It’s the kind of criss-cross universe comparable to that of their comics that made geeks salivate at the mouth. They even started off pretty well. “Iron Man” had an inspired bit of casting in Robert Downey Jr. and ended up making $318.4 million domestically. They even threw in a cameo of Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury! Genius, I say.

Next came the more mediocre “The Incredible Hulk” which barely managed to top its Eric Bana-starring previous incarnation at the box office. But the films successfully began Marvel’s path to the upcoming “Avengers.” There were even rumors that “Hulk” star Edward Norton was so passionate about the character that he took on uncredited roles as both a producer and a screenwriter. He certainly wanted in on “Avengers.”

The company looked like it was different from the ignorant studios that seem to own Hollywood. They were giving fans what they wanted by hiring quality filmmakers and showing a dedication to the quality of their own projects–a live-action Pixar, if you will.

But the studio truly hadn’t been put to the test yet. Their next film was “Iron Man 2,” and it was a clunker if there ever was one. I mean, how do you mess up a film when you have Downey Jr., Jackson, Sam Rockwell and Mickey frickin’ Rourke!? Well, they managed to do it, alright. Audiences expecting the same smarts and energy as the first installment experienced shoddy storytelling, a plot that was not clearly fleshed out, and montages such as Tony Stark shooting lasers around a room and suddenly discovering a new atom… seriously?

What about the dark, alcoholic Tony Stark fans love from the comics? Why were actors like Rockwell and Rourke literally wasted, only performing in scenes necessary to move the plot forward but not to flesh out character? I mean, no one’s going to disagree that they are both excellent character actors.

The studio was clearly becoming a run-of-the-mill entity interested more in getting out quick, fast food-like product rather than giving people memorable films that entertain and refresh far beyond a 90-minute popcorn summer film. Rourke, known for his brutal honesty about everyone from himself to those he works with, outed the studio while he was out promoting the film “Immortals.” Rourke made the following statements about his experience working with the studio:

[W]hen I did Ivan Vanko in Iron Man, I fought… You know, I explained to Justin Theroux, to the writer, and to [Jon] Favreau, that I wanted to bring some other layers and colors [to the character], not just make this Russian a complete murderous revenging bad guy. And they allowed me to do that. Unfortunately, the [people] at Marvel just wanted a one-dimensional bad guy, so most of the performance ended up the floor.

[It’s] ****ing too bad, but it’s their loss. If they want to make mindless comic book movies, then I don’t want to be a part of that. I don’t want to have to care so much and work so hard, and then fight them for intelligent reasoning, and just because they’re calling the shots they… You know, I didn’t work for three months on the accent and all the adjustments and go to Russia just so I could end up on the floor. Because that can make somebody say at the end of the day, oh **** ‘em, I’m just going to mail it in. But I’m not that kind of guy. I’m never going to mail it in.

If they let you, play the bad guy with other dimensions other than one-dimensional. You have to fight for that though, to bring layers to the character. Otherwise, if you’re working for the wrong studio or let’s say a director that doesn’t have any balls, then they’re just gonna want it to be the evil bad guy. […] So, if you’re working with some good studio guys that got brains and you’re working with a director with a set of nuts that’ll let you incorporate that then it’s fun. Otherwise, you end up with what happened on “Iron Man.”

That sounds like enough explanation as to why “Iron Man 2″ felt like it was made by a 13-year-old boy. The films just got worse in quality with the release of “Thor” and “Captain America.” I mean, they picked the guy who directed “Jumanji” to direct “Captain America!” The same guy who was quoted time and time again wanting to downplay the patriotic side of Captain America. What? I thought these guys were trying to be more faithful to the characters they showed on screen. His name is Captain America! The film was awful. The special effects showing Chris Evans as a scrawny pre-Captain America were just sad and awkward. The action scenes were so cardboard that the film felt like it had no personality. And it all just felt like one big rush to the setup for “The Avengers” at the end. Clearly, Marvel Studios had become interested in simply making mindless comic book movies, which is the reason they took control of these projects in the first place.

