By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Iron Man 2 was incredible!

libellule on 01 May 2010
--OkeyDokey-- said:
libellule 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!


I prefered IM2 to IM1 too

but I dont know if it is because it was better or because my expectation were lower ...

I'll have to watch Iron Man again so they're both fresh in my mind. I just... I can't think of anything particularly special about that movie. The only real standout was Robert Downey Jr., and he's just as much a joy to watch in the sequel.

I watched IM1 and it was great .... during the 15 min when you discover Stark character

after their was way too much "too much" action style

but with IM2, I decided to put my "too much" radar OFF, and I enjoyed the movie simply for what it is : a american blockbuster



Time to Work !

Around the Network
Munkeh111 on 01 May 2010

I plan to watch it at some point. This also reminds me that I need to rewatch Iron Man



leo-j on 01 May 2010

Never trust critic reviews.. when it comes to movies atleast..

the resident evil movies barely have a 30 on meta.. and after seeing all 3 of them I have to say they are freaking amazing.. even though I've never played RE in my life



 

mM
sabestar on 01 May 2010

My expectations are low so far, but we'll see. I might end up liking it more than the first movie, just like you.



stof on 05 May 2010
--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.



I'm a mod, come to me if there's mod'n to do. 

Chrizum is the best thing to happen to the internet, Period.

Serves me right for challenging his sales predictions!

Bet with dsisister44: Red Steel 2 will sell 1 million within it's first 365 days of sales.

Around the Network
Rainbird on 05 May 2010

 

Definitely a good movie, but I don't think it's as good as the first one. The SHIELD connection felt shoehorned in much of the time, time that should have been spent on Whiplash.
Scarlett Johansson was awesome though, and the movie just oozes awesome, and aside from the SHIELD thing, my only other major complaint was that 

Definitely a good movie, but I don't think it's as good as the first one. The SHIELD connection felt shoehorned in much of the time, time that should have been spent on Vanko.

Scarlett Johansson was awesome though, and the movie just oozes awesome, and aside from the SHIELD thing, my only other major complaint was that the final fight with Vanko was way too short. All the drone fighting leading up to it was nice, but Vanko just goes down in no time...

 



--OkeyDokey-- on 05 May 2010
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.



oldschoolfool on 05 May 2010

I'll just wait until it comes out on dvd,like I do with most movies. I hardly go to the cinema these days. To much time and money.



shio on 05 May 2010

The first Iron Man was clearly better than the sequel: it was more consistent, better pace and story, better action sequences, and a good split between the funny parts and action parts.

Although I enjoyed Iron man 2, it had some real problems:
- Terrible action sequences (except the one when Vanko appeared at the circuit)
- Too little action (although I loved the funneh, it's weird of the movie to have almost no action)
- Obligatory "hot chick" ruins the movie. It would've been better if she never appeared in the movie.
- Horrible pacing and build-up. Vanko comes in well in the beginning, but then he suddenly fades away in a tech lab (huge potential lost) and all the tension is lost.
- A lot of mediocre acting/characters in Nick Fury, the Hot Chick, the CEO of the rival company, etc...
- No story/focus. It went all over the place, with Vanko, the Rival Company and the US Army, added with the SHIELD side-story, Stark's Father side-story, and the search for a replacement of Palladium.



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg
The Fury on 05 May 2010

Saw it opening night on the 29th, thought it was excellent....remember people, stay until after the credits. Sam Rockwell is great in it.

If I were a proper comics fan I'd moan at the inaccuracies, and I am so I will but not here. I've done that enough to my housemates already. I've also learned to distance the comics from the Movies and understand it's different for a reason....well all except Deadpool.



Hmm, pie.