Iron Man 2

[Krakalakachkn]

Anyone else extremely excited for this movie?

 

Scarlett Johansson is in it and smoking hot

Mickey Rourke is playing the evil badguy

Robert Downey Jr. is back

Don Cheadle took over War Machine

Laser Whips!?!?

 

Need I say more?

[Krakalakachkn]

Iron Man 2 could break the Dark Knight's record for Opening Weekend.

 

Some have complained that Paramount hasn't done enough publicity for "Iron Man 2" and plans for a costly multi-country global junket this month were scrapped.

 

Now its become clear why, there's simply no need. The first tracking figures for the highly anticipated superhero sequel's debut have come out and according to The Los Angeles Times, interest and awareness along with other statistical indications are so high that the film could score the biggest opening weekend ever for a movie.

 

At present 2008's "The Dark Knight" retains that record with a $158.4 million haul. The original "Iron Man" opened to a strong $98 million in 2008, but the sequel is looking much like 'Knight' in that it will considerably top the opening of its predecessor.

 

What's considerably surprising isn't that men of practically every age are keen to see the film, rather that women - especially those in their 20's, 30's and older - are showing strong interest. In fact the only demographic not majorly itching to see the film are teenage girls and even that sector is beating expectations.

[Kati]

I'm very excited I enjoyed the first one very much and cant wait to see Mickey Rourke, One of my all time fav actors :)

 

Am also wondering if anything is going to happen re: Tony Starks cameo in the Incredible Hulk?

[Majsju]

 

 

Am also wondering if anything is going to happen re: Tony Starks cameo in the Incredible Hulk?

 

Quite unlikely, unless we get just a small spoken reference. They seem quite fond of planting little easte egs, like having Captain Americas shield in the first Iron Man movie.

 

If the cameo had a purpose, I think it rather pointed towards the coming Avengers movie, considering that Hulk was a founding member.

[Kati]

Yes would like to see that :)

[Cillian]

I'm very excited I enjoyed the first one very much and cant wait to see Mickey Rourke, One of my all time fav actors :)

 

Am also wondering if anything is going to happen re: Tony Starks cameo in the Incredible Hulk?

 

In this movieverse timeline The Incredible Hulk takes place after both Iron Man 1 & 2, so maybe Stark hears about the events of TIH (Hulk and Abom fighting in the streets) sometime in the film.

[Krakalakachkn]

Here's an interview and some information from RDJ and Jon Favreau

 

Early in the press conference for ‘Iron Man 2,’ Robert Downey, Jr. is asked whether there’s any truth to a rumor he’ll be playing the vampire Lestat in an adaptation of Anne Rice’s novel of the same name. Downey leans forward and squints through sunglasses, looking back at the reporter as if he honestly can’t remember whether he’s meant to play Lestat or not. Then as only he can without sounding like an unbelievable asshole, Downey responds deadpan, “Anything that’s going on, just imagine it’s been offered to me.”

 

With his talent for whip-fast free-association, and his unapologetic just-kidding-but-not-really arrogance, Robert Downey, Jr. can be difficult to separate from Tony Stark, his character in ‘Iron Man,’ and that, in large part, is the pleasure of the franchise: the unique stamp Downey has put on his lead role. Off the strength of the first film, Downey’s career was powerfully re-launched, and in the time between originating and returning to his breakthrough role as a billionaire superhero, Downey has become something of a billionaire superhero himself.

 

But star-wattage aside, the challenges of building a worthy sequel are not to be underestimated. “(It’s like) throwing a party and you don’t know if people are going to show up,” says director Jon Favreau, comparing the making this sequel to that of the first film. “Here, we knew people were going to show up and we wanted to make sure everybody had a good time.” The original ‘Iron Man’ earned high marks from critics and audiences for its light tone and humor, as much as for its action. Duplicating box office success likely won’t be hard, with fans primed for the 2010 summer season’s first big franchise installment… But profitability and quality are often separate matters.

 

‘Iron Man 2,’ picks up six months after the end of ‘Iron Man,’ with Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke,) a Russian ex-con, plotting his revenge against Tony Stark – and building his own variation on the Iron Man suit to mount his challenge. Vanko becomes Whiplash, who is a very different character, at least on the surface, than his pen-and-ink antecedent. “Whiplash in the comic book is a guy wearing tights with a big plume, a big purple feather coming out of the top his head,” says Favreau. “That wasn’t what we wanted. But, (we asked,) what’s the tech version of that?” The design that ultimately made it into the film was inspired, Favreau adds, not only by an overall ‘dirty tech’ look, but specifically by David Cronenberg’s ‘Eastern Promises,’ and its protagonist Nikolai (Viggo Mortensen,) a chiseled Russian, covered, as is Vanko, with prison tattoos.