The studio also dumbly fired Norton when it came time to cast The Hulk in “The Avengers,” and it replaced him with Mark Ruffalo. Here was their explanation:

We have made the decision to not bring Ed Norton back to portray the title role of Bruce Banner in the Avengers. Our decision is definitely not one based on monetary factors, but instead rooted in the need for an actor who embodies the creativity and collaborative spirit of our other talented cast members. The Avengers demands players who thrive working as part of an ensemble, as evidenced by Robert, Chris H, Chris E, Sam, Scarlett, and all of our talented casts. We are looking to announce a name actor who fulfills these requirements, and is passionate about the iconic role in the coming weeks.

I’m not the smartest guy in the world, but I can read between the lines. Basically, they needed someone who was more of a puppet than Norton and whose voice would not interrupt theirs. So much for being a novel idea.

Has Marvel Studios really been a success? Not really. “Iron Man” and “Iron Man 2″ managed to pull in heavy sums, but “The Incredible Hulk” couldn’t even match its production budget with its domestic haul. Neither “Thor” nor “Captain America: The First Avenger” could even touch the $200 million mark. The hauls they brought in were almost guaranteed just based on curiosity with the movie going public. I, for one, am not looking forward to “The Avengers.” Why should I? Marvel Studios has become just like the studios they were a reaction to. They make mindless entertainment that barely scratches out a profit and they allow no creativity, which we know leads to the lasting success films need.

We’ve already had Ruffalo out there comparing the Avengers to Occupy Wall Street, and behind the camera we have Joss Whedon, whose film credits include directing a whopping total of one picture. Marvel Studios is now just a part of the crop of studios turning out everything from crap to liberal crap and then not understanding the financial results. Waste your hard earned money on something more worth it.

The problem, I decided, was two-fold. For one, I am a crank and a pessimist, and becoming more so with every passing hour it seems. And for another, we are living in era of chronic political, cultural, and creative decay of the kind that afflicts all empires in their twilight (Of course, I don’t have to tell you that the two are not unrelated, and that the latter is very much a proximate cause of the former).

So there we have it. I cannot give you a best of, because what I have seen this past year has been mostly dreck – occasionally tolerable dreck, but dreck just the same. So instead I shall give you the only honest list a pessimist can give, and that is my top letdowns of the year, the movies that were advertised as good, and should have been good…but weren’t. Shall we begin?

1) Iron Man 2: Oh boy, what a botched, senseless mess, made all the more unwatchable by the sublimity of the first outing of the franchise two years previous. The first Iron Man gave us – at last – a superhero fighting America’s enemies, blasting terrorists out of their Afghan caves with an archetypal American inventiveness. Robert Downey, Jr’s Tony Stark was part Batman, part Henry Ford – an American smart-ass cum bad-ass. Conflicted, sure, but a genius and wealthy and unashamed of both. On top of that, the film was sharply crafted, moved briskly, and contained fantastic performances by some great actors who took their movie very seriously, but still looked like they were having a blast.

It was so great, that when we were offered another helping, we salivated “Yes, please!” but instead were served an incomprehensible plot with a side of bad editing, and for dessert a villain who looked like he hadn’t read the script (he hadn’t). Everyone either gave the impression that they were trying too hard or couldn’t care less – often at the same time, which is quite a hat trick when you think about it.

Please, Marvel, and everyone making superhero movies – story, story, story.

2) Black Swan:  This movie, a coal-black tale about a ballerina’s descent into madness and murder by director Darren Aronofsky, seemed to have everything going for it. Visionary filmmaker? Check. Sky high reviews? Check. Two hot chicks making out? Check and check.

Black Swan has been compared to a lot of movies, especially Susperia, The Red Shoes, and Repulsion, all of them classics and all of them far superior to this tripe. Put it this way, the only thing Aronofsky seems interested in is filming Natalie Portman masturbate and engage in possible hallucinatory sapphism; he certainly ignores everything else. And while you may say fine, that is a noble goal in and of itself (then again, you may not), let me just say the the two young women are so emaciated that the scene contains all the eroticism of two broomsticks going at it. It is undoubtedly a sign of advancing years to watch such a scene and think “Someone get that poor girl a sandwich!” but, there you go.

So these are the two movies that disappointed me most this year. I’ll now say goodbye to you, my Big Hollywood readers, and wish you a very Happy New Year. I look forward to sharing my disappointments with you in 2011.

