No iron man 3 for jon favreau

[Octoberist]

Kevin James as the new Happy Hogan!

[The Squirrel]

Originally Posted by Nuffsaid

But who influenced his choice? Clearly not Marvel, they are saints.

Twist my words that I didn't say if you want. I don't know what happened, but heaven forbid a grown man made his own decision, right? Shocking. If Marvel forced him out then that news will break sooner rather than later.

[GoldGoblin]

They will probably just reboot now instead of continue with a sequel,look at what happened to Superman Returns.

[Octoberist]

Originally Posted by GoldGoblin

They will probably just reboot now instead of continue with a sequel,look at what happened to Superman Returns.

You must be a kid. No rational adult thinks like that.

[Excelsior.]

I didn't twist your words at all. He made his own decision, but as you know, decisions are influenced by certain events, people etc.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by GoldGoblin

They will probably just reboot now instead of continue with a sequel,look at what happened to Superman Returns.

Why should they reboot Iron Man? RDJ is still under contract for 2 more movies, for Avengers and IM3; there's absolutely no reason for them to reboot even after Favreau's exit from the franchise.

[Octoberist]

again, no rational adult thinks like that unless Goldgob's a young kid. If he's not, then that's scary.

I know we live in a fast food world, where everything is disposable, but to take things for granted like a film franchise like this that is silly and absurd.

[The Squirrel]

Originally Posted by Octoberist

again, no rational adult thinks like that unless Gold's youngerish. Under 15.

I know we live in a fast food world, where everything is disposable, but to take things for granted like a film franchise like this that is silly and absurd.

Yeah, they might recast (Hulk/Rhodey) but they won't reboot it.

[Octoberist]

rebooting it now would be stupid and nonsensical.

Iron Man worked because of many elements, like RDJ. We can't take that for granted. Too bad geeks tend to overlook stuff like that.

[Doc Samson]

Originally Posted by ElMariachi

It was slow, no dobut, but hardly as bad as many make it out to be. The only scene that really was boring in that movie was the one with Stark/Pepper on the airplane. The slow parts of the movie might not have had action but they were funny, entertaining scenes in my opinion.

The Lucious Fox scene was exactly the same thing. Batman goes down and is rescued, cured by a magical forumla. No different than Stark getting cured. Then again, this was explained as a temporary solution and he did heal himself by discovering the new element.

I thought that this movie was hilarious, so I am not understanding the parts that fell flat. The action was limited in some ways (length of Whiplash/IM fight) but all in all, it was entertaining and well done. The IM/WM fight v drones was excellent in my opinion.

I don't know, to me, when Fury shows up, the whole tone of the movie changes, which doesn't happen with Lucius Fox.

Lord knows I love SLJ, and in his small part at the end of IM1, it was tonally perfect, but here he comes in and he's all "Sir I'm gonna have to ask you to exit the Donut." Then he comes full throttle "Wait! You just let little man come in, kick ya ass, take ya suit, your Iron Man ain't cha?" Lol, it was just over the top, hammy SLJ and the whole film just got weird from there, to me. I know its meant to be funny, but it was just corny. IM1 was funny minus the cheese. The whole "new element" situation was hokey, overlong, and boring as well. The fight scenes are almost nonexistent. What's there is cool, but everything is 3 seconds long, except when he's getting chased. And I could go on and on.

We just have differing opinions, which neither of us need to defend, but my point is that the worse parts of IM2 are directly the result of a subplot that IMO wasn't needed, and Marvel is to blame for that because it's their idea. There's no question in my mind that without it, IM2 would have been better, no matter how good you think it might be already. The bottomline is they had better deliver with The Avengers or none of these subplots would have been worth it anyway

[ElMariachi]

Originally Posted by Doc Samson

I don't know, to me, when Fury shows up, the whole tone of the movie changes, which doesn't happen with Lucius Fox.

