Machine would make his debut, and he may not be as impressive as the ol' shellhead but, damn, he's got all those big mounted guns. And, for dessert, curvy Scarlett Johansson steps into the franchise as the smoking hot Black Widow and she demonstrates high levels of kickassery. And oh that sexy black leather.... I only wish Pepper Potts were given more stuff to do. Jon Favreau features himself more as Happy Hogan, a chauffer in this incarnation, and I'm not mad at Favreau. What's the point of being director if you can't call your own number once in a while? Meanwhile, IRON MAN 2, in a scene here and there, gets us another step closer to that Avengers movie. Somewhere, executives from DC Comics must be gnashing their teeth, late to the game, lagging behind. The Green Lantern movie had better be something. And, as become a habit with Marvel Studios flicks, stick around until after the closing credits, yeah? Nerd nirvana awaits.
By
Renfield "Up the Irons" (Edmonton, Canada)
I will admit that I was a tad worried about Iron Man 2, because, well let's face it, the first movie was so fantastic that it was almost untouchable. I mean, with the first movie, you had the extraordinary talents of Downey, Howard, Paltrow, Bridges and plenty more anchoring what was an incredible must-see summer slam of a movie. However, seeing the trailers for the second movie made me think "Uh oh, Spider Man 3 all over again." Sequels, especially superhero ones, seem to think that since they bring tons of random crap and characters into the frame, that they are always better, and as excited as I was for this movie, I felt it was going to be another one of those movies. So upon going into the theater, I kept those worries in mind. Well, I can now officially say that those worries didn't prevent me from loving the movie. Remember when Michael Bay tried to accomplish something epic with Transformers 2 with all these new characters and stuff? Well, Jon Faverau has managed to accomplish what Michael Bay never did- make a near-perfect sequel that manages to be just as great as the first. Now like the first, there's not a ton of action, but those scenes where action is absent, Faverau manages to make the most out of them. Complete with great action, laughs and characters, Iron Man 2 is the first big summer movie, and a must see on the big screen for sure, especially if you see it in digital! ***SPOILERS*** Iron Man 2 picks up half a year from when the first movie left off. The Stark Expo has just begun in Flushing, New York, and is to last all year. Tony, in a televised hearing, privatizes world peace. Life seems to be great, except for the fact that the reactor keeping him alive is killing him. This doesn't stop him from being Iron Man though- he continues to go on a s Iron Man for the moment. He even considers replacing Pepper Potts with Natalie Rushman, appointing Potts a CEO to Stark Industries. However, in Russia, Ivan Vanko, the son of physicist Anton Vanko, having just lost his father and jealous of Stark's success, creates his own arc reactor, and becomes Whiplash, a badass villain with two electrified whips that can split anything in half with enough force. His first appearance is at a race in Monaco, and after a brief (and failed) attempt to kill Tony, he meets up with Justin Hammer, Stark's rival, and they both collaborate to build a new technology that will hopefully overthrow Tony. However, with a stint at Tony's house appointing James Rhodes as War Machine, and several other plots, Tony Stark, suffering through personal problems, doesn't know if he really can be Iron Man and resolve all this. Now the plot may not sound that great, but when you see it in the movie, you will be impressed with how complex it is. To not spoil too much, I left some stuff out, because the movie is that great. Aside from the plot, everything else is great. The acting here is fantastic! Robert Downey Jr. has his usual charm here, playing the lovable jerk that is Tony Stark. Replacing Terrence Howard is Don Cheadle, and he does it well! I can't believe I am saying this but I actually preferred him to Howard. Howard was great but wooden in places, whereas Cheadle was great the whole way. And Scarlett Johannson... whoa. When is she NEVER eye candy? As for her performance- this movie proves she is not just another pretty face. Her fight scene is just... mind blowingly amazing! Mickey Rourke gives a a fantastic performance as well, and manages to shine as the villain, Of course, halfway through, the movie takes a break from the action and focuses on some character development- I was worried about it at first hearing but as I was watching the movie, I realized that sometimes, in superhero movies, character development doe s more than whiz-bang action. Don't worry guys, the scenes where action is absent are just as great as the scenes with action. But the action scenes are INCREDIBLE!!!! People are exaggerating the lack of action- the last 20 minutes alone has more action than the first, and is certainly more thrilling than the first too. The climax certainly is a thrill, and I gotta say I had a blast seeing it on the big screen. So in short, Iron Man 2 is a success. I had tons of fun seeing it on the big screen. A great sequel and a great standalone movie, Iron Man 2 is a sequel that truly kicks ass. Whatever worries you may have, I recommend you cast them aside, because you're in for a 2 hour fun ride. So if you wanna see a sequel that truly kicks ass, this movie is it!