I know you’d be disappointed if I didn’t.

Tony Stark, left; Jack Abramoff, right

In the second “Iron Man,” Tony Stark is the same cocky hero that we know from the first film. Towards the beginning of the film, Stark is asked by an elected official to give up his Iron Man suit. Not only does Stark refuse to give it up, he openly cracks jokes with the official and makes him look like a fool. Even when his life is threatened, Stark does not lose his self-assuredness. However, despite his overt cockiness, Stark remains a strong hero that people can relate to. He may be arrogant but he is still a hero who fights against the villains in this movie and he uses his suit for the good of man.

Ann Hornaday, from the Washington Post, does not see it that way, it seems. In a recent review of Iron Man 2, she refers to Stark as a “scoundrel,” focusing on his failings rather than his strong and noble qualities. In that review, she writes that “watching ‘Iron Man 2’ earlier this week, it became soberingly clear that the film protagonist whom Tony Stark most resembles isn’t fictional, but the star of a documentary that also opens Friday.” That documentary is not about a flawed but brilliant genius who strove for world peace. That documentary, entitled “Casino Jack and the United States of Money,” is about Jack Abramoff, the currently-imprisoned corrupt former lobbyist.

Later in the article, Hornaday adds to the comparison one of the villains of “Iron Man 2,” Justin Hammer, who works with a maniacal Russian to create an army of Iron Mans. Hornaday writes, “when you put ‘Iron Man 2’ and ‘Casino Jack’ side by side, you see that Stark, Hammer and Abramoff share the same brand of moral arrogance that creates mayhem out of single-minded, by-any-means-necessary expediency.”

Unlike Stark, though, Abramoff is not well-known for his nobility or his serving the world at large. Abramoff is well-known for his criminal record.  A January 4th 2006 article in the Washington Post about Abramoff noted that he “pleaded guilty… to fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials in a deal that requires him to provide evidence about members of Congress.” Abramoff is now in prison serving time. Even though he has been in jail for several years, he is still considered a symbol of corruption and greed. Few of those people who look disparagingly on Abramoff would compare him to a superhero trying to do good for this world.

Admittedly, I had issues with “Iron Man 2,” as Hornaday did. I thought the movie was weaker than the first film and that it included too many extraneous subplots. However, I continue to enjoy watching the main character fight against the bad guys and works to promote peace.

He may be cocky and he may be selfish but he is no Jack Abramoff, and Ann Hornaday should have realized that.

Similarly, it is difficult at times to know if we are winning the great battle that faces our nation and world right now. We think we make progress, then a poll comes out indicating that a ridiculous number of Americans don’t like Capitalism. And hey, who are those 4 in 10 people who think Obama is doing a great job?

But we are winning. Every day, the tide shifts a little. The fight over Hollywood and the media is the first and biggest battle that we must win. The conflict over information and public opinion is paramount to securing a prosperous and free America.

Culturally and economically we are proving our superiority and dominance. Sites like Big Hollywood and Newsbusters that point out the leftist idiocy in the media are indispensable and growing exponentially. Wisely, conservatives are finally speaking with their wallets, allowing publications like Newsweek to die a slow death while the latest Sean Penn stupidityfest languishes at the box office.

Look no further than last weekend. Iron Man 2 spanked the politically murky Robin Hood. Do you think angry rich guy Russell Crowe’s calls for more taxes for the middle class had anything to do with that? How about the fact that the Robin Hood legend is perhaps the greatest libertarian fable ever created and yet the producers and studio opted to distance themselves from making a “Tea Party” movie? That’s not just leftist idiocy, it’s criminal negligence. Have these knuckleheads, working for a publicly traded company, never heard of “fiduciary responsibility”? In our political climate, a film about a bunch of bad asses sticking it to “the man” who is trying to tax them to death would have crushed at the box office. But we can’t have that. What if, gasp, tea partiers started wearing Robin Hood hats to their protests? How embarrassing!

Almost on cue, Dr. Natalie Wilson from Ms. Magazine posted a leftist diatribe against Iron Man 2 that makes my head hurt. When something conservative resonates with millions of people around the world, there is only one thing to do. Attack it! This psycho tosses in the kitchen sink. Sexist. Racist. Homophobic. Oh, and Tony Stark is “greedy.”

