Iron Man 2 Faverau and RDJ not happy with IM2 (Report)

[danoyse]

Dude, people saying they loved Iron Man 1 on this forum is like white people saying "I have black friends" when they talk about race issues.

That has to be one of the dumbest analogies I've ever heard.

 

[MadVillainy]

I am so confused by that

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I don't think that the movie would have been like a gazillion times better if Favreau got the amount of time that he wanted to use to work on the movie,imo he would have used the exact same script regardless.

 

[LostSon88]

Robert Downey Jr.
Edward Norton
Liv Tyler
Anthony Hopkins
Sam Rockwell
Mark Ruffalo
William Hurt
Tim Roth
Jeff Bridges
Jermey Renner
Stellan Skarsgard
Don Cheadle
Mickey Rourke
Samuel L. Jackson
Scarlett Johannsen
Tommy Lee Jones
Hugo Weaving
Toby Jones
Stanley Tucci
Idris Elba
Natalie Portman
and all the small parts played by well known/quality actors (Gary Shandling, Paul Bettany, Kate Mara, John Slattery, Ray Stevenson, Rene Russo, Kat Dennings, etc.)

This is considered 'cheap hires' in Hollywood?

Yeah um...in case you didn't know, Marvel (presumably) has a history of LOWBALLING these A-list talents to star in their movies. After signing Howard to a ridiculous amount for IM1, they upped RDJs salary and pretty much cut small deals for everyone else. Some that were found to be quite insulting.

Case in point:

Edward Norton (then again, this was moreso about creative differences)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/12/edward-norton-out-as-incr_n_642588.html

Sam Jackson ($$)
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2009/01/nick-fury-no-mo.html

Mickey Rourke ($$...at the time it was rumored they were only offering him $200,000 for the role)
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=52979

Terrance Howard ($$ asked him to take a pay cut, he refused.)
http://www.parade.com/celebrity/celebrity-parade/archive/terrence-howard-iron-man-recasting.html

Jon Faverau ($$...low offer for him to return, as they will likely do for pt. 3)
http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/06/10/jon-favreau-might-not-direct-iron-man-2-it-cant-be/

I'm just saying that they have a history of doing this. They're cheap when it comes to hiring talent. That was my whole point.

This article seems a bit questionable to me. If RDJ was upset, he sure didn't show it at Comic-Con.

Yeah um, its called being a professional.

As for being upset at the whole SHIELD/Avengers thing......this doesn't make sense. It was barely in the movie and had nothing really to do with the plot. I can understand that they rushed the movie a bit quick though, but this article seems to raise a few eyebrows.

You seriously feel like 'The Avengers' was a minor plot of Iron Man 2? Seriously? The Avengers are ALL OVER IRON MAN 2!!

 

[chiefchirpa]

They might not be happy with IM2 because of the rushed schedule, but they must be looking forward to do IM3 done right. How colossal can it get with Mandarin locked in a battle grip with Iron Man? In terms of brain clash, power set and potential destruction, this kind of comic book movie engagement has never been done.

Mandarin vs Iron Man is like Moriarty vs Holmes with WMD held by each side. Both smart dudes who achieved high level of greatness.

 

[dark_b]

Elmariachi is such an obvious troll that i am suprised how much attention he gets from a lot of people here.

very funny.

 

[Original Spawn]

I hope he returns for the 3rd but i think it´s better to change the director for the avengers, and Marvel can´t afford so much, if they did that they would have no money in the end of filming, and Joss Whedon is great to make some parts cheaper and believable, by the way what about Favreu's comment along the lines of

"I have a stake in Marvel's future"

I don´t really buy that story

 

[LostSon88]

Thing is its not like they're an independent studio anymore I mean...they did get bought by Disney, correct?

Is the penny pinching still necessary?

 

[J.Howlett]

LostSon,

It shouldn't be. But, that's how Marvel's proceeding.

 

[bapi]

I really hope it's true. IM2 is terrible and I wouldn't be surprised at all because Marvel's changing actors and creators again and again.

 

[matrix_ghost]

Thing is its not like they're an independent studio anymore I mean...they did get bought by Disney, correct?

Is the penny pinching still necessary?

Marvel is still a production company right ? Disney "owns" them but like with every movie you have production companies that supply the money and a studio the releases the movie.

As for the article. Doesn't surprise me considering that Iron Man 2 does look like a movie that were they needed to work pretty fast. A 2 year timeframe is prettyy short to crank out a sequel if you need to work on a script too. If they had begun work on the script before IM1 came ou , i might've thought different but here.

 

[Gold Samurai]

What does Raimi have to do with anything? Spider-Man was a Sony movie and I don't think Marvel had any say.

