Iron Man 2 SingleDisc Edition Bluray

Posted In: Iron Man 2

Jacqui Blaze says...

IRON MAN II.May he rest in peace. As with so many of these Marvel Comics scripts there are so many add-on characters to disrupt the meager storyline that it seems like the studio tapped everyone who walked by the filming, gave them a few lines and a wow costume and said 'come one in.' Rating an obvious millions of dollars production such as this is duplicitous: CGI 5, acting 3, story 1.But if noise, mayhem, and electrical fires are pleasing to you, then by all means jump aboard this colorful film.



Robert Downey, Jr. is a fine actor so he puts as much as he can into the lines allotted him to read.Mickey Rourke is the bad guy with even more tattoos and longer hair than the Wrestler, and with a Russian accent to boot.Don Cheadle plays Don Cheadle, and Sam Rockwell needs a shave as a supposed wily bad guy executive. Samuel L. Jackson attempts to lend some dignity.Gwyneth Paltrow seems to be asking why she bothered until Scarlett Johansson jumps on board to give the film some much need punch.It's good guy versus bad guy - with drones create by Rourke's disenchanted character that attempt unsuccessfully to turn the tide.What's missing is some of Robert Downey, Jr.'s comedic banter and the brakes put on the destruction of the Stark Expo concept.Definitely a film for those who like this sort of high volume comic book outing.Grady Harp, October 10

Posted on December 9, 2011

Renato Zeitz says...

Worse sequel since New Moon. Is there a script writer in the house? The movie starts off with a big Expo party while a Russian is working on a secret project. I thought I was watching a remake of Rocky IV, then Downy breaks into his Jon Stewart imitating Glenn Beck dialogue "I'm Not saying...but..." We then have a scene of his dad describing the city of tomorrow like Walt Disney used to show us his plans for Disney World. As it turns out Tony Stark is dying and goes on a billionaire Iron Man bucket list. The testimony Stark gives at congress is filled with lines that are so scripted, it is cartoonish. Fortunately the movie is not a total bust. I would recommend a fast forward until you see a one eyed Jackson, sitting in a diner that could have been used in Pulp Fiction. At this point Scarlett Johansson saves the film. In order to survive Tony has to create a new element so he creates a makeshift accelerator out of parts laying around his lab, a high tech MacGruber. The fact that new elements are made in reactors from neutron bombardment and accelerators take particles apart is immaterial to the writers of the script, who are too busy looking through old movies to get bad plot ideas. Hopefully this is just a transition movie to get us to something better with numerous superheros, including Samuel Jackson and Scarlett Johannson. What is it with superheros and redheads anyway?

Posted on December 10, 2011

Ellan Dilorenzo says...

WOW! What happened here!?After such a surprise smash of an original, how could this sequel come off so . . . well, boring?



I admit, at first I found the slower pace refreshing.After all, isn't that the direction every other sequel takes?Bigger, louder, faster, less plot?So when the film opened with about twenty or thirty minutes of talk revolving around Tony Stark's insistence he's got "peace privatized" while a senate subcommittee isn't so sure, I was actually interested.When we saw that Stark was being poisoned by the very tech that was keeping him alive (as Jarvis so conveniently spells out for us slow viewers), again, intriguing . . .



Here's the problem - this stuff is supposed to be the setup, NOT the ENTIRE MOVIE!Yes, at the 90 minute mark (literally, I checked my watch) when Stark was STILL dealing with these same issues, I was no longer pleased with the slow pace - I was BEGGING the movie to start doing something interesting!Minus the "race track" sequence (most of which you've already seen in the trailer) the first half of the film has zero Iron Man action (unless you count a drunken brawl between Stark and Rhodey - a glorified barfight).



By the time the woefully underused Mickey Rourke FINALLY unleashes his devious plot to assault Ironman with a batch of robots, the film has a mere 20 minutes left to go - and the ensuing climatic battle feels like what it is - a perfunctory, tacked on conclusion - seemingly included only because the filmmakers begrudgingly admit they are, in fact, making an action movie, and not a dramatic comedy.As such, the final showdown between Ironman and Whiplash takes up all of about two minutes, and then the movie sprints for its closing credits.



