Iron Man II (2010)
Directed by ... Jon Favreau
Written by ... Justin Theroux
Based on the Marvel Comics Character created by ... Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Larry Lieber and Don Heck
Executive Produced by ... Jon Favreau, Louis D'Esposito, Susan Downey, Stan Lee, Alan Fine, David Maisel and Denis L. Stewert
Produced by ... Kevin Feige, Victoria Alonso and Jeremy Latcham
Cinematography by ... Matthew Libatique
Production Design by ... J. Michael Riva
Editing by ... Dan Lebental and Richard Pearson
Art Direction by ... David F. Klassen, Page Buckner, Michael E. Goldman and Suzan Wexler
Costume Design by ... Mary Zophres
Original Motion Picture Score Composed by ... John Debney
Robert Downey Jr. ... Tony Stark/Iron Man
Don Cheadle ... Lt. Col. James 'Rhodey' Rhodes/War Machine
Scarlett Johansson ... Natalie Rushman/Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow
Gwyneth Paltrow ... Pepper Potts
Sam Rockwell ... Justin Hammer
Mickey Rourke ... Ivan Vanko/Whiplash
Samuel L. Jackson ... Colonel Nick Fury
Clark Gregg ... Agent Coulson
John Slattery ... Howard Stark
Jon Favreau ... Happy Hogan
Paul Bettany ... Jarvis (voice)
Kate Mara ... U.S. Marshal
Leslie Bibb ... Christine Everhart
Garry Shandling ... Senator Stern
Christiane Amanpour ... Herself
Philippe Bergeron ... Detective Lemieux
James Bethea ... Security Force #1
Michael Bruno ... Security Force #2
Katie Clark ... Expo Fan
Luminita Docan ... Russian Newscaster
François Duhamel ... French Photographer
Larry Ellison ... Himself
Adam Goldstein ... Himself
Tim Guinee ... Major Allen
Eric L. Haney ... General Meade
Yevgeni Lazarev ... Anton Vanko
Stan Lee ... Himself
Isaiah Guyman Martin IV ... AV Operator
Helena Mattsson ... Rebecca
Keith Middlebrook ... Expo Cop
Anya Monzikova ... Rebeka
Margy Moore ... Bambi Arbogast
Olivia Munn ... Chess Roberts
Elon Musk ... Himself
Alejandro Patino ... Strawberry Vendor
Davin Ransom ... Young Tony Stark
Billionaire Tony Stark must contend with deadly issues involving the government, his own friends, as well as new enemies due to his superhero alter ego Iron Man.
-----------------------------------------
By this point, the Comic Book Movie has become an integral component of the Summer Movie lexicon. Today, its as expected at the box office as popcorn and annoying children
so much so that theyre certainly among the most anticipated releases year in and year out.
This is clearly why, for most audiences, the theatre going need remained dormant until the back to back releases of Kick-Ass and The Losers back in April.
But if theres one thing fans and audiences look forward to even more than seeing these legendary characters being brought to the flesh-bound realm of the silver screen
its seeing those characters come for a second helping in the inevitable sequel.
And as far as Shellhead was concerned, the anticipation was downright staggering.
With 2008s Iron Man, actor-turned-director Jon Favreau (Zathura, Elf) had established a tone in super hero storytelling that was quite unique
specifically based on the attention to naturalistic improv brought to the table by his cast and his thoughtful approach to the importance of staying true to the characters comic book roots both visually as well as aesthetically.
As the first project under the new banner of Marvel Studios, It had successfully resuscitated the House of Ideas as a major player following a string of moneymakers like the Fantastic Four films and third installments in the X-Men and Spider-Man lines that didnt (arguably) hold up as much with fans as it did the grosses and ultimately, it more often than not ranks with comic book enthusiasts as one of the best the sub-genre has to offer.
No pressure.
Enter Iron Man II, the first film (no offense, A Nightmare on Elm Street) to definitively kick off the 2010 Summer Movie Season.
