Iron Man 2 (Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow!)

[falcon14141]

If you haven't seen the movie i won't say anything yet.

I might not be as delicate

... just prepare yourself for a lot a action, and some interesting story hints. As for the first movie, stay until the end of the credits to see some extra scene.

Story arc could have been further developped, but movie is still very enjoyable.

I'll now be waiting for Iron Man 3

[ruskiiVFaussie]

yes IM III will be sweet.

I'm happy with the gradual development of SHIELD through this movie/s. It makes sense.

[Valkyrie Nut]

Any chance one of you could PM me details of what happens after the credits? I didn't have time to stay and see it

[ruskiiVFaussie]

PM'd. I had lik about a 6 pack of rums am I cried it out loud "f yeah! <insert spoiler> it's f'ing <insert spoiler>!!!!"

Edited May 1, 2010 by ruskiiVFaussie

[Scream Man]

Well, I saw it tonight, and overall liked it a lot.

I get it out of the way it isn't as good as the first. A little of the spark is missing, and it slows down a lot in the middle which doesnt help it. The dude is right about Iron Man only being in 4 scenes (Though one of those scenes is the last 15/20 mins of the movie) which is part of what slows the middle down. its nowhere NEAR as essy as the 2 slapped together stories of Xmen 3 and Spiderman 3 though, so I dont know where he got that from.

That said I still thought it was great. I dont understand the complaint that it's 'muddled' and hard to understand; I think all the plots flow in and out of one another nicely. Is the 2nd half a set up for Avengers? A little, yes but not overly so. Seeing Nick Fury there for a good porton of screen time certainly helps that along. But I'm a comic fan, so I dont see that see that as a negative, and it still serves the story being told in the film itself, so its not out of left field or anything. Interstingly, this must take place before Incredible Hulk, because something Tony says in this doesnt jIbe with the tony we see at the end of that movie. Not a negative, just somethign I noticed.

Personally I think it's a win. it does certain things wrong (The 'new element' thing is crap, and the resolution of it was a real WTF moment) but otherwise it still has a lot of action, alot of laughs and a lot of good tech and effects. Plusthey MUST have had apractical suit or him to wear that had relatively decent motion, since there are quite a few scenes where its obviously RDJ wearing it.

I'd see it again at any rate!

[BeyondTheGrave]

Any chance one of you could PM me details of what happens after the credits? I didn't have time to stay and see it

Haven't seen it yet but I know of a site that has a screen cap of it.

[Twoducks]

Don't know if the comments about it being less fresh than the first movie lowered my expectations but I F** LOVED THIS MOVIE!!

This IS a comic turned into a movie. I feel there is a universe bigger than the main cast thanks to all the foreshadowing going around about future events, characters and plotlines.

The first one had Tony shining but this time all the characters get their turn.

The villains shine too. I thought Whiplash was a dumb baddie to chose but, again, this movie has turned comic cheese into awesome. Hammer is also a joy to see. What a great douche.

Now this isn't perfect. The whole

"It's Science" mini LH Collider bit together with Tony's father and his *winkwink look in the little toy city winkwink*

are really stupid. But since everything else is so good, you let it pass.

The action was great. The

MK II vs MK IV

was my favourite fight. The set up was great (you could feel that it had to be done or someone

was going to get blown up

).

And this time the climax really is a climax.

As it has been said: Stay until the very end of the credits.

[dreamweaver13]

Watched it. Enjoyed it a lot. Downey is a god. But I still liked the first one better.

just a thought: If you watched the first film, but didn't wait until after the credits, you'd be thinking: "Who the hell is Samuel Jackson supposed to be, and what's his deal??" LOL.

[Archer]

Well, I haven't seen it yet, but is there a lot of war machine? The main reason why i am gonna go see this is to go see war machine on the big screen!!

[areaseven]

On a side note, R.I.P. Adam Goldstein (a.k.a. DJ AM), who made a cameo in this film as himself during Tony's birthday party scene. He died of a drug overdose late last year.

