Iron Man 2 is a reminder why more isn’t always better. All the elements of the original are there (with one notable substitution), yet the addition of new heroes/villains ultimately stops the sequel from forming into a cohesive whole. This is not the fault of the actors, who have terrific fun, or director Jon Favreau, who is equally comfortable with action and comedy. The weakness is the screenplay – Justin Theroux has trouble crafting tense situations, and his villain never exudes menace. Even worse, he writes plot around set pieces, when it should be the other way around. With clever one-liners and slick action, here is a skillfully made movie that lacks genuine suspense or an engaging story.
Six months after announcing to he’s Iron Man, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is as brilliant and narcissistic as ever. At a congressional hearing, he declares the Iron Man suit has effectively privatized world peace. When he isn’t infuriating competitor Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) or frustrating assistant Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), Stark privately worries about how his palladium heart is slowly poisoning him. Two distractions, one welcome and the other not-so-welcome, divert attention from gnawing health concerns. The former is Natalie (Scarlett Johansson), a new assistant who may have an intriguing secret. The latter is Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), a tattooed Russian who harbors bitter resentment towards Stark. With cameras watching, Vanko’s unsuccessful attack on Tony calls the Stark family legacy into question. Now longtime buddy Jim Rhodes (Don Cheadle, formerly Terrence Howard) is torn between helping his friend and serving his country. And once Hammer springs Vanko from prison, they collaborate on a drone army that threatens far more than Iron Man’s place in history.

A comic book adaption succeeds and fails based on the strength of its villain, and in this capacity, Iron Man 2 is a clunker. It’s hard to blame Rourke, who chews the scenery in a typically bizarre performance. The problem is the character’s humdrum motivations (i.e., my dead dad hated your dead dad), and how his Big Plan is credulity-stretching. No one expects a dastardly villain’s nefarious plan to be an example of airtight plotting, yet Vanko's assaults on Stark are way too convenient. When one thinks “How did he know Stark would hop in a Formula 1 car?” instead of focusing on the action, it is easy disengage from the onscreen violence, so investment in the situation dwindles. The second big action sequence similarly lacks tension. Little is at stake, so there is no dramatic heft or sense of danger. Once Jim and Tony join forces, there is plenty for fans of cool gadgetry and big explosions. Until then, the whole production feels as if they’re treading water when they should be pushing forward.
If I sound too much like a negative Nancy, rest assured there are plenty of fun individual moments. Theroux’s other screenwriting credit is Tropic Thunder, so it’s no surprise he’s most comfortable writing throwaway gags, or when egocentric characters amusingly butt heads. Robert Downey Jr. more than compensates for the story’s shortcomings – he is one of the most watchable actors in movies today, and his wide eyes can project deep emotion even when the writing does not match his gifts. Indeed, entire subplots serve no purpose except to establish a potential for superhero crossover (Samuel L. Jackson is woefully underused as Nick Fury). There surely are comic book aficionados who’ll delight at the possibility of an Avengers movie*, but for the rest of us, Theroux should have focused on character development instead of geeky pandering. Iron Man 2 does not lessen interest in Tony Stark’s world, but with intermittent wit and badassery, many viewers will be more than slightly disappointed.
* Attention, nerds! Stick around after the credits for a taste of the next big Marvel adaptation.
Or if you prefer tightly plotted noir over comic book action, The Square recalls the early work of the Coen brothers. My favorite riff on the famous Lennon lyric is, “I think a plan is just a list of things that don't happen,” and here is a textbook situation of how such a plan can spiral out of control. David Roberts plays Ray, a well-respected husband with his own construction company. From the first scene, we know Ray is having an affair with Carla (Claire van der Boom), who is married to the thuggish Greg (Anthony Hayes). Carla and Ray are both dissatisfied with the lives they’ve eked out, and after a particularly passionate tryst, Carla suggests they steal a bag of money from Greg. Ray agrees, but only after he hires Billy (co-screenwriter Joel Edgerton) to burn down the house, thereby destroying any evidence of theft. Billy fulfills his end of the bargain, but there’s one glaring oversight: he doesn’t realize Greg’s mother is in the house. Ray and Carla struggle to salvage the situation, and once Ray starts receiving anonymous blackmail threats, it becomes clear there’s no clean way out.

Director Nash Edgerton keeps the audience a few steps ahead of the heroes, which adds an air of tragedy to the suspense. It does not take long for desperation to seize the protagonists, so their later decisions, no matter how impulsive, have an undeniable logic. Since Roberts and van der Boom underplay their character’s dread, it’s easy to care about what happens to them. Strong actors are required for such material, for even though Ray and Carla are the most sympathetic, they’re still murderous adulterers. As Billy, Joel Edgerton is adept as someone who straddles the line between amateur and professional – he’s not so much dangerous as he is reckless. Meanwhile the director drains color from the screen, so despite the backdrop of a picaresque Australian town, the setting never feels warm. With a somewhat innocuous title, The Square takes on multiple meanings as the movie continues. It comes title represents the box Ray feels trapped by, both literally and figuratively (as head of a construction site, he can dig holes that’ll make big problems disappear). Despite its modest aspirations and heavy-handed title, The Square is an effective thriller. For those who know special effects are no substitute for a well-told story, it should not be missed.