Her 1500 words are simultaneously sad and laughable. So much gender studies training and faux intellectualism stuffed into so few words. At first I thought it was from The Onion. It is indicative of the last gasp of a dying age, a baffling piece that borders on self-parody.

Let me drop the bass and rock the mic for you Dr. Wilson. If, instead of wasting your time obsessing over your superficial observations of the film (and the culture that it represents) you applied even a modicum of thought into what the film actually portrayed, you probably could have saved yourself some embarrassment and me a headache.

–The only character who doesn’t hide behind a mechanized suit of armor to kick ass is a woman, Black Widow. She uses the superficial appearance of a sex kitten as a cover to her true identity: a highly dedicated, well trained, super-powered warrior for justice.

–Despite being surrounded by cheesy hot girls who would drop their panties at the, well drop of a hat, Tony Stark choses his soulmate Pepper. Why? Because he’s the hero. That’s what heroes do. They look beyond the superficial and look to the spiritual and the intellectual. Natalie, you are not a hero.

–Heroes and real men do think the “liberal agenda” is boring. Because it is. Example: your article.

–Black actors are not interchangeable. Actors who make ridiculous financial demands, are difficult on set, and don’t get along with the director, are.

–Boy Scouts are cool. Get over it.

–All the “academic” talk of the weaponizing of the male body as some sort of gender thingy doesn’t make a lot of sense. Maybe if I had a degree in “boy culture and masculinity” I would understand. Instead, I got a real job. Sorry.

The awesome awesomeness of this unintentional comedy is maximized by surfing around the entire Ms. website. Remember my article last time about what “feminism” really is? Well, if you want to read the battle plan of the enemy, here you go. The whole thing is an affront to the real empowerment of women as individuals. It’s an entire website dedicated to articles about eating disorders, rape and abortion. I will give them a tad of props for a couple of articles about the plight of women in the Middle East, but then the clowns lost me with the subtle Jew hating articles mixed in.

Despite their attempts to prove their intellectual superiority, leftists must confront the harsh truth. They are not, nor have they ever been, at the top of the intelligence food chain. They are comfortably in the middle. They have always masked the shallowness of their intellect with the depth of their vocabularies. They have sought refuge from real world experience and accomplishment in the sanctuary of academic institutions.

Great minds and thinkers, people who can understand and contemplate the intricacies of human existence and society have always been the libertarians and conservatives. Oddly enough, our allies also live at the bottom of the intellectual spectrum. This may appear to be a contradiction, but it actually makes sense.

When you attempt to develop systems of equality and fairness, when you try to truly provide people with a means to better their living conditions, and when you actually seek diversity, you arrive at the conclusion that any system or structure that works must be based on the individual. Free markets make sense. Blocks of people based on race, gender and sexual preference do not.

As for the dumb guys, well they just want to be left alone. And good for them!

There was a time when our system wasn’t fair. We weren’t true to our principles. Much, if not all of that has been fixed. Perhaps there was a point when things like “gender studies” and “diversity training” were useful. But that time has passed. They are as useless and outdated as pay phones.

As society progresses people like Dr. Natalie Wilson shift from useless to dangerous. Their ideas are a poison that hinders progress. Their ideas create needless conflict and work to oppress millions around the world. Spiritually, economically, and creatively, they are a drag on society.

Natalie Wilson stole ten minutes of my life with her silly regurgitation of 1960s culture models. Her ideology tries to steal something much greater from others; their self-respect and their individuality. Ladies, run, do not walk away from Ms. magazine and any college class that pollutes your brain with superficial observations of society. Let’s let their little club of victimhood close down like the offices of the New York Times entertainment department.

And yes friends, we are winning. Expect to see many more cry baby rants like this one as we continue to roll back 50 years of leftist dominance over Hollywood and the media.

I’ll bet General Burgoyne cried at Saratoga too.

