New posts

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mel O&#039;Drama" data-source="post: 308536" data-attributes="member: 23">Iron Man 2 continued Throughout all three films, there’s been a definite theme of weaponry and skills being sought at any cost in order for them to be monetised or used for less than altruistic purposes. That continues here. My favourite part of the entire film was the “vintage” footage of Howard Stark which looked wonderfully authentic. John Slattery, of course, comes with mid-century credibility off the back of Mad Men. I enjoyed that he looked not only like Howard, but also very much as Tony himself did in his early appearances (to this day, my go-to image of Tony is with his moustache). Howard addressing Tony from the old video is a great moment for the film. Yes, there’s a degree of contrivance, but in this universe disbelief is already well and truly suspended, and it’s worth it for the message and the turning point. It’s not all good news, though. Having eased us credibly into the world of fantasy with the first two films, this one elevates the super heroics. But the price of doing so is that it lacks the dark undercurrent of either of the preceding films There’s nothing in this that comes close to being as oppressively effective as Tony being held prisoner in Afghanistan, which makes this film feel less meaningful - and in turn less real - than either of its predecessors.There’s also the matter of Justin Hammer. Firstly, I know his usual comics iteration is an older man with silver hair, but I don’t feel particularly precious about the characterisation as I don’t know him well. I’m perfectly open to him being played differently, just as Nick Fury is. But I found Sam Rockwell’s performance particularly distracting and - as the film progressed - downright annoying. I actually loathe the Jeff Goldblum/Bob Newhart/Chad Michael Murray style of trying to be aggressively naturalistic in delivery to the point that it becomes overly mannered and (ironically) extremely artificial. All the weird pauses and saying half a line and then repeating the beginning quickly became very tiresome. His inability to deliver a simple line of dialogue without messing around with it did my head in. It’s the acting equivalent of Christina Aguilera’s melisma on every line she sings. It’s unnecessary and it’s a complete turn off. I should also throw in that I have no idea who Rockwell is. I don't remember watching him in anything else, so I went in with an open mind but came out having made a mental note to actively avoid anything in which he appears wherever possible. On the basis of his performance alone, this becomes my least favourite of the three films. Speaking of unnecessary naturalism, there’s one very personal bugbear of mine that occurs a LOT in this film: throat clearing. I have a low tolerance for certain intrusive sounds, and anything to do with phlegmy throaty noises tops the list. Yes, everyone probably does it at some time, but it's just not something I want to see on film any more than I'd care to watch someone pooing or picking their nose. Scarlett Johansson did it twice in close succession in an early scene, and she certainly wasn’t alone. I appreciate this doesn’t have any bearing on the quality of the film, and most people probably wouldn’t even notice it, but for me the abundance of these sounds affected my enjoyment and is another key reason why I would hesitate to rewatch this one.But - hacking or no hacking - this sequel is one flawed gem for me. </blockquote>

Verification: What month follows July?