Iron Man 2 The Critics review Iron Man 2

[J.Howlett]

Sounds like the flick needs another 20 minutes added to it....

 

[Ipodman]

Hmm... High on cgi action I guess...

In the first film, the origin story really gave it emotion and meaning... in the second film it seems like they want more 'fun'

I'm afraid the second film won't be in the 90% range on RT looking at these reviews we have so far.

 

[Ipodman]

Hmm... High on cgi action I guess...

In the first film, the origin story really gave it emotion and meaning... in the second film it seems like they want more 'fun'

I'm afraid the second film won't be in the 90% range on RT looking at these reviews we have so far.

 

[jacobed]

I'm not surprised by the bad reviews if anything they're a good thing. I'm not a person who decides to see movies by the reviews or anything like that but if the general consensus stays around what these few reviews are saying then I'll have to scale back the excitement and hype a bit which in turn will allow me to enjoy it better. My only complaint on the first one was that the action was laughably bad for a character as awesome as Iron Man the action should be equally awesome and the first one just did not cut it, even though the story and characters were very very strong. Hearing that there is going to be more action but with the same characters from the last time around makes me a guy who is pumped to see this film.

 

[jacobed]

Double

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I hate to be sounding like a negative Nancy for the gazillionth time,but,I did call that the movie being stuffed with too much story lines in it could be a key criticism. I'm surprised how almost an hour of the movie seems to be dedicated to action sequences for the most part,and it sounds like none of the reviewers really care for the villains,that sounds like a bad sign as well.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I liked the action in the first Iron Man movie. I've never understood or agreed with the complaints about the action scenes. I certainly thought that they were better than the other comicbook movies released in 2008.

I hate to be sounding like a negative Nancy for the gazillionth time,but,I did call that the movie being stuffed with too much story lines in it would be a key criticism.

Because I haven't seen the movie I'll still say that too many characters is the thing that I'm most concerned about. No doubt about that.

 

[J.Howlett]

Actually, if you take out the Avengers angle, it doesn't really have that many.

As for action, both The Dark Knight and Iron Man had one great action sequence a piece...and both took place in the middle of the film. When it came time to the climax, The Dark Knight's climax is more emotionally involved and logistically complex than that of Iron Man's. Iron Man's climax wasn't bad. It just didn't live up to the rest of the film.

 

[hatebox]

The Avengers sub plot does sound like something that's really pissing a few critics off - I suppose they don't like how obvious Marvel are being about grooming audiences for somethng bigger down the road. I'd tend to agree, actually, but I'll wait to see how it plays out.

 

[J.Howlett]

hatebox,

It's always been my worry. The thing I find funny is that I bet Thor and Captain America won't push the Avengers angle as hard as we're getting here. They are an important but it seems to me that Marvel is using Iron Man the most to push the Avengers...instead of spreading it equal among this film and the next two...

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I hope the build-up to some s**tty liveaction cartoon didn't ruin the movie. The Avenger's movie is going to be some silly forgetful fanboy wetdream anyhow so it would really piss me off if Marvel's childish greed ruined what could be a good franchise.

 

[Ipodman]

The Avengers sub plot does sound like something that's really pissing a few critics off - I suppose they don't like how obvious Marvel are being about grooming audiences for somethng bigger down the road. I'd tend to agree, actually, but I'll wait to see how it plays out.

Avengers Origins?

I have to see for myself how obvious the Avengers stuff are in this film to decide they are truly distracting to the main storyline

 

[J.Howlett]

We'll see if it all works.

Personally, I think Thor has to be an entity all to himself because I think his character is going to be the hardest to adapt and make plausible for the audience so that he fits into the world established in Iron Man. There needs to be only one Avengers moment in that film.

Captain America is going to be fun because it's going to be the first period piece comic book flick. That alone makes it entirely different than anything that's ever been done in the genre. I forsee an Avengers moment at the very beginning and at the very end.

 

[Ipodman]

I hope the build-up to some s**tty liveaction cartoon didn't ruin the movie. The Avenger's movie is going to be some silly forgetful fanboy wetdream anyhow so it would really piss me off if Marvel's childish greed ruined what could be a good franchise.

So Iron Man 1 wasnt a live action cartoon?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

All of these movies are liveaction cartoons to a certain degree (yes that include's the Nolan Batman movies folks) but The Avengers just sounds like a pointless toy commercial and nothing more.

I'm not excited about it, at all. I don't care for the idea in the movieverse.

 

[Ipodman]

But dont you wanna see the relationship between Captain America and Iron Man... the way Thor interacts with mortals, the discrimination against the Hulk... and so many good storylines from the comics...

