Ryan McNeil
Just saw it last night!
Shut up – it was a busy week.
We begin where we left off, with Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr) revealing to the world that yes, he is Iron Man. While he tells this secret to a few dozen cameras and microphones, he raises the ire of a Russian named Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke). Vanko’s father worked with Stark’s father in designing the arc reactor that keeps Stark alive and powers the Iron Man suit. Vanko is bitter about what became of his father, and swears out revenge on Stark.
Meanwhile back in America, Stark is doing everything he can to keep the American government at bay. As one might expect, there are many high ranking officials that want to have the Iron Man design under the American millitary’s control. Hell, they’ve even tried to copycat the design through their top weapons contractor, Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell). No dice though – Hammer can’t get a working prototype, and Stark won’t turn over his work.
When he isn’t being evasive with bureaucrats, Stark is trying to get a handle on his well-being. While he does all he can to hide it from people close to him like James Rhodes and Pepper Potts (Don Cheadle and Gwyneth Paltrow), the arc reactor is slowly poisoning him, and if he can’t come up with an alternative power source, his days could be numbered.
Let’s start with the obvious – no, IRON MAN 2 is not as good as the original. Part of that comes with expectations, part of that comes with the film’s place in this new vintage of Marvel films. However, while the film is a slight step back from the original – that doesn’t make it a bad film. Much to the contrary, the entire storyline of Tony Stark trying to protect his intellectual property from the grabby hands of the American government is a good one. Let’s face facts, the notion of a hero like Iron Man is appealing…but if such a thing was reality, wouldn’t we all want our government to have some measure of control over such technology?
If your answer is “no”, then give this film a look – around halfway home Tony Stark will give you cause to change your mind.
What holds this film back most of all is a detail that for now is unavoidable, and that is the fact that Stark/Iron Man is yet to go up against a villain who is nearly as interesting as he is, and certainly not one as complexed. Justin Hammer is a worthy foe, but Sam Rockwell plays him (admittedly well) as a slimy weasel. Meanwhile Whiplash/Vanko has interesting facets, but this film can’t decide whether he should be a bloodthirsty killing machine, or a stoic evil genius. While I’m on the subject, why was Vanko styled to look like he should be playing bass in Iron Maiden?
Indeed the film is flawed, but those flaws do not hold it back from being an interesting and enjoyable film. Tony Stark is given a lot to deal with this time out, and evolves as he tries to understand it all. He begins the film with the same amount of bravado we remember, but really does descend to a dark place before he can understand his place in the Stark legacy, and his role as a champion. His inability to communicate with anyone is what holds him back the most…but there’s no way he’s the first millionaire brat to have that problem.
While IRON MAN 2 feels strangely paced at times, it’s only because the film wants to touch a lot of topics before the credits roll. Re-establishing the power structure at Stark Industries, keeping the Iron Man technology out of government hands, Tony’s potential role within the Avengers squad, and Stark’s own mortality all come into play before the credits roll. That’s a lot to cram into a summer blockbuster!
Sometime these themes come at the cost of action sequences, but I promise you, when the action does kick start it makes up for lost time. The Monaco Grand Prix sequence alone is better than most of the set pieces in the first film, even with much of its details well known through trailers. Jon Favreau shows quite an adept hand for action, since even in the climactic battle, the action is exciting without turning into sensory overload. Speaking of Favreau’s direction, he also deserves props for taking so many characters and finding the right mix (no small feat – see the X-MEN films).
What makes IRON MAN 2 work best of all is the way it plays on Vankos theory that if you make God bleed, then people will stop believing in him. Being a hero is one thing…but every hero can fall. What sets contenders apart from pretenders is the manner in which they pick themselves up off the matte and get back into the fight. Two summers ago, we watched Tony Stark take the title. This film is a necessary in the legend of Iron Man, to see what happens when this idol is knocked off his pedestal and how he goes about reclaiming his place as a hero.
Wow I need to learn to re-read before I post… If you can delete the first comment, that would be great 🙂
You make a good point that Iron Man hasn't met a worthy enemy so far. However, if you are familiar with the comic book, you may realize that there really isn't one in the Iron Man universe either (one of the reason why it never became as big as Batman, Spiderman etc…). Excellent review though, it's definitely a good movie, albeit disappointing that it doesn't further the Iron Man universe as much as it should.
