Friday, May 7, 2010

Iron Man 2

We went to see this film today, and I had a grand time. The simplest summary is this: If you liked the first Iron Man, you'll like this one--but not as much.

For one thing, this one has more of everything than its predecessor: more important characters, more special effects, more chewing the scenery, more explosions, more action, more exotic locales. So, you'll enjoy a lot of that--but you'll also probably feel that at times more was just too much.

The plot structure is also weaker, as you'd expect. In the first movie, we followed Tony Stark's transformation from jerk to hero. Once he's a hero, though, the second can't follow that same progression, right? Wrong. This is Hollywood. Make him a jerk again, just not as bad a jerk, and give him a reason for the descent. I don't think this part of the movie works very well, but so it goes.

Basically, this is the kind of sequel that you will enjoy tremendously if you walk in, sit down, turn off most of your higher reasoning functions, and say, "Entertain me." I expected that movie, I did those things, and I had a fine time. I wouldn't want a steady diet of films like this one, but if you're looking for your first summer action blockbuster, buy a ticket, settle down, and have fun.


Todd said...

I saw it yesterday and agree. But there was one scene with Whiplash coming through the explosions which did not look good - and was surprised it made it to the big screen looking that bad.

Action sequels are meant to be fun and give us more of the story from the first installment.

Mark said...

Yeah, I recall that scene. I also thought a few of the moments of CGI of the race in Monaco looked worse than what you'd see on Sanctuary. That said, the effects overall were great.


Blog Archive