When that superhero flew into theaters in 2008, he brought the thrill of discovery back to moviegoers who had been hit throughout the decade with a wave of Spiderman, X-Men and Superman movies. With Downey Jr. taking on the lead role of super-industrialist and weapons maker Tony Stark, that film’s producers took a big chance on giving one of Hollywood’s most legendary bad boys another shot at stardom after he had wasted years of great reviews on a personal ride through a drug-addicted hell complete with time in a hard-core prison and repeated attempts at rehab.

Audiences went wild for him, as Downey brought genuine emotion, sass and swagger to his role at the heart of the expertly mounted film, which featured Terence Howard, Jeff Bridges and Gwyneth Paltrow in key supporting roles.

That story was launched with a gritty sequence in the Middle East in which Stark escaped Arabic terrorists by creating a crude prototype for our hero, thus grounding the fantastic yarn in a sense of real-world good and evil.

The first film also had the emotional weight of Bridges’ character, Obediah Stane, who was both a mentor and father figure to Stark, running his Stark Industries, yet ultimately turning on his younger boss when Tony felt the need to stop crafting weapons and start fighting for world peace. The resulting finale’s Ironmano a Ironmano battle royale not only shook the screen with spectacular effects, but also registered on a genuinely human level.

With “Iron Man 2,” Favreau returns with Downey and Paltrow (as his assistant and ever-pining friend Pepper Potts) and Don Cheadle taking Howard’s place as Stark’s best friend, Lt. Col. James “Rhodey” Rhodes. The villain this time is played by Mickey Rourke in his first role since his Oscar-nominated comeback in ‘The Wrestler.” Here, Rourke’s still sporting a seemingly juiced-up physique, which brings an immediate sense of foreboding to his character, a disgruntled Russian physicist named Ivan Vanko.

Vanko wants to avenge his father, who developed Iron Man’s power source with Tony’s father, but died in squalor and was never credited for his work. However, it’s not long before Rourke’s Vanko becomes an oversized but poorly developed one-note monster.

Vanko’s goal is to invent his own version of Iron Man in order to fight and kill Stark. But when Stark’s defense-contractor competitor Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) lures Vanko to work with him on developing a competing weapons-based suit for the Pentagon, Rourke opts instead to create an army of droids. At this point, the plot falls into a rather long and listless stretch in which the audience is left waiting for the film’s admittedly entertaining finale.

“Iron Man 2” amps up the special effects machinery in its key action sequences — including the jaw-dropping showdown between Vanko and Stark on a Monte Carlo race track. And Downey is once again solid, veering from a hilarious televised showdown against a slimy senator played by veteran comic Garry Shandling to effectively conveying Stark’s fear over the fact that the radioactive device that’s keeping him alive is also poisoning him.

Justin Theroux, who wrote this script solo after his co-writing debut with Ben Stiller on “Tropic Thunder,” seems an odd choice for inventing the movie’s plot. The first movie had four writers, yet possessed more of a cohesive feel than Theroux’s often-exhausting mishmash of plot devices and characters (including a new double agent named Black Widow portrayed by Scarlett Johannsen, who alternately has too little or too much to do). Worst of all is that Rourke isn’t given much to do beyond scowling and fighting in a distinctly less compelling way than Bridges’ Stane.

In the end, “Iron Man 2” is good enough. But following the first film, good enough is still a bit disappointing.

Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) has privatized world peace. Yes, all on his own as Iron Man, Stark has whipped the world into behaving itself and it’s completely gone to his already bloated head. Obviously this wasn’t accomplished through the changing of our enemies’ hearts, but rather through the superior firepower that comes with being Iron Man. This is the reason/excuse our government, led by the oily Senator Stern (a very funny Gary Shandling) uses to demand Stark turn over the suit to the Pentagon. During a hearing televised on CSPAN, Stark can’t bring himself to politely decline. With his ego red-lining, (he has saved the world, after all), he both insults the Senator and dares him to try and take the suit away from him.

Game on.

In this vacuum steps a rival arms dealer, Justin Hammer (a delightfully twitchy Sam Rockwell), who’s desperate to replicate the Iron Man technology and scoop up all that Pentagon money while at the same time fulfilling a desire to humiliate Stark by elbowing Iron Man into irrelevancy. Hope arrives in the form of Ivan Vanko (a quietly menacing Mickey Rourke), a Russian scientist burning with both a hate for Stark and the technical know-how to fulfill Hammer’s mercenary desires.

