PDA

View Full Version : Iron Man 2


BreakABone
04-27-2010, 01:17 AM
This is an early thread, but reviews are coming in and they don't sound too positive.

http://www.heyuguys.co.uk/2010/04/27/review-iron-man-2


Overall, I don’t think Iron Man 2 is anywhere near as good as the first film, It’s let down by the amount it’s trying to squeeze in to the movie with the Avengers story and all the new additional characters but overall it’s certainly going to please some but will equally bemuse others.

http://slashingtheseats.net/2010/04/27/iron-man-2/

To sum up; Marvel had greater creative control, the cast are all strong actors, and Favreau has always produced decent work in the past, so what went wrong remains a mystery, but it’s one that needs to be solved quickly if we’re to hold out hope for Joss Wheedon’s Avengers, or even Iron Man 3. This is all flash and bang, with none of the neat fanboy winks that fleshed out the original.

Strongly in need of a reboot, Iron Man 2 is as confused and disillusioned as it’s protagonist. With some judicious re-editing and an extended running time there’s hope, but the suit needs some serious retooling if we’re expected to shell out to see old shell head a third time.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2010/04/27/iron-man-2-world-s-first-review-mind-numbingly-dull-chaotic-and-unwatchable-115875-22214759/


I don’t know what went on behind the scenes while the film was being made but rumours of reshoots and recuts have been swirling around the internet. Was this the film director Jon Favreau wanted to make? I doubt it. After Elf, the underrated Zathura and the first instalment, he’s proved himself a capable pair of hands. Perhaps the blame lies higher up the studio food chain.


Whoever’s at fault, if Favreau still wishes to make the series a trilogy, this is a franchise in serious need of rewiring.

~Edit~
More Reviews
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44828


http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=135908

Verdict
Rourke and Rockwell make satisfying, complementary villains, while Downey Jr. delivers again. Shame this sequel feels inessential, over-busy and a little, well, mechanical. Nothing they can’t put right for Iron Man 3.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film-reviews/iron-man-2-film-review-1004086551.story

Well, that didn't take long. Everything fun and terrific about "Iron Man," a mere two years ago, has vanished with its sequel. In its place, "Iron Man 2" has substituted noise, confusion, multiple villains, irrelevant stunts and misguided story lines. A film series that started out with critical and commercial success will have to settle for only the latter with this sequel. Robert Downey Jr.'s return as Tony Stark/Iron Man will assure that.

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117942625.html?categoryid=31&cs=1

"Iron Man 2" isn't as much fun as its predecessor, but by the time the smoke clears, it'll do. Much like "The Dark Knight," this Paramount release brings an enormous stash of goodwill to the party, thanks to a well-crafted origin tale whose popularity fueled anticipation for a follow-up. Yet while the first go-round for this lesser-known Marvel hero benefited from its freshness and visual flair, the beats here are more familiar, the pacing more uneven. Given the demand, though, that will hardly matter, and this armored adventure promises to be a money-making machine that clicks on all cylinders.

Default
04-28-2010, 06:36 PM
Sucks. I guess it's to be expected though - if you look back at the trailers there's definitly a lot of stuff going on. Comic book movies never do well trying to fit what's basically huge crossover stories or arcs into single movies. The best of the bunch keep things straight-forward and almost simple, when it all break things down. Still, I'm sure this'll be very enjoyable

Xantar
04-28-2010, 08:09 PM
I don't care about Hey U Guys or Slashing the Seats and I REALLY don't give a flying rat's ass what Ain't It Cool thinks about anything. Some of those others are somewhat respectable publications, though. I've never read a Variety review, but they aren't amateurs.

So meh. The movie is review proof. But it could just turn out that allowing comic book writers to write the movie was a bad idea.

Side disclosure: I happen to think that having comic book writers write anything other than comic books is almost always a bad idea. See also Heroes, Smallville, The Spirit.

Angrist
04-29-2010, 06:34 AM
I could have seen it yesterday, but we decided on Clash of the Titans instead.

They showed the trailer for IM2, it looked entertaining...

Teuthida
04-29-2010, 09:03 AM
Side disclosure: I happen to think that having comic book writers write anything other than comic books is almost always a bad idea. See also Heroes, Smallville, The Spirit.

The main comic book fellow on Heroes also writes crappy comic books...and was fired from Heroes before the last season. Believe the only couple decent Smallville eps were when they brought in a comic writer (Geoff Johns who got his start working on Superman 2) to write them.

And then there's Lost.

And Batman the Animated series. And JLU. And Tiny Toon Adventures. And Ben 10.

Professor S
04-29-2010, 12:34 PM
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/iron_man_2/

Right now it has a 76% rating at RT, with some very good reviews in the mix. I'm not sure why everyone seems to be concentrating on the negative reviews.

