Iron Man 2

[Edgy MD]

Robert Downey Jr. returns as semi-reformed asshole weapons manufacturer Tony Stark, donning a suit of armored weaponry to fight bad guys with grudges, crazy-assed Russsians, and the US Congresss unhappy with him keeping his asskicking technology to himself.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I gave it 3�. Lots of fun, not as cool as the first one, though.

Some key scenes took place on the site of the old Fairgrounds in Flushing. But not the derelict ruins that actually exist. The Marvel Movie Universe version of the fairgrounds is a lively, neon-splashed place. I was looking for a glimpse of Citi Field, but no luck. It was obviously a CGI landscape, so there would be no chance of Citi "accidentally" getting on camera.

The battle with Whiplash in Monaco was probably the coolest scene. And Scarlet Johansen, not surprisingly, made for a sexy Black Widow.

[Edgy MD]

The problem I find with action sequels is that they amp up the action beyond the level of coherence, replacing the story elements of the initial installment with adrenaline, empty calories, and multiple villians teaming up for extra marquee power.

So I fear this a little bit. I'm also a little eye-rolley about Downey's Stark/Ironman being the superhero vehicle of choice for women of my age demographic to swoon to.

[Ceetar]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I gave it 3�. Lots of fun, not as cool as the first one, though. Some key scenes took place on the site of the old Fairgrounds in Flushing. But not the derelict ruins that actually exist. The Marvel Movie Universe version of the fairgrounds is a lively, neon-splashed place. I was looking for a glimpse of Citi Field, but no luck. It was obviously a CGI landscape, so there would be no chance of Citi "accidentally" getting on camera. The battle with Whiplash in Monaco was probably the coolest scene. And Scarlet Johansen, not surprisingly, made for a sexy Black Widow.

I agree with this, but I bumped it up to 4 for the Flushing connection cause that always makes me happy.

Mets Police found an image of a stadium on a viral site a couple of weeks ago (http://metspolice.com/2010/04/09/looks-like-shea-stadium-was-renovated-in-iron-mans-universe/)

Looks almost like a cross between Shea and Citi to me. I spent half the fairgrounds scenes trying to spot it. In the video stark watchs of his father's message to him, little tony picks up a piece off the map to play with, and it almost looked like that may have been the stadium.

I downloaded the movie last night so i could watch the Thor teaser at the end that I missed, so maybe I'll take another look.

[Vic Sage]

Edgy DC wrote: The problem I find with action sequels is that they amp up the action beyond the level of coherence, replacing the story elements of the initial installment with adrenaline, empty calories, and multiple villians teaming up for extra marquee power.

bingo.

Its ok, but no more. I usually like Don Cheadle, but he can't pull this off. Scarlett is not much in the "assistant" scenes, but she wears black leather like nobody since diana rigg. And the action scene with Black Widow toward the end is worth the price of admission all by itself.

[Valadius]

My brother told me before I went to see it that it was "horrible", but I actually thought it was a pretty good movie with a couple of pieces missing and one piece out of place.

They definitely didn't amp up the action to an insane degree. In fact, one of my brother's criticisms was that there was too little action, but I thought they had just enough. The whole Flushing bit made the movie for me, hey, I can't resist. But as for my critiques:

Sam Rockwell was just plain annoying and weird as Justin Hammer. He spent the whole movie whining about Whiplash's bird.

They didn't spend any time whatsoever on the construction of Iron Man's new suit.

Rhodey didn't spend any time at all as Iron Man while Tony Stark was out of commission.

Other than that, solid B+, bumped up to four stars because of the Flushing connection.

[nymr83]

The problem I find with action sequels is that they amp up the action beyond the level of coherence, replacing the story elements of the initial installment with adrenaline, empty calories, and multiple villians teaming up for extra marquee power.

SpiderMan 3!

[Benjamin Grimm]

Yeah, Spidey 3 is a prime example of that.

[Edgy MD]

But hardly the only.

[Guest themetfairy]

I enjoyed it. I found it intelligent escapism.

If you do decide to see this, see it in IMAX - it is not intended for the small screen!

[soupcan]

I liked it - gave it a 3. Not as great as 'Iron Man Uno' but still very entertaining.

On the way home my 13 year-old son says 'Hey, dad, um, who was that actress that played Black Widow?'

Yeah, I noticed her too.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

soupcan wrote: I liked it - gave it a 3. Not as great as 'Iron Man Uno' but still very entertaining. On the way home my 13 year-old son says 'Hey, dad, um, who was that actress that played Black Widow?' Yeah, I noticed her too.

You mean, that she's playing a Marvel Universe spy/assassin type, and is married to Ryan Reynolds, who also played a Marvel Universe assassin-type (Deadpool, in the Wolverine origin thingy)?

[soupcan]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: You mean, that she's playing a Marvel Universe spy/assassin type, and is married to Ryan Reynolds, who also played a Marvel Universe assassin-type (Deadpool, in the Wolverine origin thingy)?

Yeah - that and the fact that she looked incredibly sexy-awesome in that black skin-tight suit.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Oh, yeah, that. (I figured.)

On a related note: It is hard out there for a pimp, apparently... especially when people won't let you forget a dumb, dumb contractual-demand-related mistake.Ouch.

[Guest The Second Spitter]

On a related note: It is hard out there for a pimp, apparently... especially when people won't let you forget a dumb, dumb contractual-demand-related mistake.Ouch.

Was it just me, or did anybody else think Terrance Howard pulled off Captain Rhodes better than Cheadle? Don't get me wrong I'm a huge Cheadle fan, just thought his performance fell on its face, a bit.

As for the movie, I was bitterly disappointed. At times I got the impression that Tony Stark was directing the film and not Favreau. Favreau's screen-time was ridiculous and his character superflous. The movie had enough plot holes to fit half-a-dozen post-retirement Benny Agbayanis, namely
- Stark enters the Monaco GP on a whim, yet Whiplash hatches a scheme months in advance to confront him.
- Rhodes is able fly the "War Machine" suit on his first try (even though it took Stark several to master) and how he manages to take it off isn't explained.
- The deus ex machina miracle-cure-all for Stark's blood condition.

Not directly addressing Stark's alcoholism was a cop-out, as it something integral to the Iron Man mythos. The climax was non-existant and the often-gratuitous Marvel Universe references did nothing to progress the story.

Perhaps my overall experience was impinged by the fact the person who accompanied me to the theatre insisted that I explain all the MU references during the film and I was too much of a [crossout]comic-book nerd[/crossout] gentlemen to say no.

[Edgy MD]

Half way through. So far, so suck.

[Willets Point]

Wait, you started this thread in May but you're only watching this movie now?

[Edgy MD]

Somebody else saw the film first and decided to comment --- I think in the Marvel movies thread --- but didn't feel like starting a polling thread.

I definitely liked this better... than The Karate Kid, Part III.