The Avengers. 9.5/10.
What do you think of my thoughts and Lowlander's thoughts on The Avengers, topper?
My tumblr page, yo: http://heyitsmario.tumblr.com/
So I just watched Iron Man 2.
It was... good.
Unfortunately good means the worst of the Marvel revivals that I've watched (Hulk, Captain America, Avengers), though.
The movie felt like it had a long series of iffy character development tied with some really really boring setpieces (the car race was a really really lame action scene) and a really boring villain to boot. Yeah, if your father's life was ruined by some bloke's father, making it your mission to destroy said bloke isn't really an interesting reason to be a villain. Hell, I wished it focused more on the Hammer guy because he had the potential to be way more interesting than the main villain. But nope! I would say Iron Man 2 suffers one of the same problems that The Avengers had in that none of the enemies really felt... dangerous. The main villain destroyed like 3 cars and blew up his stupid drones which killed each other more than it did other people. I don't understand the trend of having ineffective villains that both Iron Man 2 and The Avengers had. At least in The Avengers you saw the marshmallow stuffed mooks destroy New York City (then again, what doesn't destroy NYC these days?). But when it comes to fighting the super hero in question, they collapse faster than a house of cards in an earthquake. For example, a lot of what made The Dark Knight special was how unforgettable the villain was. The Joker WAS dangerous and never let the audience forget it. Hell, the effects that he had on both Batman and the supporting cast are shocking as he tries to show the true destruction of morality. But both Loki and that Russian dude gave me no sense that they posed a serious threat to the well being of the public or of the main character. At least Loki had a goal besides "make Iron Man cry". Oh well.
Besides the puny villain, I also felt that the way that Stark told his love interest that he was dying was just so... wrong. The scene could have been done A MILLION OTHER WAYS, but NOPE! It was in passing. Ugh. Especially in a movie that focuses on his character development as he struggles to survive (which the movie doesn't focus on as much as it should have), it was ended on a really really flat note.
Although these gripes are really big, I liked the movie. It had a likable protagonist and the little subtle touches of the movie's third act were incredibly enjoyable to watch. The action scenes were nice and although they were hampered by weak enemies, I can't say that Iron Man has boring ways of dealing with them. In fact, the nice cool kills that he does is a plus since his technological suit always has new tricks.
So yeah, Iron Man 2. It was good.
I would say:
Captain America: The First Avenger
The Avengers
The Incredible Hulk
Iron Man 2
My tumblr page, yo: http://heyitsmario.tumblr.com/
Forget potential. He was way more interesting than the main villain. If for no other reason than Sam Rockwell seemed to actually give a damn about the role (his sales pitch for the Ex-Wife shell is one of my favorite scenes in the movie). They could have used a cardboard cutout of Vanko, the way Mickey Rourke mailed in his performance.
I never saw Thor, and while I'm not really a fan of super hero movies in general, I'd say Captain America is much better than Hulk.
Iron Man 2 was easily the worst of the superhero movies, though. I'll have to check out Avengers sometime.
Blow yer' harmonica son