BreakABone
04-29-2010, 12:43 PM
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/iron_man_2/

Right now it has a 76% rating at RT, with some very good reviews in the mix. I'm not sure why everyone seems to be concentrating on the negative reviews.

Rotten Tomatoes is a weird site to use.

Since they only believe something is good or bad, and not so much the variance in those two.

It has a RT score of 76%, but the average review places it at about 65%, which is about average/crust of failing in school.

Xantar
04-29-2010, 02:19 PM
The main comic book fellow on Heroes also writes crappy comic books...and was fired from Heroes before the last season. Believe the only couple decent Smallville eps were when they brought in a comic writer (Geoff Johns who got his start working on Superman 2) to write them.

And then there's Lost.

And Batman the Animated series. And JLU. And Tiny Toon Adventures. And Ben 10.

I'll concede the DCAU, but Lost? You really want to hold that up as an example of good writing? The plot on that show is a FUBARed mess. I don't think they're even pretending to have a plan any more.

According to Wikipedia, Tiny Toon Adventures was written head written by Tom Ruegger with assists from Jean MacCurdy, Jim Reardon and Tom Minton (among others). All of them are TV writers first, and most of them have never written a comic book.

Never heard of Ben 10, but after looking at its info, I'll give you that one as well. And then I'll raise you David S. Goyer. I feel that The Dark Knight was a much better movie than Batman Begins in large part because they kicked him off writing duties. And when he attempted to direct the third Blade movie all by himself, the results were not pretty.

And I did say "almost always a bad idea." There are some full-time comic book writers who know how to exercise a little restraint, but they seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

On another note: Rottentomatoes only has 20 reviews so far. The vast majority of reviewers haven't seen the movie (or their reviews are embargoed). Rottentomatoes scores more than a week before the release date are generally not reliable.

Professor S
04-29-2010, 02:58 PM
Rotten Tomatoes is a weird site to use.

Since they only believe something is good or bad, and not so much the variance in those two.

It has a RT score of 76%, but the average review places it at about 65%, which is about average/crust of failing in school.

Well then does that mean that a movie that is three out of four stars is a "D" or a "C"? Normally I think a 3 star movie has received a very good score. This is exactly why I think RT does a good job in evaluating movie metadata. They understand how the scoring system works in movies and they score "fresh" accordingly, IMO.

Teuthida
04-29-2010, 03:04 PM
According to Wikipedia, Tiny Toon Adventures was written head written by Tom Ruegger with assists from Jean MacCurdy, Jim Reardon and Tom Minton (among others). All of them are TV writers first, and most of them have never written a comic book.

Never heard of Ben 10, but after looking at its info, I'll give you that one as well. And then I'll raise you David S. Goyer. I feel that The Dark Knight was a much better movie than Batman Begins in large part because they kicked him off writing duties. And when he attempted to direct the third Blade movie all by himself, the results were not pretty.

On Tiny Toons, most of the DC toons and other toons such as Freakazoid, and on Lost you have Paul Dini. (Turns out comics actually came later for him). Him along with Brian K. Vaughan worked on just a couple (though those were pretty good ones if I recall) episodes of Lost. Lost as a series doesn't hold up I admit, but there were some good ones. It was a sad day when I realized they didn't have a plan.

Heh, so really there aren't too many comic book writers who make the transition from comics to something else. A lot more tv and book writers get into comics later like Joss Whedon, Stephen King, Joe Hill, Paul Dini, Greg Rucka, etc. and then jump back and forth between the mediums.

Funny, seems like Ben 10 is the only real success story for comic writers transitioning to tv. Those guys and Dwayne McDuffie who did Static Shock, Justice League, and now the head guy in charge of Ben 10.

But um yeah....how about that Iron Man.

Angrist
04-29-2010, 05:52 PM
It's not out for a week? :confused: How come the local cinema here already shows it?
http://www.cinesneek.nl/film.php?film=1000000155

Default
04-30-2010, 07:33 PM
It's not out for a week? :confused: How come the local cinema here already shows it?
http://www.cinesneek.nl/film.php?film=1000000155

I'm pretty sure Europe gets it a week early for some reason

Zen
05-01-2010, 06:06 AM
Yeah, its out in some places, for example, it came out on april 29th over here, i was going to watch it today but didnt go, will probably go on sunday.

Angrist
05-03-2010, 07:10 AM
Yaay, we finally get something before America. :) But even I think that's weird...

Ginkasa
05-05-2010, 04:41 AM
I saw this. It was good. The reviews are kind of true, but I think they're being a little harsh. There are a few scenes that sort of feel unnecessary or poorly done, but most of the movie is pretty good.