By
Ken Kopper (Buffalo, NY)
Iron Man 2 is a rare gem in the world of sequels. I love this movie and I dare say Iron Man 2 Is equal to thr original. We not only see the personal stuggles of Tony Stark we see how he rises above them. We also get a glimpse of a S.H.E.I.L.D movie. Samuel L Jackson is great as Nick Fury and I hope Scarlet Johanson is part of any further Marvel Comics movies. Her action scenes (although rare) were amazing. Also Gweneth Paltrow gives another great performance. Mickey Rourqe was great as Whiplash. A superb villian. Marvel Comics movies tend to be good if not great. Iron Man 2 keeps the greatness going. Watch carefully and you get a quick look of Captain America's sheild.
By
Steve Forsyth "sforsythnoe" (Denton, TX USA) (VINE VOICE) (REAL NAME)
WOW! What happened here!? After such a surprise smash of an original, how could this sequel come off so . . . well, boring? I admit, at first I found the slower pace refreshing. After all, isn't that the direction every other sequel takes? Bigger, louder, faster, less plot? So when the film opened with about twenty or thirty minutes of talk revolving around Tony Stark's insistence he's got "peace privatized" while a senate subcommittee isn't s o sure, I was actually interested. When we saw that Stark was being poisoned by the very tech that was keeping him alive (as Jarvis so conveniently spells out for us slow viewers), again, intriguing . . . Here's the problem - this stuff is supposed to be the setup, NOT the ENTIRE MOVIE! Yes, at the 90 minute mark (literally, I checked my watch) when Stark was STILL dealing with these same issues, I was no longer pleased with the slow pace - I was BEGGING the movie to start doing something interesting! Minus the "race track" sequence (most of which you've already seen in the trailer) the first half of the film has zero Iron Man action (unless you count a drunken brawl between Stark and Rhodey - a glorified barfight). By the time the woefully underused Mickey Rourke FINALLY unleashes his devious plot to assault Ironman with a batch of robots, the film has a mere 20 minutes left to go - and the ensuing climatic battle feels like what it is - a perfunctory, tacked on conclusio n - seemingly included only because the filmmakers begrudgingly admit they are, in fact, making an action movie, and not a dramatic comedy. As such, the final showdown between Ironman and Whiplash takes up all of about two minutes, and then the movie sprints for its closing credits. Also wasted as the lovely Scarlett Johansson, who has, as I suggested in my title, the films only truly enjoyable sequence as she does her Matrix-Infused-Latex-Dominatrix best in taking down a squad of security cops. When a redhead girl's stunt-double brings more excitement to your movie than the titular Iron-clad hero, there is a SERIOUS problem! I think I understand what the problem is - the makers of the first film analyzed the reaction, saw that Robert Downey, Jr. got most of the praise for that film, and decided to build the sequel NOT around bigger and better action, but instead around twice as many opportunities for Downey to quip and mug and annoy other characters. In fact, not only do they give us double the Downey, but they also introduce a rival arms dealer (Sam Rockwell) to do the exact same act, only for evil instead of good. All this means that if you enjoy Downey and Rockwell (who are both great at what they do) and don't mind a film built on their overindulgence, then you might like this sequel. But if you go in expecting a bigger, badder Iron Man, don't . . . this is one of the first sequels I've ever seen that delivers LESS action than its predecessor. As others have suggested, at the end of the day, this film is essentially more a promotion for the supposedly upcoming AVENGERS movie - a film that is constantly being talked about and promised for some as yet unannounced future date. If the further proposed films that are supposed to lead up to AVENGERS are as dull as this one, that day may never come.
No comments:
Post a Comment