A mere six months after his blazen debut and subsequent outing of his armored persona to the world, Anthony Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is living the high life, in more ways than one. His appeal to the masses has increased since revealing that hes Iron Man (a refreshing departure from the secret identity taboo) and in order to keep up the appearance of his ego-centric Pop-CEO demeanor hes resurrected the Stark Industries Expo
a year-long hosting event to display a pantheon of cutting edge technology from around the world. Its a completely different story behind closed doors, however. Turns out the personalized Arc Reactor
the very component keeping him alive after his near-fatal endeavor in Gulmira
is slowly degenerating his health; killing him in the paradoxical essence.
As a result, Stark has become an emotional enigma
taking thoughtless risks, displaying shameful public behavior and alienating former assistant turned new Stark Industries CEO Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and Army Colonel buddy James Rhodes (Don Cheadle, replacing Terrence Howard in the role) in the process.
Meanwhile, bitter Russian physicist Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) has set out on his own personal vendetta against Iron Man
creating his own Arc Reactor (turns out his father was a partner to Howard Stark in formulating the technology) and declaring vengeance against the bloodstained Stark Family legacy
an ambition quickly recognized and manipulated by rival CEO Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) to destroy both Tony and Iron Man for his own personal gain.
For me personally, Favreaus Iron Man films boil down to this.
Approaching them as a Film Enthusiast, I much prefer the storytelling, characterization and structure of the first film.
But as a Comic Book Fanboy, Iron Man II excels for me.
Between more involvement with S.H.I.E.L.D., the appearance of a VERY sexy Scarlet Johannsen as Black Widow and the teases involving two other forthcoming members of the Avengers
I was beaming the entire time.
And cmon
freakin WAR MACHINE! Finally getting War Machine in there was obviously expected, but its a completely different story when youre finally faced with seeing him on screen firing that mini-gun
DAMN!
Now, in my own opinion, I think a lot of people who dont feel the film to be that strong mightve missed the intent of the piece. Then again maybe Im not approaching it correctly, but this is what I got out of it.
Iron Man II intentionally eases off of the action, yes
in a physical sense.
But I really dont think thats the focal point of the film. I mean at this point, action and slam bang visuals are a given for a comic book action/adventure extravaganza
so much so that they shouldnt be the main attraction anymore.
Again this might just be me, but I truly think Iron Man II was a more character-driven film than the first. It takes a richer
if not necessarily broader
look at Tony Stark and I think the film is ultimately a character-analysis both of him and what taking on this responsibility both means to him and those around him.
For Pepper, it means being an emotional wreck both in the public professional sense as well as the private romantic one. For Rhodey it means being torn between his friendship with Tony and his duty to the United States Government.
Ultimately, I see Iron Man II as a redemption story...albeit a more happy go-lucky incarnation.
The pressure manifested by the US Senate, the greed and ingenuity of others and his own mortality causes a fall from grace
One of the standout sequences of the film involves Iron Man having a throwdown in his own Malibu Mansion with Rhodey
decked out in the Chrome Mark II armor. Initially hilarious as Stark and Rhodey wail on each other to the beat of Queens Another One Bites The Dust, it immediately builds an emotional undercurrent personified by the image of Stark scaring off his guests in a drunken rage as they look on at their supposed hero. Its clearly identified as Stark looks at his own reflection in the window that this is a man at the end of his rope
shattered by the foreboding insistence of death and the power-mad desire of everyone else to reap the benefits of his technology for nefarious or selfish reasons
which would contradict his decision to NOT be recognized simply as a war monger.
However, through interfacing with his loved ones (including his own father from the bowels of the past in a lovely scene of Stark watching a nostalgic film reel) and taking his fate into his own hands rather than submitting to a death wish or the vanity and vengeance of others, Stark reassures that the emphasis is truly more on the Man
and not the Iron.
