Iron Man 2 Jon Favreau not signed on for sequel?!?!

[FlawlessVictory]

Wow. Is Marvel turning into WB?

LOL. Imagine, Singer getting to make another Superman and Favreau doesn't get to make another Iron Man. If that happens then the world truly is coming to an end.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Latino Review is also confirming IESB's scoop:

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/breaking-news-marvel-disses-jon-favreau-over-money-4815

BREAKING NEWS: Marvel disses Jon Favreau over money!

By El Mayimbe on June 10, 2008

Blasphemy! Marvel Chairman believes IRON MAN 2 can be successful without Jon Favreau!

El Mayimbe here with disturbing news.

You would think with all the drug cartel money that Marvel is making with IRON MAN that they would naturally give a proven filmmaker like Jon Favreau a decent bump in pay...NOT!

According to this report at IESB, Marvel hasn't locked in a deal with Favreau because they're being cheap. Marvel, are you kidding me?! How could you not want to give Favreau a bump in pay?

I went to my guys to see if what IESB is reporting is even remotely true and unfortunately it is. Sanchez is on the money with this one.

I've seen IRON MAN 3x already and it is one of the best comic book origin movies of all time. Also one of the most critically praised. All of this happened because of Jon's vision.

I found it a tad bit disturbing that Marvel is moving ahead with their plans for their slate, yet they did so without locking in Favreau first.

Usually, when a blockbuster opens big like IRON MAN did, they lock down the filmmaker FAST for a sequel. It's been 5 weeks and Marvel hasn't locked down Favreau for their planned sequel which is bad because there is a lot of work to do on the sequel. If Marvel wants to have a great sequel, then they have to get cracking now with the writing team, the special effects team and especially...THE DIRECTOR.

Favreau has earned that right.

Stop being cheap Marvel.

Pay Favreau what he wants and deserves which I hear is not much and wouldn't break Marvel.

Marvel needs to lock Favs down to a contract, ASAP. The man more than proved his worth, and made a great movie. He definitely should be compensated for his hard work.

We don't need another Singer/X-Men 3 fiasco...

 

[Ironfan72]

If true very sad, Jon has been the driving force behind the success of Iron Man without his efforts to reach out to the fans via Myspace, Comic-Con etc, then Iron Man may not of been a success, and Marvel would be in serious trouble with there creditors, Pay the man Marvel.

 

[Raiden]

I love Marvel, but if they let Favearu walk just because they won't give him a raise (which he deserves), then they are idiots and I won't be surprised if they bring in someone else to helm IM2, and the movie tanks. And considering RDJ's friendship with Favearu, if he doesn't come back it might even affect RDJ tremendously. I hope this is just a rookie mistake by Marvel Studio, but one call in 5 weeks (after the amazing success of IM) is just crazy.

 

[fazeforce]

Hiya folks - I haven't posted on the SHH Boards forever, but with this Favs business breaking today, I jumped on to see what folks were saying. Hopefully, the fallout from this leaking will be all it takes for Marvel to man up and sign with Favs. I did just see this posted on MTV - an interview from the Hulk premiere which took place on Sunday; Favs seems to indicate that perhaps he'd rather do Avengers than IM 2 - maybe that's part of the reason why he hasn't been signed yet? See the quotes in the article:

'Iron Man 2' And 'Avengers' Are Set To Open Only A Year Apart -- So Which Will Jon Favreau Direct?

'There's no way that I could direct both,' filmmaker says on 'Incredible Hulk' green carpet.