Also wasted as the lovely Scarlett Johansson, who has, as I suggested in my title, the films only truly enjoyable sequence as she does her Matrix-Infused-Latex-Dominatrix best in taking down a squad of security cops.When a redhead girl's stunt-double brings more excitement to your movie than the titular Iron-clad hero, there is a SERIOUS problem!



I think I understand what the problem is - the makers of the first film analyzed the reaction, saw that Robert Downey, Jr. got most of the praise for that film, and decided to build the sequel NOT around bigger and better action, but instead around twice as many opportunities for Downey to quip and mug and annoy other characters.In fact, not only do they give us double the Downey, but they also introduce a rival arms dealer (Sam Rockwell) to do the exact same act, only for evil instead of good.



All this means that if you enjoy Downey and Rockwell (who are both great at what they do) and don't mind a film built on their overindulgence, then you might like this sequel.But if you go in expecting a bigger, badder Iron Man, don't . . . this is one of the first sequels I've ever seen that delivers LESS action than its predecessor.



As others have suggested, at the end of the day, this film is essentially more a promotion for the supposedly upcoming AVENGERS movie - a film that is constantly being talked about and promised for some as yet unannounced future date.If the further proposed films that are supposed to lead up to AVENGERS are as dull as this one, that day may never come.

Posted on December 11, 2011

My Laude says...

After how fresh and fun the original Iron Man was, I was dismayed to find that its sequel, Iron Man 2, was the textbook example of how NOT to make a sequel, and worst of all, the movie commits the cardinal sin of any would be blockbuster. Its boring.



Feeling more like a set up to a potential Avengers movie than a proper sequel, Iron Man 2 fumbles its incoherent storyline from beginning to end. Scenes are thrown together with neither rhyme nor reason, many of them could be cut and mean absolutely nothing to the entire film. At no point does it ever feel like anything is at stake, and one of the primary factors that results in that feeling is the absolutely awful villain, played here by Mickey Rourke, who gets the chance to shine during an action sequence at a race track, well publicized in the adverts, but afterwards, is essentially sidelined only tobriefly re-appear when convenient. The film also resorts to the worst possible way for a sequel to "top" the original. You liked the fight against 1 robot suit in Iron Man? Well here are fights with dozens of robot suits! Not only is the set-up of the action uninspired, but so is the execution. The action is lifeless, boring, unexciting, and by the end it amounts to nothing more than little dots flying in the sky and random lazers coming from various directions. Iron Man 2 is the posterboy for bad sequels. Its not as horrific as Spider-Man 3, but it is without a doubt a poor film in almost every area. I wish I could say that by the end of the film, at least Robert Downey Jr's portrayal of Tony Stark keeps the film feeling fresh, but no, even that ends up rote thanks to the dilution of the original character whose well known battles with alcohol have been a staple of Iron Man stories, and yet here are played for laughs. For shame.



The Iron Man 2 blu-ray however features excellent audio and video, and contains a decent enough set of special features, but I can't recommend the movie in good conscience.

Posted on December 12, 2011

Jimmy Abelman says...

There's nothing like that first kiss, yeah, and so even though IRON MAN 2 comes out and unleashes its share of awesomeness, even though it is very much worth a look, the mystery is gone, the expectations met, we've, er, already copped that feel. IRON MAN 2, good as it is, doesn't drop on us like lightning in a bottle, and so it isn't quite as exhilarating. What it does give us is more of that good Robert Downey, Jr.



The guy has made the Invincible Iron Man into his own, and I can't see anyone else now as Tony Stark, and I'm betting you can't, either. Downey brings the same devilish, bigger-than-life charisma, that same brash "I'm Tony Stark! Who the eff are you?!" swagger. Tony Stark is brilliant and ego-centric, but he's got good intentions. His heart's in the right place, and so we forgive the rampant narcissism. Plus, he's a fun dude to be around.



