RE: iron Man 2: The Quest for a Plot.

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: iron Man 2: The Quest for a Plot.

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: iron Man 2: The Quest for a Plot.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: iron Man 2: The Quest for a Plot. - 3/5/2010 11:02:54 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18934
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: Epiphany Demon

Girvy, quite how you felt that was worse than Incredible Hulk baffles me. That was such a boring film, it really was. No character development, no charisma from an unusually average Norton, Roth was shit, the action underwhelming. I'd definitely give both Iron Mans 4/5.

I really enjoy TIH - it is well paced, with some pretty good action scenes. The chase through the city, the campus attack and the final battle.

Norton was pretty good I thought. He didn't go the route of the "woe is me" but the idea of his trying to control the creature was interesting.

Roth was fun. It was goofy seeing him go against the Hulk but I liked his confidence and drive. Hurt ate scenery but I think that is the character.

Tyler may have been a little bland, but she didn't really have much to do.

Its not a perfect film, but it is lean, and you get your moneys worth. Sure it is not as inventive as the Lee movie, but neither is it the abject failure some make it out to be.

And unlike Iron Man 2 it doesn't devote a significant amount of time to a subplot that goes no where and does nothing.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Epiphany Demon)

Post #: 91

RE: iron Man 2: The Quest for a Plot. - 3/5/2010 11:04:57 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18934
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

I would also query if Stark had any character development either.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 92

RE: Gone rusty - 4/5/2010 12:03:58 AM

Invader_Ace

Posts: 1534
Joined: 31/7/2008

Just seen it. It's the same as all the new marvel universe films. Alright, but a bit under-whelming. 3 stars.
I agree with what various people have said, it seemed like they chickened out on the Iron-man's Dad screwed over/didn't completely create the reactor angle. Which I personally think is a shame. Also, it's true that although you're suppose to think he's spending the whole film dying. You never ever think for a minute that he will or that he will even get his ass kicked because of it. Whiplash was cool, but waaaaaay under-used.

Post #: 93

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 9:59:29 AM

livewire

Posts: 4049
Joined: 24/1/2006
From: Northern Ireland

Right first off i really enjoyed this film. i was entertained from start to finish. if anything i could have done without sam rockwells character.

there was plenty of humor and action and i just though it was was a good, turn the brain off at the door, kick back and relax for 2 hours or so.

I have two Major issues with the film though.

First: if have is the fact that if they're going to put a tease after the credits then either make the credits shorter or puut the tease in earlier. nearly fell asleep waiting on it (but it was pretty freekin sweet)

Secondly: NOT ENOUGH AC/DC throughout the movie, several scenes i was thinking to myself, here comes a big DC riff, but no, denied the riffage. disappointed.

apart from that, really enjoyed it and will be buying the DVD soon.

_____________________________

I`ve never had a message for anyone in my entire life. Except maybe to give out my room number" - Bonn Scott 1946 � 1980

Punchdrunk - 1981 - 2010

(in reply to Indio)

Post #: 94

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 11:31:21 AM

bad hat harry

Posts: 468
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: reality is twisted, i am a buffalo

#SPOILERS#

Rather enjoyed this. RDJ was good as usual, as were the supporting cast, although Micky Rourke was underused and the plot was pretty nothingy. They made the mistake of having Whiplash's plan essentially lead up to him typing on a keyboard, which is always incredibly undramatic. It's a bit like "Under siege 2", an entire movie filled with Eric Bogossian's villanous typing. Scarlett Johanson was actually pretty good too, and especially in her semi big action scene. Again she was underused and thinking about it, her character actually did very little to further the plot. All the stuff with her and Nick Fury felt like an Avengers tease that didn't do much for this particular movie. She didn't embarrass herself though, the way she did in "The Spirit". It's probably the first time i've thought a movie would have benefited from more of her. i thought Gwyneth Paltrow was much better here than in the first movie as well.

i liked that they kept the fighting stuff limited to a few scenes. i was worried that this would just be robots battering each other for two hours. The action/fighting bits were the least interesting parts of the first movie. That said, the climatic scenes with whiplash felt rushed. They never really seemed to know what to do with either Micky Rourke or his character. The used up all their best ideas with the racetrack scene, which was actually really well shot and surprisingly effective. It had tension that the rest of the movie never really did.

Altogether i enjoyed this, even if it was pretty insubstantial. As with the first movie, it felt like they were making it up as they went along, without much idea of how it would all fit together in the end. It was fun though, which is more than can be said for a lot of summer blockbusters. it was about a million times better than tranformers 2, which was a real slog to sit through.

i did notice something a little odd though. it was in the trailer and people mentioned it already. but just before Tony Stark goes to see Ivan Vanko, after the racetrack scene, he's walks past a particular cell and the camera lingers for a second on a Norse looking gentleman. Presumably the gag is that it's meant to be Thor. My question is, why would Thor be in a prison cell in Monaco?

