Iron Man 2 Spoilers Discussion

Published 4 years ago by

iron man 2 spoilers Iron Man 2 Spoilers Discussion

While we have an Iron Man 2 review where you can leave comments, this is the place where you can discuss spoilers about the movie without worrying about ruining it for people who haven’t seen it yet.

If you’re posting comments here, assume that anyone in the conversation has seen the movie – if you haven’t seen the movie, I would recommend you don’t read these comments here until you have. icon smile Iron Man 2 Spoilers Discussion

Discuss away!

[poll id="42"]

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: iron man 2

133 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. Ok, saw the movie last night and I have to agree, the first was better. I like the little scenes with Caps shield and Mjonir but the shield seemed partially disassembled. I wonder why.

    The final fight definately could have been longer, and hopefully will on the DVD. I also felt the film lingering in it’s second act but I do realize it was building the story.

    I did like the action, especially the way Tony dispenses the drones. I had to do a Keanu WOAH! when he did that. :-)

  2. Too Much Schmaltzy dialogue. As if everyone in the film but Rourke had hyperkinetic coke tongue in some Greenwhich village coffee house. Way too much to the point it was extremely annoying. Who f-ing wrote this? An actor named Justin Theroux. They gave a $200 mil budget to first time writer who makes his money as an actor??? Are you f-ing kidding me? It wasn’t cute or charming or suave. It was obnoxious. Fav should have known better.This pissed me off more than anything else about the film.

    Far too much visual S&M. They got a bigger effects budget this time and they spent every f-ing nickle for the short attention span, riddlin, Monster energy, Axe body spray, dummy crowd. The Monocco scene with the grand prix cars flying through the air, exploding like mosquitoes was over the top. The first film was faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more effective with less.

    Rourke was very good as he always is and has been but combining the two characters of Whiplash and the Crimson Dynamo (or Titanium man) was hokey. He should have been the Dynamo. Whiplash was an excuse to show off CGI whips and that is all. Wouldn’t it have been far more effective to have Hammer showing off the Dynamo at the Expo and then having the Dynamo go apeshit on the crowds?? Drones are a bit lame as the film’s major villian. You never got the idea that they were actually a threat and the film was restricted by it’s rating to show the drones truely hurting people in a savage way. Tony and Rhodey teaming up to beat a more powerful Crimson Dynamo in a battle lasting a good ten minutes would have been more intriguing than the gay drones flying around and exploding with a 3 minute Rourke Whiplash fight tacked on the end

    Gary Shandling?????????????? WTF happened to his head? He was never Tom Selleck but good lord! He made a good smarmy a&shole Chuck Schumer type in the film but he sure was disturbing to look at. Yikes!

    All in all you would think I loathed it. I didn’t but I loathed the fact that it was a misfire after the first film. The first film worked on every level. This one failed on critical levels, especially the obnoxious coke head paced dialogue.

    I hope it get’s on track with the third and that they hire a good writer with some gravitas.

    • You wrote all that while I was writing my “thesis”. I agree about the writer — see my post.

    • You’re absolutely right about Shandling’s head…. it’s like he went in for plastic surgery but all they did was fill up his face with air.

  3. I think the first reason for “disappointment” with IM2 is that they sort of abandoned the “keeping it real” feel of the movies. IM1 was definitely grounded — not so much in reality but in the realm of possibilty — like Favreau wanted.

    IM2 — to paraphrase Vic’s review — you had to suspend your beliefs (on more than one occasion) to accept what was happening. It’s at that point you remind yourself “hey, this *is* based on a comic book” in order to accept what is happening. You didn’t have that feeling with the first movie. It feels like reality is no longer obtainable and the realm of possibility is really being stretched in IM2.

    But, given that Thor is on his way it was kind of pointless to maintain that sense of “realism” anymore. Future suspense of belief will be required.

