User Score
6.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 760 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 55 out of 760
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 19, 2010
    6
    I'm a big fan of Downey but even he couldn't bring this film to life. His character, arrogant yet funny in the first installment was simply just arrogant this time round. At least Paltrow and Johansson provided some enjoyment and the hope that the film might continue just that little bit longer. Cheadle also at times outshone Downey's own character. The action scenes were enjoyableI'm a big fan of Downey but even he couldn't bring this film to life. His character, arrogant yet funny in the first installment was simply just arrogant this time round. At least Paltrow and Johansson provided some enjoyment and the hope that the film might continue just that little bit longer. Cheadle also at times outshone Downey's own character. The action scenes were enjoyable though. However, even more annoying than the lacklustre script was the feeling that the ending had suddenly been tacked on and then was over far too soon Expand
  2. Jan 24, 2012
    6
    I enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed the first film. I thought it did a good job at cameos as well (building towards the Avengers film). The acting and the action was solid as well. It was just a little too corny and generic for my taste. Also I did not like the main villian in the film, Im sure there could have been a better one for them to pick.
  3. Sep 28, 2010
    4
    I have to admit that I thoroughly enjoyed the predecessor of this Iron Man franchise. Well it was not exactly cerebral as The Dark Knight (its Summer opponent of 2008), it was fast-paced and indeed had enough action to fill its run time. I wish I could say the same about the sequel, Iron Man 2. What was a franchise known for its action, is now a dull plot-developing movie. The majority ofI have to admit that I thoroughly enjoyed the predecessor of this Iron Man franchise. Well it was not exactly cerebral as The Dark Knight (its Summer opponent of 2008), it was fast-paced and indeed had enough action to fill its run time. I wish I could say the same about the sequel, Iron Man 2. What was a franchise known for its action, is now a dull plot-developing movie. The majority of the movie focused on the foolishness of Robert Downey's character. Although well-acted, I wish there was more "Iron Man" than of Tony Stark. The final scene of the movie does go back to it comic-book roots with the duo of War Machine & Iron Man, but it feels empty because there was not much to support it. It is an acceptable and somewhat enjoyable blockbuster, but I could not get over the mindless drama and lack of action. Expand
  4. Jan 28, 2011
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The whole movie was crap. The movie never had its "climax". All was pre-pre-pre-pre-pre- final scene. All the movie i was thinking "so...whats next... i already saw this at iron-man 1...boring....joke not funny..."

    The scene protagonized by Scarlett Johansson sucks... In general i think the writers said :
    - "how we can make a better movie"
    - "Iron-man 1 was great"
    - "oh, i know! what if... if 1 iron-man is great, then we should put 30 iron-men in scene"
    - "yeah!! spectacular"
    - "but the story?"
    - "does it matter? Fill it with anything"
    Expand
  5. Aug 21, 2010
    5
    the first iron man was really enjoyable the second one just fails to deliver . downy is still fun to wach as stark but thats about it . the plot doesnt seem near as entertaining as the first and it feels like theres even less action then the first and what action it has feels so ho hum it just doesnt grab you. the final battle especially basically just iron man running around for 10 minthe first iron man was really enjoyable the second one just fails to deliver . downy is still fun to wach as stark but thats about it . the plot doesnt seem near as entertaining as the first and it feels like theres even less action then the first and what action it has feels so ho hum it just doesnt grab you. the final battle especially basically just iron man running around for 10 min then the last 1 min is the final battle . it all felt so anticlimactic and just not very enjoyable . such a shame. Expand
  6. Sep 15, 2011
    5
    With a baffling story and really unnecessary humor, Marvel's "Iron man 2" doesn't seem to have the prominent blockbuster spirit its prequel contained.
  7. AndyA
    May 16, 2010
    5
    For an action movie in my opinion it fails to excite. Downey plays the flamboyant Tony Stark well as do the other actors but its divergence
  8. ChristiB.
    May 18, 2010
    4
    The 1st one was good (rate it 8). This one not so much. Unbelievable action scenes, not much of a story. Hoping the Avengers movie will be better. Couldn't wait for this one to be over.
  9. JamesH
    May 19, 2010
    5
    Beware! We've all seen this predictable plot before many times! After the first 10 minutes of the film it was clear what would happen the rest of the movie. Robert Downey carries this turkey on his back with his fun Stark character. Without him this movie would fail miserably. The sequence where Tony Stark creates a new element was ridiculous, but then the movie is purposely over the Beware! We've all seen this predictable plot before many times! After the first 10 minutes of the film it was clear what would happen the rest of the movie. Robert Downey carries this turkey on his back with his fun Stark character. Without him this movie would fail miserably. The sequence where Tony Stark creates a new element was ridiculous, but then the movie is purposely over the top and we know that going into it. Some of the CGI was surprisingly lame, especially the fight between Cheadle and Downey at the house, but most of the CGI was very good. Expand
  10. Sep 28, 2011
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Iron Man 2 is not exactly a worthy followup to the original. My problems with the film: The fight between Rhodey and Tony in his mansion with DJ AM in the background was really dumb. These two guys are supposed to be best friends? Yeah Tony was being a douche, but that doesn't mean you steal one of his suits and proceed to try to beat his ass and tear up his whole damn mansion in the process. It just felt like they needed an action beat, like they said "Oh hey, it's been x amount of pages since we've had some action to entertain the audience, we need to stick a fight scene in here according to this scriptwriting 101 guide." It seemed very forced and unnecessary to me.

