Iron Man 2 was incredible!

[--OkeyDokey--]

stof said:

--OkeyDokey-- said:

stof said:
It got bogged down in trying to set up the Avengers, the whole "element" story was like a ridiculous Disney children's movie, The main villian was barely used and the whole thing was just not so great.

That said, I was entertained. I figure as long as you don't expect it to be nearly as good as the first one, you'll be entertained.

Can you explain how exactly the first Iron Man was better? I'll be the first to admit the sequel has more flaws, but the good far outwieghs the bad. I don't think I've ever so strongly disagreed with the majority on any movie!

The first one had a story. I'd say that's the big one.  It also built up a villian, instead of starting off with a villian and then ignoring him for 2 thirds of the movie. The first one didn't have scenes that added absolutely nothing to the film itself because they were instead made to try and launch the Avengers series. The first one didn't say "look, we have a hot girl who beats people up" which I know some people like... but it hardly helps the movie.

 

The first one didn't have "you've created a new element"

The second movie is entertaining because it coasts on the first one.

1. And Iron Man 1 did?
2. An underused villian is better than a lame one.
3. Agree. That's the only real criticism I have.
4. You're really reaching there.
5. No, but a guy did build a flying robot suit in a cave in the middle east. You have to suspend your disbelief with these movies.