Iron Man 2 The Critics review Iron Man 2

[ElMariachi]

The general audience doesn't care about directors.

I completely disagree. People will go to see movies based on the director. Examples are Spielberg, Scorsese, Cameron, and Tarantino. Lesser examples include M Night Shyamalan, Woody Allen, the Coen Brothers, etc.

 

[batman11]

\You had Han/Jabba feud, Luke being Vaders son; Vader trying to lure Luke to the dark side...

Wait....

WHAT?!?!?!?!



Next time use spoiler tags dude.

 

[ElMariachi]

You might be right about Cameron's name causing the movie to be rated higher by critics and so forth, but as far as box office goes I think people thoroughly enjoyed the movie without even noticing Cameron's name attached to it. I don't think general audiences pay too much attention to who directed a movie. Avatar's story is certainly derivative, but then again everything in Hollywood is derivative at this point. The story is well-told even if it is very familiar. You are absolutely right that the visual aspect of the film is what makes it stand out from other similar stories.

I think they do when it's James Cameron. He directed Titanic for christsake!

The visual aspect was great, but the movie itself was too predictable. Evil white man vs. the "noble savage". Nothing we haven't seen before. This was just Pocahontas/Last Samurai/Dances with Wolves in space to me. I don't want to keep on sounding like a hater, but nothing really stood out in this movie aside from the CGI.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Forgot about Blade Runner. Heard that movie wasn't given love in the beginning.

Another early 80's movie that the public and critics flip-flopped on: John Carpenter's The Thing. It was thrashed by critics and was a big flop at the box office but is now regarded as one of the best horror movies ever.

 

[danoyse]

As for ESB, you lived it so I can't refute what you are saying about the initial reception. I am not saying that the general audience had mixed feelings on it, but from what I heard---it wasn't immediately considered greater then Episode IV.

I was around for ESB too - people were crazy for that movie, especially the ending. I don't remember anyone thinking it was the lesser of the movies. Most thought it was even better.

 

[ElMariachi]

Wait....

WHAT?!?!?!?!



Next time use spoiler tags dude.

my bad.......t:

 

[ElMariachi]

Another early 80's movie that the public and critics flip-flopped on: John Carpenter's The Thing. It was thrashed by critics and was a big flop at the box office but is now regarded as one of the best horror movies ever.

yeah, I heard about that one as well.

Also, looking at the Top Critics section of RT, they gave a poor score to The Big Lebowski! F----g amateurs!

 

[weezerspider]

I think they do when it's James Cameron. He directed Titanic for christsake!

The visual aspect was great, but the movie itself was too predictable. Evil white man vs. the "noble savage". Nothing we haven't seen before. This was just Pocahontas/Last Samurai/Dances with Wolves in space to me. I don't want to keep on sounding like a hater, but nothing really stood out in this movie aside from the CGI.

The reviews for Avatar and Transformers 2 were like identical. "Great effects, weak story" except Transformers got the bad grades it deserved, while Avatar managed to get A+'s somehow. I have said this before and I'll say it again, Cameron is a rich man's Michael Bay.

 

[ElMariachi]

I was around for ESB too - people were crazy for that movie, especially the ending. I don't remember anyone thinking it was the lesser of the movies. Most thought it was even better.

why didn't ESB make the same sort of money Ep. IV made? Curious of why that was.

 

[DarKJediKnight]

The reviews for Avatar and Transformers 2 were like identical. "Great effects, weak story" except Transformers got the bad grades it deserved, while Avatar managed to get A+'s somehow. I have said this before and I'll say it again, Cameron is a rich man's Michael Bay.

Cliched story doesn't equal weak story. Avatar was average. Transformers 2 is full of 12-year old crack and sex jokes, gangster attitude that takes you out of the story, so it deserves to be reviewed badly.

 

[ElMariachi]

The reviews for Avatar and Transformers 2 were like identical. "Great effects, weak story" except Transformers got the bad grades it deserved, while Avatar managed to get A+'s somehow. I have said this before and I'll say it again, Cameron is a rich man's Michael Bay.