IRON MAN 2 chronicles Tony's fall from grace and his redemption. Six months ago Tony Stark told the world that he was Iron Man. But has fame and success gone to his head? He's been more eccentric lately, indulging even more in hedonism lately, and he's conducting the Stark Expo like it's a rock concert (which is actually bloody cool). Certain parties are worried. Iron Man's arrival had gone a ways into ensuring global peace or at least global detente. But six months later, the American government - as embodied in the person of the slimy Senator Stern (Garry Shandling) - is itching to get its paws on the Iron Man tech and, so, Tony has to attend senate hearings. Stark, in his own inimitable manner, blows the hearings out of the water.



There's a fatal flaw in the schematics, a gremlin in the wires. Carefree on the outside, on the inside Tony is very concerned. The palladium element in the arc reactor in his chest is gradually poisoning him, and each use of the Iron Man armor accelerates the condition. But he keeps up the pretense, having informed no one of his impending death. Maybe you can't blame the guy for carrying on so.



I actually expected this movie to delve into Tony's alcoholism (from the classic story arc in the comics), but we only get a peek at the man's fondness for booze. We do get moments when we see the flamboyant playboy take a sippy, as well as one epic drunken binge at a party (while in armor, no less). This public eff-up sends Tony's credibility plummeting, and that slimy senator's smirk just got even smirkier.



Rival industrialist Justin Hammer isn't the Big Bad of the movie, but Sam Rockwell supplies him with a pronounced air of unctuousness, and you hate him. Hammer, fed up with languishing in Stark's shadow, hires a crazed and tattooed Russian physicist to craft his own arsenal of armored suits, and a Russian physicist played by the menacing Mickey Rourke probably would have no choice but to be crazed and tattooed. They don't call Rourke's character by his supervillain code name, but it's Whiplash (with a smidge of Crimson Dynamo thrown in). He nurses a serious grudge against Tony and Tony's father, Howard Stark, who had a falling out with Whiplash's own inventor father. But how does Rourke get away with chewing a toothpick all the time?



IRON MAN 2 isn't magic like the first movie and that initial sense of novelty has worn off, but it's still terrific and the scale is bigger. Downey's presence drives the thing, and the fact that we don't mind that Tony Stark is onscreen more than Iron Man says something about the skills set Downey brings to the party. We still get that good banter between him and Gwyneth Paltrow. Don Cheadle takes over from Terrence Howard, and it's like he's always been on board as Rhodey. The f/x is flawless state of the art stuff; there's nothing like heavy metal clashing resoundingly. If you've at all seen the posters and the trailer, then you already know War Machine would make his debut, and he may not be as impressive as the ol' shellhead but, damn, he's got all those big mounted guns. And, for dessert, curvy Scarlett Johansson steps into the franchise as the smoking hot Black Widow and she demonstrates high levels of kickassery. And oh that sexy black leather....



I only wish Pepper Potts were given more stuff to do.



Jon Favreau features himself more as Happy Hogan, a chauffer in this incarnation, and I'm not mad at Favreau. What's the point of being director if you can't call your own number once in a while? Meanwhile, IRON MAN 2, in a scene here and there, gets us another step closer to that Avengers movie. Somewhere, executives from DC Comics must be gnashing their teeth, late to the game, lagging behind. The Green Lantern movie had better be something.



And, as become a habit with Marvel Studios flicks, stick around until after the closing credits, yeah? Nerd nirvana awaits.

Posted on December 14, 2011

Nathan Fraint says...

