• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Anyone disappointed with the reviews Iron Man 2 is getting so far?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
It's currently at 70% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, which is rather impressive, given the fact that it's a sequel to a successful action movie. 95% of sequels these days are total trash, so, I'm happy to see it holding up rather well so far.

I'm amped to see it. Already have my ticket to the midnight showing.
 
Just got back from the Audi screening in OC......screw the haters, this movie rocked. Solid 2 hours of good entertainment.
 
bunnyfubbles said:
Iron Man 1 was an over achiever, and thus this movie obviously ended up having too much to live up to. Iron Man 1 was meant to be a typical popcorn summer movie but it ended up being better than that, whereas this sequel is more in line with that and isn't as surprisingly good.

While the first movie was all about the creation of Iron Man with some relatively serious conflicts that stemmed from that, this movie doesn't really feel like its really going anywhere, with no true antagonist (there is one, but the plot / character developments just don't fit and form right). If anything it sets up the Avengers more than telling its own story.
Click to expand...

Robert Downey Jr.'s free form acting made that movie. He was such an overly confident dick, yet it worked out for him every single time (to the point of being comedic).

I understand in this second movie the directors tried to tell Robert how to act so he would be like he was in the first movie---big mistake. This looks like it's going to be another example of directors thinking they know more about acting than the actors.
 
Any movie that Samuel Jackson touches goes to sh*t lately. Not saying that it's his fault, but every time they write up a ridiculous plot or story, they always think SJ is perfect for the part.
 
I've seen it. I was thoroughly entertained by it. Definitely worth seeing on the big screen.

And WTF, Wolverine was a fun action movie? that movie was complete shit.
 
GodlessAstronomer said:
Seen it. It's pretty weak. I really liked the first one (rare for comic movies for me). The Michael Bay comment above is pretty accurate, but the dialog between Stark and Pepper really killed the movie for me.
Click to expand...

Lame. I was presently surprised by the first Iron Man, so I had high hopes for the sequel.
 
It's getting 21% higher than SWAT on rotten tomatoes. SWAT being one of my favorite movies of all time. And remember that this is ATOT, where the 6% minority that dislike the Dark Knight abound. I'm judging for myself on this one.

Oh, and I though X-Men Origins was good too, as an fun entertaining action picture with some decent acting. Hugh Jackman is fucking Wolverine.
 
The first one was highly over-rated, so I'm not surprised. I'll probably still watch it once it's on DVD though.
 
The FT gave it 2 out of 5. I read the review last week, was a bit disappointed in that.

Still gave target of 400-600MM for revenue though.

They also wrote disney was complaining about a lack of PG rating and were hoping to censor some pieces late in development...
 
Aharami said:
i agree. Wolverine wasnt that good.
Click to expand...

Wolverine wasn't good at all. It was absolutely terrible. The script was just way to awful. It made X-men 3 look good. And the worst part is it was a movie about wolverine and they still fucked it up. He could have just smoked cigars for two hours and would have been better.
 
For some reason I wasn't blown away by the first one like everyone else so obviously was. It was pretty good, but I don't understand why it got the level of praise it did. Seems like a case of "We're so surprised that it's any good at all we'll give it an inflated 'for a superhero movie' score".

That said, I'm looking forward to the sequel regardless of reviews. For some movies that I just want to see, I'll usually avoid reading reviews that might spoil the experience. This is one of those cases.
 
I saw the movie the other night. It sucked big time! Basically the previews you saw on the promoting the movie were the only and best parts. The movie was very boring and slow paced. I would estimate that there were only about 3 or 4 minutes of action. I do have to laugh about all the companies such as Burger King who spent millions on advertising this movie and have their Iron Man II cups and bags and such, only to find out that the movie sucked! Heck, even walking through Wal-mart the other day they had almost a complete toy section devoted to Iron Man. LOL
 
Raizinman said:
I saw the movie the other night. It sucked big time! Basically the previews you saw on the promoting the movie were the only and best parts. The movie was very boring and slow paced. I would estimate that there were only about 3 or 4 minutes of action. I do have to laugh about all the companies such as Burger King who spent millions on advertising this movie and have their Iron Man II cups and bags and such, only to find out that the movie sucked! Heck, even walking through Wal-mart the other day they had almost a complete toy section devoted to Iron Man. LOL
Click to expand...

Just because a movie is shit doesn't mean it won't make money. Hell, look at the Twilight series.

Besides the fast food industry have been cashing in on big budget films for years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top