< Message edited by bad hat harry -- 4/5/2010 11:40:05 AM >

_____________________________

I was thrown out of college for cheating on the metaphysics exam; I looked into the soul of the boy sitting next to me.�
� Woody Allen

(in reply to livewire)

Post #: 95

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 12:11:27 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18934
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

How did Whiplash know that Stark was going to be racing? It was a spur of the moment thing.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to bad hat harry)

Post #: 96

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 12:29:19 PM

The Hooded Man

Posts: 2728
Joined: 12/7/2006

Having watched this my first reaction is that I'm worried for the development of the Marvel universe on film, Iron Man was great fun but The Incredible Hulk was an exercise in box ticking and Iron Man 2 is following on in that vein. Like The Incredible Hulk it didn't have any heart and never felt like rising above a three star status. That's okay but when you see the potential this universe has is it enough?

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 97

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 12:31:22 PM

Invader_Ace

Posts: 1534
Joined: 31/7/2008

His racing was spur of the moment. The fact that he would be there was not.

I'm sure Whiplash could have found his way into the hospitality area if he'd needed. He seemed like a pretty good ideas-man.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 98

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 4:37:10 PM

Timon

Posts: 14551
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol

quote:

ORIGINAL: ianclisby

graphics in the Black Widow fight were terrible

I really don't understand this comment.

But yeah, the film was a bit bloated and a bit all over the place, but it entertained me for a couple of hours.

Nowhere near as good as the first and has made me wonder how they are going to keep all the balls in the air for The Avengers if they can't even do it with the cast of Iron Man.

Still, Scarlett Johnanson made me tingle in my giblets.

Oh and why did they get rid of Ramin Djwadi's score from the first film? It was one of the best things about it! I barely noticed the new score.

3/5

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to blackduck)

Post #: 99

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 4:41:04 PM

musht

Posts: 1220
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: hatebox

quote:

ORIGINAL: largejc

THERE WAS SO MUCH ACTION I NEARLY FELL OF MY SEAT, BRILLIANT FILM!!!!

I can imagine this quote on the poster. From The Sun.

The first Iron Man had more action.

It really didn't, Iron Man 2 was much more satisfactory on the action front

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 100

RE: Fence-sitting indeed, nowhere near as bad as people... - 4/5/2010 4:43:34 PM

Epiphany Demon

Posts: 6498
Joined: 14/11/2007

quote:

ORIGINAL: spideed2
Kick Ass was overated by Empire this was underated, both should have got 4 stars.

Totally agreed.

_____________________________

THE ALTERNATIVE LOOK AT BOB DYLAN'S DISCOGRAPHY - ONE DAY MAYBE I'LL FINISH IT

Post #: 101

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 4:57:31 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18934
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: hatebox

quote:

ORIGINAL: largejc

THERE WAS SO MUCH ACTION I NEARLY FELL OF MY SEAT, BRILLIANT FILM!!!!

I can imagine this quote on the poster. From The Sun.

The first Iron Man had more action.

It really didn't, Iron Man 2 was much more satisfactory on the action front

The main villian was dispatched 30 seconds after turning up. At least in the first one a decent fight was constructed. Just because there is "action" doesn't mean it is either good, or that there is lots of it.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to musht)

Post #: 102

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 6:45:50 PM

mattdavies86

Posts: 113
Joined: 30/4/2006
From: Bath

Up until the Monaco GP action set piece I was quite enjoying this. Well paced with some decent plot strands developing. The second half though was just a garbled mess, reminding me of the 'too many cooks' formula that ruined Spiderman 3.

Scarlett Johansson was just a bit of eye candy (as always) and didn't really serve much purpose, while the scenes involving Nick Fury acted as yet another forced setup to the godawful prospect of The Avengers movie (can't understand why the geeks are getting so excited - it will be a travesty).

RDJ and Rourke rescued it for me (loved their scene together inside the prison), although Rourke takes a backseat after the Monaco section. Rockwell was also clearly enjoying himself as Justin Hammer.

The final battle is where the film really fails for me. Just like the end of the 1st Iron Man, this is a case of men in suits just lumping seven shades of shit out of one another - not particularly inspired.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 103

RE: Iron Man 2 - 4/5/2010 6:49:07 PM

Invader_Ace

Posts: 1534
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon

quote:

ORIGINAL: ianclisby

graphics in the Black Widow fight were terrible

I really don't understand this comment.

