Not. Nearly as good as the original
It's not a memorable movie and at a certain point, I kind of disliked Tony Stark.
I thought Ivan Vanko's motivations weren't explained properly. So, I actually decided to make Justin Hammer the main villain in my head and ended up enjoying the movie a little bit more.
Solid action-packed funny sequel.
Why did the bombs have to have a timer ?!
I like this more than the first one. I loved the easter eggs.
The funny thing about Iron Man 2 is that it is about as good as I expected the first one to be. The first one really was such a shock because the script was really really good (especially when you consider the genre). The second one? Not nearly so much. The dialogue was at times completely smarmy and the story was really lacking. And I'm sorry, anything with this much Gweneth Paltrow can only be so likeable. On the positive side, Mickey Rourke did a completely believable Russian accent. Other than that... it was standard fare. Can we get our elite Hollywood actors back at some point?
follow me at https:IHATEBadMovies.com
Although the first film, despite it's quality, didn't surprise much in terms of content, the denouement did so, by letting main character Tony Stark make a public statement the few second for the end credits, that he was the man behind the iron mask. This opened the door to the sequel and it became immediately clear that Iron Man is not a superhero like Batman or Spider-Man (who take their task as a heavy burden and always try to keep their identity hidden), but someone who has peace with his unusual life and simply regards his heroic deeds as an eccentric hobby. In Iron Man 2, that vision has hardly changed, so that the narcissistic Stark does not underestimate his achievements and is ready for public appearances in the Iron Man suit.
You're almost going to wonder why all the other superheroes are having such difficulties with their identity, Starks is playing his cards and hardly seems to have any problems. Sure, those aren't that far away, where's the movie without that drama? The government is after his assets, only shedding extra attention to the guy, a certain Russian criminal decided it's target practice and Stark is a perfect candidate.
In the role of Russians convicted criminal Ivan Vanko, we recognize Mickey Rourke, who made a comeback a few years before (like his counterpart and fellow (ex-)bad boy RDJ). After that wonderful role, the presence in Iron Man 2 maybe questioned, because there's little to Rourke's acting; which is more babbling/mumbling with a Russian accent and tacitly threatingly looking around, and being physically present in his action scenes. There isn't much more there otherwise. Other newcomer is Scarlett Johansson, as a result of Tony Stark's long-winded search for a new assistant. It's obvious there's more to the character from the start, but we don't really get a glimpse of that until the third act, we get shown briefly but vigorously that she's a stunning action heroine. Whether the character was necessary in the movie, or if she was just another piece in (back then) Marvel's puzzle for a bigger scheme may be doubted.
Best newcomer of the batch eventually turns out to be Don Cheadle, who replaces Terence Howard (who tipped overboard due to an oversized salary wish), in the role of soldier James Rhodes. In at least half of his scenes, the character is thrown back and forth for his loyalty between the American government and his best friend, Tony Stark. Cheadle plays him with his usualy tormented gaze and knows how to give his character a lot more sympathy than Howard did. Skeptic fans will forget about the cast-change as soon as they see Rhodes in the War Machine suit; first to protect his drunken friend, later to join in true sidekick fashion.
Follow-up films that match or exceed their predecessor are no longer an exception under the comic book adaptations. For example, Spider-Man 2 or the Dark Knight. Mainly because those can focus on character development because the origin has already been done. This made those two suitable (and much better) successors instead of dull repetitions. Unfortunaly, Iron Man 2 doesn't go for that opportunity, as in, it's not the movie it could've been, especially within this genre. The first part had Stark's essential metamorphosis from heartless weapon manufacturer to crime-fighting world improver, but that doesn't mean his character is "finished" with that. What made Spider-Man 2 and The Dark Knight so great was the fact that the main characters ended up in new situations and could only bring them to a good end by finding themselves again. Even though, for Batman, that ended ina pyrrhic victory.
There are plenty of new situations in this film for Stark, but the way he deals with them offers absolutely nothing new to this film or his character. It seems theré's never a moment that asks the utmost of Stark, at the end of the film the characters hasn't changed one inch from the previous film. Iron Man 2 is therefore not immediately a bad film, but it does make the difference between a solid sequel and follow-up film that improves and goes further than the original, adding something essential.
Don't get the wrong impression, Iron Man 2 is just a nice summer blockbuster with simply the same shortcomings and compensating qualities as the first part. Robert Downey, Jr. is in top form in his delicious bickering with.. everyone. The comedy blows life into the characters and the sparse action scenes are exciting and don't repeate each other. The fact that the film is rather coquettish to fans can't even be put as a valid criticism in this genre. With the right expectations, no viewer has to be disappointed by this film.
