Iron Man 2 SHIELD/Avengers complaints...

[Ace of Knaves]

Firstly, there was only like, 3 references to the Avengers/other characters in the whole film. 2 passing comments by Fury and Coulson, and a quick glimpse of Cap's shield.

The other was the second from last scene giving some exposition about the Avenger Initiative.

Also Tony was helped by SHIELD to show that he can't do this stuff alone. A major part of the main story. About Tony accepting he can't be a "lone gunslinger".

Now, people are complaining that all this stuff was not part of Iron Man's story, that it got in the way of his story. That is was all in there just to set up other films.

WRONG.

The involvement of SHIELD and The Avengers is the NATURAL PROGRESSION to the story of Iron Man. You cannot tell an accurate Iron Man story without those things being involved.

 

[dark_b]

-they didnt need to have a BW action scene.
-we didnt need to get 3 scenes with Fury. first at the donut shop,then he helps him with the poison.and then again for the Avengers
-after credits scene has nothing to do with the mai ncharacter but with a character that comes out in 12 months. show me Tony and not some hammer


i payed money for iron man.now that i know that they want to force characters in other movies to promote Avengers i will maybe not pay money for Thor.

 

[J.Howlett]

How SHIELD is utilized is the problem. They're the deus ex machina of the film to solve a problem Tony has...a problem which you could've used the majority of the film as the drive force of the narrative, along with the story of Vanko...

Tony could've figured out a way to fix himself in this film, just as he did in the first film. The majority of the first two acts of the first film is all about Tony figuring out things...and those were the best parts of that film.

You could've done the same thing with this film because Tony's inherent problem is more dramatic this time. It would've been more interestin to see Tony struggle and work to figure this problem out, along with fighting off Vanko and the US government. In doing so, Tony would've learned more things about himself and the legacy he wants to leave.

As it stands, Fury comes in, basically gives him the solution (which he should've given him in the first film since he knew the palladium was going to be a problem), Tony does the rest in one day and his basically happy at the end.

Do other small references to SHIELD and instead have Tony figure this whole problem out on his own, while fighting off Vanko and the military, and you have a much more dramatic film....easily.

 

[dark_b]

WRONG.

The involvement of SHIELD and The Avengers is the NATURAL PROGRESSION to the story of Iron Man. You cannot tell an accurate Iron Man story without those things being involved.

this is a live action movie and not a comicbook series over 6 months.

its a 2 hour movie. if this was 2 hours and 30 mintues then maybe it could work since it would give RDJ more time. but no. this is a light 2 hour summer movie . for 2 hours there is noooooooooooo way to tell this kind of story.

IM2 was for the marvel fans. you got it. you are happy. i am happy for you all. but for me its a disaster.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Tell what kind of story? They are easter eggs. Avengers/SHIELD talk took no more than 15 minutes.

As for Black Widow? She is a supporting character of Iron Man. Always has been, always will be.

People complain about comic book movies not being accurate to the source... then one comes along that is, and people complain about it.

And you are *****ing about an after credit scene? WTF? How does that even effect anything? It was AFTER THE CREDITS.

And J. Howlett, no Fury didn't know the palladium was going to be a problem... even Stark himself didn't know it was going to be a problem.

 

[J.Howlett]

Then how would Fury know how to take the "edge off" if he didn't know it was going to be problem?

Not only that but Fury states that in his father's case, lies the key to cure his heartache. And again, you're telling me he had no idea?

If Vanko knew, then Fury would know because of his direct connection to Howard Stark in the early days.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Fury knew because he had someone spying on him the whole film. He didn't have anyone spying on him in the first film. And what has Tony's dad's connection to Fury have anything to do with it? Howard Stark didn't know his son would have to stick palladium in his body did he?

Vanko knew?

 

[dark_b]

Tell what kind of story? They are easter eggs. Avengers/SHIELD talk took no more than 15 minutes.

As for Black Widow? She is a supporting character of Iron Man. Always has been, always will be.

People complain about comic book movies not being accurate to the source... then one comes along that is, and people complain about it.

And you are *****ing about an after credit scene? WTF? How does that even effect anything? It was AFTER THE CREDITS.

And J. Howlett, no Fury didn't know the palladium was going to be a problem... even Stark himself didn't know it was going to be a problem.

there is a myth on SHH that people complain when a movie is not accurate to the comicbooks. its not true. if a movie is good and if hte changes are good then comicbook fans dont comaplain.if the movie is bad then we(yes sometimes i also do this) complain .

will they complain here? no.

there is even a guy who wrotte that he wanted more Avengers and more Fury in IM2. WTF

 

[dark_b]

Fury knew because he had someone spying on him the whole film. He didn't have anyone spying on him in the first film. And what has Tony's dad's connection to Fury have anything to do with it? Howard Stark didn't know his son would have to stick palladium in his body did he?

