Iron Man 2 The Iron Man 2 Box Office Prediction Thread

[J.Howlett]

TDK fanboy, I am. Considering I think Hulk and X2 are in the top 5 all time in comic book adaptations. I'm most definitely a TDK fanboy.

I have a general disappointment with how Iron Man 2 was developed from a script perspective and I'm considered a troll.

Wonderful...

I didn't say Tony's a selfless figure but Christ, dude realizes what his legacy is in the first film, wants to change things... you'd at least think that the guy would figure out another way besides inventing another weapon to contribute to the world and change his legacy. I understand that you can't have a story about Iron Man without Iron Man showing up but at least ask the damn question. That's all I'm asking.

The speech at the beginning of the film pointed towards Tony at least thinking about something other than the Iron Man weapon. At least end the film with him contributing something back, instead of going with "I saved my own ass...that's pretty much all I wanted to do anyway."

But, because I'm this "supposed troll', I'll leave you guys to the box office of Iron Man 2...(people can't have a difference of opinion without being called a troll...Christ sakes!)

 

[ElMariachi]

Wonderful...

I didn't say Tony's a selfless figure but Christ, dude realizes what his legacy is in the first film, wants to change things... you'd at least think that the guy would figure out another way besides inventing another weapon to contribute to the world and change his legacy. I understand that you can't have a story about Iron Man without Iron Man showing up but at least ask the damn question. That's all I'm asking.

The speech at the beginning of the film pointed towards Tony at least thinking about something other than the Iron Man weapon. At least end the film with him contributing something back, instead of going with "I saved my own ass...that's pretty much all I wanted to do anyway."

But, because I'm this "supposed troll', I'll leave you guys to the box office of Iron Man 2...(people can't have a difference of opinion without being called a troll...Christ sakes!)

I am not understanding what you were looking for in this movie. Tony Stark did change in that he is no longer a naive weapons developer. This hasn't changed in Iron Man 2. Just because we didn't see his individual contributions to the world doesn't mean they aren't there. The whole idea of the Stark Expo is to give corporations (even rivals) and inventors a platform to show off their ideas and new technologies. The old Stark wouldn't have poured what looked like billions into a grand festival with the theme of better living through technology. He would simply be happy making a dime off of some Jericho missles, f--k skanks in Vegas, and not showing up to prestigious award ceremonies where he is the guest of honor. The Stark Expo was the greatest part of this movie and you are overlooking it's importance.

 

[J.Howlett]

For me, the Stark Expo would've been a great start had they done a proper conclusion to the whole idea. I have no idea what that conclusion is...but it's not the one we got.

As for Stark changing, I just wish the film(s) would've at least explored the idea of Tony not developing weapons at all. I mean, with the Iron Man weapon, he's a walking contradiction.

I understand that he feels this is the only way he could do what he's doing by creating this new weapon but I at least wanted the question asked...

Iron Man Extremis explores this idea. The two films don't address it, except for the beginning of the film with the Stark Expo. Not asking for it to be the whole story but a least a scene or two...like how Iron Man 2 should've had more scenes with Tony trying to figure out his solution to his problem, instead of it being handed to him in a very deus ex machina way...

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I believe that's a reasonable explanation... the Gotham police in some Batman comics were described as corrupted and could not function with much police skills.

Also, maybe TDK's Joker didnt have make-up. The skin tone on his face was that colour since birth. Or maybe he had an accident with chemicals like 89's Joker. When it comes down to it, the origin of the Joker and why his personality is so inhuman will never be known.

Check out TDK again and you'll see The Joker's makeup coming off on it's own. (it's part of his look) One swipe with a towel may have taken the rest of it off. (and ruined his look...which was obviously why Nolan didn't allow them to remove it)

Corrupt, no doubt. But also very stupid. Like when the Joker is standing in the truck in the tunnel in plain view firing weapons at the cops and they, unlike every other cop on the planet, do not think to fire back at him. He even pauses to reload and change weapons with no resistance from them.

Stupid cops may actually work in this city though...because the mob is just as dumb. The Joker is able to walk into a room full of them, threaten them, insult them, and even assault them. He shows them some explosives and walks out.

Real life mobsters grin and send about 40 guys after him to gun him down at the earliest opportunity. In TDK, the mob must think that once a person leaves a room they are gone forever. The Joker had it right when he said the city needed a better class of criminal.