As a whole, if you look real close, the film’s overall narrative doesn’t hold together all that well. But the individual pieces are so delightfully scripted and performed you don’t really notice… or care. Through the first act and right up until the dynamite initial–and very well staged and shot–encounter between Stark and Vanko, everything pops as all the familiar themes and characters effortlessly pick up right where they left off. And while the second act, except for an awkward and surprisingly claustrophobic sequence involving Stark’s birthday party, never ceases to hold your attention and entertain, the structure just isn’t there, nor is the action.

There is a lot going on with the characters, though maybe too much. The relationship between the luscious Pepper Potts and Stark is as Tracy/Hepburn as ever, but the troubling dynamic between Stark and his deceased father feels artificial, especially when it results in the solving (seemingly out of nowhere) of one of Stark’s biggest problems.  One area where you do feel the narrative pieces fall satisfactorily into place is with the arrival of Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). Much track is laid for the Avenger team Fury’s putting together and you will want to hang around for a post-credit scene.

One area where the sequel improves on the original is with its climax. This time it’s big and lusty and exciting as opposed to rock ‘em sock ‘em robots duking it out on the Hollywood freeway. But back to the lack of lift….

There were three moments in the first “Iron Man” that took my movie-loving breath away. Stark’s initial escape in his crude Iron Man suit, his first flight, and that delicious moment when he figured out that being a superhero means no longer watching helplessly as tragedy plays out on the television. Iron Man flying off to lay waste to those Jihadists terrorizing that village was a moment this country had been collectively waiting for our Hollywood Masters to deliver since the attacks on September 11th.

The best way to describe the sequel is to think about what the original would’ve been like without those moments; worthwhile and fun but far from a classic.

Jon Favreau’s direction and the snappy dialogue, like most of the performances (as Black Widow, Scarlett Johansson is a little in over her head with this cast, but kick some ass she does) are uniformly excellent, and if I haven’t said so before, Robert Downey Jr. is a friggin’ movie star in the very best sense of the word. Is there another actor out there capable of throwing around a character’s rank narcissism and irreverence but never at the expense of sincerity? He’s a marvel to watch, if you’ll pardon the pun.

If anything, this second Iron Man chapter is even more patriotic than the first. The military, as personified by Don Cheadle’s Lt. Col. Rhoades, is treated with utmost respect and Stark’s language about what he’s doing is never qualified with any of that maddening, namby-pamby United NationSpeak that’s plagued every movie made since Bush beat Gore. Stark says with no embarrassment whatsoever that he is “securing America,” and that he’s proud to “serve a great nation.” He even throws a kind word to the Boy Scouts of America. And later, a very funny and not-so-subtle riff on the megalomania surrounding Obama iconography ranks as iconoclastic when compared to what we’re seeing from today’s lockstep film industry.

So go! Have fun. Take the kids. And thank Favreau and company for proving that in the talented hands of those willing you can still make timeless universal themes cool, entertaining, and very profitable.

In the immortal words of Justin Hammer: “God bless Iron Man. God bless America.”

The list of films I’m literally counting down the days to see each summer gets shorter every year. This is either due to my advancing middle age or Hollywood’s advancing suckery. Regardless, few films were as pure pleasure of a surprise as the original “Iron Man,” which seemed to come out of nowhere in 2007 and knock us all out. Part of the thrill was watching Robert Downey Jr. become an icon before our very eyes. Not since Johnny Depp’s Captain Jack Sparrow effortlessly stepped from his sinking ship and onto that pier had a film character created such a reservoir of a goodwill that a franchise was both inevitable and welcome.

So, likes “Pirates 2,” we eagerly anticipate “Iron Man 2.” As news dribbled out, a big plus was the return of the main players and the casting of Mickey Rourke as the villain, Whiplash; the big who cares was Don Cheadle stepping into the role originated by Terence Howard; the big minus was the casting of Scarlett Johansson and not just because she’s Scarlett Johansson. What she represents is the film’s second villain Black Widow (UPDATE: this may be incorrect. I was going by BW’s comic origin story. Sam Rockwell’s Hammer is either villain #2 or #3, depending on how the film uses Black Widow) and the whole idea of a second villain brings back unpleasant memories of Batman Returns and Spider-Man 3. Meaning, overstuffed plots with too much going on resulting in the lack of a focused story impossible to lose yourself in. 

