Skip to content

Regarding the “Regarding an Iron Man 2 “analysis” (MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS)”

May 24, 2010

This person says I am wrong. I have posted extracts of his post along with my counter-points.

I’m writing this journal in order to “review” a flawed analysis of the movie Iron Man 2. Now I’m not going to argue with the reviewer’s opinion on the film overall, but they pointed out a few logical inconsistencies that, really, weren’t illogical.

The “analysis” can be found here: and is necessary to understand what exactly I’m arguing against.

I will be addressing the reviewer directly, so don’t feel I’m personally attacking you, unless of course, you areactually read it. Flowerpowerboi, in which case, take offense, I’d love that. Though I’m pretty sure they’ll never

Firstly, in regards to Anton saying “that should be you”, it was more than likely the legacy that he was referring to, changing the world, being the rich and famous one, as opposed to being Iron Man.

Also, had you been paying attention to the movie, you’d have realised that if Anton hadn’t been deported by Howard Stark for wanting to make money from the new technology instead of changing the world, Ivan wouldn’t have been in Russia, ergo the circumstances would have been different and he might have been the one kidnapped by terrorists, not Tony.

I’d hardly call his tattoos an inaccuracy, again with the paying attention; later in the film it is explained that Ivan went to prison for at least 15 years for selling weapons-grade plutonium to Pakistan, a Russian prison. He more than likely associated with the Russian mob either prior to or during his time there, hence the tattoos, each one means something in Russian prison/Mafia circles. This is explained by Rourke in an interview, he researched thoroughly for the role, and he was even the one to suggest the pet for Ivan.

And the pet sucked. Also, he was in prison for about 15 years, you say. The tattoos are explained by the mob, agreed. Why is he, then, so poor? The mob is not stupid to not use the obvious talents that Vanko has. They could have and would have used his talents for their benefit. They didn’t. Also, the ‘mob’ in the USSR was basically a bunch of 24 hour party people; they’d have used Ivan and never let him go. Or they’d at least have rewarded him better for services rendered. He wouldn’t be so poor.

The focus on Tony’s dying is more to do with character development than anything else, Tony’s worst enemy is himself, that’s the battle he was fighting. He was lying to people he cared about, pushing them away and rapidly self destructing because he was running out of hope.

Exactly. It was slightly pointless. The character didn’t change, there was no growth and he’s back to normal by the end of it. He just kisses Pepper and makes up with Rhodey. This, again, was inevitable. They could have done more. “Kicking some ass” is used as a metaphor here, for doing something better with that time. That time could have been utilized better to create a bridge for the Avenger’s initiative or for giving the other characters some dimension. Everyone knows by the end of the first movie that Tony is a bit of an asshole and his own worst enemy. Why repeat yourself over and over again?

Iron Man, and Marvel in general, are more focussed on how the characters develop, rather than just the action, if you’re looking for more “ass kicking”, go watch Batman. Batman is lacking in character but all for punching people in the face for the sake of his dead parents.

Batman, maybe, doesn’t have the best origin in the world. I don’t see the character not developing at all. You probably haven’t read the comics well. Batman Year One was incredibly clear on the point that he isn’t doing it just to avenge his parents. Even if you watch Batman Begins, you understand that he isn’t doing it just for the sake of his dead parents. The dead parents are the things that spur him on to fight injustice. Batman is inspired from Zorro. The death of his parents is the incident that constantly reminds him of the fact that injustice exists. The idea is he will stop when he thinks there is a world where he isn’t needed.

Marvel have “realistic” heroes, they’re not perfect, they have their issues, and as such is touched upon lightly by Tony drinking himself into a stupor (more thoroughly explored in “Demon in a Bottle”). It wasn’t so much about the dying, more about how he was reacting to it.

No superhero is perfect. Every comic book has addressed that. Marvel superheroes, are merely, generally, always right. One story-line does not make up for a better developed character. He was reacting to it the way anyone would? He isn’t anyone. He is a super-hero. There is no way that he can react in the manner he was reacting.

