Liked it a lot. More action than the first one. Stay until the end of the credits if you're a Marvel Comics fan. Warning: the end credits are pretty long . . . most people in the theater where I saw it didn't wait.
Just saw it too. It was awesome: I really liked the effects and action. It felt like Transformers 2, which I liked better than the first. "OK, you know all the characters now lets blow stuff up for 90 minutes"
Although I can't help feeling sold short that we didn't get to see more of The Black Widow.
(http://www.daemonsmovies.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/scarlett_johansson_ironman2_blackwidow-520x348.jpg)
Didn't stay 'till the end thou. Can you say what happened? ... please?
-Jimmybob
***SPOILERS***
You see what happened to the agent babysitting Stark. He's going off to the Arizona desert, where they're digging up Thor's hammer.
***END***
That said, I enjoyed the film. I think in terms of character development and structure, it in general was not as good as the first. But, I think it had more action and I thought the final action scene was very good. It was still enjoyable.
Much like the first one though, I didn't enjoy it as much as it seemed many others did. I think my biggest problem is I can't really connect with Stark as a character in either film. Yeah, he's charming and charismatic, but he's just too smarmy and too much of an ass for me to like. I ended up liking Rhodes more, who has probably 1/3rd the screen time. Also, what's the deal with Whiplash's father's background? From everything we're told, Howard Stark really did screw him over BADLY.
I mean, Howard didn't like that the man wanted to make money off of an invention, which seemed baffling to me considering how rich Howard Stark obviously was. But, this is never really addressed in the movie.
Whatever though. It was still enjoyable.
7/10.
Quote from: jimmybob on May 07, 2010, 09:19:34 PM
Although I can't help feeling sold short that we didn't get to see more of The Black Widow.
It would have been nice to see more of her. I thought the Black Widow's fight sequence was as good or better than the ones involving Iron Man.
If you're going to see it with high hopes: she only removes her shirt for about 2 seconds.
-Jimmybob
Going to see it tomorrow. Looking forward to it. :cheers:
Liked it. A lot of action, some new characters, but a little confusing here and there. One thing I kept thinking was almost everyone in this movie was bone thin. Don't any of these people ever eat?
Fun flick! Just got back. :teddyr:
I've never seen the first one, or the sequel. They just don't appeal to me.
I didn't see it myself, because all of my friends who's judgement on film can be trusted, voted for "waste of time and money !" :question:
Quote from: oxode on May 13, 2010, 03:15:53 PM
I didn't see it myself, because all of my friends who's judgement on film can be trusted, voted for "waste of time and money !" :question:
They are so wrong. Pure summer movie entertainment and worth every penny of the admission price (assuming you're a fan of comic book movies).
Seeing how much the 2nd one grossed so far, I think it is fairly safe to say, we'll most likely get an "Iron Man 3."
Quote from: BoyScoutKevin on May 13, 2010, 07:20:06 PM
Seeing how much the 2nd one grossed so far, I think it is fairly safe to say, we'll most likely get an "Iron Man 3."
Way back when, it was announced that in addition to Iron Man, Downey was signed on for 2 sequels, The Avengers, and a cameo in The Incredible Hulk. So far, 1&2 have come out and he was in Hulk.
I didn't like it as much as the first one. I don't know where you all saw all the action, because I sure didn't see it. Mickey Roarke fought Tony at the racetrack (most of that fight was already in the trailer) and that was it until the very end. The "big fight" at the end was also far too short, but the fight with the drones was pretty good (but still too short). There was the scuffle with Don Cheadle but that was mostly a gag, not an action scene.
The rest of the movie was too unfocused. Tony's alcoholism and illness were brought up and dropped too easily. Tony even said so himself when he refined that element.
At least whenever Mickey Roarke was around the movie was pure gold.
Iron Man 2 certainly isn't a bad movie but I didn't think it was all that good, either.
Definitely go to a matinee or wait for the $1 theater if you haven't seen it yet.
QuoteThe "big fight" at the end was also far too short, but the fight with the drones was pretty good (but still too short).
The action wasn't as well-distributed, but I'd hazard a guess and say in terms of actual run time, the second film has more action than the first. The finale was a continuous action scene lasting something like 20 minutes.
Saw it last weekend, when I had some time to slip into the city and catch a movie. Lots of action, lots of laughs, and although I wasn't sure about Mickey Rourke as a Backlash/Crimson Dynamo cross, he was great. Vanko and Hammer had some good chemistry. And Gary Shandling was a nice surprise.
I figured there would be something at the end of the credits, but I didn't stick around for it.
Saw it 2 days ago. Pretty good movie, cool effects, good acting.
I had fun watching it. I've expected to be worst but I had a little good surprise.
I haven't seen Ironman 1 to compare the movies but I thing number 2 was cool.
George
it was pretty good. Its not on spiderman or dark knight level but alot better then the fantastic four movies.
Getting in VERY late to this because I've been putting it off seeing it. I found it absolutely boring and tedious with even the climax not coming close to paying off. I was actually surprised at the complete and total lack of actual Iron Man in this movie. In the two hour running time I think he appears on screen for about literally 20 minutes of it at best. To me this was as big of a stinker as Shrek 4 in the race for "worst of 2010".
My wife and I watched it last weekend. We found it pretty entertaining, but we're easy to please. I never read any of the IM comics, so I had no preconceptions of any of the characters.
Quote from: Jim H on May 07, 2010, 10:41:25 PM
Also, what's the deal with Whiplash's father's background? From everything we're told, Howard Stark really did screw him over BADLY.
I mean, Howard didn't like that the man wanted to make money off of an invention, which seemed baffling to me considering how rich Howard Stark obviously was. But, this is never really addressed in the movie.
I liked it better than the first one. Downey Jr. was more confortable in his shoes as Stark, the action bits were cooler and liked a lot the character Mickey Rourke played. Much more complex and dark than your usual villain. Now, one thing I could have done without, Scarlet Johansson. Her scenes looked too much like some trailer for an upcoming Black Widow film. And Jon Favreau playing comic relief was just painful to watch.
I've quoted what Jim H said about Wiplash and Stark's father because I think the movie sohuld have explored this much better. I never understood completely if Whiplash had a genuine reason for hating Stark's guts or if it was just a personal obssession. I for one think that Stark Sr. screwing over Wiplash and Stark Sr. learning about it too late and trying to make things right too late would have been more interesting.