When superheroes act like "everybody loves me" and have an ego over being a hero, like Peter in Spider-Man 3 or Johnny Storm in the 2005 Fantastic Four. It has always annoyed me. So Tony Stark annoys me in this sequel since he acts like that too. The best thing about this one is that they got Sam Rockwell, who's good in everything. While Mickey Rourke makes an intimidating villain, the writing didn't really give him much to do. Like Ultron, you have a cool villain who's just written to be the villain of the week. Still at least Whiplash is what expected and we didn't get a lame twist like Iron Man 3 gave us.
It's another fun comic book movie. Not as good as the first but still worth a watch. It can be a little boring at times. The villains are forgettable. Justin Hammer was just annoying and so was Ivan going on about his bird. Tony going on a bender is fun and that fight with him and Rhodey is a blast. I forgot how much Black Widow is in this and she is great. Some more decent humor.
Meh, at best. Didn't enjoy this one as much as the first but still an essential movie for the MCU as it introduces Black Widow and War Machine. It was more of a have to rather than a want to watch.
Shaaaaaronnnnnn!!!!! They bloody stole my song for another mooovie....the dogs Sharon!!! Get the dogs!!!
The common problem with sequels is they seldom reach up to the original. That same is true here. While as a character building piece for Stark/Iron Man this has some merit there are several things I disliked.
If Vanko was supposed to be a tough oppenent that is the first failure right there because both times they are face to face he didn´t impress and was beaten fast. And in general the character was clichéd from top to bottom.The Hammer guy is just a wannabe moron. Sam Rockwell does it´s best but he´s just a laughable figure that cleary can do nothing by himself. One wonders how he got where he is.The action in this was over the top starting at the race with all those cars flying through the air and the plethora of drones that in the end don´t do much. I think in wanting to top the first movie they went overboard.A logical issue I have - Has someone an explanation why Rhodey can get into a suit and instantly control it?
There is on thing that is saving this movie from being a 6 and that is the introduction of Black Widow
As part of Marvel's Cinematic Universe (MCU) Phase One, Jon Favreau (Made. Elf. Zathura) once again returns to direct. It may not be as much fun as the first one, but when the dust settles, it'll do and with the introduction of Scarlett Johnansson's 'Black Widow' the movie gets more enjoyable and a little bit sexier. Downey Jr as always gives a great performance as Tony Stark. Where I find the plot and multiple villians just a tad misguided, the visual effects steal the show, apart from a few artifacts left on screen by the CG, the Monaco Race scene is guilty of this and doesn't look as good as the rest of the movie. My only other niggle is that Pepper Pots, played by Gwyneth Paltrow, didn't really bring a lot to the flow of the movie itself, well, maybe some little laughs. Mickey Rourke as Whiplash was passable, but if they had just focused on the one villian, Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer (Starks Competition) was very good, then who knows. Enjoyable comic book fun
Good enough for some summer fun, but nothing particularly remarkable.
Im not saying its better then 1, but it os ;)
Better than the first one.
exceeded my expectations this did i thought it was great & looking forward to part 3 & actually the avengers before that too.
There's always someone with bigger, better or more... shiny suit. ;)
Saw Iron-man 1 the nephews ask me to put the 2, I put the 2, they liked it, I liked it more than other times I've seen it. Elon Musk comes out of himself and presents the Black Widow
Love it! Better than the first one!
Johanson before childbirth,,, I am telling you, man, she is hot...
In the second part the armors multiply.
Absolutely dreadfulAbsolutely dreadfulAbsolutely dreadfulAbsolutely dreadful
About on par with the first one. I don't get all the negativity this one gets over the others.
My least favorite MCU entry, but that doesn't mean it's bad. It's just trying too hard, doing too much, not letting the characters or story grow organically. It feels forced.
It's like a fart; if you have to force it, it's probably crap.
They get worse and worse. Hey. Let's take off our helmets when missiles and electrified tentacle are fling all around the place. Typical ruining and irrational modifications to beloved sequential art characters. Zero depth, all just effects and crap flying around.
Not as good as the first one but ok
Not as good as The first Iron Man
Could have done better...
Not as good as the first one
As ironman fan can't complain!
very good movie
First one was way beter
Nicht so gut wie der erste, aber auf jedenfall sehenswert! 8/10