Iron Man 2 Discussion [Archive]

Adam Blue

05-07-2010, 07:59 AM

I couldn't find a thread for this, oddly.

I thought the movie was ok. It was just as ok as the first one. The actors and cgi are great, but I don't like how the movie is put together and find it lacking in comic book action. I still think the new Hulk did it better and I really wish there was a sequel to that.

All the Shield/Avenger talk is what really made the movie for me if anything

Post-credits ruled though. Thor's Hammer looked like a comic book object just sitting there. It was great.

Whunpo

05-07-2010, 09:44 AM

I thought it was awesome. Everything just clicked and was incredibly badass. I am so ready for more of the Avengers. It's all pretty great, in my opinion.

menage

05-07-2010, 10:04 AM

Is the endbattle or something at least a real fight this time? Last times accidental victory and suit malfunctions didn´t scream awesome to me.

Karak

05-07-2010, 10:07 AM

Wooooo. NOT what I expected to read. These are like reviews for a completely different freaking movie than anyone else saw.

Now I am torn:)

OldJadedGamer

05-07-2010, 10:44 AM

Saw it at Midnight last night and thought it was really good. I'm surprised this is the same director as the movie ELF. But the scene where Pepper throws his helmet from the plane isn't in the movie.

Adam Blue

05-07-2010, 01:18 PM

Other reasons I was disappointed:

Little action IMO. Because of the director, character development was strong...but too strong. Sometimes it just went on...and on. Part of this was jumping around to different plot points too much.

No real villain. Rourke didn't have much going on in the movie. I never felt he was much of a threat, and it seemed Stark didn't seem him as such either.

Since the first seemed similar in disappointment, I'll say it has to do with the director. He does a great job but not really for comic book movies, IMO.

But I can understand if some people like more character interation than action. It's why I don't like Lost, but like something like Burn Notice.

Vandabo

05-07-2010, 04:31 PM

I liked it overall, but I don't think it had the same charm as the first movie did. I think a bunch of the dialogue was too quick, and the way he discovers his new power source was kind of lame I thought.

Whunpo

05-07-2010, 07:47 PM

Wooooo. NOT what I expected to read. These are like reviews for a completely different freaking movie than anyone else saw.

Now I am torn:)

See it. There's nothing bad about this movie except maybe "It's not as good as the first" and I don't know if I even agree with that.

DiBiddilyBop

05-07-2010, 08:28 PM

I actually enjoyed it just as much as the first one. Good acting, fun story, I'm liking Mickey Rourke the more I see him, and Scarlett was looking *HOT*. All-in-all, I'd recommend to anyone who enjoyed the first film.

TheKeck

05-07-2010, 08:57 PM

Pigeon

05-08-2010, 01:03 AM

Definitely a must see, not perfect but still awesome

Cactaur

05-08-2010, 01:12 AM

But the scene where Pepper throws his helmet from the plane isn't in the movie.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1935011

Vigil80

05-08-2010, 01:43 AM

But the scene where Pepper throws his helmet from the plane isn't in the movie.
Crap, I hate when they do that. How is a scene good enough for the previews not good enough to make the final cut? That seems so backwards.

Seems like directors often overdo it when cutting. I've seen a few director's commentaries that talk about losing a scene being good for the integrity of the film or some crap. But cutting a few minutes of perfectly good footage isn't turning a stinker into a winner.

MalReynolds

05-08-2010, 02:08 AM

Saw it last night and enjoyed it alot and Scarlett was pretty HOT! only thing that bother me was a few of the Nick Fury parts... kinda just felt weird.

Narradisall

05-08-2010, 03:07 AM

I saw it last night too. I noticed the bit with the Potts kissing the iron man mask on the plane and throwing it out wasn't there. That threw me a bit.

The throw down between the mark II and mark IV in Starks home was all types of awesome though.

rinichanraar

05-08-2010, 03:16 AM

It was quite entertaining. Some silly stuff going on and goofy plot holes, I thought, as well as some anti-climactic stuff and other less than stellar things. Still, I liked it a lot. Lots of good humor like the first show.

Yeah, I liked the movie and thought it was a ton of fun, but I wasn't in love with the way the last ten or so minutes played out. For some reason, it just didn't feel very smooth, and I agree with you in that I felt it was kind of anti-climactic.

The throw down between the mark II and mark IV in Starks home was all types of awesome though.

pronounconnoun and I agree that that was pretty sweet. I'd have to see it again, but I probably enjoyed it more than the boss fight.

I liked it overall, but I don't think it had the same charm as the first movie did.

This is how I feel. It was pretty awesome, and I definitely liked it! I just wasn't in love with it like I was with the first one. I was totally crazy about the first movie.

CES

05-08-2010, 08:26 AM

As with the first movie, I found it slightly difficult to cheer Stark on considering how much of a dick he is to everyone (it's ramped up for this movie) though I guess it's in keeping with the comics in that regard. Far more character development compared to the first movie but it's still a summer popcorn movie.

The four types of Hammertech drones look so much like something from the Gundam series it's insane. Mech heaven though.

Crap, I hate when they do that. How is a scene good enough for the previews not good enough to make the final cut? That seems so backwards.

Seems like directors often overdo it when cutting. I've seen a few director's commentaries that talk about losing a scene being good for the integrity of the film or some crap. But cutting a few minutes of perfectly good footage isn't turning a stinker into a winner.