As you know, I thought it was slightly better than the last one, but your points are well-taken.
Frankly, I won't be completely happy until they trot out Fin Fang Foom!
I agree with you on pretty much everything. I thought there were too many plots here, a la Spider-Man 3, but it did a much better job of handling them. The Monaco scene was a mighty fine piece of action, as was the finale.
Vanko is a much more interesting and intimidating villain then Obadiah Stane in the last one, but I will agree that the film has no idea what to do with him. I wouldn't say he's stylized to be playing bass for Iron Maiden. He's too beefy, and all the guys in Iron Maiden are paper thin… and blonde! Maybe Mastodon.
One last thing, that you didn't touch on. Scarlet Johansson served no purpose other then to look absurdly hot… that again, that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Good review!!
I'm not a fan of the Spiderman 3 comparison… there are some overlapping storylines but they play into the Avengers set up so I'm fine with that. Ultimately, I thought IM2 was very good… not Spidey 2 or X2 good but just under those. This isn't as good as the first (which I think is surprisingly one of the best comic book movies out there) but was a solid follow up. I was not a fan of the ending which was just the same as the first film with more Mongers running around. Castor's right though… IM doesn't have any major adversaries… even Cap has Red Skull… so on that level they're doing a very good job.
Oh, and I think IM might be the coolest looking CGI Comic Book character rendered to date… he just looks badass!
Three stars was my reaction too although I seem to like the flick less than you did. My biggest problem is that the majority of the mid-section plays like na product placement for The Avengers movie as so during that whole time you lose tracks of Rohdes and Vanko and the plot stays idle. I'm also suprised that few people mention how little of Iron Man there actually is in this movie and for me it only started getting really good in the first when it forgot about new characters and future series' and focused on Iron Man vs Vanko/Hammer.
@ Castor… Your commenting duplicity has been taken care of.
While I am not very well-versed in Iron Man comics, it doesn't surprise me that that's such a hitch in his legacy. In that case, perhaps we've just stumbled on what will hold this entire franchise back.
@ Yojimbo… I wouldn't hold my breath on the Fin Fang Foom, but lord knows where they're gonna go with this for Avengers and I:3
@ Sebastina… Mastadon!! Thank you…I knew I had taken a wrong turn but couldn't put my finger on a better example.
Black Widow has a purpose, but if it were up to me, I wouldn't have cast such a big name and kept that whole angle a secret in marketing. How cool would it have been if we'd started out seeing her as some Stark Ind. gofer, only to find out that she's doing recon for S.H.I.E.L.D. and can wipe the floor with baddies?
As for Vanko & Hammer, one of the other bloggers (raise your hand if it's you) pointed it out best in their review:
Vanko has Stark's aptitude without the resources.
hammer has Stark's resources without the aptitude.
I can only hope the series isn't finished withe either character just yet.
@ Kaiderman… Thanks for reminding me of the look of IM. Sometimes it's crazy to think that just eight years ago I berated the first SPIDER-MAN for looking "too cartoony".
Having sat through the entire credit sequence for that final Easter Egg, I couldn't help but notice how many animators worked on this sucker. Looks like they hired quite a talented team!
@ Mike… Yeah, I've heard that whole "Long Avengers Set-Up" a few times now. Felt like they only spent ten or fifteen minutes on that though.
Thought it was Ok to say the least. Check out my review here: http://dtmmr.wordpress.com/2010/05/14/iron-man-2-2010/
You see, I had such high hopes, and the torn response has me just in ugh mode, which has been the motto so far for 2010. The mediocre seem bad, the bad seem horrid, and even the good feel flakishly ok to me. Not sure this is going to be a good year for me.
As for Iron Man 2, I've been reading lots of reviews (I'm sort of the opposite of you, I like to know everything before going into a movie – weird that way). And I have to be honest about 75% of the positive reviews I've read have sounded more like people talking themselves into liking it, than actual positive praise for it. Your review seems to avoid this pitfall (mostly), but I'm still shakey.
Here's the thing that bothers me about Vanko's God/blood thing: he never makes Iron Man bleed (metaphorically or otherwise). He attacks TONY STARK, which any home intruder might have accomplished. When Stark puts on the suit, the "fight" doesn't last all that long. Which I think hurts the movie from then on (which isn't to say that I disliked it). The only real threat to Iron Man is the elements themselves.
