Don Cheadle joins IRON MAN 2!!!

[DieSmiling]

This totally sucks. Like others, I like Cheadle, but I hate continuity screw ups... And Howard is definitely more "Rhodey" IMHO...

[Kokomo29]

I know a lot of people are gonna get mad at me for this, but I really like this idea of Cheadle playing Rhodey. Just imagine the promo photos with Downey Jr. and Cheadle side-by-side. How awesome is that gonna be?! I will admit that I am sad to see Howard go, but I don't think we should close our minds to Cheadle quite yet.

[Double Down]

Marvel really looks cheap. They tried to lowball Favreau and now this. Not good.

[Crook]

Oh my, this is very disappointing. I think I can speak for everyone when we all went giggly as Terrence said "...next time baby!". The guy was so damn good for the part, and I eagerly anticipated what would come next.

Cheadle is a great actor and all, but I don't see him fitting particularly well here. I f'n hate recasts.

[protoctista]

Some serious what-the-f^ckage going on here.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by <borkis>

I love Don Cheadle and all, but recasting a part is the death-knell of movie making.

Agreed. For example, the "Back to the Future" sequels were great and all, but Claudia Wells was so much better than Elisabeth Shue. I hate it when studios recast people, especially main and secondary actors.

How about Marvel puts in a little more effort to negotiate with Terrence Howard rather than just recast the role?

I definitely vote "yes" on this one.

The Dark Knight only got away with it because no-one liked Katie Holmes in the first place...

I actually liked Katie in "Batman Begins"; i thought she and Christian Bale had great on-screen chemistry. But that was the "pre-Scientology" version.

...there was so much hype around Ledger that they could have literally used a mannequin for Rachael Dawes and no one would have liked the movie any less.

I wouldn't take it that far. Like many, I really enjoyed Ledger's Joker, but I also liked Maggie as Rachel; she brought real authority to the role. I just wish they'd given her more to work with.

[Saint]

Cheadle is a fine actor, but recasting never inspires confidence. First the studio puts down a two-year release date when Favreau (understandably) wants three, then they don't want to pay up for Favreau because they think he isn't critical, and now this. I hope these hiccups are not indicative of (or do not evolve into) larger problems with the film.

[StylishHokie21]

What went wrong here? I like Cheadle, but I'm not so sure about this.

[LostSon88]

Gosh darn it. I HATE RECASTS!!!

This is almost as bad as if they were to recast RDJ...

I think Cheadle's a great actor but...I just can't see him as Rhodey.

What the heck happened? I thought everyone was locked down for the sequel?!

[Rac]

I got no problem with this. Never liked Howard anyway. Whiney greedy bastard!

[Hiruu]

Cheadle is the superior actor and performer, imho, and had he gotten the role in the first place...he would have been great for it...but from a continuity perspective, this is near disaster. WTF can't they figure out a way to make some peace, so that everybody gets a piece. I'm pissed at both Howard and Marvel for this bull$h!t...this is nonsense and a slap in the face of the fans. Howard's performance in IM as great, and he would have been better in this movie...part of it is for fans...we don't like change from what's already working...this sucks! There's some level of greed here somewhere...TDK has Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman. etc etc etc....And evidently, they are compensated acceptable...why can't Marvel and Howard had reached an agreement?

[odiin]

The worst thing about this is that it sets a precedent. Sure, now it's Rhodey being recast, but who's to say that by the time the Avengers film roles around we won't be seeing Tom Cruise as Iron Man and Adrien Brody as Bruce Banner?

[LostSon88]

But you can tell how much he loved playing Rhodey.

I am getting more and more wary of Marvel and the way they're doing business. After the post-Iron Man fiasco, with not immediately resigning Faverau, the 2-year timeframe for part II, stiffing Howard on the money (apparently).

One hit movie and all the sudden they think they're invincible.

[Docker2.0]

Originally Posted by Rac

I got no problem with this. Never liked Howard anyway. Whiney greedy bastard!

Eh. I actually like Howard but for him to hold out for more money, how the heck can some people blame Marvel for this? They actually got a better actor, possibly for the same price. I can't see money being the reason becuase you don't go from Xbox360 to PS3 just for the heck of it. There has to be more to the story.

[Yellow Cyclone]

Originally Posted by Doubledown44

Marvel really looks cheap. They tried to lowball Favreau and now this. Not good.

seriously now.

marvel put out the highest grossing movie of the summer, obviously after TDK

they're RAKING in cash. and then this happens?

first the whole hulk/norton thing, then the whole favreau/sequel timing thing, then THIS?

i get the hulk thing, it sucked and was stupid, but i understand the studio logic behind it (even though they were 100% wrong)

sequel timing is also a 'normal' thing. studio gets franchise, studio wants to milk franchise, etc...no biggie. standard politics

but this? howard couldn't have been asking for that much more. i mean he's not a pitt, cruise, hanks, dicaprio, etc...i'm really, REALLY curious as to what RDJ and favreau think, especially favs.

marvel has so much potential, and they're being such idiots about this.