    Justin Hammer was cheesing up the joint and just acting way too goofy.

    Tony and Pepper's playful banter had turned into a lot of bickering that wasn't that fun to watch.

    Tony's father had hidden away his secret formula for an amazing new element as... the overhead blueprint for his **** Stark Expo? What the hell, why would anybody... what? That doesn't even make any sense. How would he know that Tony would possess a nifty holographic projector that could strip away the details and reveal this magical wonder element? Why not just write down the formula on a piece of paper, why hide it as the layout for a stupid ass expo? This... this **** stinks.

    How is Tony's new power source poisoning his blood? The palladium core goes right into his arc reactor, why would this end up in his bloodstream? His bloodstream seems completely segregated from the reactor. Couldn't he just invent some filter between the reactor and his body? He seems good at inventing stuff.

    At the race track, when Vanko attacks... why don't the security guards just shoot Vanko in the chest with their guns? His exoskeleton doesn't seem to cover his chest, they could shoot him to death.

    Rourke's Vanko spends most of the second half of the movie in a factory building robots. That's kinda boring, you shouldn't have your main villain squirrelled away that much.

    The final battle with Vanko was way too short and just involved IM and WM doing some stupid high-five with their repulsors. Vanko also opens his helmet for no reason, making his head incredibly vulnerable. But other then that, I thought it was an enjoyable experience.
    Expand
  11. Mar 30, 2012
    4
    Okay Iron Man 2 is better than the first because the new actors but yet again there isn't much action and when there it is it sucks. More stupidy throughout the film. But hey its an improvement from the first.
  12. stans
    May 26, 2010
    4
    The villains were never scary, and some of the action redefined dumbness, even for a superhero movie. Pepper and Happy driving in the opposite direction on a racetrack? Tony Stark building a particle the accelerator out of found parts in his basement? Ivan (the villain) suddenly building a zillion drones and an even more powerful Iron Man costume? Plus, the fight sequences moved so fast The villains were never scary, and some of the action redefined dumbness, even for a superhero movie. Pepper and Happy driving in the opposite direction on a racetrack? Tony Stark building a particle the accelerator out of found parts in his basement? Ivan (the villain) suddenly building a zillion drones and an even more powerful Iron Man costume? Plus, the fight sequences moved so fast that it drained any human drama from them. Expand
  13. BuckmanB.
    May 15, 2010
    5
    All action and fireworks and no story line. Not nearly as good as the first.
  14. SteveB
    May 15, 2010
    6
    I felt no real story here and no underlying themes which would have helped the story had there been one. If you enjoy Paltrow and Rourke, two actors who don't work as much as they use to then go see the film.
  15. imS
    May 18, 2010
    5
    Disappointingly boring. None of the first movies' charm was present. Confusing story with pointless characters. Not enough action and boring special effects. Flat and dull.
  16. DougR.
    May 21, 2010
    4
    A lot is different.: Pros: the action at scenes is good Downey Jr. played well Scarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrlet!!! Cons: Not enough Iron Man Stupid villain idea Why change Omega Red's name to Ivan? Get original!
  17. RayeS.
    Jun 11, 2010
    4
    I really wanted this movie to be good. Great cast, loved the first one, but this one is off its mark. I wanted to see more development of the characters relationships not a bunch of words thrown at each other. Felt let down. Makes me sad so much promise so little delivered.
  18. Oct 18, 2010
    6
    The sequel lacks giving us something else to offer that wasn't already in Iron Man. However, Robert Downey Jr's performance makes this movie worth watching.
  19. Sep 5, 2010
    6
    A bit underwhelming and slow compared to the first one, but still mostly fun due to un-pretentiousness and playful irreverence so rare in superhero movies. Robert Downey Jr. is the (polonium) heart of the franchise both as the playboy Stark and the Hammeroid fighting Iron Man, Sam Rockwell makes a great weaselly villain, Mickey Rourke speaks Russian like a real Slavonic soul, ScarletA bit underwhelming and slow compared to the first one, but still mostly fun due to un-pretentiousness and playful irreverence so rare in superhero movies. Robert Downey Jr. is the (polonium) heart of the franchise both as the playboy Stark and the Hammeroid fighting Iron Man, Sam Rockwell makes a great weaselly villain, Mickey Rourke speaks Russian like a real Slavonic soul, Scarlet Johansson has only one proper super-spy action scene as Natasha Romanov/Black Widow but her ballet-like kickassery steals the show and begs her own movie. A decent popcorn movie. Expand
  20. Aug 27, 2010
    4
    It's easy to write off "Iron Man 2" as easy enjoyment, but let's look at what we have here: Mickey Rourke plays the blandest Russian villain imaginable; Robert Downey Jr. pulls off the role of Tony Stark as well as last time, but the bickering between him and Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper gets worn thin pretty quickly; Scarlett Johansson shows up supposedly to introduce romantic strain betweenIt's easy to write off "Iron Man 2" as easy enjoyment, but let's look at what we have here: Mickey Rourke plays the blandest Russian villain imaginable; Robert Downey Jr. pulls off the role of Tony Stark as well as last time, but the bickering between him and Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper gets worn thin pretty quickly; Scarlett Johansson shows up supposedly to introduce romantic strain between Stark and Pepper, but it soon becomes apparent that she is more there for the audience to ogle at (which I did). Saddest of all, the most interesting part of the movie was the Avengers subplot, which in the end really has no influence in the realm of the movie. And the discovery of Thor's Hammer at the end of the closing credits reveals all - "Iron Man 2" really isn't much more than a mediary between the (deserved) hype of the first "Iron Man" and the hype of the upcoming "Thor" movie. And this is why no one likes a critic. But seriously, Scarlett Johansson is hot. Expand
  21. Nov 4, 2010
    6
    I was looking forward to this as i enjoyed the last film, even though i didn't think it was fantastic, but this film seemed to be all over the place and was very annoying and tedious at times, especially between the exchanges of dialogue between Downey and Paltrow.
  22. Oct 15, 2010
    5
