The script is poor. Most of the film is either uninteresting or too noisy. Downey has, for me, by now overstayed his welcome with his arrogance and smugness. I'm tempted to summerize the movie in a cheesy pun... Oh hell, here goes. My one-word review is: Leaden.

The main problem is that the film is completely toothless. Instead of any interesting discussion of Tony's family, or actually making him deal with realistic problems, the story hinges on him being poisoned with palladium and then he wizards his way out of it in an amazingly ho-hum and idiotic scene. After the explosions are over, you can't help but notice that nothing actually happened.

Let's get something straight between you and I, Iron Man: I think you look cool, and I think your films have great sound design and effects that really aides said coolness, and I think your human-faced counterpart is always funny and a joy to watch, but you'll still always just be... Iron Man to me. You're not a superhero that makes me squeal, let's put it that way. What makes your sequel marginally better than your debut is the people having fun around you like Rockwell and Rourke.

Over the line product placement. Too many actors / characters. Didn't make sense / Poor story / Holes. Tried harder to get you excited for the future (Avenger movies) than they did selling this one. Overall it's just a flashy setup flick with cheesy one liners and special effects. At least it wasn't as bad as Spider-Man 3.

It's actually kind of nice to see a super-hero doing stupid things, but to me, the best thing about Tony Stark is that he deserves his out-of-control ego. Taking that away seemed out of place.

A few decent set pieces but overall pretty messy.

A fine comic book film. In the sense that it is disposable and trite. I'm kidding, comics are cool. Nonetheless, wait for the hardcover methinks -- you can skip this filler arc.

Action packed but, ultimately, forgettable.

Overall a good sequel, that comes along with some flaws and a story that´s too stuffed and needless complicated. Maybe Favreau wanted to follow the example of Jack Synder´s Watchmen. Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke are acting really great. If you liked the first one you won´t be disappointed.

GOOD: Special Effects,Action Scenes,Like new Mark VI suit, Black Widow in outfit! ; BAD: New Rhody: doesn't connect as well w/ Tony,looks very different,acts mean,boring,Too spastic,no clear plot,jumps around too much,Too many characters & plotlines,Potts is annoying, whiny,Potts as CEO make no sense,Black Widow felt wasted,How did Rhody so easily know how to use Iron Man?,Whiplash costume was horrible!Looked like a gay biker dude,Stark health danger didn't feel real, resolution too quick

Okay, so listen. I saw the trailer and had high expectations. I saw reviews and had low expectations. I saw the movie which hit somewhere down the middle. If you look at it in its broader context, Iron Man 2 is still in the top tier of superhero movies. I liked the public vs private debate that was going on in the movie, I liked the humour, and let's face it, the villain was better than in the first one. That being said, nothing beats the character growth that went on in Iron Man 1.

* Casting, Acting : 8 * Script : 7 * Directing, Aura : 7 * Ease of Viewing : 8 * Naked Eye : 7

Disappointing in light of the first movie. Feels like it went in the Transformers 2 trap: More effects, more explosions, more fights, more characters, more over-the-top broad comedy and insanely stupid "intrigues" (the whole Hammer-character is implausible). Plot suffers, tension suffers, credibility suffers BIG-TIME.