Previously in Another Movie Guy?:
- 9/16: Another Movie Guy?: "The Interrupters."
- 9/16: Another Movie Guy?: "Straw Dogs."
- 8/31: Another Movie Guy?: "The Debt."
- 8/26: Another Movie Guy?: "Pianomania."
- 8/26: Another Movie Guy?: "Brighton Rock."
- 8/19: Another Movie Guy?: "The Names of Love."
- 8/19: Another Movie Guy?: "Attack the Block."
- 8/12: Another Movie Guy?: "The Guard."
- 8/12: Another Movie Guy?: "30 Minutes or Less."
- 8/5: Another Movie Guy?: "The Devil's Double."
God loves a cheerful giver.
there is always a piece of shit that never likes a good movie, has to thread it to pieces simply because a negative review puts them on the map and generates readers online.
FUCK YOU ALAN ZILBERMAN. It really shows you do not know the story or appreciate the value of a man that suddenly finds out, in the middle of his wealth and power, that he's dying.
Its typical of a critic to be dissatisfied. You will NEVER get to star or write something like this.
Its the expectation that dissatisfies you. Its the anticipation that creates the dissapointment, in a bitter person like you.
The film is over 2 hrs long. And like many people said, this is one of those films you NEVER want it to end.
You obviously did not understand the film. The motivation of the villain its not just MY DAD HATED YOUR DAD.
Vanko's father had AMBITION. Stark's father had a bigger view for this technology to humankind.
He's avenging a life of poverty, incarcaration, exile, a ruined life.
He does not care if he dies. He wants to make Stark suffer.
He spits blood to him. Says "yoo loose".
He wants to prove he's better.
And catches a dying ironman. Not a man in full strenght.
Precisely the fact that the climax its not so full of explosions as it should be according to your little mind, shows that the film prefers to establish a broader view of character development.
This is what a sequel is for, sir.
Character development. And this film alone establishes, like 3 or 4 different movies.
You gotta know a little more about things before you issue a critic.
"You gotta know a little more about things before you issue a critic."
hai u r dumb
whoa, feelings
You gotta know a little more about how to think out your argument before spewing random invective all over a message board.
I saw the movie and, while I enjoy the idea of it all, was pretty underwhelmed. Characters were messily put together (saved by some solid acting) and the climax was boring almost because of all the explosions. It's fine if you enjoyed it, I guess Alan and I simply didn't as much. Now go back to throwing keystrokes at the internet.
It's sad to see the state into which treasured author Jack London has sunk.
you crushed someone's soul so early this morning, Alan!
YEAH! SCREW ALAN AND HIS SAYING STUFF ABOUT MOVIES.
I completely agree with Jack. Alan, you will never get to star in a 100 million dollar adaptation of a comic book.
If possible, I would like an audio recording of jack's comment
Man I was bummed this couldn't be our first comic/ co-review. But now I'm afraid if I work with you I might be attacked on the streets. I don't think I've ever heard someone defend Iron Man in such an angry manner and I go to comic book stores regular like.
L0L...most critics agree that this movie is sub-par.
Dear Mr. Zilberman I would like you to star in my next movie it is about a musical submarine that discovers a universe inside of the bottom of the ocean where naked mermaids ride seahorses and fight oil companies. You can play the white guy.
Let me know asap!
alan zilberman HAS AMBISHON!
"Character development. And this film alone establishes, like 3 or 4 different movies."
Yes...3 or 4 different and most likely terrible movies.
Let's be real, the set-up for this movie was great...Iron-Man left people ready a rabid for a sequel. Alan AND A HOST OF OTHER CRITICS believe that this opportunity was not carried forward very well and because most people are saying the production was "Meh" ironman 2 will be remembered as...just another sequel.
"i hate it when people don't like the same things as me"
Movie reviews are serious business
When one thinks “How did he know Stark would hop in a Formula 1 car?”
Well, as there is some speculation that Stark taking over for qualifying driver DeFilipo was a last minute decision, however there are clues that Tony always intended to drive the car himself and only had an alternate driver due to his poisoning from palladium toxicity. The supporting evidence is such a gadget, a SimCraft APEX sc830 racing simulator prominent in Stark's workshop.
Obviously some of this supporting plot was dropped, like the scene where Tony and Rhodey fly back from Washington together and Tony confirms his intentions to race the car himself. Or the pre-race interview from some of the IM2 trailer videos.