Where does Iron Man 2 stand among other superhero sequels?

[danoyse]

Originally Posted by redfirebird2008

I loved the tone of the first movie and I appreciate the tone of the second movie, but the story is boring. This has NOTHING to do with whether it has a "serious message." I couldn't care less about that. I do care about whether the story is actually entertaining to me or not. The first one was incredibly entertaining, arguably the best superhero origin story in movie history. This one was just "blah."

I was totally entertained and I was never bored once. To each his own, I suppose...

[redfirebird2008]

Originally Posted by danoyse

To each his own, I suppose...

That's a bingo.

[Spider-Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr. Earle

Tony and Jarvis couldnt hack into Vanko's computer, how could Natasha do that from a simple computer set at the expo for simple tasks?
Yes, Fury should have used his magic ball to spy on Stark.

Fury has TONS of SHIELD agents and ways to track people. Losing Black Widow wouldn't not have meant major script adjustments were needed in order to accomplish the spying aspect. Try writing out Vanko. Or Pepper. Or Rhodey from the film. Or even Hammer. It is much harder to write them out of the film than Widow would be. Widow in fact wouldn't have been very hard, and that is my point. She has more time on screen than Hammer, but the film needed Hammer and you couldn't easily write him out.

Have you seen House? If so, you'd know Dr.Hadley, or "13". She kept her name secret and all her personal details a secret until well into her second season into the show. It was part of the character.

You're missing my argument entirely. I am not talking about character FACTS. You keep citing me facts. I am talking about character aspects/moments of revelation. In House, 13 had tons of character moments before you learned anything about her. Like when she got the right diagnosis in one episode, but didn't observe the patient taking the medication and led to wrong diagnosis later on that killed that patient. Seeing her handle that showed you a lot about her. I didn't learn what her favorite color was, but I saw into her soul a bit. That is character development. That is what Widow lacked. I didn't need facts. I needed to learn about her. She wasn't explored.

In the end, you could take her birthday reply as a character revealing moment, but even if it isnt it doesnt matter to me. I am sure that we will see more of her in the future and learn more about her. But even if we dont, part of her character would be her secrecy and reservations about opening up to people.

But her secracy wasn't built upon. Yes, she doesn't reveal much in the comic about herself and has a hard shell, and that could have been used in this film. But, they don't explore that angle past her just...not talking much. Characters not talking or doing much doesn't tell you anything. There are better ways to explore a character and let us get a feel for them. They didn't do that with her, and they should have.

[Infinity9999x]

Originally Posted by redfirebird2008

I loved the tone of the first movie and I appreciate the tone of the second movie, but the story is boring. This has NOTHING to do with whether it has a "serious message." I couldn't care less about that. I do care about whether the story is actually entertaining to me or not. The first one was incredibly entertaining, arguably the best superhero origin story in movie history. This one was just "blah."

Honestly, story-line wise, I thought the first was in the same league as the second, maybe slightly better, but I mean slightly.

It was formulaic and predictable. It didn't do anything new or show us anything special in terms of origin stories, or superhero stories in general. It was an average plot driven by the incredibly fun performance of RDJ. Just like the second.

And thanks Danoyse

[Mr.T]

1.The Dark Knight
2. Spiderman 2
3. IronMan 2
4. X2

2-4 are all very close in my book. TDK is clearly #1, IMO.

[Figs]

Originally Posted by Infinity9999x

I don't think IM2 is forgettable at all. But pretty much for one reason: Robert Downey Jr.

Honestly, I'm just really surprised at all the people jumping on this movie, because I really don't see any difference from the first. IM would have been forgettable had RDJ not been cast as Stark as well.

But to each their own. I had a blast watching the movie. It was very fun. I didn't go there expecting to watch a movie with a TDK, Watchmen, or Road to Perdition tone, I expected to watch a fun, entertaining movie driven by the quirky performance of RDJ. And that's what I got.

Also, I'm 21 today

Agreed and Happy Birthday!!!