 

[hatebox]

Another negative from a (very popular) British tabloid:

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/entertainment/film/797051/Iron-Man-2-12A.html

HERE'S the thing about Iron Man 2. It's got everything you want from an Iron Man movie.

Great banter. Top performances. Stunning effects.
Problem is, that bit's about three minutes long, and comes at the end of a stupefyingly dull two hours of everything you DON'T want from an Iron Man movie.
I'll have a more fulsome filleting of Iron Man 2 in Sunday's paper and on the website, but for the time being, here's an early review...so you can't say you weren't warned.


Gnawing

The film kicks off with an embarassingly standard villain set-up.
Mickey Rourke's dad helped Iron Man's dad build some kind of prototype reactor. Mickey Rourke's dad never got any credit.
Mickey Rourke's dad dies. Mickey Rourke swears revenge on Iron Man. End of character.
The action then cuts to Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr) jumping out of a plane, in full Iron Man gear, to show off to the crowds at his technology convention.
In the trailers, this sequence involved him kissing his right-hand woman Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and jokily telling her, "You complete me."
That's now gone - limiting the chemistry between Downey and Gwyn to one out-of-nowhere kiss just before the end credits.
Maybe there was a proper romance subplot that was taken out. Maybe it's just bad writing. Either way, it doesn't work.
We then get a drawn-out tribunal scene that takes 15 minutes to sum up one basic plot point - the US military want control of the Iron Man suit.
This also introduces Tony's army pal Col Rhodes (Don Cheadle), and his arch business rival Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell).
You've heard of actors chewing the scenery? Rockwell's gnawing through it like the Tasmanian Devil got bulimia.
It's so over the top I don't even know whether it's good or bad. It's certainly stupid.
Vanko shows up in Monte Carlo and, in one of the film's two proper action scenes, he blows up Tony Stark's Formula One car.
Hammer realises he can use Vanko to build an army of super-robots, so kidnaps him and puts him to work.

Doldrums

Meanwhile, Gwyn hires a new legal whizz (Scarlett Johansson) who turns out to be a spy, codenamed The Black Widow. As an elite member of secret organisation SHIELD, it's her mission to...do almost nothing for the entire movie.
The film slumps into the doldrums early on, and truth is, it never recovers. For a film so heavy on characters, it's shamefully light on plot.
In a genius move, the storyline has Downey sitting around his house, looking bored, for the entire second act of the movie.
There's even a bit where he gets drunk and dances around in the Iron Man suit. THIS IS EVEN WORSE THAN IT SOUNDS.
Eventually he gets off his backside and, for reasons I won't go into here, invents a new element. Let's call it Unexplanium.
Iron Man 2 raises the bar in one way only. Embarrassing director cameos.
Jon Favreau's playing Tony Stark's bodyguard, and shamefully he gives himself more screentime than Scarlett Johansson.
Embarrassingly, he writes himself into a scene where Scarlett wraps her legs around his neck, and ANOTHER in which he ogles her getting changed in the back of a car.
Is he any good? Let's just say he was less annoying in Couples Retreat.
Finally the film drags itself to its big finish, and we get a good three minutes of stunningly-rendered action that's a total joy to watch.
But it's a textbook case of too little, too late.
Iron Man 2's going to be popular - there's nowt I can do about that - but anyone with half a brain will be sorely disappointed.
The first film was hailed as the goose that laid the golden egg.
This'll be remembered as the time Jon Favreau not only killed the goose that laid the golden eggs, but plucked it, roasted it, ate it with two veg and gravy, then burped in fans' faces for two hours straight.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

But dont you wanna see the relationship between Captain America and Iron Man... the way Thor interacts with mortals, the discrimination against the Hulk... and so many good storylines from the comics...

Nope. I've never read an Avenger's comic and I'm not saying that the crossover thing doesn't work in the comics but I've never been a huge fan of it.

DC somehow pulls it off and I'd be more receptive to a JL movie but I still think that seems like too much of a cashgrab.

That tabloid review was poorly written and harsh.

 

[jmc]

Why do I get the feeling this is gonna be another one of those times when the critics are savaged by fans?

 

[Sharkboy]

dammit! what a shame, i actually had hopes for this one. It's looking like this will be another spidey 3 all over again. We've heard the word "dull" being attached to this film twice now, and even if its a mess, or illogical. Dull is not the word that should be attached to any superhero film. Meh.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I hope it is jmc, I hope that I completely disgree with the critics.

 

[night0205]

Wow, that British review was harsh. Hopefully this movie isn't as bad as that sounded.

 

[J.Howlett]

jmc,

You're probably right.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It's already clear that this will not be as well reviewed as the first.

 

[Ipodman]

Why do I get the feeling this is gonna be another one of those times when the critics are savaged by fans?

Hmm... like what... 300?