Unless the film critic mentions the dreaded shaky-cam, reviews don’t normally have much of an effect on me. It’s just one person’s opinion, no less or more valid than the neighborhood mailman, crossing guard or the illegal aliens who take care of my yard. But when a review makes sense, when it locks a piece into place that was already floating ’round my mind, that’s when it gets my attention. And today’s review in the Hollywood Reporter diminished my expectations … some — which isn’t necessarily a bad thing: 

Well, that didn’t take long. Everything fun and terrific about “Iron Man,” a mere two years ago, has vanished with its sequel.

In its place, “Iron Man 2″ has substituted noise, confusion, multiple villains, irrelevant stunts and misguided story lines. A film series that started out with critical and commercial success will have to settle for only the latter with this sequel; Robert Downey Jr.’s return as Tony Stark/Iron Man will assure that.

Den of Geek is a little more enthusiastic, but in an exceptionally well-written review, they seconded the confirmation of my concerns:

Yet there’s no getting away from it: Iron Man 2 is a film that can’t quite recapture the magic of the first instalment. You can’t fault the fact that it tries: it throws as much as it can at you, admittedly stretching elements a little too thinly, but it’s doggedly determined to give you your money’s worth. There’s little doubt that you get it, too.

I’m sick of over-stuffed films.

One piece of good news is that over at AICN, Harry Knowles is gushing over the sequel’s “awesomery.” A great word and because I share it, I’ve always admired Harry’s movie enthusiasm, but our tastes are wildly different (though there was a moment of unspoken kinship over our mutual loathing of “Transformers 2.”)

Doesn’t matter, though. Nothing does. This is “Iron Man 2,” and when this sucker opens next Friday, I’ll be there — eager, excited and ready to fall in love with Tony Stark all over again.

This child-like anticipation which cannot be diminished by age, circumstance or a couple of troubling reviews represents The Magical Power Of Movies when Hollywood gets one right … and with “Iron Man,” Hollywood got one right, and then some.

I’m sorry, but things just aren’t working out.

That’s hard to hear, I know, and believe me, it’s hard to say. After all, we’ve had some great times together. But let’s face it – those great times are few and far between these days. In fact, things have been going downhill for a while now, and we both know it.

Remember when we would be together all the time, three or four times a week, even? Well, how often have we been together this year? Three or four total, I think, each time more painful and embarrassing than the last. The Watchmen? Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen? How did it come to this?

I guess my feelings began to change when your interest in CGI, which I thought cute at first, became your full blown obsession. Suddenly, that’s all you seemed to care about, and everything you made began to look like a goddamn cartoon. Well, I’m sorry. I’m just not that into cartoons.

By the way, about all those times I told you “Oh, that CG looks so real…I couldn’t even tell” – I faked it. It looks like shit, and doesn’t fool anyone. About time someone told you to your face.

And there’s something else that you need to hear: Your politics have made you a bore.

Oh, I know we’ve disagreed politically for a long time. But that can be fine, healthy even, in a relationship, so long as each party at least respects the other’s point of view. And that’s just it: I don’t feel like you respect me at all anymore, and I’m beginning to wonder if you ever did.

You’ve always been happy to take my money though. That much, at least, I could always count on.

It’s all so depressing. I remember we had that brief rekindling in 2008 with Iron Man and then The Dark Knight. For a while there, I felt toward you like I hadn’t felt in ages. I was happy. But it’s clear to me now that that was a last gasp of a once passionate romance. The disappointments and embarrassments of the last year have put the poor, suffering thing at last out of its misery, and buried it under an ash heap of memories and what-might-have beens.

And do I even need to mention the betrayal that was Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull? We’ve never talked about it, but I have to ask: How could you? Words can’t express how sick that made me. Most of all I’ll never forgive you for making me feel dirty and ashamed, even though you were the one responsible. I look at my original Indy trilogy DVDs now, and can scarcely hold back my tears…is there no precious memory you won’t taint? It’s not enough to ruin my present, you have to reach back into my childhood and ruin those wonderful moments as well?