 

Mickey Rourke, who plays Whiplash, was brought into the ‘Iron Man’ fold through the lobbying not only of Favreau and producers, but of Downey, who found himself alongside Rourke frequently on the 2009 awards circuit, when Downey was frequently nominated for his work in ‘Tropic Thunder,’ and Rourke for his own career re-launch, Darren Aronofsky’s ‘The Wrestler.’ “I really worked you like a rib, didn’t I? Begging you in public,” Downey remarks across the table to a recently-awoken Rourke, who says the atmosphere on-set was a collegial one, from which made at least one great friend: Whiplash’s signature cockatoo in the film inspired Rourke, an animal lover, to buy a tropical bird of his own. He named it Elvis.

 

Whiplash’s counterpart in ‘Iron Man 2’ is unscrupulous industrialist Justin Hammer, played with gusto by Sam Rockwell, who was once up for the role of Stark himself. Originally, Favreau says, Rockwell and Rourke’s characters were one – but in later drafts, were divided into two: the brutal Whiplash, and smarmy Hammer. Still, Favreau was well aware of the stumbling blocks of many previous superhero sequels. “The trick is to feather (villains) in, so they don’t overwhelm the story and you don’t suffer from villainitis,” he says. “By having Justin Hammer and Mickey Rourke’s character come together fairly early, you really have two storylines that are weaving. You don’t have five separate storylines… We really tried to keep narrative flows going so it didn’t get too convoluted, ‘cause I lose track of that stuff. Especially in sequels as franchises get more complex, I don’t always remember what happened in the last movie. Not for nothing, I like watching stuff blow up, but I don’t want to do homework before I see a sequel.”

 

Soon, however, homework may be exactly what the average viewer will have to do, with ‘Iron Man 2’ representing just one star in the ever-expanding universe of Marvel movies (such as Kenneth Branagh’s ‘Thor’ and Joe Johnston’s ‘Captain America,’) all of which are – at least in theory – meant to be linked to one another for ultimate payoff in the Greatest Marvel Superhero Story Ever Told, Joss Whedon’s ‘The Avengers.’ To that end, Samuel L. Jackson and Scarlett Johansson appear in ‘Iron Man 2’ as Nick Fury and Natasha Romanoff, agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., though Favreau insisted their inclusion not detract from, or cheapen, the story of Tony Stark himself… Kevin Feige, President of Marvel Pictures, notes that on the cluttered timeline of the Marvel motion picture universe, ‘Iron Man 2’ takes place before 2008’s ‘The Incredible Hulk’ starring Edward Norton. And for those willing to sit through the end credits of ‘Iron Man 2,’ there’s a revelatory “easter egg” that clarifies matters. No word yet on whether it will be on the quiz.

 

In the role of Tony Stark’s friend James “Rhodey” Rhodes, Don Cheadle stepped in to replace actor Terence Howard, and despite speculation that this might have made for contention between Cheadle and Howard, Cheadle said there was no bad blood: “Terence is a friend… We’re cool.” Still, Cheadle undeniably gets to do more in the role of Rhodey than Howard did, notably, in wearing the ‘War Machine’ armor suit designed by Justin Hammer. “I don’t know why my suit was heavy metal while (Robert’s) was made of a light fiber-glass,” he says. “Maybe it was an initiation.”

 

Returning in the role of Tony’s assistant/confidante Pepper Potts is Oscar-winner Gwyneth Paltrow. Pepper and Tony’s ‘will-they-or-won’t-they’ dynamic is paid off in the sequel with the inevitable smooch. “It was great,” she says of shooting that scene, “Because both my husband and his wife were right there.” Downey interjects: “She said to me that I didn’t know what I was doing, it didn’t feel good… Despite what she said on set, she still thinks about it.” But sexuality isn’t all there is to Pepper Potts, says Paltrow, and that’s part of what sets the ‘Iron Man’ franchise apart: “I think it’s a very smart decision to have women who are capable and intelligent, because it appeals to women, so it’s not only a film for fifteen year old boys, it’s a film that relate to a lot of people on a lot of levels…” For her part, Johansson adds, “I think fifteen year old boys will like it too.”

 

And, they likely will. Superhero films, after all, are based in adolescent wish fulfilment, a time-tested font of revenue. When Downey is asked if he himself ever had his own such fantasies, and dressed up as a comic book hero as a kid, he responds, “Growing up, no, but in my mid-thirties in Palm Springs right before an arrest, yes.” He may have started late, but today, Robert Downey, Jr. seems to have no problem playing the part of super-star.