    If I seriously went “nit-picky” on IM2, I could write a brochure on things that hurt the movie. But, they aren’t so much major things as simply just small things adding up: The synthesis of an element, Whiplash deflecting repulsor beams on the race track, Vanko getting rammed into the rail without so much suffering an injury (like, whiplash?), the precision it would take for two repulsor beams(i.e. laser beams) to hit hit-on, the fact that Tony had the only F1 racer that didn’t explode into a fireball on impact like all the all the other cars did, seemingly EVERYONE had an access code to Tony’s shop, the Black Widow looking at Tony’s chestpiece on Ivan’s computer and there are more but… I digress. I guess I did write my “brochure”. Now, I bet most if all the things I mentioned can be explained but, (and this brings me to my second reason) it means the writer left a lot of things to be figured out by the viewer. Which, to me, is a cardinal sin in storytelling. Sure, one or two things to make the viewer feel clever so when they figure something out it gives them a sense of co-ownership of the movie but more than that and the viewer starts to miss “what’s now” because they are still thinking about “what just happened”. Nothing against Theroux but I hope he doesn’t write IM3. This was only his second script to be made into a movie — first being Tropic Thunder.

    All in all, I DID like the movie. I give it 4/5 in my book (cast and production values/fx/action were great) but in the poll above I only voted “Good”.

    In summary, the two biggest things against the movie:
    1. We’ve abandoned the sense of realism that the first movie championed.
    2. The writer left too many things to the viewer to figure out.

    • I miss the edit button. Meant to say how two repulsor beams would hit HEAD-on. Sorry…

      • Yeah, I miss the edit button too, but it’s becoming healthy for me to take what I say as-is.

        That aspect of realism is something I didn’t find myself constantly thinking about. They were definitely a stretch, sure, but I think the film flowed with it pretty well. As far as how they handled superhero science fiction, I think they did it about as well as in Spider Man 2: some definitely far-out stuff, but they were handled well enough.

        Like you and others said, Thor is going to blow the doors wide open with that. If Kenneth Branagh can sell it and still have the reality of it being in “the real world”–and if The Avengers can work Thor in well–then I’m half-inclined to say Marvel Studios will have done a superhero movie achievement there: fantastical elements (why do I feel as though I made a pun there in light of IM2 . . .) that are still taken seriously.

        Kind of the other end of the spectrum in how Nolan used Batman–not to start an argument there! Nolan would be the blueprint in how to take a superhero and recontextualize him/her as limited by normal human constraints. Whereas Marvel would be the blueprint on how to take fantastic comic book superhero fiction and make it acceptable.

  4. @Emily says:
    “The fight between
    Tony and Rhodey laid out the plot for the rest of the movie.”

    I disagree, the plot was laid out 10min into the film, right after the Senate hearing.

    The fight between Stark and Rhodey reminded me of the 10 minute long fight in “They Live” when Piper tells Keith David to put on the glasses!
    Except in IM2 its take off the suit…

    Check out “They Live” and “Robo Cop2″ Emily. ;-)

  5. How the hell did Vanko bust through Justin Hammer’s (presumably crack) encrypted password protected computer in seconds, even if it _was_ crappy software? There was not enough Iron Man in this movie and although I enjoyed the (telegraphed) talk from Howard Stark to his son in the film-in-a-film about how he was his best invention, the complete dropping of the Crimson Dynamo to a Soviet-era defector that worked with HS on arc reactor technology was a real disappointment. For those of us that are familiar with the comics, losing Crimson Dynamo from the Iron Man universe is on par with “Where the hell is Mysterio?” in Spider-Man (who should have showed up LONG before Venom, who I never liked). He is the MAJOR nemesis for Iron Man and if the best we can get is his son as Whiplash (and let’s give Mickey Rourke props for doing the best he could with what he was given in that role), I fear for the rest of the franchise.
    The reason Theroux was given writing credits (I imagine) was to spare expense for the stars, and let’s face it, with Gwyneth Paltrow, Sam Rockwell, Don Cheadle, Samuel L. Jackson, Downey, Scarlett Johansson and the rest of the bunch, the casting budget alone must have been ginormous, not to mention all the CGI–if you stuck around for the credits you saw there were a dozen FX houses hired for this sequel–requiring the requisite massive box office receipts (which may explain why it opened overseas first). This movie needed a serious rewrite or script doctor and I can think of several that would have saved money on the budget and cut down on the number of paychecks needed to make the whole thing work better.
    In all, as a fan of Iron Man since the early 80s, I’m disappointed that Favreau didn’t pass on this script and go with a better writer, or at least pen the rewrite himself. This film could have been a hell of a lot better and even if they had just followed some of the storylines of many of the writers of the comix they thanked in the credits, it would have been.