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by Spider-Fan

But her secracy wasn't built upon. Yes, she doesn't reveal much in the comic about herself and has a hard shell, and that could have been used in this film. But, they don't explore that angle past her just...not talking much. Characters not talking or doing much doesn't tell you anything. There are better ways to explore a character and let us get a feel for them. They didn't do that with her, and they should have.

I dont know what else to say. She was a supporting character who hopefully will be in in the Avengers and IM3, so we'll see more of her as we go along. The movie wasnt about her and i like all the mystery that surrounds her.

To each his own i guess.

Fury has TONS of SHIELD agents

And one of them, if not the best, was sent to spy on Stark and evaluate his personality.

and ways to track people.

First of all, how could they evaluate his personality without sending a spy up close to do that?

Then, what ways are you referring to? Hacking into computers or placing bugs at his place? I doubt one can do that to Tony freaking Stark. Even if they could, it would be out of place if suddenly in the middle of the movie Sam Jackson appeared out of ****ing nowhere to help Tony solve his problems. "I've bugged your place and i know everything now let me help you". Natasha was Shield all along and that explained why Fury appeared so he didnt come out of nowhere. He was a deus ex machina anyway, but Natasha eased that.

[GoldGoblin]

Iron Man 2 didn't feel like a Iron Man movie,it was like Iron Man just appeared like a cameo.This movie should just be called Shield.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by GoldGoblin

Iron Man 2 didn't feel like a Iron Man movie,it was like Iron Man just appeared like a cameo.This movie should just be called Shield.

[VenomVsSpidey]

yeah coz shield took up lyke 5 ow-erz of teh m00vie

[Son of Coul]

Good lord

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Robert Downey Jr. carried this movie and made it entertaining...

1.) The Dark Knight
2.) Spider-man 2
3.) X2

4.) Batman Returns
5.) Iron Man 2
6.) Superman II

The first movie was so fun and fresh... this felt padded, slow, meandering and just lacking in a lot of things. I honestly dont know what went wrong...

[Parker Wayne]

Originally Posted by GoldGoblin

Iron Man 2 didn't feel like a Iron Man movie,it was like Iron Man just appeared like a cameo.This movie should just be called Shield.

There's just no way else to say this, but:



Just, wrong.

[Tony Stark]

Originally Posted by GoldGoblin

Iron Man 2 didn't feel like a Iron Man movie,it was like Iron Man just appeared like a cameo.This movie should just be called Shield.

If you don't like the movie then fine, but you should at least watch the movie before trashing it and coming over here to troll on the boards.

[Spider-Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr. Earle

I dont know what else to say. She was a supporting character who hopefully will be in in the Avengers and IM3, so we'll see more of her as we go along. The movie wasnt about her and i like all the mystery that surrounds her.

Being developed in the future is not an excuse for not developing her at all now. If you're giving a character that much screentime, they need developed. She wasn't a minor character, she was a prominant supporting character. That means she needed more to do and be further explored.

Then, what ways are you referring to? Hacking into computers or placing bugs at his place? I doubt one can do that to Tony freaking Stark. Even if they could, it would be out of place if suddenly in the middle of the movie Sam Jackson appeared out of ****ing nowhere to help Tony solve his problems. "I've bugged your place and i know everything now let me help you". Natasha was Shield all along and that explained why Fury appeared so he didnt come out of nowhere. He was a deus ex machina anyway, but Natasha eased that.

Tony Stark is not god. If SHIELD had been able to bug his house and hack into his mainframe, I wouldn't have questioned it. You act like Tony Stark is some god-like entity who can't be bested in technology. I think Vanko shows, other genius's are out there. SHIELD is a gov't agency. If they want to bug you, they can/will bug you. Tony Stark has a phone, right? All it takes is one call to the phone company to bug him.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by Spider-Fan

Tony Stark is not god. If SHIELD had been able to bug his house and hack into his mainframe, I wouldn't have questioned it. You act like Tony Stark is some god-like entity who can't be bested in technology. I think Vanko shows, other genius's are out there. SHIELD is a gov't agency. If they want to bug you, they can/will bug you. Tony Stark has a phone, right? All it takes is one call to the phone company to bug him.

