• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Thursday Aug 14, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST. This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Iron Man 2 The Critics review Iron Man 2

Some movies just don't click with Ebert, but at least he explains why he feels the way he feels fairly intelligently. And then rates them low. :funny: And I've really got to admire him a person, considering what he's been through.

Not with Kick Ass he didn't. It wasn't even a review, it was a rant.

And he clearly didn't pay attention to the film. He didn't know things like why Big Daddy gave Hit Girl her balisongs, even though it was CLEARLY explained it was her birthday.

He also didn't know why Kick Ass decided to become Kick Ass. Even though it was CLEARLY explained.

In other words, he didn't pay proper attention to the film he was supposed to be reviewing.
 
Ebert will never say, "this movie sucked. End of message." He will give you a full ass page about why it sucks.
 
Not with Kick Ass he didn't. It wasn't even a review, it was a rant.

And he clearly didn't pay attention to the film. He didn't know things like why Big Daddy gave Hit Girl her balisongs, even though it was CLEARLY explained it was her birthday.

He also didn't know why Kick Ass decided to become Kick Ass. Even though it was CLEARLY explained.

In other words, he didn't pay proper attention to the film he was supposed to be reviewing.


Didn't he become Kick-Ass because he was bored?
 
Na, he was sick of people wanting to be Paris Hilton instead of Spider-Man! :awesome:

But seriously it was mainly because he was sick of peoples apathy, summed up in the scene where he got jacked and someone saw it and did nothing. And also when he defended some guy getting beating to crap by three guys he was like "3 *******s laying into one guy? Whilst everyone else watches? And you wanna know what's wrong with me?!?(for helping the guy out)."

Man that movie is so awesome.
 
Na, he was sick of people wanting to be Paris Hilton instead of Spider-Man! :awesome:

But seriously it was mainly because he was sick of peoples apathy, summed up in the scene where he got jacked and someone saw it and did nothing. And also when he defended some guy getting beating to crap by three guys he was like "3 *******s laying into one guy? Whilst everyone else watches? And you wanna know what's wrong with me?!?(for helping the guy out)."

Man that movie is so awesome.

You need to stop quoting these awesome scene's Ace, i keep getting goosebumps thinking about them! :woot:
 
There's no way IM2 will have as poor of a reception as SM3 amongst the public and fanboys. My reasoning is that SM3 had bad dialogue, bad acting, and ultra melodramatic scenes that were very cringeworthy. IM2 feels more along the lines of Dead Man's Chest, or like you said, Temple of Doom. Neither of those movies are particularly great by any means, but they are praised for good acting and for being entertaining summer films. That's pretty much the vibe I'm getting with IM2.

My main problems with SM3 were emo Peter and the romantic subplot with MJ that felt like it took up half the film. I'm sure IM won't have those problems.

The mixed reviews definitely give me some concerns, but I think it will still be an enjoyable movie. The question is whether IM2 (if perceived as less-than-successful movie compared to IM1) will hurt Marvel's ambiguous plan to make The Avengers down the road, and whether Marvel has crammed Avengers Initiative stuff in Thor & Capt. America like they did with IM2. I guess we will see when those movies come out.

I was concerned a couple days ago when the criticism started pouring in but these newer, more positive reviews have calmed me down. I wish the critics were ranking it higher than they have been but at least it looks like it's not a disaster.
 
You need to stop quoting these awesome scene's Ace, i keep getting goosebumps thinking about them! :woot:

haha sorry man, can't help it. That scene gave me chills too. Sums up what being a hero is all about. The way Johnson delivered it was just perfect.
 
Eberts opposition to kick-ass was explained well though. He will never say a movie sucks without explanation. I haven't seen kick-ass, and I know alot of people like it and said it was faithful to the graphic novell, however having an 11 year old daughter myself I can understand Ebert's objections to having an 11 year old go around committing wanton acts of violence.

Anyway, the Avengers stuff is being well overblown. The one review I saw that really harped on that wan't really a review, it looked like more fanboy "this sucks" and even ended with "f-bomb marvel".

That's the type of stuff I'm talking about where I really don't take RT too seriously anymore. They used to be alot more picky about what went into their reviews.