I've loved Iron Man ever since my first Tales of Suspense comic, so I might not be the most unbiased person to write a review.Still, I'm going to try and be as honest as I possibly can.In some ways, Iron Man 2 improves on the original.For instance, the brawl between Iron Man and War Machine was perfect, and RDJr was even better this time around.However, there were some weak moments.For example, Pepper Potts is almost absent from the movie, and is shrill and unpleasant during her brief appearances. Whiplash has never been a particularly compelling villain, and the movie doesn't do much to make him any more exciting.Also, they really need to STOP with the "Iron Man fights someone who has the same technology" plots.It's already boring.Plus, I couldn't help but wonder where a drunken hobo managed to get the equipment to build an Arc Reactor. Stark did it in the first movie because he had several billion dollars worth of his own weaponry to cannibalize. How does a homeless Russian manage it?Furthermore, the character of Justin Hammer was silly and played for laughs, which was the wrong move.It had a real "Jim Carrey in Batman Forever" vibe to it.



Others have mentioned the unnecessary plot lines, and they're right.We could have done entirely without the "Paladium Poisoning" and the "Under House Arrest by SHIELD" plots, since neither of them really went anywhere, and felt like padding in a movie that didn't need any.I didn't mind the Black Widow showing up, but eventually it felt like we were tripping over minor characters.Also, they're not fooling anyone with the whole "The Avengers don't want Tony Stark" subplot.None of us believe for a moment that they'd do an Avengers movie without the only Avenger that's proven to be a box-office success.



Still, it was a good movie.Perhaps not a GREAT movie like the first one, but at least it wasn't a franchise-killing fiasco like Spiderman 3 or Batman and Robin.Honestly, if none of us had ever seen the original Iron Man, we'd all be talking about how this movie was one of the best Comic Book movies ever.But as it is, it's over-shadowed by it's phenomenal predecessor.

Posted on December 14, 2011

Hang Puskarich says...

At the end of 2008, I made two bold assertions: (1) That "Iron Man" was one of the year's best films; (2) that "Iron Man" was one of the greatest superhero films ever made. I still believe both to be true. Now we have "Iron Man 2." While it is thoroughly entertaining, it's also a bit conventional when compared to its predecessor, having less of a compelling story but more in the ways of action, special effects, gadgets, humor, and stunt work. It's a comic book through and through. That's fine by me - what it lacks in introspection it more than makes up for in sheer fun. We have plenty to cheer for, not the least of which is our hero, billionaire industrialist Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.), who when we last left him had shut down the weapon's division of his company to focus on more humanitarian uses for technology. The result was a high tech metal suit equipped with rocket boosters and missile launchers.



It's now six months after Stark revealed himself as Iron Man at a press conference. Despite the demands of a United States Senate committee, he refuses to share his technology with the American military, believing that world peace can be maintained only if it's privatized. At this meeting, he humiliates Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell), the CEO of a rival company who has unsuccessfully tried to outdo Stark's technology with his own prototype machines; in an effort to get ahead, Hammer appeals to Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), a Russian physicist who publically revealed his grudge against Stark by attacking him as he was car racing in Monaco. For as yet unknown reasons, Vanko has constructed an arc reactor very similar to the one implanted in Stark's chest. He has improved the design by attaching whips that surge with bolts of electrical energy.



Stark, meanwhile, is realizing that his chest implant, originally constructed as a way to keep him alive, contains an element that's slowly poisoning him. He doesn't handle it well. He acts out. He drinks in excess. He hastily appoints his former personal assistant, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), as the new CEO of his company. If he's to survive, he must replace the core of the implant with an entirely new element, one he has tried but failed to create on his own. Out of the blue comes special agent Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), who suggests that Stark look to his father's research for guidance.



New to the cast is Don Cheadle, who replaces Terrence Howard as Stark's dedicated but weary friend Lt. Colonel James Rhodes. Also new is Scarlett Johansson as Stark's newly hired personal assistant Natalie Rushman, who says she's from the company's legal department.