I’m looking at Rotten Tomatoes as I write this, and know that I am making the right decision – every movie out right now is thoroughly “rotten” except one: The Blind Side. Really, The Blind Side? That’s the best you can do? Well, I’m sorry, it’s just not good enough. Maybe you can’t do any better, but I sure can.

I’m sorry, Hollywood; it’s over. Don’t call, don’t text. And don’t try and woo me with promises of Iron Man 2, or another Spider Man. I just can’t do this anymore. I’m tired of telling myself it’ll be different this time, and tired of feeling like a fool and a sucker when it isn’t. I’m tired of being hurt and disappointed. Most of all, I’m just tired of giving you my money and getting crap in return.

I wish you luck with the overseas market. They seem to like crap, and hate America almost as much as you do – I think you were made for each other.

Yours Sincerely,

Matt

–

–

See trailer here.

This year they also teamed up with Wired magazine and set up a private green room called the “Wired Cafe,” where select people from the press and the industry are invited during the day. They have a bunch of laptops set up for people to blog and tweet and a cafe with an open bar and great food. I decided to go there for lunch instead of my usual haunts. I had a Smoked Turkey Panini and considered a Dim Sum sampler, which the person at my table ordered with his Burger. Maybe tomorrow.

There were some sponsors there like Patron Tequila and Bustelo Coffee giving out free drinks. I never tried either. Not being a drinker I only had one Patron cocktail, which had grapefruit juice and club soda. It was goood. I gotta say, the Bustelo canned espresso drinks were awesome. I like Starbucks products. Especially when I am driving long distances. But Bustelo is more flavorful. I never had them before. I found out these are advance copies and they will be on sale in a few weeks at Wal-Mart and Trader Joes.

The Con seemed to have the usual Thursday crowds, which were fairly intense. But the next two days will be much worse. I wish I brought my camera. I missed a couple of shots that would have been golden. They have all these pedi-cabs outside carting people between the restaurants and the Con. And I walked by one that had a guy in a predator costume being driven around. It was hilarious.

(I hate using my cell phone; the shots never look good enough.)

There were the usual people in costumes, including the Star Wars variety which are perennial. I remember one year I was sitting on the outside terrace in the back of the Con, which looks out over Coronado island. A friend walked by and we started talking. All of a sudden, about 60 Star Wars Stormtroopers walk onto the terrace and pose for a photo on the outside steps.

“Now I’ve seen everything.” I said. My friend laughed.

This year a lot of booths were scaled down from previous Cons. I’m sure the economy had to do with it. But the movie and TV companies still had impressive set ups.

Marvel Comics has four different life-sized Iron Man costumes with glowing eyes and chest generators. They ranged from the crude version from “Iron Man” to one that may be used in “Iron Man 2.”

SyFy (which used to be the SciFi channel until some rebranding doofus decided to change the name slightly) went so far as to rent a restaurant space right near the Con in the Gaslamp quarter. The coffee shop for the Hard Rock Hotel, usually called Mary Jane’s, is called Cafe Diem during the Con. All the items on the menu are advertisements for Scifi Syfy shows with names like Caprica salads (but not Battlestar Burgers). Lots of cardboard stand ups of their characters. The prices were a little high, like $7 milkshakes, but the place seemed busy.

I got to see a bunch of familiar faces and I was surprised how many people told me they loved my Big Hollywood columns. That’s always nice to hear. I will look for Doug TenNapel’s booth tomorrow. I forgot to write down the number and it’s a huge place. I only got to see about half of the show run today.

Today I parked at the Padres parking lot as the baseball stadium is next door. My mom told me it was free for the Con (disclosure: my sister knows the owner of the team, so I though the info might have come from her). Ha! It was $20. I ended up having to park on the roof because they were almost out of spaces.

Just as I was leaving I noticed I had a really good view of the old El Cortez hotel in the distance, where the Con used to be back in the 70s. It still has that big neon sign on the top with the words “Hotel” lopped off because it went condo. And there was once a restaurant on top called the Skylight Room with a beautiful flashing neon sign below the word “Hotel.” Not anymore. They don’t even turn on the sign at night.

Things change.