ext_1936 ([identity profile] walkingshadow.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] walkingshadow 2010-05-27 02:20 pm (UTC)

We were both frustrated that they had so many good ideas and then didn't really develop them.

YES. Exactly this. You would think a franchise would be excited to have so many ideas so they could, you know, make a lot of movies? Why were they compelled to squish everything into this one? There isn't time to tell eight stories, and if you try, you just end up telling none of them. Argh!

I think one of the reasons the first movie's ending was so engaging, was that we knew how hurt and conflicted Tony had to be fighting the man who had been a father figure for so many years. There was none of that drama in this movie because they didn't bother to develop the relationship between Vanko and Tony - their parallel stories, how Tony's father had destroyed Vanko's father and the guilt that Tony could have felt over this could have added so much to the final battle.

Agreed! We kind of knew why Vanko had it in for Tony, but the first time they fought, Tony was surprised because he had NO IDEA who he was; and the second time they fought, Tony was surprised again because he'd had no idea Vanko was still in the picture; and in the meantime they hadn't developed the relationship between them AT ALL, because Tony was busy with six other plots! The battle at the end had no meaning for Tony, Vanko's life or death meant nothing to Tony, so why would it mean anything to the audience?

And hey, don't feel the need to stop ranting on my account!

Post a comment in response:

Identity URL: 
Account name:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.


If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org

Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.