Lord knows I love SLJ, and in his small part at the end of IM1, it was tonally perfect, but here he comes in and he's all "Sir I'm gonna have to ask you to exit the Donut." Then he comes full throttle "Wait! You just let little man come in, kick ya ass, take ya suit, your Iron Man ain't cha?" Lol, it was just over the top, hammy SLJ and the whole film just got weird from there, to me. I know its meant to be funny, but it was just corny. IM1 was funny minus the cheese. The whole "new element" situation was hokey, overlong, and boring as well. The fight scenes are almost nonexistent. What's there is cool, but everything is 3 seconds long, except when he's getting chased. And I could go on and on.

We just have differing opinions, which neither of us need to defend, but my point is that the worse parts of IM2 are directly the result of a subplot that IMO wasn't needed, and Marvel is to blame for that because it's their idea. There's no question in my mind that without it, IM2 would have been better, no matter how good you think it might be already. The bottomline is they had better deliver with The Avengers or none of these subplots would have been worth it anyway

Completely disagree on that, so we are just going to have to agree to disagree. Thought SLJ was great in this movie and the element scene was among the best in a superhero movie.

But, I will say that you can't blame Marvel for everything here. The Avengers subplot really didn't affect the plot. Fury in the middle and at the end, as an add-on to the conclusion.

The question is, do you people want a Marvel Universe in movies or for them to be seperate? All this "too much Avengers" backlash is unfounded and taken too far in my opinon. The slightest scenes mentioning it are declared commercials for this movie and thats wrong in my eyes.

[Dr. Manhatten]

It'd be hilarious to me if it was cause they wouldn't pay Favreau more money and they were starting to lowball. It'd be one thing if they lowballed the Hulk people cause it wasn't a huge hit but Iron Man's their biggest franchise. The last people you'd wanna piss off are the ones who're bringing home the bacon

[Doc Samson]

Originally Posted by ElMariachi

Completely disagree on that, so we are just going to have to agree to disagree. Thought SLJ was great in this movie and the element scene was among the best in a superhero movie.

But, I will say that you can't blame Marvel for everything here. The Avengers subplot really didn't affect the plot. Fury in the middle and at the end, as an add-on to the conclusion.

The question is, do you people want a Marvel Universe in movies or for them to be seperate? All this "too much Avengers" backlash is unfounded and taken too far in my opinon. The slightest scenes mentioning it are declared commercials for this movie and thats wrong in my eyes.

The Thor scene at the end was fine, just like the Stark scene at the end of TIH. But to go further than that, and actually wrap your plot around Nick Fury in order to tie-in wasn't necessary. How was his inclusion important to the film as a whole? Because of the Element? You said yourself Stark figured that out on his own, they could have omitted Fury completely. And what was Widow's use? T&A shots to be sure, but other than that, what was she really needed for? Honestly?

[mclay18]

Eh, I wasn't thrilled with IM-2. It was fun in spots, but you could tell Favreau didn't have his heart in it. Maybe now that RDJ has director approval for IM-3, we'll get a director who'll inject some freshness into the franchise. (Hopefully RDJ doesn't do anything silly like get Justin Theroux to pen IM-3, get Whedon or reliable writers to do it.)

Now that Marvel and Disney are producing IM-3, they'll pick someone reliable and used to helming big-budget pics to direct this. Not a yes-man like Brett Ratner.

[Batman713]

I don't blame him for leaving. Marvel ****ed IM2 with all that Avengers garbage. The movie was basically a commercial for The Avengers.

[J.Howlett]

Listen, this only affects Marvel after the Avengers. Thor's in the can. Captain America will be soon. The Avengers starts shooting soon.

After the Avengers, it's anybody's guess where this leaves Marvel.

In all honesty, after Avengers, why do Iron Man 3 at all if it's just going to feed back to Avengers 2?

Just do another origin film for another character and then work that character into Avengers 2. Rinse, repeat until they get to Civil War, which we all know that want to at least attempt.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

Yeah Fury was basically comedic relief in IM2. It was sam jackson being sam jackson with a patch really.

