Iron Man 2 do you think IM2 was better or worse than the original?

[The Morningstar]

It was worse. But it's by no means a bad film and anyone who thinks so is dealing in hyperbole. It's an average to good action movie, with some great performances, decent characterisations and well shot action scenes.

 

[Fudgie]

There's good arguments that can be made for it being bad.

 

[kedrell]

Worse, but that belies how good it was since it was following what I consider to be a masterpiece. So even though the original was better the follow up was still very good and better than 99% of the rest of the junk that goes to cinemas these days, IMO.

 

[kedrell]

There's good arguments that can be made for it being bad.

You can do that for any movie.

 

[MarvelKnight]

IM2 was a let-down for me. I think they will bounce back with IM3 though.

 

[The Morningstar]

There's good arguments that can be made for it being bad.

I don't think there is.

You can do that for any movie.

No you can't. Whether you enjoy a movie or not is opinion. Whether a movie is good or bad is not opinion, most of the time.

Like say, if someone said Apocalypse Now or The Insider or LA Confidential or STALKER were bad movies? They would be incorrect. They might not enjoy watching them, but saying it's bad? No, they're wrong.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

IM2 was not as good as IM1. I had high hopes for it too, because with most of the cast returning and Favreau at the helm it looked very promising. IM1 is one of the better if not the best origin CBM to date but even so I believed that IM2 could run with the "2nd movie in a CBM trilogy is the best one" format. Oh well.

 

[MarvelKnight]

Imo, Iron Man is better than its sequel in every way. Funnier, better enemy, better final battle. Cheadle sucks but maybe he'll grow on me with better writing. That's my two cents

 

[Micromind]

Did any of you fans miss the Old Whiplash costume ? I really liked the costumes used in 1980's, the comics back then were really good.

 

[SchumacherFan]

I loved Iron Man 2, and I'm extremely picky with superhero movies...I'm the only one who didn't like Bryan Singer's X-Men films....

I thought Iron man 2 was a 'fun' movie, more than the first. Robert Downey Jr, Sam Rockwell & Mickey Rourke performances made the movie. How can you NOT enjoy those performances ?

 

[Mr. Immortal]

I loved Iron Man 2, and I'm extremely picky with superhero movies...I'm the only one who didn't like Bryan Singer's X-Men films....

I thought Iron man 2 was a 'fun' movie, more than the first. Robert Downey Jr, Sam Rockwell & Mickey Rourke performances made the movie. How can you NOT enjoy those performances ?

Iron Man II is insanely fun and fast paced. I'm glad I'm not the only one that enjoys it.

 

[El Payaso]

I loved Iron Man 2, and I'm extremely picky with superhero movies...I'm the only one who didn't like Bryan Singer's X-Men films....

I thought Iron man 2 was a 'fun' movie, more than the first. Robert Downey Jr, Sam Rockwell & Mickey Rourke performances made the movie. How can you NOT enjoy those performances ?

Because Downey Jr brought nothing new to the character and all Mickey Rourke did was chewing a toothpick and be calm.

But 'fun'... there were only 3 Iron man appearances; the second one was that stupid friends fight (preceeded by "humorous" drunk Tony Stark peeing in his suit) and the third one was more fast-paced than fun.

 

[Mr. Immortal]

Because Downey Jr brought nothing new to the character and all Mickey Rourke did was chewing a toothpick and be calm.

But 'fun'... there were only 3 Iron man appearances; the second one was that stupid friends fight (preceeded by "humorous" drunk Tony Stark peeing in his suit) and the third one was more fast-paced than fun.

I disagree. The first movie was about Tony, an already older man, seeking redemption. This second movie was about Tony learning that he can't do everything himself through his father and his best friend.

Rourke didn't do much after the beginning but I still enjoyed his performance. I liked all of the Iron Man fights, though I agree there could be more.

 

[El Payaso]

I disagree. The first movie was about Tony, an already older man, seeking redemption. This second movie was about Tony learning that he can't do everything himself through his father and his best friend.

Rourke didn't do much after the beginning but I still enjoyed his performance. I liked all of the Iron Man fights, though I agree there could be more.

I was talking acting-wise. The plot was different.

 

[The Morningstar]

I'd say his acting was much different. He was intentionally a bit more *****ey and less charming. In fact i think they went too far with that. Stark ended up just being a bit of a prick, instead of the lovable, irreverent rogue of the first one.

 

[El Payaso]

I'd say his acting was much different. He was intentionally a bit more *****ey and less charming. In fact i think they went too far with that. Stark ended up just being a bit of a prick, instead of the lovable, irreverent rogue of the first one.

That's right. Downey Jr, brought one new thing... that worked badly.

 

[The Morningstar]

I could see why they went that route though. He was dying, he was on a self destructive path, getting a bit too big for his boots by thinking he is the only bad ass in the world. It all makes sense with the context of the story.

The problem was, apart from that scene where he learns about was his dad really thought of him, we didn't really get enough heart and charm from him.

 

[El Payaso]

I could see why they went that route though. He was dying, he was on a self destructive path, getting a bit too big for his boots by thinking he is the only bad ass in the world. It all makes sense with the context of the story.

The problem was, apart from that scene where he learns about was his dad really thought of him, we didn't really get enough heart and charm from him.

True. It like when they decided Peter Parker's dark side should be conveyed by emo hairstyle and street dancing.

 

[The Morningstar]

Pretty much.

 

[Mr. Immortal]

I could see why they went that route though. He was dying, he was on a self destructive path, getting a bit too big for his boots by thinking he is the only bad ass in the world. It all makes sense with the context of the story.

The problem was, apart from that scene where he learns about was his dad really thought of him, we didn't really get enough heart and charm from him.

Actually, you're 100% right. I forgot that I had noticed this in my last few viewings. Like you said though, you can see how they got there. I still appreciate the demon in a bottle elements they used.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yea. I mean, the scene at his party, i don't actually think it was played for laughs really. Listen to the score when he's blowing stuff up for the crowd. It's a bit ominous really. I think that scene is more sad than funny. It's showing him going completely off the rails, putting all those people in danger, specifically when he blind fires the repulsor without looking.

We're supposed to be on Rhodey's side at that point. I know i was.

 

[DarthDaveBanner]

Did any of you fans miss the Old Whiplash costume ? I really liked the costumes used in 1980's, the comics back then were really good.

I actually kind of preferred his gimp costume myself

 

[psylockolussus]

After watching the 2 movies again, I'll say I'll go with Iron Man 1. The story was so much better and I didn't like the guy who played War Machine in Iron Man 2.

 

[mjbull23]

IM2 was not as good as the original, but by no means does that make it a sub-par superhero movie in my opinion. I still love the Monte Carlo sequence when Whiplash walks out there and starts tearing the F1's apart.

I'm looking forward to see what they do with IM3....

 

[Human Torch]

I had to vote same,since I like them both pretty much the same.Two different kinds of movies,but I enjoy each for what they are.