Gotham City...truly a dumb place. It's not that The Joker was really smart...he's just not a moron. It's like winning the special olympics.

I will agree with you on that. I'm not sure what's my favorite of his, but Terminator 1 and 2, and the Abyss would be toward the top of my list.

Alot of people here want to put financial success with quality, and if that were true then Transformers 2 would be one of the best films out there, it's not.

I put Aliens firmly at the top of my "Cameron list". ("Game over!") T2 is right up there with it. The Abyss is pretty darn good too. It gets lost in the shuffle at times.

No it isn't...considering the speech he made at the Stark Expo. So basically, Tony Stark's a liar? That's what you're saying.

You can't have Tony make a speech to thousands of people talking about "legacy", giving back to the world and then have Tony actually invent something that would technically do what his speech called for and then have him not give back.

Basically, all that supposed growth/reawakening he had during the events of the first film, that made the first film what it was, was Tony Stark lying to the characters in the film and the audience?

By that conclusion, Tony Stark isn't a character we should root for in Iron Man 3 or the Avenger films...because he's basically a jackass.

Which, ironically, is how close RDJ is playing him.

I think you got a different idea from Stark's "conversion" than I did. I got that he decided to do good things for the world...not invent stuff and give it away. (Especially stuff that could cause harm in other people's hands.) He decided to become a hero instead of just a playboy.

 

[danoyse]

True but Howlett is also the worst kind of TDK fanboy there is out there. Any chance he has to derride the success of a Marvel property, he'll take it.

lol, he should change his name, unless that's his real name.

And no wonder he threw that little jab at RDJ, yeah too bad every actor out there can't be stand up guys like Bale.

"F-SAKE MAN YOUR AMATEUR!"

And both of you are acting like the worst kind of immature fanboys who can't handle a dissenting opinion. I'm through warning you to behave in here. If you can't knock it off, you won't be posting on this thread anymore.

If this thread can't stay on the topic box office, then maybe it's time to close it.

 

[J.Howlett]

The Joker's actions in Knight don't make much logistical sense because they' re really not suppose to. He's the physical embodiment of the theme Nolan's pushing through the film. That's why his actions have a "supernatural" feel to them. And no, I'm not the first person to float that idea around.

 

[ElMariachi]

For me, the Stark Expo would've been a great start had they done a proper conclusion to the whole idea. I have no idea what that conclusion is...but it's not the one we got.

As for Stark changing, I just wish the film(s) would've at least explored the idea of Tony not developing weapons at all. I mean, with the Iron Man weapon, he's a walking contradiction.

I understand that he feels this is the only way he could do what he's doing by creating this new weapon but I at least wanted the question asked...

Iron Man Extremis explores this idea. The two films don't address it, except for the beginning of the film with the Stark Expo. Not asking for it to be the whole story but a least a scene or two...like how Iron Man 2 should've had more scenes with Tony trying to figure out his solution to his problem, instead of it being handed to him in a very deus ex machina way...

Well, I am not really sure what kind of conclusion you were looking for. I was happy with the movie, despite a few minor flaws. The Stark Expo, to me, was one of the most creative and unique things to ever grace a superhero film.

I suppose I can understand some complaints about them not showing his work on other projects (which would have been interesting), but it really wasn't a big deal to me. I think you are digging for things to complain about. Nobody questions these small details for TDK or Spider-Man (excluding the third), but every aspect of Iron Man 2 and it's plot are put under the microscope.

The only things I would have changed would probally be this.

-A bit less humor in some places.
-Longer fights with Whiplash
and
-Scenes added to the opening montage (which was great as is) showing Iron Man accomplishing all the feats that were shown in the newsclippings. A mix of like the Rocky IV training montage or the opening to Watchmen--which told the audience alot about the backrounds of the story. It would have been cool to see stuff like Iron Man at the White House with the President, Stark getting a Nobel Peace Prize, getting his handprints on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, or showing him developing new technologies. Little things like that do alot for me.

 

[ElMariachi]

The Joker's actions in Knight don't make much logistical sense because they' re really not suppose to. He's the physical embodiment of the theme Nolan's pushing through the film. That's why his actions have a "supernatural" feel to them. And no, I'm not the first person to float that idea around.