And the parts that aren't that great aren't really bad, they just sort of feel like more could be done with them. Sam Rockwell's character is sort of wasted. I like Sam Rockwell and he did well with what he had. I just think he was extraneous. A few other things, but again, not deal breakers. Its just not quite as amazing as the first one.

Fox 6
05-09-2010, 12:02 AM
Saw it. It was pretty decent. I'm actually here with combine and swan in the theatre right now, waiting for the credits to finish cus there is something you should see ;)

Teuthida
05-10-2010, 08:53 AM
Heh, funny they take into account my local subway line at the end. I'd be more forgiving of the horrible service if the delays were due to battling robots.

KillerGremlin
05-10-2010, 07:45 PM
I LIKED IRON MAN 2. IT WAS GOOD. THE WRITING AND FLOW OF THE PLOT COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER BUT ROBERT DOWNEY JR. IS GOOD ACTING.

Also, Scarlett Johansson is fine.

Vampyr
05-10-2010, 10:20 PM
I saw it tonight. I didn't much care for it - the movie was all over the place, Stark/Iron-Man was much less likable, and there were too many facepalm moments.

"This new element will solve your problem, unfortunately it cannot be made."

*Tony makes it*

Overall not a -bad- movie, just such a disappointment after the first one.

Swan
05-10-2010, 10:41 PM
Drunk Iron Man was great.


And Scarlett Johanssen has a very nice bottom

KillerGremlin
05-10-2010, 11:30 PM
I saw it tonight. I didn't much care for it - the movie was all over the place, Stark/Iron-Man was much less likable, and there were too many facepalm moments.

"This new element will solve your problem, unfortunately it cannot be made."

*Tony makes it*

Overall not a -bad- movie, just such a disappointment after the first one.

I agree, this scene and the chain of events leading up to it was cheesey and dumb.

Since Iron Man 2 bucked the trend (where the sequel is better than the original for comic movies) I'll offer my theory why. It's actually the same theory for why I feel that the sequel usually is better than the original:

Iron Man 2 was basically an intro/origins movie for War Machine and Justin Hammer. It was also an origins/intro movie for Stark's alcoholism, unless I missed that from the first movie. And an intro/origin for more SHIELD stuff which is building to the inevitable (its in these actor's contracts) and inevitably awful Avengers movie.

On the other hand, Iron Man 2 featured a rockin' cast. Mickey Rourke was awesome and looked awesome, and Sam Rockwell is one of my favorite actors period. And Sam Jackson does a decent Nick Fury as far as Hollywood goes. So sure, the movie was less than perfect and it had a little bit of Spiderman 3 syndrome, but it wasn't an emo mess and it didn't bastardize the Venom story so it is all good by me.

I STILL LIKE IT.

BreakABone
05-12-2010, 10:14 AM
I enjoyed the movie. RDJ is still awesome as Stark. I could stare at Scar Jo for hours... and really wish she was featured more, and the action was cool.

The movie did have a ton of flaws though, but more importantly left me scratching my head

How did Whiplash know that Stark was going to be in Monaco? I don't think it was ever mentioned in the movie before that.

Stark creating a brand new element while bored one day at home.

Any real motivation for the villains, like Whiplash is mad at Stark because felt his father was screwed over by Stark.... just didn't cut it.

Drunk Iron Man was an awesome scene though. Though thought the fight was dumb.

Vampyr
05-12-2010, 04:28 PM
I enjoyed the movie. RDJ is still awesome as Stark. I could stare at Scar Jo for hours... and really wish she was featured more, and the action was cool.

The movie did have a ton of flaws though, but more importantly left me scratching my head

How did Whiplash know that Stark was going to be in Monaco? I don't think it was ever mentioned in the movie before that.

Stark creating a brand new element while bored one day at home.

Any real motivation for the villains, like Whiplash is mad at Stark because felt his father was screwed over by Stark.... just didn't cut it.

Drunk Iron Man was an awesome scene though. Though thought the fight was dumb.

I complained about that third point to my girlfriend right after the movie. The movie would have been a lot better if Whiplash had had an actual reason, or just no reason at all (similar to the Joker). The way they actually did it was not cool.

Xantar
05-18-2010, 06:07 PM
I saw it tonight. I didn't much care for it - the movie was all over the place, Stark/Iron-Man was much less likable, and there were too many facepalm moments.

"This new element will solve your problem, unfortunately it cannot be made."

*Tony makes it*

Overall not a -bad- movie, just such a disappointment after the first one.

We can stop blocking spoilers now, right? Besides, this one isn't that big a spoiler.