The reason is because that scene is right at the start of the film while Pepper and Stark don't get together till the last scene in the film after she tries to quit.

cawblen

05-08-2010, 08:36 AM

i loved the film. it could have had more action though but i criticize a lot of movies for not having good enough character development and this movie simply delivered in that department. the avenger hints were fantastic. it's a pity rourke didn't get more airtime since he acted the character so well but i guess all in all favreau did a decent job in balancing the growing cast.

also, Scarlett was HOTTTTTTTTTTTTT.

Wasson_

05-08-2010, 02:46 PM

I thought it kicked ass.

and I agree CES- suiting that the big battle towards the end took place in what looked like some kind of Japanese peace garden, I thought it was some kind of homage to be quite honest.

Sazime

05-08-2010, 03:26 PM

Narradisall

05-08-2010, 04:33 PM

Yeah, the Whiplash fight was waaay too quick.

I didnt stay for the Thor bit though, will have to utube it.

CES

05-08-2010, 04:55 PM

Ok, I'm going to just cover all of this with a spoiler tag.

I think the biggest problem with the movie people will have compared to the first is that Tony is a DICK for a good chunk of the movie. Yeah, it's Tony, but it's the Demon in a Bottle Tony. He's losing it and pushing everyone away.

Then, halfway through, the go into the S.H.E.I.L.D. thing WAY too much, imo. I think it'll help with introducing the Avengers, but why did we need 20 minutes with Nick Fury?

If they spent more time arcing the story into the final battle, it would have flowed better. Again, imo, the last 20 minutes was a hurried mess rather than the climatic battle where our heroes unite and beat the bad guy. Rhodes and Stark make up very quickly, then beat down Whiplash in what, 30 seconds? It was a little anticlimactic.

Actually the movie led me to believe that Stark's general bastardry in the movie was down to the fact that the core of his mini arc reactor was killing him. He knew he was dying so he decides to fuck with everyone in typical Stark fashion.

Also, just a bit of conjecture here. We saw Cap's shield again in an unfinished state and Stark (via his father) just created a new element that appparently, when you bond it with metal it can absorb a hell of a lot of energy (namely, the high-power megalaser) and to my knowledge he never named said element.

rinichanraar

05-08-2010, 05:01 PM

Ok, I'm going to just cover all of this with a spoiler tag.

I think the biggest problem with the movie people will have compared to the first is that Tony is a DICK for a good chunk of the movie. Yeah, it's Tony, but it's the Demon in a Bottle Tony. He's losing it and pushing everyone away.

Then, halfway through, the go into the S.H.E.I.L.D. thing WAY too much, imo. I think it'll help with introducing the Avengers, but why did we need 20 minutes with Nick Fury?

If they spent more time arcing the story into the final battle, it would have flowed better. Again, imo, the last 20 minutes was a hurried mess rather than the climatic battle where our heroes unite and beat the bad guy. Rhodes and Stark make up very quickly, then beat down Whiplash in what, 30 seconds? It was a little anticlimactic.

Yeah, I read yesterday that Samuel L. Jackson wanted more screen time and almost didn't reprise his role as Nick Fury, so I think they needed to appease him by throwing in more SHIELD stuff.

And I mentioned it briefly earlier, but I completely agree with you about the end of the movie. I definitely felt like the end went by way too fast. A lot more time was spent fighting the drones than Whiplash, and I don't think they should have let his fight finish up so quickly. Then, even after the fight was over, I felt everything kind of rushed to the credits.

Hyperglide

05-08-2010, 08:23 PM

Watched it last night and was thouroughly impressed, and was entertained through out. I liked it more than the 1st one. There was more to see and Warmachine was totally badass.. which leads me to the villain Whiplash who was an excellent villain and way better than Obydiya Stain (sic) (which was the weakest part of the first movie). Mickey Rourke was a great addition.

I thought some parts were weak like all the parts with Sam Rockwell his character was pretty unneccessary. I also didn't like the whole Pepper being promoted to CEO sidestory and covering for Stark, it seemed to really drag the story down.

I also liked when at the end of the Stark Expo when we were looking from Stark's POV with director Jon Favreau character leading him through is fans and he says "here's Larry King" and it was Stan Lee I got a mild chuckle from that apparently no one else knew who he was in the theatre as it was pretty quiet.

Lastly as people mentioned the omission of the helmet scene with Pepper, they also took out the scene from the trailer where Scarlett fires off a shot from Iron Mans Hand Cannon.

TrackZero

05-08-2010, 08:29 PM

Very enjoyable film. I'd say the pacing was definitely broken in places, but always for comic book fanservice, so I could appreciate that.

TrackZero

05-08-2010, 08:31 PM

Lastly as people mentioned the omission of the helmet scene with Pepper, they also took out the scene from the trailer where Scarlett fires off a shot from Iron Mans Hand Cannon.

Yeah, I noticed that was missing as well as the entire scene with Pepper wishing him luck by kissing and throwing his helmet / the "you complete me" line. Instead we just got Tony fully suited jumping out. But I assume we can tell from this shot when/where the scene would have taken place once you've seen the film:

http://i39.tinypic.com/2hqdu03.jpg

Edit: Also knowing where that scene would have been gives more explanation to Pepper's freakout on her at that party "you know what you're doing!".

Vigil80

05-09-2010, 12:15 AM

Awesome, will purchase. Go see it.

Uatu

05-09-2010, 12:35 AM

Better than the first.