This is something that sort of bothers me in the context of this discussion. Iron Man 2 was expected to have this unreal character development (even for minor characters like Black Widow), yet excuses are constantly made for every character in the Batman series. Harvey Dent, a reasonable person, just becomes this madman because his girlfriend gets blown up. Joker exists as this evil freak with no character development or backround. Batman/Bruce Wayne exists as a sentinel of justice and was sort of mindless in his devotion to it in TDK. Contrast the character in BB and you will see what I mean. I am not saying that this is a bad thing, but Batman gets alot of leeway by the fanboys in this department. The imposing music, tone, Nolan's direction, and awesome cinematography distract the viewer from these things.

 

[Iron_Stark]

This is something that sort of bothers me in the context of this discussion. Iron Man 2 was expected to have this unreal character development (even for minor characters like Black Widow), yet excuses are constantly made for every character in the Batman series. Harvey Dent, a reasonable person, just becomes this madman because his girlfriend gets blown up. Joker exists as this evil freak with no character development or backround. Batman/Bruce Wayne exists as a sentinel of justice and was sort of mindless in his devotion to it in TDK. Contrast the character in BB and you will see what I mean. I am not saying that this is a bad thing, but Batman gets alot of leeway by the fanboys in this department. The imposing music, tone, Nolan's direction, and awesome cinematography distract the viewer from these things.

Yep, people act as though TDK was this flawless piece of work, but in reality anyone could pick it apart bad with all the mistakes it had.

 

[Anita18]

This is something that sort of bothers me in the context of this discussion. Iron Man 2 was expected to have this unreal character development (even for minor characters like Black Widow), yet excuses are constantly made for every character in the Batman series. Harvey Dent, a reasonable person, just becomes this madman because his girlfriend gets blown up. Joker exists as this evil freak with no character development or backround. Batman/Bruce Wayne exists as a sentinel of justice and was sort of mindless in his devotion to it in TDK. Contrast the character in BB and you will see what I mean. I am not saying that this is a bad thing, but Batman gets alot of leeway by the fanboys in this department. The imposing music, tone, Nolan's direction, and awesome cinematography distract the viewer from these things.

I didn't think Black Widow in particular had any motivations of her own, besides her work for SHIELD. Every character in TDK (even most of the minor ones) had their own motivations and made their own decisions.

I did like the way Stark was painted against Justin Hammer, but Hammer didn't really feel dangerous in the end at all. Vanko played him like a fiddle and just used his money, that was all.

 

[hatebox]

The Joker shouldn't have character development. He's an absolute. That's the entire point of him.

 

[J.Howlett]

Mariachi,

It's not really leeway though. The best Joker stories don't tell his origin. In his best stories, he's this "entity" that just exists to be the complete opposite of the Bat. That's why there back and forth is always so fascinating.

With Dent in TDK, his obession with justice like Batman's is the reason for his madness. Losing Rachel and not having Gordon or Batman listen to him, understand his philosophy, is why we understand his madness.

And I wasn't asking for unreal character development for Iron Man 2. The film starts out strong with pure development of Stark...but Stark doesn't solve his problems or learns anything from them in Iron Man 2. It's handed to him and basically he's cured...gotta go save Pepper. That's it.

Had Tony solved his own problems and come to an understanding with his father on his own, I honestly wouldn't complain about the film.

The whole problem with Iron Man 2 is the entire second act. The threat of the film don't test Stark...when they know his weakness(Ivan). And when you add how lazy S.H.I.E.L.D. was added to the storyline, you can see how it went from a really strong opening act to a really "what the hell were they thinking" second act to finishing off strong with a great, action packed third act, way better than the first film.

The elements were there. They just don't gel at all because of how Avengers is pushed down our throats. I understand that Avengers is an important component of Tony Stark but why force it down our throats in the middle of the film when just having SLJ show up at the end as he does and then have the reveal of Natasha at the end would've been just as good?

My argument against Iron Man 2 is born out of frustration because I think Favreau could've easily delivered the "TDK" of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The first film set that up beautifully. Marvel's interventions killed what I thought was going to be a truly great sequel.

 

[J.Howlett]

Thank you, hatebox...

 

[Iron_Stark]

Mariachi,

It's not really leeway though. The best Joker stories don't tell his origin. In his best stories, he's this "entity" that just exists to be the complete opposite of the Bat. That's why there back and forth is always so fascinating.

With Dent in TDK, his obession with justice like Batman's is the reason for his madness. Losing Rachel and not having Gordon or Batman listen to him, understand his philosophy, is why we understand his madness.