    Wow....what a disappointment this was. More action to be sure, but for me, just having more action doesn't cut it. you have to bring over everything that made the first one great: A coherent, well told story, and interesting characters...which the second one did not. While I don't think this is the train wreck that a lot of people make it out to be, I just do not understand how so manyWow....what a disappointment this was. More action to be sure, but for me, just having more action doesn't cut it. you have to bring over everything that made the first one great: A coherent, well told story, and interesting characters...which the second one did not. While I don't think this is the train wreck that a lot of people make it out to be, I just do not understand how so many people can say this is BETTER than the first. Expand
  23. Oct 27, 2010
    6
    I knew what to expect from this movie and i wasn't much disappointed. Some good action scenes, some funny lines is what characterizes Iron Man and Robert Downey Jr. the perfect actor for this role. He is very charming and funny
  24. Nov 14, 2010
    4
    Very disappointing movie. The first Iron Man movie (2008) was a thousand times way better then this one. It was a long boring pathetic two hours strait. At the end, we were all expecting the big fight between Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), but it lasted like 45 seconds. It's a little bit stupid because, Ivan was preparing for that fight through almost theVery disappointing movie. The first Iron Man movie (2008) was a thousand times way better then this one. It was a long boring pathetic two hours strait. At the end, we were all expecting the big fight between Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), but it lasted like 45 seconds. It's a little bit stupid because, Ivan was preparing for that fight through almost the whole movie. All a long the film, was a bunch of dialogue with a few action scene.This movie was a big waste of my time. While watching, I couldn't wait until it was over. Expand
  25. Nov 30, 2010
    6
    This movie suffers from what i call the "the second movie drop." The first movie had sparks flying and this intriguing edge that made you want more. This second addition to the Iron Man series was interesting for a bit but then became obvious and dragged on for long period of the movie.
  26. Mar 9, 2011
    6
    After the first Iron Man movie I was expecting a great sequel, but this fell short because they tried to add to much drama (think Spider-Man 3) and took out a lot of the humor and action that made the first one pop, while the first one was awesome this one was just ok.
  27. Jul 13, 2011
    6
    I find exactly what I expected, and that was exactly what I found in the first part. It's fun, entertaining, and compared to other recent action movies of this kind, has much more sense and not having that many absurd action scenes of those you sometimes don't even know what's happening.
  28. May 6, 2012
    6
    Passable effort which lacks a real unstoppable super villain. Downey is excellent as usual and the movie works the storyline well to get Nick Fury involved. Lacking real action scenes until the final battle it concentrates on character and storyline development so those expecting an action packed CGI dream may be disappointed.
  29. May 6, 2013
    6
    This film was a major step down from the first film. I was not a fan of how they took Crimson Dynamo and Whiplash and turned him into a villain that was nothing more than a punching bag for Iron Man & War Machine. This movie just didn't feel like it had high stakes and started playing too much for humor instead of taking the source material seriously. Black Widow was definitely a niceThis film was a major step down from the first film. I was not a fan of how they took Crimson Dynamo and Whiplash and turned him into a villain that was nothing more than a punching bag for Iron Man & War Machine. This movie just didn't feel like it had high stakes and started playing too much for humor instead of taking the source material seriously. Black Widow was definitely a nice touch though. Expand
  30. Jun 4, 2011
    5
    I think this film isn't as good as the first. A lot of Scenes weren't needed and felt they needed a better plot. Yes Tony Stark found out he was dying, that's sad. But there are only two main action scenes between him and the Villain and most of the film Tony Stark thought he was dead. I'm sorry I cannot give this film a good review. It's not a terrible film its ok but it's lacking of PlotI think this film isn't as good as the first. A lot of Scenes weren't needed and felt they needed a better plot. Yes Tony Stark found out he was dying, that's sad. But there are only two main action scenes between him and the Villain and most of the film Tony Stark thought he was dead. I'm sorry I cannot give this film a good review. It's not a terrible film its ok but it's lacking of Plot just bores me. Expand
  31. Aug 28, 2011
    5
    Iron Man 2 is a satisfactory sequel to a kick-ass comic book movie. It is nothing more than that: satisfactory. Some will call that a good thing, and some will call that a bad thing.
  32. Jul 17, 2012
    6
    While Robert Downey Jr is as great as always and the action visuals are nicely done, this sequel is nowhere near the same league as the first. There's lots of plotholes, Mickey Rourke was one-dimensional and Scarlett Johannson was bland and the plot in the third act took a back set to Avengers tie-ins. Not as bad as Spider-Man 3 or X-Men 3, but it could have been a lot better.
  33. Oct 15, 2012
    6
    A lack of depth, little real story and far too many fast-talking scenes means that IM2 never really hits the heights it should. But don't let that make you think it's not entertaining - it is and it certainly has it's moments, however it also most certainly has it's fair share of scenes where you can grab a non-pause pee-break too. I really hope they make another cut of this with about 20A lack of depth, little real story and far too many fast-talking scenes means that IM2 never really hits the heights it should. But don't let that make you think it's not entertaining - it is and it certainly has it's moments, however it also most certainly has it's fair share of scenes where you can grab a non-pause pee-break too. I really hope they make another cut of this with about 20 minutes trimmed off as it could really work with some of the fat cut out, and having said that it does work as it is - just not to any mind-blowing degree. Decent enough and never an effort to watch, an ideal film to put on when with mates or your partner if you want a film you can talk through. Expand
  34. Mar 13, 2012
    5
