BREAKING: Mickey Rourke, Sam Rockwell to Play 'Iron Man 2' Villain(s)!

in the first movie, they blended the "original" and "ultimate" iron man/tony stark well. that being said, maybe Natasha is a love interest for Stark as she was in the Ultimates 2. In that, she was working against Stark and shot Jarvis in the head! She could very well be closer to that character in this movie too. (working w/ Crimson Dynamo or KGB, whatever) As far as being an assistant, maybe they don't want to leak all the details out. Personally, I enjoy a few surprises when i go to the movie, if i hear about every little detail, it takes away from the movie because i'm going through a checklist in my head. I'll still enjoy watching two suited heroes go at it, but why not the Mandarin in the sequel? They set up "the five rings" in the first movie, i'd like to see that pay off. Anyways, Iron Man 2 will get my money regardless.

In the two recent films, Batman did little more then fight with nutcases in masks/facepaint that wanted nothing else but to see Gotham burn... Spidey fought men all torn by the same internal conflicts as him and all sharing similar origins, Hellboy bashed sticky monsters in the head again, Superman is always going to be putting a stop to Luthor's plans, the Transformers are always going to face off against other transformers, Blade will always fight Vampires... See where I am going here?

Sometimes the themes are more important then some implied redundancy that only exists on paper. It has been said that his is the pinnacle of wartime technology and unless they chose to go down the magic Mandarin road, which they don’t seem to want to do in quite that way, people using that tech against him simply makes the most sense. They even set that concept up in the first film. Just because they are sticking to those themes does not mean they are not capable of bringing something fresh or exciting. The modifications that The Dynamo makes to his suit are going to make it a whole different thing next to Iron Monger. Add the SFX/VFX that are going to make this battle look entirely unique from the last and I think you will find there is nothing to worry about.

Besides, nobody is complaining about War Machine being a redundant character just because Iron Man already wears a suit... That's just the way this universe works. On top of that, we have Hawkeye starting out on Tony's bad side, Black Widow doing the same but in an admittedly sexier fashion and besides, we will have plenty of chance to see him face something new in The Avengers, more then likely that will include the Hulk, which is, I think, exactly what you are looking for but even if not, it's not as if they are going to retread the same ground just by sticking to what makes his world work. The fact is, Iron Man does fight a lot of people in suits similar to his and it works just fine in the comics and it's going to work just fine in the film.

But that is not to say that something out of left field and having little to do with Powered Armor could not work, so out of curiosity, what would you have him face in Part 2 that manages to fit in with the path they have chosen for this branch of the Marvel Universe? Because I personally could not be more excited to hear this, all these characters together sounds like exactly the type of film I'd want to see.

I think you kind of proved my point with the examples you cited. I find it hard to believe that you think Ras al Ghul is the same as the joker, or that Doc Oc. is the same as the Green Goblin, or that the baddies in Hellboy 2 were the same as the Nazi's in the first one. The other examples you list are actually problems for the films! The complaint about Transformers was that it was just a bunch of identical robots fighting each other and you couldn't tell who was who. Superman Returns got bashed for bringing back the same type of tired Real Estate scheme that Lex Luthor was doing in the original Donnor movie. One of the things (among many) that I didn't like about Spidey 3 was that they brought back the original style of bad guy from the first one by having Harry become a villian for the first 9/10's of the movie. And one of the few reasons I read of for people not liking the first Iron Man movie (which I thought was great by the way) was that at the end of descended into 2 CGI robots battling one another for 15 minutes. So yeah, this does seem redundant, and if all Iron Man can offer is a bunch of guys battling in metal suits than it runs the risk of becoming stale and boring. Yeah, him fighting the Hulk would be awesome, but that doesn't have to be it. I don't read the comments, so my original question was "Is this all that he ever has to face? His only true villians are going to be other guys with the finances to construct their own suits?". I definitely don't want to watch that more than once.

First and foremost, if you think that I think that any of the villains I mentioned are the same, then I fear you may have missed my point altogether. See, I don't think the Joker, Scarecrow, and Two-face are the same, despite all three being suit wearing men with scary faces. Nor do I think Raz and the Joker are anywhere near the same, despite having similar goals for Gotham.
As for the Nazis, they where not at all what I referred to, they were little more the pawns in the first film... It was monsters I cited. Grand, sticky monsters that made up many of the action scenes in both Hellboy 1 and 2. What I said was that while they were similar, they were written and presented differently enough that the plot did not feel stale. By the same logic, I think that the Crimson Dynamo and Iron Monger have the potential to be very different characters with very different things to offer us moviegoers, even if their goals and methods of execution sound similar.

See, they ARE all different. They, along with everyone else I mentioned (Regardless of your individual opinions of their quality) all share major themes that tie into and set up their respective universes. And it just so happens men in metal suits are a part of the Iron Man universe and so long as the story is fresh, there is no reason to believe the execution will feel redundant. None whatsoever. Do you see what I am saying? You are telling me these other characters are different from one another and you are correct. You know it to be true as much as I do. But at the same time, you are lumping Iron Man villain's together simply because you have not seen the execution yet.

For example, as you yourself pointed out, Gobby and Doc Ock are totally different. So which, then, am I referring to?

"Spider-Man is forced to face off with a scientist he once respected, who seeks revenge after an experiment gone wrong drives the man insane. The resulting voices the scientist hears in his head will drive the narrative forward as he uses the technology he initially developed for good, to try and kill Spider-Man, as well as the woman he loves."


See? Same on paper, different on film... That is all I ever tried to say. Any further complaints you have about this or the other films I mentioned are not shared by me and amount to little more then opinion, so I cannot presume to comment on them. Although I'll concede one point you made and take it a step further... Simply by making a sequel, ANY sequel, you run the risk of becoming stale. For Iron Man, using, say, Fin Fang Foom isn't going eliminate that risk but at the same time, Crimson Dynamo doesn't guarantee it will happen either.

Dig?