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

[FaT_tONle]

If its June instead of March that could be a difference of 3-4 months time.

Also, look at Spider-man 2 which was ultimately pushed back two months from its original release date. Plus the hiccup with Tobey Maguire.

Ultimately, I do agree with Favreau. And I want everything to start moving ASAP. I'm just worried about what the potential strike does to all these projects.

Yeah but the director is different from actors in that they can't hop on board the last minute. If this deal can't get done by the summer and then were hear about a new guy stepping in in the fall... I'm sorry to say but it's over. The studio will basically have it's way and the film will be a critical disaster at least among the fan boys. Which often means a critical disaster period. If the actors strike it's different and ultimately the film will be delayed. You can't go forward without the actors. But don't think for one second they are going to delay if they can't strike a deal with Jon.

 

[FaT_tONle]

the truth is, unlike money bags WB or fox, marvel has (like someone said) only 8 mill to make like how many movies?...they are completely revenue driven at this point...and although Iron man made it's money back...it didn't make spidey money...or even TF money.

And how much money was the movie supposed to make for Marvel to start handing out blank paychecks? Right now, no matter what happens with the Hulk... you give RDJ and Jon blank paychecks. It would be irresponsible NOT to do just that. And the idea that Marvel won't have money... are you kidding me? They have spent only 300 up till this point... maybe 350 for both films this year. They still have a good 450 left. You'd think 250 for IM2 tops... 200 for Thor. Cap/Avengers will be around 500. And those are maximum estimates marketing included. With the 450 left over plus Marvel's 08 returns... they can fund all of the projects above. Do the math... and that's not even counting the net profits they'll make for future films here on out.

 

[hatebox]

Yeah but the director is different from actors in that they can't hop on board the last minute. If this deal can't get done by the summer and then were here about a new guy stepping in in the fall... I'm soryr to say but it's over. The studio will basically have it's way and the film will be a critical disaster at least among the fan boys. Which often means a critical disaster period.

Unless the film is, y'know, good anyway.

 

[Marvin]

director changes only fails with the director goes from good to bad

they succeed when they go from bad to good, good to good, and good to better

ala aliens, blade, die hard...

peter segal is looking great these days

 

[Marvin]

And how much money was the movie supposed to make for Marvel to start handing out blank paychecks? Right now, no matter what happens with the Hulk... you give RDJ and Jon blank paychecks. It would be irresponsible NOT to do just that. And the idea that Marvel won't have money... are you kidding me? They have spent only 300 up till this point... maybe 350 for both films this year. They still have a good 450 left. You'd think 250 for IM2 tops... 200 for Thor. Cap/Avengers will be around 500. And those are maximum estimates marketing included. With the 450 left over plus Marvel's 08 returns... they can fund all of the projects above. Do the math... and that's not even counting the net profits they'll amke for future films.

math like that suggests that a company like WB(technically they don't have the same constraints as marvel at the moment) can pay a director 100 mill

there are quotas in place, i'm sure marvel isn't signing any back end (on revenue) deals at the moment and they aren't going over 5 million on directors...ergo the relatively no-name helmers they've gotten thus far..

they have so many plans in place that i can see them being financially butt tight on paychecks...

the real question comes down to a directors skill at this point

 

[TheVileOne]

Just curious, if Iron Man 2 and eventually the hulk make all this money, doesn't that go beyond the original amount alotted to them in the original deal?

Iron Man's on tap to make about $600 million+ worldwide. Now of that, I'm not sure how much of that plus all the merchandise and what not goes to Marvel. And then Paramount, and then exhibitors.

But I would imagine they come out ahead of the costs of the picture right? And does that not give them some leeway with the remaining funds?

 

[Marvin]

it does but
to give them to a director that may or may not be crucial to a mega successful franchise may not be exec...exec have the highest job loss rate in the industry lol

 

[Evil Twin]

Evil Twin, a lot of people like you said the strike would have no affect on JUSTICE LEAGUE.

An Actor's Strike is different than a writer's strike as it has little to no effect on preproduction. If it goes 3 or 4 months, which seems unlikely considering that many actors already lost some paychecks from the earlier strike, it will be over in the Fall. That leaves half a year before production is likely to begin on IM2. And, it's important to note, they already have the principal cast for IM2 except for the villain under contract.

Maybe Thor will have some issues with casting while the actors are on strike, but we're at least 3 or 4 months of preproduction and script rewrites away from that ever seeing the camera. Not to mention they have to hire a director.

 

[Bubastis]

I know I'm probably a broken record here, but not getting Favreau to direct the sequel is indescribably stupid. (The phrase "shoot yourself in the foot" comes to mind.) Iron Man is the best thing to happen to marvel movies since Sam Raimi released Spider-Man. Creating marvel as its own studio was an incredibly risky thing to do, but Favreau's film is becoming one of the highest-grossing movies of all time, and is so far the most critically acclaimed movie of the year.
Not making sure that Favreau directs the film would be cinematic and economic suicide.