[odiin]

Originally Posted by Yellow Cyclone

seriously now.

marvel put out the highest grossing movie of the summer, obviously after TDK

they're RAKING in cash. and then this happens?

first the whole hulk/norton thing, then the whole favreau/sequel timing thing, then THIS?

i get the hulk thing, it sucked and was stupid, but i understand the studio logic behind it (even though they were 100% wrong)

sequel timing is also a 'normal' thing. studio gets franchise, studio wants to milk franchise, etc...no biggie. standard politics

but this? howard couldn't have been asking for that much more. i mean he's not a pitt, cruise, hanks, dicaprio, etc...i'm really, REALLY curious as to what RDJ and favreau think, especially favs.

marvel has so much potential, and they're being such idiots about this.

Seriously. I'd rather just not have Rhodey at all in the next movie and hope that they come to their senses by IM3 or Avengers so that Howard can return. That is of course nothing against Don Cheadle, he's an awesome actor, give him Black Panther or something, but Rhodey is Howard's.

[Franklin Richards]

Bah. Cheadle is an upgrade. Quit sweating it. And if any Batfan comes in here saying it's a bad call I'm going to convert to Scientology.


Don't try it. I'll do it, mister.

[bapi]

I never was a fan of Howard so it'!s not bad for me. And Cheadle is a really good actor but I'd choose somebody like Mekhi Phifer.

[spideyboy_1111]

well if it was anyone, it was marvels fault for not signing Howard in a legally binding contract for 3 movies... that means he would have agreed to the same pay for all 3, and unless he negotiated with them for a higher price, he'd still be binded to the movie legally even if they didnt give it to him.

[[A]]

Originally Posted by Dark Donnie

Perhaps....I think Cheadle is the better actor personally. Maybe Howard saw how successful the first film was, knew his role would increase and demanded some outrageous number. I wouldn't be surprised if Cheadle came in right around the same scale as Howard.

If true, this is a terrible movie for Howard to make. Sure, the first one was a hit and he even dreamt of a War Machine spin-off, but come on.. Cheadle's a better actor, yeah, but he's always supporting cast, just like Howard. I can see Howard kicking himself over it for years to come..

[odiin]

Originally Posted by Franklin Richards

Bah. Cheadle is an upgrade. Quit sweating it. And if any Batfan comes in here saying it's a bad call I'm going to convert to Scientology.


Don't try it. I'll do it, mister.

Yeah, and you could find a lot of actors out there who are better than RDJ but that doesn't mean they would fit Iron Man like he does.

[[A]]

Article from the SHH:

Don Cheadle is stepping in to replace Terrence Howard in Marvel Studios' Iron Man 2, says The Hollywood Reporter.

In the first film, Howard played Col. James 'Rhodey' Rhodes, Tony Stark/Iron Man's best friend and future armor-clad hero War Machine.

The trade says Marvel had no comment, but sources close to the deal said negotiations with Howard fell through over financial differences, among other reasons.

Marvel, which had wanted to work with Cheadle, then decided to take the role in another direction and approached the actor, who is shooting Antoine Fuqua's Brooklyn's Finest.

Justin Theroux is writing the screenplay for Iron Man 2, coming to theaters on May 7, 2010. Jon Favreau is returning as director, and Robert Downey Jr. is expected back as Stark/Iron Man. Gwyneth Paltrow also is expected to be back as Pepper Potts.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/ir...ws.php?id=7729

Article from CHUD:

Terrence Howard is out and Don Cheadle is in - in the War Machine armor, that is. Howard will not be reprising his role as James "Rhodey" Rhodes in Iron Man 2; he's being replaced with Cheadle... despite the fact that Robert Downey Jr proved in Tropic Thunder that he could totally play the role!

Sources say that Howard is out because negotiations fell apart over money. I understand that the guy wanted more dough, and he certainly deserves it, but what he really needed was the franchise. Rhodey's role is expected to be expanded in the sequel, with him donning his own suit of armor and taking a bigger part of the action. Howard's been perpetually on the verge of being big since his massive breakthrough in Hustle & Flow, and this latest bump in the road makes me worried that the actor will never ascend to the level where he belongs.

In the meantime I'm interested in seeing what Cheadle brings to the role. It seems obvious that the very nature of the relationship between Stark and Rhodes will be different simply because Cheadle has such a different style than Howard.

http://chud.com/articles/articles/16...INE/Page1.html

[LostSon88]

Originally Posted by Franklin Richards

Bah. Cheadle is an upgrade. Quit sweating it. And if any Batfan comes in here saying it's a bad call I'm going to convert to Scientology.


Don't try it. I'll do it, mister.

You don't have to be a Batfan to be upset about this.

This would be the equivalent of a recast of Gary Oldman as Gordon.

This sucks.

[Franklin Richards]

I don't think you realize the importance of Rachel Dawes in the first movie. She was the romantic lead. She had more scenes than Gordon or Scarecrow.

That's a big character and no one seemed to mind.


No one will care when they see Cheadle.

[tamron]

I wasn't big on Howard when he was first cast as Rhodey (I felt he wasn't tough enough). However, his enthusiasm for the role eventually won me over. And honestly, film Rhodey was not the hardass Marine I thought/hoped he would be. Howard fit the profile that the script called for very well.

IMHO, Don Cheadle is a superior actor to Howard, and given the character of Rhodey as defined in IM, I think he can not only nail it, but improve upon it.

But re-casting is never a good sign, imho. This, along with the Favreau and Norton situations, officially has me worried that Marvel has bitten off more than they can chew with this aggressive crossover project and are cutting corners just to rush the product to market.