They all involve Marvel big wigs

http://www.collider.com/entertainment/article.asp/aid/4168/cid/13/tcid/1

Were you reticent about having so many characters to deal with, especially the villains?

Well, I had, there's so many fears I have in the making of the movies, that that’s just one of them, so I don't want to make it seem overblown in my vast array of things I'm terrified of that people won't like. But I had worked on the story with my brother Ivan, and primarily it was a story that featured the Sandman. It was really about Peter, Mary Jane, Harry, and that new character.



But when we were done, Avi Arad, my partner and the former president of Marvel at the time, said to me, Sam, you're so, you're not paying attention to the fans enough. You need to think about them. You've made two movies now with your favorite villains, and now you're about to make another one with your favorite villains. The fans love Venom, he is the fan favorite. All Spiderman readers love Venom, and even though you came from 70s Spiderman, this is what the kids are thinking about. Please incorporate Venom, listen to the fans now. And so that's really where I, I realized okay, maybe I don't have the whole Spiderman universe in my head, I need to learn a little bit more about Spiderman and maybe incorporate this villain to make some of the real diehard fans of Spiderman finally happy.

 

[ElMariachi]

That has to be one of the dumbest analogies I've ever heard.

Saying "they liked Iron Man" or "I have a black friends" is used for the same reasons.

"I liked Iron Man, but this movie sucks. Why did they fail so much!?"

"Don't get me wrong, I have alot of black friends and love their culture, but........"

It's a way to make themselves look good and in the know, while at the same time sort of coming off as as a jacka-s. Everybody liked Iron Man and everybody has black friends---therefore saying it means nothing. Hear what I am saying?

 

[ElMariachi]

Yeah um...in case you didn't know, Marvel (presumably) has a history of LOWBALLING these A-list talents to star in their movies. After signing Howard to a ridiculous amount for IM1, they upped RDJs salary and pretty much cut small deals for everyone else. Some that were found to be quite insulting.

I'm just saying that they have a history of doing this. They're cheap when it comes to hiring talent. That was my whole point

So you are saying that Marvel should begin overpaying and throwing around money like it's going out of style? When you do that, you end up with movies like Rush Hour 3 and Chris Tucker/Jackie Chan/Ratner being paid like $50 million +. They got deals done with everybody aside from Howard (who wanted too much and didn't get along with Favreau)/Norton and have attracted major talent for every single one of their movies. If they are lowballing and being as cheap as you claim, then how did they get actors like Anthony Hopkins, Jeremey Renner, William Hurt, Jeff Bridges, Tommy Lee Jones, Stanley Tucci, Mickey Rourke, and Stellen Skargard. Are these poor actors doing Marvel a favor or something? If Marvel was cheap that list would look more like that of X-Men:First Class with a bunch people you never heard of. Or like Green Lantern with Ryan Reynolds, Mark Strong (largely unknown still to the masses), and a Gossip Girl. Truly, you all have been spoiled in regards to casting. As I said earlier, who did you expect to play your favorite superhero---Will Smith, Tom Cruise, Eddie Murphy, Julia Roberts, Russell Crowe, and Denzel Washington? Get real guys. Marvel has done the best job casting and recruiting talent for any superhero franchise/producer.

You and the rest of these people aren't making any sense whatsoever. Typical fanboys overreacting to something that is far and above your heads. Seriously, you are all overreacting to what one website said. It's the same thing with box office and how studios make money! All of you think you know the full story of contract negotiations, but in reality you know nothing. You automatically take the sides of the actors/directors but don't know how greedy they are and how /hard to work with people like Norton was. If you guys ran a football team, it would be the Washington Redskins and it would suck.

Yeah um, its called being a professional.

so being gleeful, goofing around, and calling out Inception is professional? I know how much some of you guys want this to be true, but it's probally not.

You seriously feel like 'The Avengers' was a minor plot of Iron Man 2? Seriously? The Avengers are ALL OVER IRON MAN 2!!

where? Name me the scenes. For the record, Nick Fury was in the movie as much as Coulsen was in the first, no complaints on SHIELD there so you might as well not bring it up. I count one mention of it in a conversation, briefly, at the donut shop and at the end of the movie.

 

[Immortalfire]

We may be doomed to never have a perfect superhero trilogy.

 

[ElMariachi]

Elmariachi is such an obvious troll that i am suprised how much attention he gets from a lot of people here.

very funny.

What am I trolling? The message board of a movie that I liked?

And I don't know if you noticed, but trolls lay stupid/insulting posts and don't return to engage disputing forumers. I have responded to everybody who has quoted me, given them my opinion, and challenged their points.