    By the way, are ANY superheroes going to fight sentinels at any point, or are we going to let some of the best-conceived villains in the Marvel universe be ignored as well as Crimson Dynamo?

    • The casting budget couldn’t be too big. SLJ didn’t have a ton of screen time. As for Theroux, who knows how he really got the job.

      The Crimson Dynamo is more of a soviet military and cold-war era soldier. He wouldn’t work too well in the modern story setting. I agree though, I would have liked Crimson Dynamo outright in the movie as well…

      The Anton/Ivan angle was meant to parallel Howard and Tony’s theme: Legacy. “Sins of the Father…” Anton’s dying comment to Ivan was “That should be you…” after seeing the news story of Tony.

      Sentinels are an X-Men/FOX property. That was one of my major disappointments with X3 – NO sentinels. Along with, well, everything else about X3…

      • Actually there was a Sentinel in X-men 3 :)

  6. Ironman was a good movie! The best part is after the final credits roll and we see a sneak peak of THOR!! Roll on avengers it’s gonna be amazing!!!!

  7. Nobody else has mentioned this, but when Tony was unpacking the suitcase left behind by his father (and given to him by Nick Fury) you can clearly see a Captain America comic amongst the contents as he unpacks it. I am quite sure it was issue #1.

  8. Just got out of my screening and gotta write someting:

    The good:

    - most amazing entry in supermovie history! (thanks to AC/DC)
    - Visualy bad ass action bombs
    - Don Cheadle is a very good Rhodey. At least i like him more then Howard
    - Scarlett is hot and the pepper spray was the most amazing fightscene finish in history of fightscene finishmoves!!!
    - the utility of Caps Shield just got uped!
    - i ultimatly felt entertained by the movie so: mission accomplished

    The Bad:

    - the paladium poison story kicked in way to early and realy made me not enjoy tony starks cockieness as in the first movie. wich also kinda leads to my second complain
    - It ripped away the fun part of the first dialogs between him and Pepper. I realy enjoyed the chemistry between those two in the first movie but they didn’t realy get the chance to show more of that becouse everytime they talked one side seemed to forced.
    - Nick Furys entry was …meeh! So i know i am a geek. i know the comics. I’ve seen the first movie till the bitter end to actualy know who sam jackson is supposed to be. But here…. he just shows up and the whole audience is supposed to know wtf is going on? realy? u could have done better. Show him in a corner of the courtroom as a silent observer or something….
    - Thors Hammer looks plastic =(
    - oh and the german dub wasn’t that great… but yeah thats just a local complain.

    So yeah it is not as good as the first one but still i enjoed it and i looks forward to more marvel movies.

  9. Can anyone explain how Rhodey powered up the Mark 3 suit. Don’t the suits run on Starks reactor in his chest???

    Lol, Lord Garth. I hated the drones as well.

    • It had a power source within it. The question is, why did Tony make the arc reactor for a suit he was never going to wear again? My guess: It was one of the “tries” to create a more stable power source for his chest. When it didn’t work out, he stored it in the armor.

      While we are at it, why did Tony rebuild the Mark I suit? Stane smashed it in the end of IM1 when he started chasing Pepper.

      • Your wrong there. Mark 1 is the tin can version of Iron Man’s armor. Its the one he used to escape from the mountains of afghanistan, in the first movie. What your referring to is Mark 3 because Mark 2 is the silver one that had “icing problems”. Tony probably rebuilt the Mark 3 in between the 6 month gap of iron man 1 and 2. Remember in between those 6 months he improved America’s security as said on his entrance to the expo and also at the court hearings (where they wanted to have the suit for the defense department). So in those 6 months he probably utilized a new rebuilt mark 3 going to missions and stuff. The Mark 5 (which is the suitcase armor) was probably made later, plus the suitcase armor was weaker. The Mark 6 (the one with the triangular chest piece) was later invented in Iron Man 2. So the reason he rebuilt the Mark 3 was that he needed something to use in those 6 months.