Watching this movie, I was quite dazzled by the sights and sounds, and I found the plot engaging in a suspension-of-disbelief kind of way. I did not, however, find it persuasive, as I did the first film, which I felt put a refreshing and thought-provoking spin on the traditional comic book adversary; Stark might have physically battled with the power-hungry Obadiah Stane, but his real enemies were war and injustice, both of which he took part in by selling weapons of mass destruction. This time around, it's much more by the book - a superhero pitted against a madman out for revenge, a fight to the finish that includes a lot of things blowing up, a showcase of digital wizardry and highly choreographed stunts. There are a number of films that can give you pretty much the same thing.



That being said, there's no denying the quality of the performances, especially Downey, whose cocky take on Stark makes the film fun but not jokey. Rockwell is quite good, playing Hammer is if he were Stark's slightly goofier evil twin - comedy relief with a hint of something darker, you might say. Credit also to Rourke, who truly does convey the anger, resentment, and pain his character feels in every one of his scenes. He isn't given all that much screen time, but when he's on, he's on, resonating with a deep, calm, frighteningly low voice and an imposing build.



If there is an "Iron Man 3," and I have no doubt that there will be, I can only hope it doesn't follow its predecessor's lead and decline in quality. The original "Iron Man" was a superb film, redefining the superhero genre for both old and new generations of moviegoers. "Iron Man 2" is a great looking and wonderfully performed sequel, although its approach to the story is routine, more so than I had preferred it to be. Still, you've got to hand it to director Jon Favreau and writer Justin Theroux - they sure know how to entertain an audience. There's an early scene in which Stark, dressed as Iron Man, jumps off a plane, flies through the sky, and lands unharmed in the middle of one of his own lavishly high tech expos in New York City. Throngs of people cheer him on. I suspect the audiences for this movie will do the same when it's over.

Posted on December 15, 2011

Juliann Kardos says...

While Iron Man 2 may not be perfect, it is a very solid and fun sequel. Improvements include better action sequences and some great characters added to the franchise. Unfortunately there is a lot going on here and even though it isn't hard to follow, there isn't enough time to give each sub plot the proper screen time it deserves. Oddly enough for a super hero film, I think they could have edited some of the talky scenes down and added a little more Iron Man action.



A good example of this is when we meet Natasha Romanova she isn't given much to do and I found myself wondering if she was going to be The Black Widow on screen. She is only in one action sequence(a great one with one of the funniest moments in the film)late in the movie and she and Nick Fury are really only there to set up The Avengers movie. I'm not saying it should be edited out, but there is only so much ground you can cover in two hours. Whiplash is played with gusto by Mickey Rourke, but he doesn't have much screen time either and that seems to be the problem with this film, no one but Tony Stark gets enough screen time.



After the first encounter with Whiplash in Monaco on the race track, we don't really get a good dose of Iron man until the final battle, which means there is over an hour of time where there isn't that much action. Considering what I had read about this being an action packed film, I found it to be very talky. This isn't necessarily a bad thing because the characters are well developed and the actors are all really good here.



The final battle is very good with some very cool Iron Man destruction and some nifty moves, but it's surprising and anti-climatic when Whiplash is defeated very quickly. In the first film, I thought the final battle was too long and in this one, it just seems to end too abruptly. I'm not bashing this film in any way as it is a very fun film that I will most certainly own the DVD/Blu Ray when it is released, but I think the story may have been a little too ambitious for one film.



Overall I give Iron Man 2 a solid B(4 stars)and I think Favreau did a very good job all things considered. Of course if you are seeing this in a theater, then stick around until the end of the credits role for a little teaser scene about another Marvel Hero who will be hitting theaters next year.

Posted on December 15, 2011

Christian Fraschilla says...

I saw Iron Man a couple of years ago and thought it was flawed, but servicable. My wife and I just saw Iron Man 2 over the weekend and were really not very impressed.Here are a couple of thoughts on it that may be helpful:



(i) Dialouge

As you have probably heard, this movie is big into dialouge and "character development" (At least, I think that's the term directors use when they unnecessarily load action movies down with lots of talky filler).Most of these interactions are just grating and annoying (eg. Tony and Pepper; Tony and Rhoddy; Tony and Senator Stern; Tony and Justin Hammer; Tony and Nick Fury, etc.) Bickering, talking over each other, and being generally cheesed off at one another are not the same thing as witty dialouge or clever ripostes.His Girl Friday this ain't.