    Slightly boring, with not enough zing and character development like the first one. For an action film, there was too much explosions and fighting which substituted for the storylines - I couldn't even hear myself think. Also, I wasn't sure who the villain was, and if he was who I thought he was, he didn't have much depth to his character. Although, I did love Scarlett Johansson,Slightly boring, with not enough zing and character development like the first one. For an action film, there was too much explosions and fighting which substituted for the storylines - I couldn't even hear myself think. Also, I wasn't sure who the villain was, and if he was who I thought he was, he didn't have much depth to his character. Although, I did love Scarlett Johansson, especially when she was kicking everyone's ass, and the fact that what was keeping Stark alive was also killing him, but his portrayal of a dying man was still unconvincing, seeing as he mainly acted arrogant, instead of his versatility of emotions in the previous film. In conclusion, this failed to live up to the promise of what could have been a good sequel. Expand
  35. Nov 11, 2011
    5
    Iron Man 2 is well acted, but is quite boring. This action scenes were uneventful, the fight scenes were short, but the humor was good though. I was disappointed, it could have had more stuff in it.
  36. Feb 15, 2013
    6
    There have been three films that I have seen in the cinema where I have left after the credits, not quite sure what to think of what i had just seen, not necessarily a bad film, but one which I just wasn't sure I enjoyed to the extent I thought I was going to, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Quantum of Solace, and now Iron Man 2.
    This was a big film, it had big ideas,
    There have been three films that I have seen in the cinema where I have left after the credits, not quite sure what to think of what i had just seen, not necessarily a bad film, but one which I just wasn't sure I enjoyed to the extent I thought I was going to, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Quantum of Solace, and now Iron Man 2.
    This was a big film, it had big ideas, and don't get me wrong, it delivered..but only to an extent.
    Picking up after the revelation of the first instalment, life goes on for Tony Stark, he has re-opened his fathers brainchild of Stark Expo, hoping to change direction away from weapons of mass destruction.
    Short-lived, in another world away sits Ivan Vanko, son of Anton Vanko, the man who drew up plans with Tony's father in regards to the expo.
    Back at home, Tony has to deal with his own government requesting that he hand over the Iron Man armour, but increasing health issues concerning his failure to find a substitute for the palladium he used to save his life has spawned reckless behaviour on Tony' part.
    What was surprising about this film was its failure to zero in and develop on the ideas at hand, Stark was basically dying in this feature, but this was brushed over with a few scenes Nick Fury and a cringe-worthy dance and drink in the Iron Man suit. On the subject of Nick Fury, there was a silly amount of characters in this film, all with under-developed stories that never led anywhere, Sam Rockwell also appears in this as a rival to Tony Stark, but he was just annoying and slightly orange. There was perhaps too much of a S.H.I.E.L.D presence that took over the movie. They had to play their part, but this wasn't a good movie with them in it, this was a moderately decent film until they were in it.
    Downey Jr did shine as usual, he has embraced his role to the point of belief that he could be Tony Stark, perhaps his best was shown in this film as it was quite an emotional journey, but with Iron Man himself only appearing a very small amount in this film, it didn't justify the over-abundance of characters and the messy and very anti-climatic ending, this could have been so much better on multiple levels, and unfortunately didn't deliver compared to the first effort.
    Expand
  37. Jan 17, 2012
    4
    I liked the first Iron Man. It was an origin story but didn't get overly bogged down in that. I also agreed with a lot of others in that Robert Downey Jr made an excellent Tony Stark, but upon seeing this movie I disagree and believe I was maybe wrong in the first place. I'm a comic book geek and I grew up with Tony Stark as a character. He is someone who wants control in order to doI liked the first Iron Man. It was an origin story but didn't get overly bogged down in that. I also agreed with a lot of others in that Robert Downey Jr made an excellent Tony Stark, but upon seeing this movie I disagree and believe I was maybe wrong in the first place. I'm a comic book geek and I grew up with Tony Stark as a character. He is someone who wants control in order to do the right thing or what he thinks is the right thing, he is a good man at heart but he is misguided, stubborn and egoistical. What's the problem you ask, is that what Downey is playing? Yes, but a shallow version of that, mixed with playing Robert Downey Jr. He's half acting now at best and it's less Tony Stark is Iron Man and now more Robert Downey Jr is Iron Man. We are told who he is but not really shown any depth other than the motivation of being a former arms dealer and the guilt of that. The racetrack scene is exciting though and well filmed as is the final fight, but the rest of the film is pretty dull. The villain Whip Lash just turning into another Iron Monger when he gets the suit bothered me too. Scarlett Johansson is totally miscast. Although I did like the casting of Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer. Expand
  38. Feb 7, 2012
    5
    This movie was disappointing. The problem with this movie is that the action sequences are 10 seconds. As well, the plot is less entertaining and more tedious. Scarlett Johansson's character is in the movie so that people can gawk at her. This movie is a step back from the first Iron Man.
  39. Aug 11, 2012
    6
    Robert Downey's Iron Man returns after his first film outing two years previous, with director Jon Favreau again at the helm. As with Iron Man, Favreau delivers another fun ride and allows Downey to steal the show as Tony Stark. Downey's egotist, smarmy and arrogant but ultimately likeable Tony Stark is the film. Other characters are purely used for Downey to show off in front of, flirtRobert Downey's Iron Man returns after his first film outing two years previous, with director Jon Favreau again at the helm. As with Iron Man, Favreau delivers another fun ride and allows Downey to steal the show as Tony Stark. Downey's egotist, smarmy and arrogant but ultimately likeable Tony Stark is the film. Other characters are purely used for Downey to show off in front of, flirt with or talk over. In honesty, this becomes a little frustrating by the end of the film but it doesn't become a terminal problem because of the hidden weakness and humility Stark shows on occasions. Also, it makes a change for a superhero to be so public with his identity and arrogance.