[Majsju]

Ah, less than 24 hours before I get to see it, starting to get quite excited  ;D

[Krakalakachkn]

Awww!  Dang you!

 

I have to wait until May 7th.

[Majsju]

Sucks to be you ;D

[Krakalakachkn]

Whatever.

 

I just better not hear any gloating or you going on and on about how amazing it was and how it changed your life.

[Majsju]

Nah, I will just give a very detailed description of Scarletts topless scene... :P

[Krakalakachkn]

Oh man, I wish....

 

Empy would be having a conniption fit

[reyler]

Review from ComingSoon.net. Minor spoilers, although I don't know if there's anything left to spoil that the commercials haven't taken care of.

 

Story:

Six months after he's revealed his identity to the world, Tony Stark a.k.a. Iron Man (a.k.a Robert Downey Jr.) is more of a rock star than ever before, but he also finds himself the target of a number of different factions: the government wants to take away his armor, deeming it to be a dangerous weapon; Stark's main competitor Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) is trying to get his hands on Stark's Iron Man designs as well; a Russian physicist known as Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) seeks to get revenge on Stark for sins committed by his father; his best friend Lt. Col. James Rhodes (Don Cheadle) is unhappy with Tony's partying ways; and Stark's shapely new paralegal Natalie Rushman (Scarlett Johansson) is causing friction between Tony and his beleaguered assistant Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow).

 

Analysis:

Unquestionably one of the most anticipated sequels and movies of the year, "Iron Man 2" has a lot to live up to. With the first movie, director Jon Favreau, Robert Downey Jr. and the rest of the cast really hit one out of the park, leaving many wondering what one could possibly do to match or exceed the expectations created by that movie. While "Iron Man 2" successfully conveys the tone and the momentum from the first movie, the sequel factor is unfortunately going to make it far too easy for the critical to turn cynical on that basis alone.

 

The film's opening title sequence introduces Mickey Rourke's character Ivan Vanko, a Russian physicist who has spent years in prison plotting his revenge on the Stark family for crimes they committed against his own family. A few minutes (and six months) later, we're reintroduced to Downey's Stark as he addresses the adoring masses in a keynote speech at his extravagant Stark Expo in Flushing Meadows, Queens. Mirroring the famous World's Fair held there in 1964, this location will play a key recurring role in the movie, further tying Tony to his father, industrialist Howard Stark. As with everything else in life, the government feels the need to regulate Stark's creation, seeing the Iron Man armor as a dangerous weapon that could fall into the wrong hands, something which becomes apparent when Vanko makes his presence known at the Monaco Grand Prix, wielding energy whips of his own design as he creates a swath of destruction to get to Stark. Stark's main competition, weapons contractor Justin Hammer wants to get his hands on Tony's armor for his own reasons and he sees Vanko as a possible ally.

 

The character development in the movie is top-notch, similar to "Spider-Man 2" in the way it doesn't merely fall back on what worked in the first movie, instead instilling real personal conflicts into the mix. In this case, it's the fact that Stark has essentially been poisoning himself with the technology he needs to survive, which has him acting more erratically than normal, his relationships with his closest confidantes, Pepper Potts and James Rhodes, also changing dramatically because of it.

 

Robert Downey Jr. is still on his game with the character that has successfully taken his career to another level, still playing Stark with the same arrogance and swagger as before but also showing a more sensitive side, a new-found depth of humanity as he tries to let Pepper know about his condition. A few developments early in the movie brings a new dynamic to their relationship though the awkward chemistry between them that worked so well in the first movie is still intact.

 

This makes it even harder to adjust to Don Cheadle stepping into the shoes of James Rhodes, previously filled by Terrence Howard. His first few appearances in the story are fairly inconsequential but he seems out of place in the equation. It's only once Rhodey gets a chance to don his own suit of armor, which doesn't feel as forced or shoehorned into the movie as it could have been, where he starts to develop his own personality.

 

Covered in the tattoos one might find on Russian gangsters, Mickey Rourke makes for quite an imposing presence with his brain constantly stuck in revenge mode for what Tony's father has done to his own. There are a few questionable aspects to his origin story that don't ring true, like how a brilliant physicist could go through such an unlikely transition in prison to become such a menacing villain, but Rourke still makes for a far cooler Whiplash than any that's ever appeared in the comics, so much so that you'll wish to see him in that guise more than we actually do.