You sidestepped the most important part of my post and answered the most trivial: Whether Tony's house can be tapped.

So let me try again:

1) Fury does not want to know about Tony's relationships so i doubt tapping his phone would help. Men dont talk on the phone all that much and i doubt that he'd start telephoning people to talk about his problems and his secrets.
"Hey babe, let me tell you about my palladium poisoning."
"Your palla what?"

2) You havent answered how they re supposed to evaluate his personality. I doubt they can do that based on his phone calls.

3) You havent adressed how bad it would look if Fury appeared out of nowhere in the middle of the film saying "i tapped your fones because Natasha is useless and we dont wanna waste screetime on teh Avenjors so i come out of nowhere to help you." When its revealed that she's an agent, Natasha helps Fury not seem out of place.

[Spider-Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr. Earle

You sidestepped the most important part of my post and answered the most trivial: Whether Tony's house can be tapped.

So let me try again:

1) Fury does not want to know about Tony's relationships so i doubt tapping his phone would help. Men dont talk on the phone all that much and i doubt that he'd start telephoning people to talk about his problems and his secrets.
"Hey babe, let me tell you about my palladium poisoning."
"Your palla what?"

2) You havent answered how they re supposed to evaluate his personality. I doubt they can do that based on his phone calls.

Rhodey could have done that. He works for the gov't and Stark was abusing his power. They easily could have just asked Rhodey. Rhodey has also shown willing to do things Tony won't be happy about. So again, why does it have to be her?

3) You havent adressed how bad it would look if Fury appeared out of nowhere in the middle of the film saying "i tapped your fones because Natasha is useless and we dont wanna waste screetime on teh Avenjors so i come out of nowhere to help you." When its revealed that she's an agent, Natasha helps Fury not seem out of place.

Why would Fury seem out of place? The Iron Man vs Rhodey fight was being recorded on people's phones. Slap it on youtube, show a news clip, and Fury now has a reason to talk to Stark. Again, you don't need her. Plus, if it was all on youtube, then you could just have Fury determine that himself. No need for the spying thing.

She is easy to write out of the film. So we'd miss a quip in Avengers about her in IM2. Is that 1 small piece of dialogue in Avengers worth wasting time and detracting from the story just to include her? I don't think so. She was just not an essential piece to the film.

And you said I ignored 1 of your points, while you ignored my entire point on what character development means. But, I have addressed yourr argument now.

[Tony Stark]

I thought her introduction made perfect sense, and fit in real nice with the comic book. It makes sense that Fury would use Stark's womanizing against him. Get a HYT to come in and pretend to be a notary. He was looking for a replacement for Pepper since she was being promoted to CEO, Fury new this and new that he couldn't resist having a hot chick being his personal secretary.

Sure Fury could have used other methods, but he knows Stark is too smart and would eventually figure him out. He used Stark's biggest weakness against him.

[redfirebird2008]

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

I thought her introduction made perfect sense, and fit in real nice with the comic book. It makes sense that Fury would use Stark's womanizing against him. Get a HYT to come in and pretend to be a notary. He was looking for a replacement for Pepper since she was being promoted to CEO, Fury new this and new that he couldn't resist having a hot chick being his personal secretary.

Sure Fury could have used other methods, but he knows Stark is too smart and would eventually figure him out. He used Stark's biggest weakness against him.

I completely agree with that assessment. I think the SHIELD elements have been over-criticized by some folks. My problems with the movie are that Theroux's dialogue wasn't as good as the first movie's, the humor wasn't as good, and I was disappointed in how he used Rourke and Rockwell.

[danoyse]

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

If you don't like the movie then fine, but you should at least watch the movie before trashing it and coming over here to troll on the boards.

And you need to quit referring to everyone you disagree with as a troll.

[S.A.A.D.]

I think Ironman 2 makes Spiderman 2 and X-Men 2:X-Men United look like a big piece of garbage. Despite the intensity of the retarded factor in it. Striker wasn't only bland,but really boring and uninteresting, Spiderman 2 has the main and huge problem of playing out like a bad television show that we have all seen at one point or another. Maybe it should have been shorter because of the lame plots that were in it. If those two didn't have those problems,I would regard them much better than they are as comic book movie sequels.