And I wasn't asking for unreal character development for Iron Man 2. The film starts out strong with pure development of Stark...but Stark doesn't solve his problems or learns anything from them in Iron Man 2. It's handed to him and basically he's cured...gotta go save Pepper. That's it.

Had Tony solved his own problems and come to an understanding with his father on his own, I honestly wouldn't complain about the film.

The whole problem with Iron Man 2 is the entire second act. The threat of the film don't test Stark...when they know his weakness(Ivan). And when you add how lazy S.H.I.E.L.D. was added to the storyline, you can see how it went from a really strong opening act to a really "what the hell were they thinking" second act to finishing off strong with a great, action packed third act, way better than the first film.

The elements were there. They just don't gel at all because of how Avengers is pushed down our throats. I understand that Avengers is an important component of Tony Stark but why force it down our throats in the middle of the film when just having SLJ show up at the end as he does and then have the reveal of Natasha at the end would've been just as good?

Good grief, here we go again.

How exactly was Avengers pushed down our throats?

 

[Crook]

This is something that sort of bothers me in the context of this discussion. Iron Man 2 was expected to have this unreal character development (even for minor characters like Black Widow), yet excuses are constantly made for every character in the Batman series. Harvey Dent, a reasonable person, just becomes this madman because his girlfriend gets blown up. Joker exists as this evil freak with no character development or backround. Batman/Bruce Wayne exists as a sentinel of justice and was sort of mindless in his devotion to it in TDK. Contrast the character in BB and you will see what I mean. I am not saying that this is a bad thing, but Batman gets alot of leeway by the fanboys in this department. The imposing music, tone, Nolan's direction, and awesome cinematography distract the viewer from these things.

This topic is for a different thread, but I don't think these are quite valid criticisms.

1) Harvey's entire foundations crumbled right in front of him. His belief in a legitimate political system failed. His trust in friends failed. His "you make your own luck" mantra failed. The cost of his fiancee's life as a result of these major turning points made him snap. It's not remotely as simple as "his gf blew up and now he's bad". C'mon.

2) Joker NEVER was one for deep character development. Sorry. We all know his claim to fame, even Nolan from the very beginning made it clear this was pretty much going to be a character who wrecked havoc. The development and sense of purpose is there, but in much more subtle form.

3) Bruce is firmly devoted to his own brand of morals and ethics. He's bound to it. Even many batfans realize that it's a flaw. But it's a flaw that makes the character.

I will agree that the production having hitting homeruns in every aspect makes it a lot easier to mask its deficiencies. But this is with any product. Your imperfections are bright as day as a result of not having anything in comparison to hide behind. I don't really think IM2 did that much to excel above its predecessor, and yet IM1 is the one that's almost universally praised. And that's simply because it was the film whose pros severely, severely, outweighed any of its cons. Fans are always willing to accept that so as long as the benefit is greater.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

What I found funny about this thread is that all the people moaning about others trying to turn this into a TDK vs Iron Man 2 thread have actually managed to turn it into one .

Personally I dont think they are comparable, in terms of quality, TDK is the better movie by quite a bit, but IM2 should be more compared with Spiderman 2, but its no were near as good as that either.

Also, I will say that J.Howlett is one of the most level headed and sensible people on this entire forum, and is in no way a TDK fanboy, I have seen him on loads of Marvel threads both before and after TDK came out.

 

[Iron_Stark]

What I found funny about this thread is that all the people moaning about others trying to turn this into a TDK vs Iron Man 2 thread have actually managed to turn it into one .

Personally I dont think they are comparable, in terms of quality, TDK is the better movie by quite a bit, but IM2 should be more compared with Spiderman 2, but its no were near as good as that either.

Yes, there's no comparison, The Gospel of Nolan is above everything else.

 

[ElMariachi]

Yep, people act as though TDK was this flawless piece of work, but in reality anyone could pick it apart bad with all the mistakes it had.

exactly. We don't do it because most of us understand that it was a comic book film, even though it was masked as a crime drama. The vast majority of moviegoers probally didn't notice any of these complaints. They probally only wanted more action and maybe Scarlett to go topless.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Yes, there's no comparison, The Gospel of Nolan is above everything else.

So wait, are you calling me a TDK fanboy now?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, sorry Is but you are just as bad as any of the Nolanites, anyone who has anything remotely bad to say about IM2 is a TDK fanboy in your eyes.

