Review: Iron Man 2
Posted on 22 May 2010 under Essays
Pick the top 3 superhero movies of recent times. Spiderman, Batman and Iron Man. All 3 were wildly successful blockbusters, and all 3 brought something new to the table. Spiderman, for the first time, took us to the man behind the mask of the superhero. We were exposed to Peter Parker, the kid, the loser, the little boy with his insecurities and fallibilities. In Batman Begins, the show was stolen not by Batman, but, in my opinion, by Bruce Wayne. Batman Begins is the story of Bruce Wayne’s battles with his own demons and the journey from Bruce to Batman. The Dark Knight could only have come about as it did due to the solid foundation laid down by Batman Begins. Next, we come to Iron Man, which surprised many people by its success. Yet, there was a reason. We’ve already been exposed to an emo superhero alter-ego (Peter Parker/Spiderman) and a damaged, driven superhero haunted by his own problems (Bruce Wayne/Batman). Iron Man introduced us to a completely different kind of superhero. Tony Stark is everything Parker and Wayne cannot be—cocky, funny and over the top. And hell yes, it was a refreshing change.
The Dark Knight epitomised superhero movies for months after it was released, eclipsing the effect of the emotional, colourful Spiderman world with its black flair, seriousness and a truly psychotic villain (Joker/Heath Ledger). Enter Iron Man—an escape from the drudgery and gritty melancholy of The Dark Knight. It was fun, it was colourful and it was enjoyably over the top.
And that’s where Iron Man 2 has a great fall, going from “over the top” to “just plain ridiculous” most of the time. Suffering from the effects of using his Iron Man suit too much (a plotline that’s just thrown at you inexplicably a short while after film starts), Tony Stark starts doing things that one would think were too crazy even for Stark. Then he also goes down a path of self-destruction, which makes you roll your eyes in disbelief at what the director throws at you. Robert Downey Jr is probably the best choice to play Stark, but even he has trouble carrying off his new personality. Where has the wit gone? Where has the fun gone? In the first movie, Stark was irresistible, threw one-liners like a pro and his cockiness was enjoyable. In the second movie, he goes from one extreme to the next. When he attempts to be the Stark from the first movie, he gets highly annoying, something you don’t want your protagonist to become. And when he attempts to draw the audience’s sympathy, well, he fails miserably. But maybe that’s just because Tony Stark’s character isn’t meant to draw sympathy at all. Also, while we’re on the topic of Stark/Iron Man, I would have liked to have seen a few more Iron Man sequences than Tony Stark sequences.
Moving on to other characters then. Mickey Rourke deserves a mention for trying to do a good job. I couldn’t find much fault with his acting, which was limited, I felt, by the role he was offered. Scarlett Johansson is flawless…in appearance. Thank you, God, for creating her. Of course, it’s another story that she comes across as robotic as possible, and her action sequences reminded me painfully of Daredevil, one of the worst superhero movies I’ve ever seen. Gwyneth Paltrow was also much more likeable in the first movie, and somehow, the chemistry between Potts (Paltrow) and Stark (Downey Jr) is unfortunately colder than the first movie, despite them finally kissing. However, hers was the character that I most enjoyed, as Potts remains true to her devotion for Stark. The rest of the cast are ok too, but I cannot help questioning the casting of Don Cheadle as Lt. Colonel James Rhodes, a role played well by Terence Howard in the first movie. Don’s eyes are far too expressive and his face is far too serious to play Rhodes. Also, I’d like to make a special mention of actor Sam Rockwell, who plays arguably the most annoying character in the film, Justin Hammer.
All in all, too many things about this movie are annoying and so far away from reality that one really needs to leave one’s brains at home. I don’t mind explosions and special effects (which are generally not bad), but I like them when they’re at least remotely believable. The quality of the action sequences places this movie just a notch above crap like Charlie’s Angels and Daredevil, which is far from a compliment.
All in all, if you are going to watch this movie expecting it to pick up where the original left off, please lower your expectations. It does not. But you will want to watch it just to follow the storyline and be in touch with the inevitable sequel. And though I hate saying this about movies, if you want to “enjoy” this one, leave your brains at home.
Rating: 6/10
I agree with you.r review completely This was a ridiculous movie. I’m all for science fiction and science popularization but Fe (II) had some bizarre moments including the creation of a new element (what is the atomic number?) and lithium DIOXIDE.
Well written.
completely agree, this movie has traces of the epic success that was the iron man comic “Demon in a Bottle” but sadly does not explore it fully and the flood of villains is too much to handle esp. the character of whiplash is explored in too much detail. The subtleness of the original movie is missing.
Excellent observations and kudos for the unbiased autopsy of yet another Hollywood junk….I guess Hollywood is suffering form ‘Sci-Fi Diarrhea’
Thank you for your comments, everyone. I am looking to improve my reviewing skills and your compliments are more than a boost to my confidence.
@Anirban:
That is just ONE of the many ridiculous things in the movie that cannot be excused. Intelligent and at least remotely believable sci-fi has all but disappeared. This was the same reason why an epic like The Matrix had sequels that seemed like they were not even remotely related to the original.
@Ajay:
I am all for giving a good background to a villain; perhaps Favreau was trying to do a bit with Whiplash what Nolan did with Ledger/Joker. It was not bad except that Whiplash had way less personality than Joker did (at least in the respective movies).
@Suvrodip:
You’re right. After the success of Spiderman, superhero movies have made a strong come-back, and quite a few of them have been quite good too — the new Batman series, Watchmen (which I haven’t watched, but apparently it’s not bad), etc.
@Tidrug
Excellent review ^_^
BTW isn’t the character’s name Anthony a.k.a. Tony Stark? Howard was is father. This is what I remember from the Marvel comics as well as the movie.
I watched it on the IMAX…wasn’t too bad
I dare not compare it to the prequel!
P.S….please see watchmen..its pretty good.
Shrek 4 was timepass…some good oneliners…puss and donkey were refreshing.
Waiting for Prince of Persia on IMAX.
Thank you for correcting me.
I’ve begun writing reviews for everything in order to improve my reviewing and critiquing skills.
All suggestions (and compliments) are welcome!
I look forward to watching it as a timepass movie!
Probably the best way to enjoy it.
No wonder it is well said… Iron man … What a Fe-male
Ow, that sounds like the ultimate insult!
Hehe, by the way, did you notice your monster has cute eye-lashes?
Absolutely. It appeared like a movie
1) Made in absoulte rush. It appeared like this time, the director(instead of Tony Stark in the first movie) was held captive in that desert and was forced to make the movie or die.
2) Intent to cash in the success of the previous version and make quick bucks
3) Make the audience hate comic characters anymore. I mean, how can u have a superhero with his suit on and dance with girls by his side, and showing off his powers by blasting a watermelon over their heads. Absolutely pathetic.
Yep, that watermelon/cantaloupe scene was just one example of the many ridiculous scenes.
I agree with the change of character with Tony stark. i could have done without black widow and Nick Fury altogether. I’vereviewedit as a parody script as it had plenty to laugh about. I hope people like it I’ve posted it here.
http://www.bukisa.com/articles/286818_iron-man-2-first-draft-parody-script
@Nathan G: Ah, I didn’t know she was supposed to be Black Widow. Whatever she was supposed to be, she reminded me too much of Charlie’s Angels and their unbelievably cheese action sequences.
And why would my monster have only 3 very wiggly strands of hair?
Well, most of the others don’t have any!
And oh, brilliant! I have a third eye!
Love Shrek movies, very good animation.
Yes, I agree. Movies like Ice Age and Shrek have taken animation to a new level.
also Love Shrek movies, awesome animation movie.
I think Iron Man 2 and 1 were really good movies. It is not like the comics and the cartoon or probably I am getting older, but definitely not bad.
I’ve realised that nothing is going to be like the cartoon or comic versions. Sometimes, that’s a good thing and sometimes…well…
Frankly I thought the whole point of Iron Man II was Scarlett Johansson in that Lycra catsuit. You say “her performance is flawless…in appearance”. A bit cheeky. Anyhow I think it was more than appearance that made Gwyneth Paltrow so jealous and the movie was never going to be anything but lighthearted fun. Personally as I enjoyed both the film and your review, but the abiding memory for me is Scarlett…
I don’t remember details of the movie now, but I reckon Gwyneth acted better than Scarlett in that one?
i loved this movie but most of the stuff in the trailer isnt acually in the movie or is put in wierd order mashups.
I do agree with all of the ideas you’ve presented in your post. They are really convincing and will definitely work. Still, the posts are too short for novices. Could you please extend them a bit from next time? Thanks for the post.