Iron Man sequel now officially set for April 30th 2010! - Page 2

RockSP · 06-25-2008, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFII

they need to get a big name actor to play Thor, and Captain America. or else it will never work.

Why?

EternalMaster · 06-25-2008, 07:15 AM

They don't need big name actors. They need GOOD actors.

It's easy for people to forget that Robert Downey Jr... while known to the public for his boozing antics of youth... was NOT a big name actor. He'd been in very few movies, and none of them in recent years had been a big success or very popular. But when he was cast, it was perfect because it was easy to tell, "This guy can pull off Tony Stark."

Now Ed Norton is a big name; that's for sure. But not every hero needs to be a big name. They need to be actors who FIT the role. Norton and Downey both did that.

If you want a hero movie with a big name actor that failed, look no farther than Daredevil or Ghost Rider.

So while having a big name actor is a nice bonus, you need someone who can actually pull off the role convincingly. If it takes a lesser known actor to do that, then that is what must be done. Take a look at Wolverine. Hugh Jackman was not known in America AT ALL prior to the first X-Men movie. Now he's a huge star, and most people think he's the perfect Wolverine.

Just have to find the perfect actor, not the biggest actor.

RockSP · 06-25-2008, 08:28 AM

^^I agree for the most part, except for the part saying that Downey had been in "very few" movies. He's made plenty of them...just not huge hits. And really the same goes for Ed Norton.

JackMercy · 06-26-2008, 11:35 PM

So... I'll ask this again... (because it's even more suspicious now...)

You've got a $300 mil+ domestic grosser with a wild reception, amazing word of mouth and enormous potential for a franchise... your cast is locked in...

You immediately announce a release plan for the next few years, including a certain very important sequel...

Yet you're two months (Two Months!) out from release...and the studio is being verrry quiet...not only about Incredible Hulk, which was arguably a mixed bag...but it's red & gold goose as well...?

Now tell me...

Why isn't the Favs signed?

Did Marvel have some difficult time working with him on the production that we don't know about? Could Favreau be asking for an enormous fee? Are they negotiating at all? Or are they seriously contemplating dumping him because they don't want to lose a couple more percentage points on the gross?

People are starting to believe the "lowballing" story, and the more time that passes without any news, the more people will speculate...

Batman jr. · 06-30-2008, 08:43 AM

I'm looking forward to it, but please cast a better actor as a villain than Bridges lol.

fu manchu · 07-03-2008, 02:57 PM

whats wrong with Bridges? He's a good actor and has been nominated for 4 Oscars.

I thought he was great as Stane.

Sarg92 · 07-03-2008, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YJ1

Listening to Marvel's conference call and announcement of these movies, the head of Marvel Studios said, "Perhaps the Hulk will be in IM2" with a serious wink wink.

Apparantly Marvel want Hulk to be in the last 10 minutes of Iron Man 2

Anubis Raptor · 07-04-2008, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFII

i'd consider Brad Pitt for Thor, and Matthew McConaghey for Captain America.

Brad pitt? Yes. Matthew McConaghey? Maybe, more no than yes.

Troy_Parker · 07-04-2008, 09:09 PM

There's a part of me screaming like a little girl because of this & there's also another part of me who is..happytimes about this...LOL

I Am The Knight · 07-05-2008, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Batman jr.

I'm looking forward to it, but please cast a better actor as a villain than Bridges lol.

Bridges is a fantastic actor. The problem was that "Stane" as written was not a particularly memorable villain. Bridges made the most out of it.

TheComicbookKid · 07-09-2008, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Am The Knight

Bridges is a fantastic actor. The problem was that "Stane" as written was not a particularly memorable villain. Bridges made the most out of it.

Seconded.

It's amazing how even with Marvel in control, they still couldn't get an appropriate villain arch together. It's just the standard change. "I'm ok until the hero completes his arch, now I'm evil."

Denny67 · 07-11-2008, 05:26 PM

I think a lot of the advocates for the “third film” angle are not seeing what could be an ingenious larger picture. If you look at each of the individual movies as a puzzle piece leading up to the Avengers movie you have the ultimate box set at the end (metaphorically and literally speaking).
Seems that everyone is stuck on this conventional like of there must be Iron Man I and II and Then Hulk I and II, some on and so on.

These efforts may not be fully realized until the series is over and done with. The accelerated filming schedule may be because you will have film crews overlapping in collaborative efforts. The end result could be felt looking back on the Avengers franchise in its totality as the end all be all of epic comic storylines in film with 100% continuity. They would not only boost comics into the stratosphere but rock Hollywood to its latte sipping core.

In the end I am not totally sure that is what they are doing and I could be waaaay off, but it sure looks like it could be. If that is the case, there is a lot to get excited about.

Mr. Joker · 07-11-2008, 08:50 PM

I'm really looking forward to a sequel. I know many may disagree, but as of now, I'd say the three best superhero movies yet are Batman Begins, The Incredible Hulk, & Iron Man. And with that comment, I really want to see what they'll do with the sequel as I don't know a lot about Iron Man & I'm keeping it that way so that almost anything that happens will surprise me.

Adam · 07-11-2008, 10:33 PM

I just hope they don't rush it.

Mr. Joker · 07-11-2008, 10:50 PM

I don't think they will & considering how well the first movie was handled, I definitely have faith in the second movie.

AragornKing1 · 07-13-2008, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheComicbookKid

Seconded.

It's amazing how even with Marvel in control, they still couldn't get an appropriate villain arch together. It's just the standard change. "I'm ok until the hero completes his arch, now I'm evil."

He's was evil BEFORE Tony Stark became Iron Man, right at the beginning actually. Stane was the one who told the terrorists to attack and kill Tony. We/the audience didn't know he was a bad guy until later on in the movie when he meets with Raza, that terrorist leader.

Mr. Joker · 07-13-2008, 10:19 PM

Exactly. There was no sudden turn around. The guy was plotting against Stark from the beginning. He was the company for himself.

Iron_Stark · 07-21-2008, 08:30 AM

After watching The Dark Knight and completely being in awe by it, Marvel, Favreau and RDJ need to up the ante on the sequel.

Forget the Demon in a Bottle story, we need to see more Red and Gold armor action. We need to see RDJ in the red and gold armor for more than 5 minutes like the first on.

We don't need to see him bumbling around drunk, giving up the armor and quit being Iron Man for most of the movie, we already saw that in Superman II and Spider-Man II. We don't need to see him don the suit again in the 3rd act for 2 or 3 action sequences for a total of 5-8 minutes like in the first movie.

FaT_tONle · 07-21-2008, 11:35 AM

That's a good point.... but sadly... part two is usually the conflicted superhero... the thing is if they just make if an action fest of tracking down Mandarin the whole film... with Rhodes as a side kick... you lose all that substance you would have had. I don't want another soap like SM2 either... but it probably fits the bill. I think we will see alcoholism explored and I think he'll give up the gig after a while... or they could go the other way and just have RDJ obsessed with being Iron Man and it would be along the lines of Legend of Zorro or something... either way it's going to be a rehash.

smooth3006 · 07-21-2008, 02:47 PM