Iron Man 2 trailer description and ET sneak peek
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Yes, but Iron Man 2 will be improved by a factor of Robert Downey Jr, Mickey Rourke, Samuel L. Jackson, and Sam Rockwell.
Seriously, though, it's entirely slight fare elevated by the performers and the fact that it doesn't take itself entirely seriously. I might one day own it due to my academic interests (read: man-crush on Robert Downey Jr.), but it's by no means as significant a film as The Dark Knight.
What he said.
^ That pretty much is speculation but a good one of the movie plot.
Yeah that sounds about right... although when you see Hammer and the Mark 2 suit Rhodey is with them, so I doubt Rhodey would go behind Tony's back and steal the Mark 2 and then have Hammer add all kinds of stuff to it, and then fight back to back with Tony. I'm thinking
a) The specs for the Mark 2/3 and the arc reactor are stolen by Natasha and Rhodey begs Stark for one of the suits, Tony gives him the "inferior" Mark 2 to develop a defense - while he's working on the Mark 4/4.5 (clearly he's wearing 2 different suits in the movie based on the two trailers - one looks similar but different to the Mark 3 and one looks almost like the Extremis armor with the triangular chest RT)
b) The military forced Stark to give up one of his suits since "some bad guys" have specs on how to make arc reactor based weapons. Tony gives them the Mark 2 but no other enhancements. The military go to their new go to weapons guy, Justin Hammer who just oh so happens to be behind the whole thing. After he gets his paws on the Mark 2 he has a bunch of knock offs made.
This movie will kick ass on so many levels.
a) The specs for the Mark 2/3 and the arc reactor are stolen by Natasha and Rhodey begs Stark for one of the suits, Tony gives him the "inferior" Mark 2 to develop a defense - while he's working on the Mark 4/4.5 (clearly he's wearing 2 different suits in the movie based on the two trailers - one looks similar but different to the Mark 3 and one looks almost like the Extremis armor with the triangular chest RT)
b) The military forced Stark to give up one of his suits since "some bad guys" have specs on how to make arc reactor based weapons. Tony gives them the Mark 2 but no other enhancements. The military go to their new go to weapons guy, Justin Hammer who just oh so happens to be behind the whole thing. After he gets his paws on the Mark 2 he has a bunch of knock offs made.
This movie will kick ass on so many levels.
That was a very exciting trailer, particularly IM and WM fighting back to back like that. Also cool seeing Black Widow and Nick Fury briefly. I wonder how plausible a threat Whiplash is going to be without any armor or super-human abilities. Why doesn't IM just shoot a missile at him from a mile away? Same goes for Black Widow. Could her little widow stings even hurt his armor?
Natasha's not going to fight him one-on-one, presumably (though she could Batman him with some gadget).
I can't wait for the coolest action sequence of Iron Man 2. Iron Man repulsor rays Whiplash and Natasha dead in one shot, smiles for the camera, and drinks Whiskey with War Machine while Pepper Potts gives him a shiny finish. 
I'm outright panning a movie I saw on TV because I couldn't be bothered to see it on the big screen, actually.
The trailer left me feeling very, very underwhelmed (I saw it before my screening of Sherlock Holmes). Its best moment was Stark's irreverent quips during the Congressional hearing. The rest? Looked like stock footage from any super-hero action movie (not in terms of visual effects, but actual shots) you've seen over the past decade or two. I'll likely go see it in the theater, but this certainly doesn't do a whole lot to build up the movie as an improvement on its predecessor.
Saw the trailer with Sherlock Holmes.
Loved the first movie, I watch it a few times a year, and I eagerly await Iron Man 2.
That said, the trailer was 90% underwhelming.
Just as Avatar had the cheesy "Your not in Kansas" line in its trailers(then filled the movie with horrid cliches) we get "You complete me" in the IM2 trailer. I only hope that unlike Avatar the movie is better scripted after showing me some cheese.
The trailer really felt like a flip book of all the leaked photo stills and Ent.Tonight clips. There was no cohesiveness to it at all, no narrative to follow. I await a better second trailer that gives a better sense of the movies direction.
I'll be there regardless but I want more to make me feel like my trust is well placed. Avatar let me down so I'm not ready for another full creative let down again so soon.
Loved the first movie, I watch it a few times a year, and I eagerly await Iron Man 2.
That said, the trailer was 90% underwhelming.
Just as Avatar had the cheesy "Your not in Kansas" line in its trailers(then filled the movie with horrid cliches) we get "You complete me" in the IM2 trailer. I only hope that unlike Avatar the movie is better scripted after showing me some cheese.
The trailer really felt like a flip book of all the leaked photo stills and Ent.Tonight clips. There was no cohesiveness to it at all, no narrative to follow. I await a better second trailer that gives a better sense of the movies direction.
I'll be there regardless but I want more to make me feel like my trust is well placed. Avatar let me down so I'm not ready for another full creative let down again so soon.
Meh. The "You complete me" is meant to be tongue in cheek.
Craig, the following isn't directed at you:
Based on some of the earlier comments in this thread, why the hell do fan-wanky fanboys get their collective panties in a wad when a movie trailer debuts and there aren't 8-gazillion special effects that unbunch said wadded panties? FX are better today than 5, 10, and especially 20 years ago. How about appreciating what you have and concentrating on the story?
That being said, I really liked the trailer. For a while, sequels tended to be the original rehashed through the meat grinder, while writers are finally delivering familiar characters in new situations.
Problem is, the trailer didn't exactly do much to tease the actually story. It was, essentially, "Iron Man is back, Stark is still irreverent, here are some 'cool' shots of a 'cool' villain and 'cool' action set pieces to show how 'cool' the movie is."
And those shots weren't exactly original or inspiring.
Is it just me, or are people really missing the allusions to the grander story in the trailer? Anyone actually listen to Whiplash's voice over? Even just the shot of Tony with his shirt open, showing the arc reactor in his chest and the horrible veinage drawing away from it. What does that mean? Is it affecting his health? There's lots in the trailer that alludes to a grander story, you just need to see it.
On another note, anyone know if the CGI Iron Man is motion captured by RDJ or is it purely CGI artistry?
On another note, anyone know if the CGI Iron Man is motion captured by RDJ or is it purely CGI artistry?
Fanboys don't pay attention to subtle, spoken details. If it isn't a bazillion guns and lasers then said movie is declared to be "ho hum".
Either that, or one look at how preposterously stupid Whiplash looks (and he looks almost as gawdawfully lame as Green Goblin) and everyone's brain involuntarily shuts off, so as to avoid stupidity overexposure.