Karak

05-09-2010, 02:08 AM

Saw it.
Aside from a couple plot holes it was ok. Far less action than I was hoping for. S.J. is a pretty girl but the fucking idiotic action poses to sell movie posters were so bad that by about the 9th one in her fight near the end people around me were giggling. I was more embarrassed.
I liked Rourke as a bad guy a great deal though.
The ending was also...well worse than the first. Which I did not think possible. However, its not shooting to be an intelligent movie so if you like RDJ and are bored you could see far worse things.

rinichanraar

05-09-2010, 03:04 AM

S.J. is a pretty girl but the fucking idiotic action poses to sell movie posters were so bad that by about the 9th one in her fight near the end people around me were giggling. I was more embarrassed.

Yeah, I actually wasn't a big fan of the Black Widow action scene. I thought it was going to be fun, but it's as if they had to speed it up or something, and it looked awkward to me. I thought it looked kind of choppy. And, yeah, lots of posing.

Karak

05-09-2010, 10:15 AM

Yeah, I actually wasn't a big fan of the Black Widow action scene. I thought it was going to be fun, but it's as if they had to speed it up or something, and it looked awkward to me. I thought it looked kind of choppy. And, yeah, lots of posing.

Ya. One day they will figure out a way to mask background illumination during speeding up of moves so you don't get that weird strobe. If you have good eyes it ends up looking "crunchy"

I did love the fact that my wife went before me and later that night she came home. I said "did you like it?" and all she did was strike some obtuse pose and shook her head:)

Exodus

05-09-2010, 11:03 AM

It's a marvel movie, hollywood, basic story, allusions to please fans and steady amounts of quips.

I paid to watch 60 or so seconds of scarlet in tight black suit...she would make a great starcraft ghost...

For great arcs like the infinity gauntlet war, this style is alright. When it comes to the mutant registration story arc I would really hope they go the DC route.

I have high hopes for the next movie that's alluded to at the end that most of us already know about. I'm really glad they went with a not hugely known actor while others were praying to the gods it was brad pitt.

Dark Prince

05-09-2010, 11:29 AM

Saw it last night.
Thought it was great and was a lot more on the entertainment side then the first one. While I would agree there should've been a bit more action to go with, but for being a comic book movie, you have to go with character development over everything else first, at least IMO.

My favorite scene was definitely the party scene where War Machine and Iron Man were kicking each others ass. Although I do also agree they made up too quickly after bickering back and forth only a few minutes before.

Stayed after the credits as well and cheered just like everyone else did in my theater.

Would definitely pay to see this again.

Scull

05-09-2010, 05:46 PM

Saw it on Friday and enjoyed it quite a lot. It rates about the same as the first.

I was a bit annoyed with the whole S.H.I.E.L.D. bit as it felt very unnecessary, but I know Marvel is trying to tie everything together for Avengers, so I accept that it has a point, but it felt really forced.

Rourke was fantastic in his role, but his character could have been given a better back story. He just didn't feel terribly villainous and there were so many things that could have been brought to light with Vanko, his father and the Starks.

The end fight was another disappointing fight. Iron Man and War Machine stood in one spot and spun around in circles. Not terribly compelling. Then when Vanko shows up it was over before it began. With the improvements in the whips I would have expected greater chaos and damage, but it looks like it was less effective than the first time you see him.

Black Widow was hot, but god the action scenes were awful. She's a spy, let her shoot a gun, all the acrobatics in the world are going to make you more efficient at stopping you opponent.

Sam Rockwell is a great actor and I thought he did an admirable job with the role, but the way his character ended was just a huge let down. Assuming there are more Iron Man movies to come, Hammer is a major part of the Iron Man universe and makes for a terrific in the shadows kind of villain.

The Pepper Potts C.E.O. bit was bleh throughout, although it is nice that they got the romance started. Otherwise, Pepper was a non-vital bit of the movie.

Did anyone else think that the little tester was originally measuring B.A.C.? I thought that this would be a great way to start the Demon in a Bottle arc and resolve it in Iron Man 3, with Tony being self-destructive and not caring about anything. Instead it again led into a pointless little side story that wound up going nowhere.

Even with all my complaints I still enjoyed the movie and give it a solid 4/5.

Cerebus

05-09-2010, 06:16 PM

S.H.E.I.L.D?

Sheild?

S.H.I.E.L.D!

Scull

05-09-2010, 06:36 PM

S.H.E.I.L.D?

Sheild?

S.H.I.E.L.D!
I have no idea what you are talking about :)

Whunpo

05-09-2010, 06:52 PM

Psykoboy2

05-09-2010, 07:01 PM

So does everyone else here agree that the element that Stark discovered was Adamantium?

Nope. It didn't seem at all obvious to me.

bryan

05-09-2010, 07:04 PM

Black Widow was hot, but god the action scenes were awful. She's a spy, let her shoot a gun, all the acrobatics in the world are going to make you more efficient at stopping you opponent.

I don't think shooting the security guards were an option.

TheKeck

05-09-2010, 07:50 PM

bryan

05-09-2010, 07:54 PM

So, here's one of the major things that bugged me.

Spoilers to come obviously.

Twice, after Iron Man beat Ivan, he was lying there all smug and laughing and said "You lose." In both cases, nothing really came of it. It was like, they were setting him up to be this evil conniving genius, but instead he just comes off as sort of a moron who doesn't understand what's going on.