        • I know what I am talking about… Look very closely at the scene where the Iron Monger suit is built. The Mark1 is reassembled there. When Stane loads up the Iron Monger suit and starts to chase Pepper, he smashes the Mark1 turning the corner before while taking out a couple of SHIELD agents. It is a “blink and you miss it” moment though.

          • hes a narcissist with OCD, that’s why he rebuilt it.

          • Oh, that one, sorry I thought wrong. Yeah I remember that. Well it probably had some sentimental value to tony thats why he rebuilt it…Oh but still it wouldn’t make any sense because in another scene, he said to pepper “I’ve been called many things, pepper, nostalgic isn’t one of them” (this is when pepper asked tony if he wanted to keep the old repulsor thingy which eventually became the “proof that tony stark has a heart” display) This shows tony as not a “keep things” kind of guy. What I think is, he probably learned the value of keeping things so he had it rebuilt and had it on display among the other suits (which looked kind of cool).

            Or the editors totally forgot about that scene.

        • The mark 3 is still seen in the movie. If you look at the shot in the lab, you can see the mark 1 Tin Man, Mark 2 silver, Mark 3 Used whne he battled Stane, and the Mark 4 his current suit. The 5 was the suitcase and 6 was the new rebuild.
          http://ironmanmovie.marvel.com/#/gallery

  10. i completely agree with steven zipper response , but dude like you said about thor, ofcourse they would not through in so much realism as the first ironman movie, thor i s more magical then realism. But i’ll tell you one thing, they really f***k up crimson dynamom. i having some weird feeling the avengers is not going to live up to its hype.

  11. I really enjoyed the movie, but Rhodey was a total jerk until near the end. I don’t see why they replaced Terrence Howard still, but Don Cheadle did a decent enough job. I really loved Sam Rockwell! He definitely gave RDJ a run for his money onscreen! He was hilarious.

    Also… HOLY AVENGERS REFERENCES! I loved Cap’s shield and the scene after the credits (of course!) and I thought it really added to the movie.

    I loved DJ AM’s cameo, but Stan Lee’s cameo was waaaay too brief and too close to the beginning of the movie to really be memorable.

    Jon Favreau was enjoyable being IN the movie instead of only directing. I loved his little fight sequence while Scarlett Johansson looked incredibly sexy during hers!

    Samuel L. Jackson is awesome as Nick Fury, and of course Robert Downey Jr. shines as Tony Stark. I’m glad there wasn’t too much of Iron Man in it because I really like Tony.

    The one thing I didn’t understand is WHY DIDN’T HE ACCEPT THE AVENGERS OFFER? Won’t they mean we’ll need a third Iron Man installment before “The Avengers” or will RDJ need to make an appearance in Thor or Captain America? Maybe they could even just have Nick Fury mention that he finally accepted?

    Overall I give it a 5 out of 5! I really had a good time and was geeking out with multiple nerdgasms throughout haha

    • From what I heard, Terrence Howard felt he wasn’t getting enough money to play Rhodey, so he left Iron Man and thus had to be replaced. Don Cheadle did the role in such a way that I forgot all about Howard by his third or fourth appearance!

      And according to a recent interview with Favreau, chances are there is going to be a third Iron Man, since he stated “You have to do the Mandarin”. Can’t wait to see who they cast for that!

    • Actually, it has already been said that Howard Stark will play a role in the upcoming Captain America movie, so I think it is safe to say that Tony will also be appearing at some point. Also, he turned it down because he was recommended as nothing more than a consultant for Iron Man, not Iron Man himself. I think that means that they are more interested in Rhodey for the time being, but that wouldn’t really make a whole lot of sense. Anyway, Samuel L/ Jackson is already slated to be in Thor and Captain America as Nick Fury again, and the fact that Tony showed up in The Incredible Hulk just means that almost all of the original Avengers are done with their movies. In fact, Edgar Wright has been rumored to be heading an Ant-Man movie fairly soon. I think they will finish Thor, Cap, and Iron Man 3 (maybe Ant-man as well) and then straight on to the Avengers.

  12. I keep hearing they messed some stuff up in this movie, I know they didn’t give Black Widow her accent. I’m new to the comic book world, but I keep hearing that the only Russian villain is Crimson Dynamo. Anyways, I thought the movie was awesome. I really need to do more research into these things.