Infact for those of you that remember IM's original RT rating on release day was 96% fresh. But some late reviews from mostly bloggers who thought they would rip the film, brought it down to 93%.

I'm not saying bloggers shouldn't be included, but it's rediculous the amount of crap they will post up there.
 
Best film of the year, bar none, Ace.

On a personal level, I've had a hard time seeing Iron Man 2 being better than Kick-Ass. And that was before the reviews started to kick in. Kick-Ass just works on all cylinders.
 
Eberts opposition to kick-ass was explained well though. He will never say a movie sucks without explanation. I haven't seen kick-ass, and I know alot of people like it and said it was faithful to the graphic novell, however having an 11 year old daughter myself I can understand Ebert's objections to having an 11 year old go around committing wanton acts of violence.

but it's not like the movie is marketed towards kiddies to begin with though. besides, she's an actor, it's no like she's gonna go around actually doing these things.

Anyway, the Avengers stuff is being well overblown. The one review I saw that really harped on that wan't really a review, it looked like more fanboy "this sucks" and even ended with "f-bomb marvel".

That's the type of stuff I'm talking about where I really don't take RT too seriously anymore. They used to be alot more picky about what went into their reviews.

Infact for those of you that remember IM's original RT rating on release day was 96% fresh. But some late reviews from mostly bloggers who thought they would rip the film, brought it down to 93%.

I'm not saying bloggers shouldn't be included, but it's rediculous the amount of crap they will post up there.

I'm going to see this, regardless of critics, but I have cautious optimism for it.
 
Agreed J.Howlett. I think it's gonna be hard for Kick Ass to be topped for me.

Disagreed Tony Stark. Sure he can take issues with Hit Girl, but as i explained, it was obvious he wasn't paying attention to the film properly because he missed vital plot points. And he didn't actually critique the film. I think there was 1 paragraph out of about 10 talking about anything other than Hit Girl. And it's not a kids film anyway, it's not the film makers fault there is crap parents out their who allow their kids to see such things and piracy.
 
Right. It's a delicate balance, and depending on how they treated it, it could be viewed as sacrificing IM's story for the sake of promoting Avengers. Most of us haven't seen the movie yet, so we can't say for sure. And as always, different people will have different opinions about it.

It isn't at all like Star Wars or LOTR. The LOTR comparison is especially poor because LOTR already existed as a book series.
Iron Man's story IS Avengers. It is not a separate product, or "spin-off" being promoted. Some people in this thread seem to be acting as though it is.
 
2 more positive reviews in IM2's column at RT now. 20 fresh, 4 rotten. Still a 6.4/10.
 
Hopefully it can get back up to 7/10, but I doubt it. I'm disappointed. When there are sequels like X-2, SM2, TDK out there, and this apparently falls short, you have to feel a little empty handed. I just got to get my expectations down for all Marvel productions. Can't even imagine BB3 getting close to the reception of TDK either. Can't get worked up about this **** anymore.
 
Yeah I think people are getting too worked up about it.

I look forward to the DVD though and seeing some of the alternate versions of scenes.
 
You seem to be getting quite worked up. :huh:
 
Yeah I think people are getting too worked up about it.

I look forward to the DVD though and seeing some of the alternate versions of scenes.

It's not just alternate versions, but also deleted scenes too I think. I haven't seen the film yet, but I am very interested to see if it feels like something is missing. I'll be disappointed if they took scenes out that could have helped the flow of the story in the film. It would be cool if they do a Director's Cut.
 
Latino Review - Rating: C

Excerpts from review
Iron Man 2 suffers from a really, really shoddy script. I don't know what qualifies Justin Theroux to be working on super heroes but he needs to stop. The movie plays as if it was written on the go and scenes seem to be inserted and dialogue written without any care for the scenes that follow it.

Whiplash has two fight scenes in the film, one good, the other horrible. Let's just say the scene with Whiplash in Monaco is fantastic.

