View Single Post
Old 08-02-2013, 04:32 PM   #560
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Where does Iron Man 2 stand among other superhero sequels?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kedrell View Post
Well boredom is pretty subjective. I wasn't bored at all. Now MoS and TDKR bored me quite a bit with their dour, drab boring plots and acting/story but I guess to each his/her own. IM2 had too much humor for it to be boring. In fact boredom is the last word I'd use to describe ANY of the IM movies.
Humor doesn't make it for a villain that spent the whole movie in jail, doing nothing (only to be rescued from there and taken to another place to keep doing nothing until the very last 5 minutes).

It's no secret that a hero without any villain to fight is a recipe for boredom. Or even worse, uninteresting subplots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kedrell View Post
Oh he did stuff. I would have liked more but what he did was gold, IMO.
That makes it even worse. He was a great threat having a great motivation. You have to be blind as a writer to keep that character doing nothing with so much potential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kedrell View Post
No hero is ever really in danger in any superhero movie other than maybe Kick-Ass or Watchmen(since there were no sequels to go for yet that movie still sucked).
Yes, heroes are in danger when a threatening villain is about to kill them. But when it's a friend you know for sure nothing's going to happen. Tony-Rhodey fight was inane, started as some sort of joke and it became a senseless fight with no real tension. It was a big budget version of a drunken billionaire being a douche.

Now if Tony-Rhodey fight had been one of many great action sequences, why not. But other than Whiplash's first apparition there's NOTHING else action-wise to see until the very end of the movie. Except for this vacuous conflict.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kedrell View Post
I thought it was brought to a logical conclusion and I was satisfied. BW and Fury would be in an Iron Man movie even if there were no Avengers. And the Avengers stuff took up maybe 5 minutes of the whole thing. I didn't have a problem with it at all. They're doing more than making 1 simple film, they're building a universe.
Sure, your satisfaction is not in question here. But I doubt BW and Fury would have been there if it weren't for the upcoming Avengers movie. All they did was setting up Avengers while one was sitting there wondering whatever happened to the story one was watching. They just helped to keep the story stopped for longer than the inactive villain had achieved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kedrell View Post
I'd rank IM2 far above any of those horrible-to-average movies.
But neither its action nor its villain were better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kedrell View Post
Her purpose was to build on the universe. It wasn't her movie so it's not like it was supposed to show her story. She's supposed to be kinda a mystery in this film. I think she did just fine.
You get it. It was not her movie, it was not her story, that's exactly why she feels out of place. Building a universe that's not useful for the movie's plot at the expense of the movie's plot progression sounds a bad idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kedrell View Post
Lois Lane in MoS, now there's a character who didn't need to be there nd only was there because it was expected. Same with Catwoman in TDKR.
Sure, what does Lois Lane have to do in a Superman movie. Absurd.


Last edited by Senator Pleasury; 08-02-2013 at 05:20 PM.
Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote