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