Goolphipp Award: 4.25 (Worth 11 Bucks)
Here comes the sequel: Consistent
Goolsby:
This movie was what I expected of the awaited sequel. At some parts I felt it was long, but I'm sure it was just the more lengthy plot. I felt the characters were in line with what was delivered the first go round. I knew Terrence Howard was not returning as Rhodey Rhodes, but I was still sad to see him missing. Don Cheadle was a good replacement, and I particularly liked how the first lines he spoke sort of alluded to the fact he was replacing Terrence. I thought that Paltrow gave a little bit more in this performance as Pepper Potts - loved it.
Phipps:
I thought it was a decent follow-up. I really loved the first one...and I think it's still better. I talked to a friend of mine beforehand, and he mentioned that while the technology surrounding Iron Man is obviously futuristic, the first movie really tried to be as realistic as possible. Whereas Iron Man 2, just plays with lot of fun futuristic technology that's really too advanced for even a hint of realism. I agree. I get that it's a superhero movie...and is supposed to be out-of-touch with reality...but I think they took it a little too far. But honestly, that's my only complaint - other than the ridiculous height of Pepper's high heels.
Action Sequences: Fast and hard
Goolsby:
Some of the car scenes were a bit sharp on the edges - meaning I think they could have done better. Perhaps some cleaner green screen work? The scene in particular that comes to mind is when Ivan Vanko, played by Mickey Rourke, is walking towards Iron Man with all these cars crashing into each other behind him. Needed a tad bit of work. I also noticed towards the end when the droid Iron Mans attack. Oh, and did anyone else think the atrium scene looked like the Kill Bill nature scene?
Phipps:
I thought it was decent, although, I stand by the fact that the first is still superior in this area. They were meticulous about it. This one...while still looking good...is just a tad lazier on some of the details.
Delivery: Who can play a better narcissist?
Goolsby:
Robert Downey, Jr. plays a stellar Tony Stark, and at his second pass, he seems so comfortable on screen in the role. You just have to love him in spite of yourself. He's dashing and witty, and I'm sure most girls swoon a bit. I really felt that he gave a great performance.
I also felt on the opposite spectrum that Sam Rockwell's performance as Justin Hammer was a bit... annoying? I know the character isn't supposed to be loveable, but come on... his portrayal of the character just didn't sit with me the right way. Anyone else feel this way? Or am I missing something from the comic?
Phipps:
Of course, Robert Downey, Jr. is the only one that could play Iron Man. He's already cocky. Paltrow was great as Pepper Potts. I'm not a fan of Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow. I didn't really believe she actually did all her action sequences...other than the "pause for effect" moments. Don Cheadle was a good replacement - I certainly don't blame him for stepping in - but seriously! Terrence Howard was a good Rhodey. Don't replace people - unless the actor in question is lame (like Katie Holmes in Batman Begins - Maggie Gyllenhaal is much better). Mickey Rourke freaked me out as a creepy Russian...thanks to whomever did his wardrobe and makeup. Sam Rockwell. What can I say? I normally like his performances, but I didn't quite buy it this time. As Goolsby says, he's annoying. I wish he had more of an edge - he's capable of breaking people out of jail. He should have a crazy side showing.
Here comes the sequel: Consistent
Goolsby:
This movie was what I expected of the awaited sequel. At some parts I felt it was long, but I'm sure it was just the more lengthy plot. I felt the characters were in line with what was delivered the first go round. I knew Terrence Howard was not returning as Rhodey Rhodes, but I was still sad to see him missing. Don Cheadle was a good replacement, and I particularly liked how the first lines he spoke sort of alluded to the fact he was replacing Terrence. I thought that Paltrow gave a little bit more in this performance as Pepper Potts - loved it.
Phipps:
I thought it was a decent follow-up. I really loved the first one...and I think it's still better. I talked to a friend of mine beforehand, and he mentioned that while the technology surrounding Iron Man is obviously futuristic, the first movie really tried to be as realistic as possible. Whereas Iron Man 2, just plays with lot of fun futuristic technology that's really too advanced for even a hint of realism. I agree. I get that it's a superhero movie...and is supposed to be out-of-touch with reality...but I think they took it a little too far. But honestly, that's my only complaint - other than the ridiculous height of Pepper's high heels.
Action Sequences: Fast and hard
Goolsby:
Some of the car scenes were a bit sharp on the edges - meaning I think they could have done better. Perhaps some cleaner green screen work? The scene in particular that comes to mind is when Ivan Vanko, played by Mickey Rourke, is walking towards Iron Man with all these cars crashing into each other behind him. Needed a tad bit of work. I also noticed towards the end when the droid Iron Mans attack. Oh, and did anyone else think the atrium scene looked like the Kill Bill nature scene?
Phipps:
I thought it was decent, although, I stand by the fact that the first is still superior in this area. They were meticulous about it. This one...while still looking good...is just a tad lazier on some of the details.
Delivery: Who can play a better narcissist?
Goolsby:
Robert Downey, Jr. plays a stellar Tony Stark, and at his second pass, he seems so comfortable on screen in the role. You just have to love him in spite of yourself. He's dashing and witty, and I'm sure most girls swoon a bit. I really felt that he gave a great performance.
I also felt on the opposite spectrum that Sam Rockwell's performance as Justin Hammer was a bit... annoying? I know the character isn't supposed to be loveable, but come on... his portrayal of the character just didn't sit with me the right way. Anyone else feel this way? Or am I missing something from the comic?
Phipps:
Of course, Robert Downey, Jr. is the only one that could play Iron Man. He's already cocky. Paltrow was great as Pepper Potts. I'm not a fan of Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow. I didn't really believe she actually did all her action sequences...other than the "pause for effect" moments. Don Cheadle was a good replacement - I certainly don't blame him for stepping in - but seriously! Terrence Howard was a good Rhodey. Don't replace people - unless the actor in question is lame (like Katie Holmes in Batman Begins - Maggie Gyllenhaal is much better). Mickey Rourke freaked me out as a creepy Russian...thanks to whomever did his wardrobe and makeup. Sam Rockwell. What can I say? I normally like his performances, but I didn't quite buy it this time. As Goolsby says, he's annoying. I wish he had more of an edge - he's capable of breaking people out of jail. He should have a crazy side showing.
What was the best? The prospect of The Avengers movie!
Goolsby:
I loved Samuel L. Jackson in this movie. I don't claim to be a comic person, but I know the general basics. Iron Man, Thor, The Hulk, Captain America, and according to wikipedia Ant-Man and Wasp. I've never heard of the last two, but I know of the others. I'm way excited for this. I know it will take forever to come, maybe 5 more years? Perhaps more? But I'm so excited. It is going to be awesome!
Phipps:
Actually, The Avengers movie is slated to come out sometime in 2012. Captain America and Thor next year, and I'm pretty sure they'll just introduce Ant-Man and Wasp (who I've also never heard of) in the big Avengers movie. All the leads from the movies are on board, because that's part of the deal. I'm super stoked as well. Midnight showing anyone? One more thing, I loved that Nick Fury and team were more apart of the storyline. It's a good lead-up into the Avengers.
Goolsby overall: 4.25
I really liked this movie. It was what I wanted and expected. It didn't surprise me which was sad, but it satisfied me. Oh, oh! Mickey Rourke's fingernails, I just hope that a makeup artist is behind those gross looking things. Eck.
Phipps overall: 4.25
You know I'm going to buy it. Not as good as the first, but pretty darn good for a sequel.
Goolphipp Award: 4.25 (Worth 11 Bucks)
No comments:
Post a Comment