As for why I get attention, it's because I present a compelling take and my opinions make sense. You don't see me acting like a baby either when millionaire actors have disputes with millionaire producers or b---h about every little thing.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

lol I so believe this article! Favs and Marvel can always kiss and make up but it was clear from Favs comments that he never wanted to make IM2 as quickly as he did.

The movie greatly suffered from the rush job that Marvel forced him into. If I were him I wouldn't come back for the 3rd one.

 

[ElMariachi]

They all involve Marvel big wigs

http://www.collider.com/entertainment/article.asp/aid/4168/cid/13/tcid/1

What does that have to do with anything? It just tells me that Avi Arad said that Raimi should put Venom in the movie. That doesn't say he was forced in or forced to be as stupid as Venom turned out to be. I am tired of you guys making excuses for these directors. He failed with Spider-Man 3 and it's hardly the studios fault. Same director, same writers, same cast, and a reported $258 million dollar budget. Don't blame Marvel because Venom sucked and the series had run it course.

 

[ElMariachi]

lol I so believe this article! Favs and Marvel can always kiss and make up but it was clear from Favs comments that he never wanted to make IM2 as quickly as he did.

The movie greatly suffered from the rush job that Marvel forced him into. If I were him I wouldn't come back for the 3rd one.

I wish somebody would tell me what part of the movie felt rushed though. The CGI was perfect, the acting was great, the direction/cinematography was excellent, had a great soundtrack, and had a quality feel. The only downside of the movie people are complaining about is the script and that can only be blamed on Theroux. An extra year doesn't make IM2 a masterpiece. The guy wrote Tropic Thunder and that's it, hardly a genius that only needed more time. And that was exactly the reason why Iron Man 2 was more of a comedy then a drama. Blame the writers, not them rushing the movie out.

 

[LostSon88]

I really don't understand your need to namedrop a bunch of random celebrities to prove a point.

My whole point, has been that Marvel hasn't been giving these actors a fair shake when it comes to negotiations to the point where many big players have questioned whether or not they'd be able to participate.

I don't know how hollywood works but judging from all of those reports, they seem to imply that Marvel initially has a tendency to offer these quality actors fees below the market value.

I'm not talking about them overpaying all these talents...just give em' their due, which they seem refuse and if going by the recent article is any indication will be the deciding factor in whether or not Faverau returns for IM3.

...and I gotta say, your 'argument' is not as compelling as you may think it is.

You keep saying it wasn't rushed because the CGI, music, acting, etc. was "Perfect" and that the only thing that it lacked was a story.

um...STORY is the basis of a film. Without a strong story what's the point of the movie?

Christopher Nolan spent 10 years on the screenplay for "Inception,". Peter Jackson spent 7 years on LOTR Screenplays. James Cameron has worked on the script for Avatar since the mid-90s.

Stories take time to develop and to suggest that nothing more could have been done with IM2's script with an extra year of development is naive and just plain ridiculous.

Theraoux is no Cameron, Jackson or Nolan BUT i'd like to think with an extra year, Faverau and Theraoux could've continued working on the script and turned IM2 into something a little more special.

(and this is coming from someone who likes IM2).

 

[LostSon88]

What does that have to do with anything? It just tells me that Avi Arad said that Raimi should put Venom in the movie. That doesn't say he was forced in or forced to be as stupid as Venom turned out to be. I am tired of you guys making excuses for these directors. He failed with Spider-Man 3 and it's hardly the studios fault. Same director, same writers, same cast, and a reported $258 million dollar budget. Don't blame Marvel because Venom sucked and the series had run it course.

The point is that the director was forced to include something into his script that he didn't want to simply because Avi Arad (HIS BOSS) told him to. With the arc that Raimi had built up with his previous two films, it didn't make sense to randomly include Venom into the foray when there were already two other villains (with connections to the first two films) occupying space.

It was completely random and was simply done because the "fans wanted Venom". So Raimi had to work around the parameters that they gave him and came out with a less than quality product.

What are you not understanding?

OUR WHOLE POINT IS THAT MARVELS CONSTANT INTERFERENCE IN THEIR FRANCHISES IS HAVING AN EFFECT ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR FILMS.

You keep saying, "oh its the directors fault, writers this, actors that". Forgetting that in the end, they answer to MARVEL and have to do what they say.

Marvels the boss, and the talent are at their mercy.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Please stop trying to talk sense into him, it's an impossible mission.

 

[bunk]

This is sort of a frustrating thread to read through. None of you are making fully logical arguments. Did Marvel interfere too much? Probably. Even with the schedule did the creators have enough time to turn out an excellent script? Of course. Is Marvel putting out the best possible product? Doubtful. Are the properties still better off under Marvel's full control. Hell yes.

