"Iron Man 2" Review
The ever so obnoxious, self-centered, narcissistic Tony Stark is back! If you're unfamiliar with the first movie, "Iron Man," Tony Stark (played by Robert Downing Jr.) is the head of Stark Industries, which is basically a weapons manufacturing company. Now Stark may be a genius, but he doesn't quite have a clue. Luckily though, he has a superb assistant who goes by the name of
"Pepper" Potts! Pepper, who is played by Gwyneth Paltrow, gets a promotion in the new movie and becomes the CEO of Stark Industries. Stepping in as Tony's new assistant is none other than Scarlett Johansson. So if Tony is no longer the CEO of Stark Industries, and he has a personal assistant to wait on him 24/7, what exactly does he do? Oh wait, he's Iron Man! This time around Iron Man has himself a new foe to fight off, Whiplash aka Mickey Rourke! But he doesn't have to do it alone. That's where his friend "Rohdey," or as some like to call him, War Machine, steps in. Oh, and they also have some help from Black Widow, who is really Tony's assistant, who is really Scarlett Johansson. So does that make any sense? Well for fans of the "Iron Man" series or comic book junkies, it might! But as for the average movie goer, not so much! Now I wasn't a huge fan of the first "Iron Man," but after seeing this one I immediately had to go back and watch it again. Why did I do that? Well it wasn't because this new one was so good that I decided to give the first one another try... I just wanted to compare the two! So what is my comparison? Well, I really don't think I liked one of them better than the other, but there were certain elements that I liked better in each one. I felt like the first "Iron Man" did a better job of keeping the movie's humor consistent, while "Iron Man 2" did a better job of keeping the movie's action sequences consistent! My biggest problem with the first "Iron Man" was that it didn't keep my attention as good as "Iron Man 2" did. In the first film we were just kind of being introduced to Iron Man and th
e whole film led up to on big action scene. But with the new one, there were about 3 or 4 action scenes, which still wasn't enough to satisfy me. I mean, I left wanting more, and when I say that, I don't mean it was so good that I could have watched another hour or so... I just felt like it wasn't enough, and maybe I was the only one that felt like that because apparently I was the only one who wasn't crazy about the first movie!
As for the actors... Robert Downing Jr. was of course great! I think he does a really good job in the role of Tony Stark. I don't think his smart-aleck attitude got as many laughs as I though it would. Gwyneth Paltrow is also very good in the role of "Pepper" Potts! I don't want to spoil anything for anyone, but there was actually a moment in the movie when I thought we were going to lose "Pepper!" Mickey Rourke nailed that Russian accent! I was really happy to see him in this film because he and Robert both have really made comebacks in their careers. Scarlett Johansson actually surprised me! I was a little disappointed that she didn't get very much screen time as Black Widow, but maybe they'll include her more in "Iron Man 3," if they make an "Iron Man 3," which I'm sure they will! Don Cheadle stepped in for Terrance Howard to play "Rohdey" in the movie, and I would have to say that he did a good job! Was he as good as Terrance? Well I don't know! I don't think he played the role exactly like Terrance did, but he still managed to give a decent performance. Oh, and let's not forget Samuel L. Jackson! He plays this guy who is trying to recruit Iron Man to join the Avengers, which is another comic book series that's kind of a collaboration of superheroes. But anyway, yeah, it's Samuel L. Jackson! So do I recommend this movie? Well it wasn't enough to satisfy mean, but I think it's still worth checking out! Be sure and stay after the credits, and keep your eyes open for Stan Lee!