Vanko knew?

didnt Vanko told to Tony in prison that paladium is poison for the body or something that it should not be combined?

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well they didn't take away from Stark's story. They ARE Stark's story.

You don't have to like it, but the fact is, that stuff wasn't thrown in there for the sake of it. It was in there because they are essential ingrediants of Iron Man's story.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

didnt Vanko told to Tony in prison that paladium is poison for the body or something that it should not be combined?

Actually yea you are right. But that can be attributed to Vanko being a genius on the level that Stark is. He knows the properties of palladium unlike anyone else.

 

[dark_b]

Well they didn't take away from Stark's story. They ARE Stark's story.

You don't have to like it, but the fact is, that stuff wasn't thrown in there for the sake of it. It was in there because they are essential ingrediants of Iron Man's story.

dont buy it.

is IM2 story exactly from a comicbook? or is is a combination of comicbooks and original story ideas?

 

[dark_b]

Actually yea you are right. But that can be attributed to Vanko being a genius on the level that Stark is. He knows the properties of palladium unlike anyone else.

i think he knew because he had the blueprints and god knows how many papers with tons of info. stuff that Tony didnt find out later in the movie.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

It's obviously a combination of different stories and some original ideas.

But what i mean is Iron Man's connection to SHIELD/Avengers is an essential stable to the Iron Man mythos.

If you didn't include them, it'd be like Peter Parker not working for the Daily Bugle. Sure it is not 100% essential to some of the characters particular storylines, but it is a defining part of the character as a whole.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i think he knew because he had the blueprints and god knows how many papers with tons of info. stuff that Tony didnt find out later in the movie.

Yea that too. Good point.

 

[dark_b]

but its true that he was very smart.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Oh yea definitely. I liked the way he played Hammer too.

 

[-JKR-]

The way SHIELD / Avengers project is set-up and handled in this movie is quite sloppy, and doesn't really click well with the rest of the plot and the internal logic of both the 1st and 2nd Iron Man.

Their storyline should have been weaved in better, and Fury & Co. sure shouldn't have been used as a "Joker" (refering to the card, not the character :P) to solve Tony Stark's problem. That was simply LAZY!

 

[Superboy-Prime]

-they didnt need to have a BW action scene.
-we didnt need to get 3 scenes with Fury. first at the donut shop,then he helps him with the poison.and then again for the Avengers
-after credits scene has nothing to do with the mai ncharacter but with a character that comes out in 12 months. show me Tony and not some hammer


i payed money for iron man.now that i know that they want to force characters in other movies to promote Avengers i will maybe not pay money for Thor.

is this a troll post or are you being serious

 

[Ace of Knaves]

The way SHIELD / Avengers project is set-up and handled in this movie is quite sloppy, and doesn't really click well with the rest of the plot and the internal logic of both the 1st and 2nd Iron Man.

Their storyline should have been weaved in better, and Fury & Co. sure shouldn't have been used as a "Joker" (refering to the card, not the character :P) to solve Tony Stark's problem. That was simply LAZY!

Fury didn't solve his problems for him. He just gave him the means and most importantly, the motivation to solve his problems.

By that point in the donut shop Stark was ready for death. Fury came in and gave him a reason to not just give up on his life.

 

[-JKR-]

Yeah, but come on. It wasn't handled very well. Fury comes in, gives him info. Gets out. Oh, thanks to Fury, Tony now has found the solution. Lazy writing.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

No... Tony found the solution himself by using his brain. Fury just gave him the means and motivation to do it.

That injection he got didn't cure him, it temporarily slowed the poisoning down... Tony cured himself by figuring out how to create the new element to replace pallidium.

 

[-JKR-]

Dude, I got it, I got it. It's not like you gotta explain stuff to me. But in my opinion it was lazily written and thrown together.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I'm not trying to talk down to you. I just thought you was thinking the injection cured him.

I personally don't think it was sloppily written, it gave us a great moment when Tony realized that his father DID love him when he originally thought he didn't care about him. Was a great, touching scene.

Could it of been done better? Yea probably, but no film is perfect. And it wasn't exactly a disaster.

 

[-JKR-]

No, I didn't think the injection cured him. It's said clearly that it's just for the symptoms...

I also liked the moment with Tony's father, and am not the one who says this movie was a disaster. In fact I said in the "Rate & Review" thread that I liked the movie and I'd give it a 7 or 7,5 (but of course it's not like you can read every post of mine or other readers), but that I thought that it wasn't on par with the first movie, since I thought the script had its problems and several aspects of the story could've been handled much better.