The subsequent action, to me, then feels more story and character-based (with the exception of the climax
more on that later)
which is refreshingly different from the staple nature of, say, the F-22 sequence in the first film.
A distinct example is the Monaco sequence.
This wasnt simply a one on one between Iron Man and Vanko and I was delighted to see the affection of Pepper and Happy Hogan (Favreau making an appearance of his own) emerge in aiding their friend in the battle
as much as they could anyway.
The cast of the film does exceptionally well (for the most part) given the various circumstances and elements they had to work with.
Again, the most welcome member is the star himself as Robert Downey Jr. provides another wonderful turn as the Industrialist Super Hero. Truly, Stark was the role Downey was born to play as a self-absorbed moneymaking bum sobered and resurrected into prominence (art imitating life) and its terrific to see him in his newfound prime with a string of well-deserved hits.
I love that Stark isnt the typical hero-persona
hes not traditionally noble in the Superman vein nor is he plagued by the emotional issues of tragedy or adolescence like Batman and Spider-Man respectively. With the gusto of claiming a privatization of peace coupled with a public display of elbow-rubbing and eccentric sunglasses-accompanied narcissism (Agreed) Stark is a mixed bag from a character standpoint.
The sight of him, fully armored and fully plastered, definitely sets up an interesting question as to where this character is going (not to mention its an obvious nod to the iconic Demon In A Bottle storyline from the comics). Im sure we can all assume that the full-on hero will emerge somewhere down the line and finally do away with the ego-driven eccentricities but its unique to see a hero that has to deal with the advantages and consequences of being a public figurehead and Downey once again brings much needed heart and humor to the role. In many ways theres more subtle dimension here (which Im sure is to make up for the fact that there isnt a visible character arc like in the first film) and hes easily the focus of the picture
which is only correct, being the title character and all.
The remainder of the cast, given the bravado of Roberts presence, tries to register as best they can with mixed results.
Don Cheadle is a welcome addition as Rhodey and I have to say, theres something quite unique here.
For the most part Im not a fan of re-casting for established universes like this. To me, there was a chemistry between Terrence Howard and Robert that was lacking here with Howards departure.
But I gotta say
this is one of those rare occasions (like Maggie Gyllenhaal in The Dark Knight) where I wish the 2nd actor brought in had been here all along.
For me, Cheadles sense of being works more for Rhodey as a military man than Howard
and I believe in Cheadle being a Colonel far easier than the former. This isnt to take away from Terrence, whos a fine actor in his own right
but Don has this effervescent authority about him that I bought a bit better.
Mickey Rourke also makes quite the impression as Whiplash with his accent and creepy demeanor
and I gotta say he certainly is the only villain out of both films that actually feels like a genuine threat to Stark. Though Ill admit
he went out like a chump in the final battle. But that Monaco confrontation was definitely his shining moment of badass-ness.
Scarlet Johannsen is definitely the key eye candy of the film, looking like she was pulled out of a 1945 cover of Playboy
complete with auburn waves of hair, full pouting lips and a collection of dresses and outfits that are more structurally amazing than the gadgetry and tech.
And who could ever forget Sam Jackson, who makes a heartier return to the proceedings as S.H.I.E.L.D. director Nick Fury? Im glad Jackson was given more than cameo this time around, allowing us to get a better look at his personality and character as he makes his own attempt to get the ball rolling on getting Tony out of the depths of despair.
The weak links come in however, and most unfortunately, from Gwyneth Paltrow and Sam Rockwell.
For me, it doesnt feel like there was anywhere for the Pepper character to go
as a result, Paltrow feels like shes going through the motions (Not that shes not a worthwhile actress
theres just not a lot of meat in this role). Although it was nice to see development of any sort
which made her and Tonys kiss (FINALLY some romantic interplay) seem quite motivated.