The first time, he was right - Tony's assertion and promise to the Senate hearing that the tech was 20 years away unraveled that day and put him at direct loggerheads with the country, and Rhodey.

The second time, he destroyed the Expo. Perhaps he knew Pepper was still in the grounds but I can't point to anything so that's just inference on my part.

TheKeck

05-09-2010, 07:59 PM

The first time, he was right - Tony's assertion and promise to the Senate hearing that the tech was 20 years away unraveled that day and put him at direct loggerheads with the country, and Rhodey.

The second time, he destroyed the Expo. Perhaps he knew Pepper was still in the grounds but I can't point to anything so that's just inference on my part.

I understood his point in both cases, but it doesn't change the fact that he was wrong. In the end, Iron Man came up roses, was given a medal by the very Senator who was giving him grief, and escaped the self destructing droids and saved Pepper from them as well.

bryan

05-09-2010, 08:07 PM

How is he a moron in the first instance? It went off exactly as planned and finally led to a confrontation with his best friend.

Secondly, he did destroy the Expo. As he said before, Vanko believes in destroying legacies, and Stark did see that for his Expo. Ultimately yes Stark wins, but that's true of every comic book movie. Perhaps you have a different expectation for Vanko? He's most certainly not a Mandarin type villain with some multi layered evil plan. Vanko is more direct, and both times when he said 'You lose.' He was right. He won that particular battle. He brought Stark and the US of A to loggerheads, and he destroyed his Expo. It's just that Stark won the war. But that's a foregone conclusion before you even walked into the cinema. :)

Laughing Penguin

05-09-2010, 08:11 PM

So does everyone else here agree that the element that Stark discovered was Adamantium? Because they never came out and said it, but it was so screamingly obvious to me I couldn't believe they didn't say it.

Actually, it would make more sense if it were Vibranium, both because it's a core element in Cap's shield, and no chance of any kind of hissy fit from Fox for any kind of percieved intrusion into their Wolverine territory.

Exodus

05-09-2010, 08:20 PM

Vibranium is what absorbs energy. Adamantium is what makes it indestructible. Personally I'm for vibranium but let's face it cap loses shields more than once and several can be made.

Pigeon

05-09-2010, 09:21 PM

Vibranium is a naturally occurring element in the Marvel U. Adamantium isn't.

Church42

05-09-2010, 09:21 PM

In regards to the previews of Pepper kissing the helmet and tossing it over the side I'm actually kind of glad they cut those parts out of movies...watch enough variations of the spoilers and you can see too much of a movie before you actually see it.

Scull

05-09-2010, 10:04 PM

I don't think shooting the security guards were an option.
Tranq gun then.

Whunpo

05-09-2010, 10:36 PM

Nope. It didn't seem at all obvious to me.

Even with Cap's shield? Because I had always thought it was made of adamantium (but it sounds like there could be some vibranium in there as well?)

Laughing Penguin

05-09-2010, 10:44 PM

Vibranium is a naturally occurring element in the Marvel U. Adamantium isn't.

According to the movie-verse it is... came from a meteor, it wasn't manufactured. Just sayin'

Pigeon

05-09-2010, 11:40 PM

Well, if that's the case that means that Stark(s) still didn't invent them

Narradisall

05-10-2010, 01:39 AM

I did love that part.

"That's it, that will do!"
*guy picks up caps shield*
"Do you know what this is?"
"That'll do nicely"
*uses it to hold up the reactor tubing*

cassiusregicide

05-10-2010, 09:49 AM

So does everyone else here agree that the element that Stark discovered was Adamantium? Because they never came out and said it, but it was so screamingly obvious to me I couldn't believe they didn't say it.

If it was adamantium, it almost assuredly means there's a reboot coming for the x-men franchise once they get the rights back.

Superman's Dead

05-10-2010, 09:58 AM

Even with Cap's shield? Because I had always thought it was made of adamantium (but it sounds like there could be some vibranium in there as well?)

It's some strange combination of both of them that only happened once, and was never able to be reproduced (like the super soldier serum). The uniqueness of Cap's shield is an important plot point, and one that I hope they stick with.

Blue

05-10-2010, 03:16 PM

Didn't do anything for me. The first was enjoyable and a welcome surprise, this one...I don't know. I was bored most of the time, the villain(s) felt painfully underused, and the plot was just an excuse really to set up Avengers. It wasn't awful, but it was just bland, like poorly made chicken or broccoli. No real flavor to it. I thought the characters were quite well done and made the movie as good as it was but the superhero bits were just...there. And again the ending was wicked quick and a let-down overall. I want a real villain to fight him and give IM an actual challenge.

So yeah, worth seeing on Netflix maybe but wasn't good enough to pay ticket price for I didn't think. Ah well.

OrangePulp

05-11-2010, 04:22 PM

Dukefrukem

05-13-2010, 08:53 AM

IM2 is very mediocre. But it's still the third best superhero franchise. RDJ was spot on.

Exodus

05-13-2010, 08:56 AM

I enjoyed the movie, but like a lot of people in the thread, there's quite a bit to nitpick. I think the worst issue is why they decided to go with another gimmick victory against the end boss, like they did in the first one. What's wrong with Iron man and War machine just putting the beatdown on him, until he has to activate his bombs? Felt like they were running low on the CG budget, or something.

What if I were to tell you that the director was actually told to cut the movie and halve the last fight scene?

