Iron Man 2 It Should Have Been More Global.

[Road Warrior]

What made Iron Man stand out from other films in the comic book adaptation genre is how global it was. Tony Stark was a prisoner in the Middle East and then returned as Iron Man to defeat the terrorists. That was bold stuff. You don't see that in the X-Men and Superman movies.

In Iron Man 2 we get none of that. I'm not saying that Iron Man should be fighting terrorists all the time but the locations should have been more unique to the genre. Eliminating this resulted in Iron Man 2 having a smaller scope than the original. When you watch the films back-to-back you'll realize how much the sequel was downgraded.

Now, don't misunderstand me. I like the movie. I'm not saying it sucks. The film simply felt downsized to me.

 

[Micah12345]

Hmmm, I agree with you. I also felt the movie could have used 2 or 3 more action scenes.

 

[Road Warrior]

I also felt the movie could have used 2 or 3 more action scenes.

What we got was fine. It's just that, once again, the ending didn't live up to the rest of the movie. You know the final battle sucked when Scarlett Johansson and Jon F. overshadow it.

 

[lukedoggwalker]

so i guess Monaco and Russia didnt count ..


i swear you nerds will complain about anything

 

[Venom]

I sure wanted to see Iron Man go on one of his missions. We have articles and stories about him helping protect peace, but it's an arbitrary concept since we don't get to see it. It would have helped the audience get behind Tony Stark's intentions to keep the suit to himself.

Also a big lack of hero moments. Iron Man never got to save anybody, except for that 1 kid at the end, which happened much too late for it to resonate with the audience.

 

[Road Warrior]

so i guess Monaco and Russia didnt count

Nope. The Russian scenes consist of Whiplash in his apartment. And in Monaco he just participates in a car race and then battles Whiplash on the race track. That scene could have taken place in Los Angeles and it wouldn't have made a difference whatsoever.

 

[lukedoggwalker]

why couldnt you just appreciate the film for what it was instead of criticizing what it was lacking in ur own mind. good movies do not have to keep the same formula as its predecessor

 

[TheVileOne]

What was so global about the first movie? He's in Malibu and the Middle East?

The big climax for this movie is set in New York.

 

[reddog271]

lol... if the movie had everything you asked for..... you'd complain about something else. if you enjoy the movie, why complain, and you said you liked it.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I do sorta see where he is coming from though.

Why just have TV reports and news paper clippings saying Iron Man is out there all over the world bringing peace to conflicts? Why hint at Iron Man having influences and being loved all over the world?

SHOW IT.

 

[Road Warrior]

Why just have TV reports and news paper clippings saying Iron Man is out there all over the world bringing peace to conflicts? Why hint at Iron Man having influences and being loved all over the world?

SHOW IT.

That could have been the movie's opening credits instead of Ivan building his whips.

 

[Tony Stark]

Well this is why I said on the other thread, I can understand why people didn't like it as much as the first. This is the one thing TDK fanboys can't respond to, there has never been a comic book movie that has had the balls to show a guy getting kidnapped by terrorists, and the scenes with Yinsen are on an emotional level unmatched in any superhero movie.

IM1 is really the first post 9/11 superhero movie. The Spider-man movies kind of ignore the issue, X-men was too focused on the mutant struggle, and Batman Begins and TDK almost ignore the terrorism issue. Here you have a guy blowing up hospitals and the only people interested are Batman and the Gotham City PD.

IM was very bold in how it displayed the current situation in our world, and the ramifications of how we act as a nation and our presence in middle eastern countries, without being overtly political. I thought it was very honoring of the real troops that are putting their lives on the line in Afghanistan, and the people who Yinsen represented, who want to be part of the modern world but are supressed by their theocratic fascists rulers.

IM1 had balls that no other superhero movie I've seen has had to talckle those issues, and that's why I'm not suprised people are saying it's not as good.

 

[Dark Raven]

Nope. The Russian scenes consist of Whiplash in his apartment. And in Monaco he just participates in a car race and then battles Whiplash on the race track. That scene could have taken place in Los Angeles and it wouldn't have made a difference whatsoever.

Since part of the movie was already set in Monaco and featured Justin Hammer, we should've had Justin Hammer's floating villa from "The Monaco Prelude" (Iron Man #125) which was part of the classic Demon in a Bottle storyline. That would've been a fantastic villain's lair like in the James Bond movies.

 

[Marvin]

superman returns was worse

 

[Johnny Drama]

In the first Ironman, Stark went to the middle east. He is there for about 10 minutes. It was such a globe trotting adventure spanning the entire WORLD!

*sig*

 

[hatebox]

Well this is why I said on the other thread, I can understand why people didn't like it as much as the first. This is the one thing TDK fanboys can't respond to, there has never been a comic book movie that has had the balls to show a guy getting kidnapped by terrorists, and the scenes with Yinsen are on an emotional level unmatched in any superhero movie.

IM1 is really the first post 9/11 superhero movie. The Spider-man movies kind of ignore the issue, X-men was too focused on the mutant struggle, and Batman Begins and TDK almost ignore the terrorism issue.

