Superman II

Just a few years after the first “Superman” hit, along came the sequel that was bound to happen. “Superman II,” sadly, but expectedly, did not really live up to its predecessor. The effects did not improve from the last one at all, things got a whole lot cornier this time around, and the quality of acting ranged from good to terrible. At least they kept the theme song. It’s one of the only things in the film that didn’t disappoint on some level.

Understandably, special effects back in 1980 were nothing like they are today, but in “Superman II,” Superman still looks like a man suspended by wires who never flies in the direction his arms are pointing. If anything, the effects are worse than in the first movie. “Superman II” boasts its ability to make big explosions, and wreck stuff. This is not saying much when we saw entire planets exploding, and saw Superman flying around the Earth at a gazillion miles per second in the last movie three years prior. So the lack of improved, or at least matched, special effects was pretty disheartening.

“Superman II” was undeniably a corny movie. While turning back time by making the Earth turn clockwise in the last film is also corny, nothing beats the fact that, somehow, his magical ice palace has a machine that can turn him human just when that’s what he wants. Also, I don’t think anyone knew that Superman had the ability to make copies of himself, and to teleport too. But of course, making copies of himself to stop multiple crimes at once is out of the question. So is teleporting himself to the scene of the crime, because I guess that flying is better for the public image. He really only uses those particular powers to show off and get himself laid with Lois.

The Man of Steel himself, Christopher Reeve, delivered a smashing performance as always. With an equally gifted performance came Margot Kidder as Lois Lane. The two had a very believable chemistry, albeit a bit hidden in this sequel by unnecessary slapstick comedy. Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor was very disappointing this time around. In the first film, the director established him as a twisted, evil man in a sad scene involving a New York cop. He was still funny, of course, but we all knew what he was capable of. In this film, they dropped all of that and turned him into a obnoxious, flamboyant and silly character that audiences despised. Finally, the villainous triumvirate itself. The three Kryptonian baddies were laughable. They had no acting talent at all, and were horribly monotonous.

“Superman II” failed to live up to the standard set by its predecessor. Much of the acting was disappointing, as were the visual effects. Still, it’s worth seeing once. I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Iron Man 2

How the creators of the “Iron Man” series could have let something so good slip from their fingers like this is beyond my comprehension. But still, it happened. “Iron Man 2” was vastly inferior to its precursor, and it was the biggest disappointment of the summer movie season. It would have been as great as the first film if it had just repeated the techniques that worked so well for it before, instead of trying to cram tons of material into it and leaving quality as an afterthought. What the first film was so careful not to do was blatantly did in the sequel: too many new characters and subplots were added, and so for the entire running length things progressed sluggishly and slowly. “Iron Man 2” was a complete dissatisfaction.

In the last movie there were only four main characters, which made for quality character development and upped their likeability factor. These characters are back with an added six main characters, all without that likeability, and fighting for attention throughout the film. And if you count the Don Cheadle actor change, there are actually seven new characters. Half of these characters are not even necessary, and it slows down the whole film with their nonstop recurrences. And it makes it feel as though this movie only exists to bridge the gap between the first film and the upcoming “Avengers” film, especially after the “Thor” teaser after the end credits.

The story in “Iron Man 2” was also overloaded and confusing. The main plot involved Iron Man struggling to deal with Whiplash, a Russian man with weaponry similar to Tony’s. The many subplots included Tony’s armor slowly killing him, his flawed relationship with his father, his involvement with S.H.I.E.L.D., Black Widow, his difficulties with his rival Justin Hammer, his difficulties with Senator Stern, his alcoholism, his faulty friendship with Rhodey, his position on the Avengers team, and the introduction of Thor. I probably missed a few, as well. This is just overwhelming, and the film is too full of all this garbage to really advance the main “Iron Man” storyline. Therefore, it also increases the feeling that the film only exists to get tons of characters and subplots introduced so that we know who and what they are when they return in future films.

It is impossible to review “Iron Man 2” without mercilessly comparing it to its predecessor, and this is why it receives such criticisms. It overworked new characters and plotlines too much, and made the whole movie seem slow and low-quality. This kept the main storyline from progressing much at all, which was what engendered a dissatisfied feeling when the film finally ended. This film is still worth seeing, but maybe not in theaters. It gets 5 out of 10 stars.