[Parker Wayne]

Originally Posted by S.A.A.D

I think Ironman 2 makes Spiderman 2 and X-Men 2:X-Men United look like
a big piece of garbage. Despite the intensity of the retarded factor in it.

I'd still put Spiderman 2 ahead of Iron Man 2 and X2 behind it, but IM2 did not make it look like a big piece of garbage.

[Tony Stark]

I'd agree that IM2 does not make SM2 look like a piece of garbage. I really like SM2, but over time there are some things that have worn on me about SM2, not that it's a bad movie, but I really don't like the power loss thing. Way too Superman II for me, but it doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the movie.

I guess the main thing was, I was always fond of the Spider-man no more, story in the comics, and I think it would have been better if he just had quit, but still had his spider powers. But that may have changed some other scenes like when he walks past the guy getting beaten up. If he'd had his powers, he would have been a total selfish jerk for passing that up. Anyway it's not a huge deal for me.

The big thing I liked about IM2 is that despite the number of characters the focus was always on Stark. This is the one problem you get in some superhero movies, the bad guys are soo cool and interesting, you lose focus on the main characters. In an ensemble film like X2, I don't know that it applies, and for an ensemble film, I don't know that any movie could do it better. I hope Avengers follows a similar formula.

To me the scene where Wolverine is holding up Scott after he says "she's gone" was just incredible. Infact the whole last 20 min of X2 is by far the most gut wrenching in comic films. IM2 had a uber happy ending, so it's hard to compare it on that basis, and the ending was more similar to SM2.

X2 was very solid, but I still don't like how they practically wrote scott out of the story. I get that Jackman was the emerging star, and Logan is the fan favorite, but it still bothers me with the X-movies that Cyke was never done right.

[Spider-Fan]

He didn't fully lose his powers, though. In the fire scene, he still has spider powers, they're just a bit weaker. It is not like he became powerless. I get what Raimi was saying by making his powers get weaker as his desire to be Spider-Man waned. It was symbolic of his focus. As he has more distractions, the more powerless he felt. It was symbolic and well done. When he passes up helping that guy, I didn't interpret it as he was worried he wasn't powerful enough to stop them. I felt he did it because he was putting that life behind him. He could have still beat those bullies if he wanted to, but he didn't want to.

Spider-Man 2 I feel still stands the test of time, and it still rivals TDK for me personally as favorite comic book film. X2 had its share of problems (like not giving Iceman anything to do other than be Rogue's yes/no man and writing Cyclops out shamelessly cause they had no idea what to do with him). SM2 never lost its focus and always knew where it was going, conversely.

[Tony Stark]

Oh I agree totally that SM2 stands the test of time, don't get me wrong. I even really enjoyed SM3, although I feel it was the most problematic. I think SM2 has the best superhero fight scene of any comic book movie in the train fight with Doc Ock. The powerloss thing irked me, but no enough to write the movie off.

Rami perfectly captured the Lee/Romita era of Spider-man which IMO was by far the best of any writer/artist to do Spider-man.

I like TDK alot, but I feel it's a good Joker movie, not a good Batman movie. I actually prefer Begins to it for that reason. Heath's performance is one for the ages for sure.

X2 as I said is the textbook copy of what you do for a large ensemble film. As much as I'm dissapointed with how they treated Cyke, there's only so many lines you can give people, and as horrible as Halle Berry as in X1, she got her act together for X2, and she was Stom, unfortunately she was horrible in X3 IMO.

I'm really not sure where I place IM2, and I'm not trying to be coy. There's parts of it that I like better than all of these movies, but it's just a very different movie, even different than the first film. What I like about both films is that it's all about Stark and everything else is secondary. That was really the only way an Iron Man movie was going to work. It's really the perfect marriage of a character and actor, that I've only seen in these type of movies with Christopher Reeve and Superman, not to say that there aren't some great peformances in these movies, but I put RDJ and Reeve a notch above in their character performances.