    • They basically made Crimson Dynamo Whiplash. Russian Villain/Scientist with Whips. They combined the two characters, which I did enjoy.

  13. I caught it on iMax and while I loved the movie it did feel like it missed its target in a few ways. I felt that the climactic battle at the end ended in a very anti-climatic way. I loved how Vanko (Rourke) was man handling both Iron Man and War Machine and opening up a can of Whip ass on them. However it ended, well I hate to say it, poorly. I love what Faverau has done with the Iron Man franchise but the way thee fight scene with Vanko ended felt like as if the Director realized, 10 minutes into the scene that they only had allotted 11 minutes and so they had to turn the tables on Vanko and ended it quickly; enter the very lame dual repulsor collision blast gimmick.

    So while I give the movie two thumbs up I also annotate that with a pinky finger down and heres’ why:

    Climatic Battle Sceene at the end between Iron Man/War Machine and Vanko in a Super Suit ended very anti-climatically. The fight scene between Iron Man/War Machine and the drones was far better.

    Monte Carol stole the show – Everything about the Monte Carlo scene was top notch from the one lines (‘she did a spread on Tony just last year ‘Pepper Potts to Justin Hammer in response to Hammers comment about the chick doing a spread on him in her magazine), to the action and even the story. There also was the slightly geek-cool-overload with the suitcase armor. If this were a romantic chick flick the suitcase armor scene would be the equivalent of the knight charging in to save the damsel in distress and kisses her as she lifts one leg.

    IM2 also gets a wink-wink and a Nudge – Nudge for the Black Widow in Lingerie pics scene. Still trying to find copies of those on the web..

  14. BTW – Did anyone pick up on the rather odd fact that the last time we see Vanko when he has initiated the self-destruct, that :

    A) We never saw Vanko die; not even just a quick glimpse back at him lying there just a second or 2 before the explosion
    B) The cameras left that scene and Vanko with more than enough time for something to happen like Vanko getting up and leaving before his suit went off?

    Did you also notice how the last scene with Hammer had him going off like as if he was promising to see Pepper Potts again and soon>

    I may be wrong but I don’t think the Vanko character died in the end. I believe we may see him (and ideally portrayed by Rourke) again and maybe even with Hammer. Perhaps Vanko ill become a part of whatever represents the Bad Guys in the AVENGERS film??

  15. Here’s the major reasons why Iron Man 2 was no where near as good as Iron Man 1.

    STORY
    The motivations were weak. Too many characters. Bumbling villians. Too many subplots. No real threats. Poor character arcs. Weak love story. Forced drama. Why? Different writers used. They used the Tropic Thunder writers making this too much a comedy and failing in the dramatic portion of this film.

    MUSIC
    Odd tempos and scores that just didn’t fit the mood and didn’t feel epic. Why? Different composer. Sucked donkey balls.

    ACTION SEQUENCES
    All of them ended abruptly with no real peril. Night time action sequences was extremely difficult to follow as well. New board artist Gendy Tartakovsky was brought in to “design” these action sequences who has never done a live action film. He’s good with 2D cartoons for sure. Gendy brought in his team. I wonder where the original Iron Man 1 team was?

    WAR MACHINE
    Zero chemistry between Stark and Rhodey. Was not funny like the first. No memorable moments Why? Rhodey was re-casted with Don Cheadle.

    TONY STARK
    Weak. Why? Roberty Downey Jr. was too much himself in this film. He broke out of character too much. It was like Tony Stark hired Downey Jr. to fill in for him in his absence just because they look the same.

    JOHN FAVREAU
    Why did he expand his character in this film? Why did he give himself so much screen time? It completely hurt the film and changed the tone everytime he was on. If you watch the first one he was just a minor character that was played straight. Here he had to be his “funny” self. They should’ve left his antics on the editing room floor.

    IMAX
    Totally not worth seeing in IMAX. Image was soft. Obviously blown up from a smaller resolution.

    So all of this means Iron Man 2 is no where near as fun to watch as Iron Man 1 nor does it have the repeat viewing factor. I never want to see this film again.

    • Happy Hogan is a fantastic character.