Nice to see someone enjoyed the film as much as I did. Most of the fellow LAMBs cannot muster 3 stars for it.
Interesting review, I think we picked up on a lot of the same things. Your star rating is better than mine but we both picked up on the flaws.
@ CMRok… I have no problem with promoting your review in the comments section of mine, but try not to leave the exact same comment you left in five other blogs next time, m'kay?
@ Univarn… I've read a lot of reviews since posting mine (and admittedly still have a lot to read)…and I'm left by and large wondering what people wanted this film to be.
I didn't have to talk myself into liking it – I just…y'know…liked it. Make your own mind up, but don't assume that you'll have to ramp yourself up for it.
@ Fletch… He still lays the smack down on Iron Man in a way I assume the world hasn't seen yet. Gotta remember, for the last six months he's been kicking ass and taking names…Vanko's the first guy to actually give him a tough fight.
And he might not physically bleed, but Stark sure does shut down in a hurry after that showdown. So perhaps he provided the tipping point needed, for Stark to stumble off his perch.
@ Fitz… Yup – fun times. I wonder if some who didn;t like it just got too hyped up. Remember too – I rank out of four, so on a scale of one-to-five, my score is closer to a 4.
@ Fandango… Thanks for reading! Lookin' forward to talkin' with ya soon.
I found this rather convulated, I couldn't even figure out what the A-plot was supposed to be. Excellent review, then.
vf
I was a bit late responding to your comment on my blog so I will post it here too:
Mad Hatter, thanks for taking the time to give a lengthy response! There is absolutely no reason to apologize for being “argumentative”. I actually prefer some good debate to the usual “Good review” 😉
The movie is packed with a lot of subplots and “substance”. However, it doesn’t always mean that this advance the universe of our hero significantly. For example, an extreme case of that would be to have Tony Stark shop for a new plane, hire new employees for Stark Industry, ward off a South American dictator while fighting off a meddling reporter. You could be busy watching this for 2 hours but at the end of the day, you wouldn’t learn all that much more about Iron Man than you already knew from the first movie.
In Iron Man 2, all we learn is that he will be part of a group of vigilantes called the Avengers (we all knew that already), observe Tony Stark’s reckless ways, and know that Stark kissed Pepper Potts. Everything else that happened in the movie, the bad guys, the US government meddling, the Scar-Jo character etc… are basically disposable and probably won’t even be mentioned in the sequel (they might bring back Hammer or not).
So in a way you're saying to be legendary, a hero has to fall and we should be around to witness it? I agree but it sounds like the Dark Knight formula if you ask me. Although who would care about a hero if he can never get hurt?
I think IM2 got a bit too foolish for its own good and although it was fun, I was expecting it to be a little more serious. Also, it thought it should have had less focus on being the set up for The Avengers, and focused more on Tony and his growth.
The very rushed ending was disappointing (just like Spider Man 3)…they could have drawn it out much longer to a more exciting climax like Avatar (yes, I said Avatar).
@ Simon… Geez man, you really need to pipe down sometimes. Not everyone wants to read your long, loquacious comments.
(Kidding man – thanks for reading!)
@ Castor… Prepare for an influx of argumentative comments.
I'm still not sold on the "not much happens" angle. we've identified that Tony is the most interesting thing about this story, and he is bombarded with lessons in this movie – not the least of which is to trust those around him when he needs help (Rhodey, Pepper, and S.H.I.E.L.D.).
Whether or not what happened gets mentioned down the road isn't the point, the point is that it at least gets mentioned once.
@ Marc… (Pretty sure you get the award for longest comment so far)
It's that whole "overcoming obstacles" angle that people get drawn to. A lights-out game by Kobe Bryant can amaze…but it's a much better story if he hasn't played like we know he can for the whole season and has that lights-out game two days after a major injury.
I'm still intrigued that everyone is focused on this being such an overt AVENGERS set-up…that really only amounted to fifteen minutes of this 125 minute flick.
I know what you're saying about the ending though (and you won't find any AVATAR hatred on this space). I mentioned on The LAMBcast this week, that climactic battles seem to have a sweet spot between being too short and too long.
If pressed, I'd rather a final showdown feel brief than go on and on and on…
Hatter…do you mean to say you're NOT hanging onto my every word? Nonsense!