I saw it yesterday too. Sick movie. Not sure what you mean about the final scene. The song was Highway to Hell by ACDC
No proof of anything??? Were you even watching the movie? His bots was destroying the place. Everyone knew it was his bots cause he was showing them off at that expo. I watched it over the internet and they didn't show what happened after the credits. Was it anything good? Just say yes or no. I don't want you to spoil it for me because I just might watch it again in the theaters.
Someone tell me what happens at the very end after they get awards pinned. The projector stopped at the Alamo theater so I didn't get to see the ending.
Just saw it. Better than the first IMO. The one thing that annoyed me in both 1 & 2 was how they kept opening their helmets to talk during battles. Spoiler Thor's Hammer in a big crater in New Mexico
Anyone know whats up with Hulk 2? I thought they were doing a Hulk 2 and Norton was iffy on returning but I have heard nothing in years. Just curious.
I just saw it and I liked it but agree with others in that it needed a bit more action. Overall, good flick and has me excited for Thor, Capt and Avengers.
It was okay. Made Tony seem like an unlikeable douche at times, namely the birthday party. In the first one he's a lot more likable. Also, would have been nice if they spent a little more time humanizing Mickey Rourke's character. I'm actually not sure a whole lot worked in this movie other than Downey Jr's acting and Rourke's look. I don't know Marvel comics, very well, and the whole thing with Samuel Jackson's group confused me...almost seemed pointless.
You must not have read alot of Marvel as a kid. Basically, Nick Fury is in charge of S.H.I.E.L.D, a secret military group that handles super threats. Nick Fury helped create the Avengers, a superhero group affiliated with S.H.I.E.L.D, who included Iron Man in the group (Starks provides lots of their military weaponry as is). They are basically gearing up all the characters for the Avengers which is why IM2 doesn't have such a good script, it's almost just laying foundation for their super group movie. That's what I remember from reading it as a kid at least, I could be a bit off though.
Howard fit the bill so much better even though I generally like Cheadle as an actor better. Howard just had a better persona for the movie though. They screwed up those negotiations and at least they salvaged them a bit with Cheadle.
From IMDB: "According to Don Cheadle, he tried to make the role of Stark's right-hand man Rhodes his own, but eventually stole as much as possible from Terence Howard's performance in the first film to bring him to life." What was the point?
So I don't really follow the comic books of Iron Man, but doesn't Stark fall into some kinda bad drinking habit and loses his ability to use the Iron Man suit? Then eventually Iron Man and War Machine square off against each other? I would love to see that happen. I call War Machine in 3 rounds.
Usual Hollywood big sequel hype, high expectations, mediocre results. Didn't like the character development in this one much at all, thought they really didn't show hardly anything of Whiplash. The Hammer guy was just annoying as hell, I just really felt like he needed to get off the screen every time he was on it. The back and forth "let me yell over you" dialog between RD Jr. and Paltrow got really grating on the nerves. Stark appears so dehumanized and above usual society that when he has a genuine moment of human emotion it seems cheesy and forced. Positives - RD jr. still badass, Scarlett still hot as hell, Cheadle still the modern day Sidney Poitier, and a couple genuine "wow that was cool" moments. All in all a decent action movie, really bored me at times as most action movies tend to do if I'm not enthralled with the characters. I'll Give it a B minus.