And just like Gwyneth, Sam Rockwell
despite being a brilliant actor (his performance as Sam Bell in last years Moon is just staggeringly poetic), just flounders as Justin Hammer. Im not sure if it was screenwriter Justin Therouxs approach or Favreaus (probably both) but this character just falls flat for me personally. He doesnt feel like a viable corporate threat a la Jeff Bridges and his neurotic and compulsive attitude plays more obnoxious than villainous. I mean when he threatened Pepper while being carted away by the police? Didnt buy it at all
that was like trying to believe Richard Pryor is a computer genius (Superman III) or Katie Holmes is a competent attorney (Batman Begins) or Kirsten Dunst is attractive (the Spider-Man films).
The whole Redemption angle and the concept of knocking God off his pedestal (personified by Rourkes line of making a God bleed in order to waver faith) is easily the backbone of the picture and I admire that
but I know that there are faults to the film.
How Vanko and Hammer join forces is just uninspired to me. I mean I can see that Vanko is only agreeing to side with Justin because of the resources that Hammer Industries would provide to indirectly aid Vankos own agenda
but that whole bit of kidnapping Vanko and sitting him down to dinner
what was that? And Vanko going on and on about his Cockatoo
Look, Im all for tinges and nuiances that will layer a character but trying to get me to sympathize with Whiplash over a bird!? Maybe if they had worked more on the Man in the Iron Mask angle of Vankos father being sent away to the dungeon while Stark was allowed to thrive, that wouldve worked better on an emotional level. Sadly, Vanko is never developed the way he shouldve been and its a shame
visually, seeing Rourke at the Prix wielding those electro-charged whips was awesome. But grounding his motivations wouldve made it all the better.
On a side note, tell me Im not the only who thought Whiplash worked better visually in Monaco than he did at the end in that impromptu armor
sheesh!
The technical structure of Iron Man II is more than worthwhile and it aesthetically feels in line with the previous film (you know how changing the ranks of your crew can lead to artistic and design alterations) while being, in my own opinion, subtlety superior in some areas.
The cinematography from returning DP Matthew Libatique is simply gorgeous, especially in the more open locales like the Stark Expo and Monaco specifically. Its more prisitine in appearance, more comic-bookish.
Theres also the production design of J. Michael Riva
whos no stranger to the comic realm having designed the sets of both the original Iron Man as well as Spider-Man III. And his Spider-Man III eye can be seen quite clearly in the similarity between the textured set pieces of the NY Subway for Spidey and Sandmans fight and the Stark Expo. Not literally similar, but his use of metal finishes and almost deco/Americana architecture is evident in both.
For the films musical score, I think the ante was sufficiently upped. Composed by John Debney (The Passion Of The Christ, Sin City,) the score is superior to the one composed by Ramin Djawadi for the first film
its just much more orchestral and emotional in my eyes.
To me, only by a hair (and this is more than arguable
even Im not that sure), Iron Man II might very well be Iron Mans superior, although partly by default. The first movie was stuck with a pedantic origin story. However, the sequel had no shortage of possible paths to take. Which did it choose? The way you should always go; the road of characterization
as I had stated earlier. Rather than tediously expand upon its universe, Iron Man II simply reprises its dramatis personae and sticks them into situations graver than before, upping the ante but reiterating the overall heart and spirit of its predecessor. The characters are well-etched, each snappy exchange rendered with a mature pathos that contrasts with the spurious scenarios that they feature in between of. Iron Man II could easily be called a comedy, but the naturalism of the comedy is seamless; you get the sense that it would be impossible to write this movie without having these vibrant characters joke and jeer.
In the end, Iron Man II feels like a more than worthwhile step in the journey towards the inevitable Avengers construct
with more time, Ill be able to determine more specifically where it truly ranks within the sub-genre.
A few fumbles here and there, sure
still, my faith in Favreau as a storyteller has yet to come into question
I can say
with its attention to character and stylish, if not necessarily quantitative amount of action
that Im satisfied enough to anticipate Iron Man III in earnest.
8/10