    Facing pressure from the US government on one side and the film's nemesis Whiplash on the other, Stark also struggles to cope with the ill effects of his power source and becomes isolated and irresponsible with his powers. The main antagonist is Whiplash, the son of a Russian inventor formerly employed by Stark Industries, who out of spite for the Stark family develops his own power source to rival Iron Man. The Russian factor brings about inevitably thin Cold War references but it is the idea that the US government sees Iron Man ans his technology as their property and does not wish to be dependent on Stark's alliance for protection that is the strongest plot string.

    When given scenes without Downey present, the supporting characters are a mixed bunch. The introduction of Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow to the Marvel Universe is flat and the same can be said for Gywneth Paltrow, who is talked over by Downey for all of her lines. Don Cheadle plays Iron Man's sidekick James Rhodes (aka War Machine) complete with some Robin-esque cheesy lines ("Get a roof"). The positives come in the form of Mickey Rourke as Whiplash and Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer. Rockwell injects some brilliant humour to proceedings for when you've had your fill of Downey.

    The action is evenly paced, although the action sequences towards the end of the film are a little robotic, literally, as Iron Man and War Machine take on Whiplash (in a similar suit) and his army of Iron Man suited drones.

    Overall, perhaps not as fresh as the original but still a better than average entry to the Marvel catalogue.
    Expand
  40. May 18, 2012
    6
    While I really liked the first Iron Man for some reason I, just could not get into the Iron Man 2 like I could the first one. The movie is still is funny and has action moments but not like the first one. The first one was truly great Iron Man 2 was only okay.
  41. Apr 21, 2014
    5
    I really felt like something was lacking from Iron Man so when i heard about the sequel i was of, coarse, very skeptical. Iron man 2 is an enjoyable film, none the less, yet has so many flaws that kinda out way the positive, first the Humor is funny, the action and fight scenes look amazing and spectacular and the acting is solid plus it hints at a future Avengers movie, yet despite allI really felt like something was lacking from Iron Man so when i heard about the sequel i was of, coarse, very skeptical. Iron man 2 is an enjoyable film, none the less, yet has so many flaws that kinda out way the positive, first the Humor is funny, the action and fight scenes look amazing and spectacular and the acting is solid plus it hints at a future Avengers movie, yet despite all this the things that matter to me the most are just Terrible, the characters come of as annoying and i really didn't care what was happening i just wanted to see stuff blow up, the Villain in appalling and is very forgettable, the plot doesn't really have any focus and feels boring and slow at times also whilst Iron man had a really weak final act this one has an awesome astonishing final act yet the rest feels like pointlessness that really served no purpose.

    Overall i wasn't really surprised that this sequel didn't live up to the good original film, yet, still i recommend siting down and watching the film cause it is pretty entertain when it wants to be.