I've been a Nolan fan since Memento, long before TDK came, almost ten years in fact.

TDK is the best comic book movie to date, but is it impossible to top? Not a chance, and it will be topped, I felt IM2 should have been the one to top it, but it was rushed too much.

 

[Iron_Stark]

So wait, are you calling me a TDK fanboy now?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, sorry Is but you are just as bad as any of the Nolanites, anyone who has anything remotely bad to say about IM2 is a TDK fanboy in your eyes.

I've been a Nolan fan since Memento, long before TDK came, almost ten years in fact.

TDK is the best comic book movie to date, but is it impossible to top? Not a chance, and it will be topped, I felt IM2 should have been the one to top it, but it was rushed too much.

I'm not calling you anything, I'm just saying The Gospel of Nolan was a flawless perfect movie, that should be worshiped in every thread and we should say a little prayer every night to our lord and savior Christopher Nolan.

 

[ElMariachi]

I didn't think Black Widow in particular had any motivations of her own, besides her work for SHIELD. Every character in TDK (even most of the minor ones) had their own motivations and made their own decisions.

I did like the way Stark was painted against Justin Hammer, but Hammer didn't really feel dangerous in the end at all. Vanko played him like a fiddle and just used his money, that was all.

Well, that's all she needed to be. A sexy right-hand of Fury that could lay the smackdown. She was a minor character yet I can recall some of the clowns on IMDB complaining that she didn't have enough depth. For christsake, that would be like requring a backstory on Jabba the Hutt. We just don't need it.

The characters in TDK had motivations, but you could admit that they could be open to criticism. Especially the three that I brought up. Harvey went a bit nuts and turned into a homicidal goon because his girl got blown up. It's a bit unbelieveable, but I didn't mind because it's not supposed to be realistic.

As for Hammer, yeah, he was kind of a goof. I thought he was initally going to be a Stane-like villain. He was played so well that it didn't bother me. The only thing that sort of did was the "ex wife". Don't get me wrong, the bit was funny, but that made Hammer look like a complete joke and he shouldn't be THAT bad.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I'm not calling you anything, I'm just saying The Gospel of Nolan was a flawless perfect movie, that should be worshiped in every thread and we should say a little prayer every night to our lord and savior Christopher Nolan.

Sorry, but you sound just as ridiculous as these Nolanites you keep accusing. Iron Man 2 simply wasnt as good as it could and should have, it wasnt even as good as IM1 and many movies worse than it, it should have up there with TDK, Watchmen, X2, Spiderman 2 and all the other awesome CB but its not, its unfortunately somewere in the middle and IMO the legs of the BO show this is how many felt.

 

[ElMariachi]

The Joker shouldn't have character development. He's an absolute. That's the entire point of him.

Then isn't he basically Jason, the Aliens, Jaws, or Mike Myers? Just a killing machine that must be stopped?

 

[Iron_Stark]

Sorry, but you sound just as ridiculous as these Nolanites you keep accusing. Iron Man 2 simply wasnt as good as it could and should have, it wasnt even as good as IM1 and many movies worse than it, it should have up there with TDK, Watchmen, X2, Spiderman 2 and all the other awesome CB but its not, its unfortunately somewere in the middle and IMO the legs of the BO show this is how many felt.

lol, You can't be serious.

Bottom line it had better legs than than most CB movies out there and the franchise will continue.

edit: I can't stop laughing, yeah ok what Iron Man 2 needed was redundant slow motion fight scenes, nipples on costumes, 2 or 3 15 minute gratuitous sex scenes, over the top violence, and bad cgi backgrounds. gotcha (yes I'm talking about Watchmen)

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

lol, You can't be serious.

I am dead serious, X2 had much better critical and fan acclaim than IM2 did, and still does, as it is regularly voted one of, if not the best of the genre, Empire voted it best comic book movie ever, even AFTER TDK came out.

And Watchmen was loved by fans pretty much universally, especially the DC, IM2 isnt.

Bottom line it had better legs than than most CB movies out there and the franchise will continue.

Because it was a sequel to a very successful and popular first entry, but does the fact that IM2 opened with $30 million more against much less stern competition yet still made less than IM1 not say something about the legs of the sequel? And legs indicate WOM. Not to mention that RDJ is now a household name again when he wasnt anything of the sort when IM1 came out.