Who Cares? — Early 'Iron Man 2' Reviews Not So Hot

**** This post was updated for clarity

The list of films I’m literally counting down the days to see each summer gets shorter every year. This is either due to my advancing middle age or Hollywood’s advancing suckery. Regardless, few films were as pure pleasure of a surprise as the original “Iron Man,” which seemed to come out of nowhere in 2007 and knock us all out. Part of the thrill was watching Robert Downey Jr. become an icon before our very eyes. Not since Johnny Depp’s Captain Jack Sparrow effortlessly stepped from his sinking ship and onto that pier had a film character created such a reservoir of a goodwill that a franchise was both inevitable and welcome.

So, likes “Pirates 2,” we eagerly anticipate “Iron Man 2.” As news dribbled out, a big plus was the return of the main players and the casting of Mickey Rourke as the villain, Whiplash; the big who cares was Don Cheadle stepping into the role originated by Terence Howard; the big minus was the casting of Scarlett Johansson and not just because she’s Scarlett Johansson. What she represents is the film’s second villain Black Widow (UPDATE: this may be incorrect. I was going by BW’s comic origin story. Sam Rockwell’s Hammer is either villain #2 or #3, depending on how the film uses Black Widow) and the whole idea of a second villain brings back unpleasant memories of Batman Returns and Spider-Man 3. Meaning, overstuffed plots with too much going on resulting in the lack of a focused story impossible to lose yourself in.

Unless the film critic mentions the dreaded shaky-cam, reviews don’t normally have much of an effect on me. It’s just one person’s opinion, no less or more valid than the neighborhood mailman, crossing guard or the illegal aliens who take care of my yard. But when a review makes sense, when it locks a piece into place that was already floating ’round my mind, that’s when it gets my attention. And today’s review in the Hollywood Reporter diminished my expectations … some — which isn’t necessarily a bad thing:

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. A film series that started out with critical and commercial success will have to settle for only the latter with this sequel; Robert Downey Jr.’s return as Tony Stark/Iron Man will assure that.

Den of Geek is a little more enthusiastic, but in an exceptionally well-written review, they seconded the confirmation of my concerns:

Yet there’s no getting away from it: Iron Man 2 is a film that can’t quite recapture the magic of the first instalment. You can’t fault the fact that it tries: it throws as much as it can at you, admittedly stretching elements a little too thinly, but it’s doggedly determined to give you your money’s worth. There’s little doubt that you get it, too.

I’m sick of over-stuffed films.

One piece of good news is that over at AICN, Harry Knowles is gushing over the sequel’s “awesomery.” A great word and because I share it, I’ve always admired Harry’s movie enthusiasm, but our tastes are wildly different (though there was a moment of unspoken kinship over our mutual loathing of “Transformers 2.”)

Doesn’t matter, though. Nothing does. This is “Iron Man 2,” and when this sucker opens next Friday, I’ll be there — eager, excited and ready to fall in love with Tony Stark all over again.

This child-like anticipation which cannot be diminished by age, circumstance or a couple of troubling reviews represents The Magical Power Of Movies when Hollywood gets one right … and with “Iron Man,” Hollywood got one right, and then some.