Despite the hype before hand, the fight scene wasn't that amazing from Scarlett; it looked to me like it was cut around a stunt double. There were a couple of shots where I thought they had pasted her featues onto the action. Maybe he thought the same.

(in reply to Timon)

Post #: 104

RE: Fence-sitting indeed, nowhere near as bad as people... - 4/5/2010 8:00:32 PM

theoriginalcynic

Posts: 6517
Joined: 10/4/2007

The ending is poor. All the build up and the robots get defeated easily and Mickey is beaten way too quickly. Apart from that it's a solid three star film.

(in reply to Epiphany Demon)

Post #: 105

RE: Overall Thumbs up! - 4/5/2010 9:45:43 PM

kenada_woo

Posts: 1669
Joined: 30/9/2005

Was good fun. Basically more of the same from the first one but with more 'splosions.

***/*****

_____________________________

http://dereksdontrunfilms.blogspot.co.uk/

"You bailed out a Jamaican street named Monkey the other day, I want him. This other piece of shit, Screwface, I want him. I know you're a scumbag and a puke, I don't mind that, but give me what I need and I'll leave here a nice guy. If you don't, I'm gonna fuck you up. "

Hatcher. Marked For Death

Post #: 106

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 10:05:23 PM

musht

Posts: 1220
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: hatebox

quote:

ORIGINAL: largejc

THERE WAS SO MUCH ACTION I NEARLY FELL OF MY SEAT, BRILLIANT FILM!!!!

I can imagine this quote on the poster. From The Sun.

The first Iron Man had more action.

It really didn't, Iron Man 2 was much more satisfactory on the action front

The main villian was dispatched 30 seconds after turning up. At least in the first one a decent fight was constructed. Just because there is "action" doesn't mean it is either good, or that there is lots of it.

i'll give you the final showdown was let down but overall 2 had much more action than the first which contained only 3 scenes where he dawned the suit and only once have a decent fight scene, whereas 2 had the grand prix, the 'birthday bash' with rhodey, and the final climax

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 107

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 10:21:55 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18934
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: hatebox

quote:

ORIGINAL: largejc

THERE WAS SO MUCH ACTION I NEARLY FELL OF MY SEAT, BRILLIANT FILM!!!!

I can imagine this quote on the poster. From The Sun.

The first Iron Man had more action.

It really didn't, Iron Man 2 was much more satisfactory on the action front

The main villian was dispatched 30 seconds after turning up. At least in the first one a decent fight was constructed. Just because there is "action" doesn't mean it is either good, or that there is lots of it.

i'll give you the final showdown was let down but overall 2 had much more action than the first which contained only 3 scenes where he dawned the suit and only once have a decent fight scene, whereas 2 had the grand prix, the 'birthday bash' with rhodey, and the final climax

So you are saying Iron Man 2 also had three scenes. Two of which were scenes over before they begun, and the other played mainly for laughs.

The action is not even my biggest problem. Its that massive plot point that does nothing, goes no where and doesn't even develop Stark as a character.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to musht)

Post #: 108

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 10:35:19 PM

musht

Posts: 1220
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: musht

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: hatebox

quote:

ORIGINAL: largejc

THERE WAS SO MUCH ACTION I NEARLY FELL OF MY SEAT, BRILLIANT FILM!!!!

I can imagine this quote on the poster. From The Sun.

The first Iron Man had more action.

It really didn't, Iron Man 2 was much more satisfactory on the action front

The main villian was dispatched 30 seconds after turning up. At least in the first one a decent fight was constructed. Just because there is "action" doesn't mean it is either good, or that there is lots of it.

i'll give you the final showdown was let down but overall 2 had much more action than the first which contained only 3 scenes where he dawned the suit and only once have a decent fight scene, whereas 2 had the grand prix, the 'birthday bash' with rhodey, and the final climax

So you are saying Iron Man 2 also had three scenes. Two of which were scenes over before they begun, and the other played mainly for laughs.

The action is not even my biggest problem. Its that massive plot point that does nothing, goes no where and doesn't even develop Stark as a character.

haha point taken, but i still hold up that the 3 scenes in the sequel are much better than those in the first . . . also the final set piece was pure awesome it could have been more awesome definitely but i didn't leave the cinema feeling utterly disappointed.

what plot point?

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 109

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 10:51:07 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18934
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

The "Stark is dying" subplot.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to musht)

Post #: 110

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 10:53:11 PM

Epiphany Demon

Posts: 6498
Joined: 14/11/2007

That didn't go anywhere I'll agree, but the action in this one - however short - was miles better than any action in the first. I do like the first marginally more though.