The creation of the new element was complete bullpucky. He makes the element based on a diagram laid out in his father's plan for a city. The problem is the diagram clearly isn't an element. It's a molecule. You can tell because the picture of the "element" isn't a bunch of stuff orbiting a nucleus but is instead a bunch of particles linked to each other. And there's a huge difference. Creating a new element is nuclear physics and is really hard. Creating a new molecule is chemistry and is comparatively easy (hundreds of new molecules are put together every year).

I know that's scientific nitpicking, but it annoyed me because it was so unnecessary. They could have just said "you must forge a new metal" or "you must synthesize a new alloy." There are lots of molecular structures that existed only in theory back in the 60s that we can now create today because of technological advances.

Oh and also, listen to Nerds on the Rocks. We talk about a lot of this.[/plug]

KillerGremlin
05-18-2010, 06:37 PM
I was just showering, and I do most of my thinking in the shower....

Why did they recast Rhodey?

First off, what happened to Terrence Howard? Did he punch someone on set in the face? Did he want too much money? WHAT HAPPENED TO THIS SUPERIOR SIDEKICK!!!???

Second, why recast Don Cheadle who had zero chemistry and sucks ass as Rhodey?

I know...I know....it's probably all about the money, and the contracts, and the inevitable Avengers flick.

But the more I think about it, the more I think the whole War Machine origin story was horribly thrown together in Iron Man 2. I mean it sucked ass. Oh, Tony is drunk and dropping number 2s in his suit! Okay, well I guess I'm going to break into his workspace and steal the armor! And fight him! And somehow beat him! I mean what the fuck, that was just lame.

Why couldn't they have just taken the high road and left Don Cheadle, Rhodey, and War Machine out of the Iron Man sequel. Seriously, it would have worked with just Iron Man. The only reason people are watching these films is because of Robert Downey Jr. anyway.

I'm actually kind of upset the more I consider this alternate possibility they could have taken.

Xantar
05-18-2010, 08:01 PM
Apparently, Jon Favreau didn't get along with Terence Howard. We'll never actually know the real story of why they replaced him, though. Don Cheadle reportedly got the part three days before shooting began, so he probably wasn't feeling too prepared.

And I think the idea was that Tony knew he was dying, so he let Rhodey take the War Machine suit. But while we're talking about that suit, what were the drones made out of? They got cut up by bullets shot out of War Machine's wrist guns. Even if they were made out of plain old steel, no small caliber gun is that powerful.

KillerGremlin
05-18-2010, 10:07 PM
And I think the idea was that Tony knew he was dying, so he let Rhodey take the War Machine suit.

Ahhh...that makes sense. Still...Rhodey is a fast learner, as I recall Tony spent quite a bit of time in Iron Man learning how to just use the suit.

But while we're talking about that suit, what were the drones made out of? They got cut up by bullets shot out of War Machine's wrist guns. Even if they were made out of plain old steel, no small caliber gun is that powerful.

Made in Russia. Or made by Hammer Industries. Take your pick. :p

Ginkasa
05-18-2010, 10:48 PM
Apparently, Jon Favreau didn't get along with Terence Howard. We'll never actually know the real story of why they replaced him, though. Don Cheadle reportedly got the part three days before shooting began, so he probably wasn't feeling too prepared.

And I think the idea was that Tony knew he was dying, so he let Rhodey take the War Machine suit. But while we're talking about that suit, what were the drones made out of? They got cut up by bullets shot out of War Machine's wrist guns. Even if they were made out of plain old steel, no small caliber gun is that powerful.


I thought they got cut up by the shoulder cannon....

Xantar
05-18-2010, 11:03 PM
I thought they got cut up by the shoulder cannon....

Because I think too much, I was paying attention to how Iron Man and War Machine were killing the drones. The shoulder cannon did a lot of work, it's true, but there is a distinct shot of one drone getting heavily perforated by the wrist guns which, remember, are supposed to be little submachine guns. So those drones were apparently about as well armored as your average civilian car. Meanwhile Iron Man and War Machine are shrugging off bullets left, right and center.

Ginkasa
05-19-2010, 06:50 PM
Because I think too much, I was paying attention to how Iron Man and War Machine were killing the drones. The shoulder cannon did a lot of work, it's true, but there is a distinct shot of one drone getting heavily perforated by the wrist guns which, remember, are supposed to be little submachine guns. So those drones were apparently about as well armored as your average civilian car. Meanwhile Iron Man and War Machine are shrugging off bullets left, right and center.


I suppose. If you wanted to try to "explain" it within the story you could suppose that they really were "armored" like a car. The drones are simply refurbished version of the suits that Hammer had already built. Remember he said he "rushed the prototypes," etc.

Anyway, small quibble. The movie has bigger issues.