Iron Man 2
Movie Review
"Iron Man 2"
Review by Eric D. Snider
Grade: B-
Rating: PG-13
Released: Friday, May 7, 2010
Directed by:
Cast:
"If it lacks a little oomph in the story department, or if you could wish for maybe one more action sequence, Robert Downey Jr.'s dynamo central performance makes overlooking those slight flaws an easy thing to do."
That probably sounds familiar, because it's what I said about the first "Iron Man," and you memorize everything I say. I've quoted it here because it also applies to "Iron Man 2" -- except that the flaws don't seem as slight anymore, and aren't as easy to overlook. The story is weaker and more scattershot. And while Downey's performance is joined by a terrific one from Sam Rockwell, the novelty has worn off.
Still fun, though. The sequel, written by Justin Theroux ("Tropic Thunder") and once again directed by Jon Favreau, picks up where Part 1 left off, with egomaniac billionaire Tony Stark (Downey) having told the world that he is Iron Man. (Secret identities are for superheroes who aren't narcissists.) Thanks to the technology Stark developed, Iron Man has almost single-handedly solved all the world's conflicts. "I've successfully privatized world peace!" he declares.
Naturally, a guy can't have a powerful, peace-promoting metal suit without the government wanting to get its hands on it. A congressional committee, headed by Sen. Stern (Garry Shandling), considers it a "weapon" and wants Stark to hand it over. Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell), a government-contracted weapons designer, would like to use the Iron Man suit to make, what else, super-soldiers. (Warmongers in these movies always want to make super-soldiers. How is that supposed to make our regular soldiers feel?)
Also on Tony Stark's bad side: Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), a fearsome Russian man who believes his father was wronged by Stark's father. Vanko's anger is troubling because he has access to almost the same technology that Stark does. Everyone superhero franchise needs a chapter where the villain has the same powers as the hero, so here you go.
Meanwhile, Stark's palladium-fueled machinery is slowly killing him; he's made his assistant, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), the new CEO of Stark Enterprises; his military pal James Rhodes (Don Cheadle, replacing Terrence Howard) fears he's becoming too reckless as Iron Man; and there's a new assistant, played by Scarlett Johansson, who probably isn't what she claims to be, since why would they waste Scarlett Johansson on an unimportant role like that?
I like that the villain is a good old-fashioned Russian bad guy, complete with the thick accent and emotionless malevolence. But Mickey Rourke may have applied too much Method acting to the role of Vanko: He's cold, inscrutable, uninteresting. Comic-book movies are often made or broken by their villains, and while the bland Vanko doesn't break "Iron Man 2," he doesn't help it much.
There's a lot going on here -- I didn't even mention Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) trying to get Iron Man to join S.H.I.E.L.D. -- and Favreau (who appears onscreen as Stark's bodyguard) keeps a brisk pace, even when the story meanders into lesser things like Stark and Pepper's relationship and Stark's father issues. But there are only a few action sequences in the film, none of them spectacular, and the final one is downright anticlimactic. What happens in between is droll and lively, thanks mostly to Downey and Rockwell's typically colorful performances; it just isn't very super, you know?
Grade: B-
Rated PG-13, a little mild profanity, a lot of action violence, nothing graphic
2 hrs., 4 min.
Copyright © Eric D. Snider.
This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.



This item has 7 comments
May 7, 2010 at 8:15 am
"Everyone superhero franchise needs a chapter where the villain has the same powers as the hero, so here you go."
It's funny because... wasn't the last movie like that, too?
May 7, 2010 at 12:42 pm
Yeah, and the second half of Iron Man was pretty much the obligatory, less interesting "showdown" stuff we're used to seeing everywhere.
May 8, 2010 at 2:22 pm
This movie wasn't great but it was pretty entertaining.
Mostly it was just a "my **** is bigger than yours" fight between Stark, Hammer and Stern.
May 9, 2010 at 12:20 am
Though I thought Mickey Rourke (AND his yellowish, claw-like fingernails, of which there seemed to be MANY cloes-ups) was a VERY amusing villain (until they parked him in front of a computer, almost the last fourth of the movie --!)
May 13, 2010 at 9:37 am
There really just was no emotional establishment toward the villain and this whole "Stark industries ruined my family" bit, so I couldn't've cared less about most of the action because of that. Loved Sam Rockwell. Was half-expecting to have to see his bare naked butt at some point in the movie, though.
May 20, 2010 at 2:52 pm
I never thought I would hear a major hollywood actor say the words "I'm sick of this liberal agenda." I almost started clapping
September 18, 2010 at 2:23 pm
You know, if you cut every scene with Scarlett Johansson, the movie would not be any different. Maybe it would be better, since it wouldn't be so long.
I was rather disappointed. The journey wasn't that fun, and the ending was the same old thing. The action scenes weren't even interesting.