 

Regardless, the movie's true show-stealer is Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer, playing quite the perfect counterpoint to Downey's Stark - just as funny and eccentric, but with far less scruples. Like with Whiplash, it's a shame there aren't more scenes between the two well-matched actors. Hammer really is the glue holding this story together, not only bringing Vanko into the fold, but also providing weapons for War Machine, while at the same time seeking to build his own personal army of Iron Men. The key is that everything happens in this story for a reason, and it never feels like it's just a matter of trying to sell toys. In fact, some may be surprised by the general lack of overt product placement considering all the products that have been tied into the movie via commercials.

 

Scarlett Johansson has rarely been sexier - when she hands Stark a martini and asks if it's dirty enough for him, you'll want to ask the kids to leave the room. Granted, most people will already be aware of her character's "secret identity" going in, but she's certainly at her best when we finally get to see that character in action. Again, it's another aspect of the movie which leaves you wanting more. Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury plays a slightly bigger role though still more of a continuation of his cameo in the first movie trying to persuade Tony to get involved with the Avengers Initiative; the results of this subplot will certainly surprise and confound those who think they know what to expect. Thankfully, Favreau has given himself a much bigger part as "Happy" Hogan, still on the sidelines for much of the movie but giving himself some of the best moments with Johansson. (Clearly, the man is no dummy!) By comparison, the characters played by Kate Mara and Olivia Munn are so inconsequential you'll be astounded how much press they've received merely due to their involvement with the movie.

 

The first movie was at its weakest during the climactic battle between Iron Man and Jeff Bridges' Iron Monger, and Favreau has certainly improved on the quality of the action scenes with a number of fantastic fight sequences between Iron Man and others. Unfortunately, there also seems to be a lot more talking in the movie, too, and despite the clever patter, the middle portion of the story gets somewhat bogged down and convoluted by the number of characters and subplots. Favreau manages to pull all of it together as these characters converge into an extremely satisfying final action sequence, the last thirty minutes of the movie literally exploding into a full-out war.

 

Overall, the film just looks terrific, the blending of CG and live action being seamless throughout--something also on par with the "Spider-Man" movies--and every shot having a sharp and vivid clarity of color that makes everything look hyper-real without feeling overly stylish. Favreau also uses the media well to tell this story, whether it's the ever-present C-SPAN cameras at the Senate hearings, the journalists always around the key players, and even some political commentary from Bill O'Reilly. This is one other way that Favreau keeps the movie grounded in our reality in ways that haven't been achieved quite so well in previous superhero movies.

 

The Bottom Line:

It may be hard for anyone to claim that "Iron Man 2" is nearly as mindblowingly amazing as the first movie was for its time, though it's still better than 95% of the movies based on Marvel Comics characters. Favreau clearly knows how to make a fun and entertaining summer movie, and the clever introduction of new characters and the masterfully-realized action scenes should make up for the film's dialogue-heavy lulls. High expectations from the first movie may leave some wanting, but there's enough brilliance on display to leave you wanting more as well.

[Majsju]

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.

 

Make damn sure that you sit through all the credits, even though they are annoyingly long. The easter egg after them is something you most definitly will not want to miss...

[Krakalakachkn]

Sweet!  How did it compare to the first one?

[Majsju]

Right now, I would be tempted to say that it is better than the first one.

Though, with a nights sleep, and less beer in the system, maybe 95 if the first was 100.

 

 

[Cillian]

I saw it last night, loved it. I think it's a good bit better than the first, and I'm a big fan of the first one.  ;)

 

 

And definitely stick around through the credits. Really f***ing cool. a bunch of people in the theatre actually cheered when...... it...... happened. Won't spoil it.

 

 

 

Oh, and how about that picture of Thor that was released yesterday?

http://thinkmcflythink.squarespace.com/movie-news/2010/4/30/first-thor-image.html

 

8)

[Luos Naeco]

Warning!! Spoilers ahead!

 

So I saw it a couple of days ago and, to be honest, I didn't like it nearly as much as the first one.

Now I haven't actually read any of the comics, so maybe the things I didn't like makes more sense for the fans of the comics.

First of all, I loved the Mickey Rourke character, until he got captured that is. During the last 2/3 of the movie, you almost never see him. Not to mention the last showdown between him and Stark was just embarrassingly short, like, 40-50 secs tops!?

Second, I found all the references and foreshadowing to the Avengers movie just too confusing. Like, who exactly is Samuel L. Jackson's character supposed to be?? They make a BIG deal about him and his "company" wanting to hire Stark or something, but they never explain any of it. All I know is what I've read about on forums and stuff, and as a casual viewer I just find it sad that I have to do all this research to understand the movie, when all I wanted was to watch it and have fun.