    5/10
    Expand
  42. Dec 8, 2012
    5
    A massive disappointment after the brilliance of Iron Man. It is overstuffed and bloated. Seemingly satisfied with mediocrity. Not painful to watch, but lifeless and forgettable.
  43. Nov 7, 2012
    4
    This sequel has everything it's predecessor did, but the dialogue doesn't flow and the action isn't exciting. Sequels of this genre need to bring new ideas and visual brilliance to the screen. Iron Man II had neither.
  44. Jan 6, 2014
    6
    Ficou muito abaixo do primeiro mais divertido.
  45. Dec 8, 2012
    6
    Another great action, superhero movie. Definitely not as good as the first, but I still absolutely loved it. Robert Downey Jr. is great, and Gwyneth Paltrow is again, perfect. The addition of Scarlet Johansson was very nice as well.
  46. May 5, 2013
    5
    I was so bored when I went to see this at the movie theatre. It never really caught my interest or kept me entertained the whole time and the only really cool part was when Micky Rourke was attacking the race cars with his scorpion whips. Other than the boredom of it, everything else was fine. The acting, dialogue, and the special effects are why I did not give it a 4.
  47. May 1, 2013
    6
    It's not as fun and exciting like the first Iron Man movie, but it tends to still be a decent sequel. The first 45-50 minutes of the movie are just fun and exciting. It really relates to the first Iron Man movie. But then you reach the middle of the movie where the story starts to progressively slow down a lot. That's when it really feels like your watching a drunk version of the firstIt's not as fun and exciting like the first Iron Man movie, but it tends to still be a decent sequel. The first 45-50 minutes of the movie are just fun and exciting. It really relates to the first Iron Man movie. But then you reach the middle of the movie where the story starts to progressively slow down a lot. That's when it really feels like your watching a drunk version of the first Iron Man movie. The middle really sags unlike the first 45-50 minutes. It just "in a sense" drops. Near the end, it tends to kick it back into gear. As far as characters, Tony is still as enjoyable as the first movie. The actors are still about average. Except for Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke). He was incredible at the beginning of the movie, but (just like the storyline) it starts to become progressively slow and boring once he meets Hammer (Sam Rockwell). I wish Vanko could have been in the movie much longer and be bad-a** throughout and not just in the beginning and the end of the movie. Overall, with it's progressive slowness during the middle, in the end, it still turns out to be a decent sequel. Expand
  48. May 24, 2013
    5
    This was a good movie. A little thin in a few places but the actors and actresses pulled it off okay. There were some really good scenes in the movie like when the car alams all get set off. That was good they needed more scenes like that.
  49. Oct 9, 2013
    5
    After the excitement that was the first Iron Man, the sequel contributes little of anything notable. The story is simply not as entertaining and the action not as captivating as before.
  50. Sep 22, 2013
    6
    "Iron Man 2" is able to continue its predecessor's wonderful visual effects, however, the writing feels a bit unstable. Many sub plots are not well executed, and ends up to being pointless to the film. Along with this thought, I often found myself annoyed by the protagonist, Tony Stark, and felt that the lessons learned in the original film felt off put in this sequel. While many things"Iron Man 2" is able to continue its predecessor's wonderful visual effects, however, the writing feels a bit unstable. Many sub plots are not well executed, and ends up to being pointless to the film. Along with this thought, I often found myself annoyed by the protagonist, Tony Stark, and felt that the lessons learned in the original film felt off put in this sequel. While many things irked me in the film, the story isn't horribly crafted, and maintains a nicely put action-packed story. With a surprising finale that overpasses the middle section of pointless scenes, "Iron Man 3" manages to make it to an above average super hero film. Expand
  51. Nov 10, 2013
    5
    Rather a dull, mundane superhero sequel to an extraordinary action film. It has some of those moments that shine in its predecessor, mostly due to the charisma of Downey Jr., but the whole film is uninteresting and Downey is the only thing that builds interest. Shame, was a good movie, its predecessor was.
  52. Sep 20, 2013
    5
    Mickey Rourke makes for an okay antagonist to the story, but doesn't seem to pull it off all the way. Unlike the first one, Iron Man 2 is more depressing and dark, and this takes away from it. It's less fun than its predecessor.
  53. Oct 17, 2013
    4
    this film exaggerated a little in jokes and it ended up spoiling a bit on the seriousness of the film, it would be good since it was a continuation of a good movie.
  54. Nov 17, 2013
    4
    Iron Man 2 is a junkyard.
    The movie takes off where its prequel left off, an explosive beginning with intriguing storyline behind a possibly great villain. Then after nearly no storyline or explanation for most of the following events, the movie finally finishes with a drawn out fight scene. The entertainment is barely there, and the elements that were the keys to success for the original
    Iron Man 2 is a junkyard.
    The movie takes off where its prequel left off, an explosive beginning with intriguing storyline behind a possibly great villain. Then after nearly no storyline or explanation for most of the following events, the movie finally finishes with a drawn out fight scene. The entertainment is barely there, and the elements that were the keys to success for the original aren't apparent.
    Expand
  55. Apr 1, 2014
    5
    I really liked the first Iron Man, it was a solid film telling the retelling the story of how Tony Stark became Iron Man. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about Iron Man 2. This entry felt pretty bland and lacked the action and the excitement that the first film have leaving me dissatisfied. I did think that there were some somewhat humorous parts, but overall I just felt that thisI really liked the first Iron Man, it was a solid film telling the retelling the story of how Tony Stark became Iron Man. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about Iron Man 2. This entry felt pretty bland and lacked the action and the excitement that the first film have leaving me dissatisfied. I did think that there were some somewhat humorous parts, but overall I just felt that this film just focused too much on stupid plot points that were not at all necessary making this mess known as Iron Man 2. Robert Downy Jr. is a good Iron Man, but if you want him to be in an excellent film, go watch the first Iron Man, The Avengers or Iron Man 3 because those films rocked, this one...not so much. Expand
  56. Oct 25, 2014
    6
    Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) Analysis: Iron Man 2 (2010)

