May 1 What does one do not work? Simple, go to the movies. A
see that? Iron-Man 2.
On the other hand the conditions there would be all: a cast of top-level, a lot of material from which you can build a more decent story and special effects targati Industrial Light & Magic.
So I would say that you can do.
shame that after two hours is not so sure ... But
proceed in order.
The first Iron Man was a good movie that in a couple of hours had managed to film on the origins of the character, among other things, maintaining a certain fidelity to the comic, and set the tone of the film project Avengers.
comes in part from thinking, seeing the latter film, the first film's success has come almost unexpected Marvel at home, because for much of the film you are not able to shake off the impression that with this sequel, director and production have tried in every way to create a product that exceeds all the above.
And indeed much of the film's wearing this halo of exaggeration: crazy car chases, explosions, incredible fight scenes and the limits of the improbable (hear, hear!) Tony Stark who synthesizes a new chemical element in his garage (literally!) and I would say that this is the straw that broke the camel's back.
Okay that is a film of action / sci-fi, it's good that Tony Stark is a genius, the suspension of disbelief is fine but I would say that there is a limit to everything, and see a new item synthesized with an apparatus assembled virtually within an hour I would say this is well above the limit ...
Let it be clear however that the film is not without merits.
The interpretations are all good. Indeed, it was not for Mikey Rourke's character Ivan Vanko (Crimson Dynamo awkward union of and Whiplash ) Was likely to seem even more tenuous than it appears at certain moments of the film. Surely then, to see Scarlett Johansson in tight black leather uniform makes her beautiful effect.
The film also plays the role very well in preparing the way for the Avengers film (scheduled for 2012), Nick Fury / Samuel L. Jackson has a larger role, James Rhodes finally assumes the role of War Machine, Tony Stark officially accepts to be part of Avengers, Captain America's shield appears in Bela Vista and the hidden scene after the titles of queue now so dear to the superhero adaptations, the SHIELD agent Phil Coulson is Thor's hammer hinted during a mission in New Mexico.
Well, perhaps the main problem of the film is just that. Diluted in all these endless details the history is lost. Crushed between a first chapter of excellent workmanship and a future film project that take the lead, Iron-Man 2 can not find its own identity.
bad.
Because in the end, however hard you try, you can not get rid of that taste of missed opportunity.
PS: As strange as it may seem, for once I agree with Paolo Mereghetti . Bravo Paul, I see that you are learning little by little ...
see that? Iron-Man 2.
On the other hand the conditions there would be all: a cast of top-level, a lot of material from which you can build a more decent story and special effects targati Industrial Light & Magic.
So I would say that you can do.
shame that after two hours is not so sure ... But
proceed in order.
The first Iron Man was a good movie that in a couple of hours had managed to film on the origins of the character, among other things, maintaining a certain fidelity to the comic, and set the tone of the film project Avengers.
comes in part from thinking, seeing the latter film, the first film's success has come almost unexpected Marvel at home, because for much of the film you are not able to shake off the impression that with this sequel, director and production have tried in every way to create a product that exceeds all the above.
And indeed much of the film's wearing this halo of exaggeration: crazy car chases, explosions, incredible fight scenes and the limits of the improbable (hear, hear!) Tony Stark who synthesizes a new chemical element in his garage (literally!) and I would say that this is the straw that broke the camel's back.
Okay that is a film of action / sci-fi, it's good that Tony Stark is a genius, the suspension of disbelief is fine but I would say that there is a limit to everything, and see a new item synthesized with an apparatus assembled virtually within an hour I would say this is well above the limit ...
Let it be clear however that the film is not without merits.
The interpretations are all good. Indeed, it was not for Mikey Rourke's character Ivan Vanko (Crimson Dynamo awkward union of and Whiplash ) Was likely to seem even more tenuous than it appears at certain moments of the film. Surely then, to see Scarlett Johansson in tight black leather uniform makes her beautiful effect.
The film also plays the role very well in preparing the way for the Avengers film (scheduled for 2012), Nick Fury / Samuel L. Jackson has a larger role, James Rhodes finally assumes the role of War Machine, Tony Stark officially accepts to be part of Avengers, Captain America's shield appears in Bela Vista and the hidden scene after the titles of queue now so dear to the superhero adaptations, the SHIELD agent Phil Coulson is Thor's hammer hinted during a mission in New Mexico.
Well, perhaps the main problem of the film is just that. Diluted in all these endless details the history is lost. Crushed between a first chapter of excellent workmanship and a future film project that take the lead, Iron-Man 2 can not find its own identity.
bad.
Because in the end, however hard you try, you can not get rid of that taste of missed opportunity.
PS: As strange as it may seem, for once I agree with Paolo Mereghetti . Bravo Paul, I see that you are learning little by little ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment