Iron Man 2 Am I the only one....

While mechanically and artistically inferior to Iron Man, I prefer the sequel over it immensely.

 

Iron Man 2 is my favorite especially since it has three of my favorite characters interacting with each other; Phil Coulson, Pepper Potts and Natasha Romanov. I love seeing Coulson geeking out, Pepper being in charge and Natasha...being Natasha.

Then, to make things even better, you have so many Disney references like a brand new song by Richard M. Sherman who wrote or co-wrote almost everything good musically about Disney from the 1950s-1982, including everything in Mary Poppins, There's a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow which is the basis for the IM2 song and One Little Spark for EPCOT. You have the Stark Expo which is obviously inspired by the World's Fair where Disney first had It's a Small World and Carousel of Progress and the map is almost identical to the early mock-ups of EPCOT.

Plus, that end credits scene with Coulson and Mjolnir is awesome.

 

First time I saw this movie I left underwhelmed. I didn't think it was terrible but I never again felt the need to see it. I, nevertheless, saw it last week. And it's nothing I can like. Problem is that they got a villain with an actor such as Mickey Rourke (even when he kept doing this 'evil' toothpick chewing thing) and when they had properly introduced it... they kept him out of action for the rest of the movie, leaving Iron Man with little to do and the movie with little tension. Which led to an absurd fight against Rhoady, in which we knew no one's life was in serious danger, stripping one of Iron Man's action scenes off of any true urgency. Of course the final encounter was good, but it was too late for me to start caring again.

Iron Man was a great movie. Great. But the only Iron Man sequel which shows iron man in his glory is "The Avengers."

 

It made me lose my enthusiasm for the franchise. A shame really, cause there were some parts I really liked.

But you're not alone.

 

Ah yes. I didn't mean it was wrong or anything to like it. Senator Pleasury approves this.

 

I liked it. It definitely has its problems but there's a lot to enjoy about it. And it expands the universe the way all good sequels should.

The third is the one I have problems with...

 

I loved this movie. Not as much a IM1 but that's an impossible bar to reach for me. I do wish War Machine hadn't been introduced in this film since it was too soon and it took away from Whiplash's screen time. But this is still probably the best superhero sequel I've ever seen. I like it a helluva lot more than IM3.

 

I like this one a lot toriginally,I didn't like the long stretch without Vanko and his quick defeat at the end,but after seeing all three,I'd tentatively say I enjoy it the most.

 

It's easily my favorite of the three. I have plenty of gripes with it, but at least with this one I wasn't bored or disappointed

 

Ivan Vanko was underused, but i found the film entertaining.

 

I rather enjoyed IM2, I was happy to see the War Machine armour but sadly it got it's 10 mins of fame then become Iron Patriot for IM3, Which bothered me lol

 

It's been on FX a lot recently and I've warmed up to it. Still prefer the first Iron Man.

 

After IM3 I liked IM2 much more.

 

It was easy for me to like it since I didn't think it was slow or boring and plus I'm no Iron Man fan so it's even better.

 

I don't think the Iron Man fans were the ones complaining. It was the anti-MCU crowd, the cinesta's, the DC/Nolanites or whatever. From everything I've seen, Iron Man fans liked IM2. Iron Man fans didn't start grumbling until the Mandarin fiasco in IM3.

 

I like all three films for various reason, IM was easily one the greatest superhero film made, IM2 had some great elements to it, as a Iron Man fantatic seeing Whiplash, Justin Hammer and War Machine was pretty cool as well as the mk 5 suitcase armor. IM3 I loved not for how Mandarin turned out, I felt going in Marvel still really did not know how to use Mandarin and yes I was disappointed as for 2/3 of the movie Mandarin was becoming one of the most memorable Marvel villians ever, but as usual Marvel chickened out and went a different way, IM3 worked so well for me as it wrapped things up for the triology, left on a high note, you still feel as though Stark is Iron man and he will have armors again, Iron Man has always been the man in the armor, not the armor around the man, plus we got some cool scenes with Killan and Savin.
Guess my disappointment is how Marvel seems to disregard Iron Mans history and only take elements to tell a new story, Killian was never a big player in the Extemis story, yet in IM3 he is not only the head of AIM but the Mandarin, which raised questions about how long he had been the head of the ten rings.
But over all I have no real complaints, I can sit down and watch all 3 movies and have an awesome time enjoying each one, as a fan I can see the faults in all but the good in all as well.

 

Exactly.The biggest criticism I remember was how there was too much SHIELD presence.Now,with IM 3,the same people are saying "Where was SHIELD?"

 

Yeah. If Iron Man fans had any criticism of the film it was more along the lines of them setting up Rhodey as War Machine too damn soon. I know that was my biggest criticism of the film and how it took away from Whiplash's screen time.

 

I agree , I rewatched it recently and its problems seem insignificant compared to Iron Man 3. That's the one which hurt my faith in Marvel studios not IM2

 

I love RDJ and Iron Man so I loved all of them. It was cool to see more of the outside world in IM2, like the Expo, Monaco, Washington. The first move was more centered in his workshop and SI. So, it was cool to see other places in his world.

 

Iron Man was a tough act to follow but I never understood the palpable hate for the sequel.
Yes it could have been more and it missed some opportunities to truly shine but for what it was I felt it was an overall pleasurable experience and personally I love the strides in world building it took for the MCU.

 

I saw Iron Man and Iron Man 2 in succession last night with my girlfriend who has never seen them before. Like almost everyone, she liked the first one more. She said something very interesting to me about the relationship between Tony and Ivan. The final battle between the two doesn't feel very personal to Tony. This completely explained to me why IM2 feels so underwhelming. In the first one, Obadiah was a mentor to Tony and a friend to his father. The final battle had more weight. In the second movie, Ivan might have felt as though he had a personal vendetta against the Stark family (Tony); but from Tony's perspective, Ivan was basically a stranger to him.

This got me thinking on what the filmmakers could've done to make the final battle more meaningful. The final battle should've been a legacy vs. legacy battle but the relationship between the two fathers was hardly explored. One simple line could've fixed this. When Tony and Ivan are talking in the prison, Ivan mentions his father Anton Vanko. Tony then says, "Never heard of him." Ivan should have said, "You should have, you were named after him." This would draw a connection from Tony to Anton to Ivan through Howard. This also shows Howard had enough admiration for Anton that he named his son after him even after Howard had him deported. Just that one line would've changed the perspective of the movie.

 

I like it for the small amount of War Machine we get in it. But it's like they didnt know what story they wanted to tell.