 

[FaT_tONle]

This is sort of a frustrating thread to read through. None of you are making fully logical arguments. Did Marvel interfere too much? Probably. Even with the schedule did the creators have enough time to turn out an excellent script? Of course. Is Marvel putting out the best possible product? Doubtful. Are the properties still better off under Marvel's full control? Hell yes.

Again, fans shouldn't have to settle for this by default and believe this is the best they are ever going to get. These characters are very lucrative and a lot of them have Batman level potential. So why is Batman on a different pedestal not only financially but critically? Simply because it has the number one talent in the industry behind it, and a studio that recognizes that talent. Until Marvel gives their film makers some leeway, and lets them push the boundaries and take these characters to new limits, we aren't going to get anything we haven't already seen. If you are not going to set the bar high and take risks, get the **** out of the office. That goes to Feige and any other knuckle head that wants these movies to be part advertisements for future projects or things completely unrelated to the project at hand, such as exposure for merchandising, TV shows/spinoffs, video games, and even comics. The movie by committee approach DOES NOT WORK. We have seen that story play out time and time again and we know the results more often than not.

 

[ElMariachi]

I really don't understand your need to namedrop a bunch of random celebrities to prove a point.

I name dropped because it IS my point. You people are saying they are lowballing talent, but that is obviously not the case with those names as my proof. Why would Anthony Hopkins, Don Cheadle, or Tommy Lee Jones agree to be in these movies if Marvel was paying them peanuts?

My whole point, has been that Marvel hasn't been giving these actors a fair shake when it comes to negotiations to the point where many big players have questioned whether or not they'd be able to participate.

I don't know how hollywood works but judging from all of those reports, they seem to imply that Marvel initially has a tendency to offer these quality actors fees below the market value.

I'm not talking about them overpaying all these talents...just give em' their due, which they seem refuse and if going by the recent article is any indication will be the deciding factor in whether or not Faverau returns for IM3.

How do you know these things? You are basing everything off of an article that may or may not be true. I am leaning towards the later based on previous information. Oh, and also the recasting of two actors who both were replaced by quality talent. You don't know why there was a rift between Norton and Marvel. Both sides could be equally at fault, same goes with Terrence Howard. Like somebody brought up earlier on here (forget who it was), actors that take small pay cuts for future opportunities should be commended. Look at Howard. He could have taken some pay cut and been one of the main characters in another major blockbuster. And now what is he up to? Nothing much at all. Don't get me wrong, he is a good actor, but he (from what I heard) was too focused on pride and money. Don't expect me to weep for some millionaire missing out on a few more bucks. Because you know they aren't crying for me if I have to take less hours because of the economy, lose my job, or whatever.

And what is fair due anyway? Favreau was paid like $4 million for the first Iron Man (plus a share of net profits) and got a bump for the second. Sorry, but what isn't fair about this? He gets millions of dollars and made a name for himself as a director. Zathura and Elf were nice movies, but Iron Man propeled him to opportunity for things like Cowboys and Aliens. Both sides did well in this and he should be paid big money for IM3 after delivering two blockbusters. I think he is fine with how things turned out and this story is a bunch of bull. He is going to be making some executive producer money on Avengers too. I believe they get a share of the profits and I don't think it's going to be too bad for him.

...and I gotta say, your 'argument' is not as compelling as you may think it is.

You keep saying it wasn't rushed because the CGI, music, acting, etc. was "Perfect" and that the only thing that it lacked was a story.

um...STORY is the basis of a film. Without a strong story what's the point of the movie?

Christopher Nolan spent 10 years on the screenplay for "Inception,". Peter Jackson spent 7 years on LOTR Screenplays. James Cameron has worked on the script for Avatar since the mid-90s.

Stories take time to develop and to suggest that nothing more could have been done with IM2's script with an extra year of development is naive and just plain ridiculous.

Theraoux is no Cameron, Jackson or Nolan BUT i'd like to think with an extra year, Faverau and Theraoux could've continued working on the script and turned IM2 into something a little more special.

(and this is coming from someone who likes IM2

Ok, now you have officially gotten ridiculous. Avatar, Inception, and LOTR are these guys life work, their passion, and movies they will be remembered for. Iron Man 2, as good as the first was, is just another superhero movie and a summer blockbuster. They aren't going to spend years writing these movies! These are moneymakers, not epics and indie movies. Be glad that Favreau has delivered such a good movie (despite these "flaws") in the midst of crap like Ghost Rider, Jonah Hex, and all the schlock that we have to wade through each year to get to the good stuff. Once again, you guys are being unrealistic about this all and it's not allowing some of you to have fun. Your standards are at such insanely high levels now that Iron Man could fly into it.