CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

I didn't see any recent topic for Iron Man 2, so I made this topic
where we can discuss how much we liked (or disliked) the movie.

As for me:
I finally saw Iron Man 2 in the theater this weekend.

Why I waited so long was because a friend of my Mom and I gave us two matinee tickets (passes that had to be used two weeks after the premiere) to a movie theater that was more awesome then words could describe.
It was a ways up there, but it was so worth it. It was much better then our local one we went to see G.I.-Joe last year. It wasn't crowed so we didn't have to sit with a bunch a little kids and noisy people. It was a great experience.

As for the movie itself, it was also awesome.
I'm gonna give it a 4.5 out of 5.

It was almost perfect but there were a few things that kept it back a little.

I talked about it in more detail at my blog in my latest post http://ajvsblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/iron-man-2-my-thoughts.html and I'm not sure if I should quote it here because it is a slightly lengthy post. Otherwise I would be happy to.

I thought it was pretty good?

I dunno what else is there to say about it? I don't like it when they replace a character's actor with a completely different actor and everyone acts like nothing happened, that's a big complaint of mine.

Nate (post: 1396544) wrote:I thought it was pretty good?

I dunno what else is there to say about it? I don't like it when they replace a character's actor with a completely different actor and everyone acts like nothing happened, that's a big complaint of mine.

(Whooooo did they replace? It's been a bit since I've seen the first movie, so maybe I don't remember correctly. I seriously can't remember though. XD)

Anyways, I thought it was a fun movie! Not my most anticipated movie of the summer, but I liked it and had a good time watching it! XD

Terrence Howard played Rhodes in the first film, but he was replaced by Don Cheadle in the second. Which I noticed right away because when I saw the trailers I was going "Wasn't Rhodes like...a completely different guy in the first movie?"

I realize there really isn't any way they could explain why he looks like a completely different person in the context of the film, but it's still jarring and annoying.

http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail177.html

Oooohhh, okay. That explains that, then. XD I was confused at first because I didn't remember Rhodes's name (I've never read the Iron Man comics and, like I said, it'd been a while since I'd seen the first movie), so I assumed they were just introducing Don Cheadle as a new character. Yeah, the actor switch definitely worked better for Batman than it did for Iron Man. XD

I've heard (contested) rumors that the original actor was demanding an unreasonable amount of money. That might be the studio trying to save face, but if it's true it does make the change a bit less of a jerk move.

I thought it was little better or worse than the original (which was fun but I didn't adore as much as some people). Like the first, the sequel also had one core issue that forced me to suspend my disbelief in a way that keeps me from just enjoying a straightforward comic book movie.

Justin Hammer. He's introduced as a comic relief character no one likes, but he's really not that different from Tony Stark. Selfish, ego-maniacal, wealth-abusing, womanizing, law-breaking, etc. Sure, Stark is smarter and less smarmy. But I just kept being struck by the fact that the movie wanted me to treat the same traits so differently based on who had them.

I love Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts. I want to marry her.

Paltrow > Johanssan. Any day.

Sigh... <3

uc pseudonym wrote:I've heard (contested) rumors that the original actor was demanding an unreasonable amount of money. That might be the studio trying to save face, but if it's true it does make the change a bit less of a jerk move.

Yeah I heard that too and it's probably true. I didn't think it was a jerk move on the part of the producers, it's just...like I said, I hate it when that happens because I'm willing to accept a few things (Iron Man grabbed Pepper and flew her to safety from an explosion and she was perfectly fine when in reality her face probably would've been ripped off) but someone looking completely different from before is just...it destroys the ability to accept things 100%.

Justin Hammer. He's introduced as a comic relief character no one likes, but he's really not that different from Tony Stark. Selfish, ego-maniacal, wealth-abusing, womanizing, law-breaking, etc. Sure, Stark is smarter and less smarmy. But I just kept being struck by the fact that the movie wanted me to treat the same traits so differently based on who had them.

I think that's true to a degree, but Hammer is also clearly evil, based on the fact that he sacrificed a man's life to break someone who probably killed at least a couple of people in that race out of prison, in addition to his willingness to sacrifice people to try and copy the Iron Man armor (despite his protest that the one guy whose upper body was turned completely backwards lived). Tony may be egotistical, a jerk, a womanizer, a drunk, and a spoiled rich kid, but he is at least trying to stay on the good side of the law (depending on how you view his refusal to turn over the armor to the government).

Ryan wrote:Paltrow > Johanssan. Any day.

Good jokes, Ryan, good jokes.

I think I already mentioned my thoughts on the "What are you watching?" thread. To summarize, I basically liked it --although not as much as the first. It felt like a natural extension of everything from the first movie, it didn't try to bite off more than it could chew, but it did raise the stakes sufficiently to be interesting.

If there hadn't been the father-son element, or that tad bit with Stark considering his possible immanent death to add a bit of gravity, I might have been more negative. As it was, however, I liked it.

Science and engineering where pretty much abused throughout, but it is Hollywood, so I was expecting that...... and that holographic computer interface was cool enough that I don't care how implausible it was given the level of world technology.

I also appreciated S.H.I.E.L.D., if only because they went out of their way to make sure that Stark knew he wasn't the biggest fish in the pond. They also provided a nice break from Stark's attitude and egotism.

It was good. Maybe a 7 or 8 out of 10 on the IGN scale.

Science-wise, nothing in this film came close to typing "translate" from the first. I feel like there were a few things I found amusing (things you don't expect from comic book physics) but I can't remember them right now.

Nate wrote:Yeah I heard that too and it's probably true. I didn't think it was a jerk move on the part of the producers, it's just...like I said, I hate it when that happens because I'm willing to accept a few things (Iron Man grabbed Pepper and flew her to safety from an explosion and she was perfectly fine when in reality her face probably would've been ripped off) but someone looking completely different from before is just...it destroys the ability to accept things 100%]
Plus it's Don Cheadle. He is one of the few actors I recognize right away, so to have him come in as a replacement was a bit jarring.

Nate wrote:I think that's true to a degree, but Hammer is also clearly evil, based on the fact that he sacrificed a man's life to break someone who probably killed at least a couple of people in that race out of prison, in addition to his willingness to sacrifice people to try and copy the Iron Man armor (despite his protest that the one guy whose upper body was turned completely backwards lived). Tony may be egotistical, a jerk, a womanizer, a drunk, and a spoiled rich kid, but he is at least trying to stay on the good side of the law (depending on how you view his refusal to turn over the armor to the government).

Yeah, that's true. I should have been clearer about what I meant. I'm definitely not arguing that Stark is really the same as Hammer, because Stark generally tries to help people and Hammer is willing to hurt them for himself. It mostly bothered me during the comic relief scenes where the negative personality traits were played for laughs. Hammer would do something and everyone would think he's a loser, but if Stark did basically the same thing (and he sometimes did) everyone would think he was awesome.