What if I were to tell you that the higher ups wanted the movie to be shorter and didn't care because hell people will pay to see it anyway and won't know the difference?

What if?

Dostoyevsky

05-13-2010, 09:19 PM

I thought it was not only a huge disappointment, but just a stupid movie.

Where the first excelled because it took the time to ground Tony Stark and his adversaries in some semblance of reality, 2 starts things off at silly and quickly spirals into ridiculous.

Widgetcraft

05-14-2010, 06:58 PM

God damn, I loved it! Just got back from it. I think about half of the movie was pure action, so I'm not sure what Adam is talking about in the OP. The story bits were good, and not overdone; I was surprised by how much I ended up liking the antagonists. I'm a tad disappointed in the under use of War Machine, but I guess that is what sequels are for, eh?

I'd say it might be better than the first movie, which I loved. The story was probably better in the first, but this one packed more of a punch. Also really loved all of the build up for The Avengers.

Ended up buying an Iron Man figure after the movie. It's the Mark VI 3.75" figure (the one with the snap-on missile launcher, not the glowing one). I was tempted to buy the slightly larger 6" figure, but it was about twice the price, and I had issues with it's sculpt an paint job. The pain job just looked sloppy in some places, sort of like the old Marvel Legends figures used to be. War Machine looked significantly better, except that his arc reactor looked wonky. Then again, my problem with the whole line is that the arc reactors are stickers instead of proper sculpting.

bryan

05-14-2010, 09:27 PM

Tranq gun then.

She did use some techy stuff that I guess are supposed to be representations of her Widow's Bite. I don't disagree that she should have used a more expedient and faster way to take them out tho. She's supposed to be a great martial artist, but an even better superagent.

Ink Asylum

05-14-2010, 11:43 PM

Just got back from it. Loved it and my girlfriend loved it, too. Since she's Russian she got to snicker at the bad accents and dialog.

There was plenty of action, in my opinion. I also felt the final fight was a bit rushed, but all the other action scenes worked great.

I didn't even know Sam Rockwell was in the film, so it was a treat for me, as he's one of my favorite actors. I think he played his role excellently and provided plenty of laughs at his expense. I also don't think his character is done. He's rich and connected. He's not going to be languishing in jail. The final scene with him was interesting. He seemed to have genuinely realized he fucked up and felt betrayed that Pepper called the cops on him. He'll be back, nursing an even bigger grudge.

The comic book origins of vibranium, or whatever material Cap's shield is made of, doesn't really matter as far as the movies are concerned. If they want Stark to invent it he'll invent it, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if it's the same element he created in this movie. Does anyone really think it'll come from a meteor in the Cap movie? That's a wasted origin when you can instead tie two characters together with a new one.

Widgetcraft

05-15-2010, 07:04 AM

The comic book origins of vibranium, or whatever material Cap's shield is made of, doesn't really matter as far as the movies are concerned. If they want Stark to invent it he'll invent it, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if it's the same element he created in this movie. Does anyone really think it'll come from a meteor in the Cap movie? That's a wasted origin when you can instead tie two characters together with a new one.

But how can Stark invent vibranium when Cap has his shield in WW2?

Ink Asylum

05-15-2010, 07:24 AM

The WW2 shield could be just normal materials, but he needs something much stronger in the present to go up against bigger threats.

Shjinta

05-15-2010, 07:24 AM

But how can Stark invent vibranium when Cap has his shield in WW2?

Cap running around with a cheap knock off? *cough

Sazime

05-15-2010, 08:16 AM

But how can Stark invent vibranium when Cap has his shield in WW2?
I looked at is as something Stark's dad came up with and the element was classified until now. Or adamantium. Either way, it was there, but only SHIELD holds the info on it.

Widgetcraft

05-15-2010, 08:48 AM

I looked at is as something Stark's dad came up with and the element was classified until now.

But we know that up through the 70's (when he made the expo video), Howard Stark wasn't able to synthesize it. That's why he left that message for Tony. Though, the idea that he might have been able to make it eventually would explain why the fuck the shield was in that box of junk to begin with.

Or maybe the vibranium did come from a meteorite, and Howard was just never able to duplicate it... Yeah, I like that explanation. It allows Cap's shield to be made of vibranium, and for Tony to have still made a breakthrough in recreating it.

Sazime

05-15-2010, 09:13 AM

But we know that up through the 70's (when he made the expo video), Howard Stark wasn't able to synthesize it. That's why he left that message for Tony. Though, the idea that he might have been able to make it eventually would explain why the fuck the shield was in that box of junk to begin with.

Or maybe the vibranium did come from a meteorite, and Howard was just never able to duplicate it... Yeah, I like that explanation. It allows Cap's shield to be made of vibranium, and for Tony to have still made a breakthrough in recreating it.
If I remember right, that was where Adamantium came from, a meteor that landed in Africa that was being mined for all it was worth. Then again, Wolverine is a Fox thing and who knows if Marvel will even reference it at an ancillary point.

Or, it's the Black Box. We never get to know and it doesn't really matter. It just works, deal with it. :)

zarathstra

05-15-2010, 09:40 AM

If I remember right, that was where Adamantium came from, a meteor that landed in Africa that was being mined for all it was worth. Then again, Wolverine is a Fox thing and who knows if Marvel will even reference it at an ancillary point.

