|
| ||||||
Subj: Re: Weeks after it stopped being relevant online, I have finally seen "Iron Man 2" Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 at 03:50:43 pm EDT (Viewed 459 times) | Reply Subj: Re: Weeks after it stopped being relevant online, I have finally seen "Iron Man 2" Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 at 02:44:56 pm EDT (Viewed 487 times) | ||||||
Quote: Quote: There's also a story from said head trauma victim that could be replied to as well...  Quote: I will personally round up a bus full of hobos to reply to your awesome story if it means the next part gets posted.Can you round up a bus full of hobos to help write it? I haven't had a chance to work on the next chapter yet; I've been refereeing soccer almost every night this week. Quote: I saw that they brought in the "Samurai Jack" creator to help with the fight scenes in the sequel, but to be honest I mostly remember a lot of flying around and stuff blowing up.Well, the original Whiplash fight was mostly Iron Man just standing in one spot to Whiplash could continue to flail at him. I actually liked the fight between Tony and Rhodey at Tony's birthday party, though I don't know if they explained how Rhodey powered up the old suit without an arc reactor in his chest. I do remember thinking though when Whiplash showed up in his armour at the end (which should have been red for two reasons; one to acknowledge they'd combined the Crimson Dynamo with Whiplash for the villain, and two so he stood out more from the War Machine armor visually) that they committed a cardinal Iron Man sin; they had Whiplash create the more powerful armor. Tony is supposed to be the ultimate inventor in his story, but here we have someone else building a more powerful suit of armor (in the first story we had the plot device of Tony running on a primitive version of the arc reactor that was never designed to power his newer suit). If Whiplash hadn't been dumb enough to open up his mask I don't even know if "crossing the streams" would have worked. Quote: Quote: I also think that Stark and Vanko were only in 2 scenes together, and that's including the final fight (where the actors don't really get to play off of each other). That struck me as a little strange, honestly, since the one scene they were in together was good.Quote: It was definitely odd to have a villain be underground for the entire film, never increasing the stakes or ramping up the tension. He was just believed dead by everyone until the very end... and really, attacking Tony was the only bad thing we saw him do until the finale. There wasn't a big sense of "This guy must be defeated!" At worst, he would help a Stark rival make a big weapons deal with the US government... I wasn't entirely clear on why that would be so horrible.I guess Justin Hammer was supposed to be the villain doing that, but really he was a whole new character with the only similarity being the name (and company I guess). Kind of like Nick Fury really; familiar name, new character. I didn't necessarily mind the type of characte Hammer was, he just wasn't Justin Hammer. Quote: Quote: Quote: I still don't like that the movies are going with Ultimate Nick Fury; the character just isn't the same as the cantankerous warhorse I know and love.Quote: I agree... I felt I had to grudgingly admit, however, that he wasn't as cartoonishly "off" feeling as he was in the original's post-credits scene. The more I see of Fury the more it bugs me, actually. He doesn't look like the head of SHIELD to me; his agents run around in suits, not military uniforms, and he's not dressed in either. Quote: Considering the Widow was undercover, I guess it's okay you didn't see much of the Black Widow in the character. I thought that her costume looked right on (though her stingers looked a little plasticy to me). Her raid on Hammer Industries was fun, and at the same time I liked how Happy's fighting style was boxing (even though he only took out one guy).Quote: I enjoyed that sequence, and my only complaint about the Widow's costume was that she didn't actually use her bracelets for anything. In truth, I'm not sure what would make her "feel" like the Black Widow to me... We'll have to see what Joss Whedon does with her, if anything.I agree I was disappointed the bracelets weren't used. Whedon isn't confirmed yet though, is he? Quote: Quote: Quote: As much as I hate when a character is played by a different actor in a sequel (with the other exception of Dark Knight and what's her name, the love interest), I thought that Cheadle was a better Rhodey than Howard was. Howard's Rhodey was just too soft-spoken for me; Cheadle felt tougher, which is needed to play Rhodey.Quote: I was fine with it, and Cheadle did a good job. I do think the story kind of took for granted that affection from the first film would carry over to the characters on the second, and by changing the actors I think they hamstringed that a bit. The history of the characters from the first film didn't totally translate over to the conflict here because of the new face, for me.Agree completely here. Quote: Quote: Quote: Even though I think the first film was the stronger of the two, the sequel offered up a lot of high octane fun, and that's alright to.Quote: Definitely. I'm eager to see more Marvel movies, and if they're all as good as this one then they'll be in fine shape.For sure. Iron Man 2 was still better in my mind than Ghost Rider, Incredible Hulk, the Fantastic Four Films, X3... ~Hat | |||||||