[ElMariachi]

Originally Posted by Doc Samson

The Thor scene at the end was fine, just like the Stark scene at the end of TIH. But to go further than that, and actually wrap your plot around Nick Fury in order to tie-in wasn't necessary. How was his inclusion important to the film as a whole? Because of the Element? You said yourself Stark figured that out on his own, they could have omitted Fury completely. And what was Widow's use? T&A shots to be sure, but other than that, what was she really needed for? Honestly?

Sure, they could have omitted Fury, but I enjoyed his role in this movie. He was the only guy that could cut through Tony's arrogance and b.s. If anything, the Tony/Fury scenes had the best dialouge in the movie aside from the courtroom banter between Stark and the Senator.

Widow for the most part was useless aside from T&A. I did like the fight scene she had though and that added to a great climax. LOL at using the word 'climax' relating to Scarlett Johannson.

[Spider-ManHero12]

DAMNIT! This sucks!

[ElMariachi]

Originally Posted by Batman713

I don't blame him for leaving. Marvel ****ed IM2 with all that Avengers garbage. The movie was basically a commercial for The Avengers.

Oh ffs......One scene relating seriously to the Avengers and an after credits one is a commercial now?

I am tired of this Favreau=Jesus stuff that is going around on here. It's the same with Norton as the Hulk. It's as if Favreau is unfallible and can do now wrong----almost in the same category as the Allfather Chris Nolan.

[Doc Samson]

Originally Posted by ElMariachi

Sure, they could have omitted Fury, but I enjoyed his role in this movie. He was the only guy that could cut through Tony's arrogance and b.s. If anything, the Tony/Fury scenes had the best dialouge in the movie aside from the courtroom banter between Stark and the Senator.

Widow for the most part was useless aside from T&A. I did like the fight scene she had though and that added to a great climax. LOL at using the word 'climax' relating to Scarlett Johannson.

Oh don't get me wrong, I just watched "He's just not that into you" yesterday because I turned by and saw her jiggling in a red bra, so I'm with you on enjoying her "climax," I'm just saying in terms of justification, both Widow & Fury were rather shoehorned in just for the sake of some sort of continuity in this Marvel Universe, where the Thor cameo achieved the same goal in about a minutes time at the end of the movie.

[Son of Coul]

Nick Fury and Black Widow pop up in the comics for some deus ex machina and just the sake of it all the time. Wasn't an ad for The Avengers, just warming up for the many future crossovers of the MCU in general. You could tell they had fun putting them in there, something they could never do before. I guess some people (the fans, ironically) didn't have fun watching them. I know I did.

[ElMariachi]

Originally Posted by Doc Samson

Oh don't get me wrong, I just watched "He's just not that into you" yesterday because I turned by and saw her jiggling in a red bra, so I'm with you on enjoying her "climax," I'm just saying in terms of justification, both Widow & Fury were rather shoehorned in just for the sake of some sort of continuity in this Marvel Universe, where the Thor cameo achieved the same goal in about a minutes time at the end of the movie.

It sucks for Ryan Reynolds that she is on the open market now. Then again, hot women to a movie star are like hoodrats to regular people to you and me.

Widow had more screentime in the movie and had less use. I'll agree on that. Fury had a purpose and his scenes were enjoyable though.

[HighFivingMF]

Originally Posted by ElMariachi

It sucks for Ryan Reynolds that she is on the open market now. Then again, hot women to a movie star are like hoodrats to regular people to you and me.

Widow had more screentime in the movie and had less use. I'll agree on that. Fury had a purpose and his scenes were enjoyable though.

Yeah, poor Sexiest Man Alive being single again. How ever will he find someone else?

[Doc Samson]

Originally Posted by ElMariachi

It sucks for Ryan Reynolds that she is on the open market now. Then again, hot women to a movie star are like hoodrats to regular people to you and me.

Widow had more screentime in the movie and had less use. I'll agree on that. Fury had a purpose and his scenes were enjoyable though.

I don't feel all that bad for him, he got to roll around with Blake Lively as a consolation prize

On another note though, don't sleep on me son! lol, I do ok with the hoodrats