Third, the side-plot about the poison in Starks body was really poorly handled I think. They built the suspense about it for the first half of the movie, and then...nothing. A small shot in the neck, and that's it! Never mentioned again.

 

Now, it may sound as if I hated it, but I found it ok. The action was decent, Robert Downey Jr was awesome as always, the Hammer guy was hilarious, Rourke was awesome. Still, it was just not as good as the first one, too many obscure references and too much foreshadowing without payoff to give it that "great" factor. :)

 

[Ashaman Kovan]

I'm going to see it in like a half hour. Should be sweet.

[Barmacral]

I saw the movie last night, and I must say, I really quite enjoyed it.

[Vemynal]

saw the premeir in my area, better than the first imo

 

I giggled when they mentioned "I have bigger problems in south america to deal with" XD

[Krakalakachkn]

Here are the weekend statistics:

 

"Iron Man 2" pulled in an estimated $52 million on its opening day in the United States, a number that includes $7.5 million from Thursday midnight shows reports Deadline Hollywood.

 

That figure has early estimates of a three-day opening weekend at around $130-140 million, placing it around about the fifth highest opening weekend of all time - just shy of last year's "New Moon" at $142.8 million. Saturday's tallies however could impact those estimates quite suddenly.

 

One record it has broken is the widest domestic release in history, playing in 4,380 U.S. theaters. Internationally the film, which opened last Friday, has finished its first week with an overseas tally just shy of $140 million.

 

Reviews were generally good for the sequel, pulling in 74 % and a 6.5/10 average score on Rotten Tomatoes along with a 57/100 metascore and 7.5/10 user score on Metacritic. In comparison the more acclaimed first "Iron Man" pulled in a 93% (7.6/10) on RT and a 79/100 (8.3/10) on MC.

[Krakalakachkn]

May 8th, 7:00am: "Iron Man 2" pulled in an estimated $52 million on its opening day in the United States, a number that includes $7.5 million from Thursday midnight shows reports Deadline Hollywood.

 

That figure has early estimates of a three-day opening weekend at around $130-140 million, placing it around about the fourth highest opening weekend of all time - just shy of last year's "New Moon" at $142.8 million. Saturday's tallies however could impact those estimates quite suddenly.

 

One record it has broken is the widest domestic release in history, playing in 4,380 U.S. theaters. Internationally the film, which opened last Friday, has finished its first week with an overseas tally just shy of $140 million.

 

Reviews were generally good for the sequel, pulling in 74 % and a 6.5/10 average score on Rotten Tomatoes along with a 57/100 metascore and 7.5/10 user score on Metacritic. In comparison the more acclaimed first "Iron Man" pulled in a 93% (7.6/10) on RT and a 79/100 (8.3/10) on MC.

 

May 9th, 12:02pm: "Iron Man 2" took in $46.5 million on Saturday, and the studio has released an estimate of $133.6 million for the three-day weekend. It is the fifth biggest opening weekend, just behind "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" with $135.6 million.

 

If final numbers do better than expected tomorrow, that could push it above that mark but it likely won't top New Moon's $142.8M opening. It's certainly the biggest opening of the year thus far, ahead of Disney's "Alice in Wonderland" with $116.1 million.

[Emperor]

Warning!! Spoilers ahead!

 

So I saw it a couple of days ago and, to be honest, I didn't like it nearly as much as the first one.

Now I haven't actually read any of the comics, so maybe the things I didn't like makes more sense for the fans of the comics.

First of all, I loved the Mickey Rourke character, until he got captured that is. During the last 2/3 of the movie, you almost never see him. Not to mention the last showdown between him and Stark was just embarrassingly short, like, 40-50 secs tops!?

Second, I found all the references and foreshadowing to the Avengers movie just too confusing. Like, who exactly is Samuel L. Jackson's character supposed to be?? They make a BIG deal about him and his "company" wanting to hire Stark or something, but they never explain any of it. All I know is what I've read about on forums and stuff, and as a casual viewer I just find it sad that I have to do all this research to understand the movie, when all I wanted was to watch it and have fun.

Third, the side-plot about the poison in Starks body was really poorly handled I think. They built the suspense about it for the first half of the movie, and then...nothing. A small shot in the neck, and that's it! Never mentioned again.

 

Now, it may sound as if I hated it, but I found it ok. The action was decent, Robert Downey Jr was awesome as always, the Hammer guy was hilarious, Rourke was awesome. Still, it was just not as good as the first one, too many obscure references and too much foreshadowing without payoff to give it that "great" factor. :)

 

 

Agreed! 

 

Except they fixed the poison when he made that new triangle.