    With "Iron Man" earning its marks for its success, it doesn't come by surprise that the continuation tries to be just like most sequels -- Which means it's bigger, bolder and filled with new characters and story arcs. What if I say that "Iron Man 2" doesn't quite live up to its predecessor's intelligence, but it still manages
    Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) Analysis: Iron Man 2 (2010)

    With "Iron Man" earning its marks for its success, it doesn't come by surprise that the continuation tries to be just like most sequels -- Which means it's bigger, bolder and filled with new characters and story arcs. What if I say that "Iron Man 2" doesn't quite live up to its predecessor's intelligence, but it still manages to be a rock, solid installment in the franchise? A lot of things work here but they are no match to other MCU movies. This, along with "Thor: The Dark World", is one of the most inferior MCU films to date, which is not saying much because they're still fine on their own. And even if I was a little bit disappointed with this one, I reckon that it's not as bad as people make it out to be.

    With the world now aware of his dual life as the armored superhero Iron Man, billionaire inventor Tony Stark faces pressure from the government, the press, and the public to share his technology with the military. Unwilling to let go of his invention, Stark, along with Pepper Potts, and James "Rhodey" Rhodes at his side, must forge new alliances - and confront powerful enemies.

    The performances from the returned cast and new actors stay stable. Robert Downey Jr is, once again, fantastic. His character, Tony Stark, is the same eccentric, irresponsible and energized man that he was in the first movie. Robert practically is Tony Stark. Gwyneth Paltrow also returns as Pepper Potts and new characters such as Black Widow, Whiplash, Agent Coulson and Justin Hammer appear. But only Black Widow and Nick Fury are going to be very important in this large universe. One performance I really liked it was from Sam Rockwell, yeah that guy is awesome. I saw him in Matchstick Men, which was a pretty good movie. He basically supports the movie, by delivering fun dialogue. And what about Mickey Rourke? Well, he looks menacing and he also helps the movie overcome its flaws. The movie should have dug his story a little more, though. Because the character didn’t seem to have much depth or complexity.

    The plot also adds action sequences, and they are better than the first movie. We go from a racetrack battle in Monaco to a sexy Russian spy defeating dozens of officers in a building. And I gotta say, not only is Scarlett Johansson hot and charming, but she’s also athletic and packs a wallop. The final battle really disappointed me because I was expecting an intense and exciting fight between Ivan and Tony, and I only got a 1 minute battle. *sighs* Oh well…

    Things start getting too goofy in the movie when Tony organizes a party and starts pissing in his pants. Or when he starts yelling at the guests only to frighten them. Super-heroes are goofy in general but I don’t think they could get this silly. It’s this ridiculousness that tears the film apart and I feel disappointed because this movie deserved to be so much better than its predecessor. As I am doing a MCU marathon, I would love to see this movie have some references and easter eggs (it has some though) to enlarge my excitement for The Avengers, but the movie kinda comes up with its own story, unfortunately. The best thing related to MCU that really excited me was the post-credits scene, where we see Mjölnir, Thor’s hammer and then we see a lightning bolt sound effect in the background as the movie ends. AND that’s the next movie I’m going to review!

    Final Score to Iron Man 2: 6.5/10. I had to lower my score because this sequel is a bit disappointing. Its occasionally thin plot sometimes feels weird but ultimately, the film is saved by fine performances (mostly from its main lead) and some pulpy action. Next movie to review: The Mighty God of Thunder! Thor (2011)
    Expand
  57. May 4, 2014
    5
    Oh boy they really dropped the ball here. clearly just another cash grab before the avengers. Very boring and all around stupid sequel Few good action set pieces, casting, and music. other then that a very underwhelming movie.
  58. May 15, 2015
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's a good film with good action scenes with an interesting hero, but one of the major flaws is villain, or if the bad guys, they are not very interesting and occasionally get to be boring, and the producers made the same thing they did in the first film, using armor to face Iron Man, do not need to use a similar equipment with the iron man, he could have done differently, in short is a good movie but does not compare to the first. Expand
  59. Aug 9, 2014
    4
    This sequel certainly feels fresh for a superhero movie, but is generally inferior to the original. Downey is great, once again, and Johansson is undeniably a great cast for Black Widow. But you don't get to see something except for action, fights and Stark humour. As soon as you are a dedicated Marvel fan, you 'll be a bit disappointed, perhaps, but will enjoy it nevertheless.
  60. Jan 17, 2015
    5
    Being the sequel to the film that started it all for the MCU, I had high hopes for Iron Man 2. Unfortunately, the sequel was shockingly underwhelming and dull save for a few good action sequences. This was due to more than a few unnecessary subplots, dialog that just didn't feel as witty or funny as the first, and the villain is completely underdeveloped. Downey is still great as IronBeing the sequel to the film that started it all for the MCU, I had high hopes for Iron Man 2. Unfortunately, the sequel was shockingly underwhelming and dull save for a few good action sequences. This was due to more than a few unnecessary subplots, dialog that just didn't feel as witty or funny as the first, and the villain is completely underdeveloped. Downey is still great as Iron Man, although Mickey Rourke was severely miscast as the villain.

