Iron Man kicked the crap out of Hellboy 2. Hellboy 2 was beautifully shot, with very nice creature work, but it was boring. The actors, even Pearlman read his lines flat, there was no energy between the characters. The Golden Army was built up and then was only on screen for about 10 minutes of the film, while they wasted a lot of time on that gaseous professor, which led to nothing as well. The first Hellboy was better. Pearlman seemed to enjoy himself better in that one.
Hellboy II is gonna PWN Iron Man's ass!!!
- Thread starter Johnny Rico
- Start date
I enjoyed both films. HB2's shooting and creature work was excellent and I thought Ron Perlman was good as usual.
Iron Man was just a lot of fun and RDJ just felt right for the role
Iron Man was just a lot of fun and RDJ just felt right for the role
RobertScorpio
Pariah
I enjoyed both films. HB2's shooting and creature work was excellent and I thought Ron Perlman was good as usual.
Iron Man was just a lot of fun and RDJ just felt right for the role
Especially since RDJ has been fighing those same real demons in real life...
Rob
Del Toro must have really hated his father growing up. HB2's plot was just a bit of updated plot for Blade 2. Angry young prince is martial arts expert. Even angrier at father and cannot stand the younger sister. Angry young prince kills old father, in the process also kills younger sister and our hero kills angry young prince.
And they were both played by the same guy nonetheless!
And they were both played by the same guy nonetheless!
I blind bought HBII cause I liked the first one quite a bit. Mistake.
My god, it was horrendous. Story, acting, direction, it was all ... off. The art department was on its game, but damn, it couldn't save this turd.
Abe especially suffered from the lack of Niles Crane voice. Ugh. Not going to go off on a rant. Supreme disappointment, though.
My god, it was horrendous. Story, acting, direction, it was all ... off. The art department was on its game, but damn, it couldn't save this turd.
Abe especially suffered from the lack of Niles Crane voice. Ugh. Not going to go off on a rant. Supreme disappointment, though.
I'm a big fan of some of Del Toro's other work (The Devil's Backbone in particular, as well as Pan's Labrynth) but Hellboy II was a complete and utter wreck. Just truly an awful movie.
I really enjoyed 'Hellboy II', much better than the original IMO. A drunken Barry Manilow sing along is always good for a laugh and I got a bit of a kick out of seeing Lovecraft's Elder Things wandering around in the background, especially since I gather Del Toro's next project after 'The Hobbit' might be 'At The Mountains of Madness'.
As for how it compares to 'Iron Man'...well I can certainly see why it doesn't have as much mass appeal, but that hardly makes it a bad movie.
As for how it compares to 'Iron Man'...well I can certainly see why it doesn't have as much mass appeal, but that hardly makes it a bad movie.
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
And Ron Perlman is in his 60's, so I don't think that he'll be able to be Hellboy again.
For the record, I thought that Hellboy II: The Golden Army was one of the best movies of the summer of 2008 (although I loved them all: The Dark Knight, Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Speed Racer, and Get Smart, as well as Hancock and WALL*E.) So, no disappointment on my part.
I enjoyed Hellboy II but it was a bit too weird for my tastes, and I think the film is very much the Batman Returns of that franchise; del Toro's little flourishes take full blossom here, and some of it is beauitful to watch, and some of it is just plain confusing (the long market place sequence, for instance).
Iron Man was a bit more grounded but still grossly overrated by a lot of people. It's nothing more than any one of the Fantastic Four films and the only elements that elevate the film above those is the inclusion of Jon Favreau & Robert Downey, Jr., whose shtick manages to be endurable and even amiable. Still, it doesn't really explore any boundaries beyond the normal comic-book convention cliche (it doesn't help that it slavishly follows the faithful superhero origin archtype) but the scenes of Downey Jr. having fun in the suit and then thinking about the ramifications of wearing it stand out. Gwyneth Paltrow is surprisingly charming as well. Terrence Howard was rightfully recast. And I think Jeff Bridges' performance was lost in his great big, bushy beard.
Iron Man was a bit more grounded but still grossly overrated by a lot of people. It's nothing more than any one of the Fantastic Four films and the only elements that elevate the film above those is the inclusion of Jon Favreau & Robert Downey, Jr., whose shtick manages to be endurable and even amiable. Still, it doesn't really explore any boundaries beyond the normal comic-book convention cliche (it doesn't help that it slavishly follows the faithful superhero origin archtype) but the scenes of Downey Jr. having fun in the suit and then thinking about the ramifications of wearing it stand out. Gwyneth Paltrow is surprisingly charming as well. Terrence Howard was rightfully recast. And I think Jeff Bridges' performance was lost in his great big, bushy beard.