Whoa whoa whoa. I can't count the number of reviews I read for TDK saying it was basically an allegory for terrorism and a city's response to it. In fact it's impossible to ignore, despite Nolan's deliberate coyness on the matter. The Joker is a terrorist, through and through. Let's not start pretending IM is the only franchise that has that subtext, even if IM's was more overt for obvious reasons.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

TDK didn't deal with global terroism though. It didn't deal with Islamic fanaticism.

 

[Tony Stark]

Whoa whoa whoa. I can't count the number of reviews I read for TDK saying it was basically an allegory for terrorism and a city's response to it. In fact it's impossible to ignore, despite Nolan's deliberate coyness on the matter. The Joker is a terrorist, through and through. Let's not start pretending IM is the only franchise that has that subtext, even if IM's was more overt for obvious reasons.

No he's not a terrorist, he's an anarchist that uses terrorist tactics.

The Ten Rings were trying to get Stark's weapons to conquer and to institute their ideology. The Joker was not an ideolog.

The main point I was trying to make is I find TDK rediculous from the aspect that here's a guy that will blow up a hospital, and Batman refuses to kill him. Yet he kills Dent who is just a guy who goes insane, because his fiance was murdered.

Iron Man flies into a war zone and kills terrorists, without remorse.

TDK is a good movie. IM is a good movie that has the balls to deal with real world situations.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

In the first Ironman, Stark went to the middle east. He is there for about 10 minutes. It was such a globe trotting adventure spanning the entire WORLD!

*sig*

Dealing with Islamic terrorism in a superhero movie is pretty ballsy though. It's a touchy subject.

 

[LightningFlash]

Just....

 

[Johnny Drama]

Dealing with Islamic terrorism in a superhero movie is pretty ballsy though. It's a touchy subject.

Yes, this is true but it's not as if Globe-trotting was the central focus of that film. He spends 10 minutes in the middle east and then the next 2 hours banging supermodels and shining Jeff Bridges head.

Hell, we saw more of Jeff Bridges nose hair than we saw foreign territory. And where the hell is THAT in the sequel?

 

[LightningFlash]

Hell, we saw more of Jeff Bridges nose hair than we saw foreign territory. And where the hell is THAT in the sequel?

Where is his nose hair?



I don't know. Possibly with him.

 

[Road Warrior]

Well this is why I said on the other thread, I can understand why people didn't like it as much as the first. This is the one thing TDK fanboys can't respond to, there has never been a comic book movie that has had the balls to show a guy getting kidnapped by terrorists, and the scenes with Yinsen are on an emotional level unmatched in any superhero movie.

IM1 is really the first post 9/11 superhero movie. The Spider-man movies kind of ignore the issue, X-men was too focused on the mutant struggle, and Batman Begins and TDK almost ignore the terrorism issue. Here you have a guy blowing up hospitals and the only people interested are Batman and the Gotham City PD.

IM was very bold in how it displayed the current situation in our world, and the ramifications of how we act as a nation and our presence in middle eastern countries, without being overtly political. I thought it was very honoring of the real troops that are putting their lives on the line in Afghanistan, and the people who Yinsen represented, who want to be part of the modern world but are supressed by their theocratic fascists rulers.

IM1 had balls that no other superhero movie I've seen has had to talckle those issues, and that's why I'm not suprised people are saying it's not as good.

I bow down to you.

In the first Ironman, Stark went to the middle east. He is there for about 10 minutes.

He spends 10 minutes in the middle east and then the next 2 hours banging supermodels and shining Jeff Bridges head.

You need to re-watch Iron Man. Tony Stark spents atleast the first 30 minutes in the Middle East. Think about it. There was the weapon's demonstration, his capture, his time as a prisoner, building the first Iron Man suit, and his escape. Sorry but that wasn't 10 minutes of screentime. Then, once he becomes THE Iron Man he returns to the Middle East to finish off the terrorists. Afterwards, he's attacked by the Jet planes led by James Rhodes. So, atleast 40 minutes of the movie takes place in the Middle East.

 

[danoyse]

Whoa whoa whoa. I can't count the number of reviews I read for TDK saying it was basically an allegory for terrorism and a city's response to it. In fact it's impossible to ignore, despite Nolan's deliberate coyness on the matter. The Joker is a terrorist, through and through. Let's not start pretending IM is the only franchise that has that subtext, even if IM's was more overt for obvious reasons.

Exactly. I was in NY on 9/11, and the scenes where the Joker virtually closed down Gotham City were eerily similar to the real thing. It was obvious they were using that as allegory for a terrorist act. In fact, some critics suggested that the opening shot of TDK that had the camera zeroing in on a building was similar to a plane crashing into it.

 

[Red Mask]

Dealing with Islamic terrorism in a superhero movie is pretty ballsy though. It's a touchy subject.

Not it's not. If the terrorists are hurting innocent and preaching hatred that's not politically incorrect. Enforcing the image simply on Arab Muslims and Islamic societies is wrong. Fighting them just for wish fulfillment is arguable. But terrorism should always be deemed wrong.