Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by SalvorHardin, Apr 29, 2010.
There was a little dread. It just never paid off, so it doesn't resonate on subsequent viewings.
Wasn't Vanko watching the expo on TV while working on his whips? They could have switched over to him then.
The alternate opening is SO much better than the theatrical cut. Unlike the generic shot of a fully-suited Iron Man jumping out of a plane, this scene is based in character. And the character stuff is what really made the first Iron Man movie successful.
Between this and the Edward Norton Incredible Hulk, Marvel is really developing a track record of leaving some of their most interesting footage on the cutting room floor. Let's hope that this isn't a trend that continues into Captain America, Thor and The Avengers.
Well, I didn't agree with a lot of Favreau's decisions with Iron Man 2 seeing as how I thought it was a lackluster sequel, so that doesn't really instill me with a lot of confidence. Honestly, I just don't see how this would have deterred their arc in the second film at all- if anything, their dynamic as shown in that alternate opening is full of friction, so I don't quite see your point here.
Yet Tony and Pepper have that type of argumentative dynamic all throughout the sequel. That is the cornerstone of their relationship.
I think the above explanation would be very fitting. In fact, since as The Borgified Corpse so expertly mentions, the Ivan Vanko/dying father routine never really went anywhere, I would have just cut that tidbit entirely and then just cut to Vanko working on his whips while watching the Stark Expo on TV.
As others have said, the Ivan Vanko story arc really doesn't go anywhere in the film since the Vanko character really does nothing throughout the majority of the sequel. So that dread was kind of just filler and useless anyway. I would have taken a character-oriented opener- one that does payoff since we do get some development on Tony and Pepper's relationship in the film- over an opening that never pays off in the end, but that's just me.
Some of these suggestions for improvements remind me of something that Joss Whedon once said back when he used to work primarily as a script doctor. Occasionally, he would find a project so broken, he would level with them, "You don't need me. You need to not make this." I kinda feel that way about Iron Man 2. So much of it doesn't come together. I don't think it's something that could be fixed with different editing choices. I think we need to go back in time and force Marvel Studios into a page 1 rewrite, so that maybe we could get something with some decently competant villains.
^ I'm inclined to agree with this sentiment. I was incredibly excited to see the movie and after I did was extremely disappointed due to the flaws and poor execution the film had. It really did have a "Spider-Man 3" vibe to it where there was too much going on that bogged down the main plot of the film.
Arming Rockwell, turning him from a global laughingstock into a credible threat, and setting the entire finale in motion, thus directly precipitating Tony and Pepper's relationship, is "not going anywhere"?
Good grief. I can understand why many don't like it as much as I do - I think it's at least as good as the first, a bit less even but more ambitious - but to compare it to S-M3 is going way over the top, imho.
I'm not the only one who has done that...and I don't think it's that far a stretch. If you thought it was great fine, all the more power to you, I thought it had tons of flaws which have already been discussed many times throughout this thread.
Its out on DVD I have a copy and it still rocks .but three scenes in the prior to Ivan's appearance at the race track where he witnessed his father's death I missed watching at the Bengies drive in theater,and did they cut the scene where Pepper kissed the helmet.
BTW I paid $17.99 at Target for my DVD copy.
If Atlantis is in the north Atlantic, that dot would be too far south. It may be Namor's solitary place.
Not exactly; Tony's gradual character development over the course of the IM films has an endpoint represented by his functioning as part of a group, and IM3 may reflect events in the Avengers film.
He doesn't turn Justin Hammer into a credible threat. While he ostensibly builds the weaponry in Hammer's facility, Hammer is never in control. Vanko immediately & effortlessly seizes control when it suits his purposes.
And while he did set the finale of the film in motion, I don't think it was a particularly impressive finale. I never felt any sense of jeopardy against Vanko the way I did against Stane in the 1st film.
Okay, then we could say that Hammer's resources turn Vanko into a credible threat if you'd prefer to formulate it that way.
So he goes from being a bum in a Russian basement to nearly defeating both Iron Man and Rhodey in the middle of Stark Expo. Say what you will about the film's quality, I'd hardly call that a story arc that "really doesn't go anyway in the film."
No way Vanko was a scientist/engineer just like his father as well as a hacker that why he broke into Hammer's database like a piece of cake,while Hammer was standing there like a fish taking a breath.
As to linking the drones to his armor was also a feat of genus of which Tony will implement in new armor models.
Remember the movie-verse is our reality combined with tales of global threats that our heroes have to solve or defeat.
I love the suitcase armor it harks back to the 90's animated series I own a action figure of the Tony Stark with the case and parts of the armor.
That's my take.
I thought the suitcase armor was from the early comics, back when he had a big chestplate as his life-support (instead of the arc reactor) and it had to be plugged in every day.
In the comics the suitcase contained the portable parts of the armor re:the helmet,gloves,boots in both the series and the comic,but the suitcase transforms into the armor just like the film.
I think you could argue that Tony was his own worst enemy in this movie and that one of the points the film was getting across. His ego, arrogance and own self reliance were preventing him from being the hero he could be (Much like Clark in Smallville right now).
Yes, and RDJ's line "Getting there" after "Dirty enough for you?" was also cut
( meaning that it appeared in the trailer but not in the film ), as was the scene where "Natalie" uses one of the repulsor gauntlets.
Just an average film to me with way to many plot holes and problems. A poorly constructed villian is always a problem in a movie about a super hero and Vanko/Hammer were cardboard villians. The whole Tony dying arc was useless as was its really silly create a new element resolution. The Black Widow parts worked for me and all the fight scenes were pretty well done. I think a reedit of this movie could have made it much stronger. Just moving the slow opening scene would have helped.
^ Well said. I think a rewrite could have done wonders for this film quite frankly. I don't think the Marvel Universe elements hurt this film...the film's own plot hurt this film.
About the only problem I still have with this film is a sense that the final battle doesn't seem to reflect the best tactics on the part of its participants. It has also been suggested that the whips should have done more damage, while the same can be said for the car which slams into Vanko ( he's not Weapon X as far as I know ).
Separate names with a comma.