why the hell do some critics not give it he praise it deserves? THIS WAS OUTSTANDING!

Rating: 10/10 (30 April 2010)

We walked out of the cinema absolutely energized. I was amazed at how great a movie it was and how close it stayed to the source material. I still had some personal problems with the movie (such as i wanted to see more of the characters alcohol addiction to be fleshed out)but i soon thought "thats what sequels are for". I was pumped for Iron Man 2 and even though it didn't go in to the alcohol abuse that much anyway, i still sat through the whole 2 hours and came out wanting to see it again the next day. Iron Man 2 was not only a spectacular movie, but a superior sequel, and a fantastic comic book movie all in one. That is hard to come by. The Dark Knight was a spectacular movie, a mildly superior sequel but in terms of being a good comic book movie.... lets just say that Christopher Nolan seems like he's afraid of the fantasy nature of the source material. This review is going to look over those aspects and it may contain spoilers so i suggest that you should see the movie first before you read on. OK. The Movie opens right where the first film leaves off. Tony's Iron Man identity is now known to the world. His character arc in the first film took him from being an egotistical prick to a thought provoking hero. with the theme of how his actions have affected the world and what he is now going to do to rectify it. But as the film begins, he now is egotistical from soaking up the glory of being a hero, which brings him into social conflict with his aid Pepper Potts and close friend James Rhodes. Tony is also faced with having to deal with pressure to hand over his Iron Man armor to the government. If that wasn't enough, a rival industrialist named Justin Hammer is out to get his cut and a Russian ex-con Ivan Vanko is out with a personal vendetta against tony. It is very clear in this film that the stakes are far higher than they were in the first film. critics have argued that not everything in the film is tied up and the end. but that is simply not true. the film not only ties things up, but leaves possibilities open for not only future Iron Man films, but for future Avengers films. The Film is not a part 2, it is a continuation of the first film, and clearly continues the character arcs of Tony Stark, by bringing in the realization of Futurism to the character, which is one of if not the most important aspect of the Iron Man character. the film goes in to it just enough, so that it have a chance for future films to delve into further Iron man complexities. As well as this, the film continues to explore the social argument of how dangerous technology can be utilized. The Government wants his armor to use as a weapon of defense (of destruction) but Tony does not give it up because he is Iron Man. the suit isn't. Iron Man is the symbol of Futurism and consequence. It is not the gun, it is the arm that is the real hero. and whoever is behind the gun, will leave serious consequences (being the main thrust behind the antagonist) The Character arc that tony goes through, sees him first treat the role of Iron Man as an opportunity for attention, but over the film, he understands that is a symbol for a greater future as his father intended him to be. this is shown clearly in the film through the basic progression, as well as through the plot devises, (such as the arc technology killing him and he replaces it with a new energy source. this serves as a metaphor for the actual progression). Very few would argue that tony leaves this film completely undeveloped. the only reason anyone would not grasp the progression, is the fact that the film has a slightly lighter tone than the first one. Having a darker tone makes is easier for an audience to capture intelligence and maturity. But Iron Man 2 was able to deliver it in spades. There's no reason that you can't greatly develop a story if the tone is light. Iron Man proves it. If someone is arguing that it is stupid to have all the plot points that establish the Avengers and then doesn't use it by the end of the film, i say that they are hypocrites. nobody was nit-picking at The Lord of the Rings trilogy for foreshadowing things in the first films and only using them in the last.
Most of the film consists of very enjoyable interactions between characters, much like in the first film. however this film delivers far more than the first, with well written dialog and well written characters. the film uses the witty comedy in such a natural way, that it is easy to digest all of the light and sly moments. every single member of the cast puts on there absolute A game and every character has a powerful screen presence (even Scarlett Johanson who is sadly underused until the 3rd act. this is the on of the only problems that spring to mind). the enjoyment, character interaction and development Makes even the scenes where Iron Man isn't blowing things up just a ball the watch. But there is my segue-way in to the action. the Action direction is miles above the first film. far more exciting, far higher stakes and far more explosive, while still not over blowing the film.
I highly recommend this to everyone. I highly recommend that you do not listen to the mild amount of negative reviews. Go see it. go love it!!!!!!! and stay in after the credits :)