Select to view spoiler:

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
They're making a SECOND Iron Man movie ?

Huh. Hadn't heard anything about it.

Is it suppose to be any good?

---

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
They're making a SECOND Iron Man movie ?

Huh. Hadn't heard anything about it.

Is it suppose to be any good?

---

Heh, you dork.


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigRichard:
lwaves! agree with everything you said!
but lets talk more about your final point...in secret.

Select to view spoiler:

---

Thor is already in filming I believe,
Cast list here: (includes Natalie Portman, Kat Dennings, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgard, Colm Feore, AND Clark Gregg is back as Agent Coulson!)
It's also being directed by Kenneth Branagh, which should be a big plus.
The first picture of Thor was released yesterday, and can be seen here:
No idea if this needed spoilers or not, but some people might not like to know just yet...

---

---

Select to view spoiler:

That's good news then. There were so many rumours over the years that you never know what to believe. I see they are doing a Nick Fury movie for the year after Thor. And Agent Coulson will be in both. That guy might become a legend if this whole idea of linking all the movies pays off.
And with Capt America being shot as well it looks like the superhero movie isn't going away anytime soon.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CatPirate:
Can you say big popcorn and cherry cola.

---

Quote:

---

Bigger, louder and dumber than its predecessor, "Iron Man 2" is still a lot of fun.

Just not all the time. Unevenly paced and at times visually almost incoherent, especially during action scenes, the film stays afloat as director Jon Favreau relies heavily on the considerable charms of Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark, along with an excellent supporting cast. Not that Favreau always knows what to do with it; certainly it's disappointing that Mickey Rourke spends 80 percent of the climactic battle . . . typing.

Yes, clickity-clack on a laptop keyboard, programming drones to take down Iron Man because, well, that's what Russian physicists insane with grief do, I guess. That's who Rourke plays, Ivan Vanko, a brilliant man with bad dentition who believes that his father's downfall was caused by Tony Stark's father. Now he's out for revenge.

Though it's not clear that he need be; Stark's growing ego might have taken him down without any outside help. The toxicity caused by his fake heart isn't doing him any favors, either.

"Iron Man 2" picks up where the original left off, right after Stark reveals that he is indeed Iron Man. Months pass and he's flying high, literally and figuratively, telling a congressional hearing to which he's just refused to give his Iron Man technology, "I have successfully privatized world peace!"

Not so fast, bub. Not only is Vanko making progress with a sort of steampunk Iron Man knockoff suit, Stark is also being flanked by a competitor, Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell), a squirrelly arms developer itching for a government contract. Meanwhile, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), Stark's loyal assistant, is trying to convince Stark that he needs to pay more attention to his company (he responds by promoting her). His friend, Lt. Col. James "Rhodey" Rhodes (Don Cheadle) is trying to keep Stark in the Army's relatively good graces. And newly hired legal representative Natalie Rushman (Scarlett Johansson) seems to know an awful lot about martial arts. . . .

Ultimately none of this matters much. The fun that "Iron Man 2" offers is found in the interaction between the characters, not the story. Even though Hammer is something of a stock character, the anything-for-money sort, Rockwell is obviously having fun with him. Hammer's dealings with Vanko, who he sees as a tool to get at Stark, are most enjoyable. A scene in which Hammer tries to sell Rhodey on various types of guns is even better. Hammer isn't a super hero, but I wouldn't mind seeing a movie about him, if Rockwell played the role.

Garry Shandling is also really good as the U.S. senator who wants Stark's secrets. Cheadle is a fine replacement for Terrence Howard as Rhody. Johansson gets to dye her hair red and kick a lot of butt. Rourke speaks Russian, wields electronic whips but spends a lot of time on the sidelines, thinking about, designing or building weapons designed to kill Stark.

Downey is still enormously entertaining to watch, his disheveled super hero trying to come to terms with a different kind of recognition than he's used to, while he tries to keep himself alive.

If that sounds like a lot to sort through, well, that's the biggest problem with the movie. With all those elements in play, Favreau is forced to jump around from one character to the next, meaning that if you're enjoying an exchange between Rhodey and Stark, well, don't get too attached, because we're soon bouncing over to Vanko driving Hammer crazy. Individually they're enjoyable moments, but it's hard to keep a narrative flow.

There are hints of an Avengers movie to come (fanboys will want to stick around past the lengthy credits for a specific tease), as well as a funny nod to Captain America.

There are lots of things, too many things to keep up with for "Iron Man 2" to be as satisfying as the original. But as long as Downey's portrayal is one of those things, then it's hard to complain too much.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/thingstodo/movies/articles/2010/05/05/2010050
5ironman0507.html#ixzz0nMoaToBs

---

Select to view spoiler:

Select to view spoiler:

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by lwaves:

And Chris you better post when you've seen it this weekend. I want to know your thoughts as I know your a big fan of the first movie.

---

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
On movies, I'll go w/ Chrissy's general review, and probably go check it out tomorrow.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dewrastler:


I wish they had shown, or at least attempted to show

Select to view spoiler:

---

the original fallout between Howard Stark and Vanko's father. Don't tell me that Stark ruined Vanko's life (in a way), show me. It gives Vanko's motivation to become Whiplash much more weight than a few lines of dialogue from Vanko as we see his father old and frail.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Also, is it just me, or did the unsuccessful armour tests from other countries remind you of Robocop 2?


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dewrastler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Also, is it just me, or did the unsuccessful armour tests from other countries remind you of Robocop 2?

---

YES!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dewrastler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Also, is it just me, or did the unsuccessful armour tests from other countries remind you of Robocop 2?

---

YES!

---

Wait- yes it IS just me, or yes you agree...?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dewrastler:

Yes, I agree. Fear not, you're not crazy. Either that, or both of us are. At least, then, you're not alone.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dewrastler:

Yes, I agree. Fear not, you're not crazy. Either that, or both of us are. At least, then, you're not alone.

---

I enjoy the company of crazies, given the proper venue, De!
Let's have at it & let slip the arc reactors of war!

Okay- bedtime.

The laughing Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by lwaves:+
Minor points in a great film.

---

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Select to view spoiler:

---

Johansson's fight moves,when she's taking out the guards at Hammer's complex. They looked fake. By that, I mean as if some of her moves were done on computer, and not actually as they were shot w/ the actors doing the moves as shown.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by lwaves:

Minor points in a great film.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:The particular scene you refer to was a combination of stunt peeps, the actor, wirework & CGI. Some speeds were also increased in post.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Ahhh, then I was right, and my eyes weren't playing tricks on me. I'm not so much a fan of CGI being used like that, I must say.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


River or Natalie, in a chick a' chick fight off?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


River or Natalie, in a chick a' chick fight off?

---

River, unless Nat used hi-tek trickery & River was bare handed.


The laughing Chrisisall

---

Select to view spoiler: