Iron Man 2 Emily Blunt..."rumored" to be in Iron Man 2

[Majik1387]

From CHUD



SOURCE

That's awesome.

Sort of how Hollywood used to do movies.

 

[Darkness Falls]

i'm gonna say

NO to scarlett 4 black widow..... they can do wayy better

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^Yeah for one thing they can get an actress that has facial expressions.

 

[marcvader]

Interesting. I guess Marvel's really trying to mimic comic books and their crossovers and continuity on a much grander scale. Certain characters ie. SHIELD, are going to be in alot of movies.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Nine picture deals??? Getting a little ahead of ourselves are we? I figured BW was a four picture deal... Iron Man movie, Avengers, Avengers sequel, spinoff/SHIELD movie... but NINE? I mean I am all for it don't get me wrong... but not if it means securing the worst actors out there jut to lock them up long term. I think it should be four pictures minimum for these major characters. Sort of like RDJ's deal... which I thought was perfect. Four major pictures... possible cameos... that should just about do it. We need a big time actress for BW that will stick around at the same time... but Nick Fury type deals make no sense for a character like that.

 

[marcvader]

Unless they plan on keeping her in an ancillary capacity? G wonder what they have planned for Hawkeye then.

 

[TheVileOne]

Here we go with complaints of Marvel low-balling and screwing all the good actors of the money they deserve.

It's not necessarily a head of themselves if it's an OPTION. I'm assuming that means if the sequels or other movies are go ahead.

Just so you know signing options for movies isn't the be all end all. Note that Fox decided not to renew Alan Cummings option for X-men 3. Remember how widely reported it was that all the main actors of 2003 Hulk signed for three movies? Guess how many came back for Incredible Hulk? 0.

 

[powerbomb1411]

Maybe it's just me. But she doesn't seem thrilled about it in this interview.

Link.

"I'm okay," Blunt says with a sigh. "Because I just have to do this Fox movie, and it's fine and I'm gonna have fun. The whole beginning of the year has been rather dramatic, so I'd just rather go in with fresh eyes and know that I've made the right decision. You just don't know until it's all finished and done with, do you?"

And telling her "Well, the sequel's almost never as good as the original" doesn't help. "I'm glad you said that, not me. It's a little disappointing is all I can say."

 

[Majik1387]

Nine picture deals??? Getting a little ahead of ourselves are we? I figured BW was a four picture deal... Iron Man movie, Avengers, Avengers sequel, spinoff/SHIELD movie... but NINE? I mean I am all for it don't get me wrong... but not if it means securing the worst actors out there jut to lock them up long term. I think it should be four pictures minimum for these major characters. Sort of like RDJ's deal... which I thought was perfect. Four major pictures... possible cameos... that should just about do it. We need a big time actress for BW that will stick around at the same time... but Nick Fury type deals make no sense for a character like that.

Well, out of those four titles, you know how many sequels each can have? It would be easy to use the character in crossover movies. And as for the comparison to RDJ's contract, that could have been Marvel just starting with the movie contracts and changing how they do things a bit, or it could have been a negotiation between Marvel and RDJ. Like I said, it's like how Hollywood used to do it, when studios had specific actors contracted to them as opposed to actors doing multiple studios, but it's modernized as I'm sure Marvel didn't say they couldn't work with other production companies.

Maybe it's just me. But she doesn't seem thrilled about it in this interview.

Link.

I empathize with her though. I mean I'm sure the love interest role she has to play is nothing special compared to Black Widow.

 

[Brian Braddock]

So, previously Marvel got criticised because they were apparently lowballing actors to the point of risking losing them. Now apparently Marvel is getting criticised because they are giving them multi-picture deals?

Colour me confused?

Seems a bit of a 'damned if you do/damned if you dont' situation.............

 

[Philly Phanboy]

From CHUD

Not long after the story about Samuel L. Jackson signing for a staggering nine films with Marvel Entertainment broke, I got an email from someone well placed in the entertainment industry saying that we should be expecting more. It seems like the nine picture deal is Marvel's new contractual item.

In fact, this source tells me, it seems like the nine picture deal was a major stumbling block in the Emily Blunt situation. Not only was Blunt completely low-balled, she had to agree to appear in nine films total. For Samuel L. Jackson a nine picture deal makes sense, but not for an up and comer like Emily Blunt.

Now that Jackson has signed the deal, expect to see more people signing on to Marvel movies with similar terms - low paychecks per movie, but with a nine movie option. I wouldn't expect everybody to be signing such deals, just people whose characters might be called upon to crossover into other Marvel Entertainment films.

Just today I was being interviewed by the bodacious Helen O'Hara from Empire Magazine for an article to run in a future issue, and we were discussing the surprising way that Marvel Entertainment has approached movies. Five years ago I would have laughed at anyone who told me that people would be signing on to appear in up to nine comic book movies, with the deal spreading them out across franchises. But Marvel Entertainment is approaching this in a really fresh, really innovative way. Let's see if it works for them.

SOURCE

So was it Fox that stopped Blunt from being in IM2 or did she decide to back out because of the length of the contract? If this is true, I'm not sure if lengthy contracts just to get easter egg cameo appearances is the way to go because it will really limit the quality of the possible actresses available.

 

[terry78]

Were they planning on incorporating Black Widow in nine ****in' movies? Why?

 

[cerealkiller182]

yea that doesnt sound right

 

[FaT_tONle]

Here we go with complaints of Marvel low-balling and screwing all the good actors of the money they deserve.

It's not necessarily a head of themselves if it's an OPTION. I'm assuming that means if the sequels or other movies are go ahead.

Just so you know signing options for movies isn't the be all end all. Note that Fox decided not to renew Alan Cummings option for X-men 3. Remember how widely reported it was that all the main actors of 2003 Hulk signed for three movies? Guess how many came back for Incredible Hulk? 0.

How you thought that was an attack on Marvel just shows me you are going to call me out no matter what if I go against Marvel's way of business. The point being... what bright, young actor in their right minds would sign a nine picture deal? Once again you seem to think it is all about the studio. The STUDIO has the option of picking that up... the actor is obligated to return if he signs that contract. No way are they bringing in top talent if they want that many movies for a given character.

Well, out of those four titles, you know how many sequels each can have? It would be easy to use the character in crossover movies. And as for the comparison to RDJ's contract, that could have been Marvel just starting with the movie contracts and changing how they do things a bit, or it could have been a negotiation between Marvel and RDJ. Like I said, it's like how Hollywood used to do it, when studios had specific actors contracted to them as opposed to actors doing multiple studios, but it's modernized as I'm sure Marvel didn't say they couldn't work with other production companies.

Tons... but still they'd recast at some point. On a side note, cameos to me are just bonuses... if the actor wants some extra cash, loves the character, loves the source material, wants to appease the fans... they'll agree to do some cameos. Stark's cameo in TIH did not include one of his four pictures in his original contract (since they confirmed IM3 a while back). He just did it as a bonus. And it was a pretty extended scene if you ask me. So while I definitely think that some of those nine movies would include maybe a scene or two tops and five minutes worth of screen time each for a character, cameos from 6 out 9 of those movies just defeats the purpose. It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Majik1387]

Were they planning on incorporating Black Widow in nine ****in' movies? Why?

I don't think it's a plan, I think it was more of an option.

Tons... but still they'd recast at some point. On a side note, cameos to me are just bonuses... if the actor wants some extra cash, loves the character, loves the source material, wants to appease the fans... they'll agree to do some cameos. Stark's cameo in TIH did not include one of his four pictures in his original contract (since they confirmed IM3 a while back). He just did it as a bonus. And it was a pretty extended scene if you ask me. So while I definitely think that some of those nine movies would include maybe a scene or two tops and five minutes worth of screen time each for a character, cameos from 6 out 9 of those movies just defeats the purpose. It doesn't make sense to me.

A lot of things in the business doesn't make sense, I don't think this is that confusing honestly.

 

[powerbomb1411]

The point being... what bright, young actor in their right minds would sign a nine picture deal?

The kind that wants a guaranteed paycheck in a big blockbuster movie that can and does bolt no name actors (Hugh Jackman among others) into massive stars and revive other actors (Robert Downey JR.) careers.

 

[Darth Elektra]

So was it Fox that stopped Blunt from being in IM2 or did she decide to back out because of the length of the contract? If this is true, I'm not sure if lengthy contracts just to get easter egg cameo appearances is the way to go because it will really limit the quality of the possible actresses available.

I agree.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I don't think a young up and coming 25 year old actress like Blunt wants to be playing BW until she is 36... sacrificing other opportunities on the way. 9 movies is basically two movies every three years. I don't know why you would commit to that.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Maybe it's just me. But she doesn't seem thrilled about it in this interview.

Link.

A couple of more quotes in this article to add:

Emily Blunt. Sexy as Hell - even sexier when she opens her mouth... and speaks in that divine British accent of hers. She would've been a terrific Black Widow (listen to me, talking like I know comic books) in "Iron Man 2". Alas, Fox ruined her plans.

The "Devil Wears Prada" Fox tells The Orlando Sentinel that she's a little disappointed she won't get to cozy up to Robert Downey Jr - because Fox decided to excise the option they had on her by making her straddle Jack Black's chubby ass in "Gulliver's Travels" instead - but seems to be taking it like a champ.

"I'm okay," Blunt says with a sigh. "Because I just have to do this Fox movie, and it's fine and I'm gonna have fun. The whole beginning of the year has been rather dramatic, so I'd just rather go in with fresh eyes and know that I've made the right decision. You just don't know until it's all finished and done with, do you?"

It's clear Blunt's bummed out though. ''It's a little disappointing is all I can say", the actress tells Roger Moore.

No word on who'll be playing 'Black Widow' in the flick now - maybe Theresa Russell? (Sorry, bad joke for fans of cheesy 80s thrillers).

http://www.moviehole.net/200917909-emily-pretty-blunt-about-iron-man-2

 

[powerbomb1411]

I don't think a young up and coming 25 year old actress like Blunt wants to be playing BW until she is 36... sacrificing other opportunities on the way. 9 movies is basically two movies every three years. I don't know why you would commit to that.

You mean like every other actor and actress does. It's called working on more then one thing at once. It's very common. And just because you're signed on for multiple movies doesn't mean you're going to be the star and have to spend 6 months for each film.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

You mean like every other actor and actress does. It's called working on more then one thing at once. It's very common. And just because you're signed on for multiple movies doesn't mean you're going to be the star and have to spend 6 months for each film.

But to commit to so many projects so far ahead can be very risky without seeing scripts or being assured who the director would be. Sure, Marvel could be turning out quality movies now but what if she gets stuck in the future with a "Brett Ratner" type director. These franchises seem to always deteriorate and to have to be stuck to continually do movies in a fading franchise could really be costly.

 

[Majik1387]

I don't think a young up and coming 25 year old actress like Blunt wants to be playing BW until she is 36... sacrificing other opportunities on the way. 9 movies is basically two movies every three years. I don't know why you would commit to that.

I don't see how it would be sacrificing other opportunities. From what's been reported, it's actually only Fox who has made her sacrifice the role of Black Widow. Who's to say she can't do other projects while working with Marvel?

You mean like every other actor and actress does. It's called working on more then one thing at once. It's very common. And just because you're signed on for multiple movies doesn't mean you're going to be the star and have to spend 6 months for each film.

Exactly.

But to commit to so many projects so far ahead can be very risky without seeing scripts or being assured who the director would be. Sure, Marvel could be turning out quality movies now but what if she gets stuck in the future with a "Brett Ratner" type director. These franchises seem to always deteriorate and to have to be stuck to continually do movies in a fading franchise could really be costly.

Well that's a risk that Marvel and the actors are apparently willing to take.

 

[powerbomb1411]

But to commit to so many projects so far ahead can be very risky without seeing scripts or being assured who the director would be. Sure, Marvel could be turning out quality movies now but what if she gets stuck in the future with a "Brett Ratner" type director. These franchises seem to always deteriorate and to have to be stuck to continually do movies in a fading franchise could really be costly.

What's the point in going through life without taking some risks?

Besides, plenty of still have a career without trouble after making tons of medicore romantic comedy's.

And whether you like X3 or not. It did well in the Box office, Wolverine is coming and Hugh Jackman isn't having any trouble getting jobs. In fact, while I'm not paying attention to all the actors in X3, it doesn't look like it prevented them from doing what they want in their career.

Hell, look at Clooney, Berry and Garner (Among others) that still have work after being in pretty bad movies.

 

[chamber-music]

Blunt was adorable on Jonothan Ross last night. She did a pretty good american accent too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Ae0adslsQ

 

[Chewy]

It's a shame she couldn't take the role

Now do the right thing, Marvel, and don't cast ScarJo