I never understood the backlash against Transformers by people. I am not a Transformers fan by any means but the first one was actually pretty good. The second was corny for the first part of the movie and then it became watchable. Not great, mind you, but good enough to hold my attention.

 

[weezerspider]

Cliched story doesn't equal weak story. Avatar was average. Transformers 2 is full of 12-year old crack and sex jokes, gangster attitude that takes you out of the story, so it deserves to be reviewed badly.

I'd say Avatar was pretty weak. It was one of the worst movies I saw last year ,but yes, Transformers 2 was worse.

 

[DarKJediKnight]

I'm not harsh on any movies and Transformers 1 was very fine by me. I even like Bay's Armageddon. It's just I really hate the stupid sex and butt jokes in TF2.

 

[weezerspider]

I never understood the backlash against Transformers by people. I am not a Transformers fan by any means but the first one was actually pretty good. The second was corny for the first part of the movie and then it became watchable. Not great, mind you, but good enough to hold my attention.

Its actually is a bit of a guilty pleasure for me, but I would never try and say it is a strong film. Its entertaining, but nothing more.

 

[night0205]

Guys I don't care what you say, Armageddon was amazing. J. J. Abrams wrote the script, Bruce Willis led the cast, an AMAZING cast. Michael Bay directed it? Yeah, surprisingly... The movie was good because Michael Bay kept to the script, the actors did an amazing job at doing the same, and Michael Bay got his explosions, which you have to admit, that's one thing he knows how to do. If Bay would have wrote it, yeah it would have sucked. It really is one of my favorite movies, and I hate Transformers, and it's sequel. You are right DarKJediKnight, the humor wasn't funny at all... I'm just surprised that Steven Spielberg is producing those movies... They will go down as being the first "trilogy" to actually kill people from overexposure to explosions. It will just tire them out and they will fall over dead. "Let me breath" people will yell.

 

[ElMariachi]

Its actually is a bit of a guilty pleasure for me, but I would never try and say it is a strong film. Its entertaining, but nothing more.

thats what I like about it. It's entertainment and nothing more. I hate how movies these days are expected to have elaborate stories, real world parallels/deep messages, and Oscar worthy acting/writing. If they don't, then they suck. Transformers was meant soley for summer entertainment, not to win awards. And I enjoyed it in the same way I liked Indepedence Day in all it's corny glory. I laughed harder at that robot vs. Megan Fox fight then anything in The Hangover.

 

[conan69]

why didn't ESB make the same sort of money Ep. IV made? Curious of why that was.

Unless you lived at the time, its simply impossible to explain to someone the cultural impact Star Wars had at the time. Nothing since has come close - not Avatar, TDK, Jurassic Park... nothing. Star Wars prob should have made double what its actualy recorded profit was. Back then it was very common to sit in the theater for multiple viewings of films. Raiders, Tron, Dragonslayer, Star Wars - my friends and I would burn a entire day sitting in the theater watching showing of these films over and over.I saw Raiders 4 times in one day. They didnt kick you out between showings back then.

But to answer your question, SW had massive repeat viewings. Everyone went to see the film, many times. Star Wars also played for years, continuously. It wasnt like now where a film had a release and then went to home video. Films would play over and over and over, in drive ins and such for years. There was no home video market. Id pob seen Jaws 10 times in various theaters and drive ins during the late 70s.

The Thing really was a victim of the marketing back then.I dont remember seeing any commercials for The Thing. you had ads in papers or genre magazines - that that was how they marketed back then. The massive promotional campaigns of today didnt exist. I missed The Thing in theaters (this was the early 80s and HV was beginning to grow) and I was a Carpenter fan (at 12 years old).
It was actually around this time, the early 80s that the year long runs of films was beginning to end. Drive Ins were beginning to disappear,alot of small theaters were starting to close, etc.

 

[night0205]

Ah, I love the Thing.

 

[Marvin]

what people were "offended" by in Transfomers they cheered and gave rave reviews for in The Hangover.

TF2 fails where the first one succeeded, fresh escapism over same old military action.