  16. Simultaneously too much going on and very little actually happening. People jabbering pointlessly over the top of one another; action scenes full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. No real jeopardy or tension. Scenes disjointed, bolted together like strips of Meccano in the hope they’d add up to something. Join enough of these and you’ve built a ferris wheel, see? It spins and everything. Not really – you’ve just got a lot of Meccano strips bolted together.

    What was the point of cutting the “You complete me”/jumps after helmet scene from the trailers? That would have lent more meaning to the inevitable, unnecessary end kiss. Then again, being funny, nicely timed, human and understated, it probably had no place in the overall picture.

    It’s not that I went in with sky-high expectations, more that IM1 had me cackling like a beached idiot at how much Favreau had got right, where this one didn’t move me in any direction at all.

  17. I too am a fangirl but jeez guys give this movie a break. it was awesome and it gave us easter eggs to set up the avengers movies. stop hating so much

  18. Although it was funny, what was the deal with Hammer’s self tanner stains on his hands? Seems so unrelated. Any ideas?

    • I like to think that he wants to seem like he doesn’t spend all his time in a lab building things, but that he’s also athletic like Tony Stark.

      It was those streaky palms that really sealed the deal for me with loving Sam Rockwell and the Justin Hammer character. Although I did have to explain the palms to the guy friends I saw the movie with.

  19. All I gotta say is……THOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  20. Can anyone tell what the song was that was playing while tony constructed the new chest reactor?

  21. @shanebates1000,,,

    wasn’t that the “You gotta have a montage!” theme from Team America?

    ;-)

    • Thanks For the direction but i found it. its a special score made for the movie. its called sledgehammer MK1 By John Debney

  22. Too many critics. Sheesh! Just give them one movie to write and we’ll see the result.
    @Daniel, THOR! That’s right. My favourite superhero! Been waiting for years… nay, decades for this! As a kid, i was told it wasn’t possible…not too popular to have his own movie. But voila! It’s happening.
    Quick question: the trouble Fury referred to in the South West: was that Thor or Hulk?)٠

    • Reffered to Thor. They found the Hammer in New Mexico (S.W.)

  23. @EngraverKev,,,

    Lol, isn’t that the look they were going for. A politician full of hot air?

  24. using Cap’s shield to prop up the particle accelerator was a tad bit disrespectful.

    And what the hell was that doing there?

    And Mjolnir? Is that all we get? oh well. I heard about the post-credits scene and waited and a hammer? Couldn’t they have shown a commercial flight get fried by a lightning bolt, or maybe a glimpse of an other-worldly energy, hello?! that “energy” Howard stark referred to, hello?! Asgard, open dimension… ergo new energy/elements.

    but no… Mjolnir looked cool though.

  25. Long time comic geek, first time uploader. I enjoyed the movie. While Ironman has never been one of my monthly must-have titles, I think it’s great that technology has finally gotten to the point where the comic makes it onto the screen in surprisingly good shape (I lived through television’s live action Spider-Man; I’ve seen Corman’s Fantastic Four), and I like Ironman 2 better than I like the comic. I kept thinking about what was “wrong” between the movie and the comic, but basically Robert Downey Jr adds a whole new dimension to the comic character. I vague recall that Pepper and Happy get married in the comic and you could see that chemistry on the screen (which made the kiss at the end even more confusing). I don’t like Scarlet in anything, but I thought she did a good job on Black Widow. I was surprised at how much airtime she got and no mention of her being called Black Widow ever. I think Ironman is probably one of the few Avengers she’s not slept with (Daredevil and Hawkeye) and I’ve heard Wasp is the lady-Avenger so I’m wondering if we’ll see her again. I thought Rockwell was given entirely too much time to chew up the scenery and Mickey wasn’t given enough. I also hated the talking over each other thing and the best friend stealing the suit, but all in all, it was definitely worth my hard-earned bucks. I’ll probably see it again. If anything, I have to see that map behind Samuel L. I think it pinpoints the Avengers (Africa’s Black Panther maybe?).

  26. was it just me or did anyone else see clips from the “Incredible Hulk” on the screen behind nick fury when stark was talking to him at the end?

  27. Here’s a question, why didn’t Happy Hogan pull out a 44 Mag Desert Eagle and blow Whiplashes head off during the Auto Race? Hell a 38 backup, would have worked. The guys not superhuman.