It has become apparent that you probably should have watched it more than once, Tony actually comments on the security, showing they were just as baffled as you were. However, regarding “because terrorists only existed in the first Iron Man movie” I don’t know whether you noticed the whole “Welcome to Stark Expo” thing, but I believe Tony mentioned being the source of “the world’s longest period of world peace”, which is reiterated in the Court scene, also in the newspaper clippings on Ivan’s wall when he is making his arc reactor.

a) Tony comments on the security. Yay. Still doesn’t explain the breach. They were baffled, you say. Still doesn’t explain the breach. NO METAL DETECTORS? NO PERSONNEL CHECK? BUNCH OF RICH PEOPLE GOING TO BE AT SAID EVENT, NO ONE SPOTS THE IMPOSTOR. Doesn’t explain the breach. Saying that there is no security doesn’t clear up a plot hole.

b)  I didn’t watch it more than once because I went to a press screening and then had a job that didn’t allow me to watch it more than once.

c) Tony mentioned being the source of “the world’s longest period of world peace”, which is reiterated in the Court scene, also in the newspaper clippings on Ivan’s wall when he is making his arc reactor. – Okay. Your point being? Has Tony eliminated terrorists everywhere? Has Tony solved various other issues like Israel-Palestine? There are terrorists everywhere. Different things are defined as terrorists by different people. He may be a nuclear deterrent; he is not a personal soldier to every government in the world. If he’d use the suit to THAT extent, he’d be dead by the second movie, going by the logic presented in the second movie. Plus, there wasn’t enough time. Killing Obadiah Stane does not make terrorism stop. Also, if he were dying and so concerned about the peace, he’d probably look for someone to take on the Ironman mantle. That would be logical. For a super-hero.

The point I’m trying to make is Iron Man is a “nuclear deterrent”, which also includes putting a damper on terrorist activity, lulling people into an unintentionally false sense of security where they feel safe enough to not be thorough in their security precautions.

I’d be hard pressed to find anyone reacting the way you say they will. The existence of a weapon as potent as the Ironman suit would only make people more security conscious. The general public would act in the same way you say they would, but governments all over the world would not. And enemies of governments, read terrorists, would not either. A threat that huge would mobilize them to react in a large way. This, I concede, could be the plot of the third movie, but that point is neither here nor there. Ironman or no, security conditions for events as huge as these are never relaxed. It is an international event, things like Interpol are involved. I doubt they’d be that lax.

Skipping ahead to Vanko’s break out. Again with the paying attention (or lack thereof), when Tony is going to talk to Ivan the first time, did you not see in SUBTITLES on the screen that they “checked his fingerprints and came up with nothing”? No? Really? Hmmm. They didn’t need to take any DNA samples as they’d seen his crime, they had video proof of it; they didn’t need further evidence. The body was probably mangled beyond recognition, so fingerprints were possibly destroyed (they might have been before he was put in the cell), so even though they now had Ivan’s prints on record, they probably had nothing to match it to.

Vanko was in jail, you say. Russian jail. They had records. These records could be obtained. They didn’t need to take any DNA samples for proof? Yes. They didn’t. It is protocol, I think to take certain samples when a guy is put in jail. Especially in a high security prison when you’re caught for disrupting an international event in which participants from multiple nations are involved? Not as big as the Olympics, I agree, but pretty big. They had video proof. Good for them and good for you. The DNA isn’t meant for evidence; it is generally needed for identification of the person caught. Even if they had no name for Vanko, they could still keep the records until they found an identity they could paste on his face. They could use these records to figure out if the body was Vanko’s or not.

If you were really going to justify any lack of logic here, it would be “why didn’t they notice that the destroyed body severely lacked in METAL TEETH?”

And those wouldn’t be ‘mangled up’ or knocked out in a blast?

Also, I’d like to point out that when Tony is researching Ivan, he found that the man had actually disappeared off of the grid after going to prison, meaning most records ceased to exist (Tony is the kind of man with the resources and skills to dig up information, not to mention the fact that he found out Ivan’s name, the police did not).

Exactly. International incident, big deal all around, people going nuts and the police find doodle-squat, the businessman does. Wow. Also, he went ‘off of the grid’ as you put it after going to prison. When he did go to prison, there would be records from then.

This is what really bothers me, I’m not even sure you were watching the same film. Tony didn’t know the element to synthesize, his father did, and he required information Nick Fury had regarding the element before he could synthesize it. He had to work out a puzzle in a set up he didn’t have readily available in his home and didn’t know held the information he needed prior to watching the reels.

