Iron Man vs Iron Man 2

[Asteroid-Man]

In terms of story structure I'd say the first, but in terms of fun and comic book references and the weight of SHIELD, the second one takes it. Overall, I'd say they're equally good.

[TNC9852002]

Iron Man 2 was the better comic book movie.

[The Joker]

Iron Man for me.

[darkseid26]

I never cared for the first one, it is a good adaption and the story flows better, but i like IM2 better.

[Raiden]

Overall, I'd rate IM1 slightly higher than IM2, but IM2 is by no means a drop-off after the first one. IM2 is a worthy successor of IM1, and the battle scene with IM & WM was a huge geeked-out moment for me.

[Catman]

Originally Posted by The Dark Defender

Whiplash was the main threat though.

I suppose...but he wouldn't be a threat if it wasn't for Justin Hammer. So, in a way, he still comes off as a henchman.

Originally Posted by Immortalfire

2. Because of Scarlett.

I'll accept that answer.

[VenomVsSpidey]

Just got back from a 2nd showing of IM2 in less than 14 hours....still gotta go with 2 here

[Spider-Vader]

Right now I'm going with IM2. Could change eventually, who knows.

[Upset Spideyfan]

I'd say a tie.

The first one handled some things better (like pacing) and the second was a bit more fun and exciting.

[JP]

IM2 all the way.

[Mac_Hine]

I prefer the first one better. And spider-vader, I believe that 2012 will be the best year for comic book movies. Avengers, spiderman, batman, superman.

[Tony Stark]

Originally Posted by drmick

I've been getting abuse in the rate/review thread for daring to crticise those that felt the sequel was better than the first.

I have to admit that given the amount of 10/10s being given in that thread I fully expect Iron Man 2 to win this poll. The best chance of getting an accurate result will be in a few months time when the dust settles, and the hyper-excitable dudes move on to the next hot forum.

You got abuse because you flamed people who thought it was better, so don't act like your some kind of victim.

I voted tie, and if you read what I posted in the review thread, I said I can understand both points of view. The second film is very different in tone than the first and I can see how some would be dissapointed in that. That doesn't make it a bad movie.

[Superhero 101]

Iron Man. IM2 was a great movie it just didn't have the sam zing as the first one the first one was way more funnier and than IM2. IM had a more action but the little action that was in IM2 was outstanding!! IM begining was interesting because it had a certain pace to it I felt lost in the beginning of IM2 at the senate hearing it was just way to fast for me. IM was more funner but IM2 gets a little slow in certain parts i think the movie really starts picking up after Fury shows up

[StarkTheProdigy]

You thought Iron man had more action than Iron man 2?

[JerseyJoker]

I'm still with Iron Man as the better of the two, but not by much.

I just think...i don't know, its just that first movie was so great to watch and still holds up great. The sequel is just as good, but i think it doesn't go to the levels of X2 or Spidey 2 of blasting the first one out of the water. Which really isn't a bad thing. Since its a solid 8/10 film and i can't wait to see it again.

Plus i loved how IM2 didn't just rest on what made the first one good and redo it, but Favs actually stretched his wings and tried to do new things with this film, explore new areas, not just for story, but character archs.

[Spider-ManHero12]

Both are absoloutely incredible, but i really don't know which one to choose. I'll have to think about this.

[The Chris]

Iron Man 1 was better. the second one was good and fun, but the first felt more effortlessly entertaining.

[Upset Spideyfan]

I think they could have cut out SHIELD/Nick Fury but leave in Black Widow and it would have helped the pacing of the film immensely.

The biggest weakness of IM2 is that the middle probably runs a bit too long.

[Randal Graves]

It's a tie for me because there are things I loved and didn't like in each.

[DACrowe]

Iron Man by and far.

It had the better story. The better pacing where the narrative never plodded. The better villain (Stane was far more memorable than Whiplash or Hammer), the better scenes of Tony bouncing off of Pepper and Jeff Bridges. The movie stood on its own two feet and didn't spend a huge chunk of its running time setting up other movies. All the characters served a purpose within the film.

The one thing M2 outdoes the original in is some sick action sequences.

IM1: 8.5/10
IM2: 7/10 (most of it due from the acting)

My two cents.

[Catman]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

Iron Man by and far.

The movie stood on its own two feet and didn't spend a huge chunk of its running time setting up other movies.

That's a good point. Iron Man 2, at times, felt like a commerical for The Avengers.

[SurfDUI]

I find any and all origin stories in the movies tough to get through because of being a comic fan before anything else, its my handicap. I'm sure most folks first p/u a comic because of either the hero, or the action. I mean how many folks first pick up a book and its the origin story? Its usually something you discover later.

Outside of Batman Begins, beause the origin isn't just a a scene, its weaved into the first 2 acts, so its hard to avoid, but done well as a story structure.

IM 1 I can choke down, cause he's my fav, but still I skip to the Mark II test as the film kick off. I'm sure most folks respect X-men as a movie, but X2 is the one you can pretty much always sit through at any point in the film. IM 1 is superior to X-men the first (even tho X1 doesn't have origin scenes persay), but X2 is top dog to most I think. IM2 is not X2...or Spiderman 2, but its on there heels. Again I have a slant as an IM fan.

I thought too the weight of the Avengers tie-in would harrass my time w/ the sequel, but think for a second, outside of SamNickFury at the end, there wasn't a WHOLE lot of time devoted to setting the next big thing up. Really a name on a folder, a joke about the shield, that madness at the end....( I'm sorry but **** the Avengers movie, I want an IM 3) Widows involvement as part of a larger landscape of do gooders, was minimal. IM and S.H.I.E.L.D. have always been tied together, and in IM2 they quickly made it come back to Stark. I think any and all talk about the Avengers only bothered die hards, cause we in large part know what they want to do. In actuallity Avengers talk was very brief and only involved 1 direct conversation.

I say IM2 still even after only a couple viewings (didn't most of us know when we LEFT the theater after Spiderman 3 it wasn't the best effort on a whole lot of fronts) so freshness is a factor but not as heavy as some would bring up. No one who isn't a pain in general would say the action wasn't ratched up this time and that's what I look for in my comic films, a compelling story is a bonus, but I feel what they put together is still better than most. When I get the jones for a story, ill flip thru my old back issues. Ill keep IM2 on in the background.

[darkslayer101]

i liked iron man 2 because it was iron man on steroids....

[Figs]

Just got back from seeing it a second time. I liked it more this time around. I enjoyed it when I saw it on Imax at the midnight showing but this second time I liked it a lot more for some reason.

As for which of the two I prefer. I like Iron Man 2 just a little more.

Iron Man 3.5/5
Iron Man 2 4/5

[StarkTheProdigy]

Saw Iron man 2 for the second time, it was even better!