Review: Iron Man 2

I was a pretty big fan of 2008’s “Iron Man,” thinking that director Jon Favreau did an excellent job casting Robert Downey, Jr. to play the embattled, and frequently intoxicated, Tony Stark (and, thusly, Iron Man himself). Any good super-hero movie is only as good as the leading actor, and Downey was practically born to play this role.

This movie picks up almost immediately after the previous one, with Tony Stark trying to maintain control over his creation (the Iron Man suit) as the U.S. government seeks to take it and use it with their own soldiers. At the same time, Tony’s being attacked (literally and figuratively) with the movie’s main baddie, Whiplash (played by Mickey Rourke), and chief industrial competitor, Justin Hammer (played by Sam Rockwell). While the variety of “enemies” that Iron Man is fighting could get confusing, as it has in some previous movies (read: “Spider-Man 3“), the writing navigates the complications with relative ease, crafting a half-way decent story that doesn’t just keep hitting you with the same ol’ problems.

The acting is pretty good, overall, although Scarlett Johansson seemed to “phone it in” to some extent. I know she’s not exactly a brilliant actress, but she’s done better in other movies than she does in this one. Sam Rockwell plays his role nearly as well as Robert Downy, Jr. does his, and Gwyneth Paltrow gets a bit more screen time this time around. Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard, and honestly, I thought he did a better job. Howard is a bit more convincing as an Air Force colonel, but I think Cheadle is a better actor. Whatev.

In the end, the movie was still great, but I don’t think it was as good as the first one. I tend to compare super hero sequels to “Spider-Man” and “Spider-Man 2,” where the former introduced the hero and the situation, and in the sequel, the hero comes to terms with their new existence and all the complications that go with it. “Iron Man 2” does this, however it seems to happen with heavy focus on Tony Stark, moreso than Iron Man. When I go see these movies, I want a pretty decent amount of screen time with the hero the movie’s named after, rather than the alter ego. Don’t get me wrong, the “secret identity” is a very important piece, but if I paid to see a movie about Bruce Wayne, I’d expect it to be titled “Bruce Wayne” and not “The Dark Knight.” Essentially, while the action was good and the effects were good, I wanted more sequences with Iron Man as, really, there was only the climactic ending where we saw Stark in his suit for more than 3 minutes. He appears as Iron Man a few other times, but not to a great extent.

Overall, I’m glad I saw it and I enjoyed it greatly, and I’ll probably pick up the DVD when it comes out. However, in the annals of super hero sequels, I think “X-Men 2,” “Spider-Man 2” and “The Dark Knight” were better follow-ups.