Iron Man 2

[Twitchin Kitten]

0

We watched this last night and I loved it.

Anyone else?

What sucked was having to look at Mickey Rourke's destroyed face.

[Twilla]

0

He needs to grow a full beard and cover some of that mess up.

I haven't seen the movie... I had read so many fawning fan boy reviews about the first one that I was pretty disappointed with it after all the hoopla. I'm not really interested in seeing the second one.

[twisteroo]

0

I might have to order it on netflix. I think I saw the first one.

[LKTraz]

0

I liked the first one but thy DID depart from the original comic storyline. Nothing terribly important to the flow of it but just something i noticed. I want to give 2 a good look.

[Twitchin Kitten]

0

Matt said the same thing but Stan Lee had his hand in it all and wouldn't let anything be produced that wasn't "Kosher" with him and his story.

I figure they had to. The story is old, decades old and to consolidate that into a movie that makes sense without the need for say, 21 sequels, it worked.

[LKTraz]

0

Well like I said........nothing that was important to the flow. I figured Stan looked to make the change so as to make the story a bit more relevant to the times. The change was that originally Tony Stark was becoming increasingly disabled by the suit and thus becoming more dependent on it just to survive. Now he is dependent on the power source with or WITHOUT the suit and the suit is also dependent on the same source. Not a big change.

Basically in the comics Tony continued to be Iron Man because he HAD to. Now he is because he WANTS to.

Honestly, only those familiar with the original comic would notice. I read Iron Man when I was a kid so I picked up on it.

[vtxcandyred]

0

We bought the movie and as yet its still in the box unopened. I'm a fan of Ironman and used to read all the comic books. I remember when I was a kid, I'd go the the grocery store and where the comic book rack was, was a magazine rack and the bottom of it was empty. I would go there, mainly during the winter months, and grab the comics and crawl under the rack and scoot to the back and read the comics. I could be there for hours. I rarely if ever bought comics.

[Twilla]

0

I lied, I watched this last night since amazon.com was renting it for only 99 cents. Scarlett Johanson (sp, don't care enough to check) was surprisingly good as an action star, Mickey Rourke looks a LOT better in motion than he does in photos (he's still jacked up, but still kind of sexy in a creepy way), RDJ is always good but man oh man, do I want to bitch slap Gwyneth Paltrow. I don't like her anyway but her character is REALLY FUCKING ANNOYING! I think they under-utilized Sam Rockwell, he's a wonderful actor that had a very flat character to work with. Ditto with Don Cheadle. Kind of fun but I still don't understand the mindless fan hysteria when these movies get released.

[Twitchin Kitten]

0

Gwyneth Paltrow was a pain. Matt said they really twisted the character up with this whole love for Tony Stark too. He claims it wasn't in the comics at all nor even implied.

I like Scarlett Johansson (I think that's the spelling but ain't sure either) in most of the films I've seen her in so far. I can't agree with you on Mickey Rourke he plain destroyed his pretty face. I find it very disturbing to look at him at all. His face is now perfect to play any disfigured monster and he saves them the time to use any make up on him, he's pre-made up already.

[Twilla]

0

He definitely fucked up his face from the boxing and subsequent plastic surgery, but you gotta take into account that his youthful good looks wouldn't still be around at this point in his life anyway. Look at Val Kilmer and Alec Baldwin.