Iron Man 2

I wouldn't expect a warning about the power of (media) imagery from a film whose main protagonist spends half the time drinking and goofing around. Stark is just as amoral a character as the other arms magnate, Hammer, but he knows how to impress people and make fun of himself, a trait that characterises the whole film and distinguishes the Iron Man franchise from the dark comic-book adaptations along the lines of The Dark Knight, which don't make light of the superhero mythos. Favreau doesn’t follow the trend of psychologically more intense comic-book movies. Iron Man 2 is darker solely in what happens to Stark’s body, not in what he goes through. This focus on the surface can be seen as the reason for the popularity of Stark and those like him, who know how to perform in front of television cameras (through which we also see the protagonist several times). That focus on the surface is also the reason that Scarlett Johansson, whose curves are manna for the eyes, has a generally superfluous role in the film. Mickey Rourke, who doesn’t talk much but speaks to the point, is also delightful, as is Gwyneth Paltrow, whose verbal shootouts with Downey are reminiscent of classic screwball comedies with their double entendres and timing, and the roughly two action scenes added in just for fun (since they gave us money for them...) are a joy to watch. Throw out abundant one-liners, look good doing it and quickly fade from memory. Mission accomplished. 75% (06/05/2013)

Just as good as the first one (I know I was over the moon about it and gave it five stars, but that was because Tony arrived with such a bang and so this time I simply expected it) with better action scenes, dialogs full of equally snappy lines and no longer just winking, but literally hitting you over the head with Marvel Cinematic Universe references. Downey Jr. is just as awesome as ever - this is the role he was born to play. We don't get to see much of Mickey Rourke, but while he's on screen, it's well worth it, just like Rockwell's slippery Justin Hammer, who relishes the part. I'm afraid of what dubbing will do to the movie, because I personally enjoyed the intense verbal exchanges much more than the action itself. Superb. A light yet grown-up entertainment that will always have a place in my heart. And I want that briefcase! Claridge Hi-Tec, semi-automatic, 9mm pistol. Too downtown? I agree. M24 shotgun, pump action. Five-round magazine. You know what? You’re not a hunter. What am I talking about? I’m getting rid of it. This is the FN-2000 from Belgium. They do make something better than waffles. It’s beautiful, but I can tell this isn’t disco enough for you, so I’m gonna put it right here. You’re looking at a Milkor 40mm grenade launcher. Tear gas, smoke. Hippie control. You’re tough. Let me tell you something. Size does matter. Don’t let anyone tell you different. This is an M134 7.62 Minigun. Six individual barrels. The torso taker, powder maker. Our boys in uniform call in Uncle Gazpacho or Puff the Magic Dragon. Okay. These are the Cubans, baby. This is the Cohibas, the Montecristos. This is a kinetic-kill, side-winder vehicle with a secondary cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine RDX burst. It’s capable of busting the bunker under the bunker you just busted. If it were any smarter, it would write a book. A book that would make “Ulysses" look like it was written in crayon. It would read it to you. This is my Eiffel Tower. This is my Rachmaninoff’s “Third"... My “Pieta". It’s completely elegant. It’s bafflingly beautiful. And it’s capable of reducing the population of any standing structure to zero. I call it the Ex-Wife. (04/09/2010)

Where is the taciturnity and momentum of the first film? Where is Stark's strong personal charm? The second film amounts to watery, scattered, and terribly lifeless blabbering of the star-studded characters, whose dialogues and jokes often feel like they were written by a five-year-old (I admit that the problem may be the dubbing, but unfortunately, that is hardly going to change my impression until I see the version with subtitles). I forgave Favreau’s routinism in the first film because Downey's character had an edge. In the second film, most of the beautiful things are gone, and all that remains is chatter, outdated humor, and surprisingly Downey, who seems to be so convinced about his own irresistibility that he completely ignores the emptiness of his dialogues. There is something wrong with a comic book film that does not get me out of my seat in two hours with even one ballbusting moment. I cannot give the dubbed version more than one star... (27/04/2010)

This doesn’t work, man. A by-the-numbers comic book movie with zero interesting scenes. I wasn’t particularly thrilled by the first Iron Man, either, but I had no trouble watching it as a mind breather. What I liked the most were the dialogues and the interactions among the characters, something that unfortunately I can’t say about the second one, and thus the lower rating. And the worst is that when there finally was some action, it only took a moment for me to long for it to finish quickly. Bland, without any spark or ideas. (04/09/2010)

Business as usual. As long as Downey is playing himself (or, if you like, Stark) it is mostly fun, but as soon as he puts on the suit then he just stares and it’s time for something else than verbal action, and then comes boredom, routine and... more boredom on top. Next time it needs a lot more of those “mating call" comedy scenes like those in Stark’s former CEO’s office and a lot less action. Or else a director who is good at action. (03/05/2010)