More entertainment than merit, only hindered by an unfocused script.

Rating: Null/10 (9 May 2010)

7.7
Sometimes I like to think that we are in a digital Renaissance. Consider the advances that we made during the Renaissance. Perspectives in paintings, improvements in architecture, and an overall advance in education. Consider now the industrial revolution. Machinery eventually led to electronics, and eventually the increase of reliance on computer systems and the jump from analog technology to digital technology as well. Computer electronics can be programmed to serve virtually limitless functions. Our world today is a proof itself that not only is it efficient, but very welcomed by almost all humans.
When people advance, so do their military forces. In fact, a lot of the time, a nation's military seeks to secure technology, so as to keep the enemy, or other nations, from gaining and utilizing it as well. This is probably the most realistic aspect of Iron Man 2. The rest is, well, a superhero movie. However, there is one thing about Iron Man that differentiates him from (most) other superheroes: his powers are purely technology based. This leads me to believe that the "Iron Man" is a possible reality, some day in the future.
The film and franchise's hero is Tony Stark, a young billionaire and genius inventor. The superhero is Iron Man, who is basically Stark in a cyber-suit of sorts. However, I'd like to think that the Iron Man aspect of Tony Stark is more plausible than the Stark part of him. A 21-year old billionaire/genius inventor is a superhero. It is something that does not exist in our world. In fact, to whom can you compare Stark to? Da Vinci? Well, I'm not an expert on this, but I don't think Da Vinci was as rich as Stark was. Nor probably was he as promiscuous as Stark was. Da Vinci was said to be a generous person, who practiced humility. Stark is seen by many as, like one character in the film labeled him as, "a prick." Stark and Da Vinci have one major thing in common: they are both genius inventors. So in this age, that I like to call the dawn of the Digital Renaissance, Stark does not exist. He does not take place yet in our world. But neither does Iron Man. The question is, which will come first?
But that's enough foreshadowing. I went into Iron Man 2 with little expectation, just as the first film. The first film really impressed me. I wasn't expecting much out of the superhero flick, especially after having seen some other very good ones. Iron Man 2, sadly, fails to deliver like the original did. However, it is by no means a failure. In fact, it is a pleasure to revisit this take on the Iron Man universe. While there is no wrong in taking a moment to breathe in the air, business needs to be done. Where does Iron Man stand? Who (or what) is the villain? There are multiple villains/threats to Iron Man in this movie. There's Whiplash (one of the greatest villains in comic book films), Hammer, the U.S. government, and palladium. While I was expecting the weakness of the film to lie in it's use of so many villains, it was the lack of focusing on the biggest threat that was its biggest flaw.
Not only is Whiplash's part downplayed, but so are many other characters' as well. Black Widow, and her other identities, barely has no weighty dialogue in the film. It seems like everything she said was to add to somebody else's comments, or was simply lost in all the action going on around her. The only new character whose part wasn't toned down was Hammer. I guess that ultimately that's what happens when you focus on so many villains at once, but I really think that the film should have centered on Whiplash, given that not only was he a good villain story-wise, but Mickey Rourke's performance and portrayal of the character was excellent.
Iron Man 2 is a film that seems to be comfortable being exactly what is. The first time around, it seems like they worked hard to make a good film, not just an entertaining film, and succeeded in doing so. This time, it seems like they went more for an entertainment route, rather than, "we can make a good superhero film". While there's nothing wrong with that, I still feel that business needs to get done, and there was a huge opportunity missed with Whiplash and Mickey Rourke in this film. Still, Iron Man 2 sports good direction, good performances, and is only hindered by an unfocused script. If it was entertainment that they sought, it is entertainment that they delivered.