    5.3/10
    Expand
  61. Aug 9, 2014
    5
    This movie is visually impressive, but the story is boring, some of the jokes fall flat, they got whiplash of all of Iron Mans villains, even though Black Widow and the movie's climax are the best parts of this Iron Man movie
  62. Nov 13, 2014
    4
    Whereas Iron Man featured much character development in his first movie, his personality is on reset for...MONEY!!!!$$$$$. This movie does its best to be the original Iron Man, but fails in the fact that its sole purpose is a cashgrab and a year-filler until the Avengers came out. I would still enjoy it if didn't follow overused plot devices and had less than 13 minutes of action (when itWhereas Iron Man featured much character development in his first movie, his personality is on reset for...MONEY!!!!$$$$$. This movie does its best to be the original Iron Man, but fails in the fact that its sole purpose is a cashgrab and a year-filler until the Avengers came out. I would still enjoy it if didn't follow overused plot devices and had less than 13 minutes of action (when it claims to be an action movie!). Expand
  63. Dec 22, 2014
    5
    Most of us enjoyed watching the first film ,now most of you are excited to watch Iron Man 2 but after seeing it you're damn Unsatisfied and Disappointed.Iron Man 2 is not the sequel we wanted it to be,boring and Has weak Plot with a very weak villain.despite Scarlet Johansson and Robert Downey Jr's Great performance the movie still falls flat..
  64. Apr 7, 2015
    6
    Iron Man 2 is the typical cliched marvel film. A bad guy wants to be really bad and a good guy wants to stop him. Oh, well, watching Robert Downey Jr. in another movie as Iron Man is always going to be really awesome.
  65. Apr 22, 2015
    5
    he first Iron Man arrived at cinemas an oddball underdog — it was, lest we forget, a minor-property superhero movie from the director of Zathura, starring Zodiac’s third lead — and blasted out a gold-and-red-plated megahit. Now, two years on, things have changed. Robert Downey Jr. is, for the first time in his 40-year career, a giant star, while Ol’ Shellhead’s steely visage is famous fromhe first Iron Man arrived at cinemas an oddball underdog — it was, lest we forget, a minor-property superhero movie from the director of Zathura, starring Zodiac’s third lead — and blasted out a gold-and-red-plated megahit. Now, two years on, things have changed. Robert Downey Jr. is, for the first time in his 40-year career, a giant star, while Ol’ Shellhead’s steely visage is famous from Peru to Timbuktu. And here comes the sequel, hotly awaited as one of the year’s biggest releases, the second instalment of a metallurgy-based action franchise that’s sure to roll on and on. The Wrath Of Can, if you will.

    Like the sequels to Stars Trek and Wars, Iron Man 2 is a tale of revenge. But, unlike those films, this is one of the breeziest blockbusters you’re likely to see. There’s potential for darkness here: when we meet Tony, he’s hiding from everyone the fact he’s being gradually poisoned by his suit; villain Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) is hellbent on avenging perceived injustices done to his father; and Jim Rhodes (Don Cheadle) is considering betraying his pal by teaming with rival arms dealer Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell). But Jon Favreau, it seems, didn’t want to make his Part Two a downer. He’s out to have fun, not only in front of the camera (his chauffeur character, Happy Hogan, has been bumped up from cameo to supporting role, helping out Tony in two action scenes and getting pinned between Scarlett Johansson’s legs) but behind it too, focusing on gyrating cheerleaders and gleaming tech over inner turmoil.

    Not that there’s anything wrong with fun, of course, especially in a film about a millionaire with a magic flying suit. It’s just a shame it rarely feels there’s much to threaten Tony Stark’s perfect world. In the movie’s stand-out sequence, Vanko launches an assault on his nemesis at the Monaco Grand Prix, twirling twin whips that fizz with megavoltage electricity. As he effortlessly slices up oncoming cars and advances, cackling, on a suitless and scared Stark, it actually feels like there’s something at stake, that our hero has met his Waterloo. It’s a feeling that’s sadly absent from the rest of the runtime.

    Maybe it’s the fact that two of cinema’s most charismatic, weathered actors perform their most dramatic moments with faces cloaked by metal. The climax is a particular disappointment, a beefed-up re-run of the last film’s final reel, in which featureless metal men thump each other until one falls over.

    Rourke and Rockwell make satisfying, complementary villains, while Downey Jr. delivers again. Shame this sequel feels inessential, over-busy and a little, well, mechanical. Nothing they can’t put right for Iron Man 3.
    Expand
  66. May 2, 2015
    5
    Lackluster. this movie is boring as hell and is not a good sequel! what a total cash grab! this movie was a complete joke and continually dissappointed as it went along. Not good. aside from the score, the acting, and the very little action still looked visually stunning
Metascore
57

Mixed or average reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 40
  2. Negative: 1 out of 40
  1. Reviewed by: Nick de Semlyen
    60
    Rourke and Rockwell make satisfying, complementary villains, while Downey Jr. delivers again. Shame this sequel feels inessential, over-busy and a little, well, mechanical. Nothing they can’t put right for Iron Man 3.
  2. Well, that didn't take long. Everything fun and terrific about "Iron Man," a mere two years ago, has vanished with its sequel. In its place, Iron Man 2 has substituted noise, confusion, multiple villains, irrelevant stunts and misguided story lines.
  3. Reviewed by: Brian Lowry
    60
    Isn't as much fun as its predecessor, but by the time the smoke clears, it'll do.