Or, it's the Black Box. We never get to know and it doesn't really matter. It just works, deal with it. :)

Vibranium comes from a mound in Wakanda. Caps shield was created from a combination of iron and vibranium in an experiment that was never successfully recreated. Adamantium was created in an attempt to reverse engineer to shield. In the comics, anyway.

All that being said, I have no problem with Cap's shield being made from a hunk of found vibranium, and Stark being the first to recreate it. That would also explain why the shield was disassembled. Howard Stark was trying, and failing, to reproduce what it was made of.

anakin876

05-15-2010, 09:52 AM

I wish the people in charge of the movies paid this much attention to continuity. When they do it makes the movie experience richer and creates an environment in which the "willing suspension of disbelief" does not become a chore.

divinechaos

05-15-2010, 10:18 AM

I saw it last night and it was a huge MEH. I HATED the first one, and the only reason for me that this one was ok was because of Micky Rourke and AC/DC. I really hate the shots the director chooses and the way the story is dragged out unnecessarily. Downey is great in it, but I feel like if there is truly an untapped potential in the Iron Man world, they haven't found it yet. I loved Dark Knight, Watchmen and Kick-Ass, Marvel movies just ain't up to bar as far as I'm concerned.

Urizen

05-16-2010, 03:03 AM

Disappointing. It didn't have any of the charm of the first one. Every gadget was already shown. Stark's computer at home - Jarvis - got nothing. Pepper was made to look like someone in over her ahead and completely incompetent, which is totally out of character.

The dialogue wasn't as sharp and quick as the original, either.

The fight at Chateau de Stark was ridiculous, and Rhodes' response absurd. The pacing, the unevenness, the breaks in continuity and plot holes - they played a part knocking the movie down.

It felt like the Transformers team had taken over to make this sequel. Inception can't come out soon enough.

Widgetcraft

05-16-2010, 09:32 AM

Pepper was made to look like someone in over her ahead and completely incompetent, which is totally out of character.

I really wish you guys could have seen Iron Man 2 instead of whatever it was you went and watched. In Iron Man 2, they go out of their way to show that Pepper is very much in control. She was directing the police at the end of the movie, and stayed behind in the expo to make sure that everyone go out alright; this was only the most prominent example of her being shown being well in control of Stark Industries. Sure, she had a break down at the very end of the movie, after being nearly blown up and snatched up by her former boss. Who wouldn't? She isn't a super hero.

Urizen

05-16-2010, 07:21 PM

I really wish you guys could have seen Iron Man 2 instead of whatever it was you went and watched. In Iron Man 2, they go out of their way to show that Pepper is very much in control. She was directing the police at the end of the movie, and stayed behind in the expo to make sure that everyone go out alright; this was only the most prominent example of her being shown being well in control of Stark Industries. Sure, she had a break down at the very end of the movie, after being nearly blown up and snatched up by her former boss. Who wouldn't? She isn't a super hero.

That just speaks to the unevenness I was talking about. For 95 of the 100 minutes, she was a whiny, fidgety, discombobulated mess. And then she turns around to come "this" close to exposing Black Widow, bringing the authorities to Hammer, assume the role of Police Commissioner and personally escort any weak or injured civilians at the Expo to safety in stilettos.

The action was really poorly conceived and choreographed right throughout. Black Widow's sequence has already been addressed. Mark 2 and 4 literally throwing a kitchen sink at each other was silly. Stark building a mini Super Hadron Collider in an afternoon was silly. Iron Man not attempting to beat Whiplash the way he beat him the first time was silly.

At the end, Whiplash had them both tied up, and they both tried to pull away from him. What sense does that make in the context of the first battle?

Handmade.Mercury

05-16-2010, 09:04 PM

Rhodes' first lines to address the topic of Cheadle as new actor was really funny.

"I'm here, it's me, now let's move on."

Also, since when do H.A.M.M.E.R. and S.H.I.E.L.D. exist simultaneously? Unless it's just a coincidence.

zarathstra

05-16-2010, 09:09 PM

Dostoyevsky

05-16-2010, 09:48 PM

The action was really poorly conceived and choreographed right throughout. Black Widow's sequence has already been addressed. Mark 2 and 4 literally throwing a kitchen sink at each other was silly. Stark building a mini Super Hadron Collider in an afternoon was silly. Iron Man not attempting to beat Whiplash the way he beat him the first time was silly.

It bothers me even more that Ivan Vanko built a miniature arc reactor in a Russian ghetto while drunk. It negates Tony Starks "built it in a cave!" accomplishment by being even more ridiculous. Let's just forget the fact he was then omniscient enough to know Tony Stark would impulsively enter the race in Monaco.

The overall silliness of the film is my biggest complaint aside from force feeding us Avengers crap. Yes, Iron Man 2 is fun, but it was also pretty dumb, and there's no reason to be satisfied when the previous film showed they could handle being both fun and smart.

Handmade.Mercury

05-16-2010, 09:58 PM

I don't recall H.A.M.M.E.R. being in the movie...

Hey, cut me some slack. I'm not a big comic fan, so I didn't know there was both a Justin Hammer, CEO of Hammer Industries and a H.A.M.M.E.R.

I think it's stupid to have two antagonistic entities with nearly the same name.

Exodus

05-16-2010, 10:02 PM

It bothers me even more that Ivan Vanko built a miniature arc reactor in a Russian ghetto while drunk. It negates Tony Starks "built it in a cave!" accomplishment by being even more ridiculous. Let's just forget the fact he was then omniscient enough to know Tony Stark would impulsively enter the race in Monaco.

