Iron Man 2 The Critics review Iron Man 2

[Ace of Knaves]

I wouldn't describe this film as any worse than the first one. The word i'd use is "charming". The first was so charming and charismatic, it was hard not to love it.

The sequel feels a bit more mechanical and a little more depressing. Stark is still his snarky self but he has that undercurrent of nihilism. He knows he is dying so just thinks **** it.

As for action packed? It certainly has more action than the first one, and the action is definitely more spectacular. But going by the trailers it looks like it would of been even more action.

 

[jmc]

That's a very kind RT consensus, took a while to reach it too, they must have learned from the Watchmen debacle.

 

[J.Howlett]

New review that's a good perspective of what could've been had this franchise taken things a tad more seriously...http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.com/2010/05/review-iron-man-2the-imax-experience.html

 

[S.A.A.D.]

The RT T-Meter Critics has been knocked down to a 71%. Fresh:48,Rotten:20.

 

[rashad]

Average Rating: 6.3/10

 

[redfirebird2008]

That's a very kind RT consensus, took a while to reach it too, they must have learned from the Watchmen debacle.

I think they had to wait for a 5th Top Critic to be posted before doing the consensus. It's looking like they spoke a little too soon though. It's dropped from 76% last night to 70% today. One would think it won't dip below 60% and end up rotten, but the drop today has been pretty steep considering how many reviews were already posted as of last night.

 

[Tony Stark]

That's a very kind RT consensus, took a while to reach it too, they must have learned from the Watchmen debacle.

They didn't reach a consensus because contractually they can't release the reviews until they are published in the papers. Since the film doesn't release in the US until Friday, most writers are just now publishing their reviews.

They put the consensus because they know what the reviews are, for instance Roger Ebert gave the film 3 out of 4 stars, but his review is not up yet.

This has nothing to do with Watchmen. The film was originally scheduled to open world wide on the 30th, but when Chronicles of Narnia pushed it's release back to December, Paramount took the open slot on the 7th, as tratitionally that week is much stronger for domestic releases. They kept the Europe and Asia release date, primarily to avoid interference from the World Cup.

 

[Bunker]

Certified fresh with a 6.1/10 rating...um...WAT.

 

[redfirebird2008]

They didn't reach a consensus because contractually they can't release the reviews until they are published in the papers. Since the film doesn't release in the US until Friday, most writers are just now publishing their reviews.

They put the consensus because they know what the reviews are, for instance Roger Ebert gave the film 3 out of 4 stars, but his review is not up yet.

This has nothing to do with Watchmen. The film was originally scheduled to open world wide on the 30th, but when Chronicles of Narnia pushed it's release back to December, Paramount took the open slot on the 7th, as tratitionally that week is much stronger for domestic releases. They kept the Europe and Asia release date, primarily to avoid interference from the World Cup.

Ebert's review has been posted at RT now. The movie has gone back up to 72% after 72 reviews.

 

[Tony Stark]

Certified fresh with a 6.1/10 rating...um...WAT.

It's up to 6.4, and probably will go a little higher. The certified fresh rating is based on the percentage reviews I think.

As I said this is going to fluctuate as the reviews come in. RT already knows what the final rating is, which is why they certified it. As I said they can't publish a review before it's been published in whatever news publication that has it.

For example Roger Ebert's reviews are owned by the Chicago Sun Times, so for RT to publish an excerpt and link to it, they have to have permission of the Sun Times. This is the same for all the writers. Some of the blog posts they can put up any time they want, but the "Top Critic" reviews are always among the last to go up.

People need to calm down about the reviews. It may not be 93%, but at the same time it's way higher than Transformers 2, DMC, and alot of other two movies.

Also should this finish up below Superman Returns, that should tell you the quality of some of the reiviews. I noticed alot of the reviews who panned the movie, didn't even review the first film.

I'm not suprised that alot of people think that this movie isn't as good as the first because I knew the Cave scene and the scenes with Yinsen would be hard to top from an emotional level. That's the type of personal character development that despite all the TDK fanboys, you can't find anything on that level emotionally close to it. It speaks to us, because of the real world events in Afghanistan. I knew that would be impossible to top.

 

[redfirebird2008]

People need to calm down about the reviews. It may not be 93%, but at the same time it's way higher than Transformers 2, DMC, and alot of other two movies.

You can't make a literal comparison between Iron Man and those franchises when the first Iron Man had a significantly higher rating than Pirates 1 and Transformers 1. Transformers 1 had a rating in the 50's while Pirates 1 had a 78. Relatively speaking, the drop is similar between Pirates and Iron Man.

Pirates - 53/78 = 68% of the original. Or a drop of 32%.

Iron Man - 72/93 = 77% of the original. Or a drop of 23%.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, mind you. Audiences liked DMC a lot. It had great legs at the box office despite a huge opening and it had massive DVD sales.

 

[Marvin]

bunkers avatar is abit much

lol

 

[Tony Stark]

You can't make a literal comparison between Iron Man and those franchises when the first Iron Man had a significantly higher rating than Pirates 1 and Transformers 1. Transformers 1 had a rating in the 50's while Pirates 1 had a 78. Relatively speaking, the drop is similar between Pirates and Iron Man.