Iron Man seemed to follow the standard formula for superhero movies, ala Superman, Batman Begins, et al. However, imo that doesn't mean it was so "grossly" overrated, because it did what those other films did but at least as well. So why hold it to a higher standard than the others? You could say the exact same thing about other well-regarded films. Consider that Iron Man is not so nearly well-known as a superhero as Bats and Supes, so the "superhero origin" is almost more of a necessity for this film than those two. Now that this is established, the scriptwriters can move beyond that into other areas of examination and/or action.
I definitely agree with you about Bridges' character and performance, though. Even moreso about Favreau and RDJ.
I definitely agree with you about Bridges' character and performance, though. Even moreso about Favreau and RDJ.
It just felt pedestrian. Superman: The Movie has the factor of being the first to come out and doesn't have that "sameness" quality to it like Iron Man did. Batman Begins even mixed up the formula by showing events out of order so that it felt new and interesting. Besides a flashforward at the beginning, there's nothing really new or interesting about Iron Man. The only thing that helps keep it entertaining is the parts where Tony Stark tries out the costume.
To each their own, I suppose. I will grant you that Superman gets a special pass by virtue of being first. But I don't condemn Iron Man for "sameness" if it followed a similar story type. As I said, I thought it was more important for Iron Man to do this because of the general public's lack of familiarity. In that area, Batman and Superman as characters will always be the gold standard, a luxury that others like Iron Man don't have. Call it pedestrian if you must, but I call it a necessrity in this case. The financial and critical success of the film Iron Man to me indicates a significant quality, precisely because of that public unfamiliarity.
I thought Iron Man was an excellent movie, Jeff Bridges added some much needed depth to Stane that he didn't have in the comic and the money and technology had allowed them to make the movie the way it should have been made. And they've only scratched the surface when it comes to telling stories about Iron Man, Superman and Batman in the movies anyway seem alittle tired right now, I'm really looking forward to where they take their plans for an Avengers movie and Iron Man was the start of that. 
I think Iron Man proved that you can have a 'comic book movie' without it seeming overly cheesy and can draw in top talent. While yeah I liked Terrance Howard alright, Don Cheadle is an Oscar award winning actor. Plus I think RDJ will play well off of him. I have to admit, I never thought much of RDJ until Iron Man. I picked up Kiss Kiss Bang Bang when it was on sale at Best Buy for like $5, plan to see the Soloist when it comes out, and will probably gradually start going through some of his other movies. Same as Hotel Rwanda made Don Cheadle an appealing actor, (and the Ocean's series too). HB2 did seem to be another DelToro visual treat movie, but lacking in story and substance. His movies are the kind of flicks you use to show of a bitchin' home theater set up. Iron Man was good no matter how you sliced it. It wasn't as stunningly visual, but it was real. It felt like it could happen. It could work. Anyone could be Iron Man (well not ANYONE, but still...)
Iron Man won pure and simple.
Iron Man won pure and simple.
Finally saw Hellboy II. Big improvement over the first one, but nowhere near Iron Man, which I can now confidently say ranks as this years' best superhero movie, now that I've seen 'em all. 
Thanks largely to Robert Downey Jr., Iron Man is the rare comic book movie that seems to have emotional weight of a "real" movie, as opposed to something like The Dark Knight, which struck me as emotionally hollow and off-puttingly belonging to some long-past era that no longer has any relevance. Iron Man was very contemporary and relatable by comparison. I guess The Dark Knight seeming to belong to the 30s more than to contemporary times is a stylistic choice but it's an emotionally distancing choice.
Thanks largely to Robert Downey Jr., Iron Man is the rare comic book movie that seems to have emotional weight of a "real" movie, as opposed to something like The Dark Knight, which struck me as emotionally hollow and off-puttingly belonging to some long-past era that no longer has any relevance. Iron Man was very contemporary and relatable by comparison. I guess The Dark Knight seeming to belong to the 30s more than to contemporary times is a stylistic choice but it's an emotionally distancing choice.
What's the distinction? Because there are cliche, predictable Middle Eastern terrorists in Iron Man? What makes it contemporary and The Dark Knight not? I mean if you've been captured by Middle Eastern terrorists and held hostage for three months, you might be able to relate to Tony Stark or his cavaliar attitude towards life in general, but to me losing the woman you love, losing a close friend, and suffering by the actions of someone hellbent on causing destruction seem just a tad more relatable and contemporary.
Who was Bruce Wayne's close friend? The closest thing he had to a close friend was Alfred and if he loved Rachel so much why'd he let her go.
And I wouldn't call the Ten Fingers a middle Eastern terroist group since they had people from all over in it.
No you're right my fault it was the Ten Rings, which I'm sure was a reference form the writers to The Mandarin.