 

[Marvin]

I know I'm probably a broken record here, but not getting Favreau to direct the sequel is indescribably stupid. (The phrase "shoot yourself in the foot" comes to mind.) Iron Man is the best thing to happen to marvel movies since Sam Raimi released Spider-Man. Creating marvel as its own studio was an incredibly risky thing to do, but Favreau's film is becoming one of the highest-grossing movies of all time, and is so far the most critically acclaimed movie of the year.
Not making sure that Favreau directs the film would be cinematic and economic suicide.

that may not be true

 

[ultimatefan]

Accorfding to AICN and IESB, the problem with bringing Favreau back is David Maisel, the Marvel Studios head, is being cheap about making his deal... Can you seriously believe that? This movie, about a character WHO WAS NOT A HOUSEHOLD NAME PROPERTY, has just made more money than almost any of their other "iconic" characters... And this is thanks to the talent involved Marvel, make no mistake, it wasn´t the huge built-in Iron Man fanbase... It was the talents of Favreau, RDJ and the rest of the gang that made IM a megahit... To cheapen out on bringing that talent back is a franchise killing decision worthy of Tom Rothman´s dumbest brainstorms!

 

[Raiden]

Accorfding to AICN and IESB, the problem with bringing Favreau back is David Maisel, the Marvel Studios head, is being cheap about making his deal... Can you seriously believe that? This movie, about a character WHO WAS NOT A HOUSEHOLD NAME PROPERTY, has just made more money than almost any of their other "iconic" characters... And this is thanks to the talent involved Marvel, make no mistake, it wasn´t the huge built-in Iron Man fanbase... It was the talents of Favreau, RDJ and the rest of the gang that made IM a megahit... To cheapen out on bringing that talent back is a franchise killing decision worthy of Tom Rothman´s dumbest brainstorms!

I agree completely. If Marvel is too cheap to sign Favearu, then they shouldn't have created a studio in the first place, because other studios like Sony are more than willing to sign their stars long-term.

 

[Marvin]

sony's always had money marvel has to be smart

 

[Rac]

Iron Man 2: Directed by Brett Ratner and Written by Zak Penn & Simon Kinberg.

And I thought Marvel Studios would be a different movie studio!

 

[Raiden]

sony's always had money marvel has to be smart

It is smart to sign a director who just delivered a movie about a superhero who was previously unknown outside comicdom, and the movie is now grossing $500M+ WW and got almost universal rave reviews. If Marvel let Fav go it'd be the biggest blunder in their history.

 

[Chewy]

sony's always had money marvel has to be smart

So it's smart for a fledgling studio to screw over the director who put them on the map so they can save a few bucks? They might as well hang up a sign that reads "Established/Talents Directors: Come make a movie with us, but you are completely expendable to us in the future if we can hire someone more cheaply."

 

[JackMercy]

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/regarding-all-those-iron-man-2-rumors/

Well that's a quick turnaround...

 

[Marvin]

what's smart is paying the right ppl to carry on the success of a franchise that has so much success it's next film would be hard pressed to bomb

 

[Chewy]

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/regarding-all-those-iron-man-2-rumors/

Well that's a quick turnaround...

Damage control if I ever saw it. The day after reports of Marvel ****ing Favreau over break out they make an offer, after 1 call in 5 weeks.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Damage control if I ever saw it. The day after reports of Marvel ****ing Favreau over break out they make an offer, after 1 call in 5 weeks.

LOL, agreed. What a coincidence that now Favs gets offered the sequel.

 

[Blader5489]

Damage control if I ever saw it. The day after reports of Marvel ****ing Favreau over break out they make an offer, after 1 call in 5 weeks.

Not necessarily.

I don't think people understand that directors are signed by a film-by-film basis. Sam Raimi had to be signed up for each Spider-Man movie; Bryan Singer had to be signed for each X-Men movie; and Chris Nolan had to be signed for each Batman movie. It's not the same as actors, who have to sign a three picture deal at once.

 

[The Guard]

He made a good movie. It's not like he made a movie that no one else could ever make. Maybe he's asking for too much money. Maybe they're lowballing him. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[Apollo]

my support for Marvel studios is slowly fading..

if Iron man 2 turns out to be rushed with a director put on the set within the last second like x3, i'm going to be pissed.


I thought Marvel studios was going into a more positive light for their films, not trying to repeat marvel film history

hope its all cleared up and i'm wishing for the best...i hope jon gets it before Brett Ratner tumbles in...

 

[TheVileOne]

Its another second hand internet news gossip rumor report. Make of it what you will.

While its the complete opposite. The report says, "an insider" or whatever. So in the end we don't really know.

However, Favreau only said he thought a March start date MIGHT be unrealistic. I think people blew everything out of proportion and was ready to crucify Marvel before we knew all the facts.

 

[jrd550]

Accorfding to AICN and IESB, the problem with bringing Favreau back is David Maisel, the Marvel Studios head, is being cheap about making his deal... Can you seriously believe that? This movie, about a character WHO WAS NOT A HOUSEHOLD NAME PROPERTY, has just made more money than almost any of their other "iconic" characters... And this is thanks to the talent involved Marvel, make no mistake, it wasn´t the huge built-in Iron Man fanbase... It was the talents of Favreau, RDJ and the rest of the gang that made IM a megahit... To cheapen out on bringing that talent back is a franchise killing decision worthy of Tom Rothman´s dumbest brainstorms!

well said - if anything Marvel can't afford to screw up. if they really want to play up this 'marvel film experience' then each outing has to be of tremendous quality.