The overall silliness of the film is my biggest complaint aside from force feeding us Avengers crap. Yes, Iron Man 2 is fun, but it was also pretty dumb, and there's no reason to be satisfied when the previous film showed they could handle being both fun and smart.

Yeah but the silliness is inherent considering the source material.

You can't hate the movies for being kiddy when the comics were kiddy. I mean yeah...Dark Knight really upped the anti because it's at a level that we as adults can enjoy. Marvel is going after the kids it could care less about making it for adults.

Entertainment business works like this. Target the kids. Make profit.

Ink Asylum

05-16-2010, 10:33 PM

Let's just forget the fact he was then omniscient enough to know Tony Stark would impulsively enter the race in Monaco.

He didn't have to know he'd enter the race. He could've used the crew outfit to get close to Tony in the stands or somewhere else on the premises then break out the whips. As soon as Tony entered the race it was on all the televisions and Ivan had plenty of time to change his plans and just confront him on the track.

Urizen

05-16-2010, 11:48 PM

Yeah but the silliness is inherent considering the source material.

You can't hate the movies for being kiddy when the comics were kiddy. I mean yeah...Dark Knight really upped the anti because it's at a level that we as adults can enjoy. Marvel is going after the kids it could care less about making it for adults.

Entertainment business works like this. Target the kids. Make profit.

I disagree. There's plenty of silly Batman to take inspiration from. There's plenty of silly Hulk to take inspiration from. But the recent movies using those characters showed they can be more while still being action vehicles. Iron Man doesn't have to be silly.

Say what you want about Civil War for trying to re-write the Marvel Universe, it wasn't silly and its fans are legion. I'm going to go out on a limb and work under the assumption that this is the movie they would have made if they already had a hit under their belt towards a franchise and the studio gave them a lot of freedom. But that's just me.

Iron Man and War Machine beat Whiplash with the same trick that worked on the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.

Exodus

05-17-2010, 12:07 AM

I disagree. There's plenty of silly Batman to take inspiration from. There's plenty of silly Hulk to take inspiration from. But the recent movies using those characters showed they can be more while still being action vehicles. Iron Man doesn't have to be silly.

Say what you want about Civil War for trying to re-write the Marvel Universe, it wasn't silly and its fans are legion. I'm going to go out on a limb and work under the assumption that this is the movie they would have made if they already had a hit under their belt towards a franchise and the studio gave them a lot of freedom. But that's just me.

Iron Man and War Machine beat Whiplash with the same trick that worked on the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.

Marvel simply won't go the same route that DC is going and the numbers show that they don't have to. And yes, i feel the exact same way about the last fight(you should spoiler that btw).

I've waged the same war for the same cause but it's just not winnable when the only thing that matters if were you entertained. As long as people were entertained they don't really care. Seeing Robert Downy Jr. be Tony Stark and people will say "Hey, that's just like him in the comic book" a role that isn't anywhere of a stretch for anyone especially him. They got to see glorious CG. Hell I got to see war machine in top notch CG live action...I dreamed about this shit when I was a kid that I always thought wouldn't this be cool.

It appeals to the kid in me but I know so much more now and want so much more now.

This is first and foremost, for kids. And that's why you just can't fight it. The success of Dark Knight aside, how many kids and people who don't know dick about the darker side of Batman liked it? You gotta admit the movie has a hell of a lot of talking.

Sazime

05-17-2010, 12:44 AM

Marvel simply won't go the same route that DC is going and the numbers show that they don't have to. And yes, i feel the exact same way about the last fight(you should spoiler that btw).
Huh? What route is DC going? They have a route?

Zanzibar

05-17-2010, 12:43 PM

Lemme just add: UGH. Okay, Scarlett has a nice ass, but there's no 'there' there. 'Yay. I have no personality. Again.' Didn't buy her as Black Widow, who at least has SOME charisma when she opens her mouth. (Err..well..okay, fine, but you know what I mean.)

And HOW does anyone buy Sam Rockwell as a powerful CEO? His characterization works well for a mealy-mouthed subordinate that nobody trusts, but hell, even Garry Shandling delivered more gravitas as a Senator than this fucktard did. Don't get me wrong, I've seen PLENTY that I loved Sam Rockwell in.

Sam Jackson as Nick Fury just...I dunno. He didn't seem 'together' to me.

Ink Asylum

05-17-2010, 12:57 PM

Handmade.Mercury

05-17-2010, 01:20 PM

Although we won't know for sure until this version of the character is fleshed out, perhaps Hammer is Stark's opposite, the son of the company namesake that, rather than being as brilliant as his dad, is a complete tool and clearly shouldn't be running the company. It's clear that his technology is more prone to failure than Stark's, and probably the only way the company stays afloat is because he's sucking the government teat by being the lowest bidder and having no scruples.

When the "ex-wife" failed, did anyone else think that it was never meant to actually work? It was purely just a hyped-up piece of plastic that he would sell as a one-off product to some fool in order to make a boat load of cash?

Ink Asylum

05-17-2010, 01:29 PM

Is that really the kind of product you want to sell to the biggest purchaser of weaponry in the world?

The sales pitch for that ranks up there with Zorg describing the ZF-1, in my opinion.

Urizen

05-17-2010, 02:21 PM

even Garry Shandling delivered more gravitas as a Senator than this fucktard did.