(ii) The Main Character

In the first movie, Tony Stark was smug, but also ironic and interesting; in fact, despite the first movie's faults, I thought its protagonist was a refreshing antidote to all the dark conflicted loners you find in every other superhero movie.In the sequel, Tony Stark is just a rich, obnoxious, jerk, mostly drunk and disrespectful to everyone else including his friends.I don't like spending two hours with obnoxious, rich jerks.



(iii) Action

Not a whole lot of action in this one and not really anything that was overly impressive.If you have seen the trailers to the movie, you've seen pretty much all there is to see. The final confrontation between Iron Man, War Machine and Whiplash lasts about 60 seconds or so.



(iv) Plot

MINOR SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW ******The plot is.... well, there really is not much of a plot, as much as there is a basket of interrelated half-concepts tied together. It reminded me a little of The Phantom Menance where George Lucas decided he wanted certain elements (eg. a pod race; a space battle; a lightsaber fight) and then wrote a thin story to incorporate them.The plot that does exist has holes a mile wide, lots of loose ends and a lot of stuff that goes nowhere.As an example, Black Widow is written in, but really does nothing of note (she is a secret agent disguised as a notary in Stark Industries; even though her boss tells her that she is onto her, they are confidants in the next scene).Nick Fury and SHIELD are introduced for the sole purpose of promoting Thor and The Avengers.Jon Favreau writes in a fairly large role for himself (including an incredibly implausable action scene) which contributes nothing to the plot and is really for the sole purpose of giving himself some screen-time. In sum, it felt like either the product of a committee or a bunch of last minute re-writes or re-edits.



(v) Embedded Advertising

Lots and lots of annoying promotional tie-ins from watches to software to cars to upcoming movies are scattered throughout.They don't even try to be subtle.



Conclusion:

So, is it worth your $14.99 and Saturday night?No, it really isn't.There are a bunch of great summer movies that are just now making their way to DVD.I would strongly recommend that you take a second look at those (Inception, anyone?) before putting your money down for this one.

Posted on December 15, 2011

Mary Noeldner says...

You would think that a 2 disc edition of a movie like Iron Man 2 would be loaded with special features. Maybe something like how they did Whiplash, behind the scenes, cast interviews, a little history on the characters Whiplash, WarMachine, Black Widow and Justin Hammer, etc. No they have the following:



-Commentary

-4 Deleted Scenes (2 extended, 1 alternate and 1 deleted scene)

-Behind the scenes on the Iron Man and WarMachine costumes mixed how they did some scenes involving them

-A little documentary on making the Stark Expo set

-The Shoot to Thrill by AC/DC music video

-The digital copy of the movie



These were all good but I would expect more especially if you pay the $22.99 or whatever you paid for the movie. They could have excluded the digital copy and crammed all the features into the 1 disc edition which only has commentary. Then also sell the movies in another edition with the digital copy.



Now for the movie. I dont care what people thought. I really enjoyed the movie. I have no idea what they mean by No story. I want reveal much so it wont spoil the movie. But you can clearly tell what the storyline is right off the bat.



It deals mostly with the "Demon in a Bottle" storyline which is considered the best Iron Man story ever. Iron Man deals with a new villian Whiplash (ok its a hybrid of Whiplash and Crymson Dynamo) played by Mickey Rourke. Other new characters include Natalie Rushman aka Black Widow (Scarlett Johanson) and Justin Hammer.



The movie does have an issue of introducing too many characters but that can be ignored. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) has a bigger role in this as he appears in a few scenes (mainly about talking about "The Avengers") as apposed to his after the credits scene in the first.



Like the first, there is an extra scene after the credits that sets up for Marvel's next big movie.



Set aside the lack of special features. Good movie to own

Posted on December 15, 2011