"Pepper" Potts! Pepper, who is played by Gwyneth Paltrow, gets a promotion in the new movie and becomes the CEO of Stark Industries. Stepping in as Tony's new assistant is none other than Scarlett Johansson. So if Tony is no longer the CEO of Stark Industries, and he has a personal assistant to wait on him 24/7, what exactly does he do? Oh wait, he's Iron Man! This time around Iron Man has himself a new foe to fight off, Whiplash aka Mickey Rourke! But he doesn't have to do it alone. That's where his friend "Rohdey," or as some like to call him, War Machine, steps in. Oh, and they also have some help from Black Widow, who is really Tony's assistant, who is really Scarlett Johansson. So does that make any sense? Well for fans of the "Iron Man" series or comic book junkies, it might! But as for the average movie goer, not so much! Now I wasn't a huge fan of the first "Iron Man," but after seeing this one I immediately had to go back and watch it again. Why did I do that? Well it wasn't because this new one was so good that I decided to give the first one another try... I just wanted to compare the two! So what is my comparison? Well, I really don't think I liked one of them better than the other, but there were certain elements that I liked better in each one. I felt like the first "Iron Man" did a better job of keeping the movie's humor consistent, while "Iron Man 2" did a better job of keeping the movie's action sequences consistent! My biggest problem with the first "Iron Man" was that it didn't keep my attention as good as "Iron Man 2" did. In the first film we were just kind of being introduced to Iron Man and th
e whole film led up to on big action scene. But with the new one, there were about 3 or 4 action scenes, which still wasn't enough to satisfy me. I mean, I left wanting more, and when I say that, I don't mean it was so good that I could have watched another hour or so... I just felt like it wasn't enough, and maybe I was the only one that felt like that because apparently I was the only one who wasn't crazy about the first movie!As for the actors... Robert Downing Jr. was of course great! I think he does a really good job in the role of Tony Stark. I don't think his smart-aleck attitude got as many laughs as I though it would. Gwyneth Paltrow is also very good in the role of "Pepper" Potts! I don't want to spoil anything for anyone, but there was actually a moment in the movie when I thought we were going to lose "Pepper!" Mickey Rourke nailed that Russian accent! I was really happy to see him in this film because he and Robert both have really made comebacks in their careers. Scarlett Johansson actually surprised me! I was a little disappointed that she didn't get very much screen time as Black Widow, but maybe they'll include her more in "Iron Man 3," if they make an "Iron Man 3," which I'm sure they will! Don Cheadle stepped in for Terrance Howard to play "Rohdey" in the movie, and I would have to say that he did a good job! Was he as good as Terrance? Well I don't know! I don't think he played the role exactly like Terrance did, but he still managed to give a decent performance. Oh, and let's not forget Samuel L. Jackson! He plays this guy who is trying to recruit Iron Man to join the Avengers, which is another comic book series that's kind of a collaboration of superheroes. But anyway, yeah, it's Samuel L. Jackson! So do I recommend this movie? Well it wasn't enough to satisfy mean, but I think it's still worth checking out! Be sure and stay after the credits, and keep your eyes open for Stan Lee!
Help us pick a new segment!
We need help picking our new summer segment! Which of the following would you like to see:
Let us know by leaving us a comment on our Facebook page! The new segment will premiere at the end of May!
Let us know by leaving us a comment on our Facebook page! The new segment will premiere at the end of May!
"Beauty and the Briefcase"
So I just watched the new ABC Family original movie, "Beauty and the Briefcase" starring my girl, Hilary Duff! Yes, I'm a really big fan of Hilary, but I have to look past my obsession and critique this movie for what it is... a chick flick! Duff plays Lane Daniels, a fashion journalist who is working undercover to write an article about dating businessmen. I was confused by her portrayal of Lane, for I couldn't decide if she was ditsy or just desperate! To some she might come over as desperate since she has a list of characteristics that her "magic man" must have. However, the editor of "Cosmo" magazine loves the idea and gives Lane a chance to write a cover story. The catch being that Lane has to date men only in the workplace. At first the task seems easy because there are "so many men" in the business world. Unfortunately, the guy that has all of the characteristics on Lane's list isn't a businessman! Okay, so you see where this is going. Well maybe not! Just remember that things are not always as they seem. I definitely recommend this movie to women, especially women that like movies with shirtless men and sex talk! I guess the best part of the movie for me was the suspense of finding out which guy she would end up with. Oh, did I mention there's a twist or two! Sadly though, it was predictable that there would be a twist. Anyway, this movie is a fun chick flick and should satisfy most Hilary Duff fans. Although I would have to recommend that you check out her last movie, "According to Greta" before watching this one. She can act, I promise!
"Amish Grace"
I just finished watching the fantastic new Lifetime Movie Network TV movie, "Amish Grace." It's a film based on the true story of how a gunman took the lives of five Amish school girls in the peaceful Amish community of Nickel Mines. The movie stars Kimberly Williams-Paisley, who many will rec
ognize from the "Father of the Bride" films. She plays Ida Graber, one of the Amish mothers who tragically loses her daughter in the unexp
ected schoolhouse shooting. Though her performance is strong,Tammy Blanchard's portrayal of Amy Roberts' is truly the performance that stands out. She plays the wife of the gunman, Charles Roberts, and there is just enough grief and confusion in her face that sums up the whole character. My favorite aspects of the film were the reporters and how they handled the tragedy. The movie was actually adapted from a book, which was of course adapted from the true story that occurred only a few years ago. So why was such a good movie only made for television? In my opinion, a theatrical film would have focused on the wrong parts of the story. However, with this TV release, the focus was on the struggle of how the Amish community forgave Charles Roberts, despite the pain he caused and the sin he committed. It's definitely worth checking out if you like a good movie adaptation of a true story!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)