Here's another: Hammer gets a call from one of his henchmen when the man is at the golf course with -- who else? -- Sen. Stern. Hammer mentions Vanko as being alive and causing trouble for while playing golf with the Senator.

I don't know if you guys have ever seen these called 'movies' before, but they follow certain rules and conventions. When you play that scene the way it was done, you damn Sen. Stern as being in complete cahoots with Hammer. Stern is undoubtedly shown to be someone in on the conspiracy to use Vanko to discredit and disgrace Stark.

If all Iron Man 2 was ever meant to be was mindless distraction, it failed at that level as well.

Ink Asylum

05-17-2010, 02:52 PM

Urizen

05-17-2010, 04:33 PM

I'll have to rewatch the scene, but was Hammer talking in a stage whisper? In movies people generally can talk much louder than you normally would into a cell phone without being overheard by people in your immediate vicinity.

Dude, there was no such suggestion. You go into a stage whisper with:

a. a look over your shoulder (to ward potential eavesdroppers)
b. physically lowering your body before you say anything incriminating
c. a change in your voice in some way, (you don't have to get softer, but you do have to change your voice - get raspy or something)
d. an extreme close-up of the whisperer

They made it a completely casual conversation with a shot keeping both Hammer and Stern in the frame. Then again, I must be going crazy because I'm apparently the only one who noticed this.

Exodus

05-17-2010, 04:34 PM

Dude, there was no such suggestion. You go into a stage whisper with:

a. a look over your shoulder (to ward potential eavesdroppers)
b. physically lowering your body before you say anything incriminating
c. a change in your voice in some way, (you don't have to get softer, but you do have to change your voice - get raspy or something)
d. an extreme close-up of the whisperer

They made it a completely casual conversation with a shot keeping both Hammer and Stern in the frame. Then again, I must be going crazy because I'm apparently the only one who noticed this.

You weren't the only one. Just didn't bother me or surprise me.

Vandabo

05-17-2010, 06:57 PM

One of the biggest thing that bugged me was the first appearance of Vanko at Monaco. He walks out onto the track with this harness on, but most of his body is still uncovered. What's keeping all the cops/guards that are undoubtedly around from just popping a cap in him? It should have been a total Indiana Jones moment... big impressive bad guy swinging around his melee weapon, then getting shot.

Also, the weapon sales pitch by Hammer to Rhodes should have been a lot better; why the hell is he showing off 9mm pistols and pump action shotguns? The minigun and the 'ex-wife' (even though it didn't work) were the only things really worthy of strapping onto an Iron Man suit.

Ink Asylum

05-17-2010, 07:23 PM

One of the biggest thing that bugged me was the first appearance of Vanko at Monaco. He walks out onto the track with this harness on, but most of his body is still uncovered. What's keeping all the cops/guards that are undoubtedly around from just popping a cap in him? It should have been a total Indiana Jones moment... big impressive bad guy swinging around his melee weapon, then getting shot.

Now this is just severe nitpicking. Countless movies, especially superhero ones, have similar scenes. Cops only fire on comic book characters when it's going to show how completely useless bullets are. Otherwise they show up moments after the hero has mopped the floor with the bad guys.

Urizen

05-18-2010, 05:44 PM

You weren't the only one. Just didn't bother me or surprise me.

Hmmm..

So I revisited this scene. It's even more egregious than I presented in this thread. The conversation starts with Hammer on the golf course with Stern. He causally calls up Vanko and says, "I got the Senator here with me. We're going to come by to see the droids."

"Droids not ready."

"What do you mean they aren't ready? I'm losing my patience. Blah blah blah..."

"I can make them salute."

Sloppy, lazy and silly film-making is sloppy, lazy and silly. What a piece of shit this was...

Ink Asylum

05-18-2010, 05:50 PM

Does he mention Vanko by name or use any other identifying language? If not then I see nothing wrong with that conversation, as to Stern's ears Hammer could be talking to an engineer at his company. After all, Hammer was having the droids built specifically for the government to buy them from him, so of course he'd want Stern to look at them.

BigJonno

05-19-2010, 03:50 PM

I really enjoyed it. Not sure if I prefer it to the first or not, gotta wait for the newness to wear off first.

My only real complaint would be Black Widow. Scarlett Johansson just didn't look right and was bloody terrible in the role. And where was the Russian accent?

bryan

05-19-2010, 08:20 PM

My only real complaint would be Black Widow. Scarlett Johansson just didn't look right and was bloody terrible in the role. And where was the Russian accent?

I thought she looked alright for the role but yes where was the accent?

BigJonno

05-20-2010, 02:17 AM

I thought she looked alright for the role but yes where was the accent?

The character needs a stronger face and should definitely be a bit older, in my opinion. Johansson's in her mid-20s, but looks younger, too young to pull off Black Widow's general world-weary cynicism.

I will admit that I'm going by my relatively limited experience with the character, if any big Black Widow geeks want to correct me, I'm all ears.

zarathstra

05-20-2010, 06:08 AM

The character needs a stronger face and should definitely be a bit older, in my opinion. Johansson's in her mid-20s, but looks younger, too young to pull off Black Widow's general world-weary cynicism.

I will admit that I'm going by my relatively limited experience with the character, if any big Black Widow geeks want to correct me, I'm all ears.

It might have seemed odd to have a woman with a Russian accent as a deep cover operative at an American company, for an American intelligence agency? She did at least SPEAK Russian.