By: Shawn Adler

​

A release date has been set, the principal cast will be returning and honchos at Marvel are already talking up potential villains. Just one month after its release, the overwhelming success of "Iron Man" has everyone talking sequel - including director Jon Favreau, the one guy in this whole affair who isn't even officially committed to the project.
Unlike with actors, it's unusual for studios to sign directors to more than one film. And yes, Marvel is brand-new to the whole negotiating thing. But could it be that the reason Favreau isn't signed yet for "Iron Man 2" is because he really wants to do ... something else?
Favreau himself teased as much at the green carpet for "The Incredible Hulk," insisting that, despite the overwhelming success of "Iron Man," he'd still like to be considered for "The Avengers."
"I'd love to [direct 'The Avengers']. But they announced that it's coming out in 2011, and 'Iron Man 2' is coming out in 2010, so there's no way that I could direct both. They'll either change the date, or maybe I'll just do 'Avengers' and not 'Iron Man 2,' or maybe just 'Iron Man 2' and not 'Avengers.' I would have preferred for those two movies to be at least two years apart so I could be involved with both of them."
Given a choice between the two, Favreau seems to prefer "The Avengers," the superhero tag-team event that will showcase Captain America, Tony Stark and Bruce Banner, among others. Why? Because it will feature Captain America, Tony Stark and Bruce Banner, among others.
" 'Avengers' seems to be the more fun one," Favreau said. "You get to use all the heroes for that one."
Favreau insisted that he hasn't had any official meetings with Marvel about either.
If Favreau does wind up working on "Iron Man 2," it may be on a different story line than perhaps he originally intended. As early as last July, when MTV News visited the set of "Iron Man," Favreau was hinting that the sequel would follow the famed "Demon in a Bottle" arc, wherein Tony Stark battles alcoholism. (For goodness' sake, the first shot of Stark in the current "Iron Man" is of him holding a drink!)
There's no doubt that it was set up, but now it might not pay off, Favreau implied.
"I always said it was interesting. I still think that. [But I'd] like to see if the public is ready to see Tony Stark fall apart yet. They might want to see him grow as a superhero before then," Favreau said. "It's just one of the story lines that I find compelling and would lend itself well to being in the movie.
"You want to stand out," Favreau continued. "There are so many superhero films out. I mean, 'Hancock' seems like it deals with similar themes. I want to see how they handle it and how the public receives that."
But regardless of what develops in closed-door meetings between Favreau, Marvel, the screenwriters and Robert Downey Jr., there is one thing that Favreau is happy to divulge about the sequel, independent of whether he'll be directing.
"Happy Hogan will have more to do next time," he said of the character he played in the first film. Hogan had a much more developed presence in the comics and eventually scores a romance with Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow). "I had my hands full this time."

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^Thanks for posting. So Favs would rather direct The Avengers over IM2, interesting.

 

[Chewy]

But why are sources claiming the issue stems from money, then?



This is X3 all over again. I can see it now: I2 - The Last Stand, a film by Brett Ratner.

 

[Raiden]

I hope us fans can bring some online pressure to Marvel to force them to sign Fan quickly.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Wow. Is Marvel turning into WB?

Probably. You know the odds of them screwing this up are high. They have dollar signs in their eyes with the first film, and will most likely start rushing out inferior product to cash in as quickly as possible.

Fox, WB, Marvel...it's all the same animal.

 

[FaT_tONle]

My mouth just dropped open... why is Marvel even flirting with the idea of letting this guy go? Directors are AS IMPORTANT as the cast... he NEEDS TO DO IM 2... not Avengers. For goodness sake Hogan will probably be in the love triangle? Is Fav going to just act and not direct another picture? I never thought Jon would direct Avengers. Just give that project to someone else or better yet... push the freaking release date back a few years. Jeez...

 

[louiebling$]

I am calling BS on this article.... jon just had an interview talkin about the film check out SSH main page

 

[FaT_tONle]

People always talk... it's the contract that counts. This guy should be getting ready to direct. If he doesn't get signed in a month or two and more rifts are created then **** Marvel... and **** the Avengers movie... no joke. I am telling you right now what we'll get without Favs... we'll geet a bunch of cameos in IM 2... guys that eat up screen time. Hawkeye, Black Widow... not only that but Thor will be a supporting character just like the early reports mentioned. There will be no character development and the movie will be another X3: TLS because they need the run time under two hours. And Avengers will suck ass as well. Expect a recast or two. I guarantee that's what will happen if Marvel wants to play wise ass with the people that brought them to this point.