_____________________________

THE ALTERNATIVE LOOK AT BOB DYLAN'S DISCOGRAPHY - ONE DAY MAYBE I'LL FINISH IT

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 111

RE: AMAZING - 4/5/2010 11:07:50 PM

musht

Posts: 1220
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland

yeh the stark dying was definitely brushed off way too easily especially the way all his veins went back to normal as soon as the new chest piece was in place, but i wasn't overly bothered by that

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

(in reply to Epiphany Demon)

Post #: 112

RE: AMAZING - 5/5/2010 8:55:27 AM

Marwood

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

Saw this last night and have to admit that it was ok but didn't live up to expectation.

I think the Empire 3 star rating was fair here as Iron Man 2 interestingly suffers from the same problem that Spider-Man 3 and X-Men 3 have in my opinion - overcrowding. It's like Favreau knows what happens to these films on the third outing so got it out of the way in the second.

There was a lot going on but it all felt strangely anti-climactic and in my opinion none of the new additions to the cast left much of an impression. Sam Rockwell was good for the most part but as I feared from the trailers tended to go a bit too over the top too many times.
Rourke was solid and next to RDJ put in the best performance but he was in the film so little that again Ivan doesn't live long in the memory. Scarlett was better than expected as Black Widow (aside from a lack of Russian accent) but her role was pretty superfluous - she didn't really have anything to do apart from be "the new Pepper" until her action scene towards the end.
I think I prefer Don Cheadle's Rhodey to Terence Howard's portrayal from the first film but felt that the character was underwritten here. Garry Shandling was a hoot as Senator Stern (?) but what's happened to him? He looks like a waxwork that's melted and been only partially remolded.

RDJ was golden as expected though and held it all together, there were a few times where I was starting to dislike Tony but he kind of goes off the rails a bit so I guess that was the point. Gwyneth was again very good as Pepper and still sparks brilliantly with Robert. Favreau himself played a bigger role this time and although he could have been cut entirely from the film he was quite funny. Samuel L Jackson was better than expected as Nick Fury and I'm looking forward to more of him in the upcoming Captain America and Thor films if he cameos in those before The Avengers.

Action and effects were more ambitious but not really a significant step up from the first film, the mark 2 suit that Rhodey "steals" stood out as a pretty bad effect compared to Iron Man himself, the drones and (SPOILER) Rourke's suit. However the War Machine armour when outfitted was very cool, standout scene for me was Iron Man and War Machine taking down the drones - that was some good robo carnage. Rourke's final battle was a bit anti-climactic though, pretty cool armour design but it was over far too soon - even Iron Monger had more of a battle.

I think the main issue with the film is that it is as much of a platform for the larger Marvel universe as an actual Iron Man film and suffers for it. Black Widow and Nick Fury could have been left out entirely and not missed and it's clear they were thrown in really to properly introduce Shield and the Avenger Initiative. War Machine's subplot felt rushed and again a bit shoehorned in to introduce the character for either The Avengers or maybe his own spin off. I liked the nod to Captain America though and the special post credits scene teasing another Marvel film due next summer was quite cool.

Overall I enjoyed it as a chapter in the larger Marvel Universe film but as an Iron Man film it didn't really live up to the promise of his debut. Hopefully after The Avengers we'll see the proposed Iron Man 3 and it will be a more back to basics film with the crossover stuff out of the way.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 113

RE: Iron Man 2 - 5/5/2010 9:54:32 AM

Stryder

Posts: 114
Joined: 15/10/2005

Really looking forward to this, as i thought the first film along with HellboyII were the best blockbusters of 2008 by a mile.

As expected, it was not as good as the original and suffered slightly from the common 'bigger is better' issue of blockbuster sequels, but overall the quality was good. Most notably, Johanson and Jackson were unecessary, the middle of the film dragged slightly, Rockwell's character was slightly irritating and the final act wasn a slight let down and anti-climatic.

On the plus side Downey Jr was worth the ticket price alone. As usual his charisma oozed off the screen in bucket loads and delivered another spot-on performance as Tony Stark. Paltrow was once again great, as was Rockwell whom previously i knew little about as an actor. Rourke was as physcially charismatic as always though had little to do and Cheadle seemed to fit in ok after you got used to seeing a different physical presecnece in the role. The special effects were great, and the production design, conceptual work and general visualisation of the film as it was from the first is again top notch (theres something incredbily cool and well conceived about Tony's place, his garage, his Minority Report-like design studio and the Arc Reactor concept!).