Pirates - 53/78 = 68% of the original. Or a drop of 32%.

Iron Man - 72/93 = 77% of the original. Or a drop of 23%.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, mind you. Audiences liked DMC a lot. It had great legs at the box office despite a huge opening and it had massive DVD sales.

I actually really enjoyed DMC, it was a very strange movie compared to the first, but I enjoyed it. AWE, not so much.

Anyway I hear what you're saying.

 

[topdog1]

Ebert three out of four stars

"Iron Man 2 is a polished, high-ozone sequel..."

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100505/REVIEWS/100509987/1023

but then goes on to knock it down a notch because...

"how the guys survive inside those suits. Sure, the suits are armored, but their bodies aren't. How many dizzying falls and brutal blows and sneaky explosions can you survive without breaking every bone in your body? Just asking'. At the end of a long day, those suits should be filled with bloody pulp."

Really? That could be the lamest critique I've ever read. Still, I'm glad he liked it.

 

[Crosswind Ghost]

Really? That could be the lamest critique I've ever read. Still, I'm glad he liked it.

It wasn't a critique by him, he always makes jabs at the movie he reviews by the end of the article.

 

[rashad]

Entertainment Weekly - C+

With all that heavy payload, Iron Man 2 begins to burst at its own galvanized seams as the Marvel instinct for faceless warfare among comic-book characters bangs up against the Downey-Favreau-Theroux instinct for goofitude. (Qualifying as goofy, comedian Garry Shandling plays a U.S. senator, Bill O'Reilly plays himself, and at one point Iron Man, resting curled within the curve of a famous Southern California food-sculpture landmark, is told, ''Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to exit the doughnut.'') Downey's head and heart are in the right place, but the movie is more in pieces than whole, and more about iron than about men.
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20366535,00.html

Movie Web - 3.5/5

In summary, lower your expectations for Iron Man 2. It's fun and breezy with the requisite big moments for summer popcorn goodness. Director Jon Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. make the most of what they were tasked to do. I sincerely hope that Marvel allows Iron Man 3 to be its own film than the crutch that other franchises lean on.
http://www.movieweb.com/movie/iron-man-2/REHm9HKHzzlLLK

http://www.movieweb.com/movie/iron-man-2/REHm9HKHzzlLLK

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

"how the guys survive inside those suits. Sure, the suits are armored, but their bodies aren't. How many dizzying falls and brutal blows and sneaky explosions can you survive without breaking every bone in your body? Just asking'. At the end of a long day, those suits should be filled with bloody pulp."

 

[topdog1]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1228705/board/thread/161773178

This guy is ahead of the curve. (If it really matters to any of you- I can't say I care all that much but...)

120 Positive 28 Negative reviews

 

[redfirebird2008]

I actually really enjoyed DMC, it was a very strange movie compared to the first, but I enjoyed it. AWE, not so much.

Anyway I hear what you're saying.

I really enjoyed DMC and AWE, but they are both too long. AWE's biggest problem aside from the bloated length is the constant backstabbing plots. I'm looking forward to the next Pirates movie in hopes that they have trimmed the fat in multiple ways. We just want a fun swashbuckling movie, not some 3 hour "epic" with an overindulgence in special effects (Giant Calypso = ).

 

[hatebox]

It's gone down to 69% for the first time on RT. Still a 6.3 average.

 

[RoboAmish]

Ebert three out of four stars

"Iron Man 2 is a polished, high-ozone sequel..."

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100505/REVIEWS/100509987/1023

but then goes on to knock it down a notch because...

"how the guys survive inside those suits. Sure, the suits are armored, but their bodies aren't. How many dizzying falls and brutal blows and sneaky explosions can you survive without breaking every bone in your body? Just asking'. At the end of a long day, those suits should be filled with bloody pulp."

Really? That could be the lamest critique I've ever read. Still, I'm glad he liked it.

He knocked it down because it just wasn't as good as the original in his eyes, the last comment was just a joke, it wasn't actually a critique

 

[BlackLantern]

I saw it with my mom last night....we both enjoyed it immensely

 

[Raiden]

Peter Travers (highly respected film critic) at Rolling Stone likes Iron Man 2. Here's an excerpt:

For some, it will be a fair trade-off. It took four writers to construct the first Iron Man. Responsibility for the sequel fell to just one man, Justin Theroux, who co-wrote Tropic Thunder, the comedy that earned Downey (in blackface) an Oscar nomination. Theroux clearly knows Downey's verbal rhythms. He also knows that Stark is a man hurting inside. That pain gives us a rooting interest. Favreau supplies the go-go-go that makes the movie stratospherically entertaining, even without 3-D. But it's the promiscuously talented Downey who adds the grace notes that make Iron Man 2 something to remember.

Not sure how many stars he gives to IM2, though.

 

[kedrell]

It's at 70% now overall with top critics sending in a 73% score and Roeper's review has yet to get on there(it's very positive). Funny, isn't the Top Critics usually lower than the overall score?

 

[BlackLantern]

god I ****ing hate RT