 

[louiebling$]

Wat if they are not signing him to ironman cuz they want him to do avengers?

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Wat if they are not signing him to ironman cuz they want him to do avengers?

That seems like a possibility. And it sounds like he would rather do Avengers more than IM2.

 

[louiebling$]

Yea like really he already paved the road for ironman.. I want him to come back for it but I want him to do avengers too

 

[FaT_tONle]

Yeah but that doesn't mean Marvel should hold their hope for him coming back for the team up film... What is a better fit right now??? IM2. That's not an argument. This is Jon's franchise at the moment. Marvel shouldn't be messing with it. If the guy wants three years in between then they should give him three years. He deserves that much at least. IM can go to May and Cap can go to July.

 

[TheVileOne]

For one thing. Look at the Latino Review report. He doesn't say anything of merit besides reiterating what was on IESB. He doesn't report any actual facts or new updates.

I wouldn't trust El Miyambe if he said he was on fire while literally looking like he was on fire.

OK, Marvel said they plan on releasing the sequel in the summer of 2010. OK. Favreau's statement on his myspace page doesn't really conflict with that.

Terence Howard mentioned a hopeful filming start date in 2009. OK, there's that. But that's what Howard said. Marvel didn't give any filming date as of yet.

Favreau's simply saying he doesn't want the movie to be rushed.

But if they really want to meet the target release date, they need to start writing it and everything. They need to lock up the cast and crew and get to work.

The problem is actors might be going on strike on the 30th. So who knows what will happen then. The actor's strike has prevented any Marvel Studios movie from being released in 2009 save for Wolverine which is a Fox production.

 

[Boom]

Not signing Favreau would be failure of epic proportions.

Is this studio run by monkeys? Honestly. The mere notion of not hiring back the director who delivered a critical and financial success is mind-bogglingly stupid. It almost pisses me off.

 

[TheVileOne]

OK but look at where the industry is now. If the SAG issue is not resolved in 20 days there could be another work strike. The second big work strike in less a year.

 

[Downhere]

That would be a real stupid move on Marvel's part if they don't get Fav's back. Seriously, they are making enough green to up his pay for the sequel.

 

[Bub]

OK but look at where the industry is now. If the SAG issue is not resolved in 20 days there could be another work strike. The second big work strike in less a year.

Which is all the more reason why they should lock down the director and writers now. The actors striking is not the same as the writers striking in that the preproduction can break ground while the actors march. Instead of playing games that will only delay production further (which will likely be delayed even more if/when the actors strike) Marvel should be moving forward on getting a story and script. That way when the strike ends they'll be ready with a script and schedule.

 

[TheVileOne]

Nothing is ever that simple in Hollywood.

Getting any movie made is a small miracle.

Thing is, they had a writer and director set up on Thor pre-writers' strike and look what happened there.

studios have avoided greenlighting a lot of projects out of fear for the actors' strike.

 

[Bub]

Oh I know. I just like to pretend that the entertainment facilities in this world are NOT run by greed but instead creative integrity. Also, that they are ruled by sense, as in get started on something ASAP so when a strike ends, they're ready to go.

 

[TheVileOne]

The thing is you make it sounds like its as simple as turning on a light switch which it isn't.

It's not simply a matter of being ready to definitely go right after a strike is over. The length of the strike could definitively affect that type of status.

 

[DBZ2cool]

Now you guys are making Marvel studios the villain?

Wth is your problem??

Marvel has limited production budget money for all their films like 800 something million and they already have used up $290 million of it. So naturally they don't want to bump Jon's paycheck because then it will cost too much since Robert too will demand a much higher paycheck.

You guys need to realize that ASAP.

I for one am ok if they change the director and get someone as talented as Jon. Maybe do it like the harry potter series. Truth be told Sam Raimi stayed with SM franchise and guess what! He delivered a piece of garbage with SM3.