< Message edited by Stryder -- 5/5/2010 1:24:40 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 114

RE: Iron Man 2 - 5/5/2010 11:16:36 AM

Supernova

Posts: 68
Joined: 30/9/2005

How did Rhodey initially power the MKII suit? I thought the suit's power came from Tony's arc reactor? The shell/breastplate of the suit is designed to fit around the reactor built into Tony's chest so I wasn't really clear how Rhodey got it working?

(in reply to Stryder)

Post #: 115

RE: Rust Man II - 5/5/2010 1:33:32 PM

Celluloid Seduction

Posts: 76
Joined: 3/2/2006
From: splashing about the Med.

I'm going to dare to say that Iron Man 2 is better than the original...

"I have no idea if the story line and its finale bear any resemblance to the original comic book. However, Iron Man 2 the movie is definitely worth seeing as a stand-alone. It�s the sort of movie that allows grown-ups to indulge in playing with toy cars and robots, and flying rockets through the air to attack the baddies, albeit in a �virtual� world. A real �boys� movie � you�ll have to see it to understand what I mean by this." This is just an excerpt from my review comments on my movie blog and the link is below if you want to waste some time reading it!

I liked the original too but I enjoyed this one more (maybe its because I've aged a couple of years who knows)!

_____________________________

"...guys, what if the film isn't any good?"

http://www.CelluloidSeduction.blogspot.com

Post #: 116

RE: Sounds like your typical sequel review - 5/5/2010 2:29:17 PM

coljohnmatrix

Posts: 137
Joined: 29/11/2006

I'm wondering how anyone managed to enjoy anything from this film. I really enjoyed the first, but this was a total mis-fire. I was bored for most of the running time. All the fun and energy from the first film is totally missing in Iron Man 2.

There wasn't any real plot, which I think was the main problem. There just seemed to be about 15 sub-plots weaved together - i.e. Vanko out for revenge, Hammer trying to oust Stark, the Government trying to take control over the Iron Man tech., Hammer and Vanko teaming up, the whole SHIELD thing, Stark and Pepper's love plot, Pepper taking over as CEO, Stark being poisoned by his reactor, Stark's issues with his dad being hinted at....Jesus. I'm sure there's more I'm forgetting. There was just so much time spent trudging through all these sub plots that it got boring, and no sub plot got enough time to develop in any way.

I think there was too much pressure from the studio and/or fanboys who all wanted to see various characters and plot-lines squeezed into the film to satisfy their demands. The first film was a fairly simple origin story with a token baddie to dispatch, but for the sequel too many cooks have spoiled the broth.

3 or 4 out of 10 for me.

(in reply to hatebox)

Post #: 117

RE: Sounds like your typical sequel review - 5/5/2010 2:57:48 PM

Kazuya

Posts: 7953
Joined: 23/8/2006
From: The Eighth Dimension c/o Buckaroo Banzai

Strange experience for me. I had some fun (ish) with the flick, the effects were beautifully done and Downey was just as good as he was in the first film. Rourke was an entertaining villain as well, good work (as usual) from Rockwell too..Johansson eyecandy par excellence..Palthrow only mildly annoying. But somehow it was only superficial fun, a structure of scenes but no momentum, no control. The story and dialogue definitely should have been tightened. Still, any flick that has Tony Stark, in suit, drunk as a skunk, blasting various party favors and assorted furniture, can't be all bad.

_____________________________

"Bleed, bastard."

(in reply to coljohnmatrix)

Post #: 118

RE: Miles Better Than KICK-ASS - 5/5/2010 4:11:55 PM

JCVDbaby

Posts: 7
Joined: 31/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: JIm R

quote:

ORIGINAL: JCVDbaby

quote:

ORIGINAL: theoriginalcynic

I don't know who put the tag miles better then Kickass but no it isn't. The story is slight and far too talky, with very little action. I'd like to see it again at the flicks (have unlimited card) but it's not as good as the first part.

I did. Because it is. Better directed without all the hyperbowl.

Kick Ass was too clever for it's own good. No wonder it bombed.

No it hasn't, on the back of a �27 million budget it's done exceptionally well, plus it rocks and will do amazing business on DVD / Blu-Ray so sorry mate but your talking rubbish.

It's only taken 72million though lol

Oh and the sequel being called "Balls To The Wall"...........lmao

Kick Ass starts out as a good concept but sadly sells out very quickly. It's just a film for chavs to bum and laugh at.

What next a talking dildo that says cunt??? lol lol 6 stars Empire!!!!!!!!11111

:)

(in reply to JIm R)

Post #: 119

RE: Iron Man 2 - 5/5/2010 4:13:02 PM

spamandham

Posts: 481
Joined: 27/11/2008

If you've seen the trailer then you've seen all that you need to / all the good bits.

Avoid this pap.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 120