Posted: 10/7/2010 7:48:41 PM EDT
|
I watched this last night on Bluray. All I've got to say is,... meh!
IMO, the best character in the movie was Pepper Pots (played by Gwyneth Paltrow),... by a MILE! Robert Downey, Jr was manic and frantic for the entire movie. Basically, he sucked. Mickey Roarke did a creditable job but I cannot get behind the protrayal of a villain. Where is the older thread you guys had going for this film? I checked back eight pages and couldn't find it. |
|
Quoted:
Where is the older thread you guys had going for this film? I checked back eight pages and couldn't find it. Only other I could find http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=136&t=1095030&light=iron%2Bman |
|
They should've pulled out the avengers stuff, and the final fight would've been more meaningful if the drones were manned.
Also, the script should've been written as well as the actors were ad libbing. Most of the good character development was improvised by the actors, thus was better than the script deserved. But Rourke did an awesome job with his character, the rest did really well, and generally it was a fun movie. First one was better, but this one was a solid 3/4. |
| It was a very enjoyable, rather simple film, which is saying alot. Sometimes, I do like to turn the world off for 2 hours and let the sorrows of real life melt away in a simple, fun film! And Iron Man 2 sure did deliver from that point of view. It was no Inception or The Avengers, but it sure wasn't Spiderman 3. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Regardless of what I thought of the plot it was totally worth it for the Scarlett Johansson scenes. I have just two words for you: Gwenyth Paltrow. Neither of them really turn my crank for some reason. I would like a go with the cheerleaders that were at the beginning. Maybe I just like women who wiggle and don't talk. 
|
IM2 was a lot of fun to watch. Sometimes I wonder what it takes to get a half decent rating from most of you. Jeez 
Quoted:
I am pretty sick of Samuel Jackson playing the same guy over and over again though. They were introducing Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury. He will be in several upcoming movies... Avengers, Nick Fury, Captain America. Nick Fury on IMDB.com |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Regardless of what I thought of the plot it was totally worth it for the Scarlett Johansson scenes. I have just two words for you: Gwenyth Paltrow. Negative. I'll take Scarlett. There is one scene in the movie where they are walking next to eachother and all you see is them walking away. Dear GOD that woman has some curves. Makes Paltrow look like shes 12. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Regardless of what I thought of the plot it was totally worth it for the Scarlett Johansson scenes. I have just two words for you: Gwenyth Paltrow. Negative. I'll take Scarlett. There is one scene in the movie where they are walking next to eachother and all you see is them walking away. Dear GOD that woman has some curves. Makes Paltrow look like shes 12. Yup. No question. Scarlett all the way. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Regardless of what I thought of the plot it was totally worth it for the Scarlett Johansson scenes. I have just two words for you: Gwenyth Paltrow. Negative. I'll take Scarlett. There is one scene in the movie where they are walking next to eachother and all you see is them walking away. Dear GOD that woman has some curves. Makes Paltrow look like shes 12. She's good eye candy, but it's the curves that made her not believable for the part to me. She's too soft and not toned enough to be realistic for the moves her character was dong. She seems better suited for non-physically demanding roles (ie: The Prestige), especially when you see other actors/actresses literally change their bodies for the character they are playing. To me, there are very few IM comic story lines I could read and not picture RDJr fitting into the story as Tony Stark (as he was cast to be). I really can't see SJ in any Natasha Romanoff story lines. YMMV.  |
| She was bad ass, but I really don't give a hoot about how they are trying to intertwine the other characters from the comics. Ironman could stand alone with some decent writing. These other superheroes whatever are going to sucker me into watching another Spiderman 3 and it's gonna suck. |
|
Quoted:
They should've pulled out the avengers stuff, and the final fight would've been more meaningful if the drones were manned. Also, the script should've been written as well as the actors were ad libbing. Most of the good character development was improvised by the actors, thus was better than the script deserved. But Rourke did an awesome job with his character, the rest did really well, and generally it was a fun movie. First one was better, but this one was a solid 3/4. Wait -what? The setup for the Avengers story was the best part of this film for me! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They should've pulled out the avengers stuff, and the final fight would've been more meaningful if the drones were manned. Also, the script should've been written as well as the actors were ad libbing. Most of the good character development was improvised by the actors, thus was better than the script deserved. But Rourke did an awesome job with his character, the rest did really well, and generally it was a fun movie. First one was better, but this one was a solid 3/4. Wait -what? The setup for the Avengers story was the best part of this film for me! It's fanboy crap. It appeals only to fans of the comics, while detracting from the actual storyline and character development within the movie. I can understand why that would appeal to you, but don't you honestly think your comics are better served by good movies than by distracting cameos? The end-of-credits scene in Iron Man 1 was a great way, I thought, to introduce the Avengers arc. It was there for people who wanted it, but wasn't even in the body of the movie. They had to do more this time, but it just didn't fit. 1 worked as a movie because it was about this fascinating character and the cool stuff he made. 2 failed where it tried to become about a chick with big boobs that can kick ass down a hallway. No movie has ever done that in a convincing fashion, and anyone who's ever met a girl will never be able to suspend their disbelief that much. Strongest girl character I've ever seen in a movie was Angela Bassett in Strange Days. I don't think she beat anybody up in that, and yet I'd follow her into a war. Or maybe Ripley from Alien[s]. |
|
Quoted:
<snip> Well I'm looking at all the current Marvel franchises in the context of the whole Marvel universe they're introducing. So I see each movie (to include the upcoming Thor and Captain America films) as just a few issues of select comics in a major universe-wide story. That is, after all, what marvel is up to with these films. Anyway - I get why some people didn't care too much for IM2. It worked for me, though. |
|
Quoted: I watched this last night on Bluray. All I've got to say is,... meh! IMO, the best character in the movie was Pepper Pots (played by Gwyneth Paltrow),... by a MILE! Robert Downey, Jr was manic and frantic for the entire movie. Basically, he sucked. Mickey Roarke did a creditable job but I cannot get behind the protrayal of a villain. Where is the older thread you guys had going for this film? I checked back eight pages and couldn't find it. Tony's mental health problems, and drinking problems were HUGE story elements in the comics. |
|
Quoted:
I watched this last night on Bluray. All I've got to say is,... meh! This ^^^ And I hated the replacement of Rhodey. Terrence Howard was much better. Hope they pull of the third better and it's the last one of the franchise that will lead directly into the Avengers movie... which I have doubts about as well.... especially if they don't get all of the actors from their respective movies it's definitely going to suck the haiiry beanbag. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I watched this last night on Bluray. All I've got to say is,... meh! This ^^^ And I hated the replacement of Rhodey. Terrence Howard was much better. Hope they pull of the third better and it's the last one of the franchise that will lead directly into the Avengers movie... which I have doubts about as well.... especially if they don't get all of the actors from their respective movies it's definitely going to suck the haiiry beanbag. Avengers has the cast locked in. Only replacement was Ed Norton won't be Hulk. Replaced with Mark Ruffalo. IM3 is also scheduled to come out after Avengers now. We're looking at Thor and Captain America (both 2011) then Avengers (2012). |
|
Quoted:
Something about Robert Downey just makes my skin crawl. 
He should have retired when he got clean years ago. He's always been highly overrated IMO. Overrated? If anything he's been underrated and he is finally getting his due now that he's not such a mess. Obviously, this is my opinion only. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I watched this last night on Bluray. All I've got to say is,... meh! This ^^^ And I hated the replacement of Rhodey. Terrence Howard was much better. Hope they pull of the third better and it's the last one of the franchise that will lead directly into the Avengers movie... which I have doubts about as well.... especially if they don't get all of the actors from their respective movies it's definitely going to suck the haiiry beanbag. ...And I disagree with this also ... Terrence Howard had a glaringly, distractingly sissy voice and didn't command any kind of presence on-screen at all. I think Don Cheadle was a great addition to IM2. Just because Howard was first doesn't make him better IMHO. |
|
Quoted:
Avengers has the cast locked in. Only replacement was Ed Norton won't be Hulk. Replaced with Mark Ruffalo. Wow... what a horrible casting decision that is. They seem to be taking some elements of the Marvel Ultimate universe with the Sam Jackson Nick Fury... and even without doing that why aren't they casting a weaker looking guy to play banner. Norton was perfect in my opinion. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I watched this last night on Bluray. All I've got to say is,... meh! This ^^^ And I hated the replacement of Rhodey. Terrence Howard was much better. Hope they pull of the third better and it's the last one of the franchise that will lead directly into the Avengers movie... which I have doubts about as well.... especially if they don't get all of the actors from their respective movies it's definitely going to suck the haiiry beanbag. ...And I disagree with this also ... Terrence Howard had a glaringly, distractingly sissy voice and didn't command any kind of presence on-screen at all. I think Don Cheadle was a great addition to IM2. Just because Howard was first doesn't make him better IMHO. I think my only reason for not liking Cheadle there is because the part was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay below Cheadle and his abilities. It was almost like a joke, kind of like Patrick Stewart voicing a character on American Dad. He did a good job. I don't think he can do a bad job. But there seemed to be a bit of the emotional intensity, that he is usually able to convey quite well, missing in this movie, like he "phoned it in". Cheadle phoning it in is most actor's top performance so it ain't bad. |