The biggest complaint about Iron Man was the fight at the end with Iron Monger and that it was too short. Well, if you thought that fight scene was short, you're going to be really disappointed with the
30 second fight scene once Whiplash re-enters the picture. After Iron Man and War Machine (they patch things up) dispatch of Hammer's robot army, Whiplash comes in wearing a brand new suit. But the fight stays grounded and is over much too quickly.
Very, very disappointed with the end fight scene. We do see some cool new tech from Stark's Extremis suit, but that's really about it.
http://www.latinoreview.com/movie-reviews/iron-man-2-790



Devin Faraci CHUD Review - 6.5/10
http://chud.com/articles/articles/23545/1/REVIEW-IRON-MAN-2/Page1.html

 
Last edited:
I normally agree with this site for reviews so this is a pity:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/a217005/iron-man-2.html

Jeff Bridges has often recalled walking on to the set of Iron Man with no script to work from. Despite that apparent lack of direction, the debut outing for the Marvel hero fans affectionately call Shellhead was a highly effective origin tale with a barnstorming performance from Robert Downey Jr (an unlikely action hero two years ago). Freewheeling on a $200 million budget is a risky strategy, and it appears that director Jon Favreau has tried the same trick again for the sequel with screenwriter Justin Theroux's storyline. A few rewrites would have benefited, because Iron Man 2 is flabby, unfocused and, criminally, quite dull in places.

It kicks off by introducing Mickey Rourke's Russian physicist Ivan Vanko as he tends to his fading father. It transpires that Vanko helped develop new technology with Tony Stark's father Howard (Mad Men's John Slattery) but never got credit. When Ivan's father passes away, he reinvents himself as a supervillain with designs on hunting down Stark Jr. Over in the US, the senate is pressuring Tony to hand over his Iron Man technology to the military, while his industrial rival Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) is attempting to forge his own money-making robotic armour. There's also a new cast addition in the form of Scarlett Johansson's sexy secretary Natalie and reprisals for Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), Rhodey (Don Cheadle in place of Terrence Howard) and, bafflingly, an expanded comic relief role for Tony's bodyguard Happy (Favreau).

It's this crowded nature that bogs down the movie. Remember when the Batman series got silly with its multiple villains and sidekicks syndrome? This is a bit like that, but thankfully not quite falling into the day-glo camp of Joel Schumacher's caped crusader outings. Furthermore, Marvel has an Avengers movie in sight and the intent to weave in pieces of the puzzle early - such as Captain America's shield, Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury and Johansson's Black Widow - makes Iron Man 2 a lot of set-up and no payoff.

Rourke is watchable as the cockatoo-loving baddie Whiplash who teams up with Hammer, a man desperate to get out of Stark's shadow. Rockwell, too, is very good, delivering a performance that's both creepy and charismatic. However, the crackle that was present between Downey Jr and Paltrow last time out isn't here. As the newly appointed Stark Industries CEO, Pepper's overriding job requirement seems to be to constantly nag at Tony and their back-and-forth bickering comes across more like sibling rivalry than romantic tension.

In fairness, the movie is entertaining when it's not dumping plot exposition and clunkily foreshadowing "super-secret boyband" The Avengers (Tony's words, not mine!). A sequence at the Moncao Grand Prix is pretty exhilarating and Scarlett Johansson's big action set piece shows her as a competent (and flexible) ass-kicker. Ultimately, though, it represents a significant drop in quality from its engaging and fun predecessor. Iron Man was a rare blockbuster that stayed with you - the sequel all but evaporates the moment it cuts to black.

2/5
 
I'm not gonna say much since I'll judge Iron Man 2 on its own merit, but I was often frighten at the notion that Iron Man 2 and the other Marvel flicks were just lead ins for The Avengers. I hope that is not the case..
 
I think Thor may be the only one that is not a lead in to the Avengers. Of course, if you think about it, Shield and Fury were both in the first movie, and now both, and now Black Widow, and we are surprised about it being heavily focused on Avengers? That's what some fans have been geeking about for the last 2 years. And fans will geek out about the "references" to other superheros as well for the next couple years. Iron Man is a big connection to the Avengers, especially sense he shows up in the Incredible Hulk... This isn't surprising in the least. Iron Man 2 is probably the biggest connection to what we will see in the Avengers then anything else. Captain America will have the whole WWII on his side, and Thor will have another world altogether, but we can see they will all lead to the Avengers. All I'm saying is it's not surprising, and to tell you the truth I've been hearing fans scream for it for 10 years.

Why be surprised that they actually are giving the fans what they asked for?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,960
Messages
22,042,935
Members
45,842
Latest member
JoeSoap
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"