Maybe one day Jonathan Nolan will write a serious non summer script for Bay and we can all stop talking about Michael's ability to tell a story.

 

[J.Howlett]

In Bay's defense of Transformers Revenge of the Fallen, the writer's strike practically killed that film.

Remember Bay wanted the second film to come out this summer but Paramount didn't go for it, knowing a strike was coming. The strike hurt that film in more ways than anyone on the production is willing to admit.

 

[redfirebird2008]

In Bay's defense of Transformers Revenge of the Fallen, the writer's strike practically killed that film.

Remember Bay wanted the second film to come out this summer but Paramount didn't go for it, knowing a strike was coming. The strike hurt that film in more ways than anyone on the production is willing to admit.

Except TF1 was already a 2.5 hour headache to begin with.

 

[Tony Stark]

In Bay's defense of Transformers Revenge of the Fallen, the writer's strike practically killed that film.

Remember Bay wanted the second film to come out this summer but Paramount didn't go for it, knowing a strike was coming. The strike hurt that film in more ways than anyone on the production is willing to admit.

Perhaps, but the biggest problem with Transformers 2 was that it needed a couple of more stops in the editing room.

 

[Raiden]

In Bay's defense of Transformers Revenge of the Fallen, the writer's strike practically killed that film.

Remember Bay wanted the second film to come out this summer but Paramount didn't go for it, knowing a strike was coming. The strike hurt that film in more ways than anyone on the production is willing to admit.

The strike may have hurt it, but Bay decided to use a script that he probably knew was half-baked at best, just so they can meet the schedule and cash in on Transformers' sudden popularity. He is to blamed for ROTF's quality (or lack thereof).

 

[J.Howlett]

Raiden,

He didn't have a script period. Shia just recently did an interview where he stated that they started the film with like only forty pages of a script and basically made the rest of the film up as they went along.

Paramount pushed for summer 2009. Bay wanted Transformers 2 this summer because he knew he didn't have enough time, plus the strike happened right at the start of the production.

It didn't help matters that Kurtzman and Orci originally passed on Transformers 2. Paramount went out to find writers to see if they could come up with something soon since they had already announced a release date for summer 2009. That didn't work out so Paramount begged Kurtzman and Orci to come back and they banged out an outline two weeks before the strike, an outline Bay used to start production. Strike ends, Kurtzman, Orci, and now Krueger bang out a script in basically 6 six weeks while Bay's still shooting....

Now, again, I fault Bay a little for Transformers. But, Christ, Paramount left him no wiggle room with that schedule...

...the fact that it's even remotely entertaining and looks as good as it does is a testament to how efficient Bay is when he shoots his films.

Not defending the film but people need to put that specific film into context a little before they continue to bash that one...

...Iron Man 2 feels a tad like that. It feels like they need another draft or two to fix the problems in this script because it's the film's biggest problem.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Raiden,

He didn't have a script period. Shia just recently did an interview where he stated that they started the film with like only forty pages of a script and basically made the rest of the film up as they went along.

Paramount pushed for summer 2009. Bay wanted Transformers 2 this summer because he knew he didn't have enough time, plus the strike happened right at the start of the production.

It didn't help matters that Kurtzman and Orci originally passed on Transformers 2. Paramount went out to find writers to see if they could come up with something soon since they had already announced a release date for summer 2009. That didn't work out so Paramount begged Kurtzman and Orci to come back and they banged out an outline two weeks before the strike, an outline Bay used to start production. Strike ends, Kurtzman, Orci, and now Krueger bang out a script in basically 6 six weeks while Bay's still shooting....

Now, again, I fault Bay a little for Transformers. But, Christ, Paramount left him no wiggle room with that schedule...

...the fact that it's even remotely entertaining and looks as good as it does is a testament to how efficient Bay is when he shoots his films.

Not defending the film but people need to put that specific film into context a little before they continue to bash that one...

...Iron Man 2 feels a tad like that. It feels like they need another draft or two to fix the problems in this script because it's the film's biggest problem.

I said it before. The first Transformers was a 2.5 hour headache. Why would anyone expect anything else out of the sequel?