|
Quoted: ... and even without doing that why aren't they casting a weaker looking guy to play banner. Norton was perfect in my opinion. Couldn't agree more. I'm not a big Ed Norton fan like most here are, but he was the best Banner we've ever seen on screen IMO. I suspect they'll put Ruffalo in baggy clothes and whatnot to make him look smaller than he is. |
|
Quoted: Word is it was just like every other cast change...money/control of character. Ed had a free reign to reboot Hulk and ran with it. Maybe he didn't want some of the changes he would have to do for the sake of joining a team. Quoted: Avengers has the cast locked in. Only replacement was Ed Norton won't be Hulk. Replaced with Mark Ruffalo. Wow... what a horrible casting decision that is. They seem to be taking some elements of the Marvel Ultimate universe with the Sam Jackson Nick Fury... and even without doing that why aren't they casting a weaker looking guy to play banner. Norton was perfect in my opinion.  Ruffalo will hopefully lose some body mass to fit the role better. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Avengers has the cast locked in. Only replacement was Ed Norton won't be Hulk. Replaced with Mark Ruffalo. Wow... what a horrible casting decision that is. They seem to be taking some elements of the Marvel Ultimate universe with the Sam Jackson Nick Fury... and even without doing that why aren't they casting a weaker looking guy to play banner. Norton was perfect in my opinion. I agree. That guy looks nothing like any iteration of banner. I can't understand that decision whatsoever. |
|
Quoted: I agree. That guy looks nothing like any iteration of banner. I can't understand that decision whatsoever. Ruffalo has already gone on record that he's more a fan of Bill Bixby's TV Banner (who he does kind of favor) than any comic version, and that's what he'll be going for in his portrayal. |
|
Quoted:
And I disagree with this also ... Terrence Howard had a glaringly, distractingly sissy voice and didn't command any kind of presence on-screen at all. I think Don Cheadle was a great addition to IM2. Just because Howard was first doesn't make him better IMHO. I think RDJ and Howard played better off each other. Cheadle was just there... he brought nothing to the table... especially personality. I think As far as Hulk casting... maybe... This is a pretty good list minus Bana, Crudup, Fox... there are a couple decent ones posted by people below as well. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I watched this last night on Bluray. All I've got to say is,... meh! This ^^^ And I hated the replacement of Rhodey. Terrence Howard was much better. Hope they pull of the third better and it's the last one of the franchise that will lead directly into the Avengers movie... which I have doubts about as well.... especially if they don't get all of the actors from their respective movies it's definitely going to suck the haiiry beanbag. ...And I disagree with this also ... Terrence Howard had a glaringly, distractingly sissy voice and didn't command any kind of presence on-screen at all. I think Don Cheadle was a great addition to IM2. Just because Howard was first doesn't make him better IMHO. I think my only reason for not liking Cheadle there is because the part was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay below Cheadle and his abilities. It was almost like a joke, kind of like Patrick Stewart voicing a character on American Dad. He did a good job. I don't think he can do a bad job. But there seemed to be a bit of the emotional intensity, that he is usually able to convey quite well, missing in this movie, like he "phoned it in". Cheadle phoning it in is most actor's top performance so it ain't bad. I have to wonder (given Cheadle's excellent vocal talents as well) if he also tried to act like Howard. I noticed he lightened his voice up, which actually bugged me. Seemed like he was trying to play like Howard as the originator of the role... I could be reading into it though. |
|
Quoted:
I have to wonder (given Cheadle's excellent vocal talents as well) if he also tried to act like Howard. I noticed he lightened his voice up, which actually bugged me. Seemed like he was trying to play like Howard as the originator of the role... I could be reading into it though. I could swear I read that... he went into it planning on putting his own style into the character/role but ended up more mimicking Howard. What I don't get... did he happen to have the exact same build as RDJ? If not... wouldn't the suit be pretty difficult to fit into since it's more or less tailored to Stark's build? |