HI! HE KNOWS WHAT ELEMENT TO SYNTHESIZE AFTER HE GETS ALL THE INFO? GOOD. He knows HOW to synthesize an element, not knows the element. He knows what effect palladium and other elements have on his body. He knows a ton of shit. He doesn’t know that a simple compound like lithium dioxide can counter palladium poisoning? Lithium dioxide, which I don’t believe exists, but it can in comic book universe, would be a pretty normal to obtain/create compound. If he’s smart enough to be able to do that, he should be smart enough to figure out lithium dioxide counters palladium poisoning. I was cool with the synthesizing stuff part. Particle accelerators rule.

Tell me this, would you think to scan a model your dad made 30 years ago and digitally tear it apart until you found the molecular structure of a new element? No, you wouldn’t. Tony didn’t piece this together until he had all of the facts, including his father’s notes.


Vanko’s expertise in just about everything, as a physicist he more than likely worked for the Russian government or military or some such prior to going to prison (after all, how else would you obtain weapons-grade plutonium to sell to another country? Dig it up in your back yard? Unlikely).

Yes. Because people who work with the Russian government or military know EVERYTHING. Yes. He was getting plutonium, so what? North Korea has weapons grade plutonium, doesn’t make them awesome. If you scored a bunch of plutonium, you wouldn’t become a hacker from a physicist. He’s a computer programmer, he is a physicist, and he is a Mafioso, an engineer, a bird trainer and everything else. Makes no sense to me.

His father worked with Howard Stark and was likely to have experience in the same or correlating fields as Howard. Anton said at the beginning of the film “All I can leave you is my knowledge”, which probably means he taught Ivan everything he knew. Due to his alcohol abuse and his anger at Stark Industries, he instilled Ivan with his hatred, wanting his son to get the revenge he couldn’t.

Anton taught Ivan everything Ivan knew. Home-schooling 101 with EVERYTHING from computer programming to creating robots to physics to engineering to controlling Artificial Intelligence and programming it to hydraulics to weapons development to EVERYTHING. I’m only wondering why my daddy ain’t daddy cool.

As I’ve said, it was likely he was already working for the Russian government (and the possibly the Russian mob) before he went to prison. I don’t need to explain this again, but I will add that whilst working with science, the mob and also during his time in prison, its likely Ivan learned things from those he crossed paths with.

Again, they’re just nice benevolent people who care so much about him that they want to teach him a whole ton of stuff like that. I know where you’re coming from. Either that or Russian prisons have a buncha robot building factories.

Any “logical flaws” you’ve pointed out are flaws in your own logic, I’m afraid; most everything you’ve pointed out is your own misinterpretation and your inability to actually pay attention to the film you’re reviewing.

And to top it all off, you have realised this is a comic book movie haven’t you? Comic books have their own logic; you might want to look into that someday.

Yes. I realize they do. Which is fine as far as I am concerned. They don’t need to defy logic.

How Comic Book Logic applies to this film is also linked with Ivan’s knowledge of just about everything, hell Tony’srealistic. knowledge is equally as bizarre as Ivan’s. You can’t honestly think that realism in the aspects of their knowledge would make for a good film, can you? Tony wouldn’t have been able to make his suit if he didn’t have such a vast amount of knowledge, if he was more

Tony is an MIT graduate. He is also a weapons developer. He does have a bit of a thing going there, with him. He’s also insanely rich, which Ivan isn’t.

Ivan is the same; he wouldn’t make for a particularly interesting villain if all he did was try to bamboozle Tony with physics.

He would, actually. That would be the coolest super-hero movie ever.

Disclaimer: I do not, in any way, dislike Batman comics, games, TV shows or movies; I love them actually, but Batman isn’t the most in-depth superhero on the planet now is he? His stories are more focussed on the action and the villains than building any actual sense of character in old Bruce. There isn’t really that long a period where revenge for your dead parents can be considered valid, especially when you’ve already seen the murderer dealt with (in the film anyway).

I also do not condone taking Comic Book movies seriously, nor do I feel that anyone has the right to be quite so pants-on-head-retarded when reviewing media. Honestly, if you’re going to review something, the least you can do is pay attention to the damned thing.

I do, however, promote occasional seriousness within your preferred fandom, as you could one day be faced by a numpty like “Flowerpowerboi” and feel the need to respond nerdily.


One Comment leave one →
  1. June 19, 2010 11:01 am

    Your headline “regarding the &#8220regarding an iron man 2 &#8220analysis&#8221 (m…” is profound, the benefits of understanding it are septuple..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: