Iron Man 2

The wait is over, and the sequel to one of the most popular comic-book movies ever, Iron Man, has finally hit theaters. There’s been a lot of buzz already with early reviews from press screenings having hit the interwebz a couple of weeks ago. Typically, early screenings reflect that the studio is confident about its product, and I’m sure director Jon Favreau had assumed that everyone would automatically love Iron Man 2 as they loved its predecessor. Unfortunately, reviews have been mixed. Many so-called “journos” have stated that Iron Man 2 is too convoluted. Too many subplots, they cry. Too slow in the middle, they pout. Too many characters; I can’t keep up, they scribble. Thankfully for you, I’m here to give you the honest low-down. You can trust me because my principle concern is to help you make an informed decision about whether you should spend your hard-earned greenbacks on the latest Hollywood spectacle. So, here it is.

Iron Man 2 begins where the last film left off. Tony Stark has revealed to the world that he is Iron Man, and his popularity has grown as he has been cleaning up the planet’s messes. As he states, “I have successfully privatized world peace.” Tony appears to be loving all the attention, and it would seem that it’s also going to his head somewhat. But there are cracks in the armor. Stark is sick. The element that powers his suit and keeps his heart going is poisoning him little by little. Overwhelmed by the responsibility of keeping the world safe, Stark Industries is in near shambles. A ruthless (though fairly inept) competitor, Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) is working feverishly to put the final nail in Stark’s coffin, and the U.S. government is hounding Stark to turn over his technology.

Meanwhile, a Russian scientist, Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), has developed his own version of the miniature reactor that powers the Iron Man suit. It is revealed that the technology was originally co-developed by Vanko’s father and Howard Stark (Tony’s father). Vanko’s father, who had defected to America, was deported back to the Soviet Union by Howard Stark and sent to Siberia. Now, Vanko wants revenge against Stark’s progeny. In an intense action scene, Vanko attacks Tony at a race in Monoco. But he ultimately fails to kill Tony who uses a portable version of the Iron Man suit to defeat him.

Justin Hammer sees in Vanko an opportunity get the upper hand on Stark. Hammer helps Vanko escape from prison and puts him to work developing a weaponized suit that will eclipse Iron Man. Meanwhile, Stark is spiraling out of control. His closest confidants, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and Lt. Col. Rhodes (formerly played by Terrance Howard; now played by Don Cheadle), from whom Stark has hidden the fact that he is dying, attempt to get Tony to see the folly of his self-destructive behavior. At Tony’s birthday party, the situation comes to a head. Having had enough, Rhodes commandeers one of Stark’s “Mark II” Iron Man suits, and the two friends battle each other, resulting in Rhodes stealing the suit and taking it back to the military.

At this point, everyone seems to abandon Stark. Pepper throws herself into her work, attempting to save Stark Industries. Rhodes and the military throw in with Justin Hammer, commissioning him to weaponize the Mark II suit that Rhodes has stolen from Stark. Having possession of the Mark II, Hammer perceives that he has successfully beaten Stark. Also, Vanko has developed an army of menacing battle droids for Hammer which he plans to reveal at the Stark technology expo along with the updated Iron Man suit, now piloted by Rhodes.

Fortunately, Stark is not entirely alone. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), the director of S.H.I.E.L.D., has been keeping tabs on him through Natalie Rushman (Scarlett Johansson), who replaced Pepper Potts as Stark’s assistant when he made Pepper the CEO of Stark Industries. It is revealed that Rushman is actually Natasha Romanoff, an agent of S.H.I.E.L.D., who was tasked to shadow Stark when Fury learned that he was sick. We also learn that Stark previously declined to work with Fury on the proposed “Avenger Initiative”, mentioned in the first film.

With the help of his father’s “lost” notes, provided by Fury, Stark discovers a new element that is compatible with the reactor technology that powers the Iron Man suit, without the toxic side effects. When Stark learns that Vanko is planning an attack at the expo, he dons a new and improved Iron Man suit and flies off to save the day. But what Vanko has in store is more than Iron Man can handle alone, and it requires the combined efforts of Iron Man, War Machine (Rhodes), Black Widow (Natasha) and even Happy (Tony’s bodyguard, played by Favreau) to bring Vanko down.

Some of the major complaints about Iron Man 2 involve the expository elements that make up the film’s second act: Tony’s downward spiral, Pepper’s frustrations dealing with Tony while trying to run Stark Industries, the conflict between Stark and Rhodes, and S.H.I.E.L.D.’s efforts to reign Stark in and set him on the right path. While I don’t totally disagree with these criticisms, I don’t think these elements will detract from anyone’s enjoyment of the film, nor do I think they’re wholly unnecessary. These are character development issues as well as sequel set-up considerations. Iron Man 2 is one film, but it’s part of a greater whole that includes not just the first Iron Man but also the upcoming films, Thor (2011), Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) and The Avengers (2012), not to mention 2008’s The Incredible Hulk (which I should mention takes place chronologically after the events of Iron Man 2). Iron Man 2 is just a part of this series of films that I think should be ultimately referred to as The Avengers Anthology. Certain things need to be established so that those other pieces of the anthology make sense to audiences, and Favreau is using Iron Man 2 to take care of some of that.

Does all this affect the pacing of the film? Maybe a bit, but I have to give Favreau a lot of credit. He’s managed to do a pretty good job making it all work in the least convoluted way possible. I personally enjoyed every minute of it. Fanboys should be happy. Some of that second-act stuff was lifted directly from the comics. Also, I have none of the complaints that I’d had about the first film in regards to lack of action. Iron Man 2, despite what you might think about the second act, is full of jaw-dropping action, and that final confrontation is epic.

Robert Downey Jr. continues to exceed my expectations in his portrayal of the very rich and eccentric genius, Tony Stark. If you have a problem with Stark’s arrogant abrasiveness, then maybe Iron Man isn’t the comic-book franchise for you. That’s who Stark is. He’s not Spider-Man, and he’s not Captain America. He’s no boy scout, and I kind of like that. And I love that RDJ gets it. He’s always a pleasure to watch.

I have to say, I think I like Don Cheadle’s portrayal of Rhodes over Terrance Howard’s. There’s just something about Cheadle that makes you believe he’s the kind of military attaché that you would become friends with. Howard? Not so much. And that’s one thing that never really clicked with me in the first film. Why would a rich, eccentric genius be friends with an army guy? Howard was given lines that were meant to make it seem like he was friends with Stark, but I never really believed they were devoted pals. In fact, it almost seemed to me that Howard’s Rhodes didn’t really like Stark all that much. Cheadle is a different story. I believed that Cheadle’s Rhodes genuinely cared for Stark. That makes a huge difference.

Mickey Rourke was stupendous as Vanko, a.k.a. Whiplash. My only complaint was that he seemed a bit more Russian mafia enforcer and less genius mad-scientist. Though the character was said to have spent several years in a Russian prison, I would have liked to have seen a bit more of a mix of the two aspects of Vanko. Unfortunately, I’m not sure how an actor would specifically go about doing that, so I’ll shut up about it. Overall, Rourke made a great villain. It was a casting choice that really paid off, in my opinion.

Samuel L. Jackson and Scarlett Johansson, both of whom I am a huge fan, seemed like they were “phoning it in”. In the upcoming films, especially The Avengers, I hope Jackson brings a bit more depth to his character. I’m sure that whatever it was that enabled Nick Fury to become the director of an organization like S.H.I.E.L.D., it wasn’t a pretty journey. I want to see some of that ugliness festering underneath the surface. I know it’s there. Now show it to me, Sammy J. But not too much now. Less is more. As for ScarJo (yes, I just called her ScarJo; get over it), she’s playing a former Russian black-ops agent who is infiltrating Stark Industries on behalf of S.H.I.E.L.D., so I can understand and forgive the lack of a Russian accent. But I was a little disappointed with the flat delivery of her lines. I want to see that same darkness I mentioned under the surface of her character too. She’s not called Black Widow for nothing. However, BW’s action sequences made up for every shortcoming; I’m looking forward to seeing more of this character in The Avengers.

Overall, Iron Man 2 is a fun, exciting movie whose flaws are eclipsed by its intense action sequences. It’s a great transitional film that has transformed our armor-clad hero. After his intense genesis in Iron Man 1, Stark has undergone a trial by fire, survived a cataclysmic chrysalis to become a true hero, ready to help Fury lead The Avengers. At the end of the first movie, Stark would never have been able to head up a band of heroes that will ultimately save the world from certain destruction (I can only assume those will be the stakes in The Avengers, to be directed by Joss Whedon). Now, he’s a little more capable of doing something like that… with a little help from some good friends.

Ultimately, the point of Iron Man 2 is this: no man is an island. Or, maybe in this case, no man is truly made of iron. The movie starts out with Tony Stark single-handedly being responsible for keeping the world safe. He protects his secrets, pushing away all his friends. He ultimately learns that, to overcome his personal demons and to overcome evil, he doesn’t have to do it alone. We are all stronger when we are joined together. It’s the lesson that Stark had to learn in order to lead the “ultimate” team. It’s a good message, and I think Favreau has presented it solidly.

So, don’t listen to the naysayers. Go see it, especially if you’re a fan of the genre. It’s a solid addition to the growing pantheon of comic-book adaptations and a fun ride. And don’t forget to stay through the credits. As in the first film, there’s a little Easter egg that gives a nod to one of the upcoming films in the Avengers series. Comic-book geeks especially will be pleased.

by Stuart Benedict