[RedWolf]

One thing not touched upon Iron Man 2 is who were those being contacted by one of Stain's scientists working on Mark I and Ironmonger suit in Iron Man. That scene seemed to me a setup for a future plot.

On hints on the Avengers once the Avengers movie show in 2012 I expect personalities not meshing in the team. These are a bunch of loners who are used to working alone not being ordered around.

Again as in Iron Man I the shield of Captain America show up among Tony's junk. While in Hulk he is well informed of the Super Soldier program in the Iron Man movies he doesn't know the shield's significance.

Edited May 4, 2010 by RedWolf

[miles316]

Watched it. Enjoyed it a lot. Downey is a god. But I still liked the first one better.

just a thought: If you watched the first film, but didn't wait until after the credits, you'd be thinking: "Who the hell is Samuel Jackson supposed to be, and what's his deal??" LOL.

He is Nick Fraking Fury "Agent of SHIELD" for god fraking sake I rarely read comic books and I know who his character is.

[RedWolf]

He is Nick Fraking Fury "Agent of SHIELD" for god fraking sake I rarely read comic books and I know who his character is.

Ultimate Nick Fury which was based on Samuel L. Jackson to be exact.

[dreamweaver13]

Again as in Iron Man I the shield of Captain America show up among Tony's junk. While in Hulk he is well informed of the Super Soldier program in the Iron Man movies he doesn't know the shield's significance.

What if Steve Rogers in the movie doesn't have a shield all throughout the past, and only gets the shield (that Tony presumably made) after he gets thawed in the present time? Maybe by the time of IM2, the shield isn't an iconic part of captain america lore yet --it's just something tony's toying with.

Either that, or it's just a characteristic lack of sentimentality on the part of Tony. After all, the owner of the shield is long dead (presumably).

He is Nick Fraking Fury "Agent of SHIELD" for god fraking sake I rarely read comic books and I know who his character is.

I know who he is. A lot of superhero fans who don't read much comics know who he is (although most would know him as a blond white boy). But for someone who has no idea about the marvel universe, and who only knows enough about Iron Man from what's in the first movie (main movie, without the post-credit scene), then Samuel Jackson is a complete mathafrackin stranger. He's the closest thing to deus ex machina in Iron Man 2. He just shows up.

[dreamweaver13]

Ultimate Nick Fury which was based on Samuel L. Jackson to be exact.

So basically, it was Samuel Jackson playing Samuel Jackson. Man, how easy to earn money in hollywood these days. lol.

[areaseven]

Again as in Iron Man I the shield of Captain America show up among Tony's junk. While in Hulk he is well informed of the Super Soldier program in the Iron Man movies he doesn't know the shield's significance.

That's because the circular shield that we are all familiar with was not used by Cap during his WWII years. His original shield was badge-shaped (though in retconned storylines, Cap received the circular shield toward the end of the war).

[Dobber]

I missed that, where was Cap's sheild in Iron Man I?

Chris

[CheeseKing]

It's not real easy to see. It looks only half completed, like he is still building it.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http:/...%26tbs%3Disch:1

Edited May 4, 2010 by CheeseKing

[cool8or]

I watched the movie past tuesday. And I loved it!!!

[ntsan]

Not as good as Kick-ass, the final boss fight is less than 40s.. the story doesn't flow too well, and some scene in trailer is not in the movie!

[dreamweaver13]

Not as good as Kick-ass, the final boss fight is less than 40s.. the story doesn't flow too well, and some scene in trailer is not in the movie!

I've always wondered why they didn't include the "go get 'em boss" scene in the final cut. The exchange was hilarious, and I thought that set up the lover-employer-employee tension perfectly. A bit bummed they cut that out.

[David Hingtgen]

Better than I thought it'd be based on the early reviews. Definitely funnier/more one-liners. But they're so fast you can't possibly catch all of them in one viewing. Overall more flash, less substance than the first. I actually like the earlier fights more than the later ones.

After-credits scene detailed synopsis, so you don't have to sit through 10 mins of boring B&W credits:

Car driving through desert. Agent Coulson (the SHIELD guy from the first movie, and this one) gets out, and looks over a cliff at a big smoking crater in the desert. He phones in that "we've found it". Camera pans/zooms, and reveals that it's Mjolnir in the center of the crater.

[kanedaestes]

I too enjoyed it, a lot better than the reviews make it seem, and the plot is pretty straight forward....to me anyway.

[myk]

It (the plot) was straight forward because the story was so simple-simon and I had trouble staying awake. I dunno, the whole self-destructive persona of Tony Stark and how he just can't seem to get things right was forced and didn't get me to care one damn bit. The characters were so lacking in depth or conflict that I couldn't find a reason to care about them either. Samuel Jackson, Scarlett Johansson, Gwyeneth Paltrow and a slew of other people served no purpose to that entire movie, asides from just "being there to be there," and just left the story meaningless and completely forgettable.

On another note, can we please just stop with the Samuel Jackson thing? Yeah I know, he's a bad-ass-motherf**ker who's black, sassy, proud and just too goddamn cool but it's old. I'm talking 1994 Pulp Fiction old. Give it/him/us a rest from it already...

-Oh, and don't stick around 'till after the credits-save yourself the hassle of losing even more of your time and just watch it on Youtube...

Edited May 7, 2010 by myk

[Chewie]

It (the plot) was straight forward because the story was so simple-simon and I had trouble staying awake. I dunno, the whole self-destructive persona of Tony Stark and how he just can't seem to get things right was forced and didn't get me to care one damn bit. The characters were so lacking in depth or conflict that I couldn't find a reason to care about them either. Samuel Jackson, Scarlett Johansson, Gwyeneth Paltrow and a slew of other people served no purpose to that entire movie, asides from just "being there to be there," and just left the story meaningless and completely forgettable.

On another note, can we please just stop with the Samuel Jackson thing? Yeah I know, he's a bad-ass-motherf**ker who's black, sassy, proud and just too goddamn cool but it's old. I'm talking 1994 Pulp Fiction old. Give it/him/us a rest from it already...

-Oh, and don't stick around 'till after the credits-save yourself the hassle of losing even more of your time and just watch it on Youtube...

Lol, okay.

[Grand Admiral]

Saw it last night. I thought it was really fun. I really enjoyed how it felt like they were moving toward the larger Marvel universe.

[Dangard Ace]

Spoiler tags if at least only for this weekend for those of you have seen it. I'll be avoiding this thread until next after next weekend.

Also IM spoof.

[terry the lone wolf]

So basically, it was Samuel Jackson playing Samuel Jackson. Man, how easy to earn money in hollywood these days. lol.

I heard Marvel payed a s***load of money to use his like-ness and then they paid more to be in later IM sequels and the Avengers. That's bad a** MoFo!

[HoveringCheesecake]

I'm about the farthest thing from a comic book nerd (but I'm still a nerd) and I loved it. I'll definitely see it more than once, so I'll wait to decide how it measures up to the first movie.

[eugimon]

thought it was meh. Went in with low expectations. I felt like they tried to juggle too many balls and ended up losing a lot of the magic and chemistry from the first movie. Action was good and the black widow sequence was great.

[Axelay]

*sigh*

Nerd anger on:

Was at the midnight showing at my closest theater, and the manager did a trivia thing for prizes before the show. He asked which suit was the one with the triangle on it, and I answered Mark VI. He said this was wrong, and he called on someone else who said that the answer was the Mark IV. I was like WTF, I've been reading about this for almost 6 months now. Today I went to Target and bought the Mark VI suit of the "Hall of Armor" toys which comes with the light up base and took it back to the theater. I politely introduced myself and explained that I felt like the answer last night was incorrect, so I showed the package to the manager who then claimed that the toy was wrong. Um... OK, so Marvel is gonna let Hasbro make millions of dollars of these toys and other merchandise and they're all labeled wrong? I then pulled out my phone and went to the Wikipedia page about it and showed him what it says about each of the suits in this movie and he claimed that it wasn't a credible source. So then I went to find production images and showed him the scene with the 4 suits in the workshop and pointed out that the Mark IV in the background still has the circular chestpiece. He claimed that since he had read the answer in a Marvel encyclopedia that he was correct and I was wrong. Ugh. If there wasn't a prize involved in this (which was a stack of free movie passes), I'd be content to let him continue to be wrong, but noooooooooooooo. Now I just can't let it go. LOL. I don't suppose anyone knows of any official images or storyboards with labels online which clearly specify which suit is which?

[Veritas]

Interstingly, this must take place before Incredible Hulk, because something Tony says in this doesnt jIbe with the tony we see at the end of that movie. Not a negative, just somethign I noticed.

You'd be right.

"When asked via Twitter where (or rather, when) "Iron Man 2" falls in relation to 2008's "Incredible Hulk," Favreau said the upcoming sequel actually falls "before" Edward Norton's adventure as the green goliath."

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/02/04/jon-f...movie-timeline/

Edited May 8, 2010 by Veritas

[BeyondTheGrave]

*sigh*

Nerd anger on:

Was at the midnight showing at my closest theater, and the manager did a trivia thing for prizes before the show. He asked which suit was the one with the triangle on it, and I answered Mark VI. He said this was wrong, and he called on someone else who said that the answer was the Mark IV. I was like WTF, I've been reading about this for almost 6 months now. Today I went to Target and bought the Mark VI suit of the "Hall of Armor" toys which comes with the light up base and took it back to the theater. I politely introduced myself and explained that I felt like the answer last night was incorrect, so I showed the package to the manager who then claimed that the toy was wrong. Um... OK, so Marvel is gonna let Hasbro make millions of dollars of these toys and other merchandise and they're all labeled wrong? I then pulled out my phone and went to the Wikipedia page about it and showed him what it says about each of the suits in this movie and he claimed that it wasn't a credible source. So then I went to find production images and showed him the scene with the 4 suits in the workshop and pointed out that the Mark IV in the background still has the circular chestpiece. He claimed that since he had read the answer in a Marvel encyclopedia that he was correct and I was wrong. Ugh. If there wasn't a prize involved in this (which was a stack of free movie passes), I'd be content to let him continue to be wrong, but noooooooooooooo. Now I just can't let it go. LOL. I don't suppose anyone knows of any official images or storyboards with labels online which clearly specify which suit is which?

It'd be the mark V. Mark I, II and III were featured in Iron man 1. Mark II was turned into war machine, mark III destroyed/ damaged in the battle with Stane. Mark IV used through the majority of Iron man 2 until plot point X. After which mark v was reviled.

Or at least that's what I'm going with.

Also saw at midnight will give thoughts later.

[eugimon]

It'd be the mark V. Mark I, II and III were featured in Iron man 1. Mark II was turned into war machine, mark III destroyed/ damaged in the battle with Stane. Mark IV used through the majority of Iron man 2 until plot point X. After which mark v was reviled.

Or at least that's what I'm going with.

Also saw at midnight will give thoughts later.

no, it's the VI.

I is the first suit

II prototype/warmachine

III final suit in first movie

IV is the replacement to III and used in most of iron man 2

V is the suitcase suit

VI is the new suit to accommodate the triangle chest piece.

Edited May 8, 2010 by eugimon

[BeyondTheGrave]

no, it's the VI.

I is the first suit

II prototype/warmachine

III final suit in first movie

IV is the replacement to III and used in most of iron man 2

V is the suitcase suit

VI is the new suit to accommodate the triangle chest piece.

